Ingenerous? Hardly – not when you consider all the promises Obama made to the LGBT community and how he has had to be pushed to make the one LGBT-related reform he has made – the HIV travel / immigration ban (which has yet to come into force, but would already have been in force if he had hadn’t actively killed of the Bush measure achieving the same result).

“Although such attacks fit in comfortably with the Left’s long history of sado-masochism”

Please don’t psychologise people like this.

Please don’t psychologise people like this.

Unfortunately there is more than a grain of truth in this.

Obama speaks out on gay rights … and says way too little, far too long into his presidency.

Unfortunately there is more than a grain of truth in this.

Only if you fall into the unfortunate trap of assuming that people have to share all their views, simply because they happen to share a leftist outlook.

I have to say that I actually find Claude’s ‘analysis’ quite trite and offensive.

Mark,
and yet a whole encyclopaedia could be written on this. I haven’t got the time and the patience but I will only remind you of:

- 8 years of Bush and neo-cons courtesy of Ralph Nader ;
- The split between SDP, Greens and Die Linke (in my opinion SDP to blame there) handing an easy victory to Angela Merkel and her new FDP allies;
- The mess of Italy’s left-of-centre making sure Berlusconi and the most right-wing European government since WWII can do as they please;

and going further back:
- the Spanish Civil War – the Stalinists, the POUM and the Anarchists;

“far too long into his presidency.
10 months for goodness ‘s sake! TEN MONTHS!

10 months for goodness ’s sake! TEN MONTHS!

Exactly – ten whole months to lift a finger over something that was the cornerstone of his campaign to win the gay vote. And the only reason he is doing it now is because the issue has gone explosive with a senior officer being thrown out of the army – not because he told the army, but because he told the police as part of a defence in an unfounded rape allegation.

Quite honestly, Claude, you clearly don’t understand the first thing about the subject on which you are writing – you can’t if you are peddling this trite drivel.

ten whole months to lift a finger over something that was the cornerstone of his campaign to win the gay vote.

No, his cornerstone was health, the economy and the climate bill – all three of which are prominent right now. Please Mark, I know you’re a right-wing troll but this is embarrassing, especially when Obama’s rhetoric is compared to Bush’s.

Quite honestly, Claude, you clearly don’t understand the first thing about the subject on which you are writing – you can’t if you are peddling this trite drivel.

Charming. Especially when coming from an anonymouse. Your way of ‘debating’ qualifies you for the empty-headed troll that you are.

Tell me what Tony Blair did in the first ten months. Or any other government, for that matter, including GW Bush or Thatcher.

Charming. Especially when coming from an anonymouse. Your way of ‘debating’ qualifies you for the empty-headed troll that you are.

Pathetic – and the fact that you resort to accusing people of being a troll, simply because they don’t happen to agree with you, just relegates your arguments to those of a vacuous troll.

The simple fact is that you just want the gays to shut up because you like Obama and want to silence all criticism of him – no consideration of the fact that he is breaking promises and has to be strong-armed into keeping the ones he now says he will keep. Well, the news is that no one in politics is beyond criticism.

Tell me what Tony Blair did in the first ten months

Well, if you care to check, you would see that just about the first thing Labour did when they came into power was to reaffirmed the commitment to gays in the armed forces, the repeal of Section 28 and an equal age of consent.

No, his cornerstone was health, the economy and the climate bill

Really – those were the cornerstone of his capaign to win the gay vote? That is the most bizarre nonsense I have ever hear – and if you really believe that, then it is you who is embarrassing himself.

Please Mark, I know you’re a right-wing troll but this is embarrassing, especially when Obama’s rhetoric is compared to Bush’s.

Really. Rightiwing? In that case you know nothing at all about this Labour voter. The only thing that remains for me to decide is whether you are a homophobe or just totally ignorant of LGBT issues.

I’ve never seen a politician that didn’t have to have their feet held to the fire to keep their promises. So I would say this is a tentatively good sign from Obama. Of course, it would be nice if he speeded up that whole deconstruction of the national security state that was also promised.

Oh and hate crime legislation is a bad idea but thats not within Obama’s purview at the moment: http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/2009/10/09/house-approves-hate-crimes-measure/

“Well, if you care to check, you would see that just about the first thing Labour did when they came into power was to reaffirmed the commitment to gays in the armed forces, the repeal of Section 28 and an equal age of consent.”

Mark. You really are talking out of your arse.

Have you heard of “Google”? Have you? “Pathetic”?

Just go and check. It’s very simple. Labour repealed Section 28 in England and Wales in 2003. That is 6 (SIX)years after they got voted in, which was May 1997…

Even in Scotland, when the process was quicker, it didn’t happen until June 2000. That’s 3 years after May 1997.

The Age of Consent legislation in the UK was finally amended in November 2000. Either you’re worse than me at maths, or really you are just absolutely useless at debating, because that is 3 and 1/2 years after Labour got voted in in May 1997.

The military gay ban did not take place until November 1999, which is 2 and a half years after Labour got voted in.

You really are a vacuous troll. And quite ignorant (and arrogant, which go together) as well.

You said earlier:
“you clearly don’t understand the first thing about the subject on which you are writing”.
No further comment necessary.

Claude, you really are the most clueless troll imaginable.

Can you really not get your head around the fact that Labour didn’t ignore the LGBT minority for almost a year in the way that Obama has?

It is the fact that he has completely ignored the LGBT community once he got elected that has rightly upset them – not that the measures aren’t in place. He could have bought the time for action by at the very least addressing them – instead, by total inaction, he has demonstrated that winning the Olympics for Chicago was a much higher priority than the LGBT agenda.

As I have already said – you clearly don’t understand the issues and the fact that you attempt to misrepresent does indeed show that you are an empty-headed authoritarian troll without a single liberal bone in his body.

It is people like you who show why the left can never work together as one.

Claude – my partner has just pointed out your hilarious live-in with Peter Tatchell. All my suspicions are confirmed.

Mark,
Please calm down. Make yourself a cup of tea or something. I don’t want to argue like this for no reason. It’s not worth it. I understand you’re not a right-wing troll so let’s try and debate calmly. OK?

What’s all this googling around? What’s all this venomous stuff on your blog (though -I give you that- the logo and general layout both look very nice)?

It looks like you tend to lash out very easily (“Islamophobe”- wtf has it got to do with this anyway; “totalitarian”, “air-headed”, “thoughtless drivel”, “Lunatic extremists”, “you just want the gays to shut up” – the latter an unbelievable joke) but then you call others “totalitarians” and “narrow minded”.

Please, do take a deep breath. And examine the possibility that things may just not be simply black and white.

In my opinion, perfection doesn’t exist. I wish it did, but it doesn’t.

1) Could Obama have done more? Definitely yes. He even said so himself in the speech at Human Rights Campaign.

2) Has he “totally ignored“, like you said, the LGBT cause? No. And if you read the OP, there’s a link to a White House press statement from last June- the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall riots. Sure, you could argue that was nice words, but still just words. Sure- and that’s your legitimate opinion.

3) And yet, last week then the House of Representatives passed their legislation about hate crimes. Which means, “something” is being done and that the issue is not being “totally” ignored, right?
And no doubt you will be aware that a law does not get passed in 2 days. It’s a long procedure. By the time it’s introduced, it can be months until it’s debated, amended, voted and then passed. For it to have been passed early October, it was probably tabled at the very least in the early summer.

That’s why I don’t think that ten months is a horrendously long period in this case and that the Obama administration is/was “totally ignoring” LGBT rights.

4) You’re being very belligerent when it comes to Obama, but for some reason you keep pretending that Labour were very active in the first ten months.

That is not true. You just said words (“they did a lot”). I pointed you towards specific dates and facts. On Section 28, Age of Consent, the military and civil partnership, it took them between 3 and 8 years to pass legislation.

Sure, Labour were a massive improvement compared to the previous Tory administrations. Which is why I actually wrote very recently that New Labour’s actions on the LGBT front were possibly their best legacy.

But it’s an objective fact that it took New Labour way longer than 10 months. This is where your position comes across as completely irrational and “double standards”.

5) Also, and this is not irrelevant. Remember who Obama’s predecessor was. The most bigoted homophobic right-wing US President in living memory. More than Reagan. So, before we start slamming Obama with all guns blazing, let’s just take a deep breath.

5) Final point. “In effect, he tells the LGBT community to shut up over Obama’s broken promises and that LGBT issues are secondary to all other issues. ”
You put this on your blog.
That is wholly unfair. I never said that (unless you can point out a sentence where I argue that?) and the reason why I never said that is that I don’t think that at all. Not one bit. And it’s a shame you have to resort to this type of petty internet-rage.

I’ve always thought and have campaigned in favour of LGBT rights. I don’t think AT ALL that these are secondary issues. I was just pleased to read a supportive speech by a US President as, honestly, I wasn’t used to hearing those words from a head of state.

Was it such a terrible thing to do/think? Will 10 Haily Marys be enough to redeem my soul?