Democratic Senators to Obama: Evolve Already

[jefferson_dem]

Indeed. There are no excuses. It is past time.

Democratic Senators to Obama: Evolve Already

Posted by Joe Sudbay (DC) at 6/23/2011 02:48:00 PM

UPDATE @ 3:12 PM: Word from the White House Press Secretary, who did a gaggle on Air Force One, this afternoon, is that Obama isn't going to evolve. He's going to mention the New York bill, but "but won't say anything new or endorse it" according to the pool report.
______________________________

It's not just us.

Even Democratic Senators think Obama should evolve already. Via Andrew Harmon at The Advocate who got them on the record:

Although White House press secretary Jay Carney said earlier this week that he does not anticipate any revelatory statement from President Barack Obama on his gay marriage position when he takes the stage at an LGBT fundraiser in New York this evening, a group of Democratic senators are now urging the president to support marriage equality.

This week, The Advocate reached out to senators who have previously stated their support for marriage equality and asked whether the president should now do the same. Not all responded, and some that did reiterated their own support for equal rights while sidestepping the question of whether President Obama should follow their lead.

But among the unequivocal statements in response were those from several original sponsors of pending LGBT equality legislation. Their bottom line, to borrow from a Twitter hashtag gaining momentum: evolve already.

And, here's what the Senators had to say:

<SNIP>

Remember, we're asking Obama to do something that the American people -- particularly his base -- support. The trendline is getting ahead of him. We want him to catch up -- and for his campaign to stop thinking it's 2004.

http://gay.americablog.com/2011/06/democratic-senators-to-obama-evolve.html

[tekisui]

1. Rec to zero.

[jefferson_dem]

2. Thank you.

This is starting to frustrate (even) me. Why would this President choose to miss this moment?

[villager]

3. Got it to "plus one," though I expect the frenetic back-pedalers still may try to wish it away...

n/t

[nichomachus]

8. It's OK, the earlier version of this is up to +16 -- after the unrec squad finished

[jefferson_dem]

11. D'oh...

Is this a dupe? Sorry if so.

[Dept of Beer]

32. Maybe he'll wait until after the election to fully come out on this position.

[chill_wind]

4. K & R. n/t

[vi5]

5. Ah...how fitting....

He'll be at an LGBT fundraiser but won't change his position or come out forcefully in favor of equality.

In other words: Give me your money, but don't ask me to do anything risky or bold for it.

[roguevalley]

20. Yeah. Apparently the white patriarchy that held Michelle's people as

inferior were 'evolving' rather than legislating their bigoted hatred. I do remember him saying we needed to 'reflect' on bush co and crimes rather than do anything because ... uh, ... I forget. What a cowardly tool he can be. Ask Michelle if we should 'evolve' and why we have to linger and NOT DO THE RIGHT THING for gays.

[Doctor Hurt]

6. He ain't gonna evolve until after he's re-elected

But he'll start making small rhetorical changes, probably even beginning tonight...

[nichomachus]

9. If he is relected, he has no reason to "evolve" -- we are screwed

[Doctor Hurt]

16. It's irrelevant

Change is coming. His support doesn't help anything.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

7. Would it be a good idea to inject himself into a state legislative issue?

Would that help or hurt the chances for this bill to pass? It COULD give a big boost to the bill but it might also galvanize opponents as well. :shrug:

[nichomachus]

10. Yes, it would -- a great idea

It's not a "state issue." It's a matter of human rights.

[jefferson_dem]

12. Even if he didn't address the NY initiative specifically...

He could stand proud and acknowledge what is right - that anything short of "full equality" will not do.

[tekisui]

15. It doesn't matter whether it would help in NY.

Honestly, it wouldn't likely win over the repug holdouts. But, it would be a perfect opportunity to show support and solidarity at a time when the fight is in a critical moment.

It would also go a long way to winning over progressive.

[StarsInHerHair]

26. that's what I'd like for the President to do show SOLIDARITY with the Left

in general & definately on Leftish issues

[Dept of Beer]

33. His position has been left for some time now.

[Doctor Hurt]

17. Republicans taking direction from Obama on an important issue???

I can't imagine he'd be any help at all.


There's a tension here between the right thing to do and the useful thing to do.

If he hadn't put himself out there as against gay marriage already, this wouldn't be a problem. It's a conundrum of his own creation. But I don't see how he resolves it.

[The Doctor.]

24. No, it's not. Anyone who thinks otherwise is simply naïve.

Any Republican leaning toward a 'yea' vote could easily wind up stepping back from doing so simply because Obama endorsed it. This would throw what looks like a narrow victory into chaos while Republicans use the endorsement as leverage to get more for their votes. Last I heard, Grisanti is leaning 'yea'. He comes from a district that heavily supported Paladino. Obama's endorsement could kick him to the other side of the fence.

[woo me with science]

13. K&R nt

[Myrina]

14. To quote a predecessor "Wouldn't be prudent"

I've never seen someone do such a hire-wire balancing act in an attempt to not offend anyone/not take a stand as Mr. Obama does. Well, yes I have, Evan Bayh used to be my senator.


:puke:

[ProSense]

18. Adding to the discussion, Andrew Sullivan:

Obama To Fake Changing Mind

TNC is frustrated by Obama's "evolving" marriage equality position:

I think the thing that’s most troubling about the “evolving” fudge is it feels like someone is insulting your intelligence. This is clearly a move to back gay marriage as soon as enough Americans do the same. I’m actually fine with that. It’s positioning it as some sort of deep, internal struggle that rankles.

Greg Sargent's two cents:

By declaring that his position is “evolving” on gay marriage, Obama put himself in a position that’s fundamentally untenable. He let the world know that he believes in full marriage equality, and that he will say so sooner or later. All this succeeded in doing is stoking impatience among gay advocates for him to go ahead and say what he really believe.

Dan Savage has been wrestling with the question. Yep, it's excruciating. But we should stop wanting the president to somehow legitimize a civil rights movement. It is we who will legitimize him.

These movements must come from below; they must be sustained and propelled by organic social forces; and, at this point, the New York State Senate is where the action is. In the future it will be in other state houses and courts and kitchen tables and PTA meetings. The presidency is pretty much irrelevant now, especially since the actual things a president can do, like help end the HIV ban, protect gay couples in federal employment, and end DADT, have been done. The federal government should have nothing to do with civil marriage in America. And in refusing to back DOMA in court, the Obama administration is actually proposing to take us back to that federalist position.

<...>

[libmom74]

28. "The presidency is pretty much irrelevant now"

All of the "drug addled, retarded, pony wanting, professional leftists" must remember this exact quote when we are being scolded if we support a primary challenger.

[Dept of Beer]

34. Is the President, any President, or for that matter an elected oficcial

supposed to follow us or lead us?

[Bodhi BloodWave]

19. Crazy Norwegian to senators: get a bill passed that includes what you want him to support

He has already stated he will sign those bills that appear before him so the onus is as much on them as its on the president, they shouldn't need him to hold their hand as they write the bill to send to him.

[Bluenorthwest]

23. Diane Feinstein to Crazy Norwegian:

"I believe that support of the President would be very welcomed. I hope he endorses my bill to repeal DOMA.”
That's at the link from the OP, by the way.

[jefferson_dem]

21. At this evening's NY fundraiser, Obama says "If you support me in 2012...

...I promise you we will write another chapter in that (equality) story."

[Bluenorthwest]

22. Barbara Boxer has it right when she says:

"This isn't about politics or elections—it's an equal rights issue. I hope the President and all Americans join in supporting marriage equality."

[StarsInHerHair]

25. if his own base is ahead of him then he is not a leader on this, obvious I know

[Kaleva]

27. 6 Dems plus 1 Independent Senator isn't enough.

"Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.):

Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.):

Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.):

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.):

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif):

Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.)

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.)

http://www.advocate.com/printArticle.aspx?id=212591

[Doctor_J]

29. That's our leader

unwilling to stand for anything

[Dept of Beer]

35. Im' sure he stands for plenty of things.

It is just that the definition of those things may be more readable after 2012.

[ej510]

30. This man is a coward.

[Dept of Beer]

36. Fred Hampton was a coward?

[avebury]

31. K&R