General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBill Clinton Praises The Demise Of DOMA, Without Mentioning That He Signed It Into Law
It took us 17 years to undo DOMA. Thanks a lot Bill.
http://www.businessinsider.com/bill-hillary-clinton-statement-doma-supreme-court-decision-gay-marriage-2013-6
dsc
(52,165 posts)only Bill Clinton passed this law.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Yes, he threw gays under the bus in order to get homophobes to vote for him.
The Link
(757 posts)Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Maximumnegro
(1,134 posts)Obama's many DOCUMENTED speeches about his views and the fact that during his administration is when the most gains have been made and...
Seriously? You dislike him that much you actually believe he has not played a significant part? Do you believe that all the progress that has been made would have happened anyway under McCain and Romney?
Is the hate that strong?
The Link
(757 posts)DURHAM D
(32,611 posts)and one day after Biden walked him into a corner.
Maximumnegro
(1,134 posts)his mind now. I see. He is so inept that he got bullied by Biden. Got it.
Romulus Quirinus
(524 posts)such that only the inept could be out-manoeuvred by him?
Maximumnegro
(1,134 posts)1) that is specifically, SPECIFICALLY regarding gay marriage.
2)There is a difference between HIS OWN views on gay marriage, and what he has SUPPORTED.
So again, can you answer the questions. Are you saying he has played no significant role in the gains made. Are you saying the gains made (GAINS, not just GAY MARRIAGE specifically) for the LGBT community would have been the same under McCain and Romney?
Mind you the post above is regarding EXPLOITING HOMOPHOBIC FEELINGS. THAT is what you are agreeing to. That Obama has explited homophobia. Please defend that. I would love to hear it.
The Link
(757 posts)Where the rest of us have been for a long, long time.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)That's before, not after, and certainly not 17 years removed from the scene of the crime.
The Link
(757 posts)Ms. Toad
(34,084 posts)was lip service, when necessary, coupled (at least during the primaries leading up to the 2008 election and the early years of his first term) with a core discomfort with LGBT issues. He did us no favors - and in many ways betrayed us. That is why during the 2008 primaries I supported other candidates, rather than him. Until Edwards - who had that same core discomfort - dropped out of the primaries I supported him because he was at least honest about his personal struggles with LGBT issues. I knew where he stood. I wouldn't always like where he stood, but I wouldn't be expecting different from what might be delivered.
That changed for President Obama - particularly his core connection with LGBT issues. I don't know exactly when - but by the time he made his public announcement supporting same gender marriage the change was palpable. It was just as clear to me that it was not just lip service or politics - as it had previously clear that it was. I think it was his connection with the parents of some of his children's friends, and some people I know personally who have regular contact with him, that was the catalyst for change.
I won't dismiss the role of politics, and the changing tide of public opinion, as factors in the timing of the public announcement.
But however, and whenever, he got here he is NOW he is a strong advocate for LGBT rights, and has played a very positive role in grabbing the momentum and turning that momentum into concrete gains. And that thrills me.
But that thrill is tempered by the visceral memory of bus wheels running across my torso for the first 3 years of his administration. That memory will fade - but it will also take time.
Freddie
(9,269 posts)Which, deserved or not, had a reputation for being opposed to gay rights, and the President was hesitant to anger his strongest supporters. In the end he did the right thing.
Ms. Toad
(34,084 posts)I've spent most of my life interacting with people who can mouth what they know the right thing to be with respect to LGBT issues - with varying degrees of gut knowledge that it really is the right thing. (As well as people who are just blatant bigots and don't care what the right thing is.) In more than three decades you get a pretty good sense of when what is going on in the gut doesn't match the public presentation.
As I noted - the same thing was going on with Edwards, except that he was very honest about it (which didn't win him many friends in the LGBT community).
But there truly has been a palpable change. I stopped listening for a while because it just made me angry. So sometime in the last couple of years, before his announced support of same gender marriage, something really changed at a gut level for him.
He is also a political creature, so the timing of the public announcement of that gut level change may well have been influenced by political considerations. But the kind of advocacy we now see isn't something which is purely political, nor is it something which can be sustained without the kind of gut level change I had sensed (any more than the damaging action and inaction of most of his first term could have been sustained had the change preceded his first term in office).
loyalsister
(13,390 posts)He identified the 2004 controversy as a distraction and at first argued that in the absence of meaningful consensus, civil unions could be a compromise.
He wrote about a conversation he had with a supporter who was a lesbian...
"I was reminded that it is my obligation as an elected official in a pluralistic society and as a christian, to remain open to the possibility that my unwillingness to support gay marriage is misguided
I think the fact that he values the fact that we live in a pluralistic society drives his inclination to compromise. He lacks the hubris to claim "my way or the highway." Oddly that was one of my and many other's chief complaints about W.
Ms. Toad
(34,084 posts)I was addressing what I was picking up from how he talked about people he knew or encountered who were gay - and, frankly, the comment you quoted is a perfect example. Intellectualizing, emotionally distancing, and mouthing the right words. The position is political - the way he talks about it, the tone, the word choices, the affect all of those things signal what is going on at a gut level.
Contrast that statement with the much warmer, more personal statement of support, "Obama said his daughters, Malia and Sasha, have friends whose parents are same-sex couples. "It wouldn't dawn on them that somehow their friends' parents would be treated differently. It doesn't make sense to them and frankly, that's the kind of thing that prompts a change in perspective."
That doesn't mean the change (or that his earlier position) wasn't also political.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)about it.
The Link
(757 posts)Ok.
Ikonoklast
(23,973 posts)You are vastly over-stating his importance to the electorate.
I seem to not remember McClurkin on the campaign trail stumping for Mr. Obama, going state to state in order to incite the homophobe vote; please correct me if I am amiss in my memory.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)ETA: Barack Obama did not run on a DOMA-like platform. He has his won personal views, but he didn't go around on the campaign trail bragging about his disdain for gay marriage. He just didn't.
Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)DAKAR, Senegal (AP) President Barack Obama on Thursday praised the Supreme Court's ruling on same-sex marriage as a "victory for American democracy" but clashed with his African host over gay rights in a sign of how far the movement has to go internationally.
Obama said recognition of gay unions in the United States should cross state lines and that equal rights should be recognized universally. It was his first chance to expand on his thoughts about the ruling, which was issued Wednesday as he flew to Senegal, one of many African countries that outlaw homosexuality.
Senegalese President Macky Sall rebuffed Obama's call for Africans to give gays equal rights under the law.
"We are still not ready to decriminalize homosexuality," Sall said, while insisting that the country is "very tolerant" and needs more time to digest the issue without pressure. "This does not mean we are homophobic."
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-clashes-african-host-over-gay-rights-134627018.html
----
Obama goes to other countries to push for marriage equality, even ones that tend to be more homophobic and sexist. Yeah, that's a VICIOUS man, he is!!
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)However, their actions (although callous and political at the time) are partially mitigated by later regret...especially when they act to correct themselves afterwards, such as Obama ending DADT. There is a lot I'm critical of Obama for, but IMO he took a good leadership role in gay rights. I wish he took as strong a leadership role in other issues.
bike man
(620 posts)boston bean
(36,223 posts)I think that would have been preferable.. Because as it stands he appears to have signd it for political reasons, even though he didn't want to. The election was coming up.. Sad state of affairs all the way around.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)It appears he signed the bill as a political calculation. Obviously, he should have stuck to his guns and vetoed it if he thought it was wrong. Even Obama seemed to have come around, reportedly due to pressure from his girls.
Perhaps we should commend those polititians that have changed their minds, rather than condemn them. After all, many of the Dem leadership 50 years ago were once segregationists, later supported racial equality.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts). He hid documents from the Courts, and ignored Court orders to stop. There is no evidence he regretted or apologized for his actions, nor did he do any actions in behalf of J-A's afterward.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)"is said."
I have no doubt that Lt. Gen. DeWitt had no regrets for what he had done. Others have attributed moral failing to the internment, however, in an attempt to hide the real cause (economic.)
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)...that Sasha and Malia changed his mind.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)whatever.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)because of what their kids think.
HooptieWagon
(17,064 posts)A lesson some DUers haven't learned.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)because of politicians' moral visions.
bike man
(620 posts)it is a bad bill'
If it was then overridden, the scorn would have been on congress, not the president.
Imagine! A president standing on principle.
boston bean
(36,223 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)are now jumping on the band wagon 17 years later. I wonder if DOMA would have gotten overturned if Ms. Clinton was president.
dsc
(52,165 posts)and Bill Clinton's appointees provided as many votes as Obama's in any case. (2 each)
kestrel91316
(51,666 posts)That said, in today's climate I think he would take note of how the majority favors gay rights. He was always good at testing which way the wind was blowing.
dsc
(52,165 posts)when at most 40% agreed with him.
Coccydynia
(198 posts)How many years will we have to wait to close down Gitmo after Obama tied his OWN hands by signing the bill that prevented him from closing Gitmo.
dsc
(52,165 posts)you might, just might, want to crack open these things called history books once in awhile. Both houses passed with veto proof margins.
Coccydynia
(198 posts)Even Obama's hero, Reagan, vetoed on principle and was overridden.
dsc
(52,165 posts)but the fact is the law would still been there.
Coccydynia
(198 posts)Perhaps some Democrats would have reconsidered. On the other hand, Clinton was a Blue Dog, which in my book is Republican Lightz
PoliticAverse
(26,366 posts)"it was passed ... for the sacred purpose of getting Bill Clinton re-elected"
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/06/27/colbert-tells-straight-people-how-to-protect-their-marriages-from-gay-threats/
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Like when he went back to Arkansas during the campaign for the execution of the mentally retarded guy.
dsc
(52,165 posts)it was a GOP Congress that passed it, yes with heavy Democratic support, but it was a GOP Congress which I am going to go out on a limb here and say didn't want Clinton reelected.
Myrina
(12,296 posts)Really?
dsc
(52,165 posts)but you wrote, and I quote, it was passed for the sacred purpose of getting Clinton reelected. That was a lie, plain and simple.
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)It's not like they impeach you when they override a veto.
He pandered. He tried to get more votes. This issue would get more centrist votes.
It was an unprincipled self-serving political gamble, and it worked for him. Don't know why this would be controversial or hard for you to see.
dsc
(52,165 posts)Hence to blame him and not even mention the Congress is pretty dishonest.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)overturned?
I missed that.
Everyone knows the president doesn't pass legislation, he or she only signs it once the Congress passes it.
He had an opportunity to stand against it. He didn't. He went along to get along in an election year. This is not news. The fact they would have overridden his veto doesn't change the moral implications of signing it.
dsc
(52,165 posts)issued a statement. Tom Harkin who voted for it, issued a statement. I could go on but won't.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)And there are several threads and online callouts going around for people who voted for that law. It's not like this one article here on Bill is the only one anywhere calling out hypocrisy.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)graham4anything
(11,464 posts)so I trust his opinion on the matter
In fact, Elton was very upset when Hillary lost in 2008, for just this reason.
Now I did not support Hillary in 2008, however
What would Bob Dole and Jeb Bush and W and 41 and Rand and Ron Paul have done? NOTHING at all.
Why the hatred for Hillary?
Hillary and Bill are not the same person.
Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)graham4anything
(11,464 posts)Tierra_y_Libertad
(50,414 posts)bullwinkle428
(20,629 posts)Phlem
(6,323 posts)Also Hillary Clinton has no skeletons in her closet!
-p
WinkyDink
(51,311 posts)whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)unblock
(52,277 posts)or perhaps simply that he had sensed a shift in the political winds.
to me, this is the most amazing thing about the timeline. 17 years ago bill clinton, as potus, felt the politics of gay rights were such that he needed to throw a mostly democratic constituency under the bus for his own political power.
and this year, the potus, vpotus, bill clinton, and many other democrats are actually falling over themselves to position themselves in support of gay rights.
i know 17 years sounds like a long time, and of course it's a disgrace that we have even had to fight this battle at all. but in comparison to the timeline of progress on other forms of bigotry, the last 17 years have actually been remarkable.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)I have no idea, but is this anti-Clinton happening today, an attempt to divide the party going into 2016?
And, it shows FORWARD is the optimum word, instead of people wanting to go BACKWARD.
Maximumnegro
(1,134 posts)The Clintons are inherently divisive because they have a lifetime of wanting it both ways. By Clintons I really mean Bill, because as awesome as Hillary may be Bill always wants the spotlight and always ends up putting his foot in his mouth.
The biggest obstacle for a Hillary presidency is her damn husband.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)Skittles
(153,170 posts)VERY much her own person
Whisp
(24,096 posts)he is responsible, or partly responsible for.
That's a Clinton for ya. Pretend apologies go a long way to a rapt and eager audience.
unblock
(52,277 posts)i have no doubt that both his decision to sign doma then and his decision to apologize for it now are cynical appeals to the prevailing political winds. cynical politics are so common that even when a president is being genuine it's hard to be sure there's not a political motive in there somewhere.
duffyduff
(3,251 posts)despite the fact Congress would have overridden any veto, then I will believe him.
Bill Clinton needs to retire from public life.
William769
(55,147 posts)I met him and Hilary in 1993 followed his presidency closely (the good and the bad). I do not regret voting for him either time (given what was before him the previous 12 years).
He's all right in my book And will be remembered as one the the great Presidents of our time.
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)William769
(55,147 posts)Better?
truebluegreen
(9,033 posts)Orsino
(37,428 posts)He might have reformed, but he has not refunded the happiness and monetary benefits he helped steal from US citizens.
IMO, "making amends" really isn't possible. He's had all the marriage and money he needs for a long time. Changing his mind isn't amends.
But it isn't nothing. In today's American politicscape, he and Hillary look progressive, and do deserve some credit. Along with a mountain of debits.
Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)Bandit
(21,475 posts)in the military. He caught holy hell about it and had to settle for DADT which was a whole fucking bunch better than what had been. People went to jail for being gay in the military and Clinton changed that. Now the Military could no longer go after gays unless the gays brought the matter up themselves and then the most the military could do was a discharge.. No longer could they just send them to jail. so bad mouth Clinton all you want on the gay issue but he did an awful lot to make life better for all.
DURHAM D
(32,611 posts)PennsylvaniaMatt
(966 posts)I was going to post about how President Clinton pushed hard to end the ban on gays in the military as one of his first acts in office.
This country has evolved DRASTICALLY on the issue of gay rights, just in the past 8 years, let alone 17 since DOMA was passed.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)Thanks though, I had forgotten that he did stand up for that. I remember it now.
AndyA
(16,993 posts)Special thanks to everyone still in Congress who voted for that piece of crap that discriminated against people all these years. If it's unconstitutional now, it was unconstitutional then and it shouldn't have ever been passed.
Some of us won't forget that as you gloat over this victory.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Recursion
(56,582 posts)But that it wasn't a fight he could win at that moment.
Octafish
(55,745 posts)C'mon. What is this place turning into? Business Insider. Really?
Wonder what the former president would say should Congreff ever repeal the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act that repealed the Glass-Steagall Act?
DURHAM D
(32,611 posts)because it reflects such a profound level of ignorance regarding our history. Perhaps you have failed to notice that we do not have a federal amendment to the constitution prohibiting same-sex marriage. You can thank President Clinton for that as he took the advice of progressive and LGBT leaders and signed the damn thing.
graham4anything
(11,464 posts)Arugula Latte
(50,566 posts)and the cooperation of 2/3s of the House and Senate and 3/4s of the states' legislatures. It's not like someone could have snapped their fingers and put an amendment into the Constitution.
DURHAM D
(32,611 posts)Also, the Democrats were working hard to stem the tide of take-overs of state legislatures and governor's offices by the Republicans and the amendment was a slam dunk issue for them. DOMA was designed to side-track the tsunami.
AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)We have not come SO FAR in 15 years that it is impossible now, and not impossible then.
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)because it could have been worse? Plez. The last 17 years have been hell for some. I doubt they would agree with you.
dsc
(52,165 posts)then it seems to me that instead of 17 we would have had about 100. I am not saying I know for sure we would have had one, but it was certainly a possibility and had it happened then it would have been all but impossible to overturn.
malaise
(269,113 posts)I am always amazed that he gets a free pass for a lot of things. Clinton is no liberal.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)Completely agree.
Apophis
(1,407 posts)DURHAM D
(32,611 posts)Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)He bragged about it on tv in a long speech he gave about saving marriage.
Then he bit his lower lip and held up his right thumb.
Clinton had become a caricature by 1996.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)a joke or something. I don't remember him struggling too long before doing so.
Anyway, I'm glad he and Hillary have finally 'evolved' - nonetheless, as the saying goes, "a friend in need is a friend indeed" and I do not count Bill as a friend to the GLBT community; when he could have used his power to be a friend, he chose to empower bigots.
JMHO.
BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)rather than waiting for another another 10 years of pain and suffering by average Americans.
It isn't particularly helpful to throw the LGBT community under the bus, then 20 years later saying "I'm so happy being under the bus for 20 years didn't kill you."
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)BlueStreak
(8,377 posts)Which is to say a person who embraces nearly all of the horrible policies that Republics push, while still trying to convince us that he or she is a real populist.
At least Republicans are honest about it.
DonCoquixote
(13,616 posts)People are ready to elect his wife into office in 2016, who will be a "fighter" for progressive ideals, forgetting she fought to kill them.
William769
(55,147 posts)They are on the same page. IMHO, thats a good thing.
bigwillq
(72,790 posts)Like never come back.
Enjoy.
AtomicKitten
(46,585 posts)Major Hogwash
(17,656 posts)He's like a black hole, he sucks everything in to which no light can escape.
The empressof all
(29,098 posts)Didn't care for him then...Hate what he did to my party during his terms...He still leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Honestly...he's one of the major factors I can't wrap my head around Hillary....
Maybe he can go to one of the Whitest and Richest places in America, oh that's right he already lives there.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)silvershadow
(10,336 posts)actions, though I am sure he does. Now, NAFTA, that's a core Democratic...no, wait...nevermind.
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)without mentioning that he approved his execution?
Phlem
(6,323 posts)NAFTA and it's evil off springs.
"Big D#*!"
-p