Comments on: Ruby-Sachs: Obama May Veto Hate Crimes Bill

By: nico

nico — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 07:04:09 +0000

“Let’s undermine the clever move of conservative Senators.”

Wow. I’m sorry, but this is just plain wrong. The adoption of the Matthew Shepherd Act as an amendment to the defense spending bill was a move by the democrats. In fact, not one democrat voted against including it
as an amendment to the larger bill.

But wait, it gets better! The main opponent of including the bill as an amendment was none other than John McCain. Why did he hold this position? Gasp! Because he felt that the hate crimes legislation should be debated separately… the exact same position you hold!

Dear goodness. If I didn’t know better, I’d say your (anti-republican) bias clouded your perception of the issue.

Source:

http://www.inlookout.com/2009/07/17/hate-crimes-bill-passes-63-28-in-the-senate-may-face-veto/

By: Rob

Rob — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 05:53:40 +0000

Seems like another cheap political show. The only chance this has to pass in its current form is if Obama uses the line-item veto to remove the spending for the F22′s. Democrats know this. They know it’s going to get defeated…. another cheap political show so they can bring this back next year when they’re campaigning… Do gays… scratch that… Does anyone in this country have any real representation left? Or is it really just a show?

By: Veann

Veann — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 20:46:24 +0000

If Obama vetos the bill then we will know exactly where he stands…against us.

The funding of a military budget is far less impactful even in a negative fiscal way, than is the declartive non-caring attitude that would be exhibited by voiding the Hate Crimes legislation that without, is destroying lives in a statistical as well as a Very real sense.

War is war, and it is already on with other nations. Victory has never been ours when being seen as equivocal beings in this incarnation.

It begs the question: “Where’s your passion?” When one says that their passion lies in extending the needed protections (at this time) to the GLBT community for Hate Crime protection, but lets am implemental of an already existing war hold back your hand, it would make a statement of the true nature of the opinion one would have of a given topic/choice.

By: Rick

Rick — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 17:11:48 +0000

This idea that hate crimes laws set up unequal forms of justice is crap. Our entire judicial system is, for better or worse, predicated on attempting to “figure out” the intent of of the perpetrator, with the idea being that various intentions mitigate the severity of the crime. For example, we give stiffer penalities when a murder is premeditated as opposed to a crime of passion. The intent of a hate crime is not just to hurt the person, but to intimidate and (while I hesitate to use the word) terrorize a community, the way that killing abortion doctors intimidates women from receiving abortions and doctors from performing them.

By: Matt

Matt — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 14:28:11 +0000

If you assume the role of a victim, the path will be paved for you. Hate crime laws are AGAINST EVERYONE!

By: Victor J Kinzer

Victor J Kinzer — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 13:26:23 +0000

Matt: Have you ever actually looked into what Hate Crimes Laws do? I mean really. The longer sentences are all anyone ever wants to talk about. Completely ignoring the fact that an entire community is victimized, and it creates a much broader social damage, that many communities are not equipped to handle. The fact is a carefully focused hate crime is a more erenous offense because it is an act of terror against a community. The entire community suffers due to increased fear and emotional duress. In a normal attack the victim of the physical attack at their immediate family, friends, co-workers, acquaintances suffer. This is a terrible thing, but it is on a measurably different scale than a crime against an identifiable sub-set of society. That difference calls for increased resources and different sentencing.

By: Yhitzak

Yhitzak — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 13:01:28 +0000

Does the word “lobbying” mean anything to anyone? Yeah, this sort of nonsense is nonsense, but that’s the way government works. Don’t like it, lobby for reform. Here’s a good place to start: support for line-item veto.

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 12:56:19 +0000

I agree with the author fully. I am a gay man and yet I am also incredibly sick of all the queers out there who would throw Obama under the bus in the name of political expediency. He is the only true ally our community has ever had in the White House. We’ve waited 40 years; we can wait another year while he repairs the damage Bush and his handler Cheney left us.

Yes, I know waiting is hard, but he has been pretty busy as of late. While he and his administration may not be taking a stance that we agree with (defending DOMA–defending existing laws is the job of attorney general, after all), he is also light years ahead of his former competitors when it comes to respecting us as human beings, and not just political tools. He is doing what he can, as quickly as he can, while also respecting the laws that were passed before his time. If only we, as a community, could understand that.

By: Jen

Jen — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 07:28:15 +0000

Obama has *plenty* of ground to make up, but this one is the Congress’s fault for tying hate-crimes protections to a military spending bill. But why are we surprised? The Democratic Party is two-faced on gay issues–President, Congress, whatever.

Why, it’s enough to get me voting Green…

By: Mike

Mike — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 07:23:01 +0000

Kevin, we’re not talking about “millions” for defense projects. It’s glib ignorance like that that has given us a military budget that, including Afghanistan and Iraq, easily exceeds one trillion *annually*. We’re talking about tens and hundreds of billions for unnecessary projects. I, for one, would rather have this money for balancing our budget–and preventing cuts to, say, AIDS treatment and hate-crimes prosecution–then vote on the Matthew Shepard bill again later. We can’t forget the less glamorous, daily battles that GLBT groups are fighting in schools and courtrooms, and which are threatened due to diminished resources.

The hate-crimes bill will still happen, even if “our” party is too gutless to put it up for a vote on its own. For once, this isn’t actually Obama’s fault–it’s the Democratic Congressional leadership we should be complaining about.