Two issues from the ADVOCATE "interview."

[Tyler Durden]

DADT and DOMA are very much on everyone's mind here with good reason. I have read the piece in the ADVOCATE about 5 times now, and I've parsed a bit of it.
http://www.advocate.com/exclusive_detail.asp?id=53285&p...

DADT

(snip)
(Eleveld)If you were elected, what do you plan to do for the LGBT community -- what can you reasonably get done?

(Obama)I reasonably can see "don't ask, don’t tell" eliminated. I think that I can help usher through an Employment Non-Discrimination Act and sign it into law.
(snip)

Let's parse that.

"I reasonably can see "don't ask, don't tell" eliminated."

Does he state he will advocate for this? No.
Does he state he is committed to its repeal? No.
Does he state unequivocally he will see to the elimination of DADT? No.

He can "...reasonably see..."

Does he define "reasonably?" No.

So in other words, if it is not "reasonable," that is, not politically feasible, or goes against his "Faith," will he support the unequivocal repeal of DADT?

Well, not according to this statement, and don't say well, he could have said...he's had six months to frame this, he is a good orator and a lawyer, so this statement likely says all it intends to say...

And that is very, very little.


DOMA

(snip)
(Eleveld)I assume you're talking about the Defense of Marriage Act.

(Obama)Absolutely, and I for a very long time have been interested in repeal of DOMA.
(snip)

He is "...interested in the repeal of DOMA."

Does he advocate for the repeal of DOMA? No. He is "...interested..." in the repeal: he does not commit.
Does he even state that he actually is in favor of the repeal of DOMA? No. He does not make that claim.

Why does one think he does not commit?

(snip)
(Eleveld)Do you think it's possible to get full repeal of DOMA? As you know, Senator Clinton is only looking at repealing the plank of DOMA that prohibits the federal government from recognizing state-sanctioned unions.

(Obama) I don't know. But my commitment is to try to make sure that we are moving in the direction of full equality, and I think the federal government historically has led on civil rights -- I'd like to see us lead here too.
(snip)

Again, does he commit to the repeal of DOMA? No. He actually leaves himself an "out" in that if it's not "...possible..." then it's not his fault. "I don't know."

But here he makes a tactical error:

(snip)
(Obama)...I think the federal government historically has led on civil rights -- I'd like to see us lead here too.
(snip)

Now let's move down the interview to the section on Same Sex Marriage:

(snip)
(Eleveld) Both you and your wife speak eloquently about being told to wait your turn and how if you had done that, you might not have gone to law school or run for Senate or even president. To some extent, isn't that what you're asking same-sex couples to do by favoring civil unions over marriage, is to wait their turn?

(Obama) I don't ask them that. Anybody who's been at an LGBT event with me can testify that my message is very explicit -- I don’t think that the gay and lesbian community, the LGBT community, should take its cues from me or some political leader in terms of what they think is right for them. It’s not my place to tell the LGBT community, wait your turn. I'm very mindful of Dr. King's "Letter from Birmingham Jail" where he says to the white clergy, don't tell me to wait for my freedom.
(snip)


He has deflected the argument. He has, through this statement "returned the lob." He states it's not his place to lead by insinuating that the community should not "...take its cues from me or some political leader in terms of what they think is right for them." Does anyone here think that what the community wants is not absolutely crystal clear?

1) Equal Treatment Under the Law
2) Enforcement of the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution regarding the Federal Government's guarantee that they will intervene where a state treats citizens differently according to their minority or group status.

Clear and simple, but he hints that the debate has not been framed, and changes the subject to MLK for effect.

He has stated above "I think the federal government historically has led on civil rights -- I'd like to see us lead here too." but he completely avoids accepting this leadership role.

(snip)
(Obama) So I strongly respect the right of same-sex couples to insist that even if we got complete equality in benefits, it still wouldn't be equal because there's a stigma associated with not having the same word, marriage, assigned to it. I understand that, but my perspective is also shaped by the broader political and historical context in which I’m operating.
(snip)

Translation: GLBT Civil Rights are subject to political and historical context, not the constitution. Is anyone willing to give him a break because he "...understands that..."?

(snip)
(Obama) And I've said this before -- I'm the product of a mixed marriage that would have been illegal in 12 states when I was born. That doesn't mean that had I been an adviser to Dr. King back then, I would have told him to lead with repealing an anti-miscegenation law, because it just might not have been the best strategy in terms of moving broader equality forward.
(snip)

Translation: Strategy trumps Equal Rights.

(snip)
(Obama) That’s a decision that the LGBT community has to make. That’s not a decision for me to make.
(snip)
(Regarding Leadership)

Translation: The GLBT Community will have to decide for itself if they want to chance going for Equal Rights. He will not lead in that effort, and will only provide titular support once the GLBT Community has decided (based on previous statements) that they will support "reasonable" efforts, because he is politically and historically constrained.

My conclusions

This is just the sections on these two issues. Based on the questions which were friendly and not deeply probing (Nothing like the PGN interview at all) and Obama's answers, he will do what he deems possible, IF and ONLY IF the Community forces his hand by re-stating specific issues under the community's leadership, not his.

This article was a "puff piece" compared to the PGN questions, and the answers given were evasive and non-specific, with "escape clauses" all over the place where Obama can claim something was not within his power, was beyond his control, or was not properly led by the GLBT Community.

[terrya]

1. It's a goddamned disgrace that ENDA still hasn't passed.

ENDA has bipartisan support. And I know I'm not wise in the ways of Capitol Hill, but I can't believe an INCLUSIVE ENDA would be impossible to pass. ENDA isn't a program that is going to cost billions of dollars. It's legislation that says you can't be denied employment nor can you be fired solely because of sexual orientation or gender identity.

A President Obama, if he uses the gifts of his oratory and persuasion, can get an inclusive ENDA passed. At least to me.

[Tyler Durden]

2. But here, where he could SAY he will, he didn't.

In fact, if you look at his statements from a contract point of view, the entire interview evaded any commitment to ANYTHING.

It didn't help that he was interviewed by the "PEOPLE MAGAZINE" of GLBT publications, by and interviewer throwing softballs.

[terrya]

3. I'll have to read it in full later, Tyler. I'm at work right now.

But I'm very interested in reading it. Thanks for posting this in here....I'm not sure what kind of reception this would get in GDP.

[Tyler Durden]

4. One reply.

I think I'm on everyone's IGNORE list there.

[mitchtv]

5. Hah I never go there anymore except when

someone tricks me into it.My impression? one word: Weasel.a TYPICAL POLITICIAN, which is not so bad, unless you're billing yourself as something "New".

[TechBear_Seattle]

6. I believe the expression you want is: "Blowing smoke up our skirts"

He cannot -- he adamantly WILL not -- support equal rights for the GLBT community. I don't see how anyone could be ignorant to claim otherwise.

[mitchtv]

7. But , but I HOPE he does...

I find my self hoping that one of his daughters becomes gay, too.

My mother used to say " If wishes were horses, beggars would ride"

[FedoraLV]

8. Full Federal Equality

I think in your suspicion you are mincing his words too finely, looking for things to doubt. Obama cannot know what congress we will give him to work with (that's our job) and, as a Constitutional law expert, he understands that his will as Chief Executive is not what will change federal law. He is leaving room for what congress will permit -- and what the LBGT community will request (he kindly says that he can't speak for us later in the piece: I can't think of the last time a politician who wasn't gay left room for that vital fact ... many speak as though their advocacy and our concerns are one -- with no acknowledgments that we (like most minorities) have a variety of views and no one, official spokesperson. :P)

From the interview:

"I reasonably can see “don’t ask, don’t tell” eliminated. I think that I can help usher through an Employment
Non-Discrimination Act and sign it into law .... I have been clear about my interest in including gender identity in (civil rights) legislation, but I’ve also been honest ... it is a heavy lift through Congress. We’ve got some Democrats who are willing to vote for a noninclusive bill, but we lose them on an inclusive bill, and we just may not be able to generate the votes .... my goal would be to get the strongest possible bill -- that’s what I’ll be working for.

The third thing I believe I can get done is in dealing with federal employees .... I think can be done with some opposition, some turbulence, but I think we can get that done.

And finally, an area that I’m very interested in is making sure that federal benefits are available to same-sex couples who have a civil union .... I strongly respect the right of same-sex couples to insist that even if we got complete equality in benefits, it still wouldn’t be equal because there’s a stigma associated with not having the same word, marriage, assigned to it. I understand that .... I’m the product of a mixed marriage that would have been illegal in 12 states when I was born."

(Many African-Americans reject that very comparison: it is brave of Obama to make it.)

-FedoraLV

[kdpeters]

9. Good summary, Tyler. I generally agree with you, but interpret that positive.

Here's where I'm coming from: I cast my first vote for president in 1992 only recently out of the closet for a president who actually spoke to us and wanted us included. It really was a new day and we rode that high for months. Long story short, the next eight years I developed an ample cynicism that has served me well over the years and protected me from that bitter disappointment ever since. I've heard a lot of promises and patronizing and know that the stuff that sounds great and just perfect is actually the bullshit that will never happen. Speak to me as an adult or don't speak to me at all, but don't give me that patronizing bullshit -- but they all do. I've come to expect it.

Translation: The GLBT Community will have to decide for itself if they want to chance going for Equal Rights. He will not lead in that effort, and will only provide titular support once the GLBT Community has decided (based on previous statements) that they will support "reasonable" efforts, because he is politically and historically constrained.

This is absolutely true. I've already learned one time the hard way that the gay community can only depend on ourselves. All others are subject to condition or convenience. Only gayfolks will always stand up and fight for us. Openly gay folks, that is. All the successes we've won, WE did it, we pushed, we fought. We have always been the leaders and we always will be. I would never in decades expect a straight politician to know this or even risk the candor it takes to speak so frankly. This is respect. This is believable. This is unheard of.

Obama's answers, he will do what he deems possible, IF and ONLY IF the Community forces his hand by re-stating specific issues under the community's leadership, not his.

And that's the truth I never expected to hear from a candidate who wanted my vote. This is exactly how I see the hierarchy: gay community leading, president taking direction from us. That kind of environment is what we need.

Overall, I think we both interpreted the interview similarly, but it exceeded my expectations. I need to remind myself to stay cynical. I don't dare hope.