I remember when gay marriage was "the far left wanting a pony".

[redgreenandblue]

Funny how the centrists always claim they were for something all along once it is a done deal and politically safe to do so.

[closeupready]

1. Centrism is another word for cowardice, really.

Someone who won't fight, but instead, someone who seeks to compromise the interests of their supporters.

[Scuba]

22. Yeah. Also "complicity."

[passiveporcupine]

101. And capitulation

K&R

[yurbud]

154. mostly CORRUPTION

[Hortensis]

208. Oh, I don't know. Centrist doesn't seem so bad when I'm reminded of how much those on

the left and right extremes have in common.

[yurbud]

221. Do tell.

[Aerows]

229. Seconded.

Do tell.

[Hortensis]

246. Just saw your responses, and here are a couple of links I grabbed quickly in case you return.

Unfortunately, I didn't find a favorite researcher/writer on political psychology, whose name won't come to the fore, but these give the general idea. A lot is being learned right now.

If you'll remember, this time last century Europe's communists and fascists were often wooing away each other's adherents. Not so strange when you consider the similarity between someone who'd plant a spike in a tree to kill or maim a lumberjack and someone who'd set a bomb in an abortion clinic - and wonder what it'd take to turn that passion to an issue at the other end of the political spectrum.

BTW, greatly helpful to me is the relatively new understanding that liberal and conservative, and probably libertarian, are inborn personality types, programmed by genetic code, varying in where on the spectrum and depth of passion, and then altered in infinite variations by environment.

link:http://www.lairdwilcox.com/news/hoaxerproject.html
link:http://www2.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/change/left_and_right.html

[Daemonaquila]

42. Yep.

In other words, centrists, we can do it. We can get real immigration reform. We can defeat Citizens United. We can get a reasonable minimum wage. We can get banking reform. We can roll back the attacks on abortion and birth control. We can even elect Bernie. We don't have to settle for squat for the sake of your "practicality." The GOP sure isn't. Quit trying to convince us to surrender.

[laundry_queen]

104. +1000 nt

[Scuba]

119. "Quit trying to convince us to surrender." + A zillion.

[valerief]

86. Someone working for the PTB. nt

[Marr]

109. More like 'opportunist'.

They just stand a few yards back from the line of scrimmage, and tell liberals they shouldn't try to run with the ball. And if those liberals actually do make a touchdown, the 'centrists' run into the end zone and dance, tell everyone they did it, and those stupid liberals need to shut-up and clap harder.

[yardwork]

2. That's politics.

[Sheepshank]

3. I don't remember it that way at all

But if it makes you feel better to insult your Dem Brothers and Sisters in the fight against the Republicans..........

[Yupster]

5. I remember when the centrist Democrats

said they were against the Defense of Marriage Act because it was unnecessary since no one was pushing for gay marriage anyway. Republicans had just made up a straw enemy to whip up their rabid base when there was no threat of gay marriage becoming law.

[RiverLover]

7. Obama & Hillary were against gay marriage, before they were for it (& it became politically safe)

[Sheepshank]

12. So apparently you didn't read Axelrod's book

that clarified that both Barak and Michelle Obama were always "for" marriage equality. Obama had been counselled by his strategists to protray a specific stand in the earlier days to ensure that he didn't disenfranchise a larger swath of voters that were not ready for that step yet.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/david-axelrod-reveals-truth-about-obama-gay-marriage

In his new memoir “Believer: My Forty Years in Politics,” longtime Obama adviser David Axelrod admits that the president supported gay marriage privately back in 2008 but concealed his position for political expediency.

This is a fact that many progressives have long suspected, but no one in Obama’s inner circle has ever admitted it publicly – until now. Axelrod, who served as Obama’s chief campaign adviser during the 2008 race and later as a senior adviser at the White House, has provided a rare glimpse into the inner-workings of an infamously secretive campaign machine.

“I’m just not very good at bullsh-tting,” Obama told Axelrod according to the book, and yet throughout his first victorious presidential campaign the then-Illinois senator stuck by a position of support for civil unions but not full marriage rights. In his book, Axelrod concedes that he personally put pressure on Obama to compromise his own personal beliefs in favor of marriage equality.

In the same way that Bernie writes essays that portray women in a bad light, words are said, stands are made for expediency at that time in history. You could say that the DADT was the same baby steps that lead us to modern day SCOTUS decisions. Would a Republican EVER had gone the route of any of the baby steps that A Dem has gone? Of course not.

That you want to establish that campaign and political rhetoric for anyone in the past means something today to patently false and misleading.

[Bluenorthwest]

13. Look, the point is that while Obama might have been running a tactical ploy, centrist boosters of

Obama bought it, repeated it and smeared LGBT people for being critical of his position, same for Hillary supporters. DU was chock full of 'pragmatic centrists' shouting about the need to settle for civil unions, how equality was impossible 'at least for a generation'. It went on and on and on and on.

So if Obama was really running a ploy, why did the BOG ban gay people for criticism of his fake position? Because they thought it was authentic and because they supported it. 'I'm a Christian, so I get to judge'.

[Sheepshank]

18. look, that's just not the way I remember this from the OP

re-read the OP...he/she made a statement that all persons, (not just elected officials) blathered on about ponies. It simply isn't and wasn't true.

[Enthusiast]

97. Look....

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

74. I could be mistaken here. But I believe you specifically were told, and I'm

paraphrasing here. That you had enough rights already, so chill. Or something along those lines.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

91. It would be interesting if you actually found links that said that...

...and specifically upvoted OPs. I personally think you won't because there aren't any.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

95. Well I personally don't give 2 fucks what you think. As I said in my

reply. I recall Bluenorthwest calling someone out on this back the day. If he feels like going through the trouble. He can produce the links or correct me if I'm wrong.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

114. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence

You're claiming that there was general acceptance of attacking gay rights on the DU. But if you can't bother to back that up by any hard evidence, then one must assume that you're just pulling things out of your ass, 2 fucks or no fucks.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

118. Tell you what slappy. Show me where I made that claim. I was specifically

referring to exchanges Bluenorthwest had. I asked him if my recollection was correct. Try some reading comprehension next time, before running off at the mouth.

[merrily]

193. Well, your post DID begin "I could be mistaken here...." So clearly you made no claim whatever.

Finding links to support a claim you never made in a question you asked BlueNorthWest would be quite the challenge. SMH

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

200. I'm sorry, but do you have a link to back up this post you

just typed?

[merrily]

201. Yes, as a matter of fact, I do. Two links, in fact.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6932375

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026928615#post74

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

205. I've been proven wrong then. See? How hard was that? nt

[merrily]

206. Well, you never said I couldn't provide a link. So, you were never

proven wrong. And that's how the "got a link?" game is played.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

207. Ah but now I've been proven wrong about mistakenly thinking I was

wrong. I think we should stop before we disrupt the space /time continuum.

[Marr]

115. Here you are, ConservativeDemocrat.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022947372#post283

Still a very prominent poster, and BOGer.

Look at the tone of that thread-- the people defending the same position. Several mockingly demand to know what civil rights gays don't have, and try to diminish the issue in a variety of ways. And every one of them, so far as I can see, are our most vocal promoters of 'centrist' Democrats.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

122. Thank you. At least I see now what the complaint is.

I'm not sure that I agree with the characterization, since the thread is about someone screaming at the first lady at a private party, all with the clear misunderstanding of the power of the Executive branch. (The Supreme Court has the power to actually make marriages equivalent, the President doesn't, no matter how much someone screams at the FLOTUS.)

Never the less, I'll say that reasonable people can disagree as to whether the comment "Obama has done more than any previous President" was over the top.

So let me thank you for pointing it out. Asked and answered.

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[Hassin Bin Sober]

126. You owe Guy Whitey an apology.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

148. Not even in the least bit

I asked for a reference, he declined, and someone else answered. The reference appears largely to be a mischaracterization of what was actually said, but in the spirit of being gracious to other points of view, I didn't argue the point too closely. What in the world do you think anyone has to apologize for?

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[WorseBeforeBetter]

162. "Mischaracterization."

Only in Sensible Centrist Woodchuck World.

[ctsnowman]

187. lol Love it.

[merrily]

196. You asked him to provide links for a question he asked Bluenorthwest, LOL!

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

199. Check this out bubula. You can try to Rightsplain this shit all you want and try to

weasel out of it. But the truth is your lame ass attempt at a gotcha didn't quite work out the way you probably hoped it would. It seems everyone else understood the qualifiers in my post. Not to mention that I was asking the poster to remind me of what they experienced. I wasn't these for the original post. But I did remember the poster alluding more than once that this happened to them. I know in keeping with that old time so called "conservative" tradition of never acknowledging when ya'll step in it. You won't admit it. But he, whatever works for you.

[ConservativeDemocrat]

202. I'll just leave you to your ranting

About your use of "bubula". Had to look up in the urban dictionary for that one! Hilarious.

Maybe I should "demand an apology"!

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

204. Oh I meant it in the most affectionate way possible. I think

moving on is the right decision for you.

[Aerows]

124. Oh, I fucking well remember that

"Stop flaunting it".

[WorseBeforeBetter]

159. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2952192

I could have sworn there was a post in which "you have plenty of rights" was used, but I didn't bookmark it. Same poster as above.

On edit: Marr provided it. I knew I wasn't crazy.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2948862

[merrily]

203. See? Gays had the right to free speech, equal to heteros. Where was the problem? OMFG.

[Bluenorthwest]

195. Yes correct, same poster also said 'there is only one right you don't have' meaning marriage

nt

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

198. Well lucky you..... I guess. (no sarcasm thingy needed)

[Marr]

112. +1

[nomorenomore08]

175. I wonder how much of that was gullibility, and how much was plain malice.

Not sure I'd like the answer.

[merrily]

188. +1 PREACH.

It's one thing to forgive. It's another to deny, excuse, rationalize, pretend the advice of a campaign advisor is an excuse, etc.

I get many valuable things from DU, but, in a way, I'm sorry I found it. Before I started reading here, I never knew there were certain kinds of Democrats.

[Marr]

210. I know exactly what you mean.

Having been here through the Bush years, then watching the transition into the Obama years, was particularly eye opening for me. Once a Democrat was in office, it didn't take long at all for the same behaviors, even the exact same arguments, to be openly embraced by our own authoritarian set. And they seemed just as blind to, or unconcerned with, hypocrisy.

[merrily]

214. Please repeat after me: "Whatever is, is right and good and the best that could possibly exist,

all the circumstances. If you're a pragmatic realist."

I missed the Bush years. Those were the good ones for DU, I guess, if not for the rest of the world.

[lark]

73. Obama was politically against gay marriage

until Biden forced his hand. Thank God for Joe Biden!!

[Sheepshank]

88. read again...or better still go the link and read more

or do you have something else for me to read that substantiates this?

[lark]

227. Just my memory of what happened

I don't have time to go back and research articles and such during the time but I remember when Biden came out and stated the administration supported gay marriage. Everyone was so titillated since Obama had always been saying the opposite, supporting civil unions only. First there was no response. Then within 24-48 hrs. (forget which) Obama came out and said yes, he'd evolved and did now support gay marriage but hadn't planned on announcing it yet.

[Zenlitened]

239. That's correct.

The analysis was that Biden had "gotten out in front of" Pres. Obama on the issue.

[lark]

240. Yep, that's what happened

[Marr]

111. Who gives a SHIT if a politician is 'for' you privately, if they're *against* you publicly?

In fact, that's even worse. Jesus, you're telling me these people are such moral cowards, they'd rather attack people they feel are right because it serves their political careers-- and you actually think that's somehow respectable?

But that's nothing but self-serving bullshit anyway and you know it. "No one in Obama’s inner circle has ever admitted it publicly – until now". What a ridiculous pant load.

[BrotherIvan]

133. + a billion

Worst. Argument. EVER.

[Puglover]

143. Pant Load

Perfect in more ways then one here.

[cui bono]

152. Exactly what I was thinking.

Blind loyalty must be so difficult to uphold when you have to post such blatantly stupid arguments to try to justify it.

[merrily]

220. +1 What the President says publicly impacts public opinion and lives profoundly.

We saw that after he announced he'd evolved. And, he won re-election after announcing his evolution on this subject. He would have won in 2008, too.

[LondonReign2]

241. Exactly fucking right

Sheepshank is promoting political cowardice like it is a good thing.

For fucks sake...

[Aerows]

123. "In the same way that Bernie writes essays that portray women in a bad light"

You don't get to say something like that and not back it up with a direct link. If that isn't a hit and run attack, I don't know what one is.

[Sheepshank]

128. You missed all the posts about Bernie's writings and women fantasizing about being raped?

Hmmmmm. That can't be true

[Aerows]

130. Oh, right

The one where some people were trying to make him out to be fantasizing about raping women when he was advocating protecting women from sexual assault.

That isn't even a good smear. That's like screaming "BENGHAZI!" down a well a mile away from any living souls and thinking you've made a smear.

[cui bono]

153. omg... you can't be serious. Did you read about that issue at all?

Like the other poster said, that's the same as bringing up Benghazi.

[Aerows]

158. It's fucking unbelievable

How do you say such nonsense with a straight face?

[merrily]

189. What makes you think it's a straight face?

We're on a message board. Might be a serious face, might be a very cynical one, might be smiling, might be smirking. On the internet, one never knows, does one? It's the principle illustrated so iconically:





Peter Steiner, as published in the New Yorker, via wiki

[Aerows]

228. It is structured

sniping against Bernie. You and I have talked about this before ... it's clear as day what motivates some of these folks and it isn't "freedom" or "rights" (or the best interests of you, me and anybody else who cares about both).

I just couldn't let that swipe go by without speaking up about it, though. Hopefully others will recognize it for what it was, too.

When you have people, in their own words, creating a narrative out of nothing glued haphazardly together with lies, it is at least useful to point it out. If you are that ham-handed at swiftboating, you probably shouldn't be trying to do it.

Then again, it's rather hilarious to watch them try, even as it is painfully dishonest.

[merrily]

231. I'm sure most DUers remember it was one fictional essay written 43 years ago.

Whether they accept her interpretation of it or yours probably depends on how they feel about her and you and Bernie.

Sad to say, that seems to be the status of "truth" on this board these days.

I could care less about the freakin' essay anyway. 43 years ago. Not a single person died from it, either.

[Aerows]

233. It's just messed up, merrily.

Just freaking messed up.

[merrily]

234. I agree. Some of the things I see on this board are unreal. It is what it is.

[LondonReign2]

242. It's messed up, but

it is the exact same sort of morally bankrupt games Team Clinton played in 2008. Sickening

[merrily]

186. Writings? False.

[merrily]

185. "Bernie writes" present tense. False. 43 fucking years ago. "Essays." Plural False.

One fictional essay written 43 years ago.


Also, it's amazing that you seem to think it's okay to pretend about gay people as way to improve one's own chances of fulfilling one's own ambitions. You actually seem to think "a campaign advisor told him or her to fake it" is a valid defense.

Heaven help us all.

[BeanMusical]

66. Obama & Hillary Live Together in Perfect Harmony

[Enthusiast]

99. It's a beautiful thing to behold.

[BeanMusical]

168. Oy, I didn't think that someone would reply to this!

Now I don't know what to say.

[merrily]

222. A deal was cut in 2008. Obama lived up to his end of it and so did the Clintons.

And things have been great ever since, at least when cameras are around.

[Bluenorthwest]

11. All you have to do is look at DU threads about McClurkin, Rick Warren, or Obama 08 to see

that it was that way. 'You just want a fabulous pink pony'. It's all poutrage. It's just one little prayer. Civil Unions might be possible in a generation, but marriage is impossible, don't let the perfect be the enemy of half a loaf!

I can tell you this. The morning Obama announced that he'd 'evolved' on marriage equality people on DU were posting that he could not do so until after the election 'because he knows he'd lose'.

And here, this is from Nov 2014, morning after the election, right here on DU:

"The openness and brazenness of the LBGT agenda and the media flaunting of gay marriages all across the country cost Dems dearly and threatens to do so in the future."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025764803#post45

[dbackjon]

56. Indeed - we were told we needed to wait

And not ruin it for the real Democrats.

[QC]

69. "You are not going to ruin this for everyone else!"

in the words of a banned troll who has since returned, as they all do.

[LiberalArkie]

63. Everyone knew how it was going to be once Rick Warren gave his talk and Rahm was COS.

I pretty much had my bubble burst and assumed I had voted for Reagan 5.

[riderinthestorm]

213. I remember that because it was also tied in with "it's just a little prayer!11!!"

The GLBT community being upset over Warren and McClurkin and the non-believers got clumped together and told to hold our fire. Don't rock the boat. Ponies and all that.

Remember the threads about how this was actually a GREAT move? That this was reaching across the aisle, and that it would bring the haters to our side, blah blah blah?

Here's just one thread titled "enough about Warren, it's just a bloody prayer"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8013213



I too am finding the sudden supportive about face from some DUers on gay marriage equality to be hollow.

[merrily]

225. Probably the most widely broadcast prayer in history, but who's counting?

[frylock]

34. Fortunately, other people have a better memory than you.

[Sheepshank]

36. I think those memories are altered to fit a narrative, and are not accurate

You, of course are welcome to provide evidence to corroborate all instances indicated in the OP. My recollection is that it was not the popular message here on DU. If the OP decides to narrow down the statement to a smaller class or vocal group or some dates, I'd be willing to entertain that possibility after some research. But as it stands, the OP is not and neither are you correct.

I do remember that type of rhetoric being thrown around regardng Universal and socialized or single payer medical, but not for marriage equality by the majority of the DEM population, as promoted in the OP.

[dbackjon]

71. You need some memory pills or a reality check

Shameful, really.

[laundry_queen]

106. Good thing most of us remember.

That poster is, indeed, shameful. Gaslighting, projecting - whose memories are being altered to fit a narrative here?

[BlindTiresias]

167. Someones brains are more tapioca than grey matter, apparently

RIP to the memory centers of your brain, I guess.

[dbackjon]

55. You were a member during the great gay purge of 2009

When gay members were regularly marginalized and banned here.


Derided because we wanted too many rights - that baby steps weren't enough - and want did we want, a pony as well?

[Sheepshank]

59. Du purged people for asking for a pony?

for asking for too many rights?

Really? It wsn't for something else?

[dbackjon]

70. I know why I was banned for 18 months

For challenging assholes on DU who compared LGBT rights to asking for ponies.

[Humanist_Activist]

90. I'm still banned, shhh, don't tell anyone.

I'm Solon,

[dbackjon]

94. Be vewy vewy kwiet

I'm hunting ponies

[merrily]

226. Skinner posted in ATA once that he doesn't care if banshees and banhees return, as long

as they behave themselves.

Sooooooo, welcome back.

[awoke_in_2003]

81. here on DU...

people who were advocating for marriage equality were being told to keep it quiet and push for civil unions, because fighting for ME was going to lose us the election. Because of these arguments, I re-examined my position and changed from CU to ME, because it was right. You don't sacrifice rights to win an election- you must always push for them.

[Sheepshank]

131. I never, not once applauded or advocated civil unions

I always thought that this smacked of "separate but equal" mentality. I know I was not the only one.

[awoke_in_2003]

142. Yeah, once I thought about it for a bit...

I realized that separate but equal was exactly what civil unions represented. I am not happy that I once thought they were the answer, but I did change my thinking.

on edit: I was not trying to imply that you were pushing the CU meme. You said you didn't remember others doing it, so I was just saying that I do remember that being a talking point. I am sorry if my wording sounded like I was accusing you. Please believe I was not.

[Sheepshank]

150. Thank you

[joshcryer]

102. It's pure revisionism.

For the purpose of hatefulness.

[Kalidurga]

110. It was 2012

And centrists were crying that Obama was hurting his chances at reelection by being in favor of legalizing gay marriage.

[collinsrent]

190. doma

was signed in to law during Clinton's presidency.

[merrily]

223. yes.

[Chan790]

191. You have a short memory or a bad memory then.n/t

[snooper2]

4. Just because 0.06% of the population say something doesn't make it a meme

[Prism]

6. Never happened!

Never.

Wait. What are you doing? Stop reading DU from even a few years ago. All of those people you see attacking LGBTers and telling them to STFU are just, uhm, illusions. No, that's not right. They're, uhm, dopplegangers. Yes. Everyone here was always 100% supportive at all times.

Everyone.

At least, that's what we're told now.

Once every great while, I'll go back and read from 2008-2012 on LGBT issues on DU and see all the names (still very much present) of people who were totally awful to my community, who ran off a lot of my brothers and sisters. It's like some kind of perverse super bonus if you can spot those same posters who today claim only they truly care about LGBT and minority issues.

It would be offensive if it couldn't be written off as some kind of light form of online sociopathy. Sometimes you gotta choose amusement.

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

10. Indeed.

Last edited Wed Jul 1, 2015, 01:49 PM - Edit history (1)

I recall the entire thing, especially April/May of 2009.

And how several people in the LGBT community here were banned for posting a number.

And how people now deny this ever happened.

Now with added link to Sapphocat's amazing post in the Mending Fences thread from DU2. Because some people still don't quite remember what happened.

[enigmatic]

84. Love Sapphocat

Her post was amazing and spot-on.

[Prism]

92. Sapphocat was a rock star

And that epic, epic post of her's should be the gold standard for anyone who wants to pretend DU wasn't a hostile place for gay marriage and LGBT issues in general until fairly recently.

So many LGBTers disappeared without a trace. Sigh.

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

103. Agreed.

And people (even on this thread) still deny that this ever, ever, ever, ever happened on this board.

*sighs*

[dbackjon]

113. That post should be required reading for every member of DU

[Change has come]

174. agreed

7

[closeupready]

217. Abso freaking lutely.

[Puglover]

144. Yea

I remember when a mod said, "they couldn't be bothered to read that" and got high fives from other mods.

[Puglover]

145. She was a dear friend.

And her name was Sapphocrat. 😀

[Rex]

238. Thank you, THANK YOU, THANK YOU for that link!

That explains so much of what was going on on DU1&2! I am glad I was here today and had the luck to read that link and the links provided!

SO much more now makes sense!

THANK YOU!

[Zenlitened]

141. Right? It was all a dream. A dreeeeammm!

Some of them are right here in this very thread, gaslighting and gainsaying LGBT DUers just like old times. Sociopathic behavior, indeed.

[merrily]

224. +1

[Marr]

244. It's your second point that gets me.

I only ever see one group around here insisting that they are the only ones who support gay rights, and claiming their opposition does not. And it's the exact same people who were so insulting and dismissive of gay rights just a few short years ago.

I mean, if they want to pretend they were with us all along and hop on the boat now, fine. It's a bit tacky, but fine-- whatever. But when they insist on using the issue as a cudgel against people who actually were for gay rights when they themselves were not... that's where they lose me. That's contemptible.

[Nye Bevan]

8. Yes, who can forget that far-left rag "The Economist" back in 1996

[Fearless]

33. Are you saying that gay marriage is a center-right position??

[Le Taz Hot]

9. Dead. On.

[Douglas Carpenter]

14. Back in the early 70's being openly pro-gay rights was regarded

In mainstream Democratic Party circles as a far.left kook position.

[riderinthestorm]

15. + 10000. Agreed nt

[SidDithers]

16. Uh huh...

sure you do.



Sid

[DisgustipatedinCA]

26. Have the force of character to call someone a liar if that's what you mean.

[Humanist_Activist]

93. Oh please, it happened, most of the posts were deleted, but nothing...

really happened to the posters who repeatedly posted that bullshit.

All you have to do is use the google bar above and search for things such as "Ponies", "Poutrage", "Gay/Same-Sex Marriage", etc. and there are still references and posts of very offensive shit said about the LGBT community here.

A single example:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9001854

There are many more, if you wish for me to make the search for you.

[raouldukelives]

17. When you are that far to the right, just about anything looks far left.

Including equality, environmental protections, comforting the afflicted, taxing the rich and creating a better world for the future.

You know, all those things that poll as centrist but are painted like ponies by corporate greed.

[nomorenomore08]

178. And a fossil like John "bomb bomb Iran" McCain looks like a liberal.

[Roy Rolling]

19. yeah, right

And all of those "centrists" in the civil rights movement who only marched but did not get arrested are not macho enough either.

What you call "centrist" some would call "choosing your battles". Some people are passionate about some progressive issues, some people are passionate about other progressive issues.

Just because they aren't like you doesn't make them inferior progressives. Without those supporters gay marriage would still be nowhere in 2015 the same as it was in 1915. In fact, some argue it is BECAUSE of those supporters' extra weight that gay marriage is a reality.

Don't disparage those people who marched, but were not political leaders, please.

[Fearless]

31. Some are leaders and some are followers

I've never seen someone advocate for following before. Until now.

[nomorenomore08]

180. I think the point is more to do with people who would never march at all.

Then, very likely, claim later on that they were right on the front lines.

[TM99]

181. It is arrogant as hell

to support choosing your battles when you are not the one suffering an injustice.

It is not about marching. It is about leading and not following on a civil rights issues.

Actually, those that waited and waited and told others to wait and choose their battles are NOT the ones who made this happen or possible. In fact, they are the ones who delayed change.

[PufPuf23]

20. That was certainly true at DU.

I do not know about the Democratic party as a whole.

It would be interesting to compile the Party position over time.

[Scuba]

21. That goalpost has been relocated. It's now Social Security and Medicare.

[Orrex]

24. I confess that I was one of the assholes who held that position

Even at that time I voiced my personal belief was that full marriage equality was obvious and correct, but I didn't see any way for it to happen in the existing political climate. I simply couldn't imagine it getting through the Supreme Court with such a strong affirmation.

How wrong I was, and how glad I am to have been so wrong.

[Marrah_G]

50. I'm glad you were wrong too :)

[bullwinkle428]

68. I appreciate your candor in acknowledging a rather strong sentiment that

was circulating 'round these parts a few years back.

[Aerows]

156. An "asshole"

would have never admitted as such, nor apologize and acknowledge they were wrong.

You are not an asshole

[Orrex]

182. That's very kind--thank you!

A little slow on the uptake sometimes, but I get there eventually!

[Oilwellian]

25. You remember correctly

DU's right-leaning centrists were so concerned about the liberal push for gay rights and how that may hurt the Democratic party. It was such a spectacle and a clear example of how unimportant civil rights were to these people. Their motto has always been "Party First."

[Maedhros]

38. Their support for civil rights issues after-the-fact is the facade that hides

their corporate-friendly trickle-down Reaganomic policies. They need to latch onto the civil rights issue of the day so that they can claim to be "better than the Republicans," because without doing so they aren't. It's all cosmetic.

[Oilwellian]

43. Indeed. It could not be anymore obvious. n/t

[laundry_queen]

107. Good observation. nt

[Aerows]

164. Exactly right.

Here is a crumb of cake. You should be satisfied now.

[Maedhros]

169. "Love me, love me, love me, I'm a Liberal"

[Arkana]

211. We thought it would. I thought it would too.

It wasn't such an outlandish position to take even 10 years ago. Attitudes have changed so dramatically in that time it's not even funny. Perhaps my attitudes were colored by the fact that I'm straight.

I am as pleased as anyone that we have finally seen the light in this country, but ripping on people because they were late to the party--especially politicians--doesn't seem to serve any purpose. All those guys outside the tent pissing in? They're inside the tent pissing out now.

[truebrit71]

27. Indeed.

...

[Fearless]

28. *Ahem* Hillary *Ahem*

[closeupready]

29. Be gracious in victory, is my view.

Posting in light of some of these truthful yet painful memories.

Not lecturing; merely offering my opinion.

[Prism]

83. Eh, it's difficult to let hatred slide

I have a hard time with bullies. Once the President came out in favor of gay marriage, a lot of the bullies finally relented. Because it wasn't really about people - it was about protecting a politician they liked. A lot of hostility toward the community melted away virtually overnight.

However, that just meant the bullying behavior swapped targets. The same people with the same trolling hostility are still at it. They've simply pivoted where to direct it. I haven't seen any change aside from the fact it is no longer LBGTers getting the brunt of it around here.

What I find inexpressibly depressing is when the formerly bullied switch over to hang with the bullies once they themselves were no longer the targets. The objection wasn't against the behavior - just the target. I almost find that worse - to know what being bullied is like and to join in once you feel relief from it.

I can't do that online or IRL. Once someone has made attacks of opportunity against the oppressed, it's difficult to forget their names and faces. I will always avoid those people or speak out against them. When someone has behaved in such a way, and then turns around and attempts to claim the mantle of oppression to wage their own antisocial campaigns?

Aw, hellllll no.

I can't do it. Just cannot forget what those effers spent years putting LGBTers around here through. Even though I'm sure hitting ignore would be the mentally healthier option and basically any use of time is more productive than bothering about these wretches. Some people want to forgive and forget. I don't when people attack my community and my family.

You're a better man than I for managing it. ;/

[enigmatic]

85. +1

This, right here:

"What I find inexpressibly depressing is when the formerly bullied switch over to hang with the bullies once they themselves were no longer the targets. The objection wasn't against the behavior - just the target. I almost find that worse - to know what being bullied is like and to join in once you feel relief from it."

This is the thing that most of all is astoundingly depressing to me, and like you, I see it here right now in the candidates they support. It's unbelievable to me.

[Prism]

87. Self-awareness can rarely be taught

Just yesterday or so, I saw someone who used to hit the roof when the Left was attacked give a big thumbs up to some hippie punching. I would never have believed it of this person if I did not read the name with my own eyes.

I don't understand people ;/

[closeupready]

89. Oh, I get you on this, believe me.

[cui bono]

160. Well said. n/t

[La Lioness Priyanka]

212. while i agree with you in principle, my desire to gloat sometimes just triumphs over my principles!

[closeupready]

215. You know something, me too - in going about my day,

seeing heterosexuals flaunting their sexuality immodestly in public, I've been bursting into laughter or giggles - their privilege has now been checked by our most honorable Supreme Court.

It's a genuine expression of amusement, so I'm still trying to figure out why precisely I'm reacting this way - I suppose it's a new day and era for US gay people, and I love it! No longer second-class.

Seeing them do their Alitalia tourism ad renditions for everyone to witness, I'm just giggling, like, 'hey whatever floats your boat, but leave me out of it. You can get yourself into a mess, but I know better.'

Cheers!

[Drunken Irishman]

30. Lots of comments - no proof.

Let's see the proof?

There was always talk about it gaining momentum. Hell, a year into Obama's presidency Iowa legalized marriage equality.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

78. So just the sheer transcendent majesty of his being President caused Iowa to legalize it?

Impressive. He's a veritable man with a magic wand, apparently.

[Drunken Irishman]

117. Uh...what?

The point of my post that you purposely ignored to make a petty, simple snark comment was that change was already in the air. No one was claiming gay marriage was all ponies and rainbows. We knew it was gaining more and more momentum.

[BainsBane]

32. I remember not long ago at all

When some claiming to be on the left insisted marriage equality was a rich people's issue or affected only "a very small percentage of the population. I also remember quite recently someone who regularly insults gay men expressing their concerns about their rights as "being aligned with Goldman Sachs and the 1 percent."
I also see people dismissing African American concerns as "divisive" and "a race card," or "race baiting," as is also commonly done with feminists. I also see dismissal of advances in all of the above areas dismissed as "crumbs."

I see a lack of concern for the majority that cuts across how people describe themselves politically, or how others describe them.

[Starry Messenger]

53. This. nt.

[Zorra]

171. "Claiming" is the so much more than the

operative word here, in all honesty, si o no?

Got link?

[BainsBane]

172. Ask the OP for links

First. Go on. ( I'm not playing that old link and alert game, or the link and deny their significance game. It's old, worn, and transparent.)

How is that Ayn Rand school of history coming along by the way? When precisely did that take place? Who were the major historians? Did they study at the knee of Braudel and Marc Bloch, perchance?
How is your campaign against the International Socialist Review coming? Any progress on rooting out the pernicious "revisionist" "neoliberal" historians who subscribe to Marxist theory?

[Aerows]

232. Lord have mercy

this post.

I can't even figure out where to start.

I guess I'll start with "attack not, lest you shall be attacked" but I see that ship has already sailed.

[Doc Holliday]

35. A friend of mine posted

on her Facebook page (about two years ago) that "gays would probably be able to legally get married" before she would get married. She meant it then as a wry comment intended to bemoan her still-single status.

Since she is still single as of today and apparently has excellent powers of prognostication, I need her to post this on her Facebook page: "Weed will probably be legalized in all fifty states before I get married."

[SoapBox]

37. +1

[Rex]

39. Centrists didn't exist until the Reaganites came along.

And I still think some of them are Reagan Democrats. To this day.

[iandhr]

44. You kidding me?

Centrists didn't exist until Reagan?

Ike, Nelson Rockefeller. LBJ (pre 1960) Marget Chase Smith

[Rex]

46. And did they change the face of America like Reaganites did(for the worse)? Not even close.

IKE & LBJ? Wow. What is your definition of Centrist, because we must be thinking of two different animals.

[iandhr]

47. I am talking about pre 1960

LBJ WAS a centrist pre 1960. Then he implemented a very progressive agenda as President.


Taft was a favorite of many of the right. Many of them were unhappy the Ike was the nominee in 1952

Definitions change.

[Rex]

49. LBJ and IKE were textbook conservatives...the kind that by the 1980s Newt could only dream

of being like. IMO.

And I am talking about the modern Centrist, I guess. The ones that embrace a hodge podge of Reagomics and neoliberalism. Neither IKE or LBJ (well now maybe LBJ would be more inclined toward the economic side of neoilberalism) imo were anything but traditional conservatives. Both men evolved over time toward social policy.

I always wondered why the Right hated Ike so much...until I read his percived threat toward the populace by the newly created MIC monster death machine. That kinda kicks him out of the running for modern Centrist imo.

Of course both men would be considered Fringe Left by todays standards.

[NewJeffCT]

194. Ike also spearheaded the interstate highway system

which most conservatives of that era hated, especially since it was paid for with a federal gasoline tax.

He also appointed arguably the most liberal SCotUS judge in history in William Brennan, as well as Earl Warren, another noted liberal.

He also expanded Social Security and refused to cut taxes, which were amazingly high following the Great Depression and World War 2. I can't imagine any Republican today - and most Democrats - not pushing for tax cuts if the top rate was around 90%.

On most other issues, though, he was your typical conservative. And, he was really the first candidate I can remember who called out his opponent for being an out of touch intellectual elitist.

[truth2power]

40. That was back when Obama was still "evolving" on the gay marriage issue..

Expediency

[iandhr]

41. Well you can't argue with results.

The political strategy used by the pro-marriage equality was highly successful.

[WillyT]

45. Weathervane Politics...

[demmiblue]

48. That was a truly ugly time on DU.

A lot of the same players, some new and some have switched 'alliances'.

Crazy here, at times.

[dbackjon]

51. Yes - I remember those days.

[Marrah_G]

52. We got our fucking pony :)

[Le Taz Hot]

64. For the win!

[eridani]

140. You betcha! And it farts rainbows!! n/t

[MadDAsHell]

54. Now it's politically convenient to support marriage equality...

Heck, even President Obama finally saw it that way.

[JoePhilly]

57. Divide and conquer.

Who needs the GOP when democrats will happily fight amongst themselves.

[HassleCat]

58. Follows the pattern

"I support desegregating the public schools, but the time is not yet right for such a bold move." "I support the end of don't ask, don't tell for the military, but it would cause too much backlash in the ranks." "We would all like to see the Berlin Wall come down, but it will be another 100 years before that happens."

It's human nature to expect things to remain as they are. To most people, it represents stability, even if the present condition is undesirable, and stability is comforting. Change is scary, and politicians don't win votes by scaring people.

[Dont call me Shirley]

80. While you're at it, I'd like to see the MIC totally defunded, Banksters in prison their spoils

redistributed evenly, high taxes on the rich, living wages and excellent working conditions for all, healthcare that actually heals, sane and free education for all.

Nothing's impossible!

From, The Fair-Left Fringe

[Zorra]

60. Centrists here told LGBT to STFU and were

largely responsible for a purge of the DU LGBT community prior to the 2008 election.

[closeupready]

61. Bill Clinton: "This isn't an arrangement! This is a marriage!

You know, two people who LOVE each other!" circa January 26, 1992, @ 9:15:

A few years later, he signed DOMA.

So you know, there you go.

[mainer]

62. Even my hero Howard Dean didn't believe it would happen

Early in his campaign, I remember hearing him say that civil unions was the realistic thing to support (and he did.)

10 years ago, gay marriage DID seem like something that would never pass. A failure of the imagination? Absolutely. This teaches us not to be afraid to imagine big.

[MisterP]

65. and now of course it's entirely their doing

[Hell Hath No Fury]

67. "How to piss off gay posters."

From July 18th, 2010 posted by DSC. Be sure to read the responses too to the OP at the link, because it will enlighten those whose memory seems to be a bit foggy on just what the attitude of many here at DU was towards gays demanding action on issues that were vital to their lives:

"How to piss off gay posters

Unfortunately gay priorities haven't gone well in this Congress. That has lead to great disappointment among gay posters for frankly good reason. Adding to it is when posters do the following.

Way one

Call gay priorities, especially the big three (ENDA, DADT, and hate crimes) a pony or some other belittling term meant to make out that these are unimportant frivolities. No, we don't think we are the center of the earth. But for many gay people these are issues that at the very least can cause immense problems in our lives. In 3/5 of states, including such large states as TX, FL, PA, OH, MI, GA, and NC, gays are totally unprotected by non discrimination laws. We are totally at the mercy of employers, landlords, restraunteurs, hoteliers, and others. It is the very rare gay person who hasn't had being gay or precieved as such, cost them a job or apartment. Thousands of gays are tossed out of the service each year while many others live lives of quiet desperation and fear of being found out. Hate crimes fortunately has passed for the record, we were the second most likely group to be victims of hate crimes (after Arab Americans).

Way two

Tell us we wanted Obama to wave a magic wand. We know all too well how much work it takes to pass gay friendly legislation. We didn't think Obama or Hillary for that matter, would clap their hands and pass gay friendly legislation. We did think that either Obama or Hillary would use the Presidental bully pulpit to argue forcibly for gay friendly legislation. Obama frankly hasn't. He has been, to be charitable, an intermitent advocate of gay issues. We didn't expect a magic wand but we did expect Obama to advocate forcibly for legislation that had over 70% popularity (by comparison health care never broke 45%) but he just plain didn't.

Way three

Tell us things are better for us than they really are. Posters have told us that we are covered by anti discrimination laws when we aren't. That we have marriage rights when we don't. That we can be covered on our partner's health care when we can't. We do tend to know when we are, and when we aren't legally protected. It is our lives after all.

Way four

Tell us Obama has done more for gays than any other President. That ignores the immense progress, coming from our work, that happened for gays between 1993 and 2009. In 14 states sodomy laws existed and could be used to prevent gays from obtaining and keeping professional licences, take their children away, and even put them in jail. Gay civil rights laws only existed in a couple of states and no state even entertained marriage rights. TV was nearly berefit of gay characters, schools had virtually no openly gay teachers and few openly gay students. Gays could be fired from any federal job simply for being gay. Oh, and AIDS was still a 100% fatal disease that had hardly any governemnt funding. Gay men were still dropping like flies in our major cities and our small towns. Clinton eliminated federal discrimination everywhere but the uniformed military. He appointed the first Senate confirmed gay and the first ambassador. He increased AIDS funding (both research and medication) leading to AIDS becoming a managable disease for many of its sufferers. He also came within one vote of passing ENDA. Yes, Obama, did oversee the passing of hate crimes and he did give some benefits to gay employees. He also has more openly gay employees than Clinton did (remember that many people with professional licences were closeted thanks to morals clauses on their licences) but starting points matter and Obama had a pretty big, unearned head start over Clinton. Ignoring that ignores the work we did.

Hopefully this helps you to know what annoys us.:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8772384

[blackspade]

72. It's a rainbow pony that I'll hapily ride.

[Exilednight]

75. Someone has to push the fence sitters one way or the other.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

76. but, I STILL want a pony.

[Zenlitened]

77. I remember that too. Clear as day.

Ugly, ugly stuff that was rampant on DU.

[sabrina 1]

79. I remember that too. I remember being TOLD THAT and that The Left was going to lose

for Democrats by insisting on ponies, like Marriage Equality etc.

Not that long ago.

Good thing the Dreaded Left ignored them and continued to support and act on getting Civil Rights for all Americans.

THANK YOU BERNIE SANDERS for being ahead of the crowd on all of these 'ponies' we never would get if we were to worry about 'losing' rather than what is right.

[Politicub]

82. A lot of people's hearts and minds were changed quickly

And there are a lot of reasons why. I think the most powerful one was individuals coming out to their friends, relatives and co-workers. The Internet threw a lot of fuel on this fire.

President Obama says it far more eloquently than I ever could:

"Progress on this journey often comes in small increments, sometimes two steps forward, one step back, propelled by the persistent effort of dedicated citizens... And then sometimes, there are days like this when that slow, steady effort is rewarded with justice that arrives like a thunderbolt."

I'm glad that a majority of Americans evolved on this issue. DOMA was passed while I was in college, and it's remarkable how quickly things changed. I didn't think I would live to see the day, honestly, as much as I hoped it would come.

[Enthusiast]

96. Kicked and recommended to the Max! Those "centrists" are actually righties.

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[IronLionZion]

98. Justice Anthony Kennedy was a Reagan appointee

The deciding vote on gay marriage is an unapologetic centrist swing voter.

Ginsberg and Breyer were appointed by the most centrist DLC Dem. Kagan and Sotomayor were appointed by DU's most hated Dem and many centrists in Congress voted for their confirmation.

If you think about it like that, centrists brought marriage equality to all 50 states nation-wide.

Think about what the alternative would be if we didn't have Democrats in office to appoint and confirm these 5 justices.

Don't let my blatant and open Bernie Sanders support stop you from flaming me or calling me a Hillary supporter. As if I care.

Juror: Saying good things about centrists is actually NOT a violation of DU's rules...yet. No apologies

[RadiationTherapy]

100. You are absolutely correct. I remember the centrists' term "poutrage" for referring to civil rights.

Trickle-down economics, trickle-down civil rights, and "wait-your-turn-activism" are all obvious traits of the centrist.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

105. What is the point of this post

other than get us at each other's throats? I guess that I can't speak for everybody per se but I'm sure that most of us here are quite happy (if not ecstatic) with SCOTUS' decision legalizing marriage equality here in the US, leaving the right-wing yahoos wailing and gnashing teeth with no real legal nor legislative recourse(s). I think that it's also fair to say that it's hard for anybody to know that things would advance this far this fast with Republicans still controlling a disproportionate share of power in many parts of this country and Congress, so, although I denounce name calling and abusive behavior (by anybody), I don't really blame some some party strategists ("Centrists&quot previously calling for a more measured, incremental approach to moving the needle forward on marriage politically, which, now, is a totally moot point thanks to many federal courts in many states and SCOTUS. Same goal, different strategies. In fact, I figured that we'd have ENDA long before marriage equality and it has turned out the opposite way, proving again that one can never be certain how things are ever going to play out in the world of politics.

[rhett o rick]

147. Your name doesn't seem to me to be a good fit. You seem to be appologizing for the

damn centrists. With the Left demanding freedom and liberty, the centrists are "calling for a more measured, incremental approach to moving the needle forward". That's so much bull-crap. The "needle" wouldn't be where it is if it weren't for the crazy Left.

The damn centrists would give away Medicare and call it "pragmatic". I think the deal the centrist/conservative Democrats are making with the enemy Republicons, has compensation for the American Workers that will be thrown out of work by the TPP, will come from Medicare. I bet you'd call that "a more measured, incremental approach to moving the needle forward"

I am so glad our founders weren't "centrists".

[Proud Liberal Dem]

161. I'm defending realism/pragmatism

Progress also often moves slowly and incrementally

[rhett o rick]

197. Pragmatism is used as an excuse for inaction.

While we've made headway in the areas of social justice, we have been speeding (not moving slowly or incrementally) towards financial crisis. The 99% will all be paupers if the Conservatives continue to get their way. And once the corporations have complete control of the government, we will see all our advances in social justice melt away. We need democracy to achieve social justice and some experts are saying we've already gone past the tipping point for keeping our democracy.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

218. Pragmatism

is about getting what you can, when you can based on the current political realities IMHO. The Federal Courts and SCOTUS moved the ball the rest of the way down the field for a touchdown with their SSM ruling but, legislatively, there have been few avenues available for advancing marriage equality in several statehouses, especially in red states, and in Congress without getting a massive number of progressives elected. I'm ecstatic that it worked out for the best all the same, however.

[Jamastiene]

108. I am so glad we did not STFU

when they told us to. We wouldn't be any further along if we had STFU like they told us to. They are not fooling anyone.

[Zenlitened]

146. Exactly.

[Aerows]

116. I remember that too

I also remember a post excoriating us for "flaunting gay marriage" and being in people's faces hurting us at the polls.

When I had gone to those same polls and voted for Democrats.

It pissed me off then, and it still pisses me off now. I'm not nearly as sorry that I have a long memory as I am sorry that it took too long for some politicians to lead and take a stand.

If you drag your feet on equality and call yourself a Democrat, you might not be as much of a Democrat as you think you are - you just stuck your finger in the wind and decided you could get elected as a Democrat more easily than you could get elected as a Republican.

[Skittles]

120. I remember those folk,plenty of them right here on DU

*DISGUSTING*

[Aerows]

134. For the people with

short memories, I put the whole conversation down thread, including the embarrassment of a post the user ended up deleting because it was so horrible. The sad part is that people agreed with her, but tellingly, many of them have been PPR'd.

[Skittles]

135. I kicked their ass whenever I saw them

yes INDEED

[Hekate]

121. The pony was supposed to appear on the day after Inauguration, without having to shovel pony shit....

....by the barn-load first.

The shit has now been shoveled, by the President, and now we have gay marriage across the country, which would not have happened without the slow and painstaking work he undertook to overturn DADT, estblish marriage for military (who live in all states), establish marriage for federal workers (who also live in all states) and much else.

I reject your premise.

[Marrah_G]

125. Wait....so now it's the President who worked hard for Equality?

Seriously, that is insulting towards the actual activists who worked their asses off to make this happen, despite the President.

Is he better then Republicans, sure...but he isn't some freedom fighter for the LGBT.

[Hekate]

129. Good to know activists have the power to sign bills &executive orders &direct the military as CIC...

....as well as appoint Supreme Court Justices.

In which case, why did they not get it done during the BushCheney administration.

My only quarrel with some at DU the entire time Obama has been president is the notion that he could do anything with the wave of a magic wand. I watched him take the slow road, the road that step by step would ensure changes that would stand up in court, change public opinion, and pave the way for the Supremes to make the decision they finally did. Now it is done and it is law.

[Bluenorthwest]

192. The President had a few words about that:

"That’s the consequence of a decision from the Supreme Court, but more importantly, it is a consequence of the countless small acts of courage of millions of people across decades who stood up, who came out, talked to parents, parents who loved their children no matter what, folks who were willing to endure bullying and taunts, and stayed strong, and came to believe in themselves and who they were.

And slowly made an entire country realize that love is love.

What an extraordinary achievement, but what a vindication of the belief that ordinary people can do extraordinary things; what a reminder of what Bobby Kennedy once said about how small actions can be like pebbles being thrown into a still lake, and ripples of hope cascade outwards and change the world.

Those countless, often anonymous heroes, they deserve our thanks. They should be very proud. America should be very proud." Barack Obama

I agree with him, and I am very proud of what we have done and I earnestly hope others will learn to do the same for their own most important issues.

[Hekate]

230. I agree with him too, but if he had not been doing his job, they might still be waiting.

The significance of approving gay marriage/spousal benefits for federal workers and the military cannot be overstated, imo. Those two groups are in all 50 states and nearly every community, one way or another. Their presence showed the average person that the world was not going to fall to pieces on account of gay marriage. AND all the people who did all that work as activists....

Obama does not toot his own horn. Instead he usually gracefully points out the work of others.

Nothing happens in a vacuum.

[LondonReign2]

243. Yes...it is all the doing of the guy who was against it

Yes indeed.

[Aerows]

127. Here is this fucking appalling thread

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025764803

And here is the post that was deleted, but I caught it in Google cache:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025779883#post91

"Ok, i am going to say this and hope it is taken as an observation and not a position.
There was a sizable backlash tonight against the President and his policies on gay rights. Under the radar in many states that we should have won ...like Iowa where idiot Ernst won...and many other places the backlash by religious right paid off for the GOP. Take Maine....

The openness and brazenness of the LBGT agenda and the media flaunting of gay marriages all across the country cost Dems dearly and threatens to do so in the future. It's not that there are many more LBGT folks around now...it's just that they have come out of the closets and the religious right does not like to face up to their existence..even among themselves. This issue alone cause many religious blacks and Latinos to stay home or to not vote for Dems. The same is true for the civil rights issue. The GOP knows there are many black voters out here...they just don't want to have to accept them or see them.

There have always been Log Cabin GOP but they were rarely publicized and thus they were embraced by the GOP under the radar. And there always have been many LBGT in the closets of power but they did not cause the GOP to become uncomfortable because they were in the closet.

How can I say these things...I attend church, I have many LBGT in my family. I hear the conversations, I see the voting patterns. It is even a bigger issue than abortion believe it or not. And the sad truth is that after having gained new rights under this President many in the LBGT community went out and voted for the GOP candidate last night.

No offense meant but I know this for a fact among my many LBGT friends."

Don't anyone dare fucking say that we were *NOT* told "we want a pony" because that shit right there was said, allowed to stand, and defended.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

139. Piss poor political analysis...We lost because it's hard to get our base to turn out for...

Piss poor political analysis...We lost because it's hard to get our base to turn out for mid term elections...It had diddley squat to do with glbtq rights.

[BrotherIvan]

151. Why is this poster not banned?

That is some hateful shit.

[Aerows]

166. Your guess

is as good as mine.

[nomorenomore08]

177. I agree. Calling LGBT activists "brazen" is about as reactionary as it gets. n/t

[BrotherIvan]

179. It's disgusting

There is no consistency of enforcement of the rules here.

[Kablooie]

132. And they got a fabulous unicorn instead.

[Tab]

136. But Daddy, I want a Pony!!!

[Tab]

137. But Daddy, I want a Pony!!!

[Aerows]

165. Our tent

is too small for ponies.

[mythology]

138. I suspect social change always starts out with a radical idea that with time and effort

becomes mainstream.

I'd recommend reading a book called The Radical and the Republican which goes through how it took both Frederick Douglass and Abraham Lincoln to get to the point where there was both the political will and the opportunity for slavery to be ended.

[niyad]

149. where would we be without this kind of thinking?

[Proud Liberal Dem]

219. It's not about the what

it's about the how IMHO

[Admiral Loinpresser]

157. "Think big!"

Bernie said that tonight in Wisconsin at the close of his speech. It was because of that attitude by LGBT people and their allies all these years that LGBT people have made a huge stride toward full equality under the law, thus making all Americans freer and closer to the ideal of full equality for everyone.

All important social, economic and political justice in this country has occurred when people organized and thought big!

[marym625]

163. Hey, I still want that pony!

[U4ikLefty]

170. And you have plenty of rights.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022947372#post283

[libodem]

173. Yep

[nomorenomore08]

176. Everybody needs a platform, I guess. Even if it's merely the lack of one.

"Centrists" - in this particular use of the term - have no real strong convictions. Might be too inconvenient.

[gollygee]

183. I remember that, including the "gay purge" here

with people telling LGBT DUers to shut up and stock rocking the boat or we'd never win an election. Ugly history. (It wasn't just DU - it was the Democratic Party in general.)

[merrily]

184. This did not come about accidentally. The Human Rights Campaign and other groups

did a great job. So did GLBTQ publications. So did individuals. Kudos and respect to them all.

If you really want something, you have to organize, work and put whatever money you have where your "want" is.

[LaydeeBug]

209. I can remember fighting for "civil unions" just so we could get our LGBT brothers and sisters a seat

at the table. Just so no one would have to be excluded from their loved one in the hospital. That *maybe* survivor benefits would transfer. It wasn't perfect, but it at least stopped some of the hemorrhaging.

I. am. over. the. fucking. moon. about. this.

[ieoeja]

216. Tons of Bernie supporters in this thread agree with you. Two Hillary supporters disagree.

Kind of points up the unintended irony of those who support Hillary, who routinely triangulates on minority rights, criticizing Bernie on that very issue!

[Aerows]

235. I noticed that

Please, do go ahead and lecture me on minority rights, Hillary supporters.

I'm waiting to hear how my issues aren't useful to your ambitions, but you need my support to realize your own.

I'll get right on that.

[ieoeja]

236. Had the OP title had something about Bernie or Hillary, they would have flocked in here, and ...

... said all the right things. But since they did not see this in the context of this presidential primary, they slipped right back into their Third Way triangulation on minority rights.

Which is the other half of the "Bernie may win back the White working males" argument. The DLC did not surrender the White working male vote by getting super, duper progressive on social issues. They lost them by rejecting their economic interests, then tried getting them back by triangulating on minority rights. They did just the opposite.

Embracing progressive economic policies actually frees us to push harder on minority rights.

[Aerows]

237. Embracing progressive economic policies frees us all

and many are too stubborn to realize that because they want to cling to a candidate and ideology that is based upon exclusion. I agree with you.

"You can't be part of the club because" philosophy is exclusion because of the idea that one group is preternaturally disposed to superiority.

Which is just as idiotic as saying "Gay people this" "Black people that" "Hispanic people this" "Women that" as though anybody can speak for individuals that belong to any of those groups.

We speak as individuals, and the right to speak as individuals is not stripped from any of us simply because we speak on behalf of the LGBT community, the African American community, the Latino community or women.

If a particular member of a community says something that I don't agree with? I'm still part of that community and I still disagree with them and WILL NOT be shamed into following along.