Sad part is Americans dont see this we just were told things would change but don't take into consideration ALL the red tape and crap someone has to go through to get things changed.

Ill vote for Obama again for 2012 as it seems now it takes 8 years to complete anything instead of the standard 4 year term.

_________________
"Creating Havoc and Pie Since 2001!"
My Website: http://www.anthonyhays.com
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/cakvala

Just for argument's sake, what happens when it takes 12?

That's easy. Blame Bill Clinton!

Two reactions:

1) It's brilliantly played if it works. But... are gays everywhere able to get married and share the same benefits that hetero couples have right now? You're giving credit for something that hasn't happened yet.

2) It's brilliantly played if you accept that the "long game" is the right way to do it. It's not. It could have been done easily when the Dems had complete control of the government. I personally don't think having to wait for basic equality is acceptable - CERTAINLY not enough to be called brilliant.

Is that the plan? Spend the first four years saying that it will take longer to get the big things done so you can get re-elected?

I don't want four more years of Obama.

I hope that there is a deficit hawk that gets the GOP nom. I hope that person is not Palin or Ron Paul as they are unelectable in my book.

Best case (IMO) would be for the Senate to have a small Democrat majority, the House gets more budget hawks and a budget centered Repub wins the White House.

I like Maddow's list.

I'm giving him credit for actually working in our favor and not just saying stuff to us in an election cycle and then ignoring us for the rest of the time.



And how has that worked out for the healthcare change, hmmm? It does us no good for him to be seen as "forcing people" to accept change as the president. The courts? yes. That's what they are there for. That is actually their purpose. The president? All that would entail is a whole lot of lectures about how the president is dictating to the nation (see what happened when he simply said he wouldn't defend DOMA) and either a grandstanding law in answer from congress or a reversal by a republican president. Obama did the best thing he could....he made sure that congress was on record saying that they now believe denying gay people something just because they were gay is discriminatory and he made sure the courts were aware that he was pointing out that distinction as being something we can no longer ignore as a nation.

So, yeah. Brilliant, as far as I am concerned. Do I think "today" is better than "tomorrow"? Sure. But for once, it is nice to see that a politician is actually interested in WINNING this because it is the right thing to do....and not just promising us all the moon and then forgetting us once the election is over.

_________________

You also make the mistake of thinking "democrat = in favor of gay rights". There's quite a few that refuse to budge on the issue of marriage equality.

_________________

Indeed.

I'm definitely curious how Joxur would have magically gotten all of the Red State Dems to vote against their constituencies on a whim. Joxur wouldn't be the first to arbitrarily categorize all Democrats as the same in terms of voting habits, though.

No one really has answered this incredibly crucial point against "but teh Democrats had CONTROLZ", and I don't expect one because it wouldn't make any sense otherwise.

Your example does you more harm than good. Look up the term political capital. Obama used all of it, and then some, passing a shitty health care bill and allowed this issue to languish for 2 years.

If he wanted, he could have gotten the votes out of his own party. His mismanagement of, well, everything, in the first few years is the primary reason DOMA is still around.

I do admit I have a hard time feeling as passionate about this debate with you guys as I used to. It's obvious your expectations are even lower than mine. I'm not sure I can name a moment in history where true transformation happened when the primary constituent was so lazy. You describe something as brilliant that I see as simple political cowardice.

Seriously disagree with you here. I think if Obama had come out of the gate on DOMA he would have had democrats AND republicans defending it, not repealing it.

And I guess therein lies the difference in how we view his tactics on it. I also happen to think my impression of the democrats is a little less idealistic and a lot more realistic than yours on this topic. Which is amusing on some levels to me.

You can say I have low expectations, and that's fine, but I happen to agree with the force behind the prop 8 case right now. That to win this one, it has to be done on multiple fronts. Obama marching into office and declaring DOMA dead just because he wants it so would not have gone quite so peachy keen as you seem to think it would have. Maybe you haven't been hearing all of the rhetoric and who it is coming from over the years...it's probably easy for you to miss as it doesn't impact you directly. I don't just hear it, I feel it... every fucking time I read their little quotes on the topic. They are talking about MY family. And as much as many would like to believe it, it isn't just the republicans.

I don't think Obama could have repealed DOMA out of the gate even if he had nothing BUT democrats in congress. You can disagree. That's fine. But that is the crux of our difference on this topic.

_________________

There was no way a repeal of DADT or DOMA was going to pass Congress. In the House, sure, they could have pushed it through. But it was dead in the Senate before it even got there.

The fragmentation of the Democratic caucus is both its greatest strength and its greatest weakness. For this issue (and most other big changes), it's the latter.

We get it, Joxur, you don't like Obama.

You have clearly made your (trivial, vacuous) point that Obama, a politician, has not delivered on all of his campaign promises within his first term.

To this I say: No Shit.

I for one would've loved to see energy legislation take first priority back when it could've had immediate global impact, i.e. before Copenhagen. I would've loved to see a withdrawal from Iraq and Afghanistan. I would've loved to see genuine reform of health care and (while we're at it) campaign finance. I would've loved to see substantive progress on gay rights.

Instead, we got a flaccid health care bill and another war in the middle east.

Did I hope for better? Absolutely.

Am I surprised? Not in the slightest.

So it goes.

Your cynicism is misplaced. You were not cynical enough when you bought these promises during the campaign, and now you're too cynical in that you seem to think you can't hold the people in power accountable.

Accountability to their constituents is the only thing that does cause change in Washington. It's what kept Bush 1 out of office after his pledge not to raise taxes, and it's what cost the Democrats the House after their failure to get anything accomplished in several years. It's why we went from talk of a longterm Democrat majority after Obama swept in to a divided government less than 2 years later.

You claim to be wise, but you're the problem. Not part of the problem - THE problem. The fact that Rugen has found a way to spin and rationalize Obama's failure to advocate for equal rights for ALL is proof positive of this. He's gone from being disappointed with Obama and pledging not to vote for him to declaring his movement is brilliant... *when nothing has changed*. And other than the repeal of DADT (long overdue and which I think Obama is a stud for doing), I can't for the life of me figure out what has changed so much in a few short months.

bush did 9/11 they're going after the wrong guy

_________________

Joxur, now you're just being intentionally rude AND willfully obtuse.

You say Obama has failed to advocate for equal rights for all. You are flat out wrong about this, even on the campaign trail.

You used to frequently point out that he didn't support marriage equality, that he personally believed marriage was between a man and a woman as dictated by his faith. You seemed to point it out any time I said I believed Obama would do right by the LGBT population. This seems to be the newest incarnation of that argument.

I response, I would point out (then AND now) that I believed that there was no conflict between his stated personal beliefs and his stated political beliefs in equality for all American citizens. That his time teaching constitutional law would outweigh his own individual beliefs (and I'm pretty sure I even gave the example of my own grandfather who personally believes homosexuality is a sin but was still man enough to co-sponsor a bill mandating full equality in the state he was a representative of) when it came to doing the right thing. Sort of like this guy from NoM this week that still holds his own religious beliefs, but did a complete about face on the legal rights for gay couples and why supporting it is the right thing to do.

It turns out, as DADT and his long game on DOMA have shown, that I was right and you were wrong. His belief in equal rights for all trumped his personal religious beliefs.

You seem to think the office of the president is where the short game is played. I think that the president and congress have to play the long game, the courts are the short game. And the piece that brings them together is the public. Obama's play of the long game was masterful in my book because in addition to effectively avoiding the "Because King Obama decreed it so" bullshit that the religious/right/teaparty has been slinging around (not that they didn't try anyway), it was a solid, legal and totally allowed political move that has kept this at the forefront of public debate through the anti-marriage side's outrage. Which should be pointed out has resulted in helping to spur support for the issue to the point that the majority of americans polled now support marriage equality. The anti-marriage folks can't help but come off as just flat out "mean spirited" and irrational and it is turning america away from them the more they spout off.

Do I want him to stand up and say equal rights for all Americans should be the norm? Yes. But guess what, he's already done that and been pretty clear on that point all along, despite your claims otherwise:



He's also been pretty clear that he thinks DOMA should be repealed.



Doesn't get much more clear than that, does it?

You may think that it is political cowardice that now the challenges to DOMA in court face no defense from anyone but a Congress that has already clearly stated that they think discriminating against gays just because they are gay is wrong, but you're missing the big picture entirely. Multiple fronts. The social wave, the court system, and our government. Obama helped on all 3 fronts with this maneuver...all while clearly stating his belief in equal rights for all citizens. He didn't just talk the talk during an election, he walked the walk with the intention of winning. This wasn't your usual political pandering, in any sense of the term. I can't even fathom how you can see it that way, to be honest.

So you tell me, Joxur. How should he have done it? State his intention clearly? Check. Visibly work to achieve it? Check. Let's not have any of this fanciful fairy tale stuff about "Oh, he just should have killed it while he had a majority in congress", because every time you say that... you just make yourself out to be an absolute joke. You know as well as any of us here, it would not have been anywhere near as easy as that and if it had, would have turned into a "Muslim King Obama hates Christian Marriage!" issue the second he tried it. So what would you have had him do? Besides what he has done, state his clear intention to support equal rights for all americans and then enact a plan that actually has the single best chance of seeing that come to pass, that is. I lost faith because I didn't see the long game in action. Once I understood where he was going and how he was getting there? Believer again. On these issues, anyway. I still have some problems with some other stuff going on.

As for my revote, I was always clear (search the forums) that it was dependent on these issues because these are issues directly related to my own life and family. You can attempt to paint this as an about face, but you're simply lying at that point.

Nothing has changed? Maybe this is the difference between the eyes of privilege and the eyes of those seeking equality, but I've been seeing nothing BUT ripples of change from Obama's work on his long game.

_________________