Democracy fails again

[altivo]

North Carolina demonstrates why it is inappropriate to let the majority decide on the civil rights of any minority, and why "activist" courts are needed to protect the rights of unpopular groups. Fortunately, this will not stand for more than a year or two the way things are sliding in the US.

Obama's declaration that he now supports the rights of gays to marry, however, is more irritating. He has mumbled, dodged, and refused to address this issue for years. Does he think that saying this, and following up by supporting the rights of states to decide for themselves, that he is winning any real support? As usual, he is just proving himself spineless. He has made no real effort to get rid of DOMA. The keystone of this whole issue rests on that law, which was never constitutional and has been struck down repeatedly in lower courts. Without DOMA, federal case law requires all states to recognize a marriage solemnized by any state. So NC would still be forced to recognize a gay marriage made in Massachusetts or Washington. Their silly constitutional effort would be overridden by federal law.

Romney, of course, is worse. He would try to twist his executive authorities to enforce conservative church attitudes on everyone. He has said as much. Never mind the fact that his own church treated women as property, allowed polygamous marriage, and denied the humanity of blacks for its first century and more.

Comments

[schnee]

Damned if you do, damned if you don't... yeah, he should do more, but at least it's a first step in the right direction.

[altivo]

It's not really a step in any direction. Obama doesn't take steps. He stands in one place and lets the world revolve around him, which it rarely does. He is a do-nothing, commit to nothing, don't really care, nothing.

[treppenwolf]

That sounds highly ungrateful. Obama is trying to hold together a country that looks like it's on the verge of civil war. He's had to deal with a potential government shutdown, Republicans blocking him with toddler tantrums, a healthcare reform that nobody seems to agree with.

I sincerely believe he's trying to do good, yet it's still a balancing act. Things have to be pushed forcefully, but gradually. Obama's president of Republican, libertarian, and other citizens too, not just Democrats. And while gay marriage is something that progressive thinkers recognize as a fundamental right, less - shall we say - evolved people don't share that insight. Obama, by virtue of his leadership, has the responsibility of getting them - somehow - to accept that, and other things as well, because if he doesn't, if he just barges through and surprises all those Other People with his hastily enacted laws, who's to say that his efforts won't be overturned by the ultra-conservative president his disgruntled citizens next vote into office?

Speaking from experience: if you want instant, long-lasting change, elect a dictator.

[altivo]

I just don't see it. Obama promised change and gave us a list of specific programs he promised to fight for. I have yet to see him raise a fist. Instead he has done the opposite, signing into law dozens of additional violations of civil rights and constitutionally guaranteed freedoms. Even the so called "health care reform" that he trumpeted so loudly is no reform at all, and will only make things worse for most of us. (But it keeps the profit-seeking interests in the medical marketing industry and insurance companies happy, yeah.)

Mostly though, Obama seems to just hide in his office and say nothing. Even when he does come out and threaten to veto some legislation, in the end he signs it anyway even though it includes terrible violations of human rights and the constitution. I really don't care whether he endorses gay marriage or not. Official recognition of gay marriages is not a federal issue as laws are constituted in the US. It truly is up to the states, to a point. However, there are federal court precedents that require states to recognize marriages that have been officially accepted by any other state. That's what all this crap is about. Six states and the District of Columbia already have officially recognized gay marriage, and several more have the ambiguous "civil union" legislation. The issue Obama should address is DOMA, an unconstitutional piece of federal legislation that was passed and signed under Bill Clinton's equally slimy term of office (thanks to Newt Gingrich, the man who hates everyone and everything except himself.) Federal courts have ruled DOMA unconstitutional, yet it continues to be cited as an excuse for flim flammery against gay marriage and civil unions. It forbids the federal government from recognizing gay marriages even in states that allow them. It says that no state has to recognize gay marriages performed in another state (clearly against Supreme Court decisions made in the 1960s and 1970s.) It never should have been signed into law, and if Bill Clinton hadn't been such a wimp he would have vetoed it and forced Congress to override him. They may well have done that at the time, but at least he would bear no blame for the result as he does now to this day.

The same is going to happen to Obama. He'll go down in history as having signed just as many unconstitutional laws as George W. Bush and Bill Clinton combined. The man is a spineless, valueless piece of cardboard who can't even stand up for his own promises.

[avon_deer]

Fool me once; shame on you. Fool me twice; shame on me. I wonder if (in the event of his re-election) Obama will just shout "fooled you!" again? That said the opposition is so vile he will pick up the progressive vote almost by default. A rather bad situation to be in.

[hrrunka]

...but it's looking like an election where the choices will be "which candidate do you least not want"...

[altivo]

That seems to be the basic problem with democracy everywhere. The candidates are always selected by processes that insure mediocrity rather than excellence.

[deffox]

Captchas on Dreamwidth are becoming very hard to use. They usually don't even show up now.

Dakhun found that the latest press release is just weasel words to defend the cash flow. Donors started calling him on his anti-gay stance, so now he pretends he's pro-gay again without actually promising anything.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/top-obama-donors-witholding-money-over-executive-order-punt/2012/05/07/gIQAPKsl8T_blog.html

[altivo]

Yes, he's a weasel. He has been from the very beginning. The alternatives are just so much worse that we have little choice.

This is why I give absolutely NO financial support to any party or candidate. They are all lying, irresponsible, untrustworthy scum.

[lhexa]

Obama's declaration that he now supports the rights of gays to marry, however, is more irritating. He has mumbled, dodged, and refused to address this issue for years. Does he think that saying this, and following up by supporting the rights of states to decide for themselves, that he is winning any real support?

Yes: political support, not popular support. Hollywood stars are largely useless, but they're fantastic fundraisers. And the money they raise goes not just to Obama's campaign, but to the various congressional races around the country, which is where the Democratic party needs the support. Oh, and a word to the experienced: Texan Republicans despise both Obama and Romney. (I say this having just spent a month in close quarters with various Army veterans from Fort Hood suffering from depression or PTSD, and accidentally befriending several of them.) They plan to pour all their support into congressional races, instead. After a month spent watching Fox (oh, the irony), I now know that when Texan political ads talk slyly about "empty suits", they're talking about two people at once.

Anyway. I bet that Texas is, directly or indirectly, the source of most of the Republican Party's funds. And Texas' Republican darling got trounced, pummeled and torn to pieces just about immediately. Republican fundraising is not going to be easy this year. On the other hand: we're in a depression, so even more of the money than usual will come from the rich.