Obama Refuses to Give Jann Wenner the Marriage Equality Headline He Wants, in ‘Rolling Stone’ Interview

In a cover story for Rolling Stone, Jann Wenner asks Obama about his support for marriage equality.

Rs_obamaYou've shied away from demanding marriage equality for all. Are you at least willing to say that you support it on a personal level?

Replies Obama:

I'm not going to make news in this publication. I've made clear that the issue of fairness and justice and equality for the LGBT community is very important to me. And I haven't just talked about it, I've acted on it. You'll recall that the last time you and I had an interview, we were getting beat up about "don't ask, don't tell" in the LGBT community. There was skepticism: "Why's it taking so long? Why doesn't he just do it through executive order?" I described very specifically the process we were going to go through to make sure that there was a buy-in from the military, up and down the chain of command, so that it would be executed in an effective way. And lo and behold, here we are, and it got done.

Ending "don't ask, don't tell" has been the dog that didn't bark. You haven't read a single story about problems in our military as a consequence of the ending of the policy. So whether it's on that, or changing the AIDS travel ban, or hospital visitation rights, or a whole slew of regulations that have made sure that federal workers are treated fairly in the workplace, we've shown the commitment that I have to these issues. And we're going to keep on working in very practical ways to make sure that our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters are treated as what they are — full-fledged members of the American family.

Obama should be praised for those achievements. But until he "makes news" on marriage equality, he'll continue to be pressed to do so.

(h/t paul constant)

Comments

  1. Brim says

    Sometimes the interviews and articles are really good in Rolling Stone. I think I’ll go out and buy this issue. And Obama is smart to give this interview – he needs the youth vote and the vote of the far left if he wants to win. He still can’t bring himself to say the words. I think his advisers must be telling him it would be political suicide.

  2. PAUL B. says

    I know it’s tempting to want change to come fast & big…but BO is absolutely right in his handling of these issues. I’m not patient by nature…but at 60 I’ve come to realize that slow & steady is the best way. That’s not so easy to swallow at times…but swallow slowly or expect a gag response…it’s your choice.

  3. gaylib says

    YOU were getting beat up, a@@hole??? What about those of us out here whose families are being threatened and losing our health care. I swear, everytime I think i’m going to vote for this jerk, he goes and opens his mouth again.

  4. VDUFFORD says

    I get a little tired of Obama keeping his REAL thoughts on this issue clenched in the palm of his hand. He’s as if saying guess what I’ve got for you!
    President Obama if you get reelected and I hope you do…open up that damn hand!

  5. antbnyc says

    Completely agree with you Paul B. Rushing to insist on same-sex marriage support by the President would really truly be making the perfect the enemy of the good. He’s done some great things for GLBT people and I think if we press this too far it will indeed be political suicide – for us. Imagine life with a President Romney: repeal of DADT repeal, federal support for discriminatory legislation etc. Thanks but no thanks.

  6. Peter M. says

    I’m with Paul on this, with one reservation: I expect from him to “come out” thoroughly for marriage equality in his second term and really pushing for an end of all discrimination against the LGBT comunity in this country.

  7. PAUL B. says

    @ Michael…my head is fine where it is, thank you for staying civil. If you have a better choice…state it. If not…maybe you should get some meds for that attitude. You take what the world has to offer and do what you can with it…or you get nowhere.
    Anytime you have a viable alternative to BO who can get into the White House…pass it on to the rest of us poor ignorant fools, OK?

  8. jake says

    As a married man I’m very much with the president. He’s done more for gay Americans than was thought possible 5 years ago. No, he hasn’t done everything we want but he’s done a lot. My marriage is legal in my home state but means almost nothing in practical terms because of DOMA. That’s the next big challenge.

  9. PAUL B. says

    @ Peter M…thanks! I would be more inclined to blow a fuse if he didn’t “evolve” more quickly in his second term. Right now, to get it done for us at all, he needs to be in the White House for a second term. The sad thing is that there’s not a single viable alternative for us. Someone who is 100% with us and has a shot at the White House. So, if you have nothing to eat but bread & water…you better learn to eat it.

  10. Yuki says

    Sounds to me like he’s clearly saying “I believe in it, but I can’t say it at this time or else we risk losing the presidency”. Frustrating, but I’d rather have that than have Romney in office.

  11. PAUL B. says

    So…I’m going to put this to rest now since it sounds like most of us are more or less in agreement. But…before I do…does anyone have an alternative that we should consider seriously…that can actually get to the White House…no, not Ellen, not Oprah, not Rachel…not right now anyway!

  12. Brim says

    Well the main quibble I have on this issue is that no one seems to be able to answer why he can’t sign the executive order AND continue to build human rights legislation. No one has ever answered that. You can do both.

  13. Polyboy says

    “NOW NOW NOW, if I can’t have it now I’ll have it never!!!!”

    Really?

    Go ahead then vote for Romney. You thought V for Vendetta was fiction…

  14. jim says

    I believe BO’s for full equality, and plans on tackling the different facets of it in his second term. At this point, tho, it’s all about strategy, and rightly so. The roadmap for repeal of DADT was well thought-out and worked beautifully–the man’s no dummy. I also believe that, as a scholar of Constitutional law, he fully believes that DOMA won’t stand as cases move thru the courts, and by refusing to defend it, he’s making this belief quite clear. He’s likely going to press for DOMA to be struck down, and likely has a detailed map ready to implement.

    In my opinion, what BO personally thinks about marriage equality isn’t as important as the fact that the subject is being kept alive in the public discourse, and the public is becoming much more comfortable and accepting, and in favor, of it. Think about how it was viewed just 5 years ago! Without public opinion squarely in favor of it, achieving it ain’t gonna happen. Those who keep screaming for BO to come out in favor of it, at this point in time, are selfish, short-sighted and myopic.

  15. PAUL B. says

    @BRIM…I think it’s pretty clear that if he took the executive order approach…he wouldn’t have a second term to build human rights legislation. And…his executive order would be history with the next Republican president. Back to zero we go.

  16. Matt says

    There he goes, using his botched repeal of DADT as an “testament” to his “solidarity” with gays. What he fails to mention is how he defended it in court, and ultimately had Philip’s precedent thrown out; in other words, according to Obama, DADT is constitutional. The ONLY reason it was repealed was due to the courts lighting a fire under his ass. Well, at least, NO THANKS TO HIM, even if DADT were to come back, the fact that nothing has happened and the fact that there is a precedence showing it’s nonsense to ban gays from the military, at least the courts will have our backs. After all, how can you deny 7+ months of evidence?

    As for the hospital visitation rights, wasn’t that preceded by comparing gay relationships to pedophilia and zoophilia? Yeah, I thought so.

    A “slew” of “regulations” to ensure “fair” treatment? What, exactly, is he talking about? Didn’t he NOT sign the eXO for workplace protections? He’s stupider than he looks if he thinks he can pull the “it happened, even though it really didn’t” bull.

    And the AIDS travel ban? Oh yes, Mr. President, all teh gays have teh AIDS; rather, teh GRIDS. Who are you, Reagan? Is this still the 1980s? That’s really just insult to injury now.

    To see him defending his stance AGAINST marriage equality, to see him deflect from it, I’m wondering if I’m reading an interview with one of the Republican candidates.
    The more he talks, the less I like him. But by now, the rage has subsided, and all I can come up with is sarcastic little quips. I simply don’t have the strength to care anymore.

  17. PAUL B. says

    @MATT…you sound upset…ya think?
    You took the time to write all that lovely stuff but not one minute suggesting a alternative to BO. Can you come up with something constructive?

  18. Michael Bedwell says

    1. There HAVE been many problems since repeal. WHY doesn’t he know it?

    2. He’s LYING about the AID travel ban repeal. He had NOTHING to do with it except needlessly take a year to implement the repeal the session of Congress BEFORE he took office passed, and even Rat Bastard Bush signed. Meanwhile his border agents kept turning away people with HIV.

    @ Paul: Believe it or not there IS something between voting for a Repug [which I would NEVER do] and simply kissing Obama’s ass and making numbskull excuses for him. That is to DEMAND he do more that he COULD do now like the order for federal contractors [NO, history shows that it would NOT necessarily automatically be reversed by a future president. If that WERE an excuse, why did he order protections for transgender federal government civilian employees in 2009?]

    But, no, I don’t think he should be pressured to endorse marriage equality now. My problem is his disingenuousness about it—along with the distortion and outright lie I’ve already identified.

  19. gr8guyca says

    Welcome to the world of real politics, men. I was a Senate Page as a kid and have worked on the Hill for years. So, I hope I can offer some insight.

    Because of the economy, this is going to be a close election and Obama can’t take any chances. By announcing his support for equal marriage rights, he will activate the extreme Christian right-wing. They are a major factor in the key battleground states. (Ignore national polls. What matters are the battleground states.) He will provide a rallying cry to motivate social conservatives. It’s an issue that can sway independent voters – and those are the votes he needs.

    So, here are his options: 1) announce his support for equal marriage rights and risk losing the election or 2) get re-elected and then support marriage equality.

    In reality, this issue will be decided by the Supreme Court, so his position doesn’t matter – unless he gets to appoint another Supreme Court Justice. (Unfortunately, the next retiree will probably be Justice Ginsburg. I saw her recently and, since the death of her husband, she has gotten quite frail.)

    One need only read between the lines to see his true position. He knows that without Loving v. Virginia, his parents could not have been married in many states. He has real experience with the justice and impact of marriage equality.

    He has certainly done enough to justify your vote. He handled DADT repeal in the correct manner. By getting sign off from the military brass, he blunted the attacks of the Republicans – who fought hard, despite the military approval.

    So, if you are not satisfied with the progress Obama has made, go sulk in the corner.
    But know that you will be helping to elect Romney. He will be no friend to the gay community. In fact, due to Santorum, there is now a more unified social conservative bloc that will be fighting against everything we have gained since Obama took office. And it’s a voice that will get Romney’s ear.

  20. kpo5 says

    Thank you – GR8GUYCA

    Please folks, even if you’re furious with President Obama, vote for him to get another Sotomayor or Kagan. We can’t afford another Roberts or Thomas.

  21. Brim says

    So let’s say it is all strategic on his part. He won’t sign an executive order because then he wouldn’t get a second term.

    First problem: I’m not sure that is true. Equality could have been an issue to rally around.

    Second problem: If he gets a second term and starts to build some sort of legislation, won’t the Republicans fight him on that? And if having House majority is a concern, then I don’t understand why he didn’t pass human rights legislation concerning equality and discrimination in the first two years of his presidency.

    Here is my point: I’m not sure it is strategically an advantage not to sign that order. The polls show that people are in support of it, I thought.

  22. Brim says

    And GR8GUYCA, that is very helpful – but I’m not sure that that is playing the cards right, so to speak. It was voter turnout that got Obama elected. It was the youth. He is not striking that chord again. If there is no overwhelming voter turn out, then he won’t be re-elected. Those Republicans never fail to show.

  23. Caliban says

    BRIM, national polls are very misleading. The difference between the ballot box and opinion polls is that pollsters SEEK people out to get their opinions. People have to make an effort to vote. They have to register and actually go do it. Many don’t.

    And except for gay people and our strongest allies, much of the support for gay rights is “soft support.” When asked if they support gay marriage or job protection for gays their response is basically “Eh. Sure, I don’t see why not.” It’s not a central issue for them and it’s not that high up on their list of political priorities, so if Romney doesn’t agree with them on the issue (and he *will* pretend to be more centrist during the election- witness his appointment of Grennell) it’s not a deal-breaker for them.

    Now compare those people to the Christian Right, who are hard liners on the issue, basically act as if it’s the end of Western Civilization. Right now we’re somewhat lucky in that the Religious Right doesn’t like Mormons so they’re a little “soft” on Romney. But turn this election into a referendum on gay rights and you risk them overcoming their dislike of Romney to vote against Obama.

  24. Lymis says

    Both sides are right. As a community, we won’t settle for less than full equality, and we will continue to press for it at every opportunity.

    Political realities are political realities, but that doesn’t change the fact that we deserve equality and are simply not going to say that it is okay that it is delayed. And when we have an opportunity like this to ask a question like this, we need to.

    And at the same time, political realities ARE political realities, and we’re in a situation where a sufficiently strong premature move could create things like Constitutional amendments that could take a generation or more to clear up.

    The most important move we can make towards securing gay rights including marriage is ensuring that Obama and not Romney gets to make the next set of Supreme Court appointments.

    That means getting him reelected, and if that means positive but vague statements like this with ongoing incremental change until after the election, so be it.

    We cannot give the impression that we are going to settle for anything less than full equality, but at the same time, we need to take actions that actually help that along rather than hinder it in some misguided show of our anger.

  25. PAUL B. says

    Thanks GR8GUYCA…that was insightful.
    What I don’t know is a lot…but what I do know is that the remnants of the Republican Party that are in control now would have us banished to a remote island and nuke it.
    That can’t be an option for me. So, what is left is compromise and I’m resigned to that.
    I think of the fights I’ve taken on in my life and wish that I would have walked away from the ones I couldn’t possibly win…so I could have been fully present for the winnable ones. That’s what I do now and it’s a tough choice and always a compromise….but I’m not going to my urn all mad & frustrated. When my husband looks inside that jar to remember me fondly, I want the ashes to be settled on the bottom…now whirling around like a tornado in there.

  26. Brim says

    No, I don’t like Romney. I was talking strategy.

    @CALIBAN, I pretty much agree. Polls can be misleading. But my point was IF he wants the youth vote, I’m not sure that his strategy is smart. I think you’re right when you say that there’s a difference between support and actually showing up. So, what is going to make the youth and left actually come out to vote?

    1. Foreign policy? The far left has serious problems with the DOJ under Obama and the CIA is out of control.

    2. Economy? The youth don’t understand the economy and the far left thinks his policies are again horrible.

    But gay rights could have actually been something that the left and the youth could have been moved on; and by moved I mean actually show up. I consider myself an independent that is actually pretty socialist and I see not much that appeals to me. His gay rights record has been better than I initially thought, and I think it makes sense to run on that.

    In that scenario, the only thing that might hurt him is if Paul ran as an independent. But he has to get the youth vote and jamming on Late Night with Fallon isn’t going to cut it.

    This is all just opinion.

  27. Matt says

    @Paul B.

    How astute of you. And I thought you had lost your ability to detect the obvious; rather, I still do.

    The only candidate who fully backs us is Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson. He’s the ONLY candidate to fully support gay rights. You can’t even say that about Obama. If you don’t like MY alternative, I suggest you shut up, get on the ground, and continue worshiping Obama, as sycophants should hardly have the time to criticize critics of their messiahs, not when they’re worshiping them 24/7. Don’t come to me for answers if you don’t want them.

    @SAY WHAT
    The repeal WAS botched. I understand that an Obot like you couldn’t understand, but it was. Thanks to him, it can return at any moment. Thanks to him, there are no protections for gay soldiers. If something were “repealed”, I’d say that the issue would be dead. Since it’s not, it’s pretty damn botched. It’s hard to say what it is, but “repealed” isn’t the word for it; especially not with these glaring weaknesses inflicted by YOUR Lord and Master Obama.

    You Obots need to get off it. You’re spending all your time on forums like this defending him. You can’t even get a word in edgewise of praise. It’s always “defend, defend, defend”. Has it ever occurred to you he’s indefensible? Has it ever occurred to you the rest of us aren’t blind liberals, and we’re sick and tired of his nonsense?

    No, I suppose not; liberals and conservatives live in worlds far different from the rest of us.

  28. M. Scott Hernandez says

    Obama will continue to make promises, that he cannot deliver. But if Obama loses the election, we all will be a concentration camp wearing a pink triangle.

  29. MARY says

    Matt…I think Gary Johnson would have been a viable choice…but he’s not a choice, is he?
    I think you were asked to suggest someone who could actually get into the white house. Do you believe that Gary Johnson is that person and 2012 is that year? I don’t think supporting Obama makes one a bleeding liberal…maybe a realist who sees no other viable choice. I’m not in love with Obama either Matt…but you can’t discard him without suggesting something realistic as an alternative…can you?

  30. says

    Matt, you’re seeing imaginary Obots. Many of us have problems with the President, on gay rights and other issues, but perfect presidents don’t exist and, all things considered, many of us support him (not without reservations) and understand that he’s a far better alternative than Mitt Romney, who–among his myriad backwards positions–supports undoing the thousands of existing marriages of same-sex couples (that’s radical anti-gay policy). You can vote for Gary Johnson. Free country. I’m not voting for a candidate who is libertarian and who isn’t viable.

    DADT is dead. On Obama’s watch. It would not have happened on McCain’s or Romney’s watch.

    On marriage equality, President Obama should continue to be pressured. Just because it’s an election year doesn’t mean that activists have to tape their mouths shut. Nor should gay citizens have to; it’s not our job to protect the president from issues. But what Obama says about marriage equality going into the election is far less important than what his DOJ is doing behind the scenes–which is not defending DOMA, which is defending our side now in various cases moving successfully through the Courts. Boehner and the Republicans and Mitt Romney, were he elected, are all vigorous supporters of DOMA. The mainstream Democratic position is now support of marriage equality, and Obama will get on board if he’s reelected. There’s only one right side of history on this now, and he knows what it is.

    Those who don’t support Obama don’t have to. But it’s quite possible to be a supporter, even a strong supporter, and find plenty to fault. The only people that think of him as Lord or Master or Messiah or other such nonsense are those who are enraged that he’s in office and enraged by those who don’t despise him like you do. The rest of us see him much more practically, and on a practical level he is by far the best option for gay rights progress in the next 4 years.

  31. mary says

    I’ve been reading this thread and haven’t commented until now. The other “Mary” is not me – I’m the mary who’s against same-sex marriage but interested in gay issues and has been posting here for a number of months. But basically I do agree with what this other “Mary” says. Obama is caught between a rock and a hard place on gay marriage. It’s romantic to pretend that he can “lead” by coming out in favor of it and draw out apathetic youth and “challenge” all the “bigots” who oppose it, causing them to have an epiphany….But anyone familiar with political history knows this won’t be how it plays out. He’s hoping to stall until his second term, when he’ll come out publically for SSM. It’s the safe and smart thing to do.

    Gary Johnson doesn’t have to worry about being pragmatic only because he knows he has no chance of winning. We don’t know what he’d have done if he actually had a chance of winning the Republican nomination.

  32. says

    I was staggered when USA voted for Bush…admittedly by a SCOTUS whisker……then I was floored that USA voted again for Bush, the sequel.

    Could it be conceivable that the USA will repeat these recent disasters ?
    Could “the gays” help entrench a rabid right wing Supreme Court ?
    Reading some of these posts makes me despair.

  33. Brim says

    Ron Paul, for one, stands a good chance. I disagree with some of what he says – like I said, I’m a socialist. But his foreign policy and government reform has taken the youth vote so far. I would consider him as a candidate if he ran on ending foreign aid and wars in the Mid East alone.

    Don’t count him out. He has quite a few delegates and might go to Tampa.

  34. Matt says

    @Paul B
    I’M the “bitter, nasty fag”? Oh that’s rich. Should anyone say anything against Obama, you turn into a stark, raving lunatic. I may be a bitter, nasty fag, but at least I’m not a stupid fag, like you who gave himself up as the property of Obama and the Democrats.

    @Mary
    I gave you an alternative, and you say he’s not a real choice. Cute. Like I said, if you don’t like my alternative, shut up, get on the ground, and continue worshiping Obama.

    @Ernie
    I see Obots. They’re all across this and other forums. They go on, acting like the rest of us. They only see what they want to see. But the worst part is, they don’t even know they’re Obots.
    DADT repeal was botched, plain and simple. You don’t have to like it, you don’t have to agree, but no matter what, your protests won’t change the fact that REPEAL WAS BOTCHED, and it’s all courtesy of Obama.
    As for what the DOJ is or isn’t doing, it’s quite irrelevant considering he passed the buck to the Republican controlled House (how oddly convenient), who gladly took it.
    You can say Obama will be better come term 2, but you can’t just say that. Looking at his first term, it’s highly doubtful he’ll do much. Most of what he’s “done” for LGBT is as airy-fairy as it comes. And when you don’t even question him or pressure him, you just say “wait, he knows what he’s doing (so you think), and you’re wrong to criticize him”, that’s blind support, hardly any different from treating someone as a Lord and Master.

    We can go on and on like this, or you can face the facts that Obama just isn’t that in to us.

  35. says

    @Matt, you see blind support, I don’t. I see making an informed choice between the 2 viable candidates. On all the issues, including gay rights, Obama is far superior to Romney. Nothing blind about that choice just because you don’t happen to like it. And you’re misinformed about DADT and the Obama DOJ on DOMA. He didn’t pass the buck to the Republican controlled House; they took the buck, as is their right, and his DOJ is on the other side. (You may want to reconsider your news sources, you’re obviously being mislead about basic political realities.) My state will be in the Obama camp and there’s no political threat to our pro-gay Democratic (obviously, if they’re pro-gay) Congressional delegation, so I’ll be voting on principle, and on principle I support Obama over any Republican or libertarian alternative. And, trust me, I hardly consider him a Lord and Master. Those are empty Republican talking points.

  36. Brim says

    Seen wikileaks and the collateral damage video? That’s just messed up. Seen the drone attacks? Seen the interviews with Afghanis and Iraqis? The cables were reporting over 500,000 children dead in Iraq. Not to mention the ‘motorcycle kill’ video, the kill team Rolling Stone expose where soldiers killed teenagers for sport and others covered it up, or the torture of children by the Iraqi police who were not stopped by American officials, or those who without trial were tortured to death. Abu Ghraib – Guantanamo.

    And then there’s Obama who refused to prosecute anything, refused to release any images of the second Abu Ghraib scandal. Refused to prosecute lawyers who allowed for torture – even of children.

    And then there’s the defense contractors, answerable to no one. They threw a kiddy party for tribal warlords. No one prosecuted.

    What about Manning? Assange? What about the internet laws that are being used to target New Zealanders and British subjects for extradition in order to imprison them in America?

    Obama supports all this and worse. So he got rid of DADT – great.

    But I’m telling you, he would have a tough time against a libertarian. And I really don’t think you should support him so enthusiastically.

  37. says

    @Brim: Ron Paul’s candidacy fizzled. I actually thought he’d have more of an impact on the race since he had such enthusiastic supporters at the beginning. He could cause problems for either candidate if he ran as an Independent, but I haven’t heard any buzz around that lately, so whatever remaining impact he might have will likely be confined to the Republican convention.

    Paul is a conservative Republican with libertarian leanings on some issues. I would never support him because of his views on civil rights–especially gay rights, women’s issues, poverty etc. He’s a viable curmudgeon but not a viable Presidential candidate. Way too old and unstable.

  38. Paul B. says

    Someone on here needs a little dose of reality…but alas, that’s not a choice either.
    Matt…the mind is a tricky place esp. when you spend too much time alone. I’m sure you already know this but it’s worth repeating…
    find some help, meds and a friend who will either “f” you until you’re a happy or taser you a dozen times and see if that helps.
    It’s not you’re opinion that offends me…it’s you as a person. Chao mi amore.

  39. Matt says

    @Ernie
    My “news” sources? “Political realities”? I’m “misinformed”? That is hilarious, and so rich coming from you. Obama stopped defending DOMA and passed the buck onto the House, which had been retaken by Republicans. No bias, just a statement of the facts. Perhaps you should look into it, instead of taking whatever little crumbs Obama gives you. Our “argument” on DADT has been settled. You can give him credit for it, but it doesn’t make it true.
    You prove you’re an Obot by claiming my remarks are indicative of me being a Republican. As much as you think those are “empty Republican talking points”, defending Obama, no matter what he does, is indicative of being an Obot, and it is pathetic.
    You say you’re going to vote on “principle” by voting for Obama, then the only “principle” you subscribe to is betrayal. Which is fine; it’s all Obots are good for. It’s not about gay rights, it’s about Obama being re-elected, damn the issues.

    Bottom line: you’re an Obot, I have a mind of my own. You’re going to vote for him ever so gaily, and I will not vote, knowing it to be a waste of time, thanks to sheep like you. You will be happy in lies, I will be miserable in truth. But at least I can face the truth, unlike you who comforts himself in the lies of the greatest liars.

  40. Matt says

    @Paul B

    I had a nastier response, but it was deleted for some reason. Odd, it was no worse than your ad-hominem laced rant. So let’s try this again.

    It’s odd that you claim “I offend you”, because you don’t know me at all. I wouldn’t let you, I now think you’re one of the most unpleasant people walking around, but it’s rather silly to say that to someone you haven’t even met, especially on this anonymous forum. For the record, the feeling is mutual.
    All I can say is, I don’t really care what you think of me. It would be far too silly for me to care. I don’t care what you think I need, I am quite certain you have no grounds to say such things.
    You are an incredibly bitter person, getting kicks in attacking others who dare to disagree with you on this forum. I will continue to lambaste Obama for his betrayals towards both the gay community and myself, whether you like it or not. I will continue pressuring him until he fulfills all that he promised, for that is what a good citizen does to his elected officials.

    Now, are you done? I know I am.

  41. gr8guyca says

    I wrote a rather lengthy post and I’d like to thank those people who acknowledged my comments.

    I’d also like to thank all of the people who wrote intelligent, cogent,
    insightful, and well-reasoned comments.

    And you too, Matt.

  42. says

    @Matt: We’re fortunate to live in a place where we can vote and vote for any candidate we want to. If you choose not to vote, you can’t pass the blame buck to anyone but yourself. And why be miserable in truth (or your version of it)? Work at the local level for stuff you believe in. Step away from your Obama obsession; it’s not all about him. And if you’re in misery, trust us, it’s definitely not about him or about us so-called Obots. Vote and let it go and make yourself a happy life, dude, you’ll feel less angry.

  43. Matt says

    @Ernie

    Please spare me the pretentious hippie psychobabble.
    If I don’t vote, I’ll continue doing whatever I please. My decision not to vote is my stance saying neither candidate is sufficient, so I have every right to criticize the one who is elected.
    And there you go, just like a perfect Obot, saying it’s not all his fault. Just what won’t you do to defend him. It’s so disgusting.
    There are no “variations” of truth, just deluded fools who believe one way or another, despite the cold, hard truth that would be so evident if you opened your eyes. But that’s too scary for someone like you, so you cower behind the veil of Democrats and Obama, believing whatever they tell you. If you wish to be happy, believing the lies of the liar, helping him weave the web of deceit, go ahead. But when it all collapses, the truth will be inescapable. Obama is a liar when it comes to LGBT rights. He is the worst president on civil rights since Woodrow Wilson. He doesn’t care for us. Get over it.

  44. Matt says

    @GR8GUYCA

    No one is obligated to respond to you, and unless you say something people disagree with, you generally won’t be responded to.

    As for your post, it’s little more than the Democrats will protect us from the big bad Republican boogeymen. Well let me tell you something. I’d rather punish Obama than give him a second term. If that means Romney gets in, so what? I lived through 8 years of Bush Jr.; I can live through a couple years of this putz. Maybe then, in 2016, the Democrats will appreciate the gay voting bloc they have, and they won’t take advantage of us anymore.
    Then again, maybe pigs will fly.

  45. says

    Still so very angry, Matt. Oh, well.

    In my state, we didn’t cower behind Democrats, we worked with them and got a full spectrum of lgbt rights passed, including marriage equality. You vote, you lobby, you get it done–it will be easier to get it done with Obama than with Romney. Not rocket science, and no need to be defeatist when the the historical trajectory is so obviously on our side, and when the President will want to be on the right side of history, not cause he’s the Messiah or any such nonsense, but cause it will be good politics for him after the election and good for his legacy. That’s why his DOJ is already working with our side in the Courts. Worst President on civil rights since who? Now you’re just being comical.

  46. TheThirdEye says

    The US election date is November 6, 2012.
    After a Black president, are we sure Romney the mormon liar will do better with this world recession.
    It’s 2012, the last year of are actual democracy, before the fall of this regime.
    You got to remember the 5th of November, the one you saw in V for Vendetta; the gays locked in government prison to be tested and killed.

    Anyway to gain control, they have to reduce the world population, and SOYLENT GREEN is one facist way…
    Anyhow V for Vendetta is the 2nd chapter of the movie 1984; watch both and you’ll understand why the government need to identify gays after the 5th of november…

    2012 US election will change mankind chapter…

Leave A Reply