An Attempt at Clarity

Just to clear things up in my own mind, this is sort of a summary post on the administrations latest gay rights fumble (and it is only the latest).

OK -- the Obama DoJ filed a Motion to Dismiss in Smelt vs. United States that may or may not have some validity in at least some of its arguments.

Point 1: defending DOMA, which Obama has pledged to repeal (although he has done absolutely nothing about it so far) was a judgment call on the administration's part. It's not, according to most of the opinions I've read from lawyers, a requirement. (The White House's own spokespersons have moved from "we must defend" to "as is the general practice, we are defending. . . .")

Point 2: while there might be grounds to dismiss on standing and one or two other technical points, the brief as filed is a "kitchen sink" style exercise. The aim seems to have been to counter all possible constitutional challenges to DOMA. Some of the arguments offered here are, to be charitable, specious: DOMA is constitutional because the government has a legitimate interest in abridging fundamental rights that might cost money if recognized? It doesn't discriminate because gays and lesbians have the same right to marry someone of the opposite sex as heterosexuals do? Give me a break.

Point 3: the tone and language used are demeaning in the extreme. While the brief does not make specific one-on-one analogies between same-sex relationships and incest and pedophilia, who needs the lines drawn after twenty years of right-wing hyperbole? I'm just surprised DoJ didn't find some way to make reference to bestiality.

Point 4: Obama -- and the majority of the Democratic majority in Congress -- have made no effort to distance themselves from this act. For Obama, of course, the only thing that would be acceptable is to withdraw that motion.

I hate to say it, but I will, with the full admission that I have not followed Rahm Emanuel's career with any degree of closeness. He was almost, however, my congressman (I moved), and the man's a snake. I do detect his work here -- he's a past master at snubbing the gay community -- but I'm amazed that there's no one, apparently, in this administration able to counter something like this. The indicator here is that Emanuel has been running scared of the Republicans from day one, and he's not what I'd call gay-friendly.

This is a big black eye for Obama. (I'm sorry, but signing a presidential memorandum to extend limited benefits to the partners of gay government employees just won't cut it. And scheduling the signing and the president's "remarks" for 5:45 pm? Puh-leeze!)

Couple this with his complete inaction on any of his campaign promises (except, of course, for trying to pass the buck to Congress), and it comes back to what I said previously: we voted for a leader; what we got was a Chicago politician.