Comments on: Out of whole cloth

By: Geoff

Geoff — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 18:29:46 +0000

“Aravosis -and he’s not alone – seems to be deeply invested in a narrative of betrayal, in which Barack Obama is selling out progressive causes generally and gay people in particular.”

Right, because the President has accomplished so much of what he ran on. Why look at everything he’s done for the gay community. The travel ban…gone! DOMA, repealed! And of course, there’s no reason whatsoever to think that Democrats would ever sell out our interests while making a few nice speeches in order to keep the campaign contributions flowing. That’s never happened before!

If Aravosis, Sullivan and others fret about Obama half-stepping on every single issue of importance to the gay and lesbian community, if every single statement that representatives of his administration make is closely inspected for signs of further betrayal and kow-towing to the religious nutjob right, you have only the Democratic party and the Rahm Emanuels of the world to blame for it.

By: Mark Kleiman

Mark Kleiman — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 16:14:48 +0000

“Not completely unreasonable”? He quotes Jones as saying that DADT won’t be replealed while the wars are on. Jones says no such thing. Impatience is one thing; inventing facts is another.

By: Napoleon

Napoleon — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 10:23:55 +0000

I quit reading Aravosis’ site about 3 or 4 months ago because he had become completely unreadable with stuff like this.

By: Yusifu

Yusifu — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 08:39:09 +0000

Aravosis is reading a lot from “at the right time,” but it’s not completely unreasonable. But perhaps it would be better to avoid chastising groups of which you aren’t a member about their impatience for receiving equal treatment?

By: Justin

Justin — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 04:23:10 +0000

I agree with your point w/r/t Aravosis’ characterization of the article and Jones’ quote. However, I also understand Aravosis’ frustration with the President. I think there are many of us who feel the same way, whether it arises from DADT, the stimulus package, health care reform or any of a number of other issues. Part of it represents a frustration with Democratic leadership in general, and as the figurehead of the Party Obama receives more than his fair share, perhaps.

This is just a guess, as I am not a gay man, but I can imagine that after 8 years of being vilified by BushCo, many gays and lesbians placed too great of a hope in Obama. After all, he did campaign on repealing DADT. And now, not only has he made no move to do so, but he has allowed the military to continue discharging gays and lesbians. I imagine many gays and lesbians feel like some hardcore pro-lifers feel about the GOP. Though, in fairness, at least the forced birth lobby got a couple of SCOTUS Justices.

By: Vance Maverick

Vance Maverick — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 03:38:37 +0000

One can understand activists’ desire for a clear declaration from Obama. I’ve read (and essentially accept) the various arguments for Obama’s indirection, but imagining myself as an activist for this just cause, I think I too would be frustrated.

But note how the unsourced claim in the third paragraph is actually reinforced by Jones’s words — “it’s not years”. The reporter is predicting as clearly as possible that DADT will be repealed next year.