Musing's musings

Mixed reviews? I don't think so

After 18 months in office, the harsh realities of politics and compromise have caught up to President Obama. Hailed as a champion of LGBT rights during the 2008 campaign, LGBT rights advocates now give Obama mixed reviews for his performance to date.

In a statement to the Blade, Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, said "there’s no doubt" that Obama has done more for LGBT people than any other U.S. president in history.

via www.washingtonblade.com

Unfortunately for Solomonese, the "done more for LGBT people than any other U.S. president" bar is so low to the ground that a mobility-impaired ant could get over it without any effort at all. I'm with Richard Socarides: the Obama presidency thus far has "been a disappointing 18 months."

On Inauguration Day, this LGBT rights scorecard was posted on the White House web site:

President Obama did sign the Matthew Shepard Bill--but that can hardly be described as an accomplishment, given that he had nothing to do with the bill's passage (and hadn't done much to advance it during his time in the Senate). The bill had been languishing in Congress for more than a decade before it finally made its way to the president's desk. Moreover, while it's certainly nice to know that LGBT people have legal recourse if they are attacked on the basis of their sexual orientation, that still doesn't do much to address the underlying fundamental inequality that makes gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered Americans the second most common target of hate crimes after people of color. It should also be noted that the legal recourse afforded by the legislation is totally dependent on whether the police officers who investigate the crime, and the attorneys who prosecute it, agree that it was a hate crime. Otherwise, we're still SOL.

Every other thing on that scorecard remains un-done. Most of them have not even been addressed. (Yes, I know that the House has passed, and the Senate is considering, a crappy compromise bill that the president would like to have us believe constitutes a repeal of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell," but, first, the Congress has not yet passed the bill and the president has threatened to veto it on the grounds that one version contains funding for a controversial fighter engine he does not want to support. Second, even if the bill is passed, the discharges do not stop, and DADT is not repealed, until some future point in time after which the president, the Secretary of Defense, and the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff all certify that the required conditions have been met. There is no guarantee that such certifications will ever be forthcoming, and neither is there any requirement in the law that they are made. In other words, this is a "repeal" of DADT only if you also believe that putting out a press release claiming victory equates to an actual victory. I'm not among those who believe that.

My review of the president's first year and a half in office? An unqualified "Poor." And that goes for more than just gay rights.

Stories from the Frontlines: Former Army First Lieutenant, Laura Slattery

I'm going to be participating in SLDN's "Stories from the Frontlines" campaign to encourage (I'd prefer to say "force") President Obama to live up to his promise, in the 2010 State of the Union address, that he would end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" this year. I won't go into the whole sordid history of that promise and the backpedaling the Obama administration has since done on it. Suffice it to say that he made the promise, and he told us himself on the night he was elected that it was up to us to hold his feet to the fire and make him do what he promised. Consider this ongoing effort part of that process.

"Stories from the Frontlines: Letters to President Barack Obama" is a new media campaign launched to underscore the urgent need for congressional action and presidential leadership at this critical point in the fight to repeal "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" (DADT). Every weekday morning as we approach the markup of the Defense Authorization bill in the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, SLDN and a coalition of voices supporting repeal, will share an open letter to the President from a person impacted by this discriminatory law. We are urging the President to include repeal in the Administration’s defense budget recommendations, but also to voice his support as we work to muster the 15 critical votes needed on the Senate Armed Services Committee to include repeal. The Defense Authorization bill represents the best legislative vehicle to bring repeal to the president’s desk. It also was the same vehicle used to pass DADT in 1993. By working together, we can help build momentum to get the votes! We ask that you forward and post these personal stories.

May 5, 2010

President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

I may be stating perhaps an obvious truism: Love is confusing. As a friend and, later in life, a chaplain, I have counseled many as they tried to navigate the toughest of love‘s questions: Is this the person I should marry? Is this infatuation or love, and how can I know the difference? Should I take the relationship to the next level?

The first time I fell in love, it was just as confusing. I knew I was in love, but with a woman. It was a severe test for me. I had never been in a same-sex relationship and didn't see myself as gay. Yet the fact remained — I was in love.

Adding to the confusion, and the fear of the whole experience (love can be scary enough on its own!), was the fact that I had just graduated from West Point and was serving as a Second Lieutenant (2LT) at Schofield Barracks.

I had gone to West Point, to a large degree, because of the code of honor. Integrity has always been, of all the values, the one I hold most dear. My mother had graduated from UCLA and I remember clearly the day she told me how disappointed she was when she saw some of her students buying and selling papers they had written.

At that moment I thought: Nope, that is not going to happen to me. I am going to a school that matches my desire and need for honesty and integrity.

So there I was – in love with a woman – and a brand new 2LT on a small island in the middle of the Pacific Ocean.

The easiest thing for me to do -- and the course of action I tried -- was to encourage myself to run from love. I also considered confiding in others, but given the horror stories of investigations and removals from duty, I decided against it. The thought of the shame of being interrogated and kicked out of the Service for something I wasn't even sure I was (a lesbian!), was too much to bear.

In the short three years that I was on active duty, I was Airborne and Air Assault (first female Distinguished Honor Graduate). During the First Gulf War, I volunteered to go to Iraq. Due to the needs of the Army, however, I remained in the Pacific – working in the 25th Infantry Division.

The values of physical work, integrity, service and team building made the Army an almost ideal place for me. I may have continued serving if I had felt more a part of the team.

I was well-liked and had friends, but not being able to share the biggest struggle in my life (and the biggest joy) with my peers and military friends prevented me from really forming the kind of friendships that one needs to feel as an integral part of a team.

It’s the warmth and support of a team that is truly needed for real "unit cohesion" among the officer corps and with the troops. It is necessary to continue to risk life and limb for each other.

In the end we risked everything not only for our country, but for our country personified in and by our buddies, members of that integral team. Not feeling that, I resigned my commission in September of 1991.

If I can be so bold, Mr. President: we need to help soldiers, and all people really, develop healthy understandings of what it is to be human, divorced from antiquated stereotypes about gender and gender roles.

"Macho" has no place in the modern professional Army; put downs and negative comparisons to the feminine are also hurtful to the Esprit de Corps of the Forces.

I know that you have based your Administration on creating a culture of respect for difference, of developing your version of "unit cohesion" based on the values of inclusion and diversity, not in spite of them.

This is the direction that the military needs to go, and it can start by repealing DADT now.

Sincerely,

Former First Lieutenant Laura Slattery
United States Army

Stories from the Frontlines: Former Air Force SSGt Anthony Loverde

I'm going to be participating in SLDN's "Stories from the Frontlines" campaign to encourage (I'd prefer to say "force") President Obama to live up to his promise, in the 2010 State of the Union address, that he would end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" this year. I won't go into the whole sordid history of that promise and the backpedaling the Obama administration has since done on it. Suffice it to say that he made the promise, and he told us himself on the night he was elected that it was up to us to hold his feet to the fire and make him do what he promised. Consider this ongoing effort part of that process.

"Stories from the Frontlines: Letters to President Barack Obama" is a new media campaign launched to underscore the urgent need for congressional action and presidential leadership at this critical point in the fight to repeal "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" (DADT). Every weekday morning as we approach the markup of the Defense Authorization bill in the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, SLDN and a coalition of voices supporting repeal, will share an open letter to the President from a person impacted by this discriminatory law. We are urging the President to include repeal in the Administration’s defense budget recommendations, but also to voice his support as we work to muster the 15 critical votes needed on the Senate Armed Services Committee to include repeal. The Defense Authorization bill represents the best legislative vehicle to bring repeal to the president’s desk. It also was the same vehicle used to pass DADT in 1993. By working together, we can help build momentum to get the votes! We ask that you forward and post these personal stories.

May 4, 2010

President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

They called me "vapor" --

As a little boy, I always had an interest in serving in the U.S. military. Both my grandfathers served in the Korean conflict, an uncle in Vietnam and I soon became the first of my generation to serve, followed by my brother and a few of my cousins.

After entering the Air Force in February of 2001, I eventually was promoted to Staff Sergeant. Although successful in my job as a Precision Measurement Equipment Laboratory (PMEL) technician, I was still coming to terms of being a gay man.

I struggled with my faith that told me it was a sin. I couldn't talk to the Chaplain Corps because I had read about gays being discharged after coming out to a chaplain. And so, I continued to internalize my struggle with accepting myself, my faith and how I must live under "don't ask, don’t tell."

As my separation date approached, many of my supervisors offered career-counseling. They all said the same thing: "Tony, you need to consider re-enlisting. You are the kind of Airman that the USAF needs to retain. You have a bright future in the Air Force and it would be a great loss to see you leave."

They often times would ask why I wanted to leave, and I always replied: "I don't like wearing hats."

Eventually, I changed my mind and was able to better manage living under DADT. I applied for cross training into C-130 Loadmaster and was accepted. I figured the high ops-tempo; frequent deployments and lack of down time would make for a great environment to keep me so busy that I just wouldn't have time to be gay.

I thought it was a brilliant plan.

As a distinguished graduate from Loadmaster training, I quickly established myself as a top-notch troop with the 37th Airlift Squadron at Ramstein Air Force Base in Germany. Within four months of my arrival, I had completed my upgrade training and was mission ready. I deployed to Ali Al Salem, Kuwait, in support of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

But deployment can take its toll. I couldn’t lie to my fellow troops -- my friends -- anymore. I delayed coming out as to not compromise our mission and waited until we returned to Germany. At first, I ended up avoiding them as much as possible.

They nicknamed me "vapor" -- as soon as we hit the ground, I would disappear.

I didn't avoid them because I didn't like them, I avoided them because I respected them enough to not have to lie and burden them with my secret.

When I arrived in Germany, I sent an email to my First Sergeant to tell him I wanted to speak with my commander about being gay and not wanting to abide by DADT any longer. My commander said I served honorably and they would be there to support me in my transition back to civilian life.

Each one of my past supervisors from the ranks of E7 to E9 wrote character reference letters that requested my retention. My commander and First Sergeant said my character, performance and honorable service was not at question ...it was merely a legal matter.

Upon my discharge, I was hired by global contractor KBR to fill a technical position in Iraq and later in Bagram, Afghanistan. I was once again working with the same Airmen I had worked for on active duty, but this time openly gay. No one had a problem.

I continue to work side by side with members of our military -- each of them knowing me as a gay man -- and it has caused no impact on the mission. My contracting job for the Department of Defense now is the same job I performed when I was in uniform.

Mr. President, we need you to help repeal this law -- this year -- so that my comrades continue to work in a force that retains the best and brightest based on performance rather than sexual orientation. Our men and women in the military deserve better. Listen to them, and, please, sir, do not turn your back on us.

Very Respectfully,

Former SSgt. Anthony Loverde
United States Air Force

Stories from the Frontlines: Former Petty Officer 3C Joseph Rocha

I'm going to be participating in SLDN's "Stories from the Frontlines" campaign to encourage (I'd prefer to say "force") President Obama to live up to his promise, in the 2010 State of the Union address, that he would end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" this year. I won't go into the whole sordid history of that promise and the backpedaling the Obama administration has since done on it. Suffice it to say that he made the promise, and he told us himself on the night he was elected that it was up to us to hold his feet to the fire and make him do what he promised. Consider this ongoing effort part of that process.

"Stories from the Frontlines: Letters to President Barack Obama" is a new media campaign launched to underscore the urgent need for congressional action and presidential leadership at this critical point in the fight to repeal "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" (DADT). Every weekday morning as we approach the markup of the Defense Authorization bill in the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, SLDN and a coalition of voices supporting repeal, will share an open letter to the President from a person impacted by this discriminatory law. We are urging the President to include repeal in the Administration’s defense budget recommendations, but also to voice his support as we work to muster the 15 critical votes needed on the Senate Armed Services Committee to include repeal. The Defense Authorization bill represents the best legislative vehicle to bring repeal to the president’s desk. It also was the same vehicle used to pass DADT in 1993. By working together, we can help build momentum to get the votes! We ask that you forward and post these personal stories.

May 3, 2010

President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

After the recent letter by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates recommended the repeal of "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" be delayed, this is my plea to you on the behalf of the soldiers serving in silence to end this law now:

I never wanted anything more in my life than to be a career officer. My entire childhood I was exposed to abuse, violence, and crime. I came out of it all with a simple, yet overwhelming desire to serve. When my first attempt at getting into the Naval Academy failed, I waited restlessly until I turned eighteen. I enlisted on my birthday and set off to prove myself to the Academy. I was eager to leave the cruelty of my past and join a true family.

I knew I was gay, but it was irrelevant to me then. I was determined to join an elite team of handlers working with dogs trained to detect explosives. As I studied hard to pass exams and complete training, I was convinced that the current law would protect me. I knew that based on merit and achievement I would excel in the military.

I never told anyone I was gay. But a year and a half later while serving in the Middle East, I was tormented by my chief and fellow sailors, physically and emotionally, as they had their suspicions. The irony of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" is that it protects bigots and punishes gays who comply.

Shop talk in the unit revolved around sex, either the prostitute-filled parties of days past or the escapades my comrades looked forward to. They interpreted my silence and total lack of interest as an admission of homosexuality. My higher-ups seemed to think that gave them the right to bind me to chairs, ridicule me, hose me down and lock me in a feces-filled dog kennel.

On one day in the Middle East, I was ordered by a superior to get down on my hands and knees and simulate oral sex on a person working in the kennel. We were supposed to pretend that we were in our bedroom and that the dogs were catching us in the act. Over and over, with each of the dogs in our unit, I was forced to endure this scenario.

I told no one about what I was living through. I feared that reporting the abuse would lead to an investigation into my sexuality. Frankly, as we continue to delay the repeal of this horrible law, I can’t help but wonder how many people find themselves in similar, despicable situations and remain silent. My anger today doesn’t come from the abuse, but rather from the inhumanity of a standing law that allowed for it.

Three and a half years later when the Navy started investigating claims of hazing, I had finally earned my place at the Naval Academy Preparatory School. But instead of celebration, I began to question the life of persecution, degradation, and dishonor DADT had forced on me. I questioned the institution -- our great military -- that would condone and endorse this kind of treatment of its own members. The only thing I had ever done wrong was to want the same thing my straight counterparts wanted: a brotherhood and something to stand for.

At NAPS I realized that a career of service under DADT would be a forfeiture of my basic human rights. It would be a forfeiture of basic job security, peace of mind, and meaningful relationships, particularly with my fellow straight service members whom I was forced to deceive and betray.

After completing a six-week officer candidate boot camp, my commanders said they wanted to offer me a leadership role. But after what happened in the Middle East and even the suicide of my close friend, I was mentally and emotionally depleted. And so -- with my knees buckling -- I offered my statement of resignation in writing:

"I am a homosexual. I deeply regret that my personal feelings are not compatible with Naval regulations or policy. I am proud of my service and had hoped I would be able to serve the Navy and the country for my entire career. However, the principles of honor, courage and commitment mean I must be honest with myself, courageous in my beliefs, and committed in my action. I understand that this statement will be used to end my Naval career."

They say some people are just born designed for military service. It‘s the way we are wired, and the only thing that makes us happy. For too many of us, it‘s the only family we ever had. I am sure now, more than ever, after all the loss and hardship under DADT, that all I want to do is serve as a career military officer.

Mr. President, any delay in repeal is a clear signal to our troops that their gay brothers and sisters in arms are not equal to them. I plead that you take the lead -- fight for repeal -- and allow qualified men and women to serve their country.

Very respectfully,

Joseph Christopher Rocha
Former Petty Officer Third Class, U.S. Navy

Stories from the Frontlines: Former Army Capt. Rebecca H. Elliott

I'm going to be participating in SLDN's "Stories from the Frontlines" campaign to encourage (I'd prefer to say "force") President Obama to live up to his promise, in the 2010 State of the Union address, that he would end "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" this year. I won't go into the whole sordid history of that promise and the backpedaling the Obama administration has since done on it. Suffice it to say that he made the promise, and he told us himself on the night he was elected that it was up to us to hold his feet to the fire and make him do what he promised. Consider this ongoing effort part of that process.

"Stories from the Frontlines: Letters to President Barack Obama" is a new media campaign launched to underscore the urgent need for congressional action and presidential leadership at this critical point in the fight to repeal "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell" (DADT). Every weekday morning as we approach the markup of the Defense Authorization bill in the Senate and House Armed Services Committees, SLDN and a coalition of voices supporting repeal, will share an open letter to the President from a person impacted by this discriminatory law. We are urging the President to include repeal in the Administration’s defense budget recommendations, but also to voice his support as we work to muster the 15 critical votes needed on the Senate Armed Services Committee to include repeal. The Defense Authorization bill represents the best legislative vehicle to bring repeal to the president’s desk. It also was the same vehicle used to pass DADT in 1993. By working together, we can help build momentum to get the votes! We ask that you forward and post these personal stories.

April 30, 2010

President Barack H. Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue Northwest
Washington, DC 20500

Dear Mr. President,

I am the mother of two young children, and an Iraq war veteran. I joined up just like my dad – a retired Army officer – and my sister, who currently serves in the Guard. My brother is a reservist and has been deployed to both Iraq and Afghanistan. Two weeks ago, our family gathered together as he is leaving again for Afghanistan -- his 4th deployment. Even my husband, Jay, served as an officer in the Air Force until 2008.

Like my dad, I chose the Army. I reached the rank of Captain and was a platoon leader in the military police. I was there during the invasion of Iraq in 2003.

I had some of the best NCO's (non-commissioned officers) in the Army who could accomplish any mission. Several members of my platoon received decorations for valor during the combat phase of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

On my last day of active duty, some of my old squad leaders revealed to me that one of my former team leaders was gay. They figured it was safe to tell me, as I was leaving the Army. My first feelings on the matter were, frankly, a little surprised, followed by complete indifference.

I was surprised because I had never suspected the soldier of being gay. But then, I never really had any thoughts about her sexual orientation whatsoever.

When I reflected on it, it didn't make one bit of difference in how she performed her job or how she related to the other soldiers in the platoon. She had the respect of her squad leaders (fairly conservative men, mind you), who kept her secret and continued working with her side-by-side for years.

As an officer, I would have been bound by my position to report such "credible information" that would have led to the discharge of a great NCO. I am glad that I was never placed in the position of having to choose between one of my soldiers and enforcing this terrible law, which I feel is unfair and wrong.

Please, Mr. President – at this critical time – do not allow those serving their country to be forced to choose between good, honorable soldiers, and upholding an unfair law.

Please, do not continue to allow gays and lesbians in the service to have to choose between hiding a part of their identity and continuing to serve their country.

Please, help Congress repeal "Don't Ask Don't Tell" now.

Respectfully,

Former Capt. Rebecca H. Elliott
United States Army

Color me unimpressed

Having listened to President Obama's speech tonight, I'm frankly underwhelmed. For all his pretty words at the end there about needing to combat the cynicism of the American people in the face of rapacious corporations and lobbyist-driven government, it seemed to me that much of what the president was proposing was in exactly that mold. The gist of his speech was, essentially, "Keep on hoping."

Well, Mr. President, I'm sorry, but that ship sailed quite a while ago. I don't want "hope." I don't want you to "work with Congress"--I want you to get shit done. That's what you were elected to do more than a year ago, and that's what you haven't done much of during your first year in office. I didn't hear much of anything to suggest that is likely to change in your second year--and that is disappointing.

For example, take health insurance reform. Please. I don't give a damn about reforming health insurance, except perhaps to the extent that I would like to see it eliminated altogether in favor of a government-run single-payer system like most other developed nations already have in place. That's such a radical idea that it was first enacted by Prince Otto von Bismarck in 1883. What the hell are we waiting for, pray tell? Yet you want to dither around some more with the crappy legislation that's currently stalled in the Senate--I believe, cynically, because you really are looking to have a legislative accomplishment under your belt, despite your denial that you were.

I don't want you to "work with Congress" to end Don't Ask, Don't Tell. I just want you to do it--which you could do with a stroke of your pen on an executive order. Then you can go back to Congress and work on getting it repealed. As anybody who knows basic first aid could tell you, first you stop the bleeding, and then you worry about the small stuff. Just do it, Mr. President. You have the power!

The spending freeze you're proposing? Galactically stupid idea--as you've been hearing now for the last couple of days from analysts, economists, bloggers, pundits, and historians. If you want to know why it's a galactically stupid idea, just take a look at what happened after Franklin Roosevelt did something similar in 1937. Besides, if you're looking to save a few bucks and also to bring our troops home, then do the last thing first. We'll save a hell of a lot more money than we will with your half-measure of a spending freeze, and that way, no more of our servicemen and -women have to come home in flag-draped coffins or missing limbs or other body parts.

My chief criticism of your first year in office, Mr. President, is that you've been too timid--and, taking its cue from you, the Democratic Party has done likewise. If you want to mitigate my cynicism (and, more importantly, if you want to get my vote again in 2012), you'll go a long way toward achieving that goal by acting more like you did when you were campaigning to win the office you now hold than the way you have acted since taking that office. Forget the faded pipe-dream of bipartisanship. You can't beat that dead skeleton back to life no matter how hard you try. The Republicans have demonstrated, time and time again, that they are not interested in working with you, no matter what you propose. In fact, I suspect that if you went to that meeting next week with the Republican leadership in Congress and proposed to them a legislative agenda that was lifted verbatim from the 2008 Republican Party platform, they would still oppose it, simply on the grounds that you would get credit for passing it. You can't work with these people, so stop even bothering to try. Just get on with it and get it done!

Meh

Martha Coakley, who was by many accounts an uninspiring and uninspired candidate in the first place, has conceded the Massachusetts Senate special election to Republican former Cosmopolitan centerfold Scott Brown. I can predict, with greater than 95% confidence, that there will be much bleating by the Republicans that this is bad news for Obama and the Democrats. I can also predict, with roughly the same confidence level, that the Democratic leadership will muff the lesson it should have learned and try to run even further to the right, and compromise even more of their principles, than they have already done in the first year of President Obama's term.

There will also be considerable weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth about having lost "Teddy Kennedy's seat" in the Senate. That's just bunk. You could just as accurately call it Henry Cabot Lodge's seat, or Edward Everett's. Where, exactly, is it written in our Constitution or our laws that any one person (or any particular party, ethnic or racil group, religious denomination, or any other associational entity you care to name) is entitled to claim a seat in either house of Congress? The voters decide whom the seat belongs to--and if you can't get more of yours out than the other guy (or gal) does, then you lose it. That's how the political system works in this country. And that's how it should be.

I chose the title of this post deliberately. It was my reaction to Martha Coakley's candidacy. It was also my reaction to all the appeals from this group or that party organization to help out with the race. It is also my reaction to the election result. I could wish that it would also be the Democratic Party's reaction to the result, but I doubt I'll get that lucky. (Indeed, I suspect I have a better chance at winning tonight's Mega Millions drawing...)

Will they heed the warnings?

President Obama and the Democratic Party leadership more generally have, I argue, been overlooking or ignoring significant warning signals over the last few months. That's dangerous at any time in modern politics, but even more so as we are already in the early stages of the runup to the midterm elections. Unless the president and the rest of the party leaders wake up quickly, I fear we are not going to see a third election cycle wherein the Democrats pick up seats in Congress.

The start of the slump, in my mind, was this summer. When the wingnuts were out having their fun pretending to be patriots and interrupting anyone they didn't like (which was just about everyone in politics), the Democrats largely let them have the news cycles. We woke up eventually and took some reparative steps, but by that time the damage had already been done. The initial slippage continued as we headed into the autumn, with the health-insurance reform package (where we started out from a disadvantageous position and then compromised gave in to our opponents on virtually every point). Both the president and the party leadership were largely absent from the fall election season, particularly as regards Question 1 in Maine, which should have been a no-brainer.

Once the elections were over, with their mixed results, the party leadership largely seemed to conclude that the message being sent by the voters was not (as it should have been) "stick to the principles you said you believed in and for which we voted in 2008," but rather "try to become more like Republicans than you already are." Suddenly, all questions of progressive issues were being kicked down the road--when the pressure should have been all the greater to get precisely those things taken care of, before the momentum from the 2008 elections wore off.

I would hope that the declining approval numbers for both President Obama and the Democratic Party would be a matter of concern in party leadership circles in and of themselves. But even if they are not, then this should be:

But a bigger indicator of peril comes from a new survey question added [to] the DK tracking poll for the first time this week. The poll now includes a rather simple indicator of baseline voter enthusiasm for the year 2010. The question offered to respondents is a simple question about their intentions for 2010:

QUESTION: In the 2010 Congressional elections will you definitely vote, probably vote, not likely vote, or definitely will not vote?

The results were, to put it mildly, shocking:

Voter Intensity: Definitely + Probably Voting/Not Likely + Not Voting

Republican Voters: 81/14
Independent Voters: 65/23
DEMOCRATIC VOTERS: 56/40

Two in five Democratic voters either consider themselves unlikely to vote at this point in time, or have already made the firm decision to remove themselves from the 2010 electorate pool. Indeed, Democrats were three times more likely to say that they will "definitely not vote" in 2010 than are Republicans.

The caution flag is waving

For the second time, officials in the Obama administration (at a considerably higher level than HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius this time) seem to be walking back the president's commitment to the public option, in advance of his speech to a joint session of Congress later this week. If past history is any indication, it is entirely possible that further statements and clarifications that directly contradict today's will be issued tomorrow--but the very fact that the administration is even looking ready to give up on this wimpy-ass public option is a matter for concern.

As I said last month, the only way we're ever going to get real health-care reform (as opposed to a purely cosmetic health-insurance reform, which is basically what the administration's plan boils down to) is to go the single-payer route. That option was never even on the table. The one plus to the public option was that it would at least fire a warning shot across the bow of the rapacious insurance giants that are the real arbiters of health care in America. It isn't a matter between a patient and her doctor (which it should be, and the way Republicans, Blue Dogs, and other opponents of reform would like to pretend that it is)--rather, it's a matter between a patient, her doctor, and the insurance company that mediates everything the first two partners do. Absent some kind of new regulations, these companies will continue on as they have been--raising premiums well beyond the rate of inflation, reducing coverage, cutting services, refusing to pay for expensive or experimental treatments, and generally doing everything they can to suck as much profit out of as many people as possible--never mind that their purpose is supposed to be helping those people get the medical care and attention that they need.

I was never under the impression that Obama was a liberal, and I certainly didn't buy into all of the hype his campaign put out about hope and change. That was simply rhetoric and a marketing strategy. Anyone who's looked at his record (to say nothing of his campaign platform) can see that Obama is a centrist: slightly to the left of center, yes, but still a centrist. Consequently, I'm not terribly surprised to see him embracing a centrist and fairly corporatist agenda through the first eight months of his term in office.

But what does surprise me--and concern me, as it should concern Democrats and progressives and liberals of whatever political stripe--is how staggeringly ineffective the Obama administration has been at selling its message. This is a huge contrast to the campaign, where message discipline was one of the hallmarks of the operation that crushed all opposition in a bruising two-year primary, and then snuffed the life out of the McCain-Palin ticket in the general. What we have seen since Inauguration Day has been a hapless, unfocused, undisciplined tacking hither and yon, without any discernible course. Further darkening the horizon, one of the few campaign promises President Obama has yet delivered on is his desire to be a bipartisan president.

Bipartisanship has become the shibboleth of the Obama administration. If these people had a signature tune, it should be "Bipartisanship über alles." Long past the time when most people would have given up, long past the time when the handwriting on the wall should have been obvious to the man some have called one of the most astute politicians in a generation, the president continues to woo his opponents, even though those opponents have made it perfectly clear that the only thing they want to do with the president is hand him one defeat after another. There will be no working compromises: they want what they want, and the only acceptable outcome to them will be getting it. Never mind that the Democrats have working majorities in both houses of Congress--Obama doesn't seem willing or able to move forward on anything unless he's got cover from the other side of the aisle.

His political advisers had better be sending him memos telling him to back off on that, because the hemorrhaging is getting serious. Obama hasn't picked up any ground with Republicans (not surprisingly), and he's lost a plurality of independents who are now solidly on the fence. But the worst drop in support for the president has come from his base: Democrats' opinion of the president's job performance has been trending steadily downward, just as the campaign season for the 2010 midterm elections gets under way.

Ergo, the title of this post. The president has gotten off track, and he needs to hear it from us--just as he asked us to do during the campaign. The problem there is, there's a very small, but even more incredibly vocal cadre of Obama hyper-partisans who will tromp on anything that looks even remotely like dissent, criticism, or any suggestion that President Obama isn't the smartest, most perfect, bestest, most liberal, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious president EVAH! Speak but one discouraging word about the president, and these folks come out of the woodwork screaming about how it's only been eight months, and how Bush the Lesser left the country in such a God-awful mess how could anyone possibly have done better than Obama, and how he's way smarter than we are, and a much better politician, so shut the fuck up with your negativity already and wait and see: he'll get around to giving you your goddamn pony, you whiny single-issue voter--and oh, by the way, I suppose you think a President McCain or a President Palin or a President Romney would be doing a better job?

It's too early to think about primarying the president. But it's not too early to start expressing concern about the direction and tone his first year in office has taken. It is certainly time to let the party leaders know that unless things start changing for the better, we're going to be a lot harder to get motivated to donate and work for Democratic candidates next year--let alone this president in 2012. Sure, it's only been eight months--but eight months is enough time to get a pretty good idea of what the next eight months are going to look like. Thus far, I don't like the picture I'm seeing.

What he said

As far as I'm concerned, Dan Savage has said all that needs to be said about President Obama's shameful record on gay rights since winning election--and also about the "wait your turn, faggot" crowd that inevitably pops up every time anyone has the temerity to point out that the Dear Leader is naked. The Dear Leader really hasn't been all that dear as far as the gay community is concerned, and he sure as hell hasn't been a leader. Or even that good of a follower.

But then Obama was sworn in under Rick Warren’s porcine gaze and the "fierce urgency of now" quickly morphed, in Andrew Sullivan’s damning turn of phrase, into the "fierce urgency of whenever." Never mind that gay people are being turned away from their partners’ bedsides during medical emergencies now. Never mind that people are being kicked out of the military now. Never mind that Arkansas banned adoptions by same-sex couples on the very same day that Obama was elected. (Gosh, where’s that bully pulpit when you need it?) The man who wasn’t afraid to appeal directly to us for our votes as a candidate -- and certainly wasn’t shy about asking us for our dollars -- couldn’t be bothered to acknowledge the promises he had made to us and seemed to greatly resent being asked to actually honor them.

That paragraph says, eloquently and concisely, everything I've been struggling to say for the last seven months. In all likelihood, I will be turning to it again and again throughout the next three and a half years because, as Savage concludes his piece:

Last fall we, along with everyone else, got swept up in the momentousness of the campaign, in the symbolism and the history and the drama, and lost sight of something important: Obama is a politician -- and a Chicago politician at that. Nothing is ever given to you. You have to ask and tell and demand and do the work -- not passing the legislation ourselves or signing it ourselves (no coup gay’tat is in the offing), but in making sure our "friends" in the White House and Congress understand that we won’t take "wait" for an answer.

What do we want? What we were promised. When do we want it?

Now.

We're not going to go away. We're not going to sit back and let you shove us back into the closet, or put our issues on a back burner until the next time you feel like coming around and begging for our time, our talent, and our treasure to help you get (re-)elected. In fact, if we don't start seeing some action--and I mean concrete action, not just pretty words or a cocktail party for the A Gays or a proclamation that carries with it no actual substance--you can beg us all you want for our support, but you still won't get it. Come 2010, if we're still standing on the outside looking in, the Obama administration and the Democratic Party are going to find out what "I just can't seem to find the votes" really means.