Althouse: "Obama did not tout himself as the civil rights candidate in either of his two presidential runs."

April 29, 2013

"Obama did not tout himself as the civil rights candidate in either of his two presidential runs."

"But if gay marriage becomes commonplace throughout America by the end of his second term, something that seems entirely possible right now, that could become an important part of his legacy as president."

Writes Perry Bacon Jr., in a piece written a month ago, which I ran across as I was researching the demographics of support for gay marriage. It's often assumed that black people oppose gay marriage. There's a delusion that the GOP has an opportunity to appeal to black people by leveraging this opposition. How much would black people need to loathe gay marriage to abandon the Democratic Party over this issue?

By the way, those who don't like seeing Obama get credit for anything should hope that the Supreme Court — which has 2 pending cases on the subject — finds a constitutional right to marry a person of one's own sex, because if the issue is left to political decisionmaking, we will end up in the same place and same-sex marriage will be inscribed in Obama's legacy.

49 comments:

Lauderdale Vet said...: The NRA is a civil rights organization.

Just sayin'; 4/29/13, 8:33 AM
Calypso Facto said...: By the way, those who don't like seeing Obama get credit for anything...

That would only work for those whose spitefulness regarding Obama personally outweighs their interest in seeing a sensical reading of the Constitution.; 4/29/13, 8:34 AM
Ignorance is Bliss said...: By the way, those who don't like seeing Obama get credit for anything should hope that the Supreme Court...finds a constitutional right to marry a person of one's own sex...

How much would conservatives need to loathe Obama getting credit for anything to abandon the Constitution over this issue?; 4/29/13, 8:34 AM
I Have Misplaced My Pants said...: I ran across as I was researching the demographics of support for gay marriage

I hope this research wasn't for blogging purposes. I think we've all had enough lectures on this topic, thanks.; 4/29/13, 8:36 AM
cubanbob said...: And if the court doesn't find a right to SSM will Perry then claim Obama has been a perfect failure?; 4/29/13, 8:37 AM
Anonymous said...: LOL,

Obama and Civil Rights.
He ran as fast as he could away from both traditional civil rights and the Gay Marriage topic.

Obama Saddleback 2008:

Obama: I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian ... it’s also a sacred union. You know, God’s in the mix...

It was to his advantage to be against it till the day it was to his advantage to be for it.

Just like Public financing. For, Against, now For...

Morals are not his strong side, but he was taught about political morals in Chi-town. enough said...; 4/29/13, 8:38 AM
Tank said...: Will the Gosnell murders also be part of his legacy.

That "procedure" is the kind of thing he actually supported.

Giving Zero credit for gay marriage advances is like giving Clinton credit for the dot com boom during his presidency. These things just happened at the same time. No causation was involved. Idiot Biden deserved more credit.; 4/29/13, 8:40 AM
Sorun said...: "as I was researching the demographics of support for gay marriage. It's often assumed that black people oppose gay marriage."

What did you find in your research? Do blacks oppose gay marriage more than other racial groups? (We don't want to just assume something).; 4/29/13, 8:41 AM
clint said...: Does anyone besides Obama himself really believe that most conservatives choose their positions on issues based on a personal loathing for President Obama?

I hope for same-sex marriage to be legitimized by state legislatures, one by one, over the course of the next decade -- because THAT is how social change comes to a free country.; 4/29/13, 8:41 AM
SteveR said...: The timing of Obama's new found support for same-sex marriage was so blantantly political (as was his opposition to begin with) that anyone who wants to give him any credit for "progress" in that area should feel used.; 4/29/13, 8:43 AM
KCFleming said...: "A recent anti-bullying presentation at a middle school in New York that focused on homosexuality and gender identity has angered parents after their daughters have come home to tell them they were forced to ask another girl for a kiss.

According to reports, the session occurred last week at Linden Avenue Middle School in Red Hook, New York, near Poughkeepsie. A group of students from Bard College led two workshops for the youth, separated by gender.

During the workshop for girls, the 13 and 14-year-olds were told to ask one another for a kiss. They were also taught words such as “pansexual” and “genderqueer.”

She told me, 'Mom we all get teased and picked on enough. Now I'm going to be called a lesbian because I had to ask another girl if I could kiss her,'" parent Mandy Coon said."

I mean, how could gay marriage possibly affect anyone else?
What could go wrong?

So it's probably nothing.; 4/29/13, 8:44 AM
Anonymous said...: those who don't like seeing Obama get credit for anything should hope that the Supreme Court...

What should those who don't like seeing Obama get credit for something someone else did hope for? Doesn't that group include you?; 4/29/13, 8:49 AM
Ray said...: If you think the gay agenda is for gay couples to be treated like everyone else your wrong: http://illinoisfamily.org/homosexuality/homosexual-activist-admits-true-purpose-of-battle-is-to-destroy-marriage/ H/T Right Scoop; 4/29/13, 8:54 AM
Cody Jarrett said...: Oh good. Another SSM post.

Professor, would it be possible for you to separate out the SSM posts, the way you do your legal posts? Because, as Missing Pants Lady metioned, I think we've had enough of the lecturing and hectoring.

No one's mind is going to be changed at this point--probably quite the opposite, I think.; 4/29/13, 9:01 AM
Unknown said...: Obama can have all the credit for same sex marriage.
He can have it for every other thing he's done to tear down the country.
I plan to stay as far away from credit from those things as possible. I want to be actively in opposition to those things.
History will judge it, but I plan to be on the right side of history.
No good can come of most of what Obama has done and he can have all the credit now and forever.; 4/29/13, 9:07 AM
Illuninati said...: "By the way, those who don't like seeing Obama get credit for anything should hope that the Supreme Court — which has 2 pending cases on the subject"

Everyone gives Obama credit for his accomplishments. The issue is whether his accomplishments are positive or negative.

For example, we are willing to give Jimmy Carter credit for the overthrow of the Sha of Iran and for the present fundamentalist regime. He deserves it. In the same way, Obama deserves full credit for the outcome of the Arab Spring and for the over throw of Mubarak, but is that a positive development? Marxists/socialists are thrilled with the rise of the Muslim Brotherhood, but some of us believe the world is much more dangerous because of Obama's accomplishments.

The same credit is due to Obama for elevating sodomy to a fundamental human right, with its own special status with special legal protections.; 4/29/13, 9:09 AM
sinz52 said...: Even blacks who might agree with the GOP that same-sex marriage is unwise, will not like to see the GOP use that issue.

Because all minorities know from history that when a major political party turns on one minority group, it often ends up turning on others.

Hence trying to appeal to blacks by saying "We really like you, it's just those lousy moocher Hispanic immigrants we don't like" is going to fail.

Likewise, appealing to blacks and Hispanics by saying "We really like you, it's just those immoral gays and lesbians we don't like" is bound to fail too.

All minorities are repelled by seeing the white majority go after a minority--even if it's a different minority.; 4/29/13, 9:13 AM
Brian Brown said...: They were also taught words such as “pansexual” and “genderqueer.”

Thank a union member!; 4/29/13, 9:15 AM
Brian Brown said...: because if the issue is left to political decisionmaking, we will end up in the same place

Hilarious.

And this will all happen in 3 years and all credit will be due to Obama?

Again: when you talk about religion, gay marriage, or race, your IQ falls to about 60.; 4/29/13, 9:16 AM
Ann Althouse said...: "And if the court doesn't find a right to SSM will Perry then claim Obama has been a perfect failure?"

Of course not! Perry is crediting Obama with leading political opinion on the topic. The Supreme Court case deals with the legal argument that there is a requirement whether the political majority likes it or not.; 4/29/13, 9:17 AM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: "Obama did not tout himself as the civil rights candidate in either of his two presidential runs."

That's because by 'virtue' of his ethnicity, or whatever he was/is.

All I had to do was look at him and look at whatshisname? Kerry and I knew who was the civil rights candidate.; 4/29/13, 9:28 AM
n.n said...: If equal protection is the issue, then why are we restricting its discussion to homosexual marriage?

Why don't we discuss other equal protection issues, including normalization of other dysfunctional or unproductive behaviors?

Why don't we discuss the premier equal protection issue: elective abortion? When a human life has no voice to protest or Arms to challenge its deprivation of life.

Why are the normalization of one dysfunctional behavior, and preservation of another (i.e. elective abortion), so important that it obscures the real issue: equal protection?

This is not a civil rights issue. It would be if couplets were rejected, but they are not. Their behavior is tolerated, as are most dysfunctional behaviors, which do not pose an immediate threat to the stability and viability of society and humanity.; 4/29/13, 9:29 AM
dbp said...: It all kind of fits together: Althouse assumes that those of us opposed to SSM have no rational basis for it. So what better way to combat our gay-hate than to use our supposed Obama hate?

It makes sense. Except for the assumptions being entirely wrong...; 4/29/13, 9:30 AM
Brian Brown said...: By the way, those who don't like seeing Obama get credit for anything should hope that the Supreme Court — which has 2 pending cases on the subject — finds a constitutional right to marry a person of one's own sex, because if the issue is left to political decisionmaking, we will end up in the same place and same-sex marriage will be inscribed in Obama's legacy.

This is silly and non-sensical.

Every state in America is not going to legalize gay marriage during the Obama Presidency.

And, since that won't happen, if they do, post-Obama, him getting credit is absurd.

The Obama Administration is on record saying this is a state matter.; 4/29/13, 9:36 AM
Tim said...: Two percent of the population are homosexual?

Slightly more, maybe?

We know the "10% are Gay" argument is complete bullshit, by at least a factor of two.

So, even as homosexuals are entitled to all the legal contours of marriage, like anyone else, but without the word "marriage," once they gain recognition of the right to the word, it becomes a huge civil rights victory?

For Obama?

I suppose this is a reach, all they around, so they'll take it, even though it is almost entirely symbolic.

As for the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, a far, far larger group, Obama and the Democrats are beavering away to curtail those rights as fast as they possibly can.

Yet the scales of Justice in the eyes of the media and idiot liberals will be read as "Obama and the Democrats advance civil rights."

So much bullshit in this world.; 4/29/13, 9:44 AM
ricpic said...: The Republican Party has a tremendous opportunity to appeal to straight white people...but it won't.; 4/29/13, 9:52 AM
edutcher said...: Same sex marriage is not a civil rights issue, it's a hustle just like Chuckie Schumer's AmnestyCare bill, so that's the first thing wrong with the piece.

Ann Althouse said...

same-sex marriage will be inscribed in Obama's legacy.

Just like the stimulus, ObamaTax, entrenched unemployment, and Benghazi?

sinz52 said...

Because all minorities know from history that when a major political party turns on one minority group, it often ends up turning on others.

You mean like the Party of Slavery, Jim Crow, and Welfare?; 4/29/13, 9:54 AM
damikesc said...: Of course not! Perry is crediting Obama with leading political opinion on the topic

Because, before Obama changed his mind right at the time he risked losing gay funding...NOBODY supported it.

No ma'am.; 4/29/13, 9:58 AM
damikesc said...: He has, mind you, the identical position Dick Cheney has had for years.; 4/29/13, 9:58 AM
garage mahal said...: Oh HELL no!; 4/29/13, 10:00 AM
Balfegor said...: Re: Althouse:

By the way, those who don't like seeing Obama get credit for anything should hope that the Supreme Court — which has 2 pending cases on the subject — finds a constitutional right to marry a person of one's own sex, because if the issue is left to political decisionmaking, we will end up in the same place and same-sex marriage will be inscribed in Obama's legacy.

I think you are reading the incentives wrong here -- lots of people oppose both gay marriage and Obama. Adding two silly things together does not make them wise.

Furthermore, it's hard for me to see what Obama has done to lead on the issue. He's the first sitting President to agitate for gay marriage, such. But has his support actually done anything to advance the issue? I mean, there are presidents who have taken concrete steps to advance civil rights -- Eisenhower, for example, sending in federal troops and pushing for the 1957 civil rights act -- but no one thinks of civil rights as part of Eisenhower's "legacy." That might be because Eisenhower has so many more impressive achievements on his resume. But it's also because for something to be a legacy, not only does it have to be more than just words, it actually has to represent a dramatic shift. Clinton's legacy is the gutting of welfare. Bush II's legacy is the War on Terror. Obama's is Obamacare.

Offering up a bit of rhetorical support for the idea of gay marriage simply doesn't rate.; 4/29/13, 10:02 AM
Steve Koch said...: Mind boggling that Althouse teaches constitutional law.

Since one of her children is gay, gay marriage is a hot button issue for Althouse (i.e. parental reaction to protect her children). This parental protectiveness overcomes Althouse's normal tendency to wander aimlessly intellectually, so that her brain's functioning is no longer an example of the butterfly effect.

Althouse reveals that she has no clue how conservatives think (not surprising) re: abortion. There are social conservatives who oppose sodomy and/or want to protect the institution of marriage. These conservatives are not going to support gay marriage no how, no way.

There are constitutional conservatives who protect the constitution and realize that judges deciding issues such as gay marriage for our society is a violation of the constitution. These conservatives may or may not care much about gay marriage but they definitely want the issue decided by elections, not judges.

BTW, there will come a day when the lefties betray gays, it is a simple matter of demographics. Once the lefties have bought themselves one party dominance, bye bye democracy. At that point, dems can take all the money they want from the affluent and no longer need financial support from numerically tiny but affluent minorities such as gays but the dems will still need scapegoats to blame for governmental incompetence. At that point tiny minorities that have been dem partisans will wish they had protected the constitution instead of eviscerating it because the constitution is their strongest protection.; 4/29/13, 10:06 AM
Steve M. Galbraith said...: "...finds a constitutional right to marry a person of one's own sex"

Why does Althouse continue to present the issue this way?

Americans have the constitutional right to marry one's own sex. The states can not prevent a same sex couple from getting married anywhere. For example, the Episcopal Church performs marriages of same sex couples throughout the nation.

The question is whether states must recognize for legal purposes such marriages. That is, give a marriage license to same sex couples.

But you don't need a marriage license in order to marry. If every state got out of the marriage business and stopped giving out licenses, people could still get married.

Yes, I understand the importantance - for legal purposes especially - of having that license. It confers all sorts of benefits to the couple. But those benefits are not needed in order for marriage.

This is about equal protection and not liberty.; 4/29/13, 10:21 AM
Michelle Dulak Thomson said...: damikesc,

Because, before Obama changed his mind right at the time he risked losing gay funding...NOBODY supported it.

Heavy sarcasm rightly inferred.

Obama's "legacy" on this issue is going to be that he was officially in favor of SSM (when running for State Senate), before he was officially against SSM (when running for President), before he was officially in favor of SSM (when running for a second term). Each declaration was a political calculation, and there's no way to tell which is truth and which falsehood, except that it can hardly all be truth.

The only thing possibly more nauseating than that dance is Hillary Clinton's "Hey! Me too!"; 4/29/13, 10:26 AM
mccullough said...: Dick Cheney should get a lot of credit. Back in 2004 in the summer before the election, W. was blabbering about a constitutional amendment to ban gay marriage. It was political posturing, of course, just like Obama.

Cheney didn't criticize W.'s pandering proposal but he didn't endorse it either. He has been a quiet and consistent supporter of gay marriage for awhile. "Freedom means freedom for everyone."

But that fucks up the narrative.; 4/29/13, 11:12 AM
Pastafarian said...: How much would Althouse have to loathe her conservative commenters, to imagine that their only basis for opposing same-sex marriage is spitefulness toward Obama?

In how much disdain must Althouse hold the intellect of her conservative commenters,to think they'd be swayed by such a condescending and facile argument?; 4/29/13, 11:26 AM
bgates said...: If it's true that blacks generally oppose gay marriage, should those that support gay marriage hope for the rise of a white supremacist movement that strips blacks of their citizenship and sends them back to Africa? Because, gay marriage.; 4/29/13, 11:38 AM
Steve M. Galbraith said...: " should those that support gay marriage hope for the rise of a white supremacist movement that strips blacks of their citizenship and sends them back to Africa? Because, gay marriage."

I think perhaps a better analogy or response would be a movement to reinstate anti-miscegenation laws that forbid mixed race couples from marrying or even living together.; 4/29/13, 11:43 AM
Steve M. Galbraith said...: "I think perhaps a better analogy or response would be a movement to reinstate anti-miscegenation laws that forbid mixed race couples from marrying or even living together."

But that, of course, wouldn't make sense since not all black Americans oppose SSM. Why punish them all for the views of some, even if it's the majority?

And reinstating such laws would probably weaken the case for SSM anyway.

Nonsensical on numerous levels.; 4/29/13, 11:55 AM
Anonymous said...: By the way, those who don't like seeing Obama get credit for anything should hope that the Supreme Court — which has 2 pending cases on the subject — finds a constitutional right to marry a person of one's own sex, because if the issue is left to political decisionmaking, we will end up in the same place and same-sex marriage will be inscribed in Obama's legacy.

Ah. This is more of the Althouse/SSM Borg threat: Resistance is futile! As usual, no principled argument. It's not even supported commentary.

How does Althouse know political decisionmaking will lead to the same place, which I presume is nation-wide acceptance of same-sex marriage

She doesn't. She just says so.

If the Supreme Court doesn't invent a constitutional right for SSM, I see no assurance SSM will be rammed through in all states, or even in most.
Whatever happens next will take at least a few years, and the next few years look rocky indeed. No one's crystal ball is clear enough to see ahead. For all anyone knows, Althouse included, liberal power peaked with the 2012 election.

Obama and his liberal base couldn't win on gun-control. It could be all downhill from here. There are any number of crises ahead that could blow up in everyone's face, and same-sex marriage could look like a really silly priority afterward.; 4/29/13, 11:55 AM
Anonymous said...: There's a delusion that the GOP has an opportunity to appeal to black people by leveraging this opposition.

Maybe there are Republicans who the this "delusion" though I can't think of any off the top of my head.

But we do know that Obama and many prominent Democrats had the delusion because they wouldn't support SSM until Biden blew the issue open last year.

More leading from behind.; 4/29/13, 12:01 PM
Anonymous said...: By the way, those who don't like seeing Obama get credit for anything should hope that the Supreme Court — which has 2 pending cases on the subject — finds a constitutional right to marry a person of one's own sex, because if the issue is left to political decisionmaking, we will end up in the same place and same-sex marriage will be inscribed in Obama's legacy.

Another thing...

Here we have Althouse's standard, condescending trope that group X should hope they get the result they don't want because in her superior wisdom she knows it will paradoxially be better for X. She usually doesn't support her argument, and she doesn't in this case either.

Some things could work that way but I don't see it in this one. If SSM becomes the law of the land through the Supreme Court or political decision-making, Obama will get credit for it either way. It happened on his watch; he will get credit, whether he deserves it or not.; 4/29/13, 12:19 PM
Brian Brown said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 4/29/13, 12:30 PM
Methadras said...: Oh wow, so the notions of being a 'civil' rights president just fell into his lap? I'm laughing at the mere notion.; 4/29/13, 1:16 PM
Brian Brown said...: because in her superior wisdom she knows it will paradoxially be better for X. She usually doesn't support her argument, and she doesn't in this case either.

I don't expect anyone who so casually announces that the state can regulate marriages in a manner limiting it to couples, just not opposite sex couples, as Ann did, to put forth any support for any arguments.; 4/29/13, 1:20 PM
Gene said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 4/29/13, 3:11 PM
Gene said...: Here is something I'd like to see Obama get credit for--given that he's such a big supporter of same sex marriage, he is in effect giving the government's imprematur to sodomy. Unprotected sodomy has resulted in millions of deaths from AIDS, cost us billions of dollars that could be better spent fighting diseases which are currently unpreventable and caused untold heartache everywhere.

If the country of Los Angeles can require porn actors to wear condoms, then the Obama administration can push for laws requiring condoms for anal sex.

It's a public health measure, much as requiring pasteurization of milk and hot water in restaurant kitchens.

If Obama would do this, in addition to all the other achievements liberals are eager to ascribe to him, he will also forever after be known as the president who stamped out AIDS.; 4/29/13, 3:13 PM
Steven said...: if the issue is left to political decisionmaking, we will end up in the same place and same-sex marriage will be inscribed in Obama's legacy.

Wanna bet?; 4/29/13, 3:30 PM
Gene said...: A recent anti-bullying presentation at a middle school in New York that focused on homosexuality and gender identity has angered parents after their daughters have come home to tell them they were forced to ask another girl for a kiss.

What were the boys forced to do? Drop trou and bend over?; 4/29/13, 5:37 PM