Obama Likes Gay Marriage. Good For Him.

I posted my review of Albert Brooks' 2030 right about the time Obama was telling ABC News that he "personally" thinks gay couples should be able to get married (and since I've been grading everything lately, I give Obama's endorsement a "B").  I knew it was happening even as I was completing the review, but wanted to finish that first because, well, I cared more about that.  Like most everything else in Obama's presidency, my reaction to this was a measured "Cool.  Now what?"  If that sounds lukewarm, it's because it is; I long have been on him.  I like him more than any other politician, but I learned long ago not to get too attached to any of them.  Not because they're inherently untrustworthy necessarily--I've always found that point-of-view much, much too easy--but because their job descriptions and the people who would want those jobs are fucked up.

The left-wing moaning about "great timing," intoned in the most sarcastic voices they can manage, is stupid.  As is all of their domestic issues-related hand-wringing over this guy.  Yes, his (and others') vacillating is annoying, especially if you're of my generation and gay marriage is a no-brainer.  But for a man of his generation, it's tougher.  That's not to forgive the unforgivable hemming and hawing that leaves a whole segment of the population swaying in the wind with regard to their basic human rights, but how much do we seriously expect Obama to be able to do, even with an historic endorsement like this?  At least for now, states decide the matter.  I don't like that--it means the rights of the minority frequently take a backseat to the irrational whims of the tyrannical majority, but it's the system we have.  Some will point to DOMA, but that's more Congress' ballpark and how often have they seen eye-to-eye with Obama these last few years?  Now, if you are gay and especially if you're in a committed relationship and especially if you're living in North Carolina (or any other state that refuses your right to happiness)... I got nothing.  I'm truly sorry.  The worst part of government interference in people's personal lives is that it's turned a whole segment of the population into collateral damage, all because some screeching homophobes see nothing but a political football with which to score points.  Smear the queer, indeed. 

Some of my Republican friends will flog that pathetic canard that "both sides do it" and say that this constitutes a flip-flop.  Yeah, it does.  Obama supported gay marriage back in 1996 and then reversed that sometime prior to 2008, then supporting civil unions.  That was the real flip.  Now he's just flopped back.  But if a presidential candidate is going to reverse himself on this issue, I greatly prefer this evolution (let's please stop abusing that word) change of heart to Mittens' direction.  Not that I care much about politicians' flip-flops.  I expect it and, if not done too frequently, almost prefer it.  It demonstrates that they are not unthinking or--more often--that they can respond to changing facts on the ground.  What I do demand is coherence, something Romney often seems to lack, perhaps particularly on this. 

We should take Obama's announcement for the brief "finally" it deserves and get back to things that can actually impact the issue, like overturning the existing nonsensical bans and making sure they don't get put in place in other states this year. 

Next time: Dinosaurs!