But then, Obama proved that his strategy of advancing gay rights by advancing a legislative repeal rather than an executive pause of DADT, by refusing to defend DOMA altogether in the light of the legislative repeal of DADT and court rulings, and administratively advancing equal employment opportunities within the federal government, along with a slew of unprecedented gay rights advancements - both legislative (including signing the Matthew Sheppard Hate Crimes Act) and administrative.
And so, naturally, gay donors are standing with the President more strongly than ever.
Pleased by an all-out White House push to repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell,” gay donors have surprised campaign officials with the extent of their support. And the campaign’s new fundraising apparatus appears designed to capitalize on their enthusiasm: Obama’s finance committee included one gay man in 2008; there are 15 this year, a source said. [...]Yes, yes we will. And of course, the Republicans being back in power in the House and in state houses across the country, the stark contrast between the two parties on LGBT rights began to emerge, reminding us just what is at stake - between a full implementation of DADT repeal or not, between universalized hospital visitation rights and not, between the advancement and retraction of our march towards full citizenship.
“It’s ironic — a year ago there was no constituency more unhappy. There was a sea change,” said David Mixner, a veteran New York gay activist, who said that White House actions during the past year had swayed restive gay donors. “You not only will see a united community that will contribute to Obama, but they will work their asses off.”
Others said that Republican candidates’ shots at gay rights in their attempt to appeal to socially conservative Iowa voters had reminded gay donors of the stakes. Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum this week said gays and lesbians shouldn’t have the “privilege” of adopting children, while former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty suggested he would block the repeal of the ban on gays in the military, and Donald Trump compared same-sex marriage to faddish golf gear.So you see, the constant "Obama hates gays" drumbeating by the Professional Left almost worked. Almost. But us gay people aren't stupid. We can see what's going on. And we can see the alternative above, and compare to what the Obama administration has accomplished for us even beyond a legislative repeal of DADT and deciding not to defend DOMA:
“Our community has tasted change, and it’s hard to conceive of going backward,” said Fred Sainz, the vice president for communications for the Human Rights Campaign, the largest gay rights group. “It’s hard to conceive of that coming to a screeching halt or reversing — and so it’s a subject of great energy for members of my community and especially those with great resources.”
“Any reservations that a significant number of donors might sit this out have been answered by Donald Trump and the fools in the Republican Party,” said Mixner. “They have become so vehemently anti-gay.”
1) Extended benefits to same-sex partners of federal employeesNow that gay donors seem to be loving Obama again, the Professional Left "pundits" like John Aravosis of "Americablog Gay" are scrambling to figure out a way to deny the President any credit for the achievements that have been accomplished. In his latest, desperate, sad attempts to do so, he employs an age-old, time-tested political tool: lying. After a year and a half of an embarrassing campaign to block money to the DNC (waged at the same time, mind you, when President Obama and Democrats in Congress waged a long term, strategic battle to get all these things above done and passed) that seems to now be collapsing and embarrassing its creators - the same John Aravosis - he is reduced to claiming credit for the Professional Left and outright lying about President Obama.
2) Signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act
3) Instructed HHS to require any hospital receiving Medicare or Medicaid funds (virtually all hospitals) toallow LGBT visitation rights.
4) Banned job discrimination based on gender identity throughout the Federal government (the nation's largest employer)
5) Signed the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Treatment Extension Act6) Extended the Family and Medical Leave Act to cover Gay employees taking unpaid leave to care for their children of same-sex partners
7) Lifted the HIV Entry Ban.
8) Implemented HUD Policies that Would Ban Discrimination Based On Gender Identity
9) Appointed the first ever transgender DNC member 10) Named open transgender appointees (the first President ever to do so)
11) Eliminated the discriminatory Census Bureau policy that kept LGBT relationships from being counted12) Extended domestic violence protections to LGBT victims
Let's see how. He starts his piece with this piece of utter senselessness strawman:
Time for a huge, "told ya so." Not to all of you, but rather to the administration and its defenders who claimed that: A) gay donors didn't matter; and B) The President's action or inaction on his gay promises would not affect gay donations.Just who within the Obama administration and its defenders claimed that gay donors don't matter? That John Aravosis tried to pre-emptively prove the importance of gay donors by trying to get them to withhold donations does not automatically make his false premise for doing so -- that somehow President Obama and his allies thought gay donors didn't matter -- a true one. And it's pretty obvious that President Obama has always been serious about keeping all of his promises -- including ones on LGBT equality (by the way, WTF is a "gay promise"? Yes, that bugged me) -- as much as legislatively and administratively possible.
Maybe Aravosis loves to fight strawmen, because that's what he put up here. "The administration and its defenders who claimed" the things Aravaosis says they claimed are simply a figment of his imagination.
Anyway, the strawman argument may not be very high on the "lie" meter. Here's a better one:
The White House's plan was to tackle DADT in 2011. We all know that that would have been impossible with the GOP congress, and many of us had been warning about the possibility of a GOP takeover a good year-plus ago. But still, the administration put DADT repeal on the slow-burner, even going so far as to slate DOD's DADT study for completion on or after December 1, 2010. Imagine the fundraising problem the President would have had had we kept to his timetable rather than ours.Blatant horse manure. The White House's plan was to tackle DADT in 2011? Please show me a White House document or statement (attributed, please) saying that it was President Obama's plan to not push repeal till 2011. You won't find any. Because it's not true. The truth is that President Obama announced in his State of the Union speech in January of 2010 the following:
This year, I will work with Congress and our military to finally repeal the law that denies gay Americans the right to serve the country they love because of who they are.The president's words were quickly followed up by Defense Secretary Gates and Chairman of Joint Chiefs Mullen. Then it was followed up in Congress - with the House passing repeal in March of 2010, and numerous times after that, which was then blocked in the Senate by John McCain. The military study report was published in late November, and the lame duck Senate finally went the route of the Lieberman-Collins stand alone bill to repeal it in December. So, the President's announced plan was to repeal DADT in 2010, and that is exactly what happened. So, John Aravosis, the President did keep to his timetable.
But the lies to try to undermine President Obama did not end there with Aravosis. He came up with this gem:
On DOMA, while it's good that the administration is no longer defending it in court, they waited too long. We asked them to stop two years ago. Had they done it then, the Democratic House would never have hired a powerhouse GOP outside counsel to defend the case, and we've had had nearly two years of no defense of DOMA in the courts.The problem with this argument is that the "Democratic House" would not have had anything to do with hiring outside GOP council to defend DOMA. Boehner even structured an advisory committee vote to avoid a full House vote on this. See, when the Justice Department relinquished control of the cases, it fell to members of Congress - not Congress as a whole - to defend it. From the Attorney General's statement regarding the DOJ decision not to defend DOMA:
I have informed Members of Congress of this decision, so Members who wish to defend the statute may pursue that option. The Department will also work closely with the courts to ensure that Congress has a full and fair opportunity to participate in pending litigation.In other words, Republican members of Congress would have been able to defend DOMA then just as they are now. Individual members could defend DOMA. The only difference would have been that the House legal counsel would not hire the outside lawyers, but rather the office of the minority leader and/or individual Congressional offices would. DOMA would still have been defended. What we have had in the mean time are decisions from courts stating that federal law couldn't treat gay couples different if their state authorized same sex marriage, and the legislative repeal of DADT, which established it as law that the state has no reasonable - let alone heightened scrutiny - basis to discriminate based on sexual orientation.
I never cease to be amazed by the Professional Left and their unending disdain for President Obama. Their capacity to deny the President any credit when good things happen - even when they agree that those are good things - encompasses a wide spectrum including blatant, flagrant, in-your-face lies. Which is what Aravosis is doing here. I guess he thinks that no one will rain on his "beating up on Obama" (this is pretty much a direct quote from him) festivities. Well, I will, and reality will. Reality has and will continue to rudely interrupt the Professional Left's constant whining.