Patrick over at Pams’ House Blend lays it out better than I could
Here it is in bold colored print mailed out to how many – millions? – of California homes 5 days before the election. Obama’s image and quotes show how his position on marriage has more in common with the supporters of Prop 8 than it does with the opponents of the measure.
Democrats are concerned about Obama being too closely aligned with the marriage equality movement and consequently don’t want him to risk campaigning in defense of same sex families.
Vocal advocacy of our rights is supposed to be a losing position for him to take. He has to remain detached. He can’t allow himself to get burned by marriage like Kerry did in 2004. He has already done enough by writing a letter – months ago to an LGBT political club – that explains his opposition. To do more than that – to actually say something during a campaign speech – would be too risky to his campaign.
Well, his words are now being used to help pass the measure that he supposedly opposes.
What is he going to do now?
Is it acceptable that he be shown to be a supporter of Prop 8 in such a public way? Does that harm his campaign at all? Will any LGBT organization or individual demand that Obama himself issue a repudiation of this mailer? I do not think he is responsible for this mailer, but he is responsible for the words he has said and hasn’t said about marriage.
Is it too much to ask that the first African American President of the United States issue a statement in defense of equal protections for all Americans?
This is disgusting and he cannot allow this to happen without a response. This mailer will influence the 7% of voters that will decide the fate of marriage in California.
He has nothing to lose at this point in the campaign and he has more than enough money; more than he can possibly spend between now and Tuesday.
We have to exert our power and demand his support – in words and cash – or we are abdicating our responsibility.
He did this to himself. We cannot allow ourselves to be sacrificed for his election. It is unnecessary. He must do something to counter this aggression.
jeremybthompson says
this isn’t about principles; it’s about winning. Personally, I’ve always found it difficult to believe that Obama actually thinks marriage should be limited to opposite-sex relationships. He’s spent his adult life in LA, New York, Boston, and Chicago; he’s hip enough to admit having done “maybe a little blow”; but he holds a retrograde position that, at least in these precincts, only those holding national elected office seem unable to shake? Smells funny to me.
<
p>But that’s what we get with a two-party system. Obama has basically called his supporters bluff with his flips on FISA and public campaign finance (are you, Laurel or David, going to vote for McCain? Nader?), and it is the luxury of the Democratic nominee for president to be able to throw gays and lesbians under the bus every time we have an election.
<
p>I would love a full repudiation of the Prop 8 ad, but I’m not holding my breath. The best we can hope for at this point is that the national mood shifts between now and 2012 (and as more and more states recognize full-blown gay marriage rights, that seems inevitable) to the point that Obama can magically have a change of heart. (Actually, that’s the second-best we can hope for. The best would be an actual third party started by the labor movement, but I digress…)
laurel says
if CA prop 8 passes tuesday, it’s over and i’m fucked for the rest of my life. do you honestly think non-gay people will get off their asses to get these amendments repealed? if so, what evidence have you of that, considering our next “defender of the constitution” doesn’t even care about equal protection of the laws (although he loves to talk up that line)? i’m sick over this. once cali, fl and az become hate states, the majority of citizens will live in hate states, and we’re just a few states away from having the number needed to pass a federal amendment. if you think that can’t happen with obama in the white house, look at how he’s willing to sacrifice my rights of citizenship to win in a state he can’t lose in.
kosta says
Beyond the demand of my belief in the simple principle of universal equality before the law, I feel motivated by a personal solidarity with all of my glbt friends and relatives(of whom there are many). I’ve busted a gut in the campaign to protect marriage equality in MA and across the nation. But I think this is a matter realpolitilk – the best parallel would be the late 50’s and early 60’s, when the only way to elect people to national office who would support civil rights for african americans was to shut up about it. With all the winking and shuffling I’ve seen on this issue I am convinced that Obama’s stated position is a calculated evasion which, when you examine it closely, leaves lots of room for maneuvering. We should give him the chance to engage in “relucatant” public conversion to the cause once he has assumed the presidency.
laurel says
It is truly appreciated.
<
p>As I see it, the realpolitic of the current situation is that Obama is letting something happen in his name at the state level that, once president, he will not have the ability to reverse and won’t get reversed for decades if ever. If Obama is truly against these amendmets and was sincere in his previously whispered statements to that effect, he should have no problem repeating those statements. I have no reason to believe Obama is the crypto pro-equality person you think he is, when he’ll rob peter to pay paul. and guess who is peter and who is paul? He can have public conversations till he’s blue in the face after becoming president, but that won’t undo the damage done in his name in CA because as president there is nothing he can do about marriage in CA except pound the bully pulpit. Too little too late = failure of leadership.
kosta says
and have just put put in a nudge call to the Cal. office. Tho’ at this late stage, lord knows what difference it might make. Do you really think that the prop 8 vote will be that close? I thought the good guys were ahead on this one….
laurel says
Every one of these amendments in other states passed by about 10 points higher than polled. So even if we had a “clear” advantage in the polls (we don’t), I wouldn’t be comfortable. If the amendment fails, it’ll be only the second time in US history that voters defeated an anti-gay constitutional amendment. The first was in AZ in 2006, and it failed because it would also have negatively impacted hetero senior citizens.
jeremybthompson says
I wasn’t paying respect to Obama’s realpolitik, I was bemoaning it, and really I was bemoaning the extent to which he could successfully wager that calls from his supporters to express clearly his opposition to Prop 8 and the mailer might be profitably ignored. Again, what if Obama says nothing about this? Are you gonna vote for McCain? Goddamn sure I’m not. And Obama knows this. The only way he could doubt this is if we had a real left in this country to turn to, rather then a “big tent” Democratic party solicitous of pro-life, anti-gay marriage and pro-gun candidates.
laurel says
I just hope people understand who they’re getting with their vote – a Jim Crow enthusiast, not a progressive. All I can say about being disappointed by Obama’s campaign is that at least I won’t be like I think others will be when they learn that he’s not the liberal they assumed he was. THis is a double whammy for me, because I was happy to be able to cast a vote for the first non-white president. But when that guy is himself an anti-equality bigot, the joy fades pretty quickly.
<
p>One thing is for sure though, if Prop 8 passes, he owns it.
jeremybthompson says
I was working in Cook County politics in Feb. 2007 when Saint Barack announced his candidacy. I was becoming intimately familiar with the cesspool that oozes from Chicago to Springfield. It is an operation whose corrupt and/or incompetent candidates for alderman and mayor Obama endorsed (against SEIU-backed candidates and despite his endorsees’ opposition to a city living wage ordinance). But 21 months later, no one’s talking about this stuff, and very likely some of these jokers will get plum spots in an Obama administration. No, not a progressive. Just a Democrat.
cadmium says
Should phone calls to CA Obama/Biden headquarters (866) 675-2008
<
p>I dont live in CA so I dont know who/what else to call. I think overall their national response team is probably tied up in handling direct smears in battleground states.
laurel says
to the extend obama doesn’t understand that is the extent of the problem. but what’s civil rights for queers to him anyway? just a nice launching pad for his presidency. i hope that legacy gives him nightmares, because it will make my live even more hellacious that it has been.
farnkoff says
We’d love to have you.
Hopefully, California will do the right thing. Good luck, Laurel.
laurel says
That is a very kind thing to say, and I appreciate it.
farnkoff says
I thought that Obama ought to make a statement opposing Prop 8.
laurel says
so I’m glad you go through.
kosta says
bob-neer says
But he does not — at least, not yet. That’s a pity. But insofar as the mailer accurately reports his position on the issue, I’m not sure that any specific response is warranted. Has he taken a public position on the CA referendum? If yes, that would be worth restating. If no, this is just a consequence of his unfortunate unwillingness to support marriage.
laurel says
why Obama will not answer this smear – his supporters don’t expect him to. I think that’s pathetic and unconscionable.
<
p>As to your direct question, he sent a letter to be read to a meeting of some lgbt club in sacramento this past june waffling about rights, but saying he didn’t support any amendments. The only people to know of this letter are lgbt’s who were there, and the lgbt’s who have internet access and see the letter resurected from time to time. But the average voter does NOT know of this letter. The just read and hear crap send out by the “yes” people, which goes unanswered by Obama. what should they conclude? they already don’t believe our counter arguements that kids won’t be indoctrinated in schools, etc., because of course theyr see us as biased, but the religious purveyors of lies as trustworthy. THIS IS WHY OBAMA NEED TO GET HIS SORRY ASS ON THE AIR. THIS IS WHY IS SUPPORTERS NEED TO MAKE HIM DO IT. he won’t do it without a lot of pressure, that seems clear. what are you going to do about it, Bob?
laurel says
Just got this from the NO on Amendment 2 people in FL. Amendment 2 is a constitutional amendment that would not only forbid gay marriage, it would prevent non-married heterosexuals from having the “marriage-like” agreements that are popular among retired people who don’t want to lose soc sec benefits, etc. from a former spouse by getting married.
How many other Obama voters think he supports the hate amendment in their state? Probably a lot, since Obama only whispers his “opposition”.