We need to STOP turning allies into enemies, in this instance Valerie Jarrett

Valerie Jarrett fucked up when she said that Andrew Aarberg made a "lifestyle choice," does that make her a homophobe? Really does it?

It seems that we have gotten to a point that when our allies are not perfect, when they are not pure, when their language is not correct, when they try to move forward on issue but not by following our script they become the enemy.

I cannot and will not defend Jarrett's language or her phrasing, but I do believe its important to look at she said before and after she uttered the words "lifestyle choice."

She talked about "tragic deaths of young people" she talked about kids being driven to commit suicide because they are harassed, she talked about how the bullying of GLBT teens is an important an issue that needs to be addressed now, she talked about supportive families, etc.

But because she use the words "lifestyle choice" in doing so she is homophobe who needs to be fired?

Give me a God Damned Fucking Break!

In the title of this post I said "we" even though I am not a member of the GLBT community, I used "we" because the "we" I'm talking about is progressives, DUers, the blogosphere who are obviously frustrated with our leaders in the White House, Congress and the Democratic party. Today it's Jarrett's comments, tomorrow it will be someone else talking about a different issue.

Should we stay silent when our allies let us down? No, we need to be vigilant, but this knee jerk overreaction has to stop and we need to stop turning our allies into enemies.

the DOMA decision, etc.

I've never seen jarrett come out saying anything remotely stronig in support of the GLBT community, so you again, fail, so to assume she's on our side, when she probably isn't or doesn't give a damn is the height of blind obedience.

Ignore it if you want to, I expect you to:

Valerie Jarrett speaks at HRC's National Dinner
Assistant to President Obama speaks at the LGBT organization's annual national dinner

Valerie Jarrett, senior advisor and assistant to the president for intergovernmental affairs and public engagement, addressed the nearly 3,000 attendees of the 14th annual Human Rights Campaign National Dinner on Saturday night, Oct. 9, at the Washington, D.C. convention center.

Jarrett, who mentioned the repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act and the end of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," focused on bullying, highlighting the recent suicides of young people harassed because of their real or perceived sexual orientation, gender identity or gender nonconformity. "No young person," she said, "should have to endure a life of relentless taunts and harassment, just because they're gay."

Introduced by HRC president Joe Solmonese, Jarrett noted that she had met earlier in the evening with the mother and brother of Justin Aaberg, who was 15 years old and committed suicide recently after being harassed following coming out at age 13 as gay.
-snip-

http://www.metroweekly.com/video/?ak=5659

She is not our ally she is a Donnie McClurkin supporter. Donnie was a surrogate during the campaign, he calls gay people vampires, and she placed him there due to his ex-gay ministry. They never apologized for that either, Donnie declared war on gay people. They called him 'good, decent, and honest'.
Sorry. It is what it is.

Let's start there.

Yet again we have the Obama Administration speaking to a small room of professional gays (i.e., the establishment suckups at HRC) instead of the mainstream media about a series of events that was ALL OVER THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA.

Gay people know what it feels like to be treated like the relative people talk about only in private. And that's exactly how the Obama administration addresses gay civil rights issues. In private, through a surrogate and to a select audience.

It wasn't enough for him with gay kids dying left and right, a guy getting TORTURED in the Bronx, and antigay attacks at Stonewall for Obama to address this issue publicly? Instead where was he? Photo-opping with the kids from Waiting for Superman, FFS! I mean are you kidding me? And then the surrogate he sends plagiarizes Dan Savage, and later uses a right-wing dog whistle term while talking about gay teen suicides?

You can't understand why this sucks so bad because, as another poster said so eloquently in another thread, YOU HAVE NO SKIN IN THE GAME. YOUR rights aren't at stake. YOUR dignity wasn't attacked. All YOU care about is whether Obama looks good. Well man, let me tell you, that's just SAD.

And that's been a long time ago.

Republicans.

The HRC is a morally bankrupt con-scheme and every gay person knows it. So the Obama Administration took money from con artists. The proof is in the pudding.

Never heard this perspective. Links/educational starting point for me to go from?

Did you leave out the word "not"?

It always amazes me how a party that promotes 'tolerance' is so quick to knee-jerk react. I imagine she regrets the choice of words she used, especially after she hears the reaction to it, but to burn someone at the stake for one mistake in an interview is absurd.

It always amazes me how an administration headed by a "fierce advocate" so readily uses homophobic expressions and arguments.

they have made several choices along the way that drew negative attention, Mistake my foot

the first words that came out did so because of well-worn pathways of thought.

It was no "misstatement".

Why? Because she's perpetuating a myth, and an extremely damaging myth at that. It shouldn't be anybody's difference if being gay is a "lifestyle" but many fools use this as their central argument against gay marriage. Our Democratic administration should be figuratively slapped for making such a statement.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1010/43601.html

Jarrett, in an e-mail to Capehart, said that she “misspoke” when she described Aaberg’s sexual identity as a lifestyle choice.

“I meant no disrespect to the LGBT community, and I apologize to any who have taken offense at my poor choice of words,” Jarrett said. “Sexual orientation and gender identity are not a choice, and anyone who knows me and my work over the years knows that I am a firm believer and supporter in the rights of LGBT Americans.”

. . .its too late.

and the very preachers such as McClurkin, who promote the very language she pushed into the public ear makes her 'poor choice of words' excuse difficult to believe. We have heard all the defenses from her circle of horrible invective, hate preaching, all of that, for years now.

should she resign?

of spokesperson on this issue. I wouldn't cry if she did resign.

You can't take back a dog whistle.

Her work is done.

She's always referred to as a close adviser and friend to the President and I have to wonder if this is why they haven't put their weight behind the repeal of DADT

is so upsetting.

People who think they are allies, but get on their high horses and lecture us as soon as we DARE to get upset about anything.

Some allies! :eyes:

We have some straight allies here. A few. We know who they are. But we also know who they aren't.

People who keep telling us to "get over it," or who keep lecturing us on why we shouldn't be upset about "a few words," or "a 2 minute prayer," or whatever the fuck they way of minimize the issue is this time really need to STFU and get out of our way.

We have EVERY DAMNED REASON TO BE UPSET. And if you keep telling us that we don't, then DAMED RIGHT YOU ARE HOMOPHOBIC! :grr:

as long as they get to have plenty of caveats and they get to make the rules peppered with stern finger wagging lectures along the way. I am so sorry that LGBTIQ support is sometimes filled with so many qualifications and not just because it's the right thing to do. :hug: It breaks my heart.

Hadn't seen that one, what's the "I"? Inter-sexual?

for anyone in this administration to be so out of touch regarding GLBT issues is simply at this point a disregard for GLBT issues. I know no one outside of the conservative viewpoint who would ever say this stupid thing. Lifestyle? This woman was talking to a GLBT organization and she did not know that was a vile thing to say? Gimme a break here. They are none of them stupid, it could hardly be a mistake at this point. God only knows I wish we were a society who would accept this as a choice but it is not a lifestyle any different than yours or mine. Language is important and they damn well know it.

As far as your comment about it being an overreaction....how much of this does someone need to take? Their very equality is at issue and it will never change as long as people in the administration, supposed liberals in leadership positions, cling to stupid statements like this. It just shows how much they have really paid any attention to the GLBT community outside of a few very easy things and things that also help the hetero children as well.

Add up all the slights, misinformation, pandering to bigots and lack of support for true and complete equality and you have a lot of bad stuff from this administration. To call this an overreaction is to forget all the past that has been suffered up to this point. Your comments sound very privileged, as you are if you are not GLBT.

thank you, MR. You are an incredible human being.

I love you! :loveya:

But the rest of what she said...um...isn't.

We need to consider the possibility that the phrase is so prevalent that she used it without thinking. Which, absolutely calls for an apology in which she says she was wrong and that it is NOT a choice.

Which, she did.

If she's a homophobe, she's certainly a bad one.

If Jarrett had made a similarly bigoted remark about a right-wing constituency, she'd be packing up her office right about now.

Just keep piling on.

Jarrett is many things, but she's not stupid and she's not careless with her words. This was not a "misstatement".

Wow.

She was appealing to the same anti-gay bigots who support Rick Warren and Donnie McClurkin. That's the point of a dog whistle.

Yes, Jarrett made a mistake. But those who think she and the president don't care about the rights of gay men and lesbians, don't give a damn about bullying and the tragedies of gay youth suicides are wrong.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/postpartisan/2010/10/valerie_jarrett_is_no_tony_per.html

Pardon me while I look for a fainting couch. :eyes:

...you're reaching.

'WHOEVER was offended' is apologizing profusely?

Like, you know, when you pick one up and accidentally blow it, but then it's too late, and you could apologize, but for Chrissake, it was a dog whistle! A dog whistle!

She unintentionally blew a dog whistle in the middle of her concerns about human beings, for goodness' sake! A DOG WHISTLE!


(heh...I don't get it either. But it certainly sounds sometimes like people go through a lot of effort to stay angry.)

Yes... she intentionally wanted to cause an uproar less than 3 weeks before the election. :eyes:

You just said she's not stupid.


God bless you for never uttering anything that you later regretted and then apologized for.


What would you have her do?


Have we really gotten to the point where "I'm sorry, I really fucked up. Please forgive me." is NOT good enough?


...and you wonder why people think you're intentionally looking for something to be pissed about?


She's done everything a reasonable person would expect a person to do to make up for her mistake. She didn't deflect it... she didn't say she was misquoted or it was taken out of context. She said, "I fucked up, I'm really sorry." (but in cleaner words).



Should she be dipped in boiling oil too? Would that satisfy you?

The President is practically conceding the elections three weeks before they take place. Even if they wanted to motivate their base, I'm not sure they know how.

Big rally in Wisconsin, followed by town hall on CNBC, followed by big rally in Philadelphia, followed by town hall on MTV/CMT/BET, followed by more big rallies, followed by more town halls in front of key constituencies.... etc...


Those are really the actions of someone "conceding" the election?


C'mon, jgraz.


WTF... you're not this obtuse, and you're not this stupid.

Obama's already assumed that he'll have a Republican House. Nothing could be more demoralizing to the base than hearing the President talk as if this was already a done deal.

people would be saying, rightly so, that she never should have been a liaison to that group, and never should have even been in a position of influence in that administration at all!

But because her statement was merely insulting to LGBT people it's okay. All she needs is a politically expedient apology and everything can be wiped under the rug as far as straight people are concerned. Right?

We are only talking about meeting the level of offense of Straight People here, right? What the LGBT community thinks clearly doesn't matter. Let's get that out in the open, into the light of day! x(

K&R

Delete-sorry-overreacted

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

don't you know when you are supposed to shut up? the strait people will let you know when your contribution is needed

Excellent Post!

:kick:

"...we need to be vigilant, but this knee jerk overreaction has to stop and we need to stop turning our allies into enemies."

You're going to get a lot of comments to the effect that you just don't understand. But, clearly, you do. We DUers can disagree with one another and with administration officials without the melodrama. And, yes, even on the important issues of civil rights.

1. "I say this not only as an advisor to the President. I say this from my heart, as a mother. I cannot begin to fathom the pain – the terrible grief – of losing a child. There is no greater loss – and we have lost too many in just the past few months. Asher, Billy, Seth, Tyler, Justin."

2. "So when it comes to putting a stop to the bullying and harassment of LGBT youth, we are not going to let up. We are going to stand with you. We are going to stand with every single young person in this country who deserves the chance to grow up, learn, have fun, and live their lives without the constant threat of violence, or ridicule. Because although many turn a blind eye, and think that bullying is a harmless rite of passage – words matter. Bullying is simply cruel, abusive, and needs to be stopped. Now. And the work done on the ground by HRC, GLSEN, P-FLAG, the National Youth Advocacy Coalition, the Matthew Shepard Foundation, the Trevor Project and countless others, are crucial to this fight.

The tragic loss of Seth, and Tyler, and Asher, and Billy, and Justin, and countless others whose names we don’t know – strikes at the heart of our values as Americans, and our sense of humanity. We all have an obligation to engage in the broader struggle to build a more perfect union – a nation where each of us is free to pursue our own version of happiness."

(please insert sarcasm icon here)

http://miamiherald.typepad.com/gaysouthflorida/2010/10/it-gets-better-obama-senior-advisor-valerie-jarrett-tells-crowd-at-annual-national-hrc-dinner.html

"In a recent interview I was asked about the recent tragedies about gay youth who have committed suicide, and I misspoke when I referred to someone's sexual identity as a "lifestyle choice." I meant no disrespect to the LGBT community, and I apologize to any who have taken offense at my poor choice of words. Sexual orientation and gender identity are not a choice, and anyone who knows me and my work over the years knows that I am a firm believer and supporter in the rights of LGBT Americans. Most of all, I hope this does not distract from the issue I was asked about -- the desperate, tragic decision by some young people who feel that their only recourse is to take their own lives because they are being bullied or harassed because they are gay, or because others believe they are gay. We must instill in young people respect for one another, and we must set an example of mutual regard and civility to create an environment that is safe for every person, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity."

Saying Lifestyle Choice when answering a question shows how she really felt. Great adviser he's got there. What's she making? I'd like to make a couple hundred grand sounding just like Dr. James Dobson!

What more do you want from her?

Beheading?

Burned at the stake?


When someone fucks up, the appropriate thing for that person to do is admit it and apologize for it.

She did that.


Seriously.... he should fire every person who makes a mistake? Is that where we're at?



God bless you for being perfect.

STRAW MAN doesn't hold water, sorry. I never mentioned a damn thing about BEHEADINGS, BURNING AT THE STAKE, but you sure did. Fire her ass, plain and simple - she's a BIGOT and she's advising the President of the United States who says he's a fierce advocate for GLBT rights. Having her as a top adviser says he's not one. She needs fired for being Dr. Dobson in a female's body, and if an adviser said the same thing, say, African American's behaving like AA's for being interested in black culture and living out that "Lifestyle Choice" they'd be fired... plain and simple.

Thanks for showing you're not for equality, and support the views of Focus On The Family by not condemning the WH's weak response on this.

Thanks for the blessing, even in sarcasm, God will turn it into treasure in heaven, SD. Again, thanks for the Straw Man ridiculous beheading and burned at the stake accusations... you're a peach.

i have known plenty of race bigots that changed and still make statements that are insensitive. They just dont realize it until someone points it out.


some things like racism and homophobia are so ingrained in american culture that people can be one without even knowing it. Those are the people you can reach. The ones that found their way to it on their own are the ones are view with caution.

none of my friends (and she calls herself a long time advocate for GLBTers) would ever say Gays are making a "lifestyle choice" to live their lives! My God, it's so offensive. I hope she continues to make amends for her comment - for it was straight out of a closed-minded church!

coaching them or writing for them.

And then shit like this happens, and shows that they weren't coached well enough. They don't really believe what they were saying. They were just memorizing "gay catch phrases" so when they slip, they don't realize how offensive they are until it causes an uproar.

And even a lot of the straight people here don't seem to realize or care how offensive it was.

Our allies... :(

Context is important.

. . .yet it would appear that context is not important to too many DUers.

You've got nerve. This latest insult is the worst. Saying "Lifestyle Choice" is just so freaking "right wing churchy" that it smells like the shit it is. It is not a lifestyle choice, and those are her feelings on Gay people, that they CHOOSE to be Gay, there's no dancing around it. This is a TOP adviser for the president. She needs fired or he thinks just like she does, and that wouldn't be hard to believe based on past comments. When he was before the NAACP event in '07 and Biden mentioned that he and Barack got tested for AIDS in Africa, and the people in the audience laughed, Barack QUICKLY made a point in that staccato style voice thing he does, to state that he and his WIFE got tested in Africa.
Someone who wasn't worried he'd be thought of as Gay would've just let Biden's words go. Then came the McClurkin incident where he was just going to sing one song, we were assured, then he went on a rant against Gays, using the stage of "Obama '08" as his pedestal to push his anti-Gay doctrine, and followed that up with his "Gay vampire" lunacy! Then came the promises to our community, and then the arse-kissing to the right-wingers now that Obama's in office and he wants to dance a fine line politically, to heck with the suffering of the Gay community. That's okay, President Obama, I'll keep defending you every time I hear someone rip on your color, here in this podunk county, some day hopefully you'll show the same grit.

:thumbsup:

:sarcasm::sarcasm:

what is your goal. Insult them or win equality? make a decision.

False choices, not withstanding.

Houston to tranquility base. come in tranquility base.

about the LGBT community to talk to us without being that offensive isn't an ally.

That is kindergarten level information for anyone who claims to really, truly be standing up for our rights.

However, if you're just claiming to be our ally, so that you can demand that we be the ones that change, so that we give and give and give, but get nothing in return, then this is just par for the course. This is a fake ally letting the mask slip. This is someone with a political agenda, who thought she learned enough lingo to fool our community, but couldn't keep it up because she was just spouting it, not believing it.

And if this is what we're going to get, then it's long past time for us to kick some of those fake allies and start walking with real allies instead.

just offering some advice.

from the position of a straight person looking down on the LGBT community. "Be nice to us, or else."

Yeah, we've heard it before. :eyes:

Anybody that is open to discussion or is a "bigot on the fence" is a potential ally. Many people who were bigots in the 60's where swayed by reasonable open discussion, while angry divisive rhetoric drove others away. Eventually, it was MLKs peaceful and accepting approach that won the day.

In historic struggles for equality, you generally have two choices: armed conflict, or open and peaceful persuasion.

If you choose not to see this truth, it is to YOUR direct detriment.

:kick:

But frankly, i know how to look for signs of hidden bigotry. I have watched my whole life. Even if she did, it wouldn't matter to me. Its like when people spoke positively about how great it was for Obama to be running because he was an articulate black man. The implied meaning is that most black men are not articulate. I dislike their hidden belief but i refuse to pound on their head because they support a good cause intellectually. Instead i help them see the truth.

have you read any of his writing? Have you followed his history? :wtf:

He was only "peaceful and accepting" in comparison to people like Malcolm X. Without those more radical people to compare him to, he would have been considered a terrorist at the time, and he was by many people.

He is only considered a peaceful accomodationist saint only in retrospect and only by people who revise history!

So don't go citing MLK to claim that YOU have any clue about the best way to do anything. And don't go lecturing the LGBT community from your high horse. That is the epitome of bigoted arrogance!

remotely interested in the same goals? It seems like a guarantee for failure.

Though I don't think in reality there are that many such people.

there are many people that are undecided about bigotry.

with very few people you will allow for as allies, you fail. That's politics. It's not about ideals and can't be. They can only be shot for.

I really don't get the luxuriating in turning away as many people as possible. It's like working against what you say you want to do that. Some posts on DU today seem as if they are trying to turn Democrats into right wingers who will just oppose their rights (or assume they do).

It only hurts and never helps.

Using the term "lifestyle choice" does not show by itself that Jarrett is an avowed homophobe, but it does show the latently homophobic notions of gay and lesbian people that are at the heart of this administration. It confirms our worst fears that the people running things really aren't exposed at all to GLBT people on a daily basis, at the highest level, which explains the level of callousness this administration has shown to us.

Sorry, but your OP is a total fucking FAIL.

over some words she used (taken out of context, of course).

And talk about turning allies into enemies! Do the words "fucking retarded" ring a bell? Or the notion that liberals need to be drug tested?

Respect is a two way street, and leadership sets the example.

Was Helen Thomas vilified like this after her apopology for bigoted remarks?

Such as Liberals, LGBT, Unions (especially the assault on the teachers unions) etc.

But that is exactly what the DLC said they would do from the beginning. They wanted a corporate friendly party, rather than one that showed any loyalty to its base.

. . .lets just all get on the same page.

When did the democratic party prove that they are allies of the LGBT community?

Was it when the Democratic administration's DoJ was arguing FOR keeping DADT? (ongoing)
Was it when the Democratic administration was openly against Marriage Equality? (ongoing)
Was it when ENDA got sidelined?

So far, the best we can say is that Some democrats are allies. Many Democrats are neutral. Many Democrats are homophobic. And the Democratic party MIGHT eventually get around to supporting our rights someday if WE keep making a loud enough stink that WE force it to happen despite all the heal dragging from our supposed friends and allies.

The democratic party is less hostile that the republicans, but that does not mean that the party supports us. Not by a long shot. Not even close.

If we had to depend on the party to be our friends, we'd never get our rights, and we'd end up farther behind instead of ahead.

But they are not the fierce advocates they promised they would be either, but rather non-malicious, likely sincere, and not very reliable allies.

That is the problem. It is important to have perspective: Obama is not Bush and this administration is not anti-gay. But it is important to recognize, too, that it is so, so very far from good enough.

they need to quit treating their supporters like enemies.

This is the part of your post that I really liked "It seems that we have gotten to a point that when our allies are not perfect, when they are not pure, when their language is not correct, when they try to move forward on issue but not by following our script they become the enemy."

Works both ways. It's respect and that is a two way street.

I sure don't recall you giving her any slack at all. I don't think Ms. Jarret should be fired but she surely shouldn't be their spokesperson on gay issues. She clearly has no earthly clue, to have used that phrase.

when adults get it wrong, the kids get it really wrong. it's not ok when pukes do it. it's not ok when any person in the public sector does this. to me it's like saying being black is a lifestyle choice. what's worse is she is saying it while discussing the issue of bullying gay kids in school.

Is it too late? Should this be a fatal mistake?

and at this time when kids are dying and beatings are frequent and everyone is so volatile the answer is yes, it is too late. If this was the first time GLBT issues had come up for this administration I might be slightly more willing to give her some slack but it isn't. If this was not a religious and conservative catch phrase I might be slightly more willing to cut her some slack. If this was not something that has been discussed thousands of times over the last I don't know how many years I might be slightly more willing to cut her some slack but she is a smart woman and works with smart people and works for a smart man who works for us. I expect them to know what they are doing before they go shooting their mouths off about issues. If I wanted fly by the seal of your pants I would join my brother supporting Sarah Palin.

An apology the minute after these words left her mouth would have been sincere and it would have been apparent that she knew what was right and what was wrong. THAT could be forgiven. She had to be confronted with it or she probably would never have given it a second thought.

I make mistakes all the time, one good reason I don't give speeches or interviews. Coming from a straight perspective it can be unbelievable difficult to talk off the cuff about these issues. I rarely do because I do not think in a million years I could ever understand what it is like from a GLBT standpoint no matter how much I care or how much I try and my privileged position as a straight person taints anything I might say in a way that all too often is unhelpful.

Personally I still do not think this was a mistake. These are not dumb people.

I will speak out and fight for your rights whenever I can. I think a lot of straight people are just plain jealous of the intelligence and the success in their careers that many gay people have.

. . .our friends in the gay community? Really? So I am no longer an ally?

she would sell any and all of us out to further her boss's ends. That's nothing against her, that's her job.

Good post.:thumbsup:

Enter Valerie...

RIP, Justin.

his name is far less important than defending Obama.

:thumbsup:

It's the same contrived overreaction that Obama supporters have been dealing with from various haters and instigators since the earliest days of the primaries.

Of course, Obama and co. seem to enjoy handing ammo to their enemies. Sending Jarrett out to address the LGBT community, a political constituency she clearly has no familiarity with, and one that already has a rocky relationship with the Administration, is indicative of a worrying political tone-deafness.

The Valerie Jarrett episode resembled aftermath of the Prop 8 vote. During that time a lot of folks showed their true colors. Still more have long memories of the knee-jerk reaction and the unbridled anger of that time.

In that manner, there are a lot of underlying things going on along with all of the shouts of condemnation. And it shows that things still haven't been done to work on building bridges between the LGBTQI communty and other communities in this country--especially groups of color. Instead the same old thing that was a part of the Prop 8 anger is rearing its ugly head.

It's easier to blame people and create a mob mentality than to solve it diplomatically with dignity.

Unfortunately, the lesson here is that allies tire of being disrespected and treated like garbage. That's why it is quite ironic to discuss equality when there are little to no examples of it during the fight for progress. It only reveals that a lot of things have been swept under the rug in the discussion of what true equality means in the guise of Civil Rights.

After all, respect goes both ways.

I am grateful for your common sense in this situation.

Name me one person who has never said something that they regretted later. It can happen to anyone. I support your OP 100%.

I think we need to either A) be more tolerant of people's mistakes or B) just give up this whole idea that change is possible. Unless we choose A, B is a fact.

Sorry to anyone who disagrees. But the fact is precisely this. We got where we are today because a very conservative element in this country decided that the people in it were so factionalized that they could easily led to vote against their own interests so long as you pointed out who their enemies were. Then they used the bully pulpit that our political system offers to get out the message loud and clear and unite factions behind them. As for the reward they got for their loyalty, the right to think of themselves as "real Americans" without much in the way of material benefit, well, mileages vary, for some, that's all they ever wanted, others felt a little short shrifted but had so convinced themselves of the ideological correctness that they continue to this day to support their leaders at the expense of their own interest.

What you think of this lockstep loyalty or the sense or lack thereof behind it is immaterial, you cannot be an intellectually honest person and say that it was ineffectual. It has been so effective that, and get this, not even a blatant exposition of facts, verifiable sources, and a rhetoric that carefully and simply connects all the dots cannot penetrate the very thick armor of personal belief in the sheer rectitude of their party, and this is the critical part, on the whole. Note that they can be critical of an individual, but they are loyal to the ideology, and ultimately forgiving of the individual. The force of this sort of occasionally hypocritical forgiveness of their party should not be underestimated.

I worry about gaffes and mistakes and missteps and misspeaks not because the Republicans will hammer on it, but because we as progressives have so little tolerance for it. We are a group more likely than most to toss an "ally" under the bus for a mistake, and I believe that is because we live in a realm of mistrust. The beasts are in the building, the enemies are within the walls. Doesn't really matter in what way or on what issue they are an ally, progressives seem to need/want some level of ideological purity. The rub, of course is that they operate under the so-called "big tent" of the Democratic party.

Look, we can hold our leadership accountable for their inability or chosen failure to lead, in fact I would like it no other way. But think of this. No conservative for the past 15 years has had to concern themselves with appearances because even the most egregious improprieties or miscues are known to be forgivable. I envy anyone who can claim loyal support even at their worst. Without that worry about making sure that all the i's are dotted and the t's are crossed, it leaves one free to ACT.

Not to give our congresscritters a pass, but sometimes I find myself wondering what specifically prevents our side from acting on what we've sent them to the big show for. I sometimes can't shake the suspicion that whatever capability of leadership these people have, and granted, I don't think it's much, it disappears because of our inability or fierce choice not to follow with some amount of loyalty. It's a catch-22. We won't follow unless we are sure of their ability to lead to our satisfaction, and they won't lead unless they are sure of the support of their followership. In a lot of ways, the clamor over Jarrett sheds a little (and dare I say, somewhat disheartening) light on the issue. It points to something that is a little painful to face. That unless we can face the mistakes of our "allies" positively and be forgiving of them, especially in a case like this, where the person in question stood before you and apologized for his/her offense, then we are well and truly fucked. And make no mistake, I do believe that over the years, we've gotten that way. Forget accomplishing anything because our desire for allies who are truly down with our program, and who never, ever, ever, ever offend is a pipe dream.

If we can't find it within ourselves to forgive this, well, what the hell do we think we're doing here?

:kick:

It exposes her actual feelings on the issue. Truth be told, I would rather she expose herself than pretend to be tolerant.

:kick:

:rofl:

. . .we don't always get it right.

I have never used the phrase "lifestyle choice" but I could see myself making that mistake and saying it.

Upon realizing what I said or having it pointed out to me, I would feel like absolute shit and immediately apologize. Would that all of sudden make me a homophobe?

Please tell me.

I just wonder why you're so up in arms over this that you were moved to write this OP.

The focus seems bizarre.

You don't know that. You may believe that, you may even WANT to believe that (more to the point I think, but whatever), but you don't know that. You know, I also mentioned this idea of "The beasts are in the building, the enemies are within the walls." as an indication of a generalized progressive mindset. Are you trying to prove me right, or is this just an accidental "slip"?

For clarity's sake, more is said of you of your desire to conflate her statement into some sort of barely restrained homophobia than her statement alone says about her.

:kick:

I take her at her word that she misspoke, but it's an odd misspeak. I'm still stewing about being called a whiner and that wasn't a slip of the tongue.

Period.

you don't belong here; maybe you could join focus on the family?

:thumbsup:

;)

learn to stop turning allies into enemies? How come we always have to be the ones who have to forget it? How come they don't have to do anything to court or understand or support the allies that put them in office?

Just sayin'.