Tuesday, August 31, 2010

This Week's David Mixner Blog

President Obama, At This Stage, Shame On You
By David Mixner
Copyright By David Mixner
Aug 25 2010
http://www.davidmixner.com/2010/08/president-obama-at-this-stage-shame-on-you.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DavidMixnerCom+%28DavidMixner.com%29



President Obama First and foremost, the LGBT struggle is one of the great civil rights movement of our times. Given that, quite honestly, there is simply no logical personal or political reason for President Obama to be against marriage equality. At this stage there can only be two conclusions: that he is a political coward or that he does indeed hold prejudice against LGBT citizens. Nothing else fits at this stage. No one can make any more excuses and no one can justify his position any longer. Looking at the facts, the statistics, the political reality and at the President's current position one can only say "Shame on you, Mr. President. Shame on you."

This weekend two factors forced me to focus on his lack of leadership on this issue. One was a brilliant article in the New Republic by Richard Just entitled simply "Disgrace" and the other was a chart published in The New York Times showing the massive change in support across the country for marriage equality. Combine that with a recent CNN poll that showed 52% of Americans believe now that marriage equality is a Constitutional Right and you see how ridiculous his position has become before the public.

The President should look to his fellow Democrats for courage. Overwhelmingly, Democrats now support marriage equality. If you look at the New York Times Marriage Chart you will see a state by state breakdown on the increasing support for parity. Look at the entire chart and you will see states like West Virginia support for marriage equality has grown in 15 years from 21% to 41%. Seventeen states now support marriage equality by greater than 50%! Another 13 states support it with margins of greater than 40% with most of those above 45%! Of the remaining 20 states, Obama only carried 2 of those states and 12 of those 20 are in the deep South or border states. Can the political facts be any clearer?

Moreover, we can truly say President Obama is now hurting us in our battle for marriage equality. His words can be used by our foes with ease when he gives us his tired mantra: "marriage is between a man and a woman." I can dissect all his statements but the New Republic article by Richard Just lays it out perfectly:

My colleague James Downie has assembled a fascinating timeline of Obama’s statements on gay marriage over the past 14 years, stretching from 1996 to earlier this month, when the White House responded to a judge’s ruling on Prop 8 by reiterating that it opposes same-sex marriage. What the timeline shows is a pattern that can only be described as illogical and cynical. Obama argues that he is against gay marriage while also opposing efforts like Prop 8 that would ban it. He justifies this by saying that state constitutions should not be used to reduce rights. (His exact words: “I am not in favor of gay marriage, but when you’re playing around with constitutions, just to prohibit somebody who cares about another person, it just seems to me that that is not what America is about.”) Obama appears to be saying that it is fine to prohibit gay people from getting married, as long as the vehicle for doing so is not a constitution. Presumably, then, he supports the numerous states that have banned same-sex marriage through other means, without resorting to a constitutional amendment? If so, he might be the only person in the country to occupy this narrow, and frankly absurd, slice of intellectual terrain. Obama has also said he favors civil unions rather than gay marriage because the question of where and how to apply the label “marriage” is a religious one. This argument makes even less sense than his stance on state constitutions, since marriage, for better or for worse, is very much a government matter.

The article concludes with this amazing paragraph. Please read these lines very carefully. The highlighted parts are mine.

But, while he may not realize it, Obama is already leading on gay marriage; he is just leading in the wrong direction. Every time Obama or a surrogate reiterates his position, it reinforces the idea that gay marriage is a bit too scary for the political mainstream. Worse, Obama’s stance seems to be a way of conveying to the country that he knows a lot of people still aren’t completely comfortable admitting gays and lesbians as full participants in American life, and that this is OK because he isn’t either. It is about the most cynical gesture you can imagine from an allegedly liberal leader—and we deserve better. I am speaking to you as an American, Mr. Obama.


DADT: The More Things Change, The More They Stay The Same!
By David Mixner
Copyright By David Mixner
Aug 26 2010
http://www.davidmixner.com/2010/08/dadt-the-more-things-change-the-more-they-stay-the-same.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DavidMixnerCom+%28DavidMixner.com%29



Yesterday was like a flashback from a bad political acid trip.

United States Marine Commandant James Conway, who is doing his best to undercut "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", suggested that there might have to be separate barracks for homosexual troops. In one swift moment, the commandant transported me back 17 years to 1993. In fact, this entire process is beginning to look like a repeat performance of 1993.

Trust me, that is not good news.

President Bill Clinton, caught in a firestorm the first month of his presidency, called for six months of 'study and review' in order to placate the military and to hopefully build support for allowing gays in the military. Under the ample leadership of now deceased Tom Stoddard, the "Campaign for Military Service" was formed to support the President with such strong backers as David Geffen, Barry Diller, Bob Shrum, Marylouise Oates, Greg Craig and so many others. By March, the President led by Senator Sam Nunn visited the USS Roosevelt and allowed himself to be pulled into the tight living quarters on the ship. In a notorious front page picture, Nunn made his bigoted, Neanderthal point that homosexuals and straights could not share these quarters.

Clinton then suggested segregated living quarters for homosexual troops and received a firestorm of protest. Meanwhile, the military leaders and people like Sam Nunn used this 'study and review' period to build up pressure that led to DADT.

Sound familiar?

Just look at how this is going. Last year we were told to wait until the healthcare bill passed Congress. Then we were told it would be Spring of this year. Finally, this supposedly brilliant idea of a 'study' was proposed and accepted. This wouldn't be completed until early next year and after this year's Congressional elections. Well, this 'study' by the military has consisted of the most humiliating questionnaires, probing our lives, playing to stereotypes and suggesting segregating homosexual troops. Recently in a private meeting arranged for LGBT donors, the word was given that closure might not be until next May or June.

Trust me - after the elections, we will start hearing all sort of proposals that continue in someway to make us second class citizens. They will blame the results of the elections and not their inaction this year. My guess is we will not achieve a clean-cut right to serve; that we will be offered once again some sort of new status within the military.

Guess the only question left is if the LGBT community is going to accept second class status and enable Congress to give poor excuses or will we change this time and demand full equality?



Ken Mehlman and Coming Out
By David Mixner
Copyright By David Mixner
Aug 27 2010
http://www.davidmixner.com/2010/08/ken-mehlman-and-coming-out.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DavidMixnerCom+%28DavidMixner.com%29



Melman Ken Mehlman's process of coming out of the closet certainly has stirred the troops. People are enraged by his previous politics. Some believe he has to apologize for a litany of past positions before he can be accepted into the greater LGBT community. Others have welcomed him and his vast network of contacts that he now brings to this community. What is clear is that everyone has an opinion.

There are really important facts to remember as the community comes to terms with its latest out member:

-Coming Out has been and continues to be the most important political action that a person can take in our epic struggle. Every time an individual finds the courage to come out to his family, friends and public, it creates a ripple effect that increases the hope for us all.

-No one should ever be discouraged from Coming Out nor punished for it.

-For years we have been saying, "We Are Everywhere" and this certainly proves the case.

-We are not a membership organization where someone has to meet criteria either socially or politically for entrance.

-The purpose of a movement is to change minds. Look at the shift in public opinion in the last few years. We should accept those who have opposed us in the past and use their talents and gifts.

-Finally, no one has to approve, accept nor be quiet about another person's political beliefs or actions in their past. That is the essence of free speech. You don't have to like them personally, have to sleep with them, approve of their dog or cat nor invite them to dinner.

Like Ted Olson taking the Proposition 8 Court Case, Ken Melhman's coming out process is bound to create a rippled effect. Just look at the names on the fundraiser that he has organized to support marriage equality and the American Foundation for Equal Rights Proposition 8 Court Case.. Do we want to make it impossible for all conservatives to come out for marriage equality? Do we want to shun all people whose policies of the past we personally disagree? Who gets to decide who is acceptable and who is not?

I couldn't vehemently disagree more with Ken's political choices in the past. For me personally, they are appalling. However, I understand the courage it took to make such a shift and to immediately organize his family, friends and political network to join us in this struggle. For us and for him, I hope his action benefits everyone. Whether we like him or not, coming out is good and never should be discouraged.




The United States Senate's Worst Nightmare
By David Mixner
Copyright By David Mixner
Aug 30 2010
http://www.davidmixner.com/2010/08/the-united-states-senates-worst-nightmare.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+DavidMixnerCom+%28DavidMixner.com%2
9


Senate_in_session While not impossible it is unlikely that the Democrats in the United States Senate will lose their majority. There is no question that they will lose seats and could have a long night waiting to see if the majority holds in November. That alone is reason to give pause because that great "intellectual and compassionate" Republican Mitch McConnell from Kentucky will lead that historical body. This is a man that has no business being elected senator let alone leader of the Senate.

That scenario is enough to give anyone pause but might not be the real problem in the Senate. We could see the election of five to six senators who respect no traditions, no leaders of either party and, using Senate rules, could totally bring the business of the nation to a halt. A group consisting of Sharron Angle from Nevada, Rand Paul from Kentucky, Joe Miller from Alaska, Marco Rubio from Florida and Mike Lee from Utah could form a bloc of extreme right wing views that would create chaos in the Senate. If these five senators were all elected, they would represent the new extreme of the Republican Party. Lord knows what other senators would join them given the success of the right wing defeating traditional conservatives in the primaries. We can be pretty sure Senators Jim DeMint and Jeff Sessions would be in their corner often during crucial debates.

The rules of the Senate allow filibusters, appointments to be tied up and Legislation not even come to a vote, needless delays and creating chaos until other Senator's seek peace by selling out on their ideas and principles. A bloc of seven to ten senators hell bent on an ideological agenda who don't give a hoot about their leadership just could be our worst nightmare on election day. Lord helps us.

No comments:

Post a Comment