Obama to OK benefits for same-sex partners of federal worker

[frigidmagi]

CNN

President Obama will sign a memorandum Wednesday granting health care and other benefits to the same-sex partners of federal employees, two senior administration officials said.
President Obama has been criticized by gay rights activists for not doing more since taking office.

President Obama has been criticized by gay rights activists for not doing more since taking office.

The signing will take place in the Oval Office and follows sharp criticism of the president over a Justice Department motion filed last week in support of the Defense of Marriage Act -- which opposes same-sex marriage -- that used the government's interest in opposing incestuous marriages to support its position against same-sex marriage.

Gay and lesbian advocates have also faulted the Obama administration for not moving to repeal the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy that bars officials from asking about a service member's sexual orientation but also bars the service member from revealing it.

The president rankled gay advocates before his inauguration when he named megachurch pastor the Rev. Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at his swearing-in. Warren, in an interview with Belief.net, likened homosexuality to bestiality and incest. He also supported California's Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage in that state.

During the Warren controversy, Obama -- who frequently spoke in favor of gay and lesbian rights during the campaign but has said he opposes same-sex marriage -- declared himself "a fierce advocate for gay and lesbian Americans

[General Havoc]

Another reasonable and dare-I-say 'progressive' (in the literal sense) move from the President. I approve of this.

[Derek Thunder]

Reasonable, and yet not even close to his promises during his campaign to overturn Don't Ask, Don't Tell and DOMA. I'm not sure what Obama is waiting for on this front, to be honest. Republicans are at a low-water mark unseen since the 30s, best to act now before they regroup.

Maybe it's overcaution, maybe it's bad advice from advisors. I don't know. Maybe Obama is simply another triangulating centrist of the Clinton mold?

[SirNitram]

Maybe he believes that crazy shit where the Executive enforces laws, and the Legislative makes and undoes laws. I'm sorry, beyond generic annoyance that more of Bush's appointees lurk in the rafters(The hate brief on the DOMA case was written by one), but those things have to start in Congress.

[Derek Thunder]

Right, but he's still the leader of his party, and if he wanted to he could publicly press congressional democracts to overturn those laws. So far, he hasn't done so.

DOMA, you have a point on as far as enforcement, but Obama can use his power as commander-in-chief to suspend discharges, as well as shape the way DADT is implemented. So far, Obama has not modified this process.

[Charon]

Maybe because he's still fighting his own party on the Guantanamo thing, trying to keep an eye on Iran, attempting to work on a fix for the economy, fix the last minute measures put in place by Bush, and a half-dozen other things.

The guy has four years, lets actually give it to him before we start questioning if he lived up to his promises.

[SirNitram]

No! He hasn't fixed the world in five months! He's a failure forever!

[Derek Thunder]

No! He hasn't fixed the world in five months! He's a failure forever!

Lovely. I'm not asking him to fix everything, but thanks for that, chum.

I'm not asking for the moon, or judging him on not implementing things he didn't promise (like single-payer health care). He's simply not living up to the promises he made during his campaign, and he specifically promised to address these issues.

Obama's an intelligent, charismatic person, but ultimately we have to be loyal to our values and beliefs. My values and beliefs include equal rights, and so far Obama has done little to deliver on this. I'm not condemning his presidency generally, but on this issue at least he has not yet lived up to his platform.

[SirNitram]

No! He hasn't fixed the world in five months! He's a failure forever!

Lovely. I'm not asking him to fix everything, but thanks for that, chum.

I wasn't referring to you. I'm making a jest on the fact it's been all of five months, and there are people saying that. You can see them all over, they have R-<State> next to their name on the Teevee.

I'm not asking for the moon, or judging him on not implementing things he didn't promise (like single-payer health care). He's simply not living up to the promises he made during his campaign, and he specifically promised to address these issues.

He's addressing. He specifically asked Reid, the correct person to ask, to get down to DADT, for example. What did Reid do?

Link

A passive-aggressive struggle is shaping up between Congress and the White House over the perennially-controversial issue of gays in the military.

On Tuesday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) told a gay-lesbian-transgender magazine that the Obama administration needs to press harder on the repeal of the Don't Ask Don't Tell rule -- and provide him with better "guidance" on how to proceed legislatively.

Reid, under fire form gay and lesbian groups for pessimistic comments about the prospects of passing DADT legislation, tells the Advocate he thinks a deal can be reached before the midterms.

But only if the White House takes the lead:

"We do not have a DADT bill introduced in the Senate yet, but a number of senators are working on a bipartisan approach to get DADT repealed," Senator Reid said in a statement Tuesday. "We would welcome a legislative proposal from the White House on repeal so as to provide clear guidance on what the president would like to see and when. With presidential leadership and direction, I believe we can find the time to get repeal done in this Congress. We need all the troops we can get right now."

That was welcome news to the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network, a group that lobbies for repeal of the military's gay ban:

"This clarification on DADT repeal from the Senate majority leader is most welcomed," said Aubrey Sarvis, executive director of the organization.

The group was less than thrilled when Reid told the Advocate on Monday that he hadn't yet tapped co-sponsors for the bill and was hoping Obama would deal with the controversial measure "administratively" -- through the Pentagon, avoiding Congressional action.

Get that? Obama wants it gone. Reid whines Obama has to do the work, and please please please do it Administratively, legistative solutions are like WORK!

Hint: Obama wants a solution to DADT that won't go like the morning dew when he leaves the Oval. Which any administrative cure WILL.

Obama's an intelligent, charismatic person, but ultimately we have to be loyal to our values and beliefs. My values and beliefs include equal rights, and so far Obama has done little to deliver on this. I'm not condemning his presidency generally, but on this issue at least he has not yet lived up to his platform.

Yes. In five months of global economic meltdown, two wars, riots in a nation next to both of those wars, global negotiations, chestthumping from a new Nuclear Power, and with both parties resisting his reforms at every step, to say nothing of hundreds of millions spent demonizing his reforms, he has not held Congress' hand and walked them by the big scary bigots they aren't brave enough to face alone.

Perspective.

[frigidmagi]

Reid is a spineless, flip flopping, politician. Calling someone a politician in my book is sorta like calling someone a whore, only worse, whores at least provide fair service for the cost and most whores aren't bad people, just in bad line of work. I would say it's like calling someone a pimp, but your average politico doesn't have the balls required to be that kinda of scum (enjoying your peek at the frigid scale of morality?).

But this isn't all just him. For decades, fuck longer then anyone on this board as been alive, Congress has been utterly committed to one thing no matter which party or group of people were in charge. Avoiding Responsibility. Which in a way makes sense. They gotta stand for reelection. There are two ways to get reelected, one please a group big enough to carry you. This takes a lot of work and is frankly risky, said group could turn on you without warning and they'll have you by the balls. Two, don't piss anyone off enough to vote you out. This is damn easy to do as was noted to me once by an older buddy, "Any Jackass can go through life without making enemies, just never stand for anything."

So Congress, whose members goals seem to be mostly A: Get elected to office, B: Stay in office until death have been dropping power and responsibility whenever they can get away with it. Since the President only gets reelected once and is gonna piss people off no matter what, the Presidents have been the ones mainly picking it up.

Let me make this clear, recent history hasn't been the office of the executive stealing power from a besieged Congress, it's been the Congress giving up power to the executive branch voluntarily and being damn grateful for the opportunity. Jr and Cheney just took full advantage of their chance. Who's fault is that? Partly the primary system. Partly the parties. Partly the Congresscritters. And Largely Ours for letting it slide.