Obama has taken no questions from LGBT media since election

[ruggerson]

http://www.pamshouseblend.com/diary/17312/fed-dadt-ruling-ignored-at-obama-presser-taken-no-questions-from-lgbt-media-since-election

"How can front-page news like the federal court ruling that DADT is unconstitutional be completely ignored when the President held a conference in its wake? Easy, apparently, because no LGBT reporter was called on, and the rest of the press corps was asleep or willing to give the President at pass, and not take what would place Obama in a tough position for an answer."

"Mediate noticed the omission and the political fallout and questions about this administration's clear signal that it does not want any national attention brought to its treatment of LGBT media and issues:

"While there are plenty of issues facing the White House, the lack of questions about DADT comes as some are noting that the Obama administration has ignored the gay and lesbian press generally and has avoided answering questions about DADT, same-sex marriage, and an employment non-discrimination bill that would protect employees based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

"In addition to no questions about the DADT ruling from last night, this was the first press conference since a court in California struck down California's ban on same-sex marriage based on constitutional grounds.

"Kerry Eleveld, the Washington correspondent for The Advocate, tweeted after the press conference:

'POTUS presser ending, no dadt questions; Obama has yet to take a single question from lgbt press since being elected.'

"Eleveld is the only full-time member of the White House press corps representing an LGBT press outfit and she often asks questions of Press Secretary Robert Gibbs, but she's never gotten a question to Obama. Obama has yet to offer an interview with the LGBT press during his administration."

"Other constituency media were called on -- black and Latino outlets, as well as Haaretz (Middle East issues) and AURN (poverty)-- indicates those issues are safe to answer, yet DADT is a top story on air and in print is ignored.

"That underscores this White House's disdain for engaging LGBT issues, in this case a national security issue involving the discharge of otherwise trained and qualified individuals because of their sexual orientation.

"And Kerry Eleveld's point that the President hasn't taken a question or sat down for an interview since he was elected is damning, given he's done so for every other constituency in the fold. Mediaite references the WH meeting that PHB attended with other LGBT outlets not long ago, as "one of a kind." At that meeting I actually told Barnes about the fact that the President has avoided LGBT media and she acted surprised."

"No interview opportunity has arisen since that meeting. They can't feign ignorance. We cannot ignore that we are political pariahs to this White House, but we aren't untouchables when they come knocking at the gAyTM. If the WH cannot even stand a question about DADT repeal or unconstitutionality - and repeal has broad public support - we're up sh*ts creek for the DOMA cases winding their way toward his DOJ."

[terrya]

1. Silly me, I actually thought there would be a question about Thursday's ruling

Am I the dumbest, stupidest, more laughably naive person around or what?

Kerry Eleveld, of The Advocate, is a member of the White House Press Corps. She was there Friday. The White House knows who she is...hell, she's regularly grilled Robert Gibbs at the daily White House Press Briefing. About DADT repeal. And...nothing.

There's no dialogue with the GLBT community. No interviews with the President from GLBT media, nothing. As was said in that article, all of other consituencies of the Democratic Party get their share of interviews.

We are indeed pariahs. You'd have to be rather dense to come up with any other conclusion. Message received. Got it. It's downright insulting to people who committed their votes, their time and their financial donations to helping elect Barack Obama in 2008.

[izquierdista]

2. But you will knock on doors, won't you?

I mean it's either that or....Speaker Boehner -- Booga! Booga! :scared:

[Mass]

41. You're big enough to know what is best for you. May be it is Boehner?

[stray cat]

3. So who should have been chosen to ask the question and in what venue?

[Bluenorthwest]

6. Did you read the ariticle?

First off, someone gay. Maybe the one sitting in the Press Room at every Presser.

[vaberella]

24. You might need to read post 18. I don't think the OPs article is on the ball. n/t

[ruggerson]

27. You might want to read post #26

I think Pam is on the money with her piece.

[vaberella]

28. Well no.

You're title and the full title of the writer's title is misleading at best. To say that the President hasn't taken questions by the LGBT media or even had press conferences with them is false. It may not be on full public display 24-7 but it has happened, which was stated in post 18.

[ruggerson]

30. Which link in post 18 shows a public Q and A with the LGBT press and the President?

[vaberella]

34. So now it needs to be public; because private doesn't count? n/t

[ruggerson]

35. OK then, which link in post 18 shows a Q and A with the LGBT press and the President?

[terrya]

31. There were no questions allowed at the Pride events.

No, the President did not take questions at either of those events. He gave some remarks, people applauded, and then he left the room.

Why is it so difficult to request that President Obama grants an interview with a member of the LGBT media? There are millions of GLBT Americans who would like to hear what the President has to say about issues important to us.

[vaberella]

33. And Rachel Maddow doesn't count...too right?!

I need to be clear on what is defined as LGBT media here.

[terrya]

36. If you're talking about that interview with her and President Obama a few months ago....

I watched that interview on "The Rachel Maddow Show". And while I was hoping that there would have been questions about LGBT issues, there weren't. It primarily focused on health care reform.

And don't ask me why she didn't ask any questions about LGBT issues. I don't know. Rachel Maddow isn't just solely a GLBT journalist, as you'd know if you watched her show regularly. Maybe the White House defined the line of questioning permitted. Again, I don't know.

[ruggerson]

37. the LGBT media refers to publications that cater to the LGBT community

the Advocate, Out, QV, etc. and various online blogs.

Not to people who happen to be gay who work for mainstream news outlets.

Regardless, the one meeting I believe you are referencing involved eight or so reporters from mainstream news outlets and it was entirely off the record.

None of those who attended are part of the "GLBT media."

[Sheepshank]

4. Angle from Arizon

has a solution for that problem.

[mitchtv]

7. you mean NV

I think her solution is just run away isn't it?

[Sheepshank]

43. yes NV....but where I was going with that

was her comment that she would like to tell the press what questions they should ask....remember that one?

I shouldn't have been so obtuse.

[mitchtv]

44. Obtuse... angle

yeah

[dsc]

5. try to imagine if Hillary had won and not given an interview to any African American press

the cries would be deafening, and justifibably so.

[mitchtv]

8. this will turn out just peachy

DOJ appealing and LCR plaintiffs , Who should we support??. Maybe if we all close our eyes it will just go away

[dsc]

9. I support the LCR on this

I think they are mostly useless, sometimes destructive, but on this lawsuit, absolutely right.

[LostinVA]

11. Agreed on all points

[LostinVA]

10. It's only been 22 months

[terrya]

12. Well, that's true.

Kerry Eleveld should clear her calendar for Jan 19, 2017. I'm sure she'll be granted an interview then.

[Pisces]

13. Are they questions asked of the President scripted and approved?? Maybe someone from

the media should be held responsible. Pres. Obama would have answered any question posed to him. Not everyone minus the LBGT reporters were called on. This is just another attempt to
paint Obama as anti LBGT when the media is not reporting this or making it an issue.

[dsc]

14. It has been over 600 days since he has given an interview of any kind

to any LGBT journalistic outlet, despite the fact one such reporter is assigned to the White House. Just what should gay people assume here? Again, imagine for a moment that Hillary had won and she didn't give a single, solitary interview to any publication that catered to African American readership. What would people say?

[DURHAM D]

69. They would say she was racist.

So, are we saying Obama is a homophobe?

[dsc]

178. honestly it is hard not to wonder

It is impossible to know someone's heart but it is hard to escape the notion that he is uncomfortable with gays and gay issues. Now, apparently Truman was a racist, but he still did a decent job on civil rights, so it isn't necessary for Obama not to be a homophobe but it is necessary for him to actually seek out gay opinions on issues which he is showing little to no sign of doing.

[terrya]

16. There's an unfortunate history even before President Obama assumed office

During the campaign, he NEVER sat down voluntarily with the LGBT media. The only time I remember him submitting to an interview was when he seemingly reluctantly submitted to an interview with The Advocate following the furor in the gay community over the Donnie McClurkin thing.

This whole thing with the lack of interviews just feeds into the apprehension we have with this President on GLBT issues. I'm sorry, criticize it all you want, but that's the perception.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

19. Didn't he do an online YouTube Forum along with the other candidates at the time?

They all took LGBT-related questions, didn't they? That DID happen, didn't it? :shrug:

[terrya]

20. I stand corrected.

Yes, he did. As did Hillary Clinton, John Edwards and Bill Richardson. It was a candidate forum, on the Logo channel. Jonathan Capehart and Melissa Etheridge were 2 of the moderators.

You're right. I had forgotten that. Thank you for reminding me.

[vaberella]

25. He did meet with Racel Maddow as well...

And I do believe she did ask LGBT related questions.

[QC]

15. IT'S ONLY BEEN 1 YEAR, 7 MONTHS AND 23 DAYS!1!!!11

[dsc]

17. No actually it has only been one year, 10 months, and 8 days

since election day.

[vaberella]

23. You need to read post 18. n/t

[ProSense]

18. Rachel Maddow addressed this

Video: DADT another step closer to being gone

Since it's acknowledged that Kerry Eleveld often gets to ask questions of Robert Gibbs, she needs to ask Gibbs to comment. There really is no need to try to use this to create the impression that the WH is avoiding the LGBT community.

There have been other opportunities for the LGBT media to engage the President and WH directly:

Video: President Obama & the First Lady Hold LGBT Pride Reception

LGBT Pride Reception

In a first, top Obama aide met with LGBT media today

[vaberella]

22. I thought there were LGBT media at the LGBT event, so I'm not sure where the poster gets his news.

Oh well. This is a really weird thread.

[ruggerson]

26. Yes, Rachel actually called it "weird" that no questions were asked about the DADT ruling

during Obama's press conference. It's right at the beginning of your link. The rest of the clip was an interview with a Major who had been fired from the military and who had been a witness in the LCR instigated lawsuit.

Your link #2 and #3 are videos of cocktail parties at the WH. Nice events, glad they occurred, but there was no question and answer period at either. So neither link has any bearing on the OP.

In your link #4, if you read it, the bloggers met with an aide, not the President, and the writer in your own link talks about how disappointed both he and some of the other attendees were, as nothing new came out of the meeting and he left without any more information than when he arrived. As this meeting was with an aide, this link also has nothing to do with the OP.

[vaberella]

21. So Rachel Maddow doesn't count? n/t

[boppers]

29. She's apparently straight, now.

LGBTQ media don't "count" if they have more than one issue they want to talk about, or aren't solely focused on LGBTQ issues.

Thus, Anderson Cooper doesn't count either.

[vaberella]

32. Anderson Cooper came out of the closet?! Huh. n/t

[JI7]

39. he has always been out

doesn't really talk about it but he doesn't hide it either. he appearsin public with the guys he is with.

he did once say we or us when talking about some gay rights issue.

[dsc]

42. He lives in a glass closet

which isn't the same as being out. Given the general heterosexual assumption, unless you specificly say you are gay a significant portion of the population will assume you are straight.

[boppers]

50. Huh? Really?

Maybe it's the group I run with, but the general assumption is that everybody is het/homo/bi (unless they've decided to announce a specific preference).

Changing times, I guess.

[cliffordu]

137. So: Anderson Cooper isn't gay enough now????

Fuck me, I thought living your entire life in the open did it.

Apparently not.

Glass closet indeed.

[boppers]

48. You can't come out if you were never in.

It's my understanding that he's always been himself and never hid it from anyone.

[dsc]

57. He wrote an autobiography of hundreds of pages

in which he doesn't mention a single person he has dated. What would you call that?

[stpp]

85. I would call that inaccurate.

I would call that inaccurate. It wasn't an autobiography. It was a not terribly long book concerning his experiences with war, disasters and survival. About 95% of it was professional experiences he'd had that fit the theme and the other 5% was mention of some family deaths that also fit the theme.

And a boyfriend actually did get an inclusion in the book. He gave a nice thank you to the guy he was dating.

Putting all that aside, though, I agree with the people who are arguing that a reporter being gay or lesbian doesn't automatically make them part of the "gay press" whether they are out or not. "Gay press" like "latino press" or "women's press" is determined by the identity and overall focus of the publication/network not the identity of the reporter.

[boppers]

111. I'd call that being discrete.

Now if he talked about people he dated, but changed their names to be feminine or ambiguous ones, that would be more closeted.

[LostinVA]

45. Why in the world do you consider Cooper and Maddow the LGBT Media?

They never have been, and certainly aren't now.

:wtf:

If it's because they are gay, then I Elisabeth Hasselbeck is part of the Feminist Media, and "Oprah" is part of Black Media.

[boppers]

47. You changed the wording.

There's a difference between:
"Obama has taken no questions from LGBT media"
and:
"Obama has taken no questions from the LGBT media"

Hesselbeck is female media, Oprah is black media, but neither are "THE".

edit:
Also in the OP:
"because no LGBT reporter was called on"
...was the wording used, rather than:
"because no reporter from the LGBT media was called on"

[LostinVA]

59. I didn't "change" any wording, I just answered you

Not every single poster has some kind of ulterior motive.

And, I see you still didn't answer the question.

[boppers]

116. I consider Maddow and Cooper to be GLBTQ media.

I do not consider them to be the GLBTQ media.

[dsc]

38. Would Bernard Shaw of CNN have counted as an interview with the African American media?

Rachel is a great journalist and, of course, a lesbian, but MSNBC doesn't cater to the LGBT community anymore than CNN does to the African American one. So honestly, she doesn't count for this purpose.

[ruggerson]

40. what's sad

is that they know that already. Our lives are a game for them.

[LostinVA]

46. Exactly

As I typed a reply to them, I thought this very thing.

[boppers]

51. "cater to" is your benchmark?

I wasn't aware that there was a gay-only media. Heck, even Out and 365 have straight people on staff, and run stories that have nothing to do with who a person finds desirable.

Since two of the biggest names in media (Cooper and Maddow) who are GLBTQ have gotten face time with Obama, and that doesn't meet the bar, could you explain your *exact* requirements?

[dsc]

52. Cooper isn't openly gay

and yes, I think it is different to give an interview to a reporter that happens to be gay and to give an interview to the gay media. Funny but so far no one has answered the Bernard Shaw question.

[boppers]

53. Shaw died in 1950. 60 years ago.

What question of his did you want answered?

[dsc]

54. He was anchor for CNN

in the 1980's. So again, would giving an interview to him have been giving an interview to the African American media?

[boppers]

55. George Bernard Shaw?

er....what?

Are you saying that African Americans are zombies?

I'm not following.

[dsc]

56. No the man's name is Bernard Shaw

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Shaw_(journalist)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Shaw_(journalist)

He was the main anchor of CNN in the 1980's. He asked the famous Kitty Dukakis question in 1988 that helped sink Michael Dukakis. And yes, he is an African American. So one more time, now that I have provided a link for you to show he isn't George Bernard Shaw but Bernard Shaw, would an interview with him have constituted an interview with the African American media?

On edit you will have to choose the third link on the link I provided as the () won't come up as a link.

[LostinVA]

60. Quit taking the bait, DSC -- you deserve more respect than that

They are quite aware who Bernard Shaw is, and that there is a gay media, just like there is a black media, women's media, etc. Like Ruggerson says up thread, our lives are just a game to them.

[QC]

62. Equal rights are just not as important as defending the mostest dreamiest politician

in the whole wide world.

We already know that.

[boppers]

112. I had no idea who he was (seriously).

An interview with Bernard Shaw would constitute an interview with African American media, but not the African American media. Understand the subtle difference? Contrary to the OP, Obama hasn't avoided GLBTQ press.

[ruggerson]

114. The difference is a semantical one you made up

You know perfectly well what Pam Spaulding and Kerry Eleveld are saying in this piece and every word of it is accurate.

[boppers]

115. The piece conflates the two, trying to paint Obama as more homophobic than he actually is.

Obama hasn't shut out GLBTQ media, and all the linguistic sleight-of-hand can't change that, no matter how cleverly worded.

[ruggerson]

117. You're the one employing linguistic sleight of hand

to discredit a well respected print journalist and a well respected online journalist.

The issue is not the degrees of Obama's homophobia, or whether he is homophobic at all. The issue is holding him accountable to a fairly large portion of the base - people who voted for him with the expectation that he would do what he said he would do.

[boppers]

120. What is the title of the OP?

"Obama has taken no questions from LGBT media since election"

1. Maddow and Cooper are LGBT media figures.
2. Obama has taken questions from both.
Therefore:
3. Obama has taken questions from LGBT media since election.

You may wish the original OP was written differently, and the subject was written as "Obama has taken no questions from the LGBT media since election", but this is not the case.

[msanthrope]

70. "Anderson Cooper isn't openly gay." WTF? Somebody tell Benjamin Maisani

that the guy he's been publicly dating isn't gay....

Seriously. Like I'm completely out of the culture loop, and even I know who Benjamin Maisani is.

[dsc]

81. He hasn't, to my knowledge, either publicly acknowledged that relationship

nor uttered the words I am gay. If I am wrong, I am willing to be educated, but as far as I know he is in a glass closet. And again, he wrote a rather lengthy, in depth, autobiography in which he neither discusses anyone he dated nor says he is gay.

[stpp]

86. perspectives differ

People have different ideas of what constitutes "out". Anderson Cooper is out in the way a regular person would be out in their life and workplace. He's not officially out in a celebrity Ellen way of doing a formal press announcement, but that's about it. He's get loudly outed constantly and has never denied it or raised any sort of protest. He is very free about sharing with his audience his many stereotypically gay interests. He brought Maisani as his date to the Vanity Fair oscar party and they are always out around town together. He gave previous boyfriend Julio a nice personal thank you in his book.

The book was not lengthy, nor was it an autobiography. It had some depth in regard to his professional life but had a very limited breadth there, leaving out a huge amount of his career and all of his journalist co-workers. It only touched on a few seminal death related personal things.

[dsc]

90. assuming there was press at the Vanity Fair dinner

then I would conceed he is out, that doesn't make him a journalist for an LGBT outlet but it does make him out.

[msanthrope]

98. Dude---the New York Post routinely reports on Cooper and his boyfriend.

FYI--The Vanity Fair party is 'the' Oscars afterparty...plenty of press, including shots of Cooper, with BF, talking to Jerry Seinfeld....

[ampad]

168. I find this insulting

What does it matter if he ever comes out and says I am gay? He is gay and that should be all that matters. Doesn't mean he is not proud of the fact. Does it make him less of a voice for the GLBT community because he hasn't come out and yelled his specific sexual orientation to the world? I think this is probably the most insulting statement in this entire thread yet you claim to be shocked at the "homophobia" of the president and fellow DU'ers. Glass closet? WTF Anyone who pays attention knows that the man is gay. I guess it doesn't count until he goes on Oprah and announces it. Geesh

[dsc]

176. Ken Melman and Roy Cohn were gay

I think it matters if you are out or not. I will, of course, conceed that Cooper was neither like either one of those but the notion that a closeted gay is just like an open one is absurd.

[dsc]

58. BTW this statement of yours

Heck, even Out and 365 have straight people on staff, and run stories that have nothing to do with who a person finds desirable.

Tells me all I need to know about what you think of gay rights. And it isn't pretty.

[LostinVA]

61. Yes, the homophobia of that statement appalled me, too

[QC]

65. I can't even manage to be mildly surprised anymore, much less appalled.

It's just too typical for that.

[boppers]

113. Oh, so I'm self hating now?

Interesting mental jump you took there.

[dsc]

135. If the shoe fits

[boppers]

162. I'm getting married in a few weeks.

Ruby slippers will be involved (very cute baby janes, patent leather, paired with black and white striped tights), as will a moment of silence for people who *can't* get married in various places, along with broom jumping (honoring another "marriage denied" tradition) and a handfasting (natch), under a chuppa (another marriage tradition often not recognized).

You do the math.

Maybe you see enemies where you have allies, and should stop shooting at your own troops.

[Name removed]

151. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[unapatriciated]

91. what is it you don't understand/

Yes Rachel is in the media and host a show that covers all political topics who also happens to be gay.
The op is talking about reporters who only report on issues the are related to the gay community.
sheezzs I'm straight and didn't need it explained to me once let alone over and over again.

I will give you an example: Chris Matthews is Catholic who host a show that covers all political topics.

The Catholic News covers issues related to ....... wait for it
.
.
.
.
.
.
Catholics




edited for clarity

[m00nbeam]

49. But the LGBT community should just wait and be quiet

Mr. Obama will get around to your "pet issues" eventually.

:sarcasm:

[VMI Dem]

63. I'd like to hear more straight opinions on this before forming my own opinion.

[QC]

64. I am so glad you are learning. n/t

[ClarkUSA]

66. AmericaBlog, July 1, 2010: "In a first, top Obama aide met with LGBT media today"

Earlier this week, I got invited to attend an on-the-record briefing with Assistant to the President and Director of the White House Domestic Policy Council Melody Barnes. Let's just say, I don't get invited to many White House events these days. Although, we were asked to cover the cocktail party last week, but I don't do cocktail parties. But, this was the first briefing with LGBT media by a high-ranking Obama administration official, so I RSVP'd yes.

Last night, I touched base with Pam Spaulding and confirmed that she'd be attending, too. So, after her flight arrived, Pam spent the morning with Petey and me.

Besides Pam and me, there were seven other LGBT media types at the briefing: Lou Chibarro from the Washington Blade, Kerry Eleveld from the Advocate, Chris Geidner from MetroWeekly, Jillian Weiss from Bilerico, Lisa Keen from Keen News Service, Paul Schindler from Gay City News and Jen Colletta from Philadelphia Gay News. We met with Barnes in the Department of War Suite in the Old Executive Office Building. (Apparently, the Roosevelt Room in the West Wing was booked.)

<snip>

And, you'll want to know that while there isn't a high ranking LGBT official in the White House, there are a number of high ranking administration officials to whom LGBT issues are very important. Among those high ranking officials identified by Barnes are Rahm Emanuel and Jim Messina. Yes, we're in good hands.

http://gay.americablog.com/2010/07/in-first-top-obama-aide-met-with-lgbt.html

There have been other opportunities for the LGBT media to engage the President and WH directly:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=439520&mesg_id=439666

[dsc]

67. that isn't Obama

his aides aren't him, and you have certainly made that argument in the past to defend him when his aides have run amok.

[ClarkUSA]

68. There have been other opportunities for the LGBT media to engage the President and WH directly...

... as I clearly pointed out in my previous reply, unless you think the LGBT media didn't ask him any questions at all at the LGBT Pride Reception:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=433&topic_id=439520&mesg_id=439666

<< you have certainly made that argument in the past to defend him when his aides have run amok >>

When did "his aides... run amok"? I don't recall any such occasion.

[dsc]

72. I don't think that I know that

It was directly reported at the time that Obama spoke and took no questions.

[Name removed]

80. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dsc]

82. that isn't the President himself

and the OP was clear about both that and that Gibbs has taken questions from Ms. Eleveld.

[ClarkUSA]

92. So what? How many times did Pres. Clinton take questions from LGBT media in his first 20 months? nt

[unapatriciated]

94. What has that got to do with this.

Clinton is not in office and can do nothing to repeal DADT.
Imho that question is just an attempt to avoid the truth.
It's sad to say but LGBT issues are not something Obama wants to discuss especially with those that are affected by them, namely the Gay Community.

[ClarkUSA]

97. Do you have an answer? Or is Pres. Obama the only one held to a higher standard?

<< Imho that question is just an attempt to avoid the truth. It's sad to say but LGBT issues are not something Obama wants to discuss especially with those that are affected by them, namely the Gay Community. >>

You're wrong. From the LGBT Pride Reception, the rest of us learned otherwise:

We've got a lot of hard work that we still have to do, but we can already point to extraordinary progress that we've made over the past year on behalf of Americans who are gay and lesbian, bisexual and transgender.

Just stay with me here for a second. Last year, I met with Judy Shepard, Matthew Shepard's mom, and I promised her that after a decade's-long struggle, we would pass inclusive hate crimes legislation. I promised that in the name of her son we would ensure that the full might of the law is brought down on those who would attack somebody just because they are gay. And less than six months later, with Judy by my side, we marked the enactment of the Matthew Shepard Act. It's now the law of the land. (Applause.)

Just a few moments ago, I met with Janice Langbehn and her children. Where did Janice go? There they are right there. And when Janice's partner of 18 years, Lisa, suddenly collapsed because of an aneurysm, Janice and the couple's three kids were denied the chance to comfort their partner and their mom -- barred from Lisa's bedside. It was wrong. It was cruel. And in part because of their story, I instructed my Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, to make sure that any hospital that's participating in Medicare or Medicaid -- that means most hospitals -- (laughter) -- allow gay and lesbian partners the same privileges and visitation rights as straight partners. (Applause.)

After I issued that memorandum, I called Janice and I told her the news. And before we came out here today, I wanted to make sure that I had followed up -- Secretary Sebelius will officially be proposing this regulation. And I can also announce that the Secretary has sent a letter today asking these hospitals to adopt these changes now -- even before the rule takes effect. (Applause.) Nothing can undo the hurt that her -- that Janice's family has experienced. And nothing can undo the pain felt by countless others who've been through a similar ordeal -- for example, Charlene Strong is here. She lost her wife, Kate Fleming -- and Charlene is here along with Kate's mom, who said on behalf of all mothers, thank you. Because we think it's the right thing to do. (Applause.)

In addition, I've issued an executive order* to extend as many partnership benefits to gay and lesbian federal employees as possible under current law. And I'm going to continue to fight to change the law: to guarantee gay federal employees the exact same benefits as straight employees -- including access to health insurance and retirement plans. (Applause.) And in an announcement today, the Department of Labor made clear that under the Family and Medical Leave Act, same-sex couples -- as well as others raising children -- are to be treated like the caretakers that they are. (Applause.)

Because I believe in committed -- I believe that committed gay and lesbian couples deserve the same rights and responsibilities afforded to any married couple in this country, I have called for Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act. (Applause.) We are pushing hard to pass an inclusive employee non-discrimination bill. (Applause.) No one in America should be fired because they're gay. It's not right, it's not who we are as Americans, and we are going to put a stop to it.

And finally, we're going to end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". (Applause.) That is a promise I made as a candidate. It is a promise that I reiterated as President. It's one that this administration is going to keep.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmEpD2sh0HA

[dsc]

101. He gave a speech

that isn't a discussion. A discussion means he takes questions, answers them, and askes his own. This was all one way, LGBT people listened to him, he didn't listen to them. As to your other point, it isn't a higher standard, any more than it is a higher standard for Johnson to have given interviews to the African American Press when Truman didn't. While he was refusing to give interviews to the LGBT press during the campaign, Hillary, his opponent was giving them all the time. Oh, and BTW, his record actually still was better than Obama's in this regard if you leave out the interview that Obama was forced to give as damage control for McClurkin. Otherwise, Obama has gone since Jan 2008 while Clinton gave an interview in Feb of 1992.

[ClarkUSA]

105. Tell that to Judy Shepard, Charlene Strong, and Janice Langbehn.

Last year, I met with Judy Shepard, Matthew Shepard's mom, and I promised her that after a decade's-long struggle, we would pass inclusive hate crimes legislation. I promised that in the name of her son we would ensure that the full might of the law is brought down on those who would attack somebody just because they are gay. And less than six months later, with Judy by my side, we marked the enactment of the Matthew Shepard Act. It's now the law of the land. (Applause.)

Just a few moments ago, I met with Janice Langbehn and her children. Where did Janice go? There they are right there. And when Janice's partner of 18 years, Lisa, suddenly collapsed because of an aneurysm, Janice and the couple's three kids were denied the chance to comfort their partner and their mom -- barred from Lisa's bedside. It was wrong. It was cruel. And in part because of their story, I instructed my Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, to make sure that any hospital that's participating in Medicare or Medicaid -- that means most hospitals -- (laughter) -- allow gay and lesbian partners the same privileges and visitation rights as straight partners. (Applause.)

After I issued that memorandum, I called Janice and I told her the news. And before we came out here today, I wanted to make sure that I had followed up -- Secretary Sebelius will officially be proposing this regulation. And I can also announce that the Secretary has sent a letter today asking these hospitals to adopt these changes now -- even before the rule takes effect. (Applause.) Nothing can undo the hurt that her -- that Janice's family has experienced. And nothing can undo the pain felt by countless others who've been through a similar ordeal -- for example, Charlene Strong is here. She lost her wife, Kate Fleming -- and Charlene is here along with Kate's mom, who said on behalf of all mothers, thank you. Because we think it's the right thing to do. (Applause.)

In addition, I've issued an executive order* to extend as many partnership benefits to gay and lesbian federal employees as possible under current law. And I'm going to continue to fight to change the law: to guarantee gay federal employees the exact same benefits as straight employees -- including access to health insurance and retirement plans. (Applause.) And in an announcement today, the Department of Labor made clear that under the Family and Medical Leave Act, same-sex couples -- as well as others raising children -- are to be treated like the caretakers that they are. (Applause.)

Because I believe in committed -- I believe that committed gay and lesbian couples deserve the same rights and responsibilities afforded to any married couple in this country, I have called for Congress to repeal the so-called Defense of Marriage Act. (Applause.) We are pushing hard to pass an inclusive employee non-discrimination bill. (Applause.) No one in America should be fired because they're gay. It's not right, it's not who we are as Americans, and we are going to put a stop to it.

And finally, we're going to end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell". (Applause.) That is a promise I made as a candidate. It is a promise that I reiterated as President. It's one that this administration is going to keep.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmEpD2sh0HA

Yeah, it's clear President Obama is a homophobe who doesn't care about LGBT issues and the people affected by them. :sarcasm:

[dsc]

107. that isn't what I said

but as usual you just make up what I said. What I said was HE DIDN'T GIVE AN INTERVIEW AND HE DIDN'T DISCUSS ISSUES WITH JOURNALISTS. Ms. Shepard is many things, SHE ISN'T A JOURNALIST. She didn't ask questions. It wasn't a discussion nor was it an interview WITH A JOURNALIST. IN CASE YOU NEED A DEFINITION, A JOURNALIST IS SOMEONE WHO PRACTICISES JOURNALISM. NOTICE WHAT IS ABSENT FROM YOUR QUOTE. WORDS SPOKEN BY ANYONE WHO ISN'T BARACK OBAMA. MAYBE IF I TYPE IN CAPS YOU WILL STOP PRETENDING I SAID ONE THING WHEN I SAID ANOTHER. I CAN TYPE A LARGER FONT IF NEEDED.

[ClarkUSA]

108. Um, I didn't mention what you said in my reply at all...

... though I think all the hair-splitting is ridiculous, given President Obama's record on LGBT issues.

Oh, and I don't read anything typed in large caps, as experience has taught me that it usually isn't worth the bother.

:hi:

[dsc]

109. You said this in response to my post

Yeah, it's clear President Obama is a homophobe who doesn't care about LGBT issues and the people affected by them.

that is what I responded to and said I didn't say. If you didn't mean to imply I said it then it had no business in a response to my post. Somehow though I think you knew exactly what you were doing. YOur next step will be to edit it out and go running to the mods.

[ClarkUSA]

110. Um, you conveniently left out all mention of my sarcasm tag.

Nice try.

:rofl:

[dsc]

96. you and others are calling the OP a liar for saying Obama didn't inveriew

with gay media which he didn't. BTW I checked Clinton did an advocate interview in June of 1996.

http://books.google.com/books?id=hWMEAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA6&lpg=PA6&dq=president+Clinton+advocate+interview&source=bl&ots=fv5WQGIPKF&sig=5EPY02bR_1QCOkpc8lxYnblTmVg&hl=en&ei=KZ2OTMGaE4Gdlgfxjd3IAg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=president%20Clinton%20advocate%20interview&f=false

Oh and Clinton was interviewed as a candidate as well, and not as damage control (see link).

[ClarkUSA]

100. That's untrue. Where did I do that? Please quote me. Furnish a link, too.

<< BTW I checked Clinton did an advocate interview in June of 1996. >>

That was at the end of Bubba's first term, so why does Pres. Obama get all this vitriol after 20 months? And that was after Bill Clinton made DADT the law of the land and before he signed DOMA into law. Was that before or after Pres. Clinton approved of and defended anti-gay ads in 1996?

[dsc]

102. Here is a quote from this thread

There have been other opportunities for the LGBT media to engage the President and WH directly...
Edited on Mon Sep-13-10 11:40 AM by ClarkUSA
... as I clearly pointed out in my previous reply, unless you think the LGBT media didn't ask him any questions at all at the LGBT Pride Reception:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

<< you have certainly made that argument in the past to defend him when his aides have run amok >>

When did "his aides... run amok"? I don't recall any such occasion.


You bottom line, without using the l word, said I lied. I was dead right. No questions whatsoever were answered at that event. Now you want to bring Clinton in when you have now find out we have told the truth.

[ClarkUSA]

103. ROFL! I knew it. There's no there there, as usual.

:rofl:

[dsc]

104. actually here is a better one

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=433x439520#440352

You use the words create a false impression. That is calling the OP a liar. It is post 80

Kerry Eleveld of The Advocate often gets to ask questions of Gibbs.
Edited on Mon Sep-13-10 03:39 PM by ClarkUSA
The OP is giving a false impression that the WH is avoiding the LGBT community.

Why don't you respond to Steven Leser's excellent questions and reflections?

1. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
2. http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

I agree with Mr. Leser's conclusions 100%.

[ClarkUSA]

106. Try as you might, you just can't back up your accusations, can you?

:rofl:

[Yavin4]

71. Okay, We Get It. Obama Is A Homophobe.

So, let's elect some teabagging Republicans because we all know that they're just so open-minded about GLBT issues.

[TriMera]

73. How original. n/t

[Yavin4]

74. Just Like A Contingent Here on DU

That looks for anything to point out that Obama is a homophobe no matter how small.

[dionysus]

148. except it sums up the attitude of some to a tee.

[mitchtv]

89. Hey Palin boy

at least you're not trying to dispute the story like the others tried and failed to do so you resorted to this crap. It suits you

[dionysus]

149. what does that even mean?

:shrug:

[scheming daemons]

75. So... this is today's installment in the "Obama is a homophobe" meme....

We get it. You think Obama hates/fears LGBT folks.


That's your point of view, and you're sticking with it.


So.... destroying him makes sense to you.


But... I wonder how you'll feel about how the new leadership that comes in January 2010 and January 2012 after you're done destroying him.


Think they'll be better on LGBT issues?


Really??

[TriMera]

76. Destroying???

Can you point out where anyone here is talking about destroying President Obama? I believe the OP was about recognition, or the lack there of.

[VMI Dem]

78. I don't think he hates LGBT folks. He just thinks they are lesser.

[boppers]

119. I don't think he thinks we are lesser individuals.

I *do* think he believes our lifelong relationships are lesser, which sucks.

edit:pronoun flop

[ruggerson]

93. Two respected LGBT journalists demanding access to the man they voted for

is akin to "destroying" him?

Not many of us think that Obama hates us. Many of us think he is being advised (or has come to the conclusion on his own) that we are a constituency that is not worth the political risk to spend much capital on.

Speaking for myself, I wholeheartedly disagree with that analysis and want the man I voted for to be accountable to us and be the type of leader he promised us he would be.

[dionysus]

150. +5000

[stevenleser]

77. Why are there no statistics or benchmarks accompanying an assertion of this kind?

First off, who is considered to be "the LGBT media"?

How many questions have they gotten to ask in past presidencies and press conferences?

What is the readership of the agencies these supposed "LGBT media" folks represent?

[msanthrope]

99. Why are you asking for facts in an Obama-bashing thread? n/t

[Name removed]

79. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[dsc]

83. I will bet my next paycheck that I can find all of the following

One, an interview by Obama to either BET, Essence, or some other publication or network that primarily caters to African Americans.

Two, an iterview by Obama with either La Raza, or a similar outlet for Hispanic Americans.

Three, an interview by Obama with some outlet which caters to Jewish readers.

I am not going to be around a computer for the next bit of time but I will look later and am pretty damn certain I will find all of the above.

[dsc]

84. Here is one with Essence and one with a Hispanic outlet

http://talktoevibe.blogspot.com/2010/03/essence-magazine-interviews-president.html

http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/press/exclusive-interview-president-obama,1451526.html

looks like I will have to stick with 2 out of 3 for now. I am having some difficulty finding an interview with a Jewish news outlet. But I think I made my point rather well.

[boppers]

118. Is he anti-semitic, then?

How about Japanese media?
Chinese media?
Muslim media?
Catholic media?
Protestant media?
Buddhist media?
Atheist media?

You have, indeed, made a point, but it might not be the one you intended to make.

[dsc]

123. I bet he has given that interview as well

though I admit to no link. But my point is that gays are the second most loyal constitency of the Democratic party (behind blacks). I have yet to get an answer to this btw, but imagine if Hillary had won and given zero interviews to any black media. Wanna bet that many of the same die hard defenders of Obama's conduct here would be screaming like raped roosters. And, here is the difference, I would be saying they were 100% right.

[boppers]

161. Imagine if Hillary had given interviews, and was accused of that media not being "black enough"

Would you back that?

[dsc]

177. If it was a black reporter who never, when directly asked the question

said yes I am black I think maybe, just maybe, a few black people would have problems with that. I can't speak for blacks on that though. For Cooper to be considered openly gay is a stretch frankly.

[Name removed]

87. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mitchtv]

88. sorry bub

the story remains untouched by the baseless assertions of those who whould attempt to challenge it. Rachel and Anderson are not the Gay Media. CNN and MSNBC are corporate outlets. Gibbs is not Obama , Pride party at the WH was a statement and no more. the bloggers met with staff, not the president, and that about says it all. I find your attempts to get people TS'd to be foolish, and dishonest.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

95. So, Obama is racist, anti-Semitic AND homophobic? Who knew? n/t

[grantcart]

121. and as a self hating Hawaiian hates all other Hawaiians who

have gotten no special access to him at all.



When will this stop, when will it stop?

[Name removed]

122. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Political Tiger]

124. Yet he invited Rachael Maddow to the White House

and hosted a reception for 300 LGBT activists at the White House to honor LGBT Pride, the first such event ever held at the WH ... appointed more openly gay people to his administration than the last two combined, including the first ever transgender appointees ... awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Harvey Milk and Billie Jean King ... signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act ... spoke out against LGBT discrimination at the National Prayer Breakfast ... spoke out about repealing Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell in his first State of the Union Address ... released the first Presidential PRIDE proclamations since 2000 ... invited gay families to the Easter Egg Roll as part of the Obama administration's outreach to diverse communities ... welcomed four gay couples to its first State Dinner ... publicly invited shunned gay Mississippi high school prom student to the White House ... convened the first-ever anti-bullying summit to craft a national strategy to reduce bullying in schools ... reversed the US's position by signing the UN Declaration on Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity ... successfully fought for UN accreditation of IGLHRC (the International Gay & Lesbian Human Rights Commission, against Republican attempts to block it ... extended benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees in 2009 and 2010 ... issued diplomatic passports, and provided other benefits, to the partners of same-sex foreign service employees ... banned job discrimination based on gender identity throughout the Federal government (the nation's largest employer) ... instructed HHS to require any hospital receiving Medicare or Medicaid funds (virtually all hospitals) to allow LGBT visitation rights ... extended the Ryan White HIV/AIDS program ... issued a National HIV/AIDS Strategy praised as "long-overdue" by the Task Force, Lambda and others ... eliminated the discriminatory Census Bureau policy that kept gay relationships from being counted, encouraging couples who consider themselves married to file that way, even if their state of residence does not yet permit legal marriage ... produced U.S. Census Bureau PSAs featuring gay, lesbian, and transgender spokespersons ... extended domestic violence protections to LGBT victims ... extended the Family and Medical Leave Act to cover employees taking unpaid leave to care for the children of same-sex partners ... required all grant applicants seeking HUD funding to comply with state and local anti-discrimination laws that protect LGBT individuals ... issued guidance specifically to assist LGBT tenants denied housing on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity..........

But let's ignore all that because bitching is so much more fun.

[quiet.american]

125. Now that is what I call a reply. Excellent. nt

[Cha]

126. WOW! Thanks for this history on President Obama in the White House

I'm so proud of our President..thank you so much, Political Tiger~

[stevenleser]

127. Here Here!!!! n/t

[MineralMan]

128. A very good reply. +100

[AtomicKitten]

129. It's takes a lot of denial to ignore all that so pervasively. To what end, I'm not sure.

Thanks for taking the time to respond factually.

:yourock:

[phleshdef]

130. And with that, the BS the OP is pushing is obliterated.

[Scurrilous]

131. Great post.

:thumbsup:

[NYC Liberal]

132. .

:applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause::applause:

[Name removed]

133. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ruggerson]

134. None of that has anything to do with the OP

If you want to dispute the facts that Pam Spaulding and Kerry Eleveld wrote, by my guest. But you won't be able to.

[Starry Messenger]

155. He won't be able to at all anymore...

...

[terrya]

136. You know,, this is ultimately about civil rights.

We...gay and lesbian people...have been trying to get our civil rights...the right to get married and have those marriages legally recognized, the right to serve openly in the military, the right to be able to adopt and create our own families, the right to be free from discrimination in housing, employment...for decades now.

We're in some promising times, however. My god...a right wing Republican defended, forcefully, brilliantly, for our right to marriage equality in federal court...I never thought I'd live to see the day THAT would happen. The percentage of Americans supporting marriage equality is climbing. A huge majority of Americans support repeal of DADT repeal.

I'm offended by your suggesting that we are "bitching" about this. GLBT Americans, politically, are in a difficult place. And while a few Republicans are beginning to speak up for our civil rights, the Republican Party as a whole is a very hostile place for us. Which leaves us with...the Democrats. Barack Obama actively courted us during the 2008 campaign. He promised he would work to repeal DADT, DOMA. Maybe these aren't important to you, but they are to us. It's about equality. And given that, it would be nice if this administration is serious about working to do these things to have the President talk to GLBT media once in a while about our issues and concerns. We saw at last week's press conference and the previous press conferences that the White House Press Corps won't ask these questions.

[Name removed]

138. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

139. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[stevenleser]

141. There is ONE person in the White House press corps that is considered "LGBT Media"

The fact that this ONE Person has not gotten a question is not evidence of a conspiracy. The entire OP is a fail before it begins.

There is nothing more that needs to be said or proven.

[ruggerson]

142. Reread the OP

They are reporting on the fact that no member of the LGBT media has been granted an interview - or a fifteen minute informal chat - or a question and answer period after an event. There are dozens of LGBT publications. There are magazinesi and newspapers with national readerships. This is not just about the one person with press credentials (although that in itself is alarming). It is not just that he hasn't taken a question from Kerry Eleveld at a press conference, he hasn't taken any questions from ANY LGBT media outlet at all. Read the OP.

[stevenleser]

143. I read the article you linked. There is no 'there' there n/t

[ruggerson]

145. If that is the case, tell us about the interview(s) the President

has granted to the LGBT media.

You haven't offered up an argument, just repeated tautologies.

[dsc]

144. He has given interviews to all of the following, who do not have white house credentials

Oprah, the women of the view, brian williams, and george stephanopolis. That is just off the top of my head. He has had over 600 days to find one, just one lgbt publication to give an interview to and he hasn't managed to do so.

[Touchdown]

140. Weak, transparent

And servile.

[HughMoran]

146. Truth does tend to hit a raw nerve

Admitting it is the first step.

[Name removed]

147. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Touchdown]

163. Whatever helps you sleep at night.

Way far off in left field, aren't you? How secure it must be to think you have all the answers.

Hint: It wasn't the content of the post I was remarking about.

[cliffordu]

152. excellent reply.

:applause:

[Radical Activist]

153. This is one of those posts that ends a discussion.

There's nothing left to be said. I'm glad you're here contributing intelligent comments to the discussion at DU.

[ruggerson]

154. Unfortunately, it has nothing to do with the OP

and not a single person has been able to refute Spaulding and Eleveld's contention in Pam's piece.

Posters have been asked to name one time when the President sat down with a LGBT media publication and granted them an interview.

And not one person has been able to come up with one.

So, why don't you have a crack at it.

[Radical Activist]

158. What is the OP about?

Could you explain why this reporter's quest for an interview with the President is more important than the accomplishments Tiger listed?

[ruggerson]

159. It's not just this one reporter

Their point is that Obama hasn't granted an interview, or a phone call q & a, or a fifteen minute chat with ANYONE from an LGBT media outlet since the election in 2008. He's found the time to sit for interviews with the AA media, Latino media, Israeli media, etc. But all attempts to get him to do an interview with the LGBT media have been rebuffed. He's our President. We voted for him overwhelmingly - second only to the AA vote. What is wrong with our journalists speaking up about this and asking that they be given half an hour of his time to discuss our issues? This is not such an extraordinary request to make of a Democratic President. I don't get why it's even remotely controversial.

[Name removed]

166. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

160. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[laughingliberal]

156. +1

I'm sure he'll be missed.

[jgraz]

157. Well, the discussion certainly was ended.

Probably not the way that poster intended...

[Name removed]

175. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

179. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

171. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hekate]

164. Stunningly well-laid out. I wish it were possible to Rec a reply.

:fistbump:

[yowzayowzayowza]

169. Details, details...that don't fit the outrage du jour. n/t

[DevonRex]

173. Excellent reply, PT. You always bring a wealth of information to DU. Thank you.

[Name removed]

174. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

165. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[VMI Dem]

167. You've really caught the tiger by the tail with this thread my friend.

:hi:

[Name removed]

170. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[craigmatic]

172. Obama has done all he can through exec action for LGBT. DADT is the one thing he hasn't

gotten repealed but he's done more than any other president. That's more than he's done for other minority groups in the base.