Help me destroy an argument, but please do not throw rocks at me

I am going to ask this because I myself want to repute an argument put forth by many. Don't assume I am homophobe, because I have my own answer to this question, but I want to hear people who can present good, clear arguments I can hit some people over the head with.


OK..suppose you hear someone say "Well, you know, Clinton tried to address all that Gay agenda stuff early on, and it was exactly what the GOP needed. They used that to derail his programs early on. Given how bad everything is, Obama has to put things on the backburner, or else the GOP will say he piddled around with Gay Marriage when the nation was on the brink. Then, you know that means we get a GOP in 2012 who will simply undo everything good anyway!"

Again, I am not trying to get flames, I want to hear people's arguments, because I myself want to destroy this argument when it is used against me.


Just so you all know that the quote is not my opinion, here was MY response.

"The reason why we are in this financial and political mess is because every time this nation needs to think about something serious, the GOP uses issue like Gay rights as a smokescreen to make sure we never think about what counts. Until Civil Rights issues are dealt with, the GOP will use them for their purpose, to make sure John Q public NEVER looks at the fact that the upper classes are using them as cattle, to pick their cotton and fight their battles.!"

I am sure some of you could do better, but if you are just going to be snarky, it's no help. I am looking for good, hard arguments to smash the fear of Clinton Redux into bits!

rally and call. Abortion, gay rights, sex ed, affirmative action and the ever present "THE DEMS ARE GOING TO TAKE OUR GUNS AWAY." These are the issues they use to rally their base during election time.

Wedge issues, whatever they may be, rally the base and are good fundraising tactics. Follow the money.

THe GOP will stop using Gay Marriage when it stops making money for them. IMHO it's all about the money. When that dries up they will sing another tune.

People under 35 are for gay rights. People over 60 are, well, leaving us with accelerating speed every day. This isn't the 1990's, or even 2004. I think we are at about an analogous point in the gay rights movement as the civil rights movement was in 1956---which is not ideal, but it's better than being in 1920.

Even though I was just a teenager, I heard about it and thought that it wasn't right, and that they were justified in fighting back. I guess if you were an old prude back then, you're an old prude now and getting more outnumbered as each day passes.

They say he wants to get health care done and doesn't want to get into a fight over DADT. Fine. I can see the logic behind that but he could sign an executive order halting the firing of gay people from the military while DADT is being reviewed. I understand the argument that Clinton was bogged down with this debate and the result was DADT, fine. The fact is this isn't 1992 we've moved on Obama and the Democrats could easily expose any Republican so-called outrage as a farce. I think what upsets gay people the most right now is the brief filed in support of DOMA that was outrageous and was written by a Bush crony someone on the Obama team really dropped the ball.

I completely agree with that, that and even investigating anybody. Don't Ask, to me, meant Don't Ask, EVER. If they just stopped with these inquiries it would go a long way to relieving the problem until full political attention can be giving to a sweeping gay rights reform bill.

It would mean no pressure on Congress to actually change the law, and then the hold gets lifted under the next Republican.

but I do have faith in Obama (not blind)and I see a pattern of Obama neutrualizing the wedges one by one and I'm sure he has this one on his list...and I'm sure his list is prioritized and timed. Watching his campaigne I noticed his use of prioritizing, all of us would be yelling he has to handle this or that...while all along he was quietly working on it and his timing was correct...So I'm sure he's working on it.

that's all you need to say. The world has completely changed in the last sixteen years.

... as soon as he was inaugurated. He ( i.e. they; i.e. Clinton inc. ) even disappeared us from the '96 DEM convention even though we were all over the place in '92.

Did it do Clinton any good? Did the RW not try to completely destroy him personally and politically irrespective of his scuttling gay issues??


If it's not GLBT's they will find something else. In the meantime, if Obama successfully pushes for equality, GLBT issues will be very much beside the point. Even by midterm elections.

There was a huge fight and it was used to being painting Clinton as an extremist which only got worse with Limbaugh and his "cradle to grave" Hillarycare.

I don't think Clinton's downfall was pushing a "Gay Agenda" too soon in his Presidency.......


I think his problems stemmed from him getting his "schlong" worked on by way too many subordinates........


As for those "clubs" that were used by the Republicans to beat on Clinton..... (Clinton started handing them the clubs to use on him even before he was elected)....... does Jennifer Flowers ring a bell? Which they latched on to from day one.....

all about DADT and DOD issues on top of the HillaryCare thing. Most people forget....Bill Cohen wasn't his first SECDEF. Judith Miller's boyfriend was (really).

Bill Clinton was the President from 1993–2001.......


In his 1st year in office (1994), a lawsuit was filed by Paula Jones:

http://philip.greenspun.com/zoo/clinton-full-complaint.text


So his "schlong problems" were present when he was elected to office..... (not just when he "cigared" Monica Lewinsky in his 2nd term)


As the title to a movie by the great "Divine" says it best...... "Clinton Has Had (Female Trouble)All Of His Life"... and it was just the wooden stake that the Republicans needed to finally do him in...........

It was there, but it was just .... there. Not a huge issue. It all got ugly and overwhelming in his second term.

There were "schlong issues" but they didn't become real problems until the second run!

As Hillary said, he's a hard dog to keep on the porch.

times change, 67% are in favor of DADT repeal, so it costs the Dems little political capital.

Besides, and it seems like you were talking to Dems, the Democratic party is a coalition, GLBT rights were/are good enough for fund raising but now we are supposed to sit down and shut up? Wrong.

Sometimes people internalize the sentiments of the rightwing and then regurgitate them right back at us. Odd, that.

I confess, I am looking more of a direct rebuttal to the argument, one I could use. I.E. when someone says "You know if he works on gay rights, he loses on other issues", what would you say?