Posted under Culture & Election 2012 & Obama & Politics
It’s quite amusing to watch the homosexual lobby become extremely disgruntled with President Obama in recent days. Since Obama wants to get re-elected in 2012, he’s smart enough not to touch the social issues very much at all. Today he threw a small amount of red meat at his homosexual base by signing an executive order granting certain benefits to same-sex partners of Federal employees. Despite this, the homosexual lobby isn’t happy and they think he hasn’t done nearly enough to advance their agenda.
Now the homosexual lobby understands what the “Christian Right” felt during the Bush years. Just as homosexuals are a reliable Democratic voting bloc, so too conservative Christians fervently backed Bush both times around. Toward the end of his administration, Bush had greatly disappointed various “Christian Right” groups by not doing enough to advance their cause in the “culture war.” The various homosexual activist groups on the Left are feeling the same type of disappointment as they watch Obama dodge these thorny issues.
But unlike the “Christian Right,” the homosexual lobby actually holds elected officials accountable for their promises. Some prominent homosexual organizations have gotten the clue that they’re being taken for granted by the Democrats and so they withdrew their support from an upcoming DNC fundraiser. Where will the situation go from here? Well, Obama has reiterated his support for repealing the Defense of Marriage Act, but he’s washing his hands clean of it by throwing the ball to Congress to hammer it out.
And to be fair, any repeal of DOMA must indeed start with Congress. The President may not make law (or at least he isn’t supposed to). If this continues, then expect to see the homosexual lobby become even more radical in their approach. Like other groups on the Left, they are rooted in a streak of radicalism in the first place. Yet it does say something about the naive idealism of people on both sides of the spectrum to think that either of the two major parties will actually care enough to advance social issues most of them wish would just go away.
Bede on 18 Jun 2009 at 6:48 pm #
Obama isn’t socially liberal in a white sort of way. The pro-gay lobby is largely white. He is socially liberal in the sense that he is pro-black and wants to promote pro-black causes, such as affirmative action, which see the increase of minorities in positions and the weakening of white influence.
Sotomayor is similar. She is pro-mestizo and wants to advance mestizo causes, but probably isn’t too concerned with the gay lobby.
HarrisonBergeron2 on 18 Jun 2009 at 8:43 pm #
I think this is all political theatre.
The Great O claims to be a Christian who does not support “same-sex” marriage, then pushes the camel’s nose into the tent by granting same-sex benefits.
The radical homosexuals make O look like a moderate, but the reality is that this is clearly another step toward “same-sex” marriage. So poco a poco, the homosexual lobby wins while the social conservatives think they’re holding the line.
roho on 18 Jun 2009 at 10:36 pm #
Blacks have not really ever supported homosexual marriage. However, in the act of Robery/Murder involving the white male, the act of homosexuality rape is quite comon as an act of degradation, prior to murder. (It’s a tribal thing.)
http://cofcc.org/?p=463
It now has not only become a prison inmate problem, but a culture crime, rarely diognosed as a hate crime against whites.
Andrew T. on 19 Jun 2009 at 3:56 am #
There’s something I rather dislike about the CofCC — they are good about reporting the stories that go unreported by MSM, especially white-on-black crime, but they are as bad as their stated opposition in completely ignoring any and all injustices to those groups they are not concerned for (non-whites), as if they never existed. I think VDARE, for example, is a better medium in that it at least presents a more all-encompassing view of racial and cultural relations, and not a militant, oppositional one. Whereas the MSM acts as though the blame is primarily on whites and victimizes minorities excessively, basically putting blame on one side, the CofCC and its ilk places the onus of guilt almost entirely on any and all non-whites, often in the most apocalyptic and dire of terms.
The CofCC is a crypto-white nationalist organization, but roho lately has been referencing them on a constant bais. Are you WN, roho? “By their fruits you shall know them…”
roho on 19 Jun 2009 at 11:24 am #
Define WN?…………..I think of myself as a Kinist.
Andrew T. on 21 Jun 2009 at 4:19 am #
“Define WN?…………..I think of myself as a Kinist.”
Kinism is a WN movement. What went wrong with calling yourself paleo, btw? Did you prefer the Kinist movement’s peculiar mixture of Christianity and pseudo-scientific ethnonationalism? The Kinism.net website itself links to Majority Rights and Stormfront, and besides calling themselves something different than WN, generally rely on EXACTLY the same arguments and focus on the same set of issues as any WN group.
roho on 24 Jun 2009 at 9:36 pm #
Andrew T……………I’m still a “Paleocon”, and consider myself a Buchanan Brigader. “Old Boy Conservatism” has reached the winter of it’s life, being reduced to nothing more than philosophical blather, much like people trying to save “Santa Clause” in a room of children that know that they have been had……….”Political Correctness” has muzzled the truth, and multiculturalism and diversity is like termites to an old building………….People live for their own, and not failed concepts. America has become a failed experiment, but we still walk around lieing to ourselves about our real feelings inorder to fit into the “PC Matrix”………Segregation worked.
How many negros, muslims, jews, hindus, american indians, and mexican nationals spent Christmas Day with you last year?
Like me Zero………………… But, I have no guilt.