Various reports on Obama's speech to HRC last night. Louise has posted videos of the speech at Pam's House Blend. (Which I've decided to post here as well):
See if you can spot anything that anyone else has missed.
Pam Spaulding is trying hard to be even-handed, but winds up pretty much where I am:
There are two realities, the Beltway reality, a myopic view that is so disconnected from the lives of everyday LGBTs (particularly Ts) that has us setting such low expectations. The reality outside the Beltway doesn't exist, the focus is on cultivating the relationships with power brokers with the secondary focus on obtaining "what's possible" politically, which of course is pretty subjective and dependent on whether there is professional peril in rocking any boats.
The reality outside the Beltway is often too impatient about the logistics of moving legislation in many respects, but the impatience is borne of the peril of losing a job, losing custody of children, or myriad other problems that will not be solved in their Red state any time soon. To see such inaction and promises and action delayed or deferred is disheartening -- and very personal. For activists in this sphere, a speech like this is a reality check of its own -- beautiful, empty prose telling us we are on our own for who knows how long. (Emphasis in original.)
It's a good post, one of her best -- read it.
As for realities on the ground, get this exchange from the comments to that post (edited for cleanup only):
# Thank you for posting this.
I was outside picketing. My signs and those around me called for real action and for Obama to keep his promises. Just before his motorcade came by, the Secret Service had the MPD force us back from where we had our premit. It seems that our fierce advocate can't stand the heat.
by: TrumpetDC @ Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 21:24:21 PM CDT
# P. S.
I did two on camera interviews. Pam, I don't know how you do it. I felt like I was going to hurl.
by: TrumpetDC @ Sat Oct 10, 2009 at 21:25:38 PM CDT
#
How far back did they move you?
What was the excuse?
Or didn't they bother to offer one?
"In order to maintain an untenable position, you have to be actively ignorant." The Colbert Report
by: Lev Raphael @ Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 03:55:19 AM CDT
#
They tried to move us two blocks away to the other side of the convention center. That way we would have been out of site from the motorcade.
We moved about 30 feet (1/4 down the block) and then sat down. We had filled out all the propper paperwork for a permit, so we used that motivate us and them.
by: TrumpetDC @ Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 07:22:16 AM CDT
# As to why...
One police officer pulled one of our organizers aside and appologized. He said that they were being pressured to do it by Obama's Secret Service detail.
by: TrumpetDC @ Sun Oct 11, 2009 at 07:23:23 AM CDT
Somehow, sadly, I have to say that I'm not surprised -- it seems to have become the norm to insulate the president from anything that might cause him to actually notice people's reactions to what he says and does.
John Aravosis was very funny:
Barack Obama just promised us that if he becomes president, he's going to repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell, the Defense of Marriage Act, and get ENDA passed. It was a bit surreal. I'm sitting at a fundraiser for the No on 1 effort in Maine (that Obama didn't even bother to mention), and we were all just speechless (actually, hardly speechless - and I thought yelling at the TV was long since over). Obama repeated his campaign promises. That was it.
Joe Sudbay wasn't quite so amused:
This speech offered less than the cocktail party speech for the A-listers back in June.
The expectations were very high. The president spoke for approximately 25 minutes. And, tonight, he did not deliver anything new or exciting. He did not assuage our concerns.
I'm sure HRC is happy. This was a big night for the institution. But, I'm not sure what it did for the movement -- or HRC's actual mission of full equality.
Dan Savage:
Imagine all the wonderful things this guy is going to accomplish if he ever actually gets elected president.
Andrew Sullivan, from his live blog:
8.56 pm. More campaign boilerplate. This speech could have been made - and was made - a year ago.
8.53 pm. His major achievement - the one thing he has actually done - is invite gay families to the Easter egg-roll. (Ed. note: So did Dubyah. Does that make George W. Bush a "fierce advocate" for gay civil rights?)
8.51 pm. Again, more of a campaign speech. I've called on Congress to repeal DOMA. Does he think we're fools? He has done nothing to advance this.
8.50 pm. Now we get the campaign speech on Don't Ask, Don't Tell. Does he not realize he is now in office? "I'm working to end this policy. I will end Don't Ask, Don't Tell." Solmonese has given us the timeline: 2017. This is bullshit. .
Jim Burroway:
When he becomes President, he’s going to sign the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Act, he’ll sign the Employment Non-Discrimination Act if it ever sees the light of day, and sometime during his presidency he’s going to end Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Oh, and he’s gonna appoint a gay ambassador or two, and we’re all invite to the big Easter Egg roll.
Jeremy Hooper, noting Obama's stance on marriage:
Dear HRC dinner attendees:
The president does not deserve a standing ovation on anything involving our relationship recognition unless and until he comes out for FULL marriage equality. He did not do that. On this issue, let's not rise to our feet (in a supportive way) until he does.
A polite applause? Sure. Even a standing O when he vows to repeal DOMA? Okay, fine. But when the official position is still "one man, one woman = marriage," his support for our bonds really has no other way to fall but short.
I think you get the idea -- there is, after all, a recurring theme in these responses -- and I'm sorry, once again, that Obama has fully met my minimal expectations. What's left to say? Has he made any real progress on gay civil rights? No, he hasn't. I'm afraid I'm of the camp that says extending benefits that were already available to gay government employees is no big deal. Neither is appointing a gay ambassador. When there are substantive issues, embodied in actual pieces of legislation, that have widespread public and institutional support, across party lines, and he can't be bothered to push for them, why should I listen to a rehash of his campaign speeches? Yes, I am talking about DADT. I am talking about the HIV ban on overseas visitors. These are no-brainers. Look, everyone has their favorite bit of "most important" on gay civil rights, and some are going to be easier to get done than others. Certainly DADT is one of those. As I believe Pam Spaulding put it, the face of opposition to DADT reform is Elaine Donnelley, for crying out loud! And you will remember that her last testimony before a Congressional committee hearing on this issue sparked outright laughter.
And yet, what reaction are we getting to questions on DADT repeal? Somehow, that timeline keeps getting longer and longer. Not good enough.
(Stray thought: If, as seems to be the rationale, gay issues are too likely to bring fire from the right [and the thinking there, if you can call it that, just floors me], it would appear that the administration is really not cynical enough to use them to draw fire away from the stimulus and health-care reform. Bunch of tyros.)
No comments:
Post a Comment