|
(Cross-posted from Blue News Tribune. Blame sabutai at Blue Mass Group for putting me in a metamood.)
Here is something I am tempted to call misguided activism:
http://www.jennymccarthybodyco...
But is it? It certainly gets one's attention.
It got me thinking about the state of activism in the Obama era. For one thing, I didn't hear a single Democrat mention John Ensign yesterday. If he were a Democrat (and this were June 2001), the GOP would howl.
So all hail leftist restraint, or maybe leftist prioritizing. But sometimes, I must admit, I miss the delirious, joyous defiance that was Queer Nation ("We're here, and we're queer!"). They are alleged to have stormed into St. Patrick's Cathedral in New York and thrown holy water on to the ground to protest the Catholic Church stance on gays. At the time, even pro-gay rights people were offended by Queer Nation. One person argued to me that they kept some people in the closet, because they didn't want to be associated with that type of militancy (this anecdote was given without examples).
But here is what I remember: President George H.W. Bush saying he had no problems with gays, just the militant ones. He wouldn't have said that if he didn't have to. In other words, Queer Nation (and other groups) expanded the terms of the national debate. That may have been a necesary contribution to advancing gay rights.
So what now? The tension is pretty obvious: condemn Obama for not moving quickly enough, or keep thinking "President McCain" and "Sarah Palin an aging heartbeat away" and be patient.
I have a foot firmly in each camp. For one thing, I admit a "no single payer" hangover. On one hand, I understand why it was taken off the table; on the other hand, I don't understand why. We have both the House and the Senate. I know there is no Democratic unity on the issue, but there is a large chunk of the party that wants single payer. Why not, then?
Thoughts?
|
