To Many Gay Activists, Obamacare Is Good because it's a Democratic Priority (even if Dems zapped provisions benefiting gays)
April 1, 2010 by B. Daniel Blatt
Last week, I received a dewy-eyed e-mail from Kate Kendell, Executive Director of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, all misty because Congress had just passed health care reform. You see, when it comes to items on the Democratic agenda, they just have to be good for gay people, you see, because, well, they're on the Democratic agenda and the Democrats are good people.
And anyway, Republicans opposed it and those nasty obstructionists are meanies!
The last time Miss Kendell got all misty-eyed was last September 11, when ignoring the anti-gay animosity of Islamicists, you know, those folks who had orchestrated the attacks eight years previously on that very day, she insisted that LGBT people, need health care reform "as much as anyone, and because [Obama's] entire national agenda of greater inclusion, security, and humanity for all of us hangs in the balance." And anyway, those who oppose it are Republicans who are meanies who hate gay people.
Yep, she devoted her 9/11 letter to attacking and vilifying conservatives for opposing Obama's agenda. (Wonder if Barney's gonna ask Democrats to "differentiate themselves" from Miss Kendell. If not, we can deem her a spokesperchild* for his party.) You see, for her (and folks like her toiling for the national gay organizations), the Obama agenda is the gay agenda because she so closely ties her politics to left-wing ideology and Democratic partisanship.
Doesn't bother her Obama's health care reforms will likely make it easier for government bureaucrats to gain access to our medical records. It doesn't matter "that a provision giving" same-sex partners "the same tax exclusion" as different-sex "spouses on the value of employer-provided health benefits was also removed." What does does matter to her that this was a big bill high on the agenda of a Democratic Administration.
As Charles Winecoff put it in his most humorous must-read post on folks like Miss Kendell, ever faithful to "their religion (D-ism)": "Domestic fairies enjoyed many fetishes, but none was so great as their fetish for the letter 'D.'" It's all about that "D" and because of that (D) after Obama's name, any provision he supports must needs be most excellent.
*I'm wary of offending anyone here. If I called her spokeswoman, I'd still have the offensive word, "man" in the title. Spokesperson wouldn't work because it has the male term for a child, so I just replace it with that gender-neutral word.
Filed Under: Gay America, Gay Marriage, Gay PC Silliness, Gay Politics, Humor, Obama Health Care (ACA / Obamacare)
Conservative Guy says
April 1, 2010 at 3:05 am - April 1, 2010
Do you remember when women were wimmin?
Ted B. (Charging Rhino) says
I remember when it was proper to call them "Ladies".
Shouldn't it be The National Center for Lesbian Lefts?
April 1, 2010 at 11:41 am - April 1, 2010
[Obama's] entire national agenda of greater inclusion, security, and humanity for all of us…
What a fascist! She *seriously* expects her life to be spiritually and morally fulfilled, through the Dear Leader expanding the power of the State.
TCG, it is now, wymen. You know, change the spelling and create a whole new gender.
Sorry, I'm still not quite over this.
– "agenda of greater inclusion, security, and humanity" – The socialist's words for socialism.
– She carefully prefixes it with "national".
– In other words… whether Kate Kendell realizes it or not… she stands for, and just endorsed, NATIONAL SOCIALISM.
B. Daniel Blatt says
April 1, 2010 at 12:09 pm - April 1, 2010
Yes, heliotrope, it should. 🙂
Lloyd says
The fact is that it has always been Democrats who have supported equality and it has always been Republicans have who have opposed it. Every LGBT anti-discrimination law has had more Democrats than Republicans voting for it. Every marriage amendment has always had more Republicans than Democrats voting for it.
What is your strategy for gaining equality, seriously? To me, it seems like it's:
1: Electing and supporting anti-gay politicians.
2: Dismissing all pro-equality legislation as useless and/or stupid.
3: Insisting that marriage equality come from only one source, rather than by any means necessary. (Try telling Thurgood Marshall that he shouldn't pursue Brown v. Board because it would provoke a backlash and should be left to legislatures-as if any Southern legisature would ever vote to integrate schools)