Patience

Filed in National by on May 9, 2012

President Obama, “who is under mounting pressure to clarify his thinking on same-sex marriage after top aides publicly embraced it in recent days, will sit down for an interview with ABC News on Wednesday during which he is likely to discuss his ‘evolving’ views on the issue,” the New York Times reports. I find it hard to imagine that he will endorse gay marriage in this interview and at this time, but I could be wrong.

Why do I say that?

“Even as opinion polls show growing approval of same-sex marriage nationally, opposition remains strong in some battleground states, as North Carolina voted to ban gay marriage and Colorado Republicans killed a measure to approve such civil unions,” Bloomberg reports.

He is evolving and “leading from behind” because in many places the country is still evolving. In my opinion, the worst thing President Obama could do for equal rights in this country is to endorse gay marriage. Yes, I am serious. Equality can’t be a partisan issue. It can’t be an issue that people oppose just because Obama supports it, like so many other issues in our country.

The goal should be universal acceptance. We have come so far in the last twenty years and we will go far in the next twenty, as the bigoted older generations die off and as people see that the end of all humanity and civilization did not result from gays marrying in New York and California and Iowa and New Hampshire and Massachusetts and Maryland.

The overwhelming majority of my generation (mid to late 30’s) and the generations after me don’t give a frackin rat’s ass about homosexuality and gay marriage. We accept it as normal. So as those in the older generations who are bigoted die, opposition to gay marriage and equality drops. So patience.

Yes, last night was gut wrenching and a little soul crushing in North Carolina. But look down the long road.

About the Author ()

Comments (52)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. socialistic ben says:

    I gotta disagree DD. What if LBJ decided not to get involved in civil rights because it might “politicize” the issue. The conservatives (from now on refered to as “bigots”) already think Obama supports forced gay marriage for straight men, and forced abortions for nuns. A president must embrace civil rights.

    As far as the “long road”, I hope it involves cutting loose part of Dixie from the Union. They want a Christian Taliban Nation, let em have it. Build an iron wall around it, impose snactions and welcome their asylum seekers.

  2. Delaware Dem says:

    That’s fine. You can disagree. The point I am making is merely a tactical / strategic one anyway. And this all might be moot if the President surprises us today.

  3. Valentine says:

    Ben makes a good point. Although I am a strong supporter of marriage equality, I have been wrestling lately with the problem that the issue threatens to alienate one of the Democratic Party’s most important constituencies, African Americans (although I recognize that they do not speak as a monolith and are divided on the issue). And my rethinking has taken me right back to my original position: marriage equality is a civil rights issue and the Party needs to stand on principle. If we don’t have principles, we don’t have anything. And I also think that independent voters respect people who have principles, even if they disagree with those principles, and reject people who flap in the wind or obviously pander.

  4. V says:

    I think what’s going to happen is that we’ll continue to hear high ups but not the man himself endorse marriage. Maybe Hilary next? I know she’s always been a head of him on this one, but why not a reminder. That telegraphs the administration as a whole is one the same page. He’ll get through the election (because no one wants this to be 2004 all over again, SANTORUM had a shot at the nomniation so that isn’t that far-fetched)and once he’s secure in a second term will come out in support of marriage.

    I want him to be on TV TOMORROW shouting for marriage equality from the rooftops just as much as everyone else. But he has to be smart. This election won’t be a blowout and he has to pick his battles. If he’s going to go down in flames on an issue, I think he’d prefer it to be healthcare.

  5. Valentine says:

    I don’t think it is smart to claim you are evolving for years and to have people think you are spineless, unprincipled and/or a liar. I really don’t understand what is to be gained by this charade. The Christian Right hates him already.

  6. nemski says:

    “I really don’t understand what is to be gained by this charade.”

    Um, electoral college victory.

  7. Delaware Dem says:

    Exactly my point, V and Nemski.

  8. Valentine says:

    I know, DD, but I totally disagree. Consider this:

    “Support for gay marriage is highest among Democrats, with 64 percent supportive of the issue. Just over half of independents — 54 percent — back legalized gay marriage, according to the Post/ABC poll. Support among Republicans is the lowest, at 39 percent.”

    If he thinks a totally transparent and patently absurd position is going to help him win with independents, I am afraid he is sadly mistaken.

  9. Delaware Dem says:

    “It’s a generational issue. If it passes, I think it will be repealed within 20 years,” – North Carolina State House Speaker Thom Tillis, a Republican.

  10. pandora says:

    Here’s what I see on this issue (btw, put me in the DD/nemski camp)… either NC Dems and Independents didn’t care enough about the ban to come out and, you know, vote, or they did vote, just not the way those polls, Valentine cited, predicted.

    Either way, there is no reason for Obama to base his reelection campaign on this. First, he gets reelected, then he handles this issue. There’s a big warning in the NC voting results.

    Have we already forgotten what cost Kerry Ohio?

  11. occam says:

    I’m tired of leadership from behind. I’m not giving him any more money if he doesn’t endorse in the ABC interview.

    If Delaware is in the bag (no reason to assume it won’t be) I’ll vote for a third party candidate who does believe in equality.

  12. Valentine says:

    I agree occam. He crossed the line with me a long time ago. I am doing nothing for him.

  13. nemski says:

    Good job, Valentine and occam, I hope you enjoy President Romney.

  14. puck says:

    I’m tired of leadership from behind. I’m not giving him any more money…. I am doing nothing for him.

    But… but… the Lily Ledbetter Act!!!

    Isn’t this the moment when DL posts the crying baby pic and calls them emo-progs who want a pony?

  15. puck says:

    jinx

  16. socialistic ben says:

    I really understand the need to “play the game”, But what we are saying is “your (to gay people) rights can wait until we win our election” count me out of that camp.

  17. nemski says:

    Then we never win the election.

  18. puck says:

    I’m not gay so I can only imagine how it feels to be told to be patient yet again. But I do think gay marriage is inevitable, but a Democratic president is not. How would you feel to wake up next to your same-sex spouse, knowing that the price was President Romney and a Republican Supreme Court for the rest of your life?

    Even worse would be a toothless Obama endorsement that costs the election without even any legislation to show for it – a much more likely outcome. Obama is smart not to get behind the issue until there is legislation on the floor.

  19. Valentine says:

    I have to say that the logic here is alluding me. The Republicans hate Obama and will not vote for him, regardless of how he stands on gay marriage. Democrats will vote for him, regardless as well.

    Are people positing that the independents are not going to conclude, like the rest of us have, that he really does support gay marriage and will come out for it after the election? Do you really think he is fooling them with this charade?

    Isn’t it better to settle this now instead of having it drag on: When will he come out for gay marriage?

    And won’t people respect him more for taking a stand than for looking like a pandering, contradictory coward?

    I must be missing something.

  20. socialistic ben says:

    Johnson didnt care about losing the South. He did what was right and didnt care about the political blow back…. How did President Goldwater feel about that one?

  21. Geezer says:

    “Good job, Valentine and occam, I hope you enjoy President Romney.”

    Yeah, it’ll be all their fault. Not the fault of the president who failed to impress them; it’s their fault for failing to be impressed.

    You’ll apparently never get this, nemski, but it’s far worse for liberals to have a Democratic president endorse the Republican ideas that Obama has endorsed, from Romneycare to the failure to restrain Wall Street. It only empowers the Republicans to move even further to the right.

    What good is winning the election if the guy you elect is afraid to do anything you like?

  22. pandora says:

    Gotta win to be in the game. And gay people understand more than most how the game is played. That community has its strategy together. They never give up – just keep chip, chip, chipping away… and getting results.

  23. Valentine says:

    nemski – How will it be our fault? DE is going for Obama anyway.

  24. puck says:

    “Democrats will vote for him, regardless as well.”

    That is not a given. Republicans have finally alienated many of their long-term Reagan Democrats, but they might win some of them back with poutrage over gay marriage.

  25. socialistic ben says:

    You’re spot on, valentine. As far as anyone who would decide to vote against him based ont his view is concerned, his entire administration as for it, democrats in general stand up for civil rights… if someone will decide their vote based on a president’s views on same sex marriage, they have already decided to vote against him. Comming out with a full throated support would FORCE MIttens to re-declare his opposition to equality and he would probably waffel around for a news cycle or 2.

  26. nemski says:

    Geezer, what good is it impressing maybe 20% of the party who will not win you a general election? I didn’t see the progressives out up a primary fight against Obama.

  27. Valentine says:

    Another point here, about being in the game. Consider the Tea Party. They will primary any Republican candidate that is not sufficiently right wing. They don’t care if they then lose the general election. Consequently, they have gained power and successfully pushed the GOP to the far right.

    You have to have a long game, not just a short game.

  28. socialistic ben says:

    “And gay people understand more than most how the game is played.”
    As evident by New York and California, the game is played and won by courageous leaders doing something difinitive.

  29. nemski says:

    Valentine, the Tea Party puts up candidates, the far left just complain.

  30. Valentine says:

    Right. I am saying the left should not be just complaining. We need to play hard ball, those of us who are on the left.

  31. Delaware Dem says:

    This whole thread is about to become moot.

    It has been announced that Obama will make news in the interview today.

    If he now supports gay marriage, I expect occam, valentine, puck and socialistic ben to be downright embarrassing in their praise of the President.

  32. Geezer says:

    Valentine: The thinking is that Obama needs all the black votes he can get, and he’ll get fewer if he alienates the black Christian vote.

  33. nemski says:

    Obama will sit fir an interview with ABC News this afternoon.

  34. Delaware Dem says:

    oh yea, and you too Geezer. Embarrassing praise.

  35. socialistic ben says:

    DD, you insult my prickishness
    my pre-scripted statement-o-meter says “it’s about time. thanks mr president. Now, onto the next thing.”

  36. Valentine says:

    DD, That is great news, although his hand was forced, so this is hardly an impressive act. But believe me. There are MANY other issues that render me less than excited about Obama. After his performance the last 3 years, he will never get generous praise from me, although he has done some good, and certainly has been in a bad place and is way better than any Republican.

  37. Geezer says:

    “If he now supports gay marriage, I expect occam, valentine, puck and socialistic ben to be downright embarrassing in their praise of the President.”

    Sorry, DD. The rest of us don’t wear the Team Blue uniform. Timidity in the face of bigotry is no virtue.

    Neither is demanding fealty from those of us you apparently consider your troops. If you want to dictate to people, join the GOP.

  38. Valentine says:

    Geezer, that is a good point. But will African Americans really stay home?

  39. Geezer says:

    Just to be clear to the Democratic Party cheerleaders here: I despised Bill Clinton, not just for turning the Democratic Party into a junior partner of the Republican Party, but for being a smug prick towards everyone who disagreed with him. Obama took longer to show those colors, but they’re bleeding through all right.

    I’ll vote for him, but I won’t mind a lot if Romney seizes the wheel and takes us over the cliff. It apparently will take a disaster of monumental proportions to end conservatism in this country, and Romney makes George W. Bush look like a bastion of efficiency and competence.

  40. Delaware Dem says:

    Speak for yourself only Geezer.

  41. socialistic ben says:

    I really get your concern DD, but Obama declaring support for civil rights wont really be news to anyone other than MSNBC/Fox junkies. And like i said, it will force the GOP and Mitt to come out against it AGAIN.
    I actually think it is a brilliant tactical move. the GOP will have to promise legislation that nullifies marriages that happened legally in states that support equality. It will make them declare war on 1/10th (?) of the population. In 3 weeks everyone will be talking about how Obama recognized something as easy as civil rights, while the GOP wants to force divorces, split up families, and oh yeah… force gay women to marry and bear children for a person they can never feel physical attraction for.

  42. Geezer says:

    “But will African Americans really stay home?”

    The churchgoers will. Few institutions in American life, or at least few popular ones, are more opposed to homosexuality than the black churches.

  43. Geezer says:

    “Speak for yourself only Geezer.”

    You too, pal. Your ability to face the truth is no better than a Republican’s, either.

  44. Delaware Dem says:

    Go fuck yourself. Face what truth? That you are an idiot purist who prays for the destruction of our country and the suffering of untold millions just so he can be proven right?

  45. Valentine says:

    So much for civility!

  46. nemski says:

    Yeah, that horse civility left in 2008.

  47. Delaware Dem says:

    I apologize, Valentine. That is only directed to Geezer. When he calls me a Republican goosestepper not once but twice in this thread, Geezer should expect an insult or two.

  48. SussexWatcher says:

    It’s their way or the fuck-you-you’re-out-of-here way in these parts, Geez, old chap. Time to hush so Delaware Dem can address his anger management issues again. We have to be quiet when Daddy’s upset.

  49. Que Pasa says:

    “I’ll vote for him, but I won’t mind a lot if Romney seizes the wheel and takes us over the cliff. It apparently will take a disaster of monumental proportions to end conservatism in this country.”

    Geezer…most of us WOULD mind if any President, right or left, drove this country over a cliff. Are you saying you’d be invulnerable to the crash?

    “End conservatism”, i.e. classical liberalism of the Founders, in this country? And replace it with what, European-style socialism that fails and re-fails every generation or so? Yep, you and what army is going to tell 45% and more of this nation that your piddly, unarmed 10 to 20% is going to ‘rule’ us. LOL! Go back to the coffee shop.

  50. Delaware Dem says:

    @ Socialistic Ben

    I really get your concern DD, but Obama declaring support for civil rights wont really be news to anyone other than MSNBC/Fox junkies. And like i said, it will force the GOP and Mitt to come out against it AGAIN.

    We will see. It would be an “all in” move politically by the President. Perhaps a brilliant tactical move, like you say. I am all for gay marriage. Politically, I just worry about two things 1) that if you politicize equal rights too much, and make it a Republican v. Democrat issue, then it becomes a Republican v. Democrat issue; 2) black turnout.

    If the President is coming out in support of it, then obviously he and his team has thought through all the political ramifications and are comfortable.

    This is an issue where you always suspected Obama would eventually be for gay marriage, and as stupid as it sounds, the evolution was sincere. The reason I say that is many people, including myself, “evolved” from civil unions to full on gay marriage over the past ten years.

  51. nemski says:

    Interestingly, in reading various threads on Facebook, there seems to be an “Oh well” attitude about North Carolina. Those that were planning on vacationing in the Outer Banks are going to continue so. No talk of boycotts or Obama being a bigot. Nothing scientific mind you, but these people have other concerns like jobs, family, etc.

  52. Liberal Elite says:

    Obama’s intrade numbers are up a half point or so. Apparently the betting public thinks this plays well.