I am sick of the Dems having no balls, afraid of the Religious Right
What ever happened to the party of civil rights? The Boston.com article excerpts below contain some of the most tepid, timid, 'nad-less reactions by Dems in CA regarding the state's legal battle over gay marriage. A trial court in SF is about to begin hearings on whether the state's ban on gay marriage is legal and you can see the Dems squirming on this already. They clearly have made no internal attempts to reframe support for civil marriage for gays as a moral principled stand. This, in a state with a Republican-light governor that has expressed support for gay marriage. You could understand Arnold's reticence to push things (and even he has urged his own party to move leftward).
The Right, however, has clearly staked its ground without fear; it plans to push for a radical state constitutional amendment that will also be a super-DOMA -- it will strip gay couples of partnership benefits as well -- read the out-front homophobic comments. They aren't unsure of their positions. This should outrage Dems nationwide, let alone California.
On the same day that California Assemblyman Mark Leno introduced a bill seeking to legalize gay marriage, the Traditional Values Coalition also launched a legislative drive for a ballot measure that would not only write the statutory ban on same-sex marriages into California's Constitution but also strip gay and lesbian couples of existing domestic partnership rights.
''We're going to stand our ground and take back what was taken from us when it comes to marriage. We're doing what it takes to push this back into the closet where it belongs," said Benjamin Lopez, a lobbyist for the coalition, a faith-based advocacy group based in Orange County, among the state's most conservative quarters.
To see the p*ssy comments by the Dems below, it's just f*cking shameful -- the Left, aside from the gay rights advocates, is running for cover. Where is the leadership? At what point will the gay population see any balls from the Democrats? Will we all have to be rounded up and put on boxcars to re-education camps before we are worthy of being defended as worthy of civil rights?
''There's always a general assumption that we [Democrats] are all on the same page on this," said Assemblyman Joe Canciamilla, a Democrat who represents a San Francisco Bay Area suburb. ''From a political strategy, a number of us are concerned after seeing the results of the national election."
...''You can certainly win the battle, but lose the war," Canciamilla said, suggesting that Leno's bill could be ''used as a rallying point for the Lou Sheldons of the world," referring to the conservative minister and firebrand who founded the Traditional Values Coalition.
''There are a lot of members who want to make a point of this, who see it as a civil rights issue and want to make a political issue," Canciamilla said, adding that ''most members are afraid to talk about the issue" and will not be heard from until a vote.
So f*cking what? The counter the Lou Sheldons of the world with why gay civil marriage will help, not hurt our culture?. The party certainly didn't mind taking gay dollars during the campaign, yet the post-mortem line from many circles in the party was often a "blame the gays for losing" theme -- we didn't push those amendments. Wake up Dems, it is NEVER going to be a convenient time to fight for civil rights. It is going to be politically hard, and require political courage and strategic thinking -- I don't see the commitment there or, quite frankly, the smarts in the leadership to handle this issue. All I see is cowardice and shuffling and jiving in front of the intolerant, hypocritical American Taliban.
4 Comments:
-
Pam -
By Jon in West Hollywood, at 10:13 AM
I've never heard of CA Assmby Joe Canciamilla until today. Unlike most states, California has a powerful gay caucus in the Legislture. Hold fire for a moment until we hear from people who have actual power, including my Sen. Sheila James (Zelda on "Dobie Gillis") Keuhl as well as two other powerful "out" members, Carole Midgen and Jackie Goldberg.
The amendment Sheldon is proposing arrives still-born. The Dems are firmly in control of both houses of the CA legislature and there is no "moral values" lobby in the state that is powerful enough to threaten their majority.
The initiative in '01 (?) instituting the anti-gay marriage ban here did pass overwhelmingly but the anti-marriage feeling has softened in every subsequent poll.
Sheldon et al can propose the amendment via initiative of course. And one thing that's going on here is the fundies want Schwarzenegger to choose between his presidential aspirations and his support for gay civil rights. If Schwarzenegger campaigns against this sort of constitutional amendment, it has no chance of passing, but he can kiss the GOP presidential primaries goodbye forever. If he remains neutral, the amendment's future is still dicey. Its supporters have to rasie between $35 mil to $50 mil in ad dollars just to play the game - and much more if their campaign gets solid opposition from HRC or PFAW.
Even if they raise the money, if only 8 out 10 Kerry voters vote against it, it would fail by a significant margin.
Finally, fiscal conservatives see this sort of restriction on partner benefits as bad for business. Witness what happened in Cincinatti when corporate interests in the city worked hard to overturn a similar ban on benefits.
Boston.com has a record of unfair reporting on liberal issues so it's good to take articles they post with a grain of salt or two.
- Jon in West Hollywood -
Thanks for the input from a local on this, Jon. I'm wondering if the Larry Klaymans of the world are going to be able to successfully go directly after corporations offering partnership benefits in the states where, up till now, it hasn't been an issue, like CA (and, in fact, NC).
By Pam, at 1:50 PM
I hope the CA Dems make a lot of noise about this. Sheldon and his crowd are really hateful and powerful. It isn't clear to me how much support he would have in the conservative pockets of CA. -
It has been under-reported but after vigorously campaigning in Red counties (meaning: counties along the eastern border of the state) where Dems hold seats in the Legislature, Schwarzenegger failed to flip any seats to the Gops. If he'd been successful, we'd be in a whole different political environment in which the CA Gops would be energized. They're not, and the fact that his solution to the state deficit was to borrow multi-billions of dollars - which was the same plan he excoriated when Gray Davis proposed it - has left him with a bad odor among the most rightwing members of his own party.
By Jon in West Hollywood, at 9:27 AM
In corporate America, offering same-sex benefits has proven to be good for business, and when you look at sociological trends, what's good economically tends to trump idealogy over time. Mainly, however, I don't think corporate interests here or in NC - or anywhere - are going to be swayed by the likes of Larry Klayman. He was a fanatical Clinton-hater, lodging a series of frivolous and unfounded lawsuits against them in the '90s via his Judicial Watch organization. More recently, he failed utterly in the GOP primary for the US Senate seat in Florida, but is probably best known for suing his own mother.
He's just looking for a meal ticket and a spotlight. Jumping on the homophobe bandwagon seems to fit the bill for now. Alan Keyes, of course, is an even bigger loser than he is. -
That's funny about Klayman suing his mom. What a loser. And Keyes, well...what was that losing percentage against Obama? Geez. Pathetic. Sad, since his daughter is gay that he's such a homophobe.
By Pam, at 10:18 AM
Pam :: permalink
