Obama’s Political Operation Takes Heat For Lack Of Push Against Maine Anti-Gay Initiative
Among gay rights advocates already frustrated by Obama’s foot-dragging on their issues, this one threatens to balloon into a new controversy:
Obama’s outside political operation is urging supporters in Maine to turn out to the polls for local elections — without making any mention in its emails of the nationally-watched anti-gay ballot initiative in the state.
Organization for America is beginning to take heat for this, but OFA officials are declining to comment in response to this blog’s inquiries.
The reason this could become a real issue for OFA is that the vote on the Maine initiative — which would repeal gay marriage — is expected to be super close. And a loss — particularly one rooted in turnout, which OFA has the capacity to boost — will result in fierce recriminations.
What’s more, tensions are already so raw because of a host of other ways gay advocates feel let down by the new president that they may be even more inclined to point a finger at OFA in the event of a loss. This one could get ugly.
This blog’s homepage is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
Greg, your concern duly noted.
had a feeling you’d be popping up, amk.
@Greg: Thanks for reporting on this – first I’ve heard. Wonder why they are declining to comment? – that don’t look too good.
Maybe the Maine initiative will fail and then we won’t have anything to worry about. I’m being positive today.
LOL. This is a typical case of left will always lose by finding innovative methods to shoot themselves in the feet. If teh “libruls” want their agenda to be fulfilled, they better not kneecap their best candidate available.
What’s wrong, lmsinca? Why is today a special effort to be positive?
lmsinca,
in that case, whatever you do, do Not read the OFA email to Mainers
clarice, agreed, it is indeed odd that OFA’s refusing to explain itself here.
Personally, I’m all for a loud full-throated defense of gay everything from the Obama Administration… It will catch the “family values” conservatives completely off guard and divert their attention away from matters like HCR and Cap and Trade… let’s face it, these neo-conservatives cannot walk and chew gum at the same time. If you give them too much to be scared of, they will implode.
“Obama’s outside political operation is urging supporters in Maine to turn out to the polls for local elections…”
Just because they don’t explicitly call out that initiative doesn’t mean they aren’t working to boost turnout. They are still working to get more Democrats to the polls. The idea that if it gets repealed is somehow OFA’s fault for not including it in their email is a bit of a stretch.
Here is a little positive thinking from Jacob Heilbrunn.
“One year after the election, President Obama has not: ended world hunger, brought about perpetual peace, banished unemployment, abolished crime, or even managed to prevent snowstorms and floods from occurring.
What he has merely done, however, is to: prevent a new Great Depression from occurring by rescuing the banking system and Wall Street, partly by backing a stimulus plan that his conservative opponents denounced as the beginning of socialism; ensure that Congress will pass a comprehensive health-care will be passed that his conservative opponents are depicting as full-blown socialism; preside over the beginning of the withdrawal of American forces from Iraq; push for a global warming bill; and, along the way, be everything that George W. Bush was not.”
Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jacob-heilbrunn/the-striking-obama-record_b_343413.html
it is indeed odd that OFA’s refusing to explain itself here
Why? When yet has the Obama Administration itself indicated much willingness to spend real political capital on gay Americans? So far when it comes to that constituency Obama’s political people give the distinct impression of wishing the constiuency would go away.
Given that Obama has tried to maintain a stance of supporting domestic partnerships or civil unions, but opposing gay marriages, why would his political operation be expected to out & out support an attempt to kill a marriage repeal?
Greg, This is a Maine problem – you know the state that elected two repubs. If Obama jumps in, it’s likely backfire since the “moderates” who are inclined to support the ****, might get pissed off. I think it’s a smart move from the Prez and OFA not to push too blatantly in ME lest the tea-baggers tilt the scale.
BBQ
I think you’re right. I discovered here over the weekend that Gay Marriage and equal rights issues are extremely divisive still. That’s not to say we shouldn’t put up the fight, but it may be best to push from a grassroots level upward, better coming from MoveON, Credo, FDL and other more progressive groups. Just my opinion.
They should be outraged at Republicans too since Republicans are so against the intrusion of Govn’t laws into peoples lives.
A loss on this initiative would be OFA’s (and thereby Obama’s) fault, not because they asked voters to go out and vote against it, but because they asked voters to call to drum up support for Corzine?
One minute people are saying OFA is irrelevant (see the dismissal of OFA’s calls to Congress for healthcare reform, etc.), and the next OFA is the lynchpin of success.
Aravosis just simply doesn’t like (hates?) Obama. It’s pathological and patent now. Anything negative is hyperbolized and anything good is completely ignored, or spun into something negative. When Obama signed the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Bill, Aravosis didn’t even mention the event, until he brought up the fact that the White House would not release a list of the gay members attending the event (as if they document the sexual orientation of guests). [Commenters on his blog frequently noted the absurdity of his critique.]
What anti-gay in the 24 point headlines is fine, but gay$ in the post are taboo ?
Greg, you’ve some ridiculous moderating tools. Can I say you’re anti-gay ?
This is a Maine problem
There is that, too. Criticism of outside influence has been used as a rhetorical tactic in this repeal campaign.
Greg, you seem to be catching a bit of flak for poor framing. Good.
Commenters on his blog frequently noted the absurdity of his critique.
And how soon thereafter were the critics banned? His tolerance of criticism is just about nonexistent.
At the end of the day, if Yes on 1 passes gay advocates will have a larger issues and those that want to blame Obama won’t get much political traction, particularly if Corzine pulls it out and NY 23 goes blue.
If No on 1 passes, I think there will be a bigger political stink because gay advocates will want to push off their victory into a greater push to repeal DADT and this will become a touch stone to push the administration.
I think the bigger political stink will come if gay advocates actually WIN in Maine. JMHO, then it will be a real political hot spot for the administration. Particularly as folks will be debating whether to go left to wake up the base for 2010 and how best to do that.
“His tolerance of criticism is just about nonexistent.”
That’s why I love this blog. Greg is thick-skinned.
I think the bigger political stink will come if gay advocates actually WIN in Maine.
If they win it will encourage the advocates of marriage equality in New York & New Jersey. If New York in particular (because it’s so populous) enacts marriage equality in 2010 that will most likely make a stink, too.
“His tolerance of criticism is just about nonexistent.”
When he’s right Aravosis can be quite eloquent (& stinging), but he’s always shrill and God forbid you try to point out that he erred.
I find Aravosis’ skepticism toward the Obama administration a welcome antidote to all the gay sycophants who make excuses for every anti-gay slight coming from the administration and who think the way to make progress in a civil rights movement is to lick the boots of indifferent politicians.
Then again, I skipped HRC’s degrading Obama ***-kissing fest and joined the kids at the National Equality March.
Just face it, kids.
He’s just NOT that into you.
Your beloved Moonbat Messiah is as homophobic as any Moral Majoritarian you would happily howl and yammer at is, but you don’t want to say it, and his acolytes don’t want to admit it.
Any word on turnout so far? It’s half way through the day out here on the east coast…
Everybody wants a piece of the Obama brand.
The guy lifted the HIV travel ban and signed the Hate Crimes Act and has appointed **** to high level posts. He insists that he will end don’t ask-don’t tell.
OFA is ostensibly targeting Obama supporters who if they get their fat Maine asses to the polls will vote the right way on #1. Its win win for the White House.
He is stingy with his brand.
“for every anti-gay slight coming from the administration ”
Such as…?
You know what I see? The first president in US history to acknowledge gay rights openly and to stand up for supporting those rights.
I find that almost miraculous, considering we spent 8 years hearing that it was absolutely positively unnatural and a sin and threats to amend the constitution of the US to enshrine prejudice against ****.
But hey, he’s been in office 11 months now – he should have reversed 2500 years of Judeo-Christian morality by now.
He insists that he will end don’t ask-don’t tell.
And when I see him spending his capital on that I’ll be delighted. So far it’s talk. I’m not freaked about that, but I’ll be pissed if it’s still just talk three years from now.
It’s terrific that he’s carried out the lifting of the HIV ban that was passed during the previous administration. It’s also excellent that he’s signed off on hate crimes legislation that required no real effort on his part. DADT will require effort from him, not because the public’s not behind it, but because if he doesn’t get involved there will be too much of a stink about it in the Congress, and also because there are haters in the Pentagon who are only going to be stopped if CINC puts himself out there to do it.
When he does that he’ll have my respect much more than he does now.
I look forwards to seeing him walk the walk on this, as he’s promised to do.
Andrew Sullivan has been making noises about this for more than a week.
I see it like this: Obama is on record as opposing gay marriage. I don’t know what he really THINKS, but that’s something he put out there last year.
Now his thinking may evolve, which is why and how No on 1 even has a chance. But based on his procrastination on DADT, etc., I wasn’t expecting him to openly advocate for this, because that would put even more pressure on him to end DADT NOW, and he is clearly unwilling to do that now.
And OFA would really rather not deal even try to spin this, so no comment.
I believe he will get there. But he has other fish to fry. Fair or not.
“I see it like this: Obama is on record as opposing gay marriage. I don’t know what he really THINKS, but that’s something he put out there last year.”
O please don’t force me to try to explain this because no matter how hard I try, I still cannot seem to get this across.
He’s not really – what he’s said is he is in favor of civil unions. What he knows and what I know is that THAT is all marriage is = the civil union. Without it you ain’t married no matter how many ordained ministers pronounce you married. My nephew and his spouse were married in a church in NY by an ordained minister but they aren’t married because there was no license and that is the civil union when you get married in a church – the license. IF you get a JP to marry you without any religion at all, you are married – end of story.
Y’all get hung up on a word when the most clever, easiest solution to this is to go around the objections by saying: Fine – civil union – that way people cannot bring religion into it.
It’s the smart way. It’s the legal way to get where you want to be because churches will say Fine and do weddings as soon as you have the license in hand that says it’s legal.
Marriage is a contract. It’s not a religious rite = they layered that over the top of the real meaning of marriage.
@Tena
“But hey, he’s been in office 11 months now – he should have reversed 2500 years of Judeo-Christian morality by now.”
Uh, he’s only been in office 9 and a half months. From Jan. 20th until Nov. 3rd.
Basically, once you have a marriage license,all you need to make it official is someone to sign off on it. Ministers sign off on the license in religious weddings, JP’s sign off in civil weddings.
BBQ- fine – he’s been in office 9 and half months. Shoulda gotten it done.
Except that where it’s been tried (ie., in those states where there are “civil unions” for homosexuals and “marriages” for everyone else), even though on paper they are the same thing in reality they aren’t, and civil unions are lesser or a legal no-man’s land, where some honor the equivalence and others don’t.
Unfortunately we get hung up on the word because society gets hung up on the word, and consequently so does the law.
Tena, it sounds ridiculous to say I agree with you, because that’s like agreeing with you that the sky is blue. It is. But semnatics are a powerful thing, and they’re keeping Obama and OFA from joining in on this fight, at this time.
And I’m not encouraging everyone else to stay patient, he’ll come around. There must be pressure, continuous and firm. But I also hope we don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater, blah, blah, blah.
Greg, this is patently a ridiculous controversy. Can you name any time that a President (not a candidate) has opposed or supported a state referendum? Look, they might have a point if he was for some other referendums but not this one, but that’s not the case here. He’s not supporting or opposing ANY referundum not just Maine’s.
A Maine problem
wasn’t a VA problem to campaign for a guy waaay behind in the polls
a NJ problem to campaign for Corzine
a NY problem to send Biden in, let alone discourage Paterson not to run
if this had gone the other way and OFA had done GOTV on Q 1, there wouldn’t be any mention of a Maine Problem just lots of mad props for doing the right thing. so which is it ?
Tena has her sycophant talking points down.
Ridiculous Sycophant Talking Point #1: Obama is better than Bush.
Duh! He’s a Democrat. The test for a Democrat is not whether he’s better than a hate-mongering Republican bigot. If that’s the test, Tena, Obama is done. He doesn’t have to lift another finger because singing that silly hate crimes law makes him better than Bush. Done. Is that all you think he has to do, be better than Bush, in order to be worshipped as some kind of gay messiah?
Ridiculous Sycophant Talking Point #1: Obama has only been in office for 1/4 of his term and has had time to do anything.
Really? How long does it take to sign a stop-loss order? How long does it take to sign off on a Maine statement? How long does it take to tell aides to get ENDA passed now? He could have done all of those on his junket to Denmark to lobby for the Olympics. He’s the multi-tasker, remember? It isn’t a failure to act; it’s a REFUSAL to act. There is a difference.
You want a statement Steve? Here you go. From the advocate on 10/16:
The President has long opposed divisive and discriminatory efforts to deny rights and benefits to same-*** couples, and as he said at the Human Rights Campaign dinner, he believes “strongly in stopping laws designed to take rights away.” Also at the dinner, he said he supports, “ensuring that committed gay couples have the same rights and responsibilities afforded to any married couple in this country.”
BBQ, amk, Curious, Tena and Chris A.= OFA astroturf. Not only did OFA fail even to mention in their Maine email what is THE No. 1 issue in Maine’s local elections, they actually encouraged Mainers to get involved in New Jersey rather than get out the vote for No on 1. Any comment that OFA will have had anything to do with a No on 1 victory is complete and utter BS. They cite the White House’s mealy-mouthed statement on “divisive” initiatives even as they know the opponents of marriage equality distribute flyers bearing the President’s photo and quoting his statement that he opposes same-*** marriage. And what about Attorney General Eric Holder’s comment last week that he “doesn’t know enough” about Question 1 to decide whether he’s for it or against it?
To Chris A. about whether any president has opposed or supported a state referendum: I recommend you rent “Milk,” where you can see the footage of Jimmy Carter saying, on camera as sitting President of the United States,”Please vote no on Prop. 6″ (banning **** from being teachers in Cal).
If No on 1 wins, it will be in spite of, not because of, OFA and the White House.