Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Is overall liberal dissatisfaction with Obama overstated?

An interesting finding from Gallup: Obama's average approval among liberals for the month of September is at 75 percent -- only four points lower than the 79 percent approval Obama notches among Dems overall.

That number, of course, doesn't tell us anything about the degree of enthusiasm animating liberal approval for Obama or about whether the base will turn out in November. But it does suggest that liberal sentiment may be more in line with Dems overall than we've been led to believe.

This brings me to a point I've been meaning to make that keeps getting lost amid the endless arguments about Obama and the Dem base: The impression of dissatisfaction with Obama among the base is largely driven by specific groups of Dem base voters who are unhappy with Obama's performance on specific issues.

For instance: While liberals overall appear generally happy with Obama, that same Gallup poll finds Obama only has the support of 55 percent of the Dem base subgroup of Hispanics. And another Gallup poll out today finds that in the midterm elections Dem candidates have plummeted sharply among Hispanics, ostensibly because of the Congressional Dems' failure to pass comprehensive immigration reform.

Another example of this: Gay advocates have been very vocal in expressing disapproval of Obama -- but that's because of his performance on specific issues, such as the failure to repeal Don't Ask Don't Tell. And union members are also unhappy because Obama has disappointed them on core issues of importance to them.

The bottom line is that the constant chatter about Obama's problems with the left continues to miss the mark in a big way. Expansive claims that liberals are broadly unhappy with Obama seem overstated. What's really going on is that subgroups of the Dem base are voicing dissatisfaction with Obama's performance on issues that matter to them.

This is why the White House's ongoing gripe with the left -- that liberals and core base voters should be happier with Obama because he's racked up major victories -- also continues to be off base. Even if true, that argument is hardly going to persuade Hispanics, gays and union members who want more from the White House on their own issues.

All this is to say, again, that the whole discussion of Obama, liberals and the left has been oversimplified and dumbed down so badly that it's lost all meaning.

By Greg Sargent  | October 4, 2010; 3:55 PM ET
Categories:  2010 elections, Labor, economy, gay rights  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Sharron Angle promises Tea Party candidate "juice" if he drops out of race
Next: Happy Hour Roundup

Comments

Greg...this is a great post.

I'm sick and tired of folks trying to play one faction of the Dems against the other.
Now before Mike jumps me I'm not talking about Jane and FDL. I have visited that site perhaps a half dozen times in the past year.

I'm talking about the general dissatisfaction people like me and wbgonne have with Obama's policies. I think HCR was a compromised mess...and compromised for no real reason. I'm appalled at the ignorance our nation has shown in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But having said all of this I would still give Obama good marks. Despite what the reactionary looney tunes on this blog and other places might continually bleat...Obama ran as a CENTRIST DEM..somebody who is obsessed with consensus..he has GOVERNED AS A CENTRIST.
I give him high marks for his accomplishments as a CENTRIST. As a progressive that doesn't make me happy but it's certainly not Obama's fault. He has been very effective in his job from a Centrist..almost blue dog..perspective.

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 4, 2010 4:04 PM | Report abuse

Well done Greg. Excellent insight.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 4, 2010 4:04 PM | Report abuse

Countdown till Jane Hamsher calls Greg "a GOP patsy":

3...2...1...

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 4, 2010 4:05 PM | Report abuse

Yes, and I have to fight off my usual conservative jousters on FB, who declare that the whole country has come to its senses and realizes that Obama has never shared our values and is destroying the country.

Democrats don't count, I guess.

Posted by: KathleenHusseininMaine | October 4, 2010 4:11 PM | Report abuse

I think this post lonks up with what I was saying on an earlier thread: yes there are parts of the Dem base that are not fully satisfied, but given the stark choices in the coming election, all that is required is for people to vote.

They don't have to contribute or be thrilled with the Dems in general. They just have to understand that the GOP is a FAR worse alternative. Then they go to a polling place, vote, and that's it.

Simple.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 4, 2010 4:11 PM | Report abuse

"All this is to say, again, that the whole discussion of Obama, liberals and the left has been oversimplified and dumbed down so badly that it's lost all meaning."

And that about sums it all up! Good post Greg.

The follow up question is who is saying this sort of thing and why are they doing that? FoxNews is obviously busy trying to sell the "Dems will lose" meme, but why are the other media outlets doing that? Because it will get folks to tune in if they think Dems are giving up?

Posted by: Alex3 | October 4, 2010 4:13 PM | Report abuse

"lonks up"?

How about "links up"?

Geez.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 4, 2010 4:16 PM | Report abuse

"Even if true, that argument is hardly going to persuade Hispanics, gays and union members who want more from the White House on their own issues."

Obama has been in the Whitehouse for two years (a little less). Do those folks really believe Obama should have delivered 100% on every pet issue in *2* years?

High standards, much?

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 4, 2010 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Remember all the PUMA stories. Remember how CNN, MSNBC and of course FOX, worked themselves into a frenzy up until Hillary and Bill gave their speeches at the Democratic National Convention. You couldn't turn either of those three stations on without a story about how the Dems were divided, etc. Then suddenly after the speeches, it was all about unity, etc and turned into a love fest. Shortly after, Saturday Night live ran the Palin skits and the Republican party instantly turned into a complete joke.

The press loves when their meme's turn into reality. They relentlessly hammer away, probing, prodding to find the rifts. Perceived common knowledge morphs into factual knowledge. It's all a given when suddenly, a poll comes out or an election takes place and everyone forgets what they were talking about...look a squirrel!

The loudest voices of dissent get all the attention. The overwhelming silent majority are a boring, drab bunch. But the dissenters! They are the real story. So animated and theatrical! Now that's exciting. Plus, it helps feed the press' given knowledge that the Dems are in disarray, no wait, the Republicans are, no way, it's the Dems after all....look a squirrel!


Posted by: mikefromArlington | October 4, 2010 4:26 PM | Report abuse

FoxNews is obviously busy trying to sell the "Dems will lose" meme, but why are the other media outlets doing that?
=========================

This has been going on a long time in our SCLM (so-called liberal media).

Since 2006, at least, "xyz is Excellent News! For Republicans!" has been a tongue in cheek joke on blogs like TPM.
~

Posted by: ifthethunderdontgetya | October 4, 2010 4:33 PM | Report abuse

"IN A WIDELY READ essay about the tea party movement published earlier this year in the New York Review of Books, historian Mark Lilla provided a now-familiar explanation about what motivates the tea partiers. They are, he reckoned, angry about the recession; angry about health care reform; angry about President Obama; and angry about educated elites forever telling them what to do. "A new strain of populism is metastasizing before our eyes," he said, and he described the movement this way:

'It supports with worshipful intensity the Constitution of the United States; it places itself on the side of the individual and of liberty in opposition to an encroaching government bureaucracy; it respects the judgment of the founding fathers who had so wisely incorporated the separation of federal powers and the rights of the states into the great national document; it defends the American right to enjoy the sweat of one's own labor and the rewards of one's ability.'

Actually, Lilla didn't write that last bit. Another historian did. This passage comes from Frederick Rudolph, writing in 1950 about the American Liberty League, a group formed in 1934 in reaction to FDR's New Deal. But it sounds pretty familiar, doesn't it? All I did was change the verbs to the present tense, and it might as well have come from a portrait of the tea party written the day before yesterday."

http://motherjones.com/politics/2010/08/history-of-the-tea-party?page=1

Posted by: bernielatham | October 4, 2010 4:35 PM | Report abuse

Two must-reads (both short):

1. The cartoon that shows exactly what Bernie is saying:

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2010/10/04/afternoon-open-thread-6/

2. On the right turn the Supreme Court has already made:

http://www.balloon-juice.com/2010/10/04/blue-dahlia/

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 4, 2010 4:40 PM | Report abuse

@kevin: "Obama has been in the Whitehouse for two years (a little less). Do those folks [hispanics, gays] really believe Obama should have delivered 100% on every pet issue in *2* years? High standards, much?"

I like you Kevin but those two groups have every right to be disappointed and I don't think that anyone here on either side could reasonably argue that obvious point. It's not a question of delivering 100% (nice strawman). And if you are a member of one of these minorities it's hardly a pet issue - nor did Obama treat these as pet issues.

Posted by: sbj3 | October 4, 2010 4:41 PM | Report abuse

The real story is the great movement of the mainstream moderates away from the Obamacrats.

Obama still has liberal Democrats which includes most blacks (90+%) but that would never get him or his 'crats anywhere.

The fat hump in the middle of the political "bell curve" is what got 'em there and it is what will give 'em the bums rush outta there, real soon.

Posted by: battleground51 | October 4, 2010 4:43 PM | Report abuse

@Battleground

NOBODY here respects your opinion. If you expect anybody here to pay attention to you how about some links backing up your lame arse conclusions.

Your second sentence gives you away...
"Obama still has liberal Democrats which includes most blacks (90+%) but that would never get him or his 'crats anywhere."

YOU have just injected RACE into the conversation...so you tell us what that makes you. Most of us can already figure it out with the kind of posts you contribute.

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 4, 2010 4:56 PM | Report abuse

It was very hard for President Obama to put any issues ahead of trying to keep the Bush/Cheney Great Recession from sliding into A Great Depression.

Hispanics, Gays, and other groups, can whine all they want to about President Obama not giving their cases top priority, but had he decided to put their issues ahead of staunching the job hemorrhaging, the polls would have his support level in the mid twenties now, instead of the mid forties.

It was a national economic crisis, second only to the Great Depression, so of course he had to shuffle his campaign agenda, and focus first on ending The Great Recession that he inherited from Bush/Cheney.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 4, 2010 4:57 PM | Report abuse

The extremist Republican party (12+ / 0-)
Recommended by:PLS, Dburn, wishingwell, Into The Woods, Pam from Calif, BaritoneWoman, Pris from LA, Fonsia, kat68, mel70, Larsstephens, cocinero
is eventually going to pay a severe electoral price for their beloved Teabagger buffoons.

After getting blown out of the water in the last two elections, the Wingnutters are finally favored to make a small comeback. Which is not all that surprising when you consider that these things are cyclical, which also means there's eventually going to be a severe backlash against any of these far right wing extremists who manage to get elected this year.

I'm happy with Pres Obama and I know there's going to be alot of low hanging extremist Republican fruit for the Dems to knock off in the next few elections (after the one this fall).
.

Posted by: DrainYou | October 4, 2010 4:57 PM | Report abuse

@TPM

The TPM Poll Average for the congressional generic now stands at +1.9 GOP.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/2010/10/keeps_closin.php

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 4, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse

More on that Germany/Pakistan link and the militants who were killed by our drone attack, possibly disrupting another major Al Qaeda attack on Europe:

A U.S. missile killed five German militants taking shelter in a house in northwest Pakistan on Monday, intelligence officials said.

The attack hit a house in North Waziristan. That region has been named as the source of a European terror plot that has prompted American authorities to issue a travel advisory. One or more German citizens are reported to be linked to the plot.

The missile strike took place in the town of Mir Ali, a known hub for foreign militants with links to al-Qaida.

[...]

A senior Pakistani intelligence official said last week that some 60 Germans were believed to be in the region where the latest missile strike occurred. He said eight of them — as well as two Britons, one of whom was killed in a Sept. 8 missile strike — were at the heart of the Europe terror plot.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/10/04/world/asia/AP-AS-Pakistan-Missile-Strike.html

Well done President Obama! Well done indeed!

Way to take the fight directly to Al Qaeda's front stoop, literally.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 4, 2010 5:06 PM | Report abuse

@Battleground This is exactly why along with STRF, Jake and others you are a joke who is not taken seriously on this blog.

How about a link to back up what you just posted...from a Murdoch conservative paper the Wall Street Journal...

http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/WSJNBCPoll09282010.pdf

Ooops. Pretty much confirms what we've thought about you all along. You don't know what you're talking about. You just toss out mindless opinions which for the most part are literally ignorant. You're probably one of those gems who doesn't know the difference between socialism and communism. Well here is some reading for you...

The WSJ/NBC poll found that Obama has a 47% positive rating ("very positive" or "somewhat positive"). This number DOMINATES the Republican Party and its Congressional leaders: the Republican Party (31%), Senator Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (12%), and House Minority Leader John Boehner (14%). It also dominates all of the non-elected Republican politicos: Mike Huckabee (26%), Mitt Romney (21%), Newt Gingrich (24%), and Sarah Palin (30%). Even "the Tea Party Movement" garners only a 30% positive sentiment rating.

Emphasis was mine because you seem a little slow on the uptake battleground.

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 4, 2010 5:07 PM | Report abuse

"I like you Kevin but those two groups have every right to be disappointed and I don't think that anyone here on either side could reasonably argue that obvious point. It's not a question of delivering 100% (nice strawman). And if you are a member of one of these minorities it's hardly a pet issue - nor did Obama treat these as pet issues. Posted by: sbj3 "

Ok, so they are dissappointed. Four weeks from now they have to decide to vote or not, and if they vote, whom do they vote for?..

They get a month to look at what has been accomplished, a foundation dug out and poured, a base laid on the foundation, and plenty of room left to build on a very good foundation.

Let the republicans in and the foundation is busted up and the base filled in with rubble, and there is nothing to build on and yet another mess to clean up before that foundation can be poured again.

So, do they sit home and watch the R's win by default? They vote, and their choice is a Democrat that don't fully agree with, or a Republican they totally disagree with.

Sort of stacked deck.

So the Republican's hope is Independents they have done their level best to alienate, who just might be sincere about being against the giant deficits and the wall street bailouts. So, do the Independents vote for $4 trillion in deficits over the next ten years to let Wall Street moguls get their obscene bonuses?

Now people can vote, and so now they think about voting and then act accordingly.

Posted by: ceflynline | October 4, 2010 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Greg,
I think your point is well taken: Different groups have different gripes with the Admin, and for different reasons. Each group should be evaluated independently as to the validity of their complaints as well as the electoral threat they pose by vocalizing their dissent/not voting. I think in most cases, the threat is fairly minimal. Activists vote, and progressive activists are not going to vote GOP.

My question to you is, why doesn't the WH seem to get this? They are smart people and ran a near-flawless campaign. Why do they buy this conflation of specific interest-groups'/pundits' complaints with apathy among Dem voters? Rather than address the specific complaints and defuse activist critiques, they are taking out their frustration on voters with this foolish "buck up" talk.

Posted by: jbossch | October 4, 2010 5:09 PM | Report abuse

We are dissatisfied.

We're dissatisfied that we haven't seen ANY Trust Busting of the Too Big To Fail banks - one of the preconditions for economic recovery.

We're dissatisfied that we haven't seen ALL our troops brought home from the two foreign civil wars of Republican adventure in Iraq and Afghanistan - wars that serve only to provide Red China and Russia with cheap resources at the expense of America's blood, tears, and taxes.

We're dissatisfied that we still haven't seen the end of H1-B visas for foreign workers in the US at a time of record unemployment for American citizens.

But he's still better than the America-hating Republic Party of No.

Posted by: WillSeattle | October 4, 2010 5:10 PM | Report abuse

@ceflynline EXACTLY!!!

Those who have read my posts know how disappointed I am...not particularly in Obama but two moronic wars that are bankrupting us and HCR that is as pleasing as a warm bucket of spit. I am a progressive. Again Obama never lied to me..he campaigned as a Centrist and he has governed accordingly. He worships at the altar of consensus...he told us that during the campaign so we really can't be hacked at Obama.

To your larger point ceflynline...Yes I'll be at the polls and I'm contributing to the Alex Sink campaign till it hurts. Progressives may wish for more but unlike the tpers we're not brain dead!

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 4, 2010 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Liam-still: "Hispanics, Gays, and other groups, can whine all they want"
_________________________

What you're hearing from this gay man isn't whining, you bigot. What you're hearing is an ultimatum. That $50K I raised last time? Yeah, I've raised $0 this time and will continuing raising $0 until Obama takes the knife out of our back.

Good luck without us.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 5:14 PM | Report abuse

Now even Rick Perry is refusing to enter debates or to meet with newspaper editorial boards...
http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/04/texas-paper-slams-rick-perry/

This is an odious trend.

Posted by: bernielatham | October 4, 2010 5:15 PM | Report abuse

So the gays and hispanics think they are going to fare better under rule by Demint, Angle, Paul, Miller, Angle, et al?

They may rightly be dissatisfied but they will still vote Dem.

Posted by: pragmaticstill | October 4, 2010 5:15 PM | Report abuse

rukidding7 at 4:04


UMMMM your name is Are you Kidding


AND Are You Kidding?

All the nation has had to ENDURE is a sharp turn to the left by Obama.

EVEN Jan Hamsher of Fire Dog Lake was said today on MSNBC that she was in favor of more moderate health care bill.


What have you been smoking - that you have to lie saying that Obama has been a centrist.


Ask any Blue Dog.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 4, 2010 5:17 PM | Report abuse

@cefly: "Ok, so they are dissappointed. Four weeks from now they have to decide to vote or not."

They ain't gonna vote. "Well they spit in my face but it could be worse..." They've laid a foundation? A foundation on which to break even more promises?

Posted by: sbj3 | October 4, 2010 5:18 PM | Report abuse

@BGinChi, I kind of like "lonks in." Has a certain I don't know what to it.

Posted by: dkp01 | October 4, 2010 5:18 PM | Report abuse

@ ceflynline

Yes, this gay man is sitting out. After 25 years of supporting this party and 25 years of being stabbed in the back by it, you and your back-stabbing cronies in the party are on your own. Gay-rights legislation is dead whichever party is in control, but when the GOP takes over, your straight-Democrat agenda will be dead too. I call that karma. Welcome to the underside of the bus where you deliberately threw us the day after the 2008 election. Not a fun place, huh? Well, I guess you should've had that insight before you tossed group after group under there. Enjoy losing.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 5:18 PM | Report abuse

One reason the dissatisfaction of liberals with Obama is being overstated is because the supposedly huge rift between progressives and Obama is now an immutable feature of the corporate media narrative.

Last week, CNN's John King had the far-right Erick Erickson to attack Obama for criticizing Fox News. Then he turned to Amy Goodman, whom King has on his show for "balance." But instead of asking Goodman her take on Obama's comments about Fox, he changed the question to "why do you think the left is so dissatisfied with Obama?"

So, King arranged it for Obama to get attacked from the left and the right. I respect Amy Goodman as journalist, who has sometimes risked her life to report major stories (most notably, the East Timor genocide by an erstwhile Indonesian dictator). But now she is just being used by the corporate media as another means by which to attack the president.

Posted by: Spacer | October 4, 2010 5:19 PM | Report abuse

@WillSeattle....Well said. Haven't seen you here before...hope you hang around...wbgonne, lmsinca, and I can use your help! :-)

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 4, 2010 5:20 PM | Report abuse

I guess I don't see the point of this post. Even if its just specific groups on the left who are dissatisfied on specific issues, Obama still has to ask the same question: Will these voters give money and come to the polls when I need them, or will they stay home?

Posted by: tomtildrum | October 4, 2010 5:20 PM | Report abuse


Liam-still: "Hispanics, Gays, and other groups, can whine all they want"
_________________________

What you're hearing from this gay man isn't whining, you bigot. What you're hearing is an ultimatum. That $50K I raised last time? Yeah, I've raised $0 this time and will continuing raising $0 until Obama takes the knife out of our back.

Good luck without us.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 5:14 PM |

....................

Good luck to you with calling someone who has been a staunch backer of equal rights for gays, "a bigot", and good luck to you with the Republican Congressional Majority that you will be helping to bring about. They have really been outstanding champions of full equal rights for gays for the past three decades.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 4, 2010 5:20 PM | Report abuse

Overstated? It's not the Republicans or the Tea Partiers who say that the left is dissatisfied with Obama,it's the left. It's not the Republicans who told the left to stop whining. It was the Obama administration. It's not the Republicans and the Tea Partiers who has been attacking the left for speaking out against Obama. It's Gibbs.

Posted by: houstonian | October 4, 2010 5:23 PM | Report abuse

It doesn't matter, come November they will vote for the Democrats. They really haven't anymore integrity than any of the others. They will vote for the one closest to their socialist ideals and they will continue to vote for them. For anyone to undermine the "community organizational" expertise of the Democratic Party is stupid. They are skilled manipulators of the populace. They will bus them to register, they will bus them to the polls, and they will tell them how to vote. No questions. The idea of a Republican having such skills is ridculous since most Republican constitients already have home owners association so they do not require a "communicty organizer" mentality. The Democrats will win, no matter what because they have the right "hooks and crooks".

Posted by: staterighter | October 4, 2010 5:23 PM | Report abuse

It seems many expected Obama to magically fix all that ills this country shortly after taking office. It just doesn't work that way.

I'm a liberal and I'm thrilled with how Obama has been doing. Has he done everything I'd want him to? No. Has he done more than I expected him to be able to? Yes.

This meme started in the media during the 2008 primaries. The PUMAs were all powerful (think today's Tea Partiers.) The big hoopla was, "Will Obama be able to bridge the PUMA divide?" "If Obama doesn't choose Hillary for his VP the PUMAs may vote for McCain."

It was all nonsense. Luckily (or un-luckily) it was persuasive to John McCain and, per some reports, was one of his reasons for choosing Sarah Palin. McCain thought that he could get the PUMAs by choosing a female for his VP. Silly man.

That cost him a couple of percentage points, but burdened America with several years of the brain-free Facebook Ramblings by Sarah Baracuda. A mixed blessing at best.

So what is the moral of the story? Just because something is persuasive enough to convince the US media and John McCain doesn't mean it is true. In fact, it is a fairly good indication that it is NOT true.

Posted by: PaciolisRevenge | October 4, 2010 5:25 PM | Report abuse

Battleground

You are correct.

I believe it was the same survey - or another one which came out this week - saying that Obama had the support of 91% of blacks in the country - and 36% of the whites.

Obama is down to 36% of the whites.

Let's just break down the 36% of the whites for a moment - how many of those describe themselves in the gay interest group, how many are hispanice - and how many are primarily motivated by their union ties?

My point is this: ONCE all the special interests are pulled out of the equation, WHO IS LEFT?


What are the white, non-hispanic, straight non-union supporters left?


It is a fair question.

The hispanics are probably more motivated by economic issues - as opposed to the specific question of immigration.


All this quibbling about unhappiness with Obama on the left - those people are going to go out and vote anyway - if they complain about Obama out of concern about liberal issues, those are the people who are going to go out and vote for democrats anyway.

The REAL problem Obama and the democrats have is everyone else - all those people who CAN NOT WAIT to vote straight Republican to SEND A MESSAGE TO OBAMA.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 4, 2010 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Uh huhh ... uh huh.

Except you revealed yourself as a dishonest poseur with your "straight-Democrat agenda" reference.

You don't vote democratIC you're not gay. Go climb back under the bus.

Posted by: pragmaticstill | October 4, 2010 5:26 PM | Report abuse

Liam-still: Good luck to you with calling someone who has been a staunch backer of equal rights for gays, "a bigot", and good luck to you with the Republican Congressional Majority that you will be helping to bring about. They have really been outstanding champions of full equal rights for gays for the past three decades.
___________________________

Oh, what a poor little whining bigot. It's too bad that just 4 weeks before the election, all you have to sell is fear and abuse. Sorry, but the national Democratic party has done nothing for three decades either. And that's because people like you think as long as you can use fear-mongering to suck in gay dollars, you never have to actually lift a finger to do anything on gay rights. That era is over, starting now.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 5:28 PM | Report abuse

obama is a corporate presdient no different than bush.
He's waiting to leave office so he and his wife Michelle can claim more BOD memberships... 4 meetings and a million dollars a year.
He cares about the working men and women to the exact same extent as any republican

Posted by: newagent99 | October 4, 2010 5:28 PM | Report abuse

@Spacer...great observations.

@SBJ You and I go back a ways on this blog.
You know I respect your intellect and wit. But really...it's hard to understand someone in your position. You just wrote..

"Well they spit in my face but it could be worse..." They've laid a foundation? A foundation on which to break even more promises?"

You like uh_huhh have identified you as one of our gay brothers. You've also repeatedly said you did not vote for Obama.
How can you weigh in on this issue? Not that you don't have a right to your opinion...but really...it just seems incredibly disingenuous since you never voted for O to begin with..whether on gay issues or not.

I get that you are a fiscal conservative and have nowhere to turn socially. But seriously...with no snark intended...I do not for the life of me understand how gay people could possible vote R at this time in our country. Formerly reasonable R's like John McCain have turned into absolute sl&ts to retain their power. The highest ranking elected official of the Tea Party group that is currently dominating R politics..Jim Demint looks at you SBJ and uh_huhh and proclaims you're not even fit to be school teachers. If Demint was an outlier I could understand...but he's not!
He is very representative of the current R brand. Again I'm not trying to be snarky, nasty, or even judgmental. I'm truly trying to understand how a gay person can support the R party right now.

I'm on your side guys. I agree the administration is blowing it over DADT..Gay marriage and virtually every issue important to the GLBTs. I also understand uh_huhh's justifiable anger after all he did to help out in 08...but support the CURRENT R party...I just don't get it. Perhaps you can help me understand.

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 4, 2010 5:30 PM | Report abuse

Someone should tell Eric Cantor it's too late:

"Republicans, he said, 'have to be careful about how we do it. We don't want to be seen as a bunch of yahoos.'"

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/10/cantor-no-government-shutdown----we-dont-want-to-be-seen-as-a-bunch-of-yahoos.php?ref=fpblg

Posted by: pragmaticstill | October 4, 2010 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 5:28 PM

No one is buying your fake outraged gay person act. Begone right wing troll.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 4, 2010 5:32 PM | Report abuse

LOL @ pragmaticstill. Get therapy for your paranoia. I was referring to an agenda that serves only straight Democrats. I was not using that silly GOP label "Democrat Party." My same-sex partner of 15 years would certainly be surprised to learn from you that I'm not gay.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 5:33 PM | Report abuse

Grandmas for Obama
http://www.votolatino.org/events/2010/10/02/hasta-tu-abuela/

Posted by: bernielatham | October 4, 2010 5:34 PM | Report abuse

"The idea of a Republican having such skills is ridculous since most Republican constitients already have home owners association so they do not require a "communicty organizer" mentality."

That's gotta be the funniest thing I've read in awhile, it actually brought me into the comments, it was so funny. Because everyone knows Dems can't afford homes, don't own homes, have never worked a day in their lives, need buses to get them to the polls because they can't afford cars on the public dole and let's see what else, oh yeah, and we're all socialists to boot.

Anyway, what I was going to post was that because this is a mid-term election whatever "disappointment" in Obama that various groups have will be trumped by local elections and candidates.

Hispanic voters in CA have a REAL clear choice between a candidate who favors and will fight for the DREAM act here and one who thinks that children of illegals born here shouldn't actually even have access to higher education, much less find a pathway to citizenship through education or military service. And believe me, they're getting out the vote. I doubt you'll see any kind of a Republican sweep in CA because some voters are dissatisfied with Obama.

Posted by: lmsinca | October 4, 2010 5:34 PM | Report abuse

Uh huhh ... of course the Republicans think you should get therapy to cure you of the GAY!

Good luck with that.

Posted by: pragmaticstill | October 4, 2010 5:35 PM | Report abuse

rukidding7

. I'm appalled at the ignorance our nation has shown in Iraq and Afghanistan.

______________________


I'm not sure what you are talking about - however would you prefer if there were 150 terrorist training camps in Afghanistan?

Many liberals (even those who claim to be centrist) place little value of what the military has done in the Middle East.


You think it is better to have 150 terrorist training camps - and sleeper cells all over the US and Europe?


At what point do you think we should fight back?


Bill Clinton tried to ignore the terrorist threat - ignoring seven or eight attacks in the 1990s - up until the USS Cole in 2000.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 4, 2010 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Someone should tell Eric Cantor it's too late:

"Republicans, he said, 'have to be careful about how we do it. We don't want to be seen as a bunch of yahoos.'"

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/10/cantor-no-government-shutdown----we-dont-want-to-be-seen-as-a-bunch-of-yahoos.php?ref=fpblg

Posted by: pragmaticstill | October 4, 2010 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Ha! Good one!

Posted by: wbgonne | October 4, 2010 5:36 PM | Report abuse

LOL @ Liam-still. You really don't get it. You stab the gay community in the back and then when you're challenged on it, all you can do is pretend nothing's wrong and attack the accuser as a right-wing troll.

Let me know how that works for you come November, you smug little bigot.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 5:38 PM | Report abuse

Yes! Understated! No! Overstated! No! Understated! Yes! Overstated! We're going to be just fine, Mabel! Hold me tight! Everything's going to be okay! Yes we ....could have!

Posted by: chatard | October 4, 2010 5:40 PM | Report abuse

"until Obama takes the knife out of our back"

Oh shut up, uh_huhh.

What, you think everyone is 100% pleased? I'm a sustainability advocate, you don't see me giving up even though my pet cause has been pushed back to 2011 or beyond, do you? No, you frigging don't.

So go ahead and take your b.s. somewhere else. The vast majority of gay men and women will do the right thing and get motivated to get the vote out for Democrats. If you're so stupid as to give up your vote by not voting or throw away your vote by voting for the GOP or 3rd party you have only yourself to blame. The Democratic Party is the Big Tent party. Gay Americans are right to support Democrats because it's not JUST about civil rights, the Dem agenda means progress for the country on every front. You want to give up fighting? You want to go somewhere and sulk while those of us with heart stay in the battle and fight on YOUR behalf? Fine by me. Just take your whining somewhere where I don't have to hear it.

"Change is hard." ~ Barack Obama

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 4, 2010 5:40 PM | Report abuse

@ruk: I think you must have missed kevin's initial post that I was responding to. He sarcastically and condescendingly commented that gays and hispanics expected too much for their pet issues. I pointed out that these minority groups were justifiably upset. I NEVER made the jump to say, "Therefore they will vote for the GOP."

"How can you weigh in on this issue? Not that you don't have a right to your opinion...but really...it just seems incredibly disingenuous since you never voted for O to begin with..whether on gay issues or not."

That's got to rank as one of the dumbest things you've ever written.

"I do not for the life of me understand how gay people could possible vote R at this time in our country."

Gee - ruk: How can you weigh in on this issue? Not that you don't have a right to your opinion...but really...it just seems incredibly disingenuous since you aren't gay.

"I agree the administration is blowing it over DADT..Gay marriage and virtually every issue important to the GLBTs."

That was my point.

Posted by: sbj3 | October 4, 2010 5:41 PM | Report abuse

Well, one thing is for sure. The MEDIA sure wants voters to believe this. Just as they have been pounding into our heads that the republicans are going to win big!!
President Obama has faced more crisises than any president in history. Add to that the republicans obstruction, propaganda, voting against anything and everything, their fillibusters, it is a wonder anything has been accomplished.
For those with special interests saying they do not support him, well, he had some pretty important things to contend with, like keeping our country from total destruction. Think of the alternative and then say you do not support him.

Posted by: kathlenec | October 4, 2010 5:41 PM | Report abuse

uh_huhh, it would make a lot more sense to keep making noise about your issues and make it clear that you aren't going to fund raise to the same extent you did before in order to put pressure on the Dem party. But to skip the election and hope the Dems lose?

That's childish and you know it. You might feel better for a little while, but that is not a political strategy. It won't win you anything.

The GOP will be a thousand times worse. Plus, if it wasn't for aggressive GOP anti-gay pushback, the Dems would have gotten much more done for GLBT rights.

Gay rights are human rights. We all agree with that on the left and it will get sorted. First we have to get past dealing with stupid right-wing bigotry and fear.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 4, 2010 5:43 PM | Report abuse

pragmaticstill: Uh huhh ... of course the Republicans think you should get therapy to cure you of the GAY!
_____________________

Yes, many of them do, because they're ignorant bigots. As, however, are plenty of Democrats.

Many Democrats like you are also backstabbers who suck down contributions from the gay community during the campaign and then deliberately refuse to do anything for the gay community in office.

All you can do is mock, belittle, bully, and attack. Sorry, but that's not working anymore. Your gay gravy train has ended.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 5:43 PM | Report abuse

WHO is bring RACE into this?

When there is an ethnic group which is going 91% behind someone - that group is voting by RACE - NOT by issues.

There is simply no other way around it.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 4, 2010 5:45 PM | Report abuse

@uh_huhh I GET your anger! We can hear you loud and clear. Many of us..including I suspect AGREE with you...up to the point you don't vote or vote R.

Support is a relative term. Like you I gave far more money to OFA in 08...zero this year..all my $ are staying local with Alex Sink. I truly understand how you feel backstabbed. Obama promised a P.O. during the campaign so I feel backstabbed. But if you don't get out and vote then you are providing a "level" of support for the R's by your abscence.

Pragmatic is right...these people intend to set back ALL progress on your issues. I can't say I empathize because I'm not Gay
just as I'm white which means I can't truly know what it feels like to be black.
Alas our country operates with a two party system. If you don't at least help us GOTV YOUR country is going down the cr&pper..and not just on gay issues. 1-7 of YOUR neighbors is living below poverty.
More than half of my neighbors here in Florida owe more on their houses than their worth. Way more than one out of ten of my neighbors is looking for work.
You need to search your heart and get out and help us. I'm sorry we haven't done a better job of helping you...we'll simply have to keep on trying!

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 4, 2010 5:45 PM | Report abuse

"Your gay gravy train has ended."

That sounds like a great new show on Bravo. I'd watch it.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 4, 2010 5:46 PM | Report abuse

BGinCHI: uh_huhh, it would make a lot more sense to keep making noise about your issues and make it clear that you aren't going to fund raise to the same extent you did before in order to put pressure on the Dem party. But to skip the election and hope the Dems lose?

That's childish and you know it. You might feel better for a little while, but that is not a political strategy. It won't win you anything.

The GOP will be a thousand times worse. Plus, if it wasn't for aggressive GOP anti-gay pushback, the Dems would have gotten much more done for GLBT rights.

Gay rights are human rights. We all agree with that on the left and it will get sorted. First we have to get past dealing with stupid right-wing bigotry and fear.
____________________________

No, it isn't "childish," and bashing me is never going to re-open my wallet.

There certainly is a political strategy. It's called having the gay community finally get tough with the Democratic Party the way the NRA does with Republicans after literally decades of the Democratic Party raping and pillaging us for support and never, ever doing ANYTHING in office.

After two years of being repeatedly thrown under the bus by the party, don't you dare even try to make an appeal to solidarity. The party should have thought about solidarity 20 months ago when straight Dems gleefully threw the gay community under the bus.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 5:49 PM | Report abuse

"That sounds like a great new show on Bravo. I'd watch it."

It is a new show on Logo, "The A-List"

http://popwatch.ew.com/2010/08/31/logo-a-list-new-york-trailer/

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 4, 2010 5:51 PM | Report abuse

@SBJ "Gee - ruk: How can you weigh in on this issue? Not that you don't have a right to your opinion...but really...it just seems incredibly disingenuous since you aren't gay."

I don't have to be gay to understand when political leaders of one of the parties refers to gays as an abomination against god.
No cap for god here because I don't believe these heathens worship the REAL God. When the highest elected leader doesn't see you as fit to even teach in the classroom I don't have to be gay to understand that is demeaning, ignorant and disrespectful. I've already conceded since I'm not gay I can't pretend to know how painful it is...but again I don't have to be gay to know it is freaking insulting.

And so I angered you. I apologize. You still haven't answered the basic question.
Perhaps we can leave the word "gay' out of my question.

Perhaps SBJ you can inform as to why ANY group would support a party that has insulted and demeaned their group and even campaigned for laws that discriminate against that group. From an outsiders perspective it simply looks like a black person voting for the Grand Wizard of the KKK in an election. I wouldn't understand that either.

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 4, 2010 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Let's talk about the black vote for a moment.

For the most part, when it comes to the House, the gerrymandering has had the OPPOSITE EFFECT than those who supported racial lines originally.

For the most part, the black districts are democratic now and they will be democratic after this election - the blacks have now been DRAWN OUT OF THIS ELECTION.

I don't believe that was the intention - because of the racial gerrymandering - the black votes are not contested anymore for House races.


________________________________


Now the black vote only really comes in for Senate and Governors' races - and if one looks carefully at the map, the combination of election cycles and states this year has served to SIDELINE the blacks.

I don't believe this is a healthy situation

And as such the racial gerrymandering of House districts should END - it has served its purpose and blacks have gotten elected.

One can make their own statements on the QUALITY of black leadership the nation has gotten out of these black majority districts. There are serious questions here.

The problems are not because these people are black - it is more rooted in the fact that they have safe districts and they have been isolated from scrutiny. The nepotism is out of control as well.

It is time to end racial gerrymandering.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 4, 2010 5:52 PM | Report abuse

uh-huhh, good luck out there. Thankfully most of your GLBT fellows are smarter than you.

I'm not asking you not to be mad; I'm asking you not to be stupid. Sorry, but that's what allowing the GOP to come into power would be: stupid.

And the consequences of that are going to be beyond DADT and marriage rights, both of which are going to get solved once the current Grumpy Old White Man generation gets out of the way.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 4, 2010 5:53 PM | Report abuse

Democrats have elected and reelected openly gay house members.

If you can get a better deal from the Republicans then take your wallet over to them.

All you want to talk about is your wallet, which is a tell that you are just a money obsessed Right Wing Troll.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 4, 2010 5:54 PM | Report abuse

Btw, uh_huhh,

When you say they "never, ever do ANYTHING in office," should we assume that you mean EXCEPT for the Matthew Shephard Act?

The Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act, also known as the Matthew Shepard Act, is an American Act of Congress, passed on October 22, 2009,[1] and was signed into law by President Barack Obama on October 28, 2009,[2] as a rider to the National Defense Authorization Act for 2010 (H.R. 2647). This measure expands the 1969 United States federal hate-crime law to include crimes motivated by a victim's actual or perceived gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Matthew_Shepard_and_James_Byrd,_Jr._Hate_Crimes_Prevention_Act

You mean, EXCEPT for that, right?

Get it together uh_huhh. Because right now you're fake outrage is pretty much looking like an act.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 4, 2010 5:57 PM | Report abuse

rukidding7, the failure to do ANYTHING of note on gay issues was primarily a result of a deliberate decision by Barack Obama and Rahm Emanuel to refuse to do anything on gay issues and, in fact, to pressure congressional Dems not to do anything on gay issues.

The attitude was as it has been for decades: We won't do anything for them and we'll just use scare them a little and get their money again next time anyway.

NO. NEVER AGAIN. I will never again compromise my dignity for the sake of party and vote for a man who calls my relationship inferior to his marriage. I will never again support a party that takes my money and then stabs me in the back the day after the election.

If they wanted support, they should have thought about that 20 months ago when they had time to do something.

Until their attitude changes, no more money, no more volunteer work, and no more votes. The domestic violence ends now.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 5:57 PM | Report abuse

@BG "once the current Grumpy Old White Man generation gets out of the way."

You've just hit on why I remain an optimist.
Even though I am a grumpy old white man I get that most of my peers simply don't get it.

We have to listen to the caterwauling..."I want my country back...I want us to follow the Constitution EXACTLY as it was written.
Well if you're a white male I guess you do since it was a sexist racist document.

But as you wisely point out BG I don't believe the young folks are ready to return to a country where blacks represent 3/5ths of a person and women do not get to vote.

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 4, 2010 5:59 PM | Report abuse

What percentage of the US population is African American, and what percentage of the 100 US Senate seats do they occupy?

Now the Forrest Nymph wants to also dilute their ability to elect African American House members to represent them. The problem is not that black people do not vote for white people, because they do; the problem is that very few white people are willing to vote for black candidates.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 4, 2010 6:00 PM | Report abuse

The Gay Issues

The gays in this country are just going to have to get used to the fact that Obama lied to you just like Obama lied to the rest of the country.

In 2008, the country was fed a bunch of lines - it sounded good -

However, at this point the American People are like abused spouses - going back for more, hoping that he won't do it again. Obama WILL lie to you again.

Obama puts that smile on his face when he is caught in a lie or a deception.

Obama is filled with deceptions.

The Gays just have to realize that black churches in this country are conservative on some issues - and gay issues are some of them.

The hispanics too - they have to realize that Obama might file a lawsuit in Arizona to help Harry Reid - and Obama may play his games.

However, the REAL issues important to hispanics are economic issues - and on those Obama let the hispanics down.

______________________


These interest groups have to realize that Obama is filled with deceptions and lies - and Obama is going to do what he wants.

If you want to support Obama and the democrats this year, you can count on getting more of the same from Obama - more blaming someone else, and Obama will not listen to your concerns.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 4, 2010 6:00 PM | Report abuse

Democrats and liberals are VERY happy with President Obama.

The wacko right wing extremists have been pretending to be Dems ever since they invented Demagoguery and as usual they're as nasty as can be.


Posted by: lindalovejones | October 4, 2010 6:01 PM | Report abuse

uh-huh:

The Democratic Party has an interesting approach to motivating its customer base, doesn't it? Who knew that telling people to shut-the-f-up-and -stop-whining was such a successful marketing strategy? Retailers, please take note.

Posted by: wbgonne | October 4, 2010 6:02 PM | Report abuse

ruk, right on. I'm on my way to grumpy old man land, but I'm sure as hell not going to let fear make me crazy like on the right.

Gay rights are human rights, and I want the current admin to fight for them.

But enabling the party of McCain and DeMint??

NO WAY.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 4, 2010 6:02 PM | Report abuse

uh_huhh sounds a lot like the conservatives of 04, 06 and 08. We were furious with the Republican establishment. Many of us still are.

so we voted but we didn't contribute or campaign. I'll never forget the two nice ladies staffing the Mike DeWine booth at a local street fair. I think a know leper would have gotten more interaction. No one went near them. And DeWine lost.

Withdrawing support for the Democrats MAY mean that the gay community loses ground toward its objectives. But is it gaining any ground with the current situation? What can these folks do to get the attention of the Democrat party power structure.

Oh and I'd like to thank Liam Still for venting his bile all over uh_huhh. Thanks for proving my point.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | October 4, 2010 6:03 PM | Report abuse

The dissatisfaction part of it is becoming old news. As more and more of the nation (including liberals) become alarmed by the dangerous extremists who are running against many Democrats, moving past differences is a growing trend.

Posted by: revbookburn | October 4, 2010 6:03 PM | Report abuse

Speaking of Grand Wizards of the KKK...with this whole tea party thing isn't it about time for David Duke to make a comeback...

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 4, 2010 6:04 PM | Report abuse

Hey, Ethan2010, does the DNC pay you to spin for them by the word or by the letter?

Describe for me what Barack Obama did to get the hate crimes bill passed? Answer: nothing. As Kerry Eleveld recently explained in the Advocate, the bill had already passed both houses of Congress the year before Obama was even in office. Tell me, how many prosecutions has Obama undertaken using the act? Answer: zero. Tell me who considered hate crimes legislation important? Answer: the Human Rights Campaign, for whom it was a gimmicky, easy-to-pass trinket to allow them to proclaim--after decades without accomplishments--that they could finally get something passed.

The big three items: ENDA, DADT repeal, and DOMA repeal. Obama did nothing on any but deliberately pressure congressional Dems to kill them.

Now, go report how many letters you posted and get your DNC check.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 6:04 PM | Report abuse

P.S.,

Though I do question your pseudononymous bona fides.

Posted by: wbgonne | October 4, 2010 6:05 PM | Report abuse

uh_huhh is going to open his wallet for Christine O'Donnell, Sharron Angle, etc because they are such staunch backers of equal rights for gay people.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 4, 2010 6:06 PM | Report abuse

There's also this:

Obama signed the measure that, among other things, grants employees' same-sex partners access to a government insurance program that pays for long-term conditions, such as Alzheimer's disease. They also would be allowed to take sick leave to care for a sick partner or non-biological child.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/federal-eye/2009/06/eye_opener_same-sex_partners_g.html

The Dems have not done enough but it's sure more than nothing. Definitely not a stab in the back. Buy, hey, uh huhh, I'm sure the GOP has some better ideas for you.

Posted by: pragmaticstill | October 4, 2010 6:09 PM | Report abuse

Liam at 6;00

There are over 50 Black Presidents worldwide - Blacks are President of over 50 nations in Africa.

Out of 189 nations on Earth, the blacks have over 50 Presidencies - WAY over their percentage of worldwide population.


WHAT is to be done about that?

Yes, the blacks have one Senate seat - but as I said in the posting above, there are significant disadvantages to having the black-majority districts in the House.

Perhaps it would be better to spread the blacks out over many more districts - so MANY MORE Congressmen have significant black populations in their districts.

Obama proved that white voters will vote for black candidates - the black majority districts the disadvantages now outweigh the advantages.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 4, 2010 6:09 PM | Report abuse

BGinCHI, let me know how "Vote Democrat, you stupid f-----" works for you come November.

Tell me, BGinCHI, would the NRA blindly support the GOP if the GOP repeatedly stabbed it in the back?

No, BGinCHI, the "stupid f-----s" are the ones who keep supporting Dems no matter how they stab us in the back. If we support even if they stab us in the back, they'll just keep stabbing us in the back because it's politically cost-free.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 6:10 PM | Report abuse

@ruk: "Perhaps SBJ you can inform as to why ANY group would support a party..."

We've had this discussion before - you aren't interested in an answer.

Posted by: sbj3 | October 4, 2010 6:10 PM | Report abuse

@SBJ Forgive me. As I just pointed out to BG I am a grumpy OLD white man. Perhaps it's simply the onset of early senility but I do not remember that discussion. You're younger with a better memory and so I'll take your word for it.

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 4, 2010 6:14 PM | Report abuse

Now the resident Forrest Nymph has turned into a one world promoter. Apparently he now wants to take into count what happens in foreign elections, as being relevant to proportional representation in the USA.

Got to love the wacky political windsocking of our resident Forrest Nymph!

Posted by: Liam-still | October 4, 2010 6:15 PM | Report abuse

All, Happy Hour Roundup posted:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/10/happy_hour_roundup_101.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | October 4, 2010 6:16 PM | Report abuse

uh_huhh updating the Hate Crimes bill to outlaw hate crimes against gays equals a failure to do anything of note.

I guess hate crimes aren't note-worthy.

As for prosecutions, I don't know what you're talking about. A quick google search brings us plenty. Here are two recent stories about crimes being charged as hate crimes against gays:

http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2010/10/04/2010-10-04_hate_crime_probe_as_man_is_badly_betaen_in_restroom_at_bar_that_launched_gayrigh.html

http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local-beat/Would-Be-Soldier-Arrested-For-Hate-Crime-On-Man-Who-Wasnt-Gay-104205969.html

And that's just two articles since this past Saturday.

I admit, you had me for a minute, but it's obvious now that you are just putting on an act.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 4, 2010 6:17 PM | Report abuse

pragmaticstill, you've fallen for the Obama game hook, line, and sinker. Did you know that virtually all of those benefits were already available? Yeah, that's right. Obama issued a meaningless, symbolic "order" to provide things that were already available.

Let me save you the trouble, he also made a big P.R. deal out of signing some order about hospital visitation. Yeah, except when you read the text, it explicitly says it provides no new rights and is just referring to rights that we already have under state law. Gimmick.

This is all about deliberately doing nothing significant but pretending to do something to fool people who aren't paying attention.

But some of us watched him order anti-discrimination language stripped out of the health-care bill, and without it, health-care "reform" will probably result in the slow death of private-sector domestic-partner health coverage. But you didn't hear the White House crowing stripping coverage from gay partners, did you?

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 6:17 PM | Report abuse

@sbj3: "but those two groups have every right to be disappointed and I don't think that anyone here on either side could reasonably argue that obvious point. It's not a question of delivering 100% (nice strawman)"

Given the realities on the ground, I think the various special interest groups are expecting too much to have been done too soon. I at least gave Bush 6 years before becoming disappointed. ;)

And lets not say 100% (not trying to make strawmen), I just think Obama has done about as much as a person can do--in the real world, in the real job of the presidency--to cater to liberal interest groups who feel betrayed because they haven't gotten enough yet.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | October 4, 2010 6:17 PM | Report abuse

Love the post.

I am a bit torn. On the one hand, we are in this mess because of the very policies that the GOP now espouses. We were losing 800,000 jobs a month when Obama took office, and staring at a total meltdown of the economy. Obama and team have managed to stabilize the economy and put us back on a path to growth. There are a number of issues on which he hasn't done what he said he would do, or where I don't agree with his position, but overall, he's doing fine.

The issue I have is that the GOP is being let off the hook for its part in the whole mess. And, in some ways, I am torn as to whether it is better for the GOP to lose and for Obama to be blamed for every ill that plagues the nation, or whether they should win and we reach in impasse, but atleast, the problems become our collective problem.

I don't see the GOP taking responsibility, so I tend to root for their loss, but I wonder ...

Posted by: autish2 | October 4, 2010 6:17 PM | Report abuse

Which political part promotes referendums, on state ballots, to outlaw same sex marriages?

Posted by: Liam-still | October 4, 2010 6:18 PM | Report abuse

@uh_huhh IMHO you've chosen a very bad analogy. NOBODY effs with the NRA...R or D.
Not saying I agree that's a good thing...but it IS WHAT IT IS. You cause does not have as Sharon Angle might say..."the juice" that the NRA has..disgusting perhaps but true never the less.

A better comparison would be to compare your cause to the civil rights movement of the blacks. Perhaps you are too young..again I hate to keep saying this :-)
I'm old enough to remember. While LBJ was passing his great society he also conducted our misbegotten adventure in Vietnam which with a draft in effect sent a hugely disproportionate number of blacks into the meat grinder while wussies like DICK 5 deferment Cheney took a pass. It took the blacks FAR TOO LONG to get what should have simply been human rights. I feel ya...it's taken you guys FAR TOO long as well...but you just have to keep on fighting the good fight...you can't give up now..you're too close to the finish line.

Posted by: rukidding7 | October 4, 2010 6:20 PM | Report abuse

Gee, Ethan2010, it's too bad you're too stupid to know the difference between state and federal law and state and federal prosecutors.

Maybe the DNC shouldn't be paying so much after all, since you don't seem to be that bright.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 6:20 PM | Report abuse

One last point, uh huhh ... you seem frustrated with the President but he isn't on the ballot. I don't know where you live, is the Republican running for Congress in your district promising to promote your agenda? How about the Senator running in your state?

Posted by: pragmaticstill | October 4, 2010 6:20 PM | Report abuse

"I at least gave Bush 6 years before becoming disappointed. ;)"

When do you finally give up on Marsha Blackburn?

How many terms you going to give THAT mental midget?

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 4, 2010 6:22 PM | Report abuse

TO: SaveTheRainforest who wrote:
“These interest groups have to realize that Obama is filled with deceptions and lies - and Obama is going to do what he wants.
If you want to support Obama and the democrats this year, you can count on getting more of the same from Obama - more blaming someone else, and Obama will not listen to your concerns.”

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Lies about what?

Nobody but NOBODY lied more than Republicans with their phony WMD story.
There is no bigger lie than that, unless you count the one where Republicans claimed they were going to use Iraqi Oil Revenues to pay for their phony war.

No matter what anyone says, the Democrats are at least 1,000 times better than the real liars – Republicans.

It’s not that people aren’t listening to Republithugs, it’s that we simply don’t agree with you, especially since Republicans love to borrow and spend, and our hard earned American Taxpayer dollars anywhere in the world except here at home.

The only spending Republithugs will do here in the United States is spending on the already rich with neither need the extra money, nor are they asking for it.


Posted by: lindalovejones | October 4, 2010 6:22 PM | Report abuse

TO: SaveTheRainforest who wrote:
“These interest groups have to realize that Obama is filled with deceptions and lies - and Obama is going to do what he wants.
If you want to support Obama and the democrats this year, you can count on getting more of the same from Obama - more blaming someone else, and Obama will not listen to your concerns.”

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Lies about what?

Nobody but NOBODY lied more than Republicans with their phony WMD story.
There is no bigger lie than that, unless you count the one where Republicans claimed they were going to use Iraqi Oil Revenues to pay for their phony war.

No matter what anyone says, the Democrats are at least 1,000 times better than the real liars – Republicans.

It’s not that people aren’t listening to Republithugs, it’s that we simply don’t agree with you, especially since Republicans love to borrow and spend, and our hard earned American Taxpayer dollars anywhere in the world except here at home.

The only spending Republithugs will do here in the United States is spending on the already rich which neither need the extra money, nor are they asking for it.


Posted by: lindalovejones | October 4, 2010 6:23 PM | Report abuse

And Mike Pence won the recent Value Voters straw poll for president.

On Saturday night, Pence traveled to Iowa —a key state for any presidential hopeful — to speak at the Iowa Faith & Freedom Coalition dinner. The Iowa Independent reports that Pence made an “impassioned plea” for the audience to vote this November in order to “protect your Christian values and freedom.” In his speech, Pence suggested that advancing socially conservative policy is more important than fixing the economy, bizarrely implying that marriage equality will further damage the economy.

http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/04/pences-priorities-stopping-marriage-equality-is-as-important-as-fixing-the-economy/

Uh huhh ... take your vote and stay home.

Posted by: pragmaticstill | October 4, 2010 6:25 PM | Report abuse

Liam-still: Which political part promotes referendums, on state ballots, to outlaw same sex marriages?
_______________________

The GOP.

Which president's opposition to same-sex marriage is used in every ballot campaign to give cover to bigots?

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 6:26 PM | Report abuse

All

You are missing the point : Obama is inept.

The gay groups are wondering why their issues were not taken care of earlier - It is because Obama is horrible at running the democratic party.

You elect an inexperienced and unqualified person - and you get what you got -

That is an unwise concentration on an overly expensive health care bill - one which few people really understand - and one which few people believe will actually work.

The health care bill is going to develop DEFICITS - on the federal level and the state levels. For the most part the democrats never really looked at that issue. No one wanted to listen.

Obama doesn't know what he is doing - don't expect Obama to suddenly become competent.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | October 4, 2010 6:27 PM | Report abuse

the overstatements come from the traditional press that has had alot at stake pushing the Obama is a failure meme.
they began the honeymoon is over garbage the day after the election.
and they have worked hard to push angry public blames Obama, angry public prefers gop and the tea party is the obsession of the moment, trying to portray them as just folks.
they also have gone out of their way to find voices of discontent like Huffington, Jane Hamsher and Cenk Unger and claim they are the voice for us on the left.
You never see people from the left who are just average, disappointed in some things and happy in others.
The press has this pre-written storyline of the recreation of 1994 all over again.
And they have invested alot in pushing untruths and misconceptions to the general public.

Posted by: vwcat | October 4, 2010 6:27 PM | Report abuse

I don't care for Obama anymore. Comes in like a real deal-changer and sells out within a year. Am I supposed to be happy with his half-$#$ health bill that was worked out with industry give-a-ways? Where's the public option?

Just shows that industry is in the driver's seat. Obama isn't going to change that. Vote for him or don't -- nothing changes.

Posted by: ShawnDavis1 | October 4, 2010 6:28 PM | Report abuse

uh_huhh, I'm not an expert on hate crimes laws. I apologize.

But really, in addition to that, I'm a bad, evil DNC plant. And I've "fallen for the Obama game hook, line, and sinker" whatever that means.

The "Obama Game"! Hilarious.

Once again, I am not going to stop fighting for your rights, whether you have given up or not.

Go throw your vote away. Who cares, right? Better yet, go jump in a lake.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 4, 2010 6:30 PM | Report abuse

LOL @ pragmaticstill (and Liam-still)

You seem to think I believe the GOP and Dems are equally bad. I don't. Obviously the GOP is horrible. The problem is the Dems are backstabbers. So while the GOP has done just about everything they realistically can do to the gay community legislatively, the Dems won't lift a finger to undo any of it. That means, for all practical purposes, there won't be much impact on gay issues no matter who wins. That's why your humorous attempts at running the Dem playbook on gay-fearmongering isn't working anymore. They aren't scary enough, and you don't even bother to make Dem promises anymore because you realize the Dems are nothing but backstabbers whose promises to the gay community are worthless.

If you want the support, I suggest you go actually spend a little political capital and get a real pro-gay accomplishment. Your scare tactics don't work anymore, and mocking, belittling, and bashing people isn't going to get you any money or votes.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 6:31 PM | Report abuse

Ethan2010: Go throw your vote away. Who cares, right? Better yet, go jump in a lake.
______________

If that means you're shutting up now, I welcome that development.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 6:33 PM | Report abuse

Yep, most liberals love him; except for women, unions, gays, hispanics, public option supporters, anti-war protestors, environmentalists, teachers, and the unemployed.

Hey, who's left?

Posted by: ShawnDavis1 | October 4, 2010 6:36 PM | Report abuse

I don't care for Obama anymore. Comes in like a real deal-changer and sells out within a year. Am I supposed to be happy with his half-$#$ health bill that was worked out with industry give-a-ways? Where's the public option?

Just shows that industry is in the driver's seat. Obama isn't going to change that. Vote for him or don't -- nothing changes.

Posted by: ShawnDavis1 | October 4, 2010 6:28 PM | Report abuse

---------------------------

I suggest you read up on how laws are made and who does them.
You seem to think the president can control the final product from congress. the most a president can do is suggest and urge the congress.
If you were paying attention it was Liebermann who killed the public option and there was not much that could be done at that point because the senators were not in the mood to go with it to begin with.
There are many on the left like you who seem to think the president killed it when it was the senate.
Not that much a president can do about it.
Getting health care passed to begin with and go back and correct those things was what he decided to do given the blue dog senate traitors.
That is what is so frustrating.
Too many expect one man to change everything, including blue dogs and republican obstruction and tea parties, ect. all by himself while you sit at home and complain.
that is not how change is done.
it takes far more then one man and to blame that one man for not getting everything done and makeing everyone happy and becoming El Dictator in 2 years is sheer folly and foolish thinking.

Posted by: vwcat | October 4, 2010 6:37 PM | Report abuse

It's the ECONOMY and double-digit UNEMPLOYMENT!

Posted by: 2012frank | October 4, 2010 6:39 PM | Report abuse

Actually, I am shutting up, because I have a helluva lot better ways to spend my time than trying to tell you, "No really, the sky is blue." Figure it out. I'll give you a clue, your "backstabbing" comments really amount to nothing more than a hollow whine. As I said, I wanted strong climate change legislation. I've been an advocate for strong renewable energy legislation for more than a decade. Do you see me whine about "backstabbing"? No, you don't. This whole discussion is just a dance around the central fact that YOU have problems with the Democratic Party. Not all gays or even most gays, YOU. There's definitely no rational basis in fact for your behavior. Nor is there a solution. You just need someone else to do your work for you and only then will you wake up to reality. Pretty pathetic. Well-intentioned, yes, but pathetic nonetheless.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 4, 2010 6:40 PM | Report abuse

Ethan2010, is this what you shutting up looks like? Try again.

And thanks for anointing yourself world spokesman for gay people everywhere. I'm sure we all appreciate your instructing us as to what we're required to think. Funny how what you require us to think is that we should continue showering the Democratic Party with money and votes so that your concern for addressing climate change can benefit without wasting any political capital on gay issues. Thanks for proving my point about how petulant straight Dems get when we have the gall to stop just handing out votes and money in exchange for nothing on our concerns. Well, you better get used to not taking our money and votes for granted anymore because times are changing and we aren't submitting to the exploitation anymore.

And, fyi, that your panties are in a wad demonstrates that the gay community can gain more power from threatening to walk away than from staying and taking domestic abuse from the party cycle after cycle.

But, by all means, keep calling people whiners. Let me know how that works for you--and climate change--come November.

P.S. If you care about climate-change, you should spend less time worshiping Barack Obama and more time reading the New Yorker. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/10/11/101011fa_fact_lizza

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 6:54 PM | Report abuse

@ethan: You're not in "sales" are you?

Posted by: sbj3 | October 4, 2010 6:57 PM | Report abuse

If you want the support, I suggest you go actually spend a little political capital and get a real pro-gay accomplishment. Your scare tactics don't work anymore, and mocking, belittling, and bashing people isn't going to get you any money or votes.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 6:31 PM

..............

Why don't you make politicians do what you want. Close your damn wallet and just go quietly into the night, or do like Doctor King did. He made the case to the country, so that politicians were emboldened to pass civil rights legislation.

Where are your sit ins at marriage license offices? Where is your march on Washington?

Emulate the civil rights movement, and engage in non violent protest, on a large and ongoing scale, so that you remain in the headlines and on the daily TV reports.

You need a charismatic leader who will lead mass sit ins, and rallies, and perhaps write a "letter from a Birmingham jail".

Make a big noise, and keep on making it, in a non-violent manner. That is your best chance to achieve full and equal civil rights.

You will never get to the promised land, by depending on the kindness of strangers. I understand your frustration, but dropping out, is not going to make things better. Organize and protest, over and over.

Good luck. Keep fighting. Never give up.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 4, 2010 6:59 PM | Report abuse

I didn't call you a stupid f***, uh_huhh.

I'd also suggest that you not keep using the NRA as your example.

You want the GLBT community to be the new NRA? You think single-issue style politics is the only answer?

I said allowing the GOP to get control of the gov't is stupid. Anyone who aides and abets this is doing something stupid.

Keep stomping your feet though.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 4, 2010 7:01 PM | Report abuse

@ Liam-still

Spare me the smug lecture when you aren't even informed enough to know about the activism of the past year alone.

And depending on the kindness of strangers is exactly what you demand that we do by blindly supporting a Democratic Party that has done nothing for 25 years but take our support and stab us in the back.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 7:05 PM | Report abuse

Here BG, allow me. Uh_huhh is a stupid f***.

Hey Uh_huhh. You win. Keep your money and your votes. Good luck getting your priorities accomplished with that strategy.

As I've said, I will continue to fight for YOUR issues on YOUR behalf because they are the right thing for America. You, on the other hand, hey, you have more money to spend! Knock yourself out! You have a vote to throw away in November! Go for it! Try the Green Party, try the GOP, I'm sure either way it'll work for ya, no doubt! Hahaha! Unreal.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 4, 2010 7:09 PM | Report abuse

BGinCHI, was there supposed to have been a substantive response in any of that last comment? Where did you explain how blindly supporting the Dems whether they do anything or not on gay issues ever leads to them addressing gay issues?

Single issue? Well, I haven't been during the previous 25 years when I tried being a team player--and even set aside my own personal dignity to support a man who belittled my 15-year relationship as inherently inferior to his marriage. But, you know what? Being a team player doesn't work with this party. They just take your support and kick sand in your face.

Being the good little gays has failed. It's time to be the big bad gays. And if you recall the 1980s, you'll realize that we know how to do it. Be glad that, so far, it's just boycotting. Next up is active zapping of the party's events. A quarter century of being treated like lepers and taken for granted is enough.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 7:12 PM | Report abuse

Ethan, after uh_huhh takes his ball and goes home, maybe we can get some things done.

These are the kinds of fair weather political types that must really frustrate pols who are working on their behalf, even if slowly.

Posted by: BGinCHI | October 4, 2010 7:13 PM | Report abuse

Ethan2010, the word is f**, not f***. At least spell the epithet right.

Now, did you have a substantive response? If you don't like the new strategy of holding the party's feet to the fire, perhaps you'd like to suggest another one? Tell me, how will continuing to blindly support the party result in anything different than the previously decades of blind support?

You're really just proving my point about how outraged straight Dems get when the gay community threatens to take the teet out of their mouths.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 7:18 PM | Report abuse

BGinCHI, These are the kinds of fair weather political types that must really frustrate pols who are working on their behalf, even if slowly.
________________________

LOL!!! Yeah, that's right. Call the q----s a bunch of ingrates for complaining about the knife in the back. That kind of bullying--along with the fearmongering--is all the party has left, isn't it? Nothing positive to run on anymore because, I mean, what are you going to do promise to enact ENDA, repeal DADT, and repeal DOMA--again, no, I mean, really, this time we actually mean it, this time, now, for once?

Tell me, how was it slowly making progress to cancel the House subcommittee markup of ENDA in 2009 and never return to the matter again. That's a bill, btw, that has been pending in one form or another since 1974 and has been throughly revised and revised and revised over the last 16 years.

Spare us the intelligence-insulting posturing about slow progress. It's not slow progress. It's no progress. And it's no progress because the administration intentionally decided to shelve everything significant on our agenda.

Again, please explain to me how blind support ever leads to anything but perennial backstabbing.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 7:25 PM | Report abuse

uh_huhh

I don't care what your sexual orientation is, because regardless of if you are straight or gay, that would not alter the fact, that you are just an obnoxious jerk.

Fortunately you are just a rare exception, because the vast majority of gay people are wonderful kind people who deserve to have their full equal rights now.

Just go away, because you are either a right wing troll, or you are just a rotten miserable jerk who happens to be gay.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 4, 2010 7:29 PM | Report abuse

The liberals were going to vote for Obama all along anyway, what makes a difference if even all of them were mad at Obama? They would vote for the devil, as long as he had a Democrat button on his lapel. This election is going to be notable for the number of independents that line up behind one side or the other. If the Dems are wringing their hands about their own team, they are going to miss the opportunity to try to persuade the votes that are going to determine the winners this time around. Perhaps that is what the Repubs are hoping; that the Dems take their eyes off the real portion of the electorate that will mean something. Or have they already given up?

Posted by: stvcar | October 4, 2010 7:31 PM | Report abuse

But, Why is The Anti-Christ Obama Destroying America. If you truly want to know what is going on; Then you will have to accept these things as the TRUTH. Once you understand the following things; All things will be understood. So I tell you Obama is Satan on Earth, Lawless One, or what ever else you want to call this Demonic Figure. His words describe him, He is a False Hope, If you listen to him you will love him. He carries a Bow without an Arrow. He will conquer all through his speech, his false hoods will capture all who sit and listen to him.
2 Thessalonians 2:11-12
11And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, 12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

Posted by: makom | October 4, 2010 7:34 PM | Report abuse

No really, Uh_huhh, I wasn't kidding. Take your money somewhere else! Please! I'm begging you! Speaking for myself, I really don't need you and I really don't want you in the Democratic Party. I want gays and LGBT groups who actively seek to join the broad coalition of groups and individuals who rally to the progressive cause. I am NOT interested in fools who whine about "backstabbing," impugning the motives of all the public servants in the Democratic Party.

So go jump in a lake already. Take your precious money with you. Vote your heart out on whatever party you want. But don't vote for the back-stabbing Democratic Party. See if I care one iota!

Substantively? Hold the Dems feet to the fire, fine. That's not what YOU are doing. You are whining relentlessly while impugning the motives of people like me who actually do give a d@mn about your cause.

For that, I say GO JUMP IN A LAKE ALREADY, idiot.

BG, totally. Can you imagine where this country would be if everyone actually cared about getting things done and went about doing so in an intellectually honest fashion?

Uh_huhh just wants attention. He is not here to have an honest discussion. Maybe this is cathartic for him, I don't know. But obviously he's being an idiot and, like you, I find his "fairweather fan" pathology completely irritating.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 4, 2010 7:35 PM | Report abuse

Liam-still, it's too bad that instead of one vicious ad hominem attack after another you can't simply explain how continuing to blindly support the Democratic Party and never holding its feet to the fire will lead to that full equal rights you claim to support.

You are the one who personalized this, not me. My criticism is aimed at the exploitive party; yours has been aimed at me as a person. Whose the miserable jerk? The one who criticizes the party, or the one who calls the critic a miserable jerk?

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 7:38 PM | Report abuse

Sure, keep telling yourself that. You came out of the box, calling me a smug bigot, and now you claim I started it with you. I never even knew you existed until you attacked me. Get lost you miserable jerk!

Posted by: Liam-still | October 4, 2010 7:42 PM | Report abuse

Ethan2010: I want gays and LGBT groups who actively seek to join the broad coalition of groups and individuals who rally to the progressive cause.
_________________

I know you do. That's the problem. That's exactly what you want. You want obedient little gays, who give blind support to the party, never expect anything in return, and allow folks like you to benefit from that blind support for your own initiatives without ever having to spend any political capital on a significant gay issue.

Duh! We know that's what you want. We've been giving you that for years, and we know that you have become so accustomed to taking it for granted that when anyone suggests actually spending political capital on a gay issue, you act like someone has invaded your right to endless gay support without providing anything in return. You are wallowing in straight-Democrats' privilege and breathtaking sense of entitlement.

Keep on telling folks to get lost because fewer and fewer gays and lesbians are willing to blindly support an abusive, backstabbing party. We don't exist to service you.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 7:43 PM | Report abuse

Liam-still, try re-reading the thread, Mr. "they're a bunch of whiners."

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 7:45 PM | Report abuse

I repeat and still stand by the following remarks.
Do not let this fake gay troll excerpt something out of context.

t was very hard for President Obama to put any issues ahead of trying to keep the Bush/Cheney Great Recession from sliding into A Great Depression.

Hispanics, Gays, and other groups, can whine all they want to about President Obama not giving their cases top priority, but had he decided to put their issues ahead of staunching the job hemorrhaging, the polls would have his support level in the mid twenties now, instead of the mid forties.

It was a national economic crisis, second only to the Great Depression, so of course he had to shuffle his campaign agenda, and focus first on ending The Great Recession that he inherited from Bush/Cheney.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 4, 2010 7:47 PM | Report abuse

Ah, "fake gay troll." Yes, it exudes respect, just like "Gays...can whine all they want" did. You're a real humanitarian.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 7:51 PM | Report abuse

"You are wallowing in straight-Democrats' privilege and breathtaking sense of entitlement."

Yeah, how dare I want people to work together for the greater good! Isn't that just a breathtaking sense of entitlement on my part?

Seriously. Please DO get lost. Your little parade of tears is a farce and it has run its course. I won't be back to entertain your pathological self-induced misery.

Posted by: Ethan2010 | October 4, 2010 7:53 PM | Report abuse

The Fake Gay Troll came on here and attacked me, and now he wants to play the victim card.

I never even heard of the miserable jerk, until he attacked me. I hope he goes over the Republican side. They deserve each other. He is probably one of those self loathing Log Cabin Republicans, who keep fawning over the Party that classifies him, as a sub-human, who is not entitled to equal rights.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 4, 2010 7:53 PM | Report abuse

Liam-still: The Fake Gay Troll came on here and attacked me, and now he wants to play the victim card.

I never even heard of the miserable jerk, until he attacked me. I hope he goes over the Republican side. They deserve each other. He is probably one of those self loathing Log Cabin Republicans, who keep fawning over the Party that classifies him, as a sub-human, who is not entitled to equal rights.
_______________________________

Do you eventually run out of bile to spew in other people's faces? You're really just one vicious ad hominem attack after another aren't you?

If you think the criticism is unfair, perhaps you can explain why it was necessary in 2009 to cancel the subcommittee markup of ENDA. What's your theory?

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 8:02 PM | Report abuse

My dissatisfaction is lies primarily with Congress.

Posted by: IndieOne | October 4, 2010 8:08 PM | Report abuse

"@ ceflynline Yes, this gay man is sitting out. After 25 years of supporting this party and 25 years of being stabbed in the back by it, you and your back-stabbing cronies in the party are on your own. Gay-rights legislation is dead whichever party is in control, but when the GOP takes over, your straight-Democrat agenda will be dead too. I call that karma. Welcome to the underside of the bus where you deliberately threw us the day after the 2008 election. Not a fun place, huh? Well, I guess you should've had that insight before you tossed group after group under there. Enjoy losing. Posted by: uh_huhh"

I( haven't decided whether you are just another I hate Democrats poster or massively confused. On the off chance that you are just confused, I will address the complaint that Obama and the Democrats somehow stabbed you in the back.

Obama had to pick his fights, and Gay Rights aren't quite as universal a need as health care, Jobs, Financial reform, Jobs, or cleaning Up Bush's mess, or jobs. STILL, DADT's end is written into the Military Budget that the Republicans filibustered because repeal of DADT was in there, along with provisions for illegal immigrants serving in the Armed Services to get fast tracked for citizenship. If the Republicans had stood up for their supposed principles when this bill came up for a vote, There would have been no filibuster. DADT ceases to be the law of the land, and since the California Courts are going to force a SCOTUS review of an unnecessary and arbitrary law, and then Gay Marriage in some form will also BE the law of the land, you don't seem to be that badly betrayed by the Democrats. So you stay home, and so do your friends, and the R's get control of the Senate. (They can do that even if the D's retain the majority , by winning five or six net seats this time around).

DADT gets reinforced, and some language defeati9ng the Courts invalidation of California's defense of marriage act gets submitted and pushed. Even when it fails there is enough Republican Push back that just California gets its law invalidated, and the republicans in Cali9fornia push another version, get it passed, and the merry go round keeps turning.

What you did won't be anything new. When Bobby Kennedy was assasinated, and the only serious candidate for the democratic nomination became Hubert Humphrey, lots of gene McCarthy supporters decided that, although Gene had run a very lackluster, and particularly disconnected campaign, and gene wasn't even after Bobby's death all that enthusiastic about his own campaign, since HE didn't get the nomination handed to him, they would sit out the 1968 election. Enough McCarthyites sat out the election in California to give Nixon the State and the election. They cost Humphrey several states that might have elected him had they gone to the polls. We got six years of Nixon because of that.

SO, do you go home and sulk, and hope the republicans don't do too much damage?

Or, do you grudgingly go vote?

Posted by: ceflynline | October 4, 2010 8:12 PM | Report abuse

Do you eventually run out of bile to spew in other people's faces? You're really just one vicious ad hominem attack after another aren't you?

If you think the criticism is unfair, perhaps you can explain why it was necessary in 2009 to cancel the subcommittee markup of ENDA. What's your theory?

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 8:02 PM
................


Your opening comment to me, was to call me a "smug bigot". That was my introduction to you. I was not aware of your existence until you lashed out at me, and now you have the gall to complain about an "ad hominen attack" against you?!

I am not going to waste anymore time, talking to such a two faced whiner.

Posted by: Liam-still | October 4, 2010 8:19 PM | Report abuse

I'm a general liberal, not a member of anyn particular group, and "dissatisfaction" is not how I would describe my current feelings about President Obama. I would say it's more headscratching incredulity that he could really have thrown away all the momentum and influence which he generated in the Presidential election in order to play patty cakes with the right-wing Republican extremists who populate the Congress in the vain hope that they would miraculously decide to be bipartisan with him.

Posted by: ejs2 | October 4, 2010 8:30 PM | Report abuse

Obama is a loooong way from a centrist!! He is as far left as one can get! He will not compromise - even when he was in the senate where is was one of the most leftist senators. You need to open your eyes and ears. I know that is hard for a liberal, but you must try. Your life depends on it!!

I can not believe this article. Obama has not given us what Americans want - jobs and a mending economy. He has given us the opposite like he wants America to fail. The last I heard, yesterday, was that his rating was 38%.

Posted by: annnort | October 4, 2010 8:34 PM | Report abuse

ceflynline, I really couldn't care less how you regard or whether you deign to smugly respond to me.

Despite having only a superficial understanding of gay issues (hence your naive belief that the defense bill vote was ever a legitimate effort), you've unwittingly stumbled upon one truth. When straight Democrats get into office and rank their priorities, gay rights are NEVER "quite as universal a need as" anything that affects straight people. The recession is just the convenient excuse this cycle, but there is always some excuse.

Don't worry. I won't be sitting at home sulking. I will be cheering if straight Democrats get put out of office. Your focus may be only on the next Congress, but mine is on seeing to it that the Democratic Party starts thinking twice before subjecting the gay community to another two years of endless abuse like the last two years.

Tell me, how did that recession require the administration to file aggressively lobby courts to rule that gay people are constitutional outcasts? You realize that those court rulings had to reject the administration's view that DOMA and DADT are perfectly constitutional, right?

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 8:37 PM | Report abuse

The thing Obama got wrong with don't ask, don't tell is where it is applied. For grunts and jarheads in the Afghan theater from the bible belt or similar religious thought openly gay hurts morale. Anywhere else including supply and rescue, Navy, Airforce, CIA, it does not make a difference. The Sheppard law and Ledbetter laws protect our freedoms more, as well as carrying guns in national parks. I think a national law letting the significant other in a gay union have the other's children covered under their medical insurance and eligible for scholarships, etc. Even the hard religious would not punish children for the "sins" of the parent. Personally I think most people are born gay, not some lifestyle choice.

Posted by: jameschirico | October 4, 2010 8:37 PM | Report abuse

Liam-still: I am not going to waste anymore time, talking to such a two faced whiner.
_______________________

I guess that means you don't have a pro-Obama theory to explain why it was necessary in 2009 to cancel the subcommittee markup of ENDA, huh?

I guess if you can't spew bile, you just don't have anything to say.

Posted by: uh_huhh | October 4, 2010 8:41 PM | Report abuse

Liberals?
Only 20% claim to be liberal
The rest of American knows Obama and accomplices are going in the wrong direction. So who cares about liberals right now...

Yes, the leftist are unhappy that Obama is only incrementally destroying capitalism (although in big increments). The leftists want to destroy capitalism all at once...

America will start to remove those scumbag Democrats in November...

Posted by: jblast2000 | October 4, 2010 8:53 PM | Report abuse

As that ancient saw was wont to say: Only time will tell.

Posted by: boblusby | October 4, 2010 9:14 PM | Report abuse

"The leftists want to destroy capitalism all at once..."

Propaganda much?

Huh uh is a right wing troll. No sane gay person really believes they'll be better off under repubs. It's a false argument.

And it's not about Obama. It's about extremist right wingers who want do away with minimum wage and do away with social security all while telling us how we should worship and how we should engage in sex. All while they drive up the deficits with tax cuts for the wealthy.

Posted by: Alex3 | October 4, 2010 9:28 PM | Report abuse

" You realize that those court rulings had to reject the administration's view that DOMA and DADT are perfectly constitutional, right? Posted by: uh_huhh "

I have you pegged. This will be my last response.

The Obama administration feels that consistency, (an overrated but stubbornly held position that even bad laws consistently applied are better than good laws inconsistently applied) even in these cases, requires it to put out a proforma defense. Sort of like applying cab Rank order in British Courts. You have to defend the bounder even though you, he, and every other barrister in London know he is guilty of everything he is accused of and bad taste as well.

Repeal of DADT is required because it is the law of the land, so a presidential order isn't applicable.

And the bill that contains it is still active ion the Senate.

But you aren't any better than a whole bunch of other I Hate Obama posters.

I can find sufficient reasonable posters to debate that I can simply ignore the unreasonable.

So adios, sayonnarra, aloha, and don't let the carraige return hit you on the way out._

Posted by: ceflynline | October 4, 2010 9:34 PM | Report abuse


Well Sargent,

Your counterpart, or whatever in the NYT,
Douthat
says it's the center Dems who've dissed hme...unhappy about "business and ISRAEL!"

Then, inexpicably, he summers the leaving of Summers and Emanual and the budget guy, wht's his name...all Jewsish...
abandoning the President.

Never mind that the WH was rabid to get the untenable Summers gone...not to mention
Emanual whom they all rounded hated.

NOw, either Douthat has an editor or publisher that things he doesn't write Jewish enough, or he's suddenly got religion, again.

Why don't you try to be better than that, though your own newspaper leans disasterously the same way...

Emanuel and


Posted by: whistling | October 4, 2010 9:39 PM | Report abuse

Added to everyone else's anger at the Kenyan, it will suffice.

Posted by: carlbatey | October 4, 2010 9:55 PM | Report abuse

I'll cosign on Liam. Uh-oh is trolling. I have my doubts about veracity and that's mainly because of pure venom directed only at a few regulars on the left side of the comments section.

It was the Democrats in the Senate who attempted to repeal DADT *in this session* and were blocked by a Republican filibuster. With friends like uh-oh, who needs enemies?

BB

Posted by: FairlingtonBlade | October 4, 2010 9:57 PM | Report abuse

I fail to see the good news for Democrats. What I see is a party that has made a lot of promises to single-issue groups, that if fulfilled will alienate even more of their own base. Let's have a look at that:

Amnesty aka "Immigration Reform": Hispanics are happy, every other group (other than rich employers who will pay even lower wages) is unhappy, in particular lower income Americans who will receive those lower wages if they are lucky enough to find a job at all.

Gay Rights: Gays (perhaps 5% of the population) are happy, while social conservatives (including many African-Americans and Hispanics) are unhappy.

If single issue groups cannot gain political traction for their single issue, they will tend to look at other issues when making their decisions on whether to vote and for whom. This means at best a loss of support for Democrats as voters don't bother to turn out and at worst a gain for Republicans as some voters decide that their single-issue aside, would prefer Republican representation in government at this time.

Posted by: robert17 | October 4, 2010 10:11 PM | Report abuse

"Obama ran as a CENTRIST DEM..somebody who is obsessed with consensus..he has GOVERNED AS A CENTRIST.
I give him high marks for his accomplishments as a CENTRIST. As a progressive that doesn't make me happy but it's certainly not Obama's fault. He has been very effective in his job from a Centrist..almost blue dog..perspective."

This first poster said it best. Obama has been a centrist all along. Health Care Reform was taken straight out of the Republicans' 1993 plan. Tax increase? Even Greenspan (and every other economist) says it's regretfully necessary. Bailing out Wall Street? Again, no one other than Wall Street was enthused with that, but it had to be done - and it was done well, it turns out. Taxpayers will even turn a profit (shh! don't tell FoxNews!).

He's been dead center. I'm a liberal, but I don't expect all my wishes granted overnight. We do have half a nation of brainwashed Fox captives to cope with. This is not exactly an enlightened country. Considering all that, Obama's performed magnificently.

Posted by: B2O2 | October 4, 2010 10:20 PM | Report abuse

"Obama ran as a CENTRIST DEM..somebody who is obsessed with consensus..he has GOVERNED AS A CENTRIST.
I give him high marks for his accomplishments as a CENTRIST. As a progressive that doesn't make me happy but it's certainly not Obama's fault. He has been very effective in his job from a Centrist..almost blue dog..perspective."

This first poster said it best. Obama has been a centrist all along. Health Care Reform was taken straight out of the Republicans' 1993 plan. Tax increase? Even Greenspan (and every other economist) says it's regretfully necessary. Bailing out Wall Street? Again, no one other than Wall Street was enthused with that, but it had to be done - and it was done well, it turns out. Taxpayers will even turn a profit (shh! don't tell FoxNews!).

He's been dead center. I'm a liberal, but I don't expect all my wishes granted overnight. We do have half a nation of brainwashed Fox captives to cope with. This is not exactly an enlightened country. Considering all that, Obama's performed magnificently.

Posted by: B2O2 | October 4, 2010 10:20 PM | Report abuse

Sargent...you and your schmoozie sycophants on this thread ought to be more worried about EVERYBODY else who's mad at this President and especially the Democratic controlled Congress. Who cares if a bunch of tongue-pierced losers are mad at somebody. All Democrats should be unelected in 2010...all of them.

Posted by: PanhandleWilly | October 4, 2010 10:21 PM | Report abuse

"...the whole discussion of Obama, liberals and the left has been oversimplified and dumbed down so badly that it's lost all meaning."

It's no wonder. The media has spent the last year providing nonstop coverage of every word uttered by the legion of right wing provocateurs on the Fox News payroll. If you spend your days putting a respectable veneer on lies and propaganda, it becomes hard to see the truth when its staring you in the face.

Posted by: exco | October 5, 2010 12:25 AM | Report abuse

It is very unlikely that I would vote republican on a national level. I just do not believe in the right wing ideology. Obama was a breath of fresh air. His speeches lifted me up and gave me hope that America would once again take a lead in business, science, and art. I guess that is why I am so fiercely disappointed with him. He started with bailing out the rich bankers. The most corrupt got the most money and they spent it mostly on bonuses. He shunned the smaller profitable banks that could have stepped in the ranks if the government did not favor corruption. Obama then gave away an opportunity to make a real change in the auto industry. Instead of giving an incentive to the auto industry to make the best car in the world, cash for clunkers helped the industry leaders that made bad deceision sell off there obsolete technology at an amazing profit. The health plan makes it a requirement fto pay for health insurance with little protection from corrupt insurance companies, while the bipartisan bill that would stop pharmaceutical companies from gouging us was ignored. We are still in a war we cannot win because we do not know exactly what a win is. As a gay man, I never really expected that obama could make a difference in gay rights. America has never been big on Human Rights. It took a civil war and the embarrassment that almost every civilized country in the world and a few not so civilized countries had already embraced abolition before the US politicians attempted to write the law and, if it were not for a mulatto in office, I would say we never really did embrace it. I always knew there were going to be things that he could not do. His insistence on bipartisanship when the democrats had the house, senate, and the popular vote showed his inexperience if not complete immaturity. It just seems that what he did could easily have been done by a Moderate Republican, if there is such a thing. Feed the greed and stay the status quo. That is what I see when I look back at his accomplishments. It is frustrating because his words are so eloquent and express rather closely what I believe. I just cannot see myself voting for a Republican on a national level. No I am not please with Obama's accomplishments but until someone else comes along who can lift my hopes in humanity and talk to the world, then I guess it is Obama who gets my vote.

Posted by: tomlarryjr | October 5, 2010 1:22 AM | Report abuse

Don't forget Jane what's-her-name and the four people who read that warmkittypond blog.

Posted by: converse | October 5, 2010 8:29 AM | Report abuse

The satisfaction may be low but most will still vote for Obama b/c the other choices are laughably ridiculous

We have candidates who can barely read or write trying to get power in DC

Posted by: Bious | October 5, 2010 12:57 PM | Report abuse

Ohhh look! It's the Limp Democrats pity party and a poll that will let you cover your collective guilt for not USING our Super Majority!

The cowardliness, in face of the party of "No", to be united and leaders brought this environment of voter chaos. This time where stupidity fills the vacuum of leadership.

Sure, tell yourselves that 'reaching across the isle' was the right thing to do, while we lose any majority we have today.

But this angry, progressive, Universal Health Care loving voter in Las Vegas remembers all those backroom deals that left DADT, Climate, and Single Payer on the floor. And I'm voting for a new Senate Majority Leader on November 2nd by voting against Senator Harry Reid.

It's too late for a change in Senate leadership to make a difference now, our side has lost. But accountability must be had or the system doesn't work.

Thanks to Limp-D's everywhere I'm reaching across the isle this November 2nd for a new Senate Majority Leader.

Posted by: 89118 | October 6, 2010 4:52 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company