Bloodthirsty Liberal

So argues the Obama administration over gay rights:

States that allow gay marriage cannot force the federal government to provide benefits to those couples, the Obama administration argued yesterday in court papers in a lawsuit by the State of Massachusetts. The Justice Department is at odds with Massachusetts - the first state to allow gay marriage - over a 1996 federal law defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman. Massachusetts sued in July, saying that law is discriminatory and deprives gay couples in the state of some federal spousal benefits. The Obama administration agrees the Defense of Marriage Act is discriminatory and wants it repealed, BUT says it has an obligation to defend laws enacted by Congress while they are on the books and can be reasonably defended.

I call BS. The laws also demand free and unfettered access to polling stations, but Eric Holder declined to prosecute the brothers from the New Black Panther Party who blocked entrances and menaced voters because… well, because he said so.

Now that I think about it, Obama has already spoken out against gay marriage, hasn’t he? So why should he support giving benefits to Adam and Steve now? Why should he repeal “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell”, which he opposes, just because he’s the commander in chief of the armed forces, and can do so with the stroke of a pen? Maybe he needs months of meetings and strategy sessions before he can make up his mind.

American gay people who are disappointed that President Obama has words, just words, on their behalf can take solace that words, just words, are all his administration has for gays around the world:

Russia’s leading gay activist said yesterday that he was disappointed that Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton met with an outspoken foe of gay rights during her two-day visit and did not decry homophobia.

Clinton attended a statue unveiling of Walt Whitman at Moscow State University with Mayor Yuri Luzhkov. Luzhkov has blocked all attempts to hold gay pride marches in Moscow, once saying they “can be described in no other way than as satanic.’’

Clinton did not mention of the issue during the ceremony. Some biographers have described Whitman as homosexual and US gay activists have claimed him as a symbol of their movement.

…

Gay activist Nikolai Alexeyev said yesterday that he was disappointed Clinton did not discuss discrimination against gays.

“Russia is supposed to be a democracy and she said nothing,’’ he said.

Alexeyev had called on Clinton to denounce what he called entrenched and degrading homophobic attitudes in Russia.

I’m sure she’ll get right on that.

America is supposed to be a democracy, too, Nikolai, and how’s that working out for us?

So who’s a bigger schmuck: President Barack Obama, or CNN?

Listening to Obama pleasure the sensibilities of the gay community, while CNN gives him a tongue bath—well, I’m a tolerant fellow, but I feel like calling the vice squad on the whole pack of perverts (and I’m very much excluding the gay community):

“For nearly 30 years, you’ve advocated for those without a voice,” Obama said during his address at the dinner for the Human Rights Campaign. “Despite the progress we’ve made, there are still laws to change and hearts to open.”

Obama’s speech came as gay rights activists continued to lose patience over the lack of change to key issues for the gay community — including the Pentagon’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. It comes on the eve of a major gays-rights rally in Washington.

“This fight continues now and I’m here with the simple message: I’m here with you in that fight,” Obama told the applauding crowd.

The Human Rights Campaign issued a statement praising the speech, saying it was a “historic night when we felt the full embrace and commitment of the president of the United States. It’s simply unprecedented.”

Obama called for the repeal of the ban on gays in the military — the “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy.

“We should not be punishing patriotic Americans who have stepped forward to serve this country,” he said. “I’m working with the Pentagon, its leadership and the members of the House and Senate on ending this policy, legislation that has been introduced in the House to make this happen, I will end ‘don’t ask, don’t tell.’ That’s my commitment to you.”

The soaring rhetoric, the moral certainty! Oh rapture, oh swoon!

Who does he think he is, the illegitimate love child of Rock Hudson and Judy Garland? Reading the CNN account (between dry heaves), you’d thing Queer Nation had been taken in by the Illinoisan Lothario.

Nuh-uh:

“He repeated his promises that he’s made to us before, but he did not indicate when he would accomplish these goals and we’ve been waiting for a while now,” said Jones, national co-chair of a major gay-rights rally scheduled for Sunday on the National Mall.

Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network said he was encouraged to hear Obama’s pledge but added “an opportunity was missed tonight.” He said his group “was disappointed the president did not lay out a timeline and specifics for repeal.”

These ain’t your swishy gays, Mr. President. The action they want is federal, not fellatial. If they haven’t had enough of your empty rhetoric, I have. Either put up, or shut up.

And I’m a little annoyed by the “hearts to open” language. This is our nation’s military and security we’re talking about. Listen to your generals, get the lay of the land (so to speak), then issue your order. It is their duty to follow it.

Here, let me show you how it’s done:

It is hereby declared to be the policy of the President that there shall be equality of treatment and opportunity for all persons in the armed services without regard to race, color, religion or national origin. This policy shall be put into effect as rapidly as possible, having due regard to the time required to effectuate any necessary changes without impairing efficiency or morale.

President Harry Truman, 61 years ago. But then he was hung like a Clydesdale, not a chipmunk.

You Democrats have been making promises you can’t keep to the gay community for seventeen years now. God knows what the see in you—but then they worshipped Joan Crawford, too.

Otherwise known as the Quakers

Last year you hosted Achmadinijead at a big dinner. At that time, he was on record as planning genocide against Israel, his country was routinely practicing the stoning of women and girls, and gays were being hung. This wasn’t an issue. Today there are street protests by student groups. My question is this: Why have the street protests gotten to you? Why not the anti-Semitism, stonings, hangings, etc.?

I’ll never understand this. I know that you are nice people. How could you?

With thousands of demonstrators protesting outside that he had stolen Iran’s election, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stoutly defended his legitimacy here on Wednesday, declaring in a speech that the Iranian “people entrusted me once more with a large majority” in a ballot he described as “glorious and fully democratic.”

Protesters rallied outside the United Nations while President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran delivered his address inside.

In a 35-minute address, Mr. Ahmadinejad leveled familiar attacks against the United States and delivered an oblique rant against Jews, saying it was unacceptable for a “small minority” to dominate the politics and economy of much of the world through “private networks.” But he did not raise the Holocaust, the subject of another anti-Semitic theme he has used in speeches.

Shortly before Mr. Ahmadinejad began speaking, the United States and other world powers met and announced that they would give Iran a chance to begin negotiating seriously over its nuclear program at a meeting on Oct. 1, or face consequences — harsher sanctions.

Harsher sanctions. Scary. Really scary.

“They are at a turning point; they have a choice to make,” Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said after the meeting, which included foreign ministers from Russia, Britain, France, Germany and China. “We will now await the results of the Oct. 1 meeting and take stock at that time.”

And, if they don’t start to play nice, only one story at bedtime. They’ll be sorry.

- Aggie

secretly, quietly

JOSEPH Massad’s schol arly contribution during his decade as a faculty member of Columbia University’s Middle East Studies Department may be summed up as follows: Israel is racist, and homosexuality is an insidious Western invention.

Yet that was enough for Columbia, which officially — if quietly — awarded Massad tenure earlier this month.

Columbia’s process for reviewing tenure candidates is as rigorous as any Ivy League school’s. Ordinarily, an academic of Massad’s caliber would be bounced from Morningside Heights. And in fact, the system did work — it denied Massad tenure two years ago.

But now the school’s academic standards have succumbed to ideological tensions and campus politics — in what appears to be a remarkable manipulation of the tenure process and a breach of fiduciary trust.

Aside from Jew hatred and paranoia to the point where he has written that Israelis stole hummus and falafel, he also hates women and gays:

In a recent work, “Desiring Arabs,” Massad claimed to expose yet another plot against the Muslim world — the “Gay International.” He describes how a vast conspiracy of gay activists descended on Arab countries and endangered the lives of “practitioners of same-sex contact” by transforming them into “subjects who identify as ‘homosexual’ and ‘gay.’ ”

Nor is Massad fond of the women’s rights movement, or “colonial feminism,” as he calls it. He bristles at the attention paid to the Muslim practice of honor killings, which he likens to “crimes of passion,” accusing women’s groups of ignoring “rampant Western misogyny.”

I hope the story gets wide play and that graduates consider withholding gifts to Columbia/Barnard. I don’t expect this; I only hope. Columbia extended the opportunity to lecture at Achmadinejad, knowing that he is a holocaust denier, but also that the nation he represents hangs homosexuals and stones women for adultery, some in their early teens. They have no values. So why should this come as a surprise?

- Aggie

The Left is furious

My personal politics are that I support the full spectrum of rights for gays and lesbians. I realize that many of our readers strongly disagree. I also respect and admire many evangelical Christians. I think that the fashionable disdain for them, as well as for Mormons, is nauseating. I am speaking as someone who lives in a rather hip area. They are targets. You cannot attend a social gathering without listening to people sneer at them. It is an introductory move, something that breaks the ice in the first awkward moments socially. “I hate Christians, don’t you?” If you don’t jump right in there and begin to trash them, you have cooties. In any case, Obama has marched into the muck here. I don’t see how he satisfies both sides, but I often miss the magic with Obama.

Prominent liberal groups and gay rights proponents criticized President-elect Barack Obama Wednesday for choosing evangelical pastor Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at the presidential inauguration next month.
President-elect Barack Obama has chosen pastor Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at his inauguration.

President-elect Barack Obama has chosen pastor Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at his inauguration.

Warren, one of the most influential religious leaders in the nation, has championed issues such as a reduction of global poverty, human rights abuses and the AIDS epidemic.

But the founder of the Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, California, has also adhered to socially conservative stances — including his opposition to gay marriage and abortion rights that puts him at odds with many in the Democratic Party, especially the party’s most liberal wing.

“[It’s] shrewd politics, but if anyone is under any illusion that Obama is interested in advancing gay equality, they should probably sober up now,” Andrew Sullivan wrote on the Atlantic Web site Wednesday.

People for the American Way President Kathryn Kolbert told CNN she is “deeply disappointed” with the choice of Warren and said the powerful platform at the inauguration should instead have been given to someone who has “consistent mainstream American values.”

“There is no substantive difference between Rick Warren and James Dobson,” Kolbert said. “The only difference is tone. His tone is moderate, but his ideas are radical.”

Dobson, a social conservative leader, is founder and chairman of Focus on the Family.

Linda Douglass, a spokeswoman for Obama, defended the choice of Warren, saying, “This is going to be the most inclusive, open, accessible inauguration in American history.”

Here’s the rub: It is relatively easy to invite a bunch of people to a party that basically can’t stand each other. The tough thing is that sooner or later Obama will have to make decisions and those decisions will cut one way or another. Does he support marriage for gays or not? How about Israel, do they get defensible borders or not? Does Iran get to drop atom bombs or not? Do parents get to choose the schools their kids attend or not? Are we raising taxes or not? If yes, on whom? Those questions will be answered rather narrowly.

Having said all that, I am impressed with Obama for trying this. I just have my doubts. It should also be noted that Bush ran an “inclusive” administration. People still hated his guts.

- Aggie