Skip to main content

View Diary: I apologize Mr. President (329 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  ...but not too much credit (14+ / 0-)

    President Obama gets credit because it happened on his watch, but once again he did not lead from the front. It was up to Lieberman, Collins, and others in the Senate to do the heavy lifting after Obama chose the legislative route rather than fight via the Justice Department where he has the most sway. If the Senate had not come through, you would have heard a sigh and an "Oh, well" out of the White House and that would have been the end of it. Obama had nothing to lose this way, and he could blame the dysfunctional Senate as he has on everything else.

    I love the cartoon, by the way.

    •  Uh, yes, he did lead from the front. You... (24+ / 0-)

      ...apparently haven't been following this.

      Obama himself and the White House were pressuring Senators CONSTANTLY in the last three months on this, with the president visiting them in their offices, calling them on the phone, etc.

      If he had gone the route people like you suggest, the repeal would not be a "repeal" - it would be a temporary stop-gap that could EASILY be overturned by ending up in the Roberts court as soon as next year.

      The record is there. Obama was DEMANDING they pass this and has been working like a dog to get it done.

      If you don't follow these things as closely as you should, don't comment on them - you just embarrass yourself.

      May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house.

      by dasheight on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 02:04:31 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  P.S. He did what a smart leader does...he... (22+ / 0-)

        ...waited until popular opinion was at its peak, set up a strategy of passing it by having the GOP look bad by voting against the Defense bill - twice - and then brought the stand-alone bill before the Senate when the GOP had no other choice but TO vote yes - and he was working the aisles like crazy. There have been several articles and interviews with people on the Hill who were witness to this.

        This attacking Obama shit is getting REALLY old considering the gigantic leaps forward he's made in the last 2 years for progressive causes.

        GROW. UP.

        May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house.

        by dasheight on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 02:07:41 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  How about a link to these articles? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          musing85

          Because so far, I haven't seen evidence that Obama deserves [i]any credit at all[/i] for DADT. It happened on his watch because he didn't actively oppose it. It seems to me that he's been too busy selling out the Left to be the political super ninja you claim.

        •  O rly? (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          cdreid, psalongo, ohmyheck

          So what you're saying is that a "smart leader" is like that famous French radical who famously quipped "Those are my people: I must find out where they are going, so I can lead them"?

          That's not what I'd call leadership. In fact, I'd call it something far less flattering.

          And what, exactly, are those "gigantic" leaps forward that have been made in the last two years for progressive causes? I sure as fuck haven't seen any. Just a hell of a lot of crappy negotiations that always involve giving the Republicans everything they want and getting squat in return.

          •  "I sure as fuck haven't seen any." (6+ / 0-)

            Isn't this a diary about DADT?  Or does that no longer count, since Obama would get some amount of credit for it?

            "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

            by Geekesque on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 04:51:56 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  No, sorry, as ever, you're wrong (0+ / 0-)

              DADT is not a "great leap" forward. It's a tiny step forward that will have limited effect--and one which should have been accomplished long before now. (Not that it has actually been accomplished, mind, since there is still the matter of the waiting period and the certifications to get out of the way--which could well defer the actual repeal until after the next president takes office.)

              And Obama had little if anything to do with DADT getting done--he gets credit for it only in that it happened while he happened to be president. Just like he will get credit for the monumental Democratic losses in the 2010 elections, the Gulf oil spill, and anything else that happens over the next two years.

              •  Yes, Obama gets blamed for all bad things (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Inland, fou, FiredUpInCA

                and no credit for any good things, and if he gets credit for good things they're actually pretty meaningless.

                Man, you're really going to hate this site in 2012 when expressing intense personal animosity towards the President and the people who intend to vote for him and prevent a Republican from taking over the White House.

                I'll spare you the necessity of a reply:  We already have a Republican in the White House, nyuk nyuk nyuk.

                Seriously, you don't do issue discussion, you just come here to crap on Obama and his voters.

                "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

                by Geekesque on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 05:30:13 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  As usual, you missed the point (0+ / 0-)

                  If Obama gets to take credit for DADT repeal, then he also gets to take credit for everything else that happens while he happened to be in office--good, bad, or indifferent.

                  I've been on this site longer than you have--and I'll be here long after you and the rest of the idolaters have gone--which will happen most likely before 2012. If you think the president has been coming in for criticism on this site so far, you ain't seen nothing yet. Just wait until he starts compromising with the new Republican Congress next year. With your thin skin, you won't be able to hack it well before the primaries start.

                  •  Idolaters (sic)? Again, you smear people who (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    fou

                    disagree with you as "idolators" merely because they refuse to believe that OBAMASUX is not an all-encompassing piece of wisdom.

                    I would daresay that he played a more active role in DADT than he did in the BP rig blowing up.  

                    Obama is a flawed politician and human being who has made significant mistakes while in office, and will make more.

                    But, he's also not the cartoonish combination of evil and ineptitude you and yours pretend he is.

                    I don't see why you'd punish yourself by remaining at a website that will likely promote this man you so clearly want out of office in 2012.  

                    "[R]ather high-minded, if not a bit self-referential"--The Washington Post.

                    by Geekesque on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 05:40:07 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Check your dictionary (0+ / 0-)

                      idolater, n.

                      Forms:  α. ME ydolatrour, ME–15 ydolatrer, ME–16 idolatrer, (15 ydolatrar, idolatrar). β. 15 ydolatre, ydolater, ydolatour, idoloter, 16– idolator, 15– idolater.... (Show More)
                      Etymology:  < Greek εἰδωλολάτρης (N.T.), idol-worshipper, gave ecclesiastical Latin (Tertullian) īdōlolatrēs, later -latra (see idololater n.), shortened in Romanic to idola′tra (Spanish idolatra, Portuguese idolatra, Italian idola′tro), Old French idolatre, ydolatre, whence (by confusion with the suffix -astre, -âtre) idolastre, idolâtre (see idolaster n. and adj.). The α form idolatrer, -rour, was either <Old French idolatre + agentive suffix -er, -our, or was a native formation < idolatr-y (compare astronom-y, -er, etc.) with same suffix; the β form idolater, -our, was either a phonetic simplification of idolatrer, -our, or < French idolatre, idolâtre....</p>

                      1. A worshipper of idols or images; one who pays divine honours to an image or representation of a god, or to any natural object as a deity.
                      1. An adorer, idolizer, devoted admirer of (some person or thing).

                      But, hey, what do the compilers of the Oxford English Dictionary know about spelling?

            •  It's not important, and should have been done (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Geekesque, FiredUpInCA

              a long time ago, and Obama had nothing to do with it, and it's not really repealed, and now I'm going to change the subject Gitmo mountaintop removal Gulf Oil spill midterms so there.

              Denounce someone else's lack of courage from safe distance and anonymously!

              by Inland on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 05:27:43 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

      •  I think it's you who isn't paying attention (10+ / 0-)

        Obama's state of the union mention came almost a year after Dan Choi made national headlines and Sen Gillibrand made national headlines announcing her plan to hold DADT Senate hearings.

        We can disagree on things, but the timeline is clear, and I personally tend to credit people who go first with being the ones who "lead."

        Now passing 1,000 Choi Units into the Obama administration.

        by Scott Wooledge on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 02:07:46 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Actually, he spoke out against Gays (8+ / 0-)

          being discriminated against back in 2008.

          "I get up, I walk, I fall down. Meanwhile, I keep dancing." Daniel Hillel

          by Onomastic on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 02:22:08 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Oh, was he leading then? (4+ / 0-)

            Frank Kameny beat him by 58 years on that account.

            Now passing 1,000 Choi Units into the Obama administration.

            by Scott Wooledge on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 02:24:04 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Oh, come on Clark. (4+ / 0-)

              I responded to your comment that said Obama hadn't gotten behind anything until Dan Choi and Senator Guillibrand make national headlines.

              All I'm saying is that it's very apparent that Obama has been against discrimination for years.

              And you throw out a false equivalency.

              Frank Kameny's courage cannot be understated. But how does that fit into this conversation about the President?

              Was he supposed to speak out against discrimination before he was born?

              "I get up, I walk, I fall down. Meanwhile, I keep dancing." Daniel Hillel

              by Onomastic on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 03:30:59 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

            •  My God, that's stupid! (5+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Jeff Simpson, DWKING, Inland, fou, regster

              I don't think you realize it, Clark, but you just put together an argument for why Dan Choi's activism shouldn't be called "leadership," either.  After all, someone else was doing it first!

              You will say anything to run down this president, but you really jumped the shark on this one.

              Art is the handmaid of human good.

              by joe from Lowell on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 04:36:48 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  Fuck you. (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                musing85, Alec82

                Now passing 1,000 Choi Units into the Obama administration.

                by Scott Wooledge on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 04:41:42 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Oh, no, Clark. "Fuck You" is dead. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Inland, regster

                  Heh.

                  Tell me, as you were enjoying the news about the Senate voting to repeal DADT, was your enjoyment interrupted just a little bit by the knowledge that you'd just been proven utterly wrong about a point that you had spent several months strutting around and proclaiming your superiority over?

                  Mine wasn't.  Not even a teeny-tiny bit.

                  Art is the handmaid of human good.

                  by joe from Lowell on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 04:51:53 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  I see no reason to engage with someone (6+ / 0-)

                    who just said I'd "say anything" as in lie. We can disagree. But your attack was unwarranted and nasty.

                    Now passing 1,000 Choi Units into the Obama administration.

                    by Scott Wooledge on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 04:58:49 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  You shouldn't engage with this jerk. (3+ / 0-)

                      Like so many others here on DK, he is only concerned with trying to get LGBTs to give Obama credit for the potential repeal of DADT.  I doubt he read your recent diary about how this is a victory for a movement, but I can assure you that if he did, it was the first time in his life that he'd ever heard of Frank Kameny, Perry Watkins, or most of the other activists you talked about.

                      And of course, although it will be denied vociferously by those trying to credit Obama rather than activists like Kameny, Matlovich, Choi, and you, homophobia plays a huge role in their attitude.  They deliberately devalue decades of work by LGBT activists so that they can heap praise upon a straight man.  Only straight people (like themselves) can be responsible for something good happening, even when it concerns LGBT rights, and even when it's an issue on which LGBTs have been working since before the president was even born.

                      Maladie d'Amour, Où l'on meurt d'Aimer, Seul et sans Amour, Sid'abandonné

                      by FogCityJohn on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 08:30:53 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  The last time you called me a homophobe, champ... (1+ / 0-)
                        Recommended by:
                        el cid

                        it was because I kept insisting that focusing on Senate passage was a good idea.

                        So I'm not terribly upset that you're still carrying around the same blankey.

                        Art is the handmaid of human good.

                        by joe from Lowell on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 03:17:57 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  You can't stop, can you? (0+ / 0-)

                          "Same blankey"?  Gee, infantilization of a gay person.  Oh, but I'm sure that doesn't have anything to do with unacknowledged homophobia on your part.

                          And your silence on the substance of my comment is deafening.  Straight guys like you will never give credit to the decades of work done by gay activists on this issue.  All you can do is insist on the glorification of a fellow straight man.

                          Maladie d'Amour, Où l'on meurt d'Aimer, Seul et sans Amour, Sid'abandonné

                          by FogCityJohn on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 08:48:33 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  I can't stop? YOU can't stop. (0+ / 0-)

                            Every time you've been pwned, every time you don't get what you want, you throw out baseless accusations of bigotry to make yourself feel better.

                            Do the homophobes steal your socks from the dryer, too?

                            Have you considered the possibility that I described you as a child because you, individually, wholly apart from your orientation, act like one?

                            As for the "substantive" part of your comment, there really is no talking to someone who uses baseless accusations like you do.  There's just no conversation to be had.  Regardless of what I wrote, if the argument was going bad for you, you'd just call me a bigot again.  Suffice to say, no, you've got my opinion about the contributions of gay activists over the years completely wrong.

                            But I'm really not interested in having that conversation with someone of your low intellectual honesty and determined defensiveness.

                            Art is the handmaid of human good.

                            by joe from Lowell on Wed Dec 22, 2010 at 01:08:42 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                  •  What point was I "strutting around" making? (7+ / 0-)

                    Mostly my point was it was a bad idea to kick the can down the road for two years. And it should have been done earlier. And I stand by that, it wasn't "wrong." That the 11th hour hail Mary orchestrated by Lieberman and Collins worked does not mean it was a good idea.

                    Was your point, you're so boastful of, that was proven so incontrovertibly correct that it was a masterful plan fail the vote twice  on the Levin's 800 page NDAA then go stand-alone? Was it a great plan to let the NDAA serve as a sacrificial lamb? Do you understand the failure of the NDAA is a tragedy for our troops? No mental health services improvements for them, no pay raises.

                    Now passing 1,000 Choi Units into the Obama administration.

                    by Scott Wooledge on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 05:20:58 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Yes, it does mean it was a good idea. (0+ / 0-)

                      Just to refresh your memory, the point you spent months strutting around making was that Obama's strategy - Congressional repeal - was a pointless fraud, with no chance of success, done only for show, and that the refusal to give up on that route and settle for a half-assed stop-loss order was a demonstration of Obama's awful political sense, his support for maintaining DADT, or both.

                      Of course legislative initiatives are a bumpy road.  That's exactly why you have to keep your head.

                      Since stopping DADT repeal was the only thing holding up the NDAA, and that amendment is now moot, it won't be any trouble to pass it under the new Congress.

                      Art is the handmaid of human good.

                      by joe from Lowell on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 03:22:51 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                •  Looks like Clark just conceded the argument. (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  fou

                  Hannity's America is just South of Sanity.

                  by DWKING on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 05:35:03 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

          •  I think you're serious (6+ / 0-)

            but it reads like snark.

            Actually, he spoke out against Gays being discriminated against back in 2008.

            Is that supposed to be remarkable? The Employment Non-Discrimination Act to protect gays from employment discrimination was introduced in 1974. So if you can only trace Obama back to 2008, I'd keep that quiet.

            (In truth, he spoke of support I'm sure since the start of his political career, being in Chicago.)

            Now passing 1,000 Choi Units into the Obama administration.

            by Scott Wooledge on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 02:27:29 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  He supported marriage equality (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              fou, emsprater, Onomastic

              in 1996, for example. (and didn't really have to, being as he represented Hyde Park).

              •  He supported only civil unions... (5+ / 0-)

                in the campaign.  That's not marriage equality.

                Obama - getting rolled like a chump by mouth-breathers since 2008.

                by teknofyl on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 03:22:50 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

              •  I know (9+ / 0-)

                but that's all really off-topic. The thread branched out from topic of his leadership on DADT. And my premise was Gilibrand certainly took a big leadership role in moving the bill forward in the Senate.

                Obama was a Senator from 2005 which offered him the opportunity to introduce a companion bill for DADT, to Patrick Murphy's bill in the House. He showed no interest in the issue until he pursued the Democratic primary and had to beat Hillary who was promising to repeal don't ask don't tell. DADT repeal had already been adopted as a goal in the official party platform, and had also in fact been promised by Presidential candidate John Kerry in 2004.

                I know my point will be misconstrued. My point merely being he was leading on an issue that had become rather mainstream and held rather widespread.

                He got it done. And he got Gates & Mullen on board, and I thank him for that.

                Now passing 1,000 Choi Units into the Obama administration.

                by Scott Wooledge on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 03:27:12 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  And Gillibrand was a freshman senator, appointed (3+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Clarknt67, Onomastic, Chitown Kev

                  to her seat by a rather unpopular governor and needing to prove herself worthy of election in her first run.  Even though New York is a fairly liberal state overall, it's not like this was a slam-dunk issue for her.  She took a lead on this, even in the face of the teabagger landslide.  That showed some real conviction.

                  They only call it Class War when we fight back.

                  by lineatus on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 04:07:21 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Everyone has motives (5+ / 0-)

                    There were risk and rewards. And the risks where, as you say, she was young, new, unknown, and did not really know how the public and her new Senate colleagues, military leadership & WH would react to her move. Alcee Hastings had tried to move the issue in the House the year before and gotten stopped in his tracks.

                    And lets face it, none of the Senators really want to move LGBT issues to the forefront. They'd just as soon kick them down the road for the 224th Congress to vote on. They couldn't have appreciated this newcomer forcing a "difficult" vote. They'd name post offices and give corporations tax cuts all day if left to their own devices.

                    But, Gillibrand was vulnerable from the left, and in fact, got rather slammed here at the time of her appointment.

                    She shrewdly saw an issue that could offer her the opportunity to do the right thing AND shore up a little left-wing good will.

                    And that's fine. That's being a good politician, imo. I'd rather they play to our side than they other.

                    Now passing 1,000 Choi Units into the Obama administration.

                    by Scott Wooledge on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 04:23:19 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

              •  And then stopped supporting it (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Clarknt67, Chitown Kev

                when he decided he wanted to be more than just an Illinois state senator. That mitigates any credit he might get. (Not to mention the fact that his support was lukewarm at best--and accomplished nothing.)

                •  Well...not lukewarm support (0+ / 0-)

                  in the context of 1996, he campaigned against DOMA that year as well.

                  And Illinois was not doing gay marriage in 1996 (then again, no state was doing gay marriage in 1996, really)

                  Point being this...

                  Obama was not as generalized about "gays being discriminated against" as Onomastic would lead us to believe; he had very specific policy positions and always has. For the record, marriage equality is the only one that he's backed away from for, as you say, wider political ambitions.

                  •  Yes, lukewarm (0+ / 0-)

                    He "campaigned on" it to the extent that he mentioned that he supported it. He didn't actually try to do anything to bring it about. He was never an original sponsor of any gay-related legislation while he was in the General Assembly--he only ever signed on to someone else's bills: and then those bills inevitably died in committee.

                    •  Uh, in 1996 (0+ / 0-)

                      There weren't all that many gays that had signed on to gay marriage.

                      For that matter, gays in Illinois still aren't pushing all that hard about marriage, to be honest about it.

                      Anyway, clark was right in that this was an unnecessary digression; my only point was that he was more specific than simply saying that one shouldn't discriminate against gays.

              •  Yup, and then he reversed himself. (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                musing85, joanneleon, Chitown Kev

                By the way - Hyde Park is a pretty liberal place.  I know what the "chitown" stands for in your KOS name - you can probably guess what the "HP" stands for in mine ...

                My mom wrote a great book on the church & gay marriage - buy it here! http://www.ermalouroller.com/

                by hpchicago on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 04:53:52 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Oh, Hyde Park is very liberal (0+ / 0-)

                  (although it's not the People's Republic of Rogers Park).

                  My point there was it's not exactly a gayborhood (although there are some gays who live there to be sure, but nothing like Lakeview, Andersonville, or even Edgewater and the People's Republic).

                  I've heard some people claim that Obama held that position to get gay votes but...there ain't that many gay votes in Hyde Park (liberal votes, yes)

                  •  there are probably more (0+ / 0-)

                    gay votes than you think there.  U of C, of course, is there.  And I think there's a  substantial gay (but almost all African American) vote.

                    Besides, he knew he was going to run for Senator - and lots of gay votes in Illinois.  

                    My mom wrote a great book on the church & gay marriage - buy it here! http://www.ermalouroller.com/

                    by hpchicago on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 07:13:42 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

      •  And how long has the fight been going on (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        AndyS In Colorado, FogCityJohn

        to repeal DADT? Seventeen years. You think making a few phone calls over the last three months is "leading from the front"? Not to mention the fact that it took people chaining themselves to his fence and making it clear that they would no longer be donating money to the Democratic Party to get the president to do that much--nearly a year after he'd promised to get it done.

        That's not what I'd call leadership. Of any kind.

        •  By virtue of the bill to allow DADT to be (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          musing85

          repealed, President Obama's been saved.  His own reelection, probably, his civil rights legacy, almost certainly.

          Now, nothing is going to happen between now and 2013 on gay rights.  The Republican takeover of the house, and the Democratic complicity with Republican agendas, makes certain of that.

          Which means DOMA and ENDA are most likely dead for the remainder of President Obama's one or two terms -- whichever it is.  DADT will be the "great civil rights victory" Obama has sought and upon which he will wish to campaign.  But the people themselves who suffer under discrimination -- they don't matter so much.

          So we can look forward to 2016 to expect to get anywhere with those battles.

          Also -- I very much doubt he reads Daily Kos messages and almost certainly neither knows nor cares when bloggers either thank him or issue "apologies" to him.  When people want people to thank President Obama (presumably, for saving his own administration or if not his legacy) it is an open question of why they want it and what (or who) they want it for.

          But he will care about the vote in 2012.

          "When in doubt, be ruthless" - Ferengi saying (-6.62, -6.26)

          by AndyS In Colorado on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 06:29:02 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I don't think so, actually (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            AndyS In Colorado

            This bill is awfully weak sauce to hang a civil rights legacy on. Not only does it not actually do anything to make it safe for gays and lesbians to serve openly in the military (since it does not require the Pentagon not to discriminate against them), it does nothing to address the second-class citizenship that is the norm for gay and lesbian Americans generally. It's nice that I could, in theory, now serve in the armed forces if I were so inclined--but that does nothing for me if I'm not so inclined. It's still legal to fire me from my job in more than half the states. It's still legal to refuse to rent me an apartment or a hotel room in more than half of the states. It is still illegal for me to get married to my partner in virtually all of the states--and even if I happen to live in one of the locations that does allow me to marry, the federal government still won't recognize that fact. This bill is the gay-rights equivalent of a law that would have made it illegal to have segregated water fountains in public schools--but nowhere else. Nice, but in no way, shape, or form a significant advance in civil rights or full equality.

            Nor am I at all confident that the passage of this bill means Obama will win re-election. He's still a wishy-washy politician who seems more interested in caving to the Republicans than he is in standing up for the principles and promises he campaigned on and that his party has traditionally stood for. The wingnuts are already frothing at the mouth over this, and I don't see this one achievement pacifying the GLBT contingent for very long (well, except for Solomonese and the A-gays, who are more concerned about making sure they're still on all the right Beltway cocktail-party invitation lists than they are about achieving gay equality). Progressives are still pissed at him for myriads of reasons--and the way he flubbed this should be one of them. No savvy politician announces something in the State of the Union without having a clear path established and a reasonably firm basis for believing it's something that can actually be achieved. That Obama promised to get rid of DADT last January, then spent ten months pretending like he'd never said any such thing and doing, seemingly, everything in his power to avoid even having to mention the policy, does not paint the picture of a great leader to me. It certainly doesn't seem likely to fire up the progressives or the GayTM to the extent that he's going to need to overcome the effects of the economic meltdown.

            I am quite certain that the president no longer reads this web site. Though you'd never know it by the number of folks who brandish his name like some holy thing that must be protected from profanation.

            •  Nonetheless, they will try. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              musing85

              This bill is awfully weak sauce to hang a civil rights legacy on.

              I guess my point is, right now a process must be going on within the administration -- one that says, "my gosh, what do we do in the campaign of 2012?"

              Right now, the President is looking weak and the claims of his supporters look fatuous.  His potential campaign slogans must be looking threadbare.

              And I suppose I'm succumbing to the straight viewpoint at least a bit in terms of thinking of civil rights as kind of "head hunting trophies" -- or at least understanding that point of view in the political arena inasmuch as I think it totally morally bankrupt..  

              Obama has "boldly" sliced off the head of hate crimes (not really, but in theory) and now he has "boldly" sliced off the head of military discrimination (even if not really and not yet).

              Whatever this turns out to be, if Obama implements DADT repeal fully and forcefully, it won't matter to either him or those who defend him how many people are left to suffer and die.

              Me -- I was looking for an excuse and this is why I laugh at people who want "apologies" and "thanks" for President Obama.

              Colorado is a swing state.

              My vote matters.

              And to do something -- anything -- was something I was looking for just to give me the barest patina of reason to pinch my nose and vote for Obama again.

              Not that it's fair to use lil' ole me as an example.

              The Obama supporters on this site want me to genuflect.  Obama himself cares about none of those things -- he just wants to be reelected.

              He may have just bought himself a second chance.  He may have just rescued my vote at least from the trash can.  And my non-forthcoming thanks would be important -- how?  

              "When in doubt, be ruthless" - Ferengi saying (-6.62, -6.26)

              by AndyS In Colorado on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 07:34:08 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

    •  How ironic that Lieberman (11+ / 0-)

      an indepedent and Collins a Republican ended up being the ones pitching the Final Hail Mary pass that finally connected, delivering Obama's campaign promise.

      Guess we can be glad Lieberman wasn't nursing a grudge from being stripped of his chairmanship and kicked from the Dem caucus as many, myself wished for in 2008, lol.

      I give Obama points for bringing on Gates and Mullen, without whom the effort would almost certainly have failed. And it seems in the final weeks, reports were he called Senators and lobbied on the bills behalf. That it passed so well, may arguably be evidence of that.

      Now passing 1,000 Choi Units into the Obama administration.

      by Scott Wooledge on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 02:04:32 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Yeah, I think that Obama's... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Chitown Kev

        planning on DADT was vindicated.

        I'm no fan of the tactics, but in DADT it worked out very well and while I'm not sure I'd go so far as to crediting him with leadership on the issue... I do think he was working it (which I was not sure of at the time!) and his gambles paid off in this fight.

        Gotta give him props for this victory.  We just have to see it through all the way now (through implementation).

        Obama - getting rolled like a chump by mouth-breathers since 2008.

        by teknofyl on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 03:25:01 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The strategy was good (mostly) (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          musing85, teknofyl, Chitown Kev

          the timing was awful.

          Now passing 1,000 Choi Units into the Obama administration.

          by Scott Wooledge on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 03:28:22 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Jesus H Christ (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            regster, cuphalffull

            If you were given a solid gold ingot, you'd seemingly bitch that it wasn't diamond-encrusted.

            ... and we have seen the black suns | pouring forth the night. -- Clark Ashton Smith

            by bustacap on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 04:17:57 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Project much? (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              musing85, teknofyl, Empty Vessel

              I said the strategy was good. But nope. That's not good enough for you. I must kiss the ring or you'll swear at me. Why is it such a crime to not be in love with Obama here?

              The timing was awful. Because the Hail Mary Pass worked does not mean it was a good idea to count on it.

              Now passing 1,000 Choi Units into the Obama administration.

              by Scott Wooledge on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 04:29:59 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  I do find this (3+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                musing85, teknofyl, Clarknt67

                aspect of some diehard Obama supporters nerve wrecking...this whole "kiss the ring" bullshit.

                And I am a tepid Obama supporter.

              •  Yeah, it was a gamble. (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                bustacap

                And it paid off.  Like you said, I don't think it was the surest, best strategy... your Hail Mary analogy is pretty good some of the last minute shit was straight up heroic, certainly the last minute split into a stand alone bill was not part of the long term strategy.

                Give Obama credit for creating the atmosphere going into the lame duck session. Credit for the actual navigation of the bill through Congress properly goes to Congressional Democrats and activists, with the umph of the final push coming from activists, Congressional Dems and the Obama administration with a key part of the consensus being military brass buy-in (which I think you can credit Obama for that - the commission's output I think really delivered the broad top-level buy-in. I did not expect to happen as a result of that commission, I though it was a bullshit move by Obama. But, it fit into his plans how he thought it would so you have to give him a check on planning and execution for that phase of the process).

                So yeah.  I'm surprised and delighted that repeal is through, though.  Major civil rights stuff right there.

                Obama - getting rolled like a chump by mouth-breathers since 2008.

                by teknofyl on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 06:28:53 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Well, I give credit the military buy in worked (4+ / 0-)

                  from getting Gates, Mullen and ultimately the survey was a plus. And that's what I meant by good strategy.  But it was poorly timed, and I got slammed for making that observation. Gates said in May, "Don't vote until the survey's done!" So we had to wait until lame duck. But even neophyte politicos know, lame duck is a time when the losing party has little leverage and little time. So the failed votes, the hail Mary, all unnecessary stress and strive.

                  And a lost opportunity, if we believe Rachel Maddow who said "the base will reward him."

                  Wouldn't it have been nice to have put the base in that mood going into midterms?

                  Now passing 1,000 Choi Units into the Obama administration.

                  by Scott Wooledge on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 07:38:56 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  Yes, I agree the timing was not good at all. (0+ / 0-)

                    DADT was something that could have inspired turnout in November.  I'm not sure that the GOP votes would have been there prior to the election... the TP seems to have them on a very, very short leash.

                    That was not a good reason not to try, because if you are only looking for a few votes you never know what will happen.

                    But it passed.  That's good.

                    Obama - getting rolled like a chump by mouth-breathers since 2008.

                    by teknofyl on Tue Dec 21, 2010 at 04:37:40 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

              •  Bottom line (0+ / 0-)

                The plan worked; perhaps not to your complete and utter satisfaction, but it worked.  This is politics.  This is how things get done.

                If DADT had been ended by the fiat of executive order without the seemingly interminable steps than have preceded this, it could just as easily have be reinstituted in the future with exactly the same mechanism in the name of "protecting the unity and esprit de corp of our armed forces" or some other such inane drivel.

                And this is, face it, a leap in the right direction that is going to be difficult to overturn.

                And it's not a "crime to not be in love with Obama here."  In fact I -- who has visited here at least once almost ever single day since I joined back over six years ago -- have actively avoided this place for weeks because of near-constant deluge of depressing, enthusiasm-sapping back-biting and negativity.

                ... and we have seen the black suns | pouring forth the night. -- Clark Ashton Smith

                by bustacap on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 06:57:31 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  The thing of it is, (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  teknofyl

                  it isn't about my dissatisfaction. It appears, the strategy of attaching it to the NDAA made the NDAA a the sacrificial lamb, after it got voted down twice.

                  Vet groups are rightfully very upset. There were pay raises, new programs to address PTSD, sexual assault, and a bunch of other things, that will have to wait. Or, because of Speaker Boehner, will now be lost forever.

                  So the bottom line isn't quite as simple. DADT did get repealed, but the plan definitely came at a cost. Gay troops won, but all troops suffered.

                  Now passing 1,000 Choi Units into the Obama administration.

                  by Scott Wooledge on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 07:30:19 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                •  It can still be reinstituted. (0+ / 0-)

                  I really wish people would read this statute.  There's nothing in it that protects LGB servicemembers from dismissal based on sexual orientation.  There's nothing in it that guarantees LGB servicemembers the right to serve openly, or even to serve at all.

                  Instead, the statute gives the Pentagon unfettered discretion to make policy in this area.  Assuming that all of the certifications are made, and that 10 U.S.C. § 654 is finally actually repealed, any future administration will have the power to reinstitute DADT or an even harsher policy if it so chooses.  The administration and Congress made a deliberate decision NOT to include nondiscrimination guarantees in the statute.  

                  Maladie d'Amour, Où l'on meurt d'Aimer, Seul et sans Amour, Sid'abandonné

                  by FogCityJohn on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 08:38:32 PM PST

                  [ Parent ]

    •  Yes Obama led from the front (5+ / 0-)

      President Obama gets credit because it happened on his watch, but once again he did not lead from the front.

      Without the tax compromise that Obama made (over the objections of many in the progressive wing of the party), DADT would never have passed.

      Snowe, Collins, and Brown all conditioned their votes on DADT on first getting the high-end tax cuts extended.  You may not like that the three of them care more about the rich than gay and lesbian service members--but they are republicans, so what did you expect.

      So yeah, without Obama's active leadership, at the cost of a significant rift with his progressive base, DADT would still be the law of the land.

      You may not like the deal, or the the compromise that Obama made to get DADT (and some other things)--but he made the deal, and rightly deserves a big part of the credit for its passage.

      "Empty vessels make the loudest sound, they have the least wit and are the greatest blabbers" Plato

      by Empty Vessel on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 03:44:06 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Don't blame LGBTs for the tax cut deal. (4+ / 0-)

        None of us asked the president to make any such deal to get DADT on the path to repeal.  

        I know many on this site like to blame LGBTs for all sorts of things, like losing presidential and midterm elections, but please try to resist the temptation.  We asked for the repeal of DADT.  At no time did anyone in our community suggest that the president should extend the Bush tax cuts as a way of getting a vote on DADT.  The deals politicians make are their responsibility, not ours.

        Maladie d'Amour, Où l'on meurt d'Aimer, Seul et sans Amour, Sid'abandonné

        by FogCityJohn on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 03:59:50 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Uh (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          knocienz, regster, joe from Lowell

          I wasn't.  I really wasn't.  Just saying that without one, you couldn't get the other.  Same with UI benefits extension and the middle class tax cut extension.

          I am not blaming gays, nor the unemployed, nor the middle class.

          All I am asking is that folks accept that Obama made a deal, a complex deal helping a variety of issues.  He was not simply 'in office' when DADT passed.

          Making laws is like making sausage, and sadly, at the end of the day--we got DADT cause Collins, Snowe, and Brown got an tax cut extension for the rich.  It ain't the fault of the gays--its the fault of Snowe, Collins, and Brown, and the rich people who support them.

          "Empty vessels make the loudest sound, they have the least wit and are the greatest blabbers" Plato

          by Empty Vessel on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 04:03:46 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I'll accept your explanation . . . (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            musing85, Empty Vessel

            about your intent, but without further proof, I am unwilling to link the action on DADT to the tax cut deal.  

            By the way, the idea that the tax cut "compromise" was what allowed DADT to come to a vote tends to undercut the idea that Obama's "long-term" strategy was vindicated here.  You might want to rethink that.

            Maladie d'Amour, Où l'on meurt d'Aimer, Seul et sans Amour, Sid'abandonné

            by FogCityJohn on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 04:13:28 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Check my links (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              regster

              for evidence of the deal.  They are in my first comment.  Snowe, Collins and Brown held DADT hostage over the tax compromise.

              There are reasonable arguments to be made that the tax compromise should never have been pushed to the lame duck session--thus avoiding becoming entangled with DREAM, DADT, START and some other things.  

              But, this is the detail everyone forgets.  Snowe and Collins were the votes that allowed for the last UI extension, demanding one short enough to end on December 1st (during the lame duck session).  Snowe and Collins have also been playing a long game to get all of these different things entangled in the lame duck session--so they could get the tax cuts extended for the rich.

              Its all fucking ugly, and fucking complex, but that is the nature of all of this.  Every bill in congress, is ultimately part of a larger bargaining 'package.'

              "Empty vessels make the loudest sound, they have the least wit and are the greatest blabbers" Plato

              by Empty Vessel on Mon Dec 20, 2010 at 04:19:39 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site