Gay Rights And Obama’s State Of The Union: Was It Enough?
President Obama’s State of the Union address last night — all sixty-two minutes, all 6820 words — was met with expected mixed success. Most on the Left were pleased, most on the Right were not. Depending on which flash poll you read, anywhere from 50% t0 77% to 92% of the American people thought it was a success. But his merely passing mention of gay rights has left some members of the LGBTQ community, however, are feeling rather… ambivalent.
No one is, and no one should ever suggest that gay rights take priority over all other aspects of American life. Gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgenders are all Americans, and are affected by all the challenges our heterosexual brothers and sisters face. Gay or straight, we all need jobs, financial security, protection from enemies — both foreign and domestic — and a safety net should we fall and can’t pick ourselves back up; in short, everything the founding fathers and our United States constitution promises us.
So is it incumbent upon our president to mention us specifically in every major speech? Was it important for Obama to have mentioned the LGBTQ community — more than he did — in this State of the Union? Did he acknowledge us enough?
Some in the gay community think yes, some think no. The Advocate’s Andrew Harmon, in “Obama: Mum on Marriage“Â writes that “marriage equality, clearly the holy grail of civil rights advancements for national LGBT groups and an issue at the heart of multiple state battles, was not mentioned. That left some advocates, though perhaps not surprised, wanting more.”
“I thought it was a good speech, aspirational in many ways, as it should be, even though I thought the president missed an opportunity to build on the repeal of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ and lead the nation forward toward full LGBT equality,†said Richard Socarides, president of Equality Matters and a former White House adviser to President Bill Clinton.”
Was it a missed opportunity to send a strong message to America that gay or straight, we all need jobs, financial security, protection from enemies, both foreign and domestic, a safety net should we fall and can’t pick ourselves back up; in short, everything the constitution promises us?
Gay men and lesbians, bisexuals, and transgenders are all treated as second-class citizens by our government. We operate at a disadvantage: an economic and emotional disadvantage.
Gays and lesbians, bisexuals and transgenders can be fired in a majority of states just for being who we are.
We don’t have the economic or emotional protections of marriage. There are at least 1138 federal benefits our heterosexual brothers and sisters are afforded by the federal government that we are legally prohibited from enjoining.
That’s not fair, not right, and not American.
National Gay and Lesbian Task Force Executive Director Rea Carey on the issue of equality and Obama’s State of the Union address said, “The president should pave the way.”
“If the president is truly serious about job creation and boosting America’s economic well-being, he must provide leadership and action in helping to pass employment protections for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people and ending the costly and unjust federal marriage ban.”
“Fact is, the state of the union for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people remains largely one of inequality, as we can still be fired from or denied employment in many parts of the country for nothing other than bias, and marriage inequality relegates our families to second-class status.”
Last night, President Obama said, “Our troops come from every corner of this country – they are black, white, Latino, Asian and Native American. They are Christian and Hindu, Jewish and Muslim. And, yes, we know that some of them are gay. Starting this year, no American will be forbidden from serving the country they love because of who they love.”
By the way, here are a few words President Obama didn’t say: marriage, Â civil rights, DREAM Act, bullying, suicides, Â equality, Â lesbian, Â climate change, Â global warming, sexual orientation, Â ENDA, Â DOMA, Â guns, Â gun control.
Should our president have done more during the State of the Union address than mention he signed into law the bill that repeals “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell?”
Should he have mentioned ENDA, the Employment Non-Discrimination Act that would protect LGBTQ people from being fired for who they are?
Should he have mentioned his stated desire to repeal DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act, the law that makes it illegal for the federal government to recognize married same-sex couples?
These issues are at the heart of financial, economic, emotional, and societal discrimination of gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transgenders.
Some say that there is no way Obama will be able to give life to these critical pieces of the gay agenda with a Republican-controlled House, so why offer empty words? Others say that having a president keep these words and ideas alive is important. Both are correct.
On the issue of marriage equality not being mentioned in the State of the Union, Washington Post editorial writer Jonathan Capehart writes, “Stand in line, folks. He didn’t mention gun control, either. Would anyone suggest he didn’t really care about that issue or the folks who care about the issue?”
Saying, “Evolutions require as much patience as persistence,” Capehart adds, “When it comes to Obama and marriage equality, gays need to take a page from Obama and his handling of DADT repeal. Richard Socarides, former adviser to President Clinton and the new head of Equality Matters, told the Advocate, “Press him at every turn,” he said, “and do so creatively and strategically.”
Truth Wins Out founder Wayne Besen writes, “If the election were held today, Barack Obama would capture an overwhelming majority of the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender vote. Indeed, I believe that the LGBT community will be his most loyal block of supporters other than African Americans — and maybe Latinos if Republicans insist on passing more Arizona-type immigration laws.”
Besen goes on to say “the state of the union with most LGBT voters — following a two-year rocky relationship — remains quite stable, although not entirely satisfying.”
Make no mistake. No other president has ever done more for the LGBTQ community than Barack Obama. He is fulfilling his promises to us. Some think just not fast enough. Others think we risk alienating those in the White House who are trying to make things better for us.
What do you think?
Enjoy this piece?
… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.
NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.
Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.
 |
President Donald Trump is reportedly suing Rupert Murdoch and Dow Jones, the parent company of The Wall Street Journal, over the publication of a story alleging he sent a “bawdy” birthday letter in 2003 to Jeffrey Epstein, the now-notorious convicted sex offender who died in 2019.
“Court records show that Trump filed a lawsuit alleging libel against Murdoch, the Journal’s publisher, Dow Jones, and the reporters who wrote the article in federal court for the Southern District of Florida,” CNBC reported late Friday afternoon.
Trump vehemently denied the Journal’s report and publicly threatened to sue after it was published. The Journal had reported in its story that Trump had warned he would take legal action if the story ran.
“The Wall Street Journal printed a FAKE letter, supposedly to Epstein,” Trump wrote on his Truth Social platform Thursday night. “These are not my words, not the way I talk. Also, I don’t draw pictures. I told Rupert Murdoch it was a Scam, that he shouldn’t print this Fake Story. But he did, and now I’m going to sue his a– off, and that of his third rate newspaper. Thank you for your attention to this matter! DJT”
READ MORE: FBI Told to Flag Mentions of Trump in Epstein Files, Dem Says in Scathing Letter to Bondi
Image via Reuters
One thousand employees of the Federal Bureau of Investigation sifting through thousands of pages of the Epstein files were instructed to flag any mentions of President Donald Trump, according to Democratic U.S. Senator Dick Durbin, the Ranking Member of the Judiciary Committee.
“According to information my office received,” Senator Durbin wrote in a letter (below) to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi on Friday, “you…pressured the FBI to put approximately 1,000 personnel…on 24-hour shifts to review approximately 100,000 Epstein-related records in order to produce more documents that could then be released on an arbitrarily short deadline.”
“My office was told that these personnel were instructed to ‘flag’ any records in which President Trump was mentioned,” Durbin charged.
The files are from the criminal investigation into the notorious Jeffrey Epstein, who was convicted of child sex offenses.
RELATED: ‘He’s So Frustrated’: Johnson Defends Trump Over Explosive Epstein Birthday Letter
In his letter, Senator Durbin also posed a series of more than a dozen questions to Bondi. Among them:
“Have you personally reviewed all files in DOJ’s possession related to Jeffrey Epstein?”
“The records DOJ released on February 27 did not include a client list. Why did you
publicly claim on February 21 that the client list was ‘sitting on my desk right now to review’?”
“Why were personnel told to flag records in which President Trump was mentioned?”
“Please list all political appointees and senior DOJ officials involved in the decision to flag records in which President Trump was mentioned.”
“What happened to the records mentioning President Trump once they were flagged?”
CNBC reported that “Durbin asked the Justice Department and FBI to explain what his office called ‘apparent discrepancies’ regarding handling of the Epstein files and findings from a Justice Department memo.”
In his four-page letter, Durbin also wrote, “in 2002, Mr. Trump said of Mr. Epstein, ‘I’ve known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy, He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.’ Just yesterday, it was reported that the Department previously reviewed a ‘leather-bound album’ comprised of dozens of letters from Mr. Epstein’s friends in celebration of his 50th birthday in 2003.”
READ MORE: ‘War Is Peace’: White House’s Navarro Mocked Over Claim Tariffs Are ‘Tax Cuts’
“The letters were collected by Mr. Epstein’s partner Ghislaine Maxwell and included one from President Trump that allegedly ‘contains several lines of typewritten text framed by the outline of a naked woman, which appears to be hand-drawn with a heavy marker … and the future president’s signature is a squiggly ‘Donald’ below her waist.'”
“Despite tens of thousands of personnel hours reviewing and re-reviewing these Epstein- related records over the course of two weeks in March, it took DOJ more than three additional months to officially find there is ‘no incriminating ‘client list,’ and the memorandum with this finding includes no mention of the whistleblower or additional documents, the existence of which you publicly claimed on February 27.”
Read a copy of Senator Durbin’s letter below or at this link.
Pam Bondi, Kash Patel, and Dan Bongino have made a mess of the Epstein files.
It’s time to clear it up once and for all for the American people. pic.twitter.com/WQw13gmf1F
— Senate Judiciary Democrats 🇺🇸 (@JudiciaryDems) July 18, 2025
READ MORE: ‘Trust in Trump’: White House Touts ‘Incredible’ Economy as Inflation Jumps
Image via Reuters
U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, after cutting 1,300 employees last week, is now ordering diplomats to not comment on foreign elections and internal affairs—limiting official communications to congratulating the declared winner.
“Rubio has instructed U.S. diplomats not to comment on the legitimacy or fairness of foreign elections, breaking with decades of American diplomatic practice,” The Daily Beast reports. In a memo, the Secretary stated that U.S. missions will no longer issue election-related statements unless there is a “clear and compelling” foreign policy reason for doing so.
“Diplomatic personnel writing official messages are instead instructed to ask themselves: ‘Would the President say this?'”
The memo, seen by Reuters, says the messages “should be brief, focused on congratulating the winning candidate and, when appropriate, noting shared foreign policy interests.”
READ MORE: ‘He’s So Frustrated’: Johnson Defends Trump Over Explosive Epstein Birthday Letter
The memo makes clear, based on President Trump’s remarks, that the U.S. will “pursue partnerships with countries wherever our strategic interests align,” regardless of democratic values.
U.S. promotion of human rights, democracy, and press freedoms has traditionally been a “core foreign policy objective,” Reuters reported.
“Under Trump, the administration has increasingly moved away from the promotion of democracy and human rights, largely seeing it as interference in another country’s affairs.”
The Washington Post adds that for “decades, the United States has offered judgments on whether elections were conducted in a free or fair matter [sic], a judgment that can have significant impact in countries.”
“Scholars have accused the United States of democratic backsliding since Trump, who refused to accept the results of the 2020 presidential election, returned to office this year.
President Trump and Vice President JD Vance have defended right-wing and far-right political groups, including Germany’s Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, which reportedly has ties to right-wing extremists.
Secretary Rubio in May ignited a “spat” with Germany’s foreign ministry when it “hit back…after he criticized the decision to classify the Alternative for Germany party as a ‘right-wing extremist’ organization,” the Associated Press reported at the time.
READ MORE: ‘War Is Peace’: White House’s Navarro Mocked Over Claim Tariffs Are ‘Tax Cuts’
Image via Reuters
Trump Sues Murdoch Over WSJ’s Epstein Birthday Letter Story
FBI Told to Flag Mentions of Trump in Epstein Files, Dem Says in Scathing Letter to Bondi
‘Would the President Say This?’: Rubio Demands Diplomats Echo Trump
‘He’s So Frustrated’: Johnson Defends Trump Over Explosive Epstein Birthday Letter
‘War Is Peace’: White House’s Navarro Mocked Over Claim Tariffs Are ‘Tax Cuts’
News2 days ago‘War Is Peace’: White House’s Navarro Mocked Over Claim Tariffs Are ‘Tax Cuts’
News3 days agoRepublican Says Trump on Immigration Could Be Like Lincoln Was for Slavery
News3 days ago‘Go Home’: Noem Tells Farmers to Help Their Undocumented Workers ‘Self Deport’
News4 days agoTrump Appears to Forget He Appointed Fed Chair — Denies Rumors He May Fire Him
News3 days ago‘Total Nonsense’: Stephen Miller Blasted Over ‘Wonders’ of Life ‘When Illegals Are Gone’
News2 days ago‘Trust in Trump’: White House Touts ‘Incredible’ Economy as Inflation Jumps
News4 days ago‘Loathsome’: Fox Host’s ‘What Up, My Nazi?’ Rant Slammed by Civil Rights Icon
News2 days ago‘He’s So Frustrated’: Johnson Defends Trump Over Explosive Epstein Birthday Letter