Tweet
Try to figure out what the scared-to-be-for-marriage-equality President will say at the LGBT fundraiser this evening, based on this exchange with Press Sec Jay Carney:
Q At the Gay and Lesbian fundraiser tonight, is the President going to address the pending vote in the New York State Senate on gay marriage?MR. CARNEY: I’m sure he will mention it and I think make the point that, as he always has, that he believes that this is something that states should be able to decide. And that’s one of the reasons, because of the — that the President believes that we should withdraw from our participation in DOMA cases, because he believed it was unconstitutional.
Q Is he going to endorse the bill, the New York bill?
MR. CARNEY: He’s not going to make any new declarations of a position. He’s simply going to address it.
And this from one of the pool report:
“I’m sure he will mention it and I think make the point that as he always has that he believes that this is something that states should be able to decide.”
Just tossing out that red meat for you.
From Chris Geidner’s report:
Tickets for the LGBT Gala start at $1,250 per person. The cost to serve as a “Chair” at the event — which gets “top billing as Chair on invitation and program, as as well as two priority seats at Gala Dinner, including keynote address by President Obama, and photo with the President for two” — clocks in at $35,800. According to Public Campaign communications director Adam Smith, $30,800 is the maximum contribution an individual can give to a party, and $5,000 is the maximum total contribution an individual can contribute to a candidate — $2,500 for the primary election and $2,500 for the general election.
Two LGBT reporters who will be live-Tweeting the fundraiser are @ChrisGeidner and @ChrisJohnson82
29 Comments
Should we have let the states decide on interracial marriage after Loving?And what about moral leadership from the Bully Pulpit?
I really cannot vote for him, I am tired of voting for the lesser to two whatevers,
I cannot vote for a man who does not believe that I am equal to him.
“Let the states decide.”What a wonderful perspective on a Civil Rights issue. That would have worked out so well historically for oppressed minorities, wouldn’t it?
What do you suppose he’ll say when he “mentions” it tonight?
FIERCE!!!
What these guys said:
The president can take his states’s right argument and shove it.
It’s a winning strategy, all right.Just not for the oppressed minorities. Only for the president’s re-election.
I can’t believe how many sexual minorities are willing to sell out their community for a picture with the president.
DOMA unconstitutional or not?Who can take President Fierce seriously?
I don’t get it?
Anyone in attendance tonight – let alone Neil Patrick Harris the man with a partner and two newborn children – should have NO QUALMS about asking Obama (in public on the microphone in front of the crowd) to explain how he can view the federal DOMA to be indefensible and unconstitutional yet somehow find it logical to allow individual states the right to enforce their own mini-DOMA.
It doesn’t make one small bit of goddamned sense and there isn’t ONE argument that can be offered to make it sound better.
Stick up for your family – your partner, your children, yourself – NPH. Don’t just let him collect his LGBT money and slink away without making clear concrete demands on him.
EMBARRASS HIM WHILE HE IS AT THE TROUGH.
What does it take to get people to not be fools?
Obama doesn’t think gays have a fundamental right to marryWhen is a reporter going to ask Obama if he thinks gays have a fundamental right to marry the person of their choice?
His actions say he does not.
Actually, there isn’t a conflict between the two viewsAlthough I don’t think Obama has stated why he thinks DOMA is unconstitutional, one of the main arguments from the marriage equality side (and a major finding of the federal court) is that DOMA is a userpation of states’ rights to set rules on who in their respective states may marry or can be considered married. From the founding of the republic until DOMA’s passage in 1996, the state was always the unit of government with that authority. Thus, a true “states rights” believer would find DOMA unconstitutional on that basis.
He’s been askedHe answers that his position is “evolving”, and that he supports the right of each state to decide who can marry in that state. Even if he really does personally support marriage equality, it seems doubtful that he’d say anything to that effect until after the 2012 election.
NOBAMAI really cannot make myself vote for him, laurel, whether or not he is secretly for us while weakening our drive toward equality
A shame that we dont have leaders who would stand up to him…
I don’t pretend to know what he really thinksAnd I’m not asking anyone to vote one way or the other. I’m just postulating that even if he is pro-equality, he’s not going to say so until after the election because that would allegedly make his re-election more difficult. He’s shown time and again that he’s willing to stay silent on the anti-equality actions of states. Why would anyone expect anything different from him regarding New York? That said, I think it’s 100% appropriate to point out that he’s endorsing discrimination by taking the states’ rights approach.
I will vote for Obama because I see an abstention as a de facto vote for the Republican. However, my plan to vote for Obama isn’t an endorsement of everything he says and does. Far from it.
He just said it was wrong it was unfairHe cites his law degree that gives him information that DOMA is unconstitutional.
If it is unconstitutional federally – WHY IS IT NOT UNCONSTITUTIONAL in states.
He is playing a shell game right now.
Don’t help him.
Patrick! Wonderful to see you and to battle at your side againHow do we legitimise his position by re-electing him and then act suprised later when he is still evasive and evolving?
Am I “helping him” by describing the situation as I see it?Understanding someone else’s line of argument is not the same thing as endorsing it. I think the states rights position is reprehensible, but I can see how someone could hold it and believe federal DOMA is unconstitutional. Especially if they feel they need to distance themselves from the issue until after an election. It’s a shameful, weasely position for a president and constitutional scholar to take, but it’s perfect for a politician concerned about not inflaming certain blocks of Republican and conservative unenrolled voters.
We don’t have to be politeIt was encouraging to hear (although incoherent) heckling of some kind during his comments tonight…but there should have been more.
The well-heeled BIG MONEY gays that have the access to him are too sycophantic. They are literally PAYING to have his attention – to be in his presence. They should use their power to speak for those of us that do NOT have $1250 – $38,500 to breathe his air.
His evolution is a marketing ploy and just because we don’t want someone from a further right wing ideology in his office doesn’t mean we abdicate our responsibility to demand what we know is historically sound and legitimate.
Thank you Maura…for saying hello and remembering me.
The carrot is allowing him to serve. After election day, it’s all stick. And tonight was not an example of stick. It was a big fat gay hand job.
Eugene “secret gay warehouses” Delgaudio chimes in
He takes not of the fact that we are down to only one more vote necessary to win in New York
If I’m not equal, MY GayTM is closed.To the Obama reelection team,
You want support, tell “our” fierce advocate to get off his ass.
bkmn
ladies and gentlemen, the Weathervane of the United States!Transcript from ThinkProgress. Da, da, da-DA, da-da da, da-da, da-da da.
http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/…
Gee, at this rate, if the U.S. had had this kind of social progress when he was born, his parents could have been legally married in what? Half the states by now.
gAyTM: Still out of orderWe are still one vote short;
and Mr President “god is in the mix” and “evolving” and “states rights as far as gay discrimination” Obama did not make it any easier with his utterances.
My My My, aren’t we an impatient bunchFirst off, Carney is a tool and I wouldn’t put too much stock in what he said, if any. Seriously, Obama is a Constitutional scholar and he knows full well that marriage equality is a Constitutional issue, not states.
There’s another story in the news regarding Sec. Gates’ departure. While signs point to the lifting of the ban on gays in the military, he won’t rubberstamp it until ALL of the JCOS have signed off. With only a week to go, this may very well pass on to Panetta. If it does, it could still be a few more months before anything is finalized.
I would venture to guess that Obama does not want to jeopardize DADT by endorsing full marriage equality just yet. In fact, I’m banking on it. These two struggles are intrinsically bound together and to endorse marriage equality now would seriously risk the failure of DADT. Not to mention, failure to to have the full endorsement of the JCOS would be political fodder for the right wing false prophets.
My partner and I just celebrated 10 years together in April. Living in the ATL, has its benefits, but living in Georgia and hailing from Texas doesn’t bode well for equalizing our partnership in the eyes of the law. I am as impatient as everyone else, but there is a time and place and that time IS coming soon.
Inpatient? Isn’t 300+ years enough?We have had to live in the closets or wait in jail cells for executions, we have been subjected to drownings, burnings, hangings, beatings, rapes, mutilations in what is now the United States for 300 years.
Late in the 19th century, Lesbians did make some gains, and one could expect hints in society pages about this or that wealthy heiress and her friend having s “passion for Sappho” but that got swept away in the early 1920′s and repression and supression reigned supreme again. Then came the 1950′s, McCarthy, the self loathing Cohn and the hunts for homosexuals in the government; meanwhile ohers were locked in mental institutions.
Impatient?
LGBT’s have been persecuted in what is now the US since the Mayflower Compact. We’ve waited long enough.
Yes, Obama is a constitutional scholar–who believes that not all Americans are entitled to equal justice under the law; that the president has the right to wage war without first having congress to declare it; that it is perfectly okay to funnel public money to churches and other religious organizations; that the president can authorize warrantless spying on American citizens; that the president has the right to create hit squads to assassinate American citizens; that the government has a right to require citizens to buy products form private, for-profit corporations; and on and on. Which constitution is it you think he’s a scholar of? Not America’s, certainly. Even if you think it’s just peachy for LGBT people to have to wait for full constitutional equality, does none of the rest of his villainy bother you? Really?
(In)famous fierce advocates for states rights…Jefferson Davis. Democrat
Strom Thurmond. Dixiecrat
Michele Bachman. Republican
Barak Obama. Democrat
Geroge Wallace. Dixiecrat
Bill and Hillary Clinton. A Dixiecrat and a Democrat
John McCain. Republican
Meanwhile it was business as usual for Wall Streets favorite lapdog… Obama’s meeting with Democrat LGBT donors at a $1,250 per person dinner was the least important of his meetings in New York.
Later, at a charming little restaurant called Daniel he supped with Wall Street banksters who paid $35,800 per plate to have the ear of the man who’s given them trillions in bailouts, in donations to insurance companies as part of his ‘heath care’ scam, in hundreds of billions in ‘stimulus’ boondoggles and to subsidize the losses of banksters caught in the Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac debacles.
“Among those who were to dine with Obama at Daniel were Robert Wolf, chairman of UBS Americas; Blair W. Effron, partner and co-founder of Centerview Partners LLP; Marc Lasry, managing partner and founder of Avenue Capital Group; Mark Gallogly, a managing principal of Centerbridge Partners; James Rubin, managing director of BC Partners; and Frank Brosens of Taconic Capital Advisors LP, according to a party official who spoke on condition of anonymity because the list hadn’t been made public.” ”
John Emerson, an Obama backer who is president of Capital Guardian Trust Company, said the president’s support for the Troubled Assets Relief Program and the measures that tightened financial regulations has bolstered his position with Wall Street… Candidly, the financial services industry hasn’t done too badly in the last year and half.” Bloomberg Business Week
Whether Democrats win or lose is not our concern. Voting against bigots, warmongers and union busters is. Millions and millions will sit it out or use the vote to lodge a protest against the bigoted, prowar, probusiness policies of both parties.
Real change will only come when we reject the silly idea that voting accomplishes things and build a mass movement to compel them to accept our agenda.
Letting the States decide…WILL NOT HELP ME GET A GREEN CARD FOR MY LOVER!
More political bullshit! He is not a governor, he’s the President of the United States of America, and it is the USA which is keeping me and my beloved apart. It is his responsibility to ensure that the laws of the nation are faithfully executed. Last time I looked, the Constitution stated the I was entitled to equal protection of the laws and could be not denied due process or liberty. All of which have been denied to me.
Do your job Mr. President, uphold the Constitution’s guarantees of my rights as an American citizen!
Let the states decide!!! BS!!!
States Rights…This was the Democratic code word in the South for decades to justify discriminatory laws against blacks, and now our friend Barry is going to use it against us. The irony is just too obvious to be even be laughable. This guy is convincing his supporters by the truckloads to sit out 2012. What a coward. Despicable.
“allegedly make his re-election more difficult”The polls indicate otherwise. One poll after another has shown that a majority of Americans favor gay marriage. A slim, majority, granted, but still… How could stating publicly that he agrees with the majority make his election more difficult?
I’m not aiming this specifically at you, Laurel. I know you said allegedly. But that is the exact justification we hear all the time for his lack of action on our issues. I’m a big proponent of Occam’s Razor, and the simplest explanation of his near-total failure to come through on his promises to us is that he never meant to.
A 4th century bishop, Hilary of Poitiers, summed up our community’s relationship with Obama perfectly:
I applaud the President…For not allowing himself to be pushed into this unnecessary bit of political posturing right now.
The President gain nothing by wading into this divisive mess right now.
The extremists have convinced themselves that gay marriage is not a toxic subject without much proof beyond soft poll numbers.
The President needs to appeal to a wider audience than the extreme activists. The success or failure of his campaign will not be determined by a collection of hotheads that lack sufficient patience and commonsense to wait until after the bloody election to address this subject.
He will need to hold on to the more conservative members of his own coalition and win back the independents who are NOT going to be in favor of this move.
What’s silly about all of this is that the activists, at this point, have lost their collective mind for the sake of a soundbite that won’t have any practical purpose beyond bragging rights since DOMA repeal reamains DOA in the House of Representatives.
There is NO advantage to doing this now and introduces an unnecessary bit of uncertainty into an already choppy reelection campaign.
The question thus becomes…why are the activists committed to this suicidal path that does nothing but hurt the Democrats and has no practical effect? Why NOT wait. More importantly…why push this above all else? Gay marriage is THE most controversial component of the LGBT agenda. Why not focus this time and energy on pushing the government to implement policies that actually has real support from the electorate…like ENDA? ENDA, like DOMA, currently has no chance of success in the Republican controlled house. What is does have is much broader public support…so why isn’t this top shelf? Why aren’t more people screaming and demanding more support for ENDA…especially since doing so would have a much smaller political cost for Democratic allies.
They’re probably factoring in voter propensitywhen weighing the value of those polls you mention. Are pro-equality voters as likely or more likely to get out and vote, contribute and volunteer than anti-equality voters? As we know, advanced age correlates with anti-equality views. And older voters are also MUCH more likely to vote than younger voters. Considering that the national polls show a razor-thin pro-equality margin and that polls haven’t been showing that for more than a year, it would be unusually bold for a national-level politician to take an unabashed pro-equality stance before the 2012 elections. Now, NY voters are more heavily in favor of marriage equality than the national average, so NY legislators might make a different calculation. But what I’ve said above is part of why I’m not at all surprised that Obama hasn’t “evolved”, even though I’m very disappointed that he hasn’t.
You applaud the President?Quelle surprise.