Fierce, Advocate!

A picture may be worth a thousand words, but sometimes one suffices: NOPE. At least that's how The Advocate summarizes Obama's progress on promises to gay voters on the cover of their September issue. Harsh, but true, and clever, too; this pink-hued take on the "Hope" poster has our commander-in-chief not looking upward and inspirational, but sideways, like he's avoiding our eye-contact. Guilty much?

The question mark at the end of "Nope" softens the message a bit; at eight months in, Obama's betrayal is not yet a forgone conclusion. And although they call Obama "a player" for making promises he apparently had little intention of implementing as President, the article criticizes the gay community, too. The gay rights movement is described as "impotent", its leaders torn between "wanting equal rights and wanting to get invited to parties at the White House."

Look we've said it before, and we'll keep saying it until the 45th President is sworn in: we support this President, because we believe he has the best interests of all Americans in mind, but we expect some support in return. And enough with the "he's got a lot on his plate" arguments. Even the White House, on the eve of his 200-days-in-office mark, admits some of his challenges are getting a little easier. The battle for healthcare is a biggie, but the President can offer us more than mere tokens in the meantime. Congress is already moving on ENDAand DADT, with repealing DOMA not far behind...it remains to be seen what response or actions the White House will offer, despite Candidate Obama's pledges to implement all of these civil rights initiatives. We'll wait and see.

No More Promises

President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama hosted a cocktail reception for gay leaders Monday, ostensibly to mark the 40th anniversary of Stonewall. Observers know that this was really an attempt at damage control, after gay activists have criticized the President's lack of effort to fulfill campaign promises to end DADT, overturn DOMA, and pass ENDA. The President gave a speech where he reiterated those promises, receiving polite applause from those present. He went on to say that, by the time he's done, most of us "willl have pretty good feelings about the Obama administration." The crowd cheered.

WTF? No, seriously. He's not running for President anymore. He IS the President. While overturning DADT with the stroke of a pen might shock the system, he easily has the authority, the political capital, and the support of the public, to issue an executive order that would stop the discharges while the policy is under review. As for DOMA, he still says it's unfair, but why did his Justice Department defend the law recently, using language comparing us to incest and pedophilia that came straight from the far-right's playbook? As for how we'll feel when he's "done" fulfilling these promises: we'll believe it when we see it. Get back to us then if you want cheering from us.

Why are these champagne-sipping suck-ups cheering? We've mentioned before that it pains us to criticize this President; we know there are big problems facing the country that he's trying to deal with. Wars, the economy, healthcare; all impact far more people than the issues the gay community is focused on. Yet we still see these issues all intertwined; isn't discharging qualified soldiers in a time of war a matter of national security? Wouldn't granting marriage benefits to same-sex couples help insure vulnerable families? Shouldn't protecting a class of people from job discrimination be a priority in an economic downturn?

We're not cheering anything until this administration finally starts keeping its promises.

To hell with the suck-ups: we're takng our gripes straight to Washington for the National Equality March on October 11th. I doubt we'll be sipping cocktails in the East Room with Barack and Michelle, but we'll make sure they hear from us! Don't forget to register for the march, and we'll see you in DC!

US Census To Count Gay Couples

Obama blew another make-up kiss to the gays yesterday, when the White House announced the 2010 Census will be the first to include same-sex couples, reversing a Bush administration interpretation of the Defense of Marriage Act that prevented the release of such information. In the past, gay couples that identified as married were down-graded to "unmarried partners" when the final counts were tabulated.

This news is exciting, but particularly so for Andy, who is an archivist and historian by day. He's seen his share of ambiguous census documents. Who are these two male academics living together in the 1930 Census, the second of the two listed as "partner" to the head of the household?


Landlord and tenant, perhaps...or top and bottom? Who knows? It's hard to determine the exact nature of a relationship when two unrelated people of the same gender are simply listed as living together.

The White House is still, according to the Wall Street Journal, "seeking ways to include same-sex marriages, unions and partnerships" in the Census, so we're not sure exactly what this means. Still, it's a big step for gay people; any time an institution changes to reflect our existence, we consider that a very good thing. We wonder how inclusive this will really be, though. Gay single people will still be invisible. And how many closet-cases and paranoids will just lie?

One thing we hope is that shining a light on us will prove how (depressingly) normal married gays are. The Census is already proving us right with this study showing that married couples -- straight, gay or lesbian -- are remarkably similar in demographic breakdowns like income and education level. See, we really are just like you, straight people! We can be boring and predictable, too!

A Bone?

CNN is reporting President Obama will be signing a memorandum today, granting benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees. CNN went a little crazy with the headline, though, and made me think for a split second that Andy and I were getting a pony for Christmas. "Obama to OK benefits for same-sex partners"...really? Where do we sign up?

Partners of employees of the federal government will be granted these benefits, not all gay couples. Not that I really thought so when I read it (we first heard of this last night), but it just seems like sloppy journalism. Yes, headline space is limited, but on the heels of last week's disgusting DOMA-defense from Eric Holder's Justice Department, we're a little touchy. Don't jerk with us, CNN.

This is a good move by Obama, but excuse us for not doing cartwheels of joy. This is merely a memorandum, not an executive order, so it can be overturned by any future administration. And, sorry, but the cynic in me knows we were just thrown a bone. Clearly the White House felt the need to do something for the gays; the outcry from gay organizations and even the mainstream media over Obama's record with the gay community since getting elected can't be ignored. But it's interesting that word of this broke last night, hours after news that an upcoming Democratic Party fundraiser was hemorrhaging Big Gay Donors. Prominent gay activists and leaders have pulled out and some are calling for a boycott. And suddenly the President remembers us?

Sorry, but no, too little, too late. Last week your Justice Department compared our relationship to pedophilia and incest, while defending a law you promised to overturn. Now you're doing something woefully limited in scope, while exercising a presidential power that you could have used on your first day in office. What took so long? It's just a freaking memo.

You're going to have to do better than that, Mr. President.

Disgusted

How’s that for a headline? Look, we really didn’t want to write this post, for a number of reasons. First, because we just wrote about our disappointment with Obama two weeks ago, and second, because it’s such a big downer. So we’re not going to dance around the issue, we’re going to come right out with it: we’re disgusted.

The Obama Justice Department said some pretty repugnant things about gay people in a legal brief defending the Defense of Marriage Act last week. Yes, OBAMA, not Bush, and it’s the same DOMA that Obama promised to overturn when he ran for President, the one that Newt Gingrich guided through the Republican-controlled Congress during an election year, signed into law by Bill Clinton in 1996, when same-sex marriage wasn’t legal anywhere in the US. DOMA is the law that prevents the federal government from recognizing same-sex marriages the states perform. Because of DOMA, we can't file a joint tax return or seek citizenship for an immigrant partner, among numerous other rights.

Fast-forward nearly 13 years; it’s an electoral off-year, and both houses of Congress are firmly in Democratic hands. Same-sex marriage is no longer some mysterious unknown; 5 states sanction them, and numerous other municipalities legally recognize some form of same-sex relationship. We have a president who ran on a promise to overturn DOMA, and what do we get? A motion to dismiss a case challenging the law, in which relationships like ours are equated with marriage between “an uncle and a niece” or “under-aged marriage.” Hmmm, incest and pedophilia? Where have we heard that before? We’d expect this from a Republican, or a Democrat if we dialed our time machine back to the mid-90s or before. But this? This, in 2009? From a Democrat who ran as a “fierce advocate” for gays and lesbians?

We can’t go on because we’re too ticked off to process this rationally, so we’re going to let our gal pal Rachel Maddow hash it out with our daddy-crush Howard Dean. It’s long, but take the time to watch it. Dean nails the point that, although he doubts Obama knew the specifics of the brief, "you cannot talk about gay Americans the way gay Americans were talked about in this brief." Which makes us wonder...who wrote the brief? Where did all this homophobic language come from? We'd expect this from Alberto Gonzalez or John Ashcroft, but who in Attorney General Eric Holder's Justice Department wrote this, and why was it allowed to go forward?

Promises, Promises.

Many of you have heard by now that President Obama was in Beverly Hills for a DNC fundraiser last week, and that he made reference to some protestors outside the event while addressing the audience. The day before, the Supreme Court of California upheld Proposition 8, the ballot measure to amend the state Constitution outlawing marriage for gay people. Demonstrations were well publicized in advance, but Obama claimed to not know what a protestor was referring to when he heard him say “Obama, keep your promise.” Opinions vary on whether the President was making light of people protesting Prop 8, or simply making a point that he’s juggling a lot of competing priorities right now. You can view his remarks and decide for yourself.

We’re still going to tell you what we think, though: we think it stinks. We think his attitude towards gay people is abysmal. Not just here, but since getting elected; he’s demonstrated a pattern of subtly dissing gay people and our concerns. During the campaign he promised to be a "fierce advocate" for gay equality. Many gay voters hoped his opposition to marriage for gay couples was a pragmatic concession for votes, and believed him when he said he favored civil unions that offered rights equal to marriage. He promised to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act, which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex marriages, because he didn't think laws should discriminate against gay people. He promised to repeal the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. We knew he would govern from the middle, but he seemed willing to address our concerns. We believed in him.

We still want to, but he's made that increasingly difficult since election night. He invited a homophobe to pray over his inauguration, someone who likens our relationship to incest and pedophilia. Maine and Vermont legalized same-sex marriage since he took office. The White House’s response? Silence. OK, we know the President doesn't like the idea of "marriage." But two more states now share his supposed vision for gay equality and non-discrimination. Doesn't that deserve a mention, a reaction, an acknowledgment? Iowa has also extended marriage equality to gay couples, and the President’s only reaction to that was a lame joke at the White House Correspondent’s dinner about going there with his chief advisor, David Axelrod, to “make it official.”

Cracks like that, and the one last week, really piss us off. Are we just a joke to him? It’s one thing to feel your President takes you for granted, but it’s another to feel that he’s openly mocking your concerns. Mr, President, you don’t know what promises those people are talking about? Here’s a refresher: you promised to repeal the ban on gays in the military, end hiring discrimination against gay people, and recognize gay relationships at the federal level.

Look, we know Rome wasn’t built in a day. Obama’s only been in office 4 months and he’s got a lot to deal with; the economy is in crisis and we have some pretty enormous international concerns to deal with. But especially in light of those issues, wouldn’t now be a good time to ensure gay partners can share health benefits without an unfair tax burden? Is this really the time to still be discharging qualified military experts simply because they’re gay? Since we do have bigger fish to fry, why are these outmoded policies allowed to continue?

We still support Obama, but we’re growing concerned, and not just about lame jokes. We knew during the campaign that there were groups he had to reach out to in order to build a winning coalition, including some socially conservative factions. We were ok with that, as long as he kept the commitments he made to us during the campaign. We’re not sure he is, though.

First we heard repealing the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy might have to wait. Then, a month ago, it came out that the White House’s official website had watered down much of the language in its civil rights section pertaining to gay rights, including repealing “don’t ask, don’t tell.” And still the discharges continue under this new administration.

We’re not naïve; we know that politicians will say certain things to get elected, then conveniently "forget" (or just change their tune) once they’re in office. We know that, even though polls are moving in the right direction, it’s still a political tight-rope act to implement policies of equality for gay people. We’re still bothered, though, by this nagging feeling that this administration doesn’t consider our concerns to be very important. We understand that the economy and the wars demand a great deal of attention, and that tackling big gay political issues might have to wait until after the mid-term elections, or even until a potential second term. It’s troubling, though, that he can’t use his politically deft speaking skills to reiterate his commitment to gay rights. It's troubling that he can't even speak of us at all as President, unless he's cracking a joke.

Candidate Obama promised to be a “fierce advocate of equality for gay and lesbian Americans.” President Obama seems to have forgotten that promise, or assigned it such a low priority that it’s fallen completely off his radar. Gay issues may be a low priority for him, but not for us.

That's what really bugs us when we're told we have to wait for our rights, because there are too many other problems to deal with. We don't have the luxury of thinking these issues aren't important, because these issues are vitally important to us and people just like us. We've dealt with the hassle of being a committed, long-term family-unit without legal recognition; tax burdens that married couples don't bear, awkward conversations with medical people about our relationship and our wishes, that sort of thing. We have gay friends who have children, or an immigrant partner, or who own property together, all circumstances with unique issues that straight married couples are protected against automatically. There are gay people who fear discrimination on the job, and there's no federal law to protect them. There are gay men and women defending our country, at a time when we need all who are willing and able to serve, yet they can be dismissed for simply being who they are, and they too often are, even under this new President.

We haven't given up; we still love this President, and we want to see him succeed. But we intend to hold him accountable to the commitments he made. He campaigned on two promises in particular, two ideas that we, like many, truly believed in; change, and hope. He hasn't given us the change he promised us, yet. We still hope he will, though.

We'll be waiting.