June 14, 2009
Update: All is well, and I regret suggesting Cincinnati.com is in any way shape or form a POS. (Uh, I’ve been a little edgy lately.) See my follow-up post.
Original post:
Just left a voicemail — probably a tad disjointed, but it’s 5:37 a.m., and I am pissed — here: 1-513-248-8600
I’m calling Fair Use, because once this slime (and the slimeball who wrote it) disappear off the pages of Cincinnati.com, you won’t be able to find it in full anywhere else.
Put on your waders and pull up the nearest wastebasket in case of sudden puking before reading this vile insanity:
Read more »»»
Posted by: Sapphocrat
Tweet This Post!
Filed Under: Hate Speech, Homophobia, Media, Ohio
June 12, 2009
Backstory: “Obama Defends DOMA; Invokes Incest, Rape, Child Marriage; Ditches Loving, Roemer, & Lawrence; And More That Will Make You Sick to Your Stomach,” June 12, 2009
Pam Spaulding, “The Obama admin defends DOMA in a brief comparing marriage equality to incest“:
Today is the anniversary of the Loving v. Virginia decision that struck down state laws against interracial marriage. How has the Obama administration recognized it? By lobbing this bomb right into the civil rights of gay and lesbian couples. …
This is a President who said he is a “fierce advocate” for our rights. This doesn’t look much like an advocate, it looks more like an enemy pulling the pin on the grenade and tossing it at us. While this may not be the perfect test case for DOMA, the Obama administration, in its defense of the Act, has filed a brief that is a roadmap for every fundnut anti-gay argument against the right of same-sex couples to marry. …
Friends, is this is the watershed mark, the line in the sand, the utter moral betrayal of this administration in black and white? Does this mean that we are not only expendable to this Administration, but that it has decided we can also be vilified as a constituency at will and not receive any blowback? That’s balls. A brief with language like this could have been written by Liberty Counsel it’s so homophobic; that it’s written in legalese doesn’t blunt the arguments being made here. It will be used to cause lasting damage to future civil rights gains.
Law Dork, 2.0, “Obama’s DOJ Did Not Have To Go This Far“:
Even if one argues, as I often have, that a government lawyer — from the Department of Justice to state attorneys general — must defend even those laws with which one disagrees*, such a lawyer needn’t overstate his or her case. The government lawyer defending a statute with which she disagrees needn’t add gratuitous demeaning statements into the legal brief she files.
Unlike the Obama Administration’s brief filed in the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell case turned away by the Supreme Court this week, last night’s filing in Smelt v. United States goes too far. It’s offensive, it’s dismissive, it’s demeaning and — most importantly — it’s unnecessary. Even if one accepts that DOJ should have filed a brief opposing this case (and the facts do suggest some legitimate questions about standing), the gratuitous language used throughout the filing goes much further than was necessary to make its case. …
Perhaps the simplest way to express my anger at this filing is to reprint what is easily the most disingenuous line of the brief, at p. 32:
DOMA does not discriminate against homosexuals in the provision of federal benefits.
There you go.
(Needless to say, I’m not wearing my Obama T-shirt today.)
foxsucks81, “Happy Loving Day! (And How Obama Just Lost My Support)“:
What is so troubling about these briefs is that they are so avoidable. First, the Obama DOJ could have simply argued that since DOMA is unconstitutional, it will decline to uphold the law. This would not be an unusual move as every president since Reagan has made these arguments, and the Obama DOJ has made similar arguments regarding the federal prohibition against medical marijuana licensing.
Second, even if the administration didn’t want to draw the line in the sand over this issue here and now, it had the option to argue against the suits on technicalities. The DOJ could have raised “improper standing”, or some other issue, and avoided taking sides on the matter. But that’s not what Obama did.
Call it the Audacity of Nope. …
I’m afraid this is the end of road for Obama. My time and money will no longer go to helping him pursue his agenda.
Marc Ambinder, “Obama Admin Hearts DOMA (For Now). Do Gays Still Heart Obama?“:
A lot of the same rhetoric used to justify actual discrimination against gays is cited in the brief as a reason why DOMA is necessary. (Child abuse precedents, all of that.) The brief even resorts to the argument that DOMA doesn’t deny gays anything because they’re still entitled to all the benefits that heterosexuals get — if they act heterosexually. The brief also suggests that gays accessing federal benefits will be free riders. …
The Department of Justice insists that Obama wants Congress to change DOMA (he called it “abhorrent” during the campaign), but in the absence of a new law, the government is duty-bound to enforce the laws of the land unless they are clearly unconstitutional. This is the same argument the administration is using to justify its aggressive defense of the states secrets privilege. Joe Solomnese, the president of the Human Rights Campaign, said in a statement that if Obama wants to change the law, he should send legislation repealing DOMA to Congress. He won’t do that. …
The response from Obama aides has generally been a version of the following: Trust us. We’re doing what we can. We’ll get this stuff done. But it will take some time. We’ve got a lot on our plate.
Andrew Sullivan, “The Most Egregious Line“:
“DOMA does not discriminate against homosexuals in the provision of federal benefits. …”
This only makes sense if you hold the view that gays are not being discriminated against because they can choose to marry someone of the opposite gender. This is the kind of argument I’ve had to counter for twenty years from the hardcore Christianist right, who emphatically reject the notion of homosexual dignity and homosexual relationships. To hear it come back to us in the mouth of the Obama administration - even in a pro forma case - is brutalizing. And it is all the more brutalizing sine Obama has said nothing and done nothing to support our civil marriages across the nation, since he took office.
Dave’sDailyDump, “Subject: Resignation” (long letter, more than worth the full read):
TO: XXXX XXXX, XXXX County Democratic Party Chairman
From: David Greer, Precinct XXX Chairman
CC: XXXX County Democratic Party Executive Committee
Subject: Resignation
After long and serious deliberation, I feel it is necessary to resign my position as a Precinct Chairman. I cannot continue to support the current administration and its abdication of its campaign promises, particularly to the GLBT Community.
In 1996, now-President Obama declared his support, in writing, to Marriage Equality. As a candidate for President, he withdrew that support in favor of “Civil Unions”. This is tantamount to being diametrically opposed to the decision of Brown v. Board of Education in 1954, establishing clearly, that “separate but equal” is unconstitutional. Today, by his actions, President Obama has told me clearly that he actually believes “separate but equal” is bad for everyone…unless you are gay.
Today, Obama’s DOJ has stood up to defend DOMA as Constitutional (after pledging to repeal DOMA), even going so far as to equate my 15-year relationship with incest and rape…
I love my Party. I have loved the time spent in service to the Party and to our local community. This is, without doubt, one of the most difficult decisions I’ve ever made and this is also one of the saddest days in my life.
With tremendous respect,
David Greer
Michael @ LeonardMatlovich.com, commenting at Queerty:
The issue here is NOT “marriage equality.”
It IS that the plaintiffs simply asked for the two rights OBAMA HIMSELF PROMISED TO FIGHT FOR in this campaign [with one caveat].
1. They want their relationship recognized in every state. Herein is the Obama Caveat…aka political magic trick so many fell for.
He claimed over and over…and gays too lazy to look behind the curtain wet themselves in glee…that he was “better than Hillary on DOMA” because he wanted to repeal “all of DOMA” while she hesitated on DOMA Section 2 which is nothing more but a reaffirmation of “states rights” to do what they want. Which, note, was EXACTLY his position [reiterated in his limp statement about the Iowa Supremes marriage decision], too.
DOMA was such a scalding hot buzz word that by even PRETENDING he was against the substance of Section 2 he “sounded” better. But the contradictory positions [NO on S-2; YES on “states rights] was there all the time for anyone who bothered to look.
2. The plaintiffs also want the same federal benefits as married straight couples. NOT to be declared “married” by the government simply the rights of others…the EXACT same promise Obama made and many of his defenders always applauded saying the substance of the benefits is more important than the label on the relationship.
NOW, Obama Inc. is echoing virtually every RIGHT WING homophobic legal argument against universal state recognition and simple equality benefits such as those administered by the IRS and Social Security.
With “fierce advocates” like this who needs Fred Phelps?
Ameriqueer, “The president’s idea of being a fierce advocate: Let them on the lawn to find chocolate eggs, then tell them to get the ‘ef out of here!“:
So when Obama campaigned for the LGBT vote and in the early days after the election claimed he would be a FIERCE advocate for LGBT people, what he meant was, “I’ll allow them on the lawn for Easter Eggs.” Because that’s what we’ve got from him on his campaign promises.
Dan Savage, “Obama Defends DOMA“:
Maybe he meant to say “fierce apathy.” Or “fierce antipathy.” Because if this shit is “fierce advocacy,” Mr. President, we’ll take benign neglect.
The New Civil Rights Movement, “DOJ: ‘What’s Past Is Prologue.’ Indeed.“:
On Wednesday, Attorney General Eric Holder, once heralded by the gay community as someone who would work to achieve President Obama’s promise to repeal DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act, on Wednesday stood in front of his Department of Justice’s LGBT employees and, as reported in an article just released by The Washington Blade, spoke to the Obama Administration’s promise of equality for all…
That was Wednesday. …
So, Attorney General Holder, in a celebration called, “What’s Past is Prologue: Honoring Our Past, Forging Our Future,” on one day claims to fight for us, the next day takes away all our arguments. I don’t think we can afford to have him or Obama leading the charge. …
It’s time to recognize that Obama has used us. Obama - while we never expected him to complete his promises within his first one hundred days, or even wthin his first year - has not ignored them, but actually broken, stomped on, and thrown his broken promises at our feet. Attorney General Holder has taken one of our most sacred pieces of history and all but used it against us. What’s past IS prologue, Mr. Holder, Mr. Obama. You too should know that better than most Americans. We certainly do.
It’s time to march. It’s time to fight for our rights. It’s time to win.
Joe Mirabella (Washington State Community Organizer, Join the Impact), “Obama defends DOMA, we defend our families“:
The LGBT community supported President Obama and his campaign with our money, our valuable time, and our votes. We believed the President when he promised us he was going to repeal DOMA, end Don’t Ask Don’t Tell, Pass the Employment Non Discrimination Act, support Hate Crimes Legislation, and more. We believed the President because he offered the country hope and our community needed hope more than any other community in America. We needed a friend in the White House who was willing to lead us through the civil rights movement of the century. We needed someone who was not going to stab us in the back.
Mr. President you flip-flopped. We should have known. You started your Presidency with one of the most anti-gay Pastors in the country giving your inaugural prayer, Rick Warren. You further hurt us by remaining silent on proposition 8. The one moment you mentioned our advances in Iowa and other states was in jest at the correspondence dinner. You asked the Supreme Court to ignore an appeal on Don’t Ask Don’t tell for “unit cohesion”. You did all these things and yet your promises remained on Whitehouse.gov (FYI his promise to repeal DOMA is no longer there.) Some of us still hoped, myself included, that you would do the right thing and not defend DOMA.
I no longer have hope for you President Obama. I no longer believe you are on my side. Your adminstration is using the arguments of our worst enemies to uphold laws that destroy our families. I should have known. I should not have been so enchanted by your beautiful speeches and colorful campaign posters. Mr. President you are no different than the rest. You used our community to get to the White House and now you have pushed us aside. This time is different though, because we won’t take it anymore!
I was once on the fence about the October march on Washington. It is clearer to me now more than ever we can not wait. We need to show up and stand up. We need to destroy our worst enemy — apathy. We need to mobilize our communities to fight locally and nationally. We need to demand that our leaders not only say they are going to protect our families, but they must prove it through action. Flowery speeches will no longeer woo us. Colorful posters are a red flag now. …
Obama reminded us today that we are the only ones we can depend on to fight for our rights. Apathy is no longer an option. Either stand up for yourself now or don’t be surprised when we are left with nothing. …
So, what about the October March on Washington? Just as Obama chose Loving v. Virginia Day to take a gigantic, steaming dump all over equality, ever so serendipitously, Cleve Jones tells Joe.My.God. “We Have The Permit, The March On Washington Is Definitely On“:
Speaking with me by phone this afternoon, activist Cleve Jones confirmed that despite earlier reports that the National Mall was previously booked and unavailable, he does have a permit from the Parks Department for a Columbus Day weekend March On Washington. “We put in a request for the West Lawn of the Capitol, where the Obama inauguration took place, and we got it. Nobody else had applied for it,” said Jones.
Jones added, “We’ve been getting nothing but complete cooperation from all the authorities - the DC police, the mayor, the Parks Service. They told us, ‘Go ahead, you’ve got it. Put the word out.’ They are happy to work with us and are expecting a lot of people.” …
As to the cost of putting on the weekend, Jones stresses that the MOW will be a stripped down, no frills, purely activism-focused event. …
Regarding the MOW’s timing, Jones has this to say: “It’s a three day weekend, it’s easier to travel, and the weather is usually very good. …” Jones estimated that “most people on the west coast will be able to come to this march for less than $700.” …
Jones issued this call to action: “We should be saying, ‘Enough of this, we demand full equality under civil law.’ We should be marching, engaging in nonviolent civil disobedience every day. We have a window, but it’s already starting to close. If you think you’re going to get anything out of Obama in the second half of his term, you don’t know anything about political history. In a year, he’ll be in full re-election mode.”
Referring to today’s DOJ-DOMA news, Jones closed with this: “It’s so clear that Obama and the Democratic leadership are turning their backs on us. If we don’t go for it now, we’ll get nothing. It’s beginning to smell a lot like Clinton.”
Read the rest of Cleve’s remarks at Joe’s — especially the part about the gay “leadership” opposed to the march.
Posted by: Sapphocrat
Tweet This Post!
Filed Under: 10/11: National Coming Out Day, Barack Obama, California, Civil Rights, Events, Hate Speech, Homophobia, Marriage, Radical Religious Right, Washington, D.C.
