Michelle Obama Confronts Gay-Rights Protester, Threatens To Leave Fundraiser

[manarak]

"You all decide. You have one choice."

Congratulations on correctly using the word "choice". A lot of people would have said "You have two choices".

correct use of the word "alternative" is equally simple, but for many people the word is more obscure than "choice".

[Publicus]

"You all decide. You have one choice."

Congratulations on correctly using the word "choice". A lot of people would have said "You have two choices".

correct use of the word "alternative" is equally simple, but for many people the word is more obscure than "choice".

Wordsmith!

[manarak]

"You all decide. You have one choice."

Congratulations on correctly using the word "choice". A lot of people would have said "You have two choices".

correct use of the word "alternative" is equally simple, but for many people the word is more obscure than "choice".

Wordsmith!

I don't make the words, I just use them!

[Jingthing]

One would think the gays could fade away from the headlines now they can marry, but no they don't. What is it this time they want? Federal equality? Are they making stuff up?

In the U.S. gay people CAN marry in a limited but increasing number of STATES. However these marriages are NOT recognized at the federal level for very important things like taxation, immigration, and social security survivor benefits. THIS MONTH, in the U.S. supreme court there is a fair chance this unfair discrimination of the gay married (in those states) will be relieved. However, even if that happens, those same couples moving to a non-gay-marriage state would immediately lose their federal rights.

The OP I think explains this woman's issue, which is another important issue. She isn't making it up. Marriage equality is an important part but not the TOTALITY of the decades long struggle for gay civil rights in the USA. I don't think her TACTICS were politic. She called attention more to her bad behavior than the issue and yes the Obamas ARE good friends and deserve more respect than politicians who are enemies, in other words, sadly, almost ALL republicans.

Edited June 8, 2013 by Jingthing

[chuckd]

One would think the gays could fade away from the headlines now they can marry, but no they don't. What is it this time they want? Federal equality? Are they making stuff up?

In the U.S. gay people CAN marry in a limited but increasing number of STATES. However these marriages are NOT recognized at the federal level for very important things like taxation, immigration, and social security survivor benefits. THIS MONTH, in the U.S. supreme court there is a fair chance this unfair discrimination of the gay married (in those states) will be relieved. However, even if that happens, those same couples moving to a non-gay-marriage state would immediately lose their federal rights.

The OP I think explains this woman's issue, which is another important issue. She isn't making it up. Marriage equality is an important part but not the TOTALITY of the decades long struggle for gay civil rights in the USA. I don't think her TACTICS were politic. She called attention more to her bad behavior than the issue and yes the Obamas ARE good friends and deserve more respect than politicians who are enemies, in other words, sadly, almost ALL republicans.

Rather than speculating on why Ms. Sturtz confronted Michelle, you might want to read her very own op-ed explaining her motivation.

From the vaunted Washington Post.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Why I confronted the first lady

By Ellen Sturtz, Saturday, June 8, 4:00 AM

Ellen Sturtz is a retired public servant and an advocate for LGBT equality.

When Barack Obama was running for President in 2008, I thought he was serious about protecting the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community from workplace discrimination. He made two key promises — that he would sign an executive order providing workplace protections by federal contractors, and that he would help pass the Employment Non-Discrimination Act (ENDA), ending workplace discrimination by all employers. I contributed to the campaign, expecting that if elected, he would keep his word to fight for our community.

Five years later, I’m still waiting.......

Article continues here: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/michelle-obamas-heckler-why-i-confronted-the-first-lady/2013/06/07/5dc68c1c-cf98-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_story.html

[Jingthing]

I agree with her on THAT issue. I already said that. But not her tactics at that event. That is all.

Edited June 8, 2013 by Jingthing

[chuckd]

I agree with her on THAT issue. I already said that. But not her tactics at that event. That is all.

You might not have had to time read the link, so let me give you another small portion of her op-ed.

"Some have said that the first lady wasn’t a proper target because she is not an elected official. However, time and again, the first lady has come to our community and asked us to “max out” on our contributions to the DNC. In fact, she had just made the same request of several hundred LGBT attendees, days after Senate Democrats had refused to include same-sex binational couples in their immigration reform bill. Despite the Democratic Party happily cashing LGBT checks, I have not seen the Obama administration “max out” on the myriad ways that the government could protect the LGBT community."

Would you disagree if she used those same tactics at a speech being given by a republican?

[Jingthing]

I think people should be allowed to finished their speeches. Period.

However, if people are spouting bigoted hate speech, like some republicans do, I think some kinds of theatrical protest actions can sometimes be justified and can sometimes be tactically beneficial. It's a case by case.

I don't think this lady's actions helped the issue. I know she has some lefty support, but I think in general gay supporters of Obama think that both he and his wife deserve enough respect to be able to finish their speeches.

Edited June 8, 2013 by Jingthing

[Credo]

The chances of someone like, say, Mrs. Romney ever being seen publicly with a gay or lesbian is pretty small, let alone giving a speech in one of their homes.

[chuckd]

I think people should be allowed to finished their speeches. Period.

However, if people are spouting bigoted hate speech, like some republicans do, I think some kinds of theatrical protest actions can sometimes be justified and can sometimes be tactically beneficial. It's a case by case.

I don't think this lady's actions helped the issue. I know she has some lefty support, but I think in general gay supporters of Obama think that both he and his wife deserve enough respect to be able to finish their speeches.

So what you just said is it is OK to protest if one disagrees with the content of a speech. You claim it is a case by case issue but fail to address who decides what that particular case by case issue actually is.

This lady apparently felt the issue called for her to address this case enough to use your "case by case" defense.

We all know "gay supporters of Obama think that both he and his wife deserve enough respect to finish their speeches".

Where the gray area is when others give speeches that the gay community might not agree with. Is a disruption of that speech justified and proper?

I personally feel EVERYBODY should be given the respect to finish a speech, regardless of their political position. It's the Left Wing that doesn't seem to share my convictions.

[Jingthing]

Read my post again. I didn't say what you seem to think I said. Protest and interrupting speeches are NOT always the same thing. There are many kinds of protest and there are also many kinds of possible protest tactics at speeches, for example raising banners.

Edited June 8, 2013 by Jingthing

[Publicus]

One would think the gays could fade away from the headlines now they can marry, but no they don't. What is it this time they want? Federal equality? Are they making stuff up?

In the U.S. gay people CAN marry in a limited but increasing number of STATES. However these marriages are NOT recognized at the federal level for very important things like taxation, immigration, and social security survivor benefits. THIS MONTH, in the U.S. supreme court there is a fair chance this unfair discrimination of the gay married (in those states) will be relieved. However, even if that happens, those same couples moving to a non-gay-marriage state would immediately lose their federal rights.

The OP I think explains this woman's issue, which is another important issue. She isn't making it up. Marriage equality is an important part but not the TOTALITY of the decades long struggle for gay civil rights in the USA. I don't think her TACTICS were politic. She called attention more to her bad behavior than the issue and yes the Obamas ARE good friends and deserve more respect than politicians who are enemies, in other words, sadly, almost ALL republicans.

Yes, Republicans are the enemy of gay people in the United States. Anytime I find out someone is in the Republican party, I always ask them for their list of people they hate. Almost every Republican has a list, but the Evangelical Christian Republicans have the longest list and are the most loud.

So we see Prez Obama of the Democratic party is moving on several fronts to advance human rights as in gay rights in the United States.

As I'd posted previously, the radical feminist lesbian warhorses so often go after "straight" women, as in this instance of the targeted and unsuspecting Michelle Obama at a private home during a fundraising event that attracted some 200 almost exclusively women and at least a few warhorses. This warhorse is a raging idiot who needs some patience and restraint. Prez Obama clearly is proceeding one gigantic step at a time.

Give credit to both the president and to the first lady. They deserve it.

Same-Sex Partners Of US Troops To Receive Military Benefits In September

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/same-sex-to-receive-military-benefits-2013-6#ixzz2VbzLdAIJ

I suspect it's the Republican party people who are going to end up burning in hell due to all their hate and consistent history of wicked deeds.

[chuckd]

Yes, Republicans are the enemy of gay people in the United States. Anytime I find out someone is in the Republican party, I always ask them for their list of people they hate. Almost every Republican has a list, but the Evangelical Christian Republicans have the longest list and are the most loud.

So we see Prez Obama of the Democratic party is moving on several fronts to advance human rights as in gay rights in the United States.

As I'd posted previously, the radical feminist lesbian warhorses so often go after "straight" women, as in this instance of the targeted and unsuspecting Michelle Obama at a private home during a fundraising event that attracted some 200 almost exclusively women and at least a few warhorses. This warhorse is a raging idiot who needs some patience and restraint. Prez Obama clearly is proceeding one gigantic step at a time.

Give credit to both the president and to the first lady. They deserve it.

Same-Sex Partners Of US Troops To Receive Military Benefits In September

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/same-sex-to-receive-military-benefits-2013-6#ixzz2VbzLdAIJ

I suspect it's the Republican party people who are going to end up burning in hell due to all their hate and consistent history of wicked deeds.

From your post:

" Anytime I find out someone is in the Republican party, I always ask them for their list of people they hate."

You must be a real toot to have at parties.

[Jingthing]

From your post:

" Anytime I find out someone is in the Republican party, I always ask them for their list of people they hate."

You must be a real toot to have at parties.

Just keeping it real, I reckon.

[Credo]

Chuckd, don't worry, I think he's referring to people IN the Republican Party. I doubt he goes to very many Republican parties.

[chuckd]

Chuckd, don't worry, I think he's referring to people IN the Republican Party. I doubt he goes to very many Republican parties.

Yeah, I don't either. When I meet a Democrat at parties, I pull out my holy beads and try to exorcise the demons out of them.

[Publicus]

Yes, Republicans are the enemy of gay people in the United States. Anytime I find out someone is in the Republican party, I always ask them for their list of people they hate. Almost every Republican has a list, but the Evangelical Christian Republicans have the longest list and are the most loud.

So we see Prez Obama of the Democratic party is moving on several fronts to advance human rights as in gay rights in the United States.

As I'd posted previously, the radical feminist lesbian warhorses so often go after "straight" women, as in this instance of the targeted and unsuspecting Michelle Obama at a private home during a fundraising event that attracted some 200 almost exclusively women and at least a few warhorses. This warhorse is a raging idiot who needs some patience and restraint. Prez Obama clearly is proceeding one gigantic step at a time.

Give credit to both the president and to the first lady. They deserve it.

Same-Sex Partners Of US Troops To Receive Military Benefits In September

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/same-sex-to-receive-military-benefits-2013-6#ixzz2VbzLdAIJ

I suspect it's the Republican party people who are going to end up burning in hell due to all their hate and consistent history of wicked deeds.

From your post:

" Anytime I find out someone is in the Republican party, I always ask them for their list of people they hate."

You must be a real toot to have at parties.

I'm pleased that very few, if any, Republicans I know of attend the kind of parties I do with the people I know.

During 13 years in Washington, most of them in politics and government, I never consciously met a Republican at a party. There used to be some Republicans in the Congress whose staff we could work with and at 10 pm or so, when our "day" was concluded, a politically mixed group go to a restaurant to have dinner and a few drinks.

That's a rarity now. Extremely rare. Which Democratic party staffer wants to have dinner and drinks with a staffer of Sen Ted Cruz? Or Ron Paul, Cong Darrell Issa etc etc?

[snarky66]

I love it when one left wing loon attacks another left wing loon.

No one on planet Earth dare interrupt MO.

[Jingthing]

I love it when one left wing loon attacks another left wing loon.

No one on planet Earth dare interrupt MO.

You'd have to be to the right of Mussolini to call Michelle Obama a left wing loon ...

Edited June 8, 2013 by Jingthing

[chuckd]

Yes, Republicans are the enemy of gay people in the United States. Anytime I find out someone is in the Republican party, I always ask them for their list of people they hate. Almost every Republican has a list, but the Evangelical Christian Republicans have the longest list and are the most loud.

So we see Prez Obama of the Democratic party is moving on several fronts to advance human rights as in gay rights in the United States.

As I'd posted previously, the radical feminist lesbian warhorses so often go after "straight" women, as in this instance of the targeted and unsuspecting Michelle Obama at a private home during a fundraising event that attracted some 200 almost exclusively women and at least a few warhorses. This warhorse is a raging idiot who needs some patience and restraint. Prez Obama clearly is proceeding one gigantic step at a time.

Give credit to both the president and to the first lady. They deserve it.

Same-Sex Partners Of US Troops To Receive Military Benefits In September

Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/same-sex-to-receive-military-benefits-2013-6#ixzz2VbzLdAIJ

I suspect it's the Republican party people who are going to end up burning in hell due to all their hate and consistent history of wicked deeds.

From your post:

" Anytime I find out someone is in the Republican party, I always ask them for their list of people they hate."

You must be a real toot to have at parties.

I'm pleased that very few, if any, Republicans I know of attend the kind of parties I do with the people I know.

During 13 years in Washington, most of them in politics and government, I never consciously met a Republican at a party. There used to be some Republicans in the Congress whose staff we could work with and at 10 pm or so, when our "day" was concluded, a politically mixed group go to a restaurant to have dinner and a few drinks.

That's a rarity now. Extremely rare. Which Democratic party staffer wants to have dinner and drinks with a staffer of Sen Ted Cruz? Or Ron Paul, Cong Darrell Issa etc etc?

I only spent four years in DC so I didn't get out on the political party scene very much. J. Edgar didn't approve of scandal.

Well, you see, I'm a little more adult than that. If I find myself at a party and somebody happens to be toasting your beloved leader, BO, I would simply move to another group in the party and try to have a good time. I've met lots of Democrats in my life and have actually befriended some of them. A few even have a sense of humor but they are mainly golfers, not college professors, who have neither common sense nor a sense of humor.

As a matter of fact, my father and mother never voted for a Republican in their lives. Of course the Democrats in Texas were conservative back then and not the big government socialists they are now.

Why, I have even voted for some Democrats during my lifetime. That's something I am not proud of but I feel it is better to cleanse my conscience than having to carry around such a heavy mental burden any longer. I pray God will forgive me for this transgression because I really don't want to spend my eternal life in hell surrounded by Democrats with no Republicans to talk to.

[Publicus]

I think you need to tell all that to someone who cares or who might be a bit interested.

[hookedondhamma]

One would think the gays could fade away from the headlines now they can marry, but no they don't. What is it this time they want? Federal equality? Are they making stuff up?

They cannot marry and are still denied some basic rights that some of us take for granted. I don't think the rude woman spoke for the majority of gay people, particularly those with some manners.

+1 and a rainbow!

[Publicus]

I think people should be allowed to finished their speeches. Period.

I know she has some lefty support, but I think in general gay supporters of Obama think that both he and his wife deserve enough respect to be able to finish their speeches.

That is nonsense and you know it.. If it were Rumsfeld Ashcroft Cheney or bush you would love to shout them down. Go ahead deny it.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I777 using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

That's what many on the right would like to believe, or might need to believe. Perhaps more caution is in order in trying to assign to others malicious intent and purposes. One can get too cynical, cold, hardbitten..

Edited June 8, 2013 by Publicus

[impulse]

55 posts (and that's in Thailand, no less) and still going.

Had she been polite and proper, nobody outside the meeting would have ever heard of her or the point she was trying to make.

Woman behaves badly and succeeds wildly. She got her 15 minutes. I can see a book deal next. Kind of like Monica....

(Not a slam on her as much as our society's obsession with fame and the infamous)

Edited June 9, 2013 by impulse

[Scott]

A couple of off-topic posts have been deleted. Although side issues are nice to hear, it's time to stick a little closer to the topic. Thanks.

[Rimmer]

Personal Attack removed

[Jingthing]

55 posts (and that's in Thailand, no less) and still going.

Had she been polite and proper, nobody outside the meeting would have ever heard of her or the point she was trying to make.

Woman behaves badly and succeeds wildly. She got her 15 minutes. I can see a book deal next. Kind of like Monica....

(Not a slam on her as much as our society's obsession with fame and the infamous)

Yes she got publicity for the issue. Did she in actuality bring the issue closer to resolution with that particular tactic? I reckon not.

Gays in the USA have made fantastically rapid progress in turning public opinion polls TOWARDS being pro equality and civil rights for gay people. I think at this point actions like that are more likely to hurt than help. I understand impatience but that's what it takes in any system, and especially in the American system.

Edited June 9, 2013 by Jingthing

[impulse]

Jingthing, with that particular act, she probably did not advance the cause.

But what do you think are the chances she'll get more opportunities to advance the cause when she's invited on the late night shows, and Good Morning America and...

And what would her chances of getting those venues be if she had not misbehaved?

Her challenge now if to make something positive of the limelight. Or she can just be the stereotypical bitter lesbian and waste the opportunity.

It's up to her now (and I hope some wise folks that are now coaching her- folks that wouldn't have given her the time of day if she weren't in the spotlight).

Edited June 9, 2013 by impulse

[Jingthing]

I still can't agree.

Enemies of gay rights will think, there goes those "uppity" gay people again; acting out like anarchists, we can't give such people equal rights.

Friends of gay rights correctly recognize President Obama as the most supportive president for gay civil rights issues in American history, and most will not be comfortable dissing such a good friend (indirectly via his wife).

[impulse]

I know what you're saying, but she has a pulpit now.

I did not even see the original kerfuffle.

But if she got on The Daily Show and showed up as an articulate, sincere person and apologized for being rude to the most gay supportive "first couple" in recent history, she may make an impact.

Imagine the positive press all around if she and the first lady were to publicly bury the hatchet, forgive and move on and all...as in: "There's serious work to be done, too important to let one minor incident derail the progress we're making."