I figured out why some Democrats seem to hate the LGBT community.

[Pab Sungenis]

WARNING/GUARANTEE: Please note my word choice in the subject line. I am not referring to DU users specifically or in general (although some might fit the criteria). Nor am I saying that said people hate gays (as in bigotry). Please keep all that in mind as you hopefully read further.

Democrats got used to being out of power. Since 1953 we'd only held the White House for about 1/3 of the time, and after losing control of Congress as well for 12 years we'd fallen out of the role of governing and gotten into opposition mode. We kept striking away at the Republicans, even if our efforts were sometimes less than effective. We adopted a bunker mentality.

Fast forward to 2007. We took back Congress but we didn't switch our brains back to leadership mode from opposition. Still having Bush in office helped; we kept railing against his fiscal policies and the wars. We turned on our leaders when they took impeachment off the table and let war criminals go unpunished, even though in the long run their strategy of actually governing was probably the best approach we could have taken. We needed to show that we were the adults in the room and too many of us (including me) were agitating to use our power the same way we'd tried to use what little power we had in the opposition.

Fast forward again, this time to the 2008 election. Obama's victory should have been a great day for all of us but the disaster of Prop 8 destroyed the spirits of the vast majority of the LGBT*.* community. Some people so eager to celebrate couldn't understand why we were so angry. This was the beginning of the major rift in the Democratic Party between its LGBT*.* members and the rest of the party. I won't go into depth about the slights (real and perceived) of the early Obama Administration since I recently did that elsewhere on DU, but the rift kept getting wider.

So what was the natural reaction to our agitation for what we felt we were due? Too many Democrats were still punch drunk from the wilderness years and were in full-blown opposition mode. Someone who disagrees with the President about something? They must be the enemy. They must be destroyed.

How did we LGBT*.* react? We were still in opposition mode, and needed to be since we'd just been dealt a major defeat. The attacks on us were met with in kind. And as Obama continued to push us to the back burner or even to the back of the Big Tent at points, we connected his actions with the vitriol we were receiving from some of his supporters. Giant feedback loop. It's led to a lot of hatred, anger, and bad feelings on both sides that persists to this day.

And it wasn't just gays who got hit upside their heads by Opposition Mode: look at single-payer and public-option supporters and those who wanted an accelerated end to the wars. Disagreement was seen as full-blown opposition and led to all-out assaults.

Let's add in another aspect that we've been tiptoeing around too much: the race issue. The 2008 campaign was one of the dirtiest and nastiest in modern history and a lot of it stemmed from the fact that one nominee had brown skin and the other didn't. The African American community was justified in thinking that a lot of the opposition to Obama during the campaign was racially based. But the sheer volume of racist opposition tripped something in a lot of people's minds that made all opposition to the President seem like it was racially based. Then that extended to all criticism of the President had to be racist. So the gays who were complaining about our treatment? We all obviously hated the idea that a different minority than our own was in the White House. Factor in as well that the African American community statistically does have a lower opinion of LGBT*.* (due mainly to the evangelical Christian background in the community) and you had a train wreck waiting to happen.

That brings us to where we are now, still at each other's throats. And in too many cases what started as misguided anger and unwarranted opposition has now led to outright hatred. Can we repair these rifts? Can we rebuild our coalition? Or was our party of 2001-2008 just a crazy quilt of disparate groups knitted together in opposition to right wing Republicans and unable to hold together?

One thing's for sure: if we're going to heal this party we need to do it now.

Copyright 2011 Paul L. Sungenis, all rights reserved, may not be reprinted or reproduced in whole or in part without express written permission.

[Pab Sungenis]

1. A deafening silence.

No one has anything to add to this?

[Occulus]

4. Silence is assent.

It may be quiet because, deep down in some cases, most here agree.

[jberryhill]

8. It is very thoughtful, and food for thought

Just because there are few comments does not mean you have not provided a valuable post.

[Initech]

2. Prop 8, DOMA, DADT - it's all evil, hateful legislation...

that should never hold ground in any civilized society. Until we tell the Talibangelicals to fuck off and take a hike, this crap will happen election after election.

[leftstreet]

3. Oh stop your whining and get under the bus!

:hi:

:toast:

I have nothing to add, but I disagree about the race issue. The only race-baiting I saw in the 2008 campaign came from camp Clinton, and it was fairly subtle. I don't recall the GOPers and McCain ever really going there. They wouldn't have dared.

A thoughtful post all the same

[hfojvt]

5. well I certainly do not understand your "opposition mode"

When somebody disagrees with me, I do not try to destroy them. I try to win them over to my side.

It's a discussion board anyway, so the only things that can be destroyed are falsehoods and illogic.

[Pab Sungenis]

6. It's not only on DU.

It's everywhere throughout the party. DU is just one window on a larger problem.

[jberryhill]

10. I'm always struck by " (TV personality) destroyed (politician)" tonight!

...or similar language in reference to a political arm wrestling match.

While in a video game, one can rip the still-beating heart out of one's opponent, the reality in political argument is that there are no words one can say which is going to vaporize the other side. They'll still be there tomorrow. One only wins when one establishes at least an understanding of one's point of view. One may not reach a point of agreement, but if the other side at least understands, then your opposition is planted in their own brain, even when you are not around.

[hfojvt]

12. well in TV land things are different

If a person does get "destroyed" then both they and their message would seem to be discredited in the eyes of many viewers. Often the idea trying to be planted is one that says "the other side is dishonest/stupid."

[closeupready]

7. K&R

nt

[FreeState]

9. Mostly agree - Prop 8 changed everything - no longer will we allow others to treat us as less than

Its how they treat us as less than that most people don't seem to get. We're not saying legally, thats a given. Lots of Dems agree with that. We deserve equal rights period. However, how we are treated, how our opinions and experiences are treated are far from respectful or equal, and thats true from American society in general, including a large segment of Democrats. It's a sly hidden heterocentrist attitude that is pervasive to the core of most discussions of LGBT rights with those that are not part of the community.

[Behind the Aegis]

13. I agree with you about Prop 8.

I really feel it was a wake-up call for many people, especially in so-called (or perceived) "progressive" states (areas). I remember many posts here and actual stories which pretty much felt that it wouldn't pass and it was a waste of energy to even campaign against it...lesson learned!

[Major Hogwash]

11. For most of the rest of the nation, I don't think they knew what Prop 8 was about.

So, while some people might have gotten angry about it, the vast majority didn't know what it was about, whether it was good, whether it was bad, or what it meant to them.

There was no Prop 8 on the ballot where I lived at the time of the 2008 election, so I imagine there were a great deal of other people who didn't know what it was about or how it would impact the rest of the country.

[LWolf]

14. Frankly,

any healing for me isn't going to happen as long as there is an enemy of teachers and public education in the WH.

[MadHound]

15. A bit off topic here,

But you state that taking impeachment and prosecution of war crimes off the table was a good thing in the long term.

I beg to differ. Allowing crimes in high office to go unpunished is never a good idea, either in the long or short term. Let's look at the Nixon debacle. Sure, we forced Nixon and Agnew out of office, but once that was done, once Nixon was out of office, the investigations, the prosecutions of his cronies was dropped, done with.

That action allowed those evil men, including the likes of Rumsfeld and Cheney to walk away scott-free. Free to pursue their agenda in the Reagan, Bush I and Bush II administrations. Like plucking the flower off a dandelion, we took away the bloom of Nixon, but allowed the weed to continue to spread.

By not pursuing justice, we simply insured that, in the long run, more injustice will occur in the future. This is not a good thing, it is simply allowing evil to infect the next generation.

[xchrom]

16. In an age of culture war - we pose a problem

For a defensive party.

It's a party set from it's moorings on a # of issues - except we agitate for our rights.

We are then blamed for losses because the party can't be proactive & seems to have lost it's charisma some where.