The President is a cypher. A symbol. Not much else…That’s not to be sniffed at, but come on, did you really think that a different President was going to structurally transform the USA?

That’s why there were no significant changes in the fabric of American life and politics between the Clinton years and the Bush years, right? Right? Amirite?

The executive branch was not created to be only symbolic and it has been accruing powers for more than two centuries. Maybe you should run those studies through the shredder and look at the news for the last twenty years instead.

Thanks for that post.

Evil only wins when good does nothing.

No. Evil wins when good people decide that the ends justify the means. Once you’ve convinced yourself that the “good guys” must win at all cost, even if that means doing things that you would condemn the “bad guys” for doing, then, congratulations, you’ve just become one of the “bad guys”. Don’t be surprised if you look in the mirror and see Dick Cheney’s face staring back at you.

Are you deliberately ignoring the example that I’ve given of the DOJ failing to do that?

No. Are you deliberately ignoring this quote from the HuffPost article you linked to?

“one key difference is that the park service is a regulation (not a statute) as opposed to DADT,” which was an act of Congress. ” A regulation is an executive branch creation, as such, the president is able to modify or rescind [it].”

There’s also the cold, hard fact that society doesn’t change for the quiet. After all, if you can calmly tolerate your present state, why should anyone else bother changing it? It wasn’t a peaceful, softly, softly approach that started the march towards gay equality, it was the Stonewall riots. Hell, just look at womens’ lib and racial equality, too, plenty of people marched, rioted and died making those happen.

You don’t win an argument by being accomodating. You just convince the other side they can safely ignore you. We need to make it clear to anyone who would defer and deny the dream of equality that being better than the kitten orphanage-burning bastards on the right is not sufficient.

If they can get away with only pushing just hard enough to throw us a bone while hopefully not alienating some other demographic, they will. We will get nothing if we do not demand they rise to the challenge.

I was only stating my opinion of how you may be coming across to others on this forum. Since you’ve made it clear that you are perfectly comfortable with the content and tone of your comments, I can see that my own comment was unnecessary. Sorry for the interruption.

Besides, since Hillary is now part of the Obama administration, she no longer represents a viable alternative to Obama. Who does? Are there any potential Democratic candidates out there who might have a real chance of winning a presidential election who would be stronger advocates of gay rights than Obama has been? I can’t think of any off the top of my head. As things stand right now — just before the 2010 midterm elections — the only candidates who seem poised to challenge Obama for the presidency in 2012 appear to be Republicans. And none of them is going to advance GLBTQ rights one iota if elected.

Besides, the critical thing right now is the midterms. As I said before, if the Republicans take control of either house of Congress, say goodbye to any hope of advances for the GLBTQ community until 2013 at the earliest.

But I, for one, am glad we now have a President who respects the Constitution and the rule of law, and doesn’t try to rule by decree. But that’s just me. I’m an old-fashioned Madisonian Liberal who believes in limits on the power of government, even when those limits make it harder to enact policies I support. If you’re not a Liberal, your mileage may vary.

@Tim & UUBuntu: Thanks for the kind words. It’s sad that our K-12 educational system and (especially) our media do such a lousy job of informing citizens about how our political system works; and that the political debate in this country is dominated by the most extremist (and usually the most clueless) voices.

How can he be supporting all of our differences when he is directly supporting “don’t ask, don’t tell” now?

Not sure what to say. In regards to all things LGBT, Obama is STILL better than any GOP candidate.

Obama is STILL better than any GOP candidate.

As a Californian, I contend that Arnold is more progressive than Obama. But, he’s ineligible for that particular job.

I hope that all this ‘freedom to pursue your version of happiness’ talk means that he’ll be supporting gay marriage. At least he said the word gay without getting all red and bug-eyed.

But, you see, any dissatisfaction on your part is really your fault, not his.

Obama just said DADT will end under his watch. How is that “directly supporting it”?

First of all, on occasion, politicians say things to get votes that they have no intention of actually doing.

Second, when a judge ordered the military to put DADT on hold, Obama’s Justice Department, which could have let that lie, chose to challenge it in court. Obama directly supported the continuation of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. When a judge in California iced Prop 8, Arnold chose not to challenge it. Obama could have used his discretion, but chose to throw us to the wolves.

He keeps saying that he wants a legislative solution, but his waffling and pathetic non-leadership of his own party means that we will have a Republican controlled Congress after the elections and there will be no chance of repeal.

Obama is a traitor to the people who elected him.

A) Who cares if Obama is better, worse, or exactly like Bush? He wasn’t running against Bush, he was running against McCain/Palin and he is definitely better than either of them. Do any of you seriously think that McCain or Palin would be more friendly to GLBTQ issues than Obama? This isn’t even a lesser of two evils situation, we’re arguing because even though he said he wants it gone he’s not trying to get rid of DADT the way we want him to while the guy he ran against is actively working in the legislature to keep it from being overturned.

B) Given that we’re weeks away from the midterm elections and we’re facing a climate where the idiots who gave us 8 years of Bush and Cheney are riled up to give us at least 2 more years of a stronger GOP in congress do you really think that any POLITICIAN worth his salt is going to veer hard left? Let alone someone fairly moderate (and diplomatic) like Obama? This one thing may not save the day but at least he’s doing a good job of disarming opponents who would otherwise accuse him of not listening to his generals. Right or wrong, a lot of the folks in charge of armed forces came out against repealing DADT instantly. That sucks but you know that if Obama went against the recommendations he’d instantly be branded as an anti-military liberal and right now that would be a particularly bad thing.

He’s a man with remarkable dignity and a far more admirable human being that many of those who mouth off about him with so little knowledge of the realities of power. The US left has to wise up. Intelligent, thoughtful, progressive Presidents do not last long without support – look at Carter. And without support you are going to get the Sarah Palins, the Christine O’Donnells and the Rand Pauls in power very soon, and you can bet that they will have the backing to drive through every narrow-minded, prejudiced and vindicative little plan their tiny brains can dream up.

And guess what? This will be more the fault of the ‘progressives’ who slipped away into cynicism as soon as the going got tough than Obama himself.

The “well, he’s better than Bush” line isn’t carrying much water these days with an increasing number of GLBTQ people. No, they’re not going to flock to the GOP, but they’re also not going to rush out to vote in droves, canvas door to door or donate.

I find it maddening that a man whose own parents would have been denied marriage rights in nearly 20 states at the time of his birth isn’t in support of marriage equality for all.

I suspect its not as easy to stick to your political guns when you wind up in the limelight. For me personally – some things I feel strongly about – well there are sometimes counter arguments I don’t necessarily have the information to rebut.

would really like to hear the honest insider truth from first step to last. Don’t think it wil ever happen, though. Let’s face it:the American political system is BUILT around dishonesty.

Augh…

Back to thinking we’re just doomed..:p

Sure, maybe we should stand by Obama when it comes to voting. This does not mean that we can’t have substantial complaints about his approach. Again, they are entirely different things. Conflating them does not help anyone, it’s just another way to ignore problems.

Evil wins when good people do nothing, it wins when they decide the ends justify the means, and it wins when they decide to settle for expedience and ignore what is right. That’s probably why there’s so much of it.

This is either not grasped by people who either really ought to know better, or deliberately ignored by the utterly cynical.

Thanks for that post.

While the Governator’s refusal to defend Prop 8 may FEEL like the right thing to do it actually sets a dangerous precedent by suggesting that it is acceptable for the Executive (and agents of that office) to selectively enforce, defend or ignore laws at their discretion.

The Justice Department defends US federal laws from legal challenges NOT because they disagree with the challenges, but because that’s part of their job. If we establish a precedent that it’s okay for the Justice Department NOT to defend federal laws in some cases, you leave the door open for similar behavior in the future when folks from the other side of the political aisle are in power.

This is an awkward, politically annoying time for the President because I really DO believe he’s in favor of gay rights, but he’s got to make the smart move long-term as well. It’s obvious that DADT won’t survive his term, so it’s the right thing – long term – for him to instruct his Justice Department to behave according established precedent and to at least make token efforts to defend the “on the books” DADT law.