Archive for Barack Obama

Race and Gay Issues – What No One Is Saying About This Election

November 8, 2012 Barack Obama, Gays, LGBT, Race No comments

Every election season when gay marriage makes its way to the ballot, race is always an issue. The gay community loses its battle at the polls and the media rushes to print to prove (falsely) that African Americans, once again, screwed over the gay community. Even though African Americans are only (comparatively) a small percentage of the vote, the media will imply that African Americans, and African Americans alone, are the reason that the gay community lost the fight for equality – again.

But election 2012 was drastically different for the gay community. There were very few disappointments at the polls. Tammy Baldwin, an out lesbian, became the first woman from Wisconsin AND the first out gay person to win a senate seat in United States. Maine, Maryland and Washington state voters passed same-sex marriage laws that allow gays and lesbians the right to marry. Minnesota struck down a ban on same-sex marriage.

So, where’s the conversation on race?

Let’s discuss race.  On May 9, 2012, President Barack Obama became the first sitting president to express support of same-sex marriage.   He’s Black (in case you didn’t notice).  A Black president, who planned to run for re-election, already facing much opposition from groups like the tea party and the conservative religious right, and needs as much support as he can get from the Black church (you know, the church that gay white men claim is sooooooo homophobic) publicly expressed support for gay marriage.   That takes some balls – and apparently, it’s balls the 43 white presidents before him didn’t have.  (I’m calling it like I see it.  We ARE talking race, here.)

In the months following his announcement of support for same-sex marriage, the right hated Obama even more – that was expected.  But, the gay white bloggers who hated on him for 3 years continued hating and doubting while Black political leaders spoke to leaders of Black churches and begged them not to withdraw their support of the president simply because he believed that all people should be treated equally under the law.

Fast forward to the election.  On election night, the gay community witnesses an historical night of victories for our community.  Coincidence?

I’m not suggesting that Obama’s support of same-sex marriage is the reason the gay community fared so we well on election night.  What I am suggesting is that Obama’s vocal support of same-sex marriage opened up a national dialogue, one that should have started many, many presidents ago.  Yes, former presidents and their family members have expressed support for same-sex marriage, but they’ve done so long after their political equity has run out and only after they have little to lose.  Only the Black guy did it when it mattered.

That’s the race conversation the media won’t have.  This time around, the Black community isn’t the bad guy.  This time around the gay community didn’t lose the battle and there’s no need to find someone to blame.  This time around, the media knows that the Black guy gave it his all and the Black church didn’t screw it up for him – and that doesn’t make great news, now does it?

Update:  2:16pm
Told ya. There’s always a race discussion:

According to an ABC News poll, a majority of Latinos supported same-sex marriage in the four statewide ballot initiatives Tuesday night.

Hispanic voters were more likely than other voters to say they would approve if their state recognized same-sex marriage, according to preliminary exit poll results.

Nearly six-in-ten Latino voters (59%) said their state should legally recognize same-sex marriage while 32% said their state should not. But among all voters, about half (48%) favored legalization of gay marriage while nearly the same share said they would oppose it (47%).

While African Americans mostly supported marriage equality in their states (52 percent compared to 40 percent opposed), it was non-Hispanic whites who were most likely to vote against equality for same-sex couples. ABC News reports that 47 percent of white voters supported same-sex marriage at their state’s ballot box but 50 percent opposed equality for LGBT couples.

I find this interesting. Why is it that when the gay community wins the battle, then (and only then) does the media admit that it’s really the non-Hispanic whites who are most likely to vote against equality for same-sex couples?

Will Obama Owe the Gays if he Wins Election 2012?

November 4, 2012 Barack Obama, Gays, Lesbian Podcast, Podcast No comments

Gays Will Control the Election, So They Say

October 27, 2012 Barack Obama, Gays, LGBT, Politics No comments

Re-electing President Obama Trumps Black Resistance to Same Sex Marriage

May 31, 2012 Audio Update, Barack Obama, Culture, LGBT, Politics, President Barack Obama, Race No comments

Cleo Manago, founder and CEO of the Black Men’s Xchange, joins us to discuss the topic of how the Black community is more interested in re-electing President Obama than it is in getting involved in the same-sex marriage battle.

One Letter a Day Until Same-Sex Marriage is Legal

February 27, 2010 Barack Obama, Lesbian Podcast, LGBT, Love No comments

Crystal Alburger has been writing one letter to President Obama every day since she married her wife, Christina. Crystal plans to continue writing Obama until same-sex marriage is legal in all 50 states. Crystal joined us on SistersTalk Radio to discuss The Love Letters Project.

Listen to the interview here.

Subscribe to SistersTalk Radio on iTunes here.

Obama’s Healthcare Interview on BlogTalkRadio

August 19, 2009 Barack Obama, Politics, Religion No comments

Unfortunately, I missed this show live because I couldn’t get a connection.

President Obama was a guest on 40 Minutes for Health, a faith-based initiative tackling the healthcare issue in the United States. If you can sit through all the opening prayer and religious babble, you might like what you hear (or maybe not!)

I was a bit disappointed that most of the questions I have about healthcare reform were unanswered, but I might have expected too much from this broadcast.

I know I’ll piss off a whole lot of liberals with this comment, but I’ll say it anyway: this broadcast sounded more like a public service announcement designed to support the Obama administration’s healthcare plan. I didn’t hear anything tangible that would help me decide if Obama’s healthcare plan will be the best thing for America.

Arizona Man Brings Military Style Assault Weapon to Obama Protest

August 18, 2009 Barack Obama, Bitch Slap, Politics, WTF? 4 comments

I support a person’s right to bear arms, but seriously, since when is it okay to bring a gun near the president? Oh wait . . . this president is Black so it’s perfectly acceptable, right?

About a dozen people carrying guns, including one with a military-style rifle, milled among protesters outside the convention center where President Barack Obama was giving a speech Monday — the latest incident in which protesters have openly displayed firearms near the president.

Gun-rights advocates say they’re exercising their constitutional right to bear arms and protest, while those who argue for more gun control say it could be a disaster waiting to happen.

Phoenix police said the gun-toters at Monday’s event, including the man carrying an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle slung over his shoulder, didn’t need permits. No crimes were committed, and no one was arrested. [source]

Who wants to bet if someone brought a gun anywhere near a white Republican president, these anti-Obama Arizonians would call the gun-toter unpatriotic and demand he was arrested for threatening the president’s life.

Several Tweeters have suggested that if a Black man had shown up at a presidential protest with a gun, the media would be all over that shit – calling it a Black-on-Black hate crime. I’m willing to bet he’d probably be in jail, too.

Update: 4:15pm

I just found some great commentary on this issue:

Arlington, Va.: While I support gun ownership rights (within the legal framework), I see protesters “exercising their right” to carry a firearm at town hall protests as a form of intimidation. The reason for this is that I doubt (yes, I don’t have the facts) that they carry their firearms everywhere (home, work, supermarket, church, etc.). If they don’t, then they’re doing it to make a point, and that point seems to be the threat of violence.

I’d like to get feedback from you and others, in particular those with differing opinions, on this.

Rick Perlstein: Carrying a gun to a political meeting is an obscenity. Anyone who does it, even if they are within their legal rights, should be ashamed. Our founders fought a revolution (and, yes, took up arms) to build a society where political disputes are not settled through force or intimidation–and that’s the only purpose of bringing a weapon to a political discussion: to intimidate.

It is utterly unacceptable, and every politician should have the guts to say so. What worries me is that the people bringing weapons are hoping to have their weapons taken away, forcing a confrontation that will escalate; many of them, after all, quite frankly proclaim them “revolutionaries.”

I agree. The intent there was indeed intimidation. Unless he’s carrying his military style assault weapon with him to church, the grocery store and to pick up his kids from school, he was just being a bully when he carried that very weapon to an Obama protest.

Obama Uses The Word ‘Change’ Instead of ‘Repeal’ When Asked About DADT

July 13, 2009 Barack Obama, DADT, LGBT, Politics 5 comments

Anderson Cooper spoke with President Obama about the Clinton administration’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT) policy. Obama stated that while he’d like to see DADT changed (sooner, rather than later), he insisted it’s not appropriate for the president to say he won’t enforce a law that’s constitutionally valid. Obama stated: “I do think that there’s the possibility, though, that we change how the law is being enforced even as we are pursuing a shift in congressional policy.”

What’s interesting to note here is that Obama used the word “changed” instead of “repealed,” although he recently called on Congress to repeal both DADT and the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).

I don’t know about anybody else, but I’d like to beat Bill and Hillary Clinton with a nail-spiked baseball bat. The Clinton administration left a mess for Obama to clean up.

Obama Calls on Congress to Repeal Anti-Gay DOMA and DADT

June 29, 2009 Barack Obama, DADT, LGBT, Politics 2 comments

At a press conference designed to appease Obama critics in the LGBT community, President Obama said “I’ve called on Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act to help end discrimination to help end discrimination against same-sex couples in this country.”

I’ve called on Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act to help end discrimination — to help end discrimination against same-sex couples in this country. Now, I want to add we have a duty to uphold existing law, but I believe we must do so in a way that does not exacerbate old divides. And fulfilling this duty in upholding the law in no way lessens my commitment to reversing this law. I’ve made that clear.

I’m also urging Congress to pass the Domestic Partners Benefits and Obligations Act, which will guarantee the full range of benefits, including health care, to LGBT couples and their children. My administration is also working hard to pass an employee non-discrimination bill and hate crimes bill, and we’re making progress on both fronts. Judy and Dennis Shepard, as well as their son Logan, are here today. I met with Judy in the Oval Office in May — and I assured her and I assured all of you that we are going to pass an inclusive hate crimes bill into law, a bill named for their son Matthew.

. . .

And finally, I want to say a word about “don’t ask, don’t tell.” As I said before — I’ll say it again — I believe “don’t ask, don’t tell” doesn’t contribute to our national security. In fact, I believe preventing patriotic Americans from serving their country weakens our national security.

During the press conference, Obama also called out anti-gay Black Americans – a move I’m sure will make those upper-class white male homosexuals over at HRC very, very happy:

Now, even as we take these steps, we must recognize that real progress depends not only on the laws we change but, as I said before, on the hearts we open. For if we’re honest with ourselves, we’ll acknowledge that there are good and decent people in this country who don’t yet fully embrace their gay brothers and sisters — not yet.

That’s why I’ve spoken about these issues not just in front of you, but in front of unlikely audiences — in front of African American church members, in front of other audiences that have traditionally resisted these changes. And that’s what I’ll continue to do so. That’s how we’ll shift attitudes. That’s how we’ll honor the legacy of leaders like Frank and many others who have refused to accept anything less than full and equal citizenship.

The LGBT community has heard Obama promise to repeal DADT and DOMA for quite some time now. WHEN will we actually see some action?

Shame on Obama for Letting Hillary Clinton Show Him Up

June 17, 2009 Barack Obama, Bitch Slap, Gays, Lesbians, LGBT, Politics, WTF? 3 comments

Update 5:35pm Here’s the final text of Obama’s memorandum.  Note the section highlighted in yellow.   I don’t get it.

After Obama’s Justice Department filed a legal brief against same sex marriage in which it compared gay unions to incestuous ones and that of an underage girl, his administration (compliments of Sec of State Hillary Clinton) turns around and releases a memorandum that outlines federal benefits for same-sex partners of federal employees in the civil service and the foreign service.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
June 17, 2009

Fact Sheet: Presidential Memorandum on Federal Benefits and Non-Discrimination

In an Oval Office event later today, President Barack Obama will sign a Presidential Memorandum on Federal Benefits and Non-Discrimination. The Memorandum follows a review by the Director of the Office of Personnel Management ant the Secretary of State regarding what benefits may be extended to the same-sex partners of federal employees in the civil service and the foreign service within the confines of existing federal laws and statutes.

Over the past several months, the Director of the Office of Personnel Management and the Secretary of State have conducted internal reviews to determine whether the benefits they administer may be extended to the same-sex partners of federal employees within the confines of existing laws and statutes. Both identified a number of such benefits.

For civil service employees, domestic partners of federal employees can be added to the long-term care insurance program; supervisors can also be required to allow employees to use their sick leave to take care of domestic partners and non-biological, non-adopted children. For foreign service employees, a number of benefits were identified, including the use of medical facilities at posts abroad, medical evacuation from posts abroad, and inclusion in family size for housing allocations.

The Presidential Memorandum to be signed today will request that the Director of OPM and the Secretary of State act to extend to same-sex partners of federal employees the benefits they have identified. The Memorandum will also request the heads of all other executive branch departments and agencies to conduct internal reviews to determine whether other benefits they administer might be similarly extended, and to report the results of those reviews to the Director of OPM.

The Memorandum will also direct OPM to issue guidance within 90 days to all executive departments and agencies regarding compliance with, and implementation of, the civil service laws, which make it unlawful to discriminate against federal employees or applicants for federal employment on the basis of factors not related to job performance.

Is anyone else confused? If I didn’t know any better, I’d say Hillary Clinton is trying to prop herself up as the gay community’s savior – even though she helped Barr write the very anti-gay DOMA. Her timing couldn’t have been any better. She waits until Obama’s DOJ files a very offensive brief defending her precious DOMA, then she steps in with great news for same-sex partners of federal employees? Coincidence? I think not.

If I were Obama, I’d fire that Bush-era holdover who recently filed the brief defending DOMA and I’d fire Hillary Clinton’s shadey ass. Between the two of them, he has way too many enemies on his team.

Michelle Obama’s new job ought to be keepin’ an eye on Hillary Clinton. I think Mrs. Obama can handle that wicked witch just fine.

« Older Entries