The past few weeks have been exhilerating for all of us in the LGBT community who pay attention to politics. The exhileration hasn’t all been from positive sources– disappointments like the DOJ’s memo on DOMA, President Obama’s lackluster federal employee rights order, and the DNC’s callous handling of gay outrage have hit hard– but it has been exhileration. The LGBT community has been talking about policy and politics, people are paying attention, and apathy seem less cool (and less widespread) than it did a few weeks or a month ago.

I’m not being naive. In order to force real change, we’re going to need sustained outrage, sustained protest, sustained attention. And that’s tough to generate.

But getting results, however small, helps.

And the Department of Justice inviting LGBT legal groups to a meeting to start discussions on an upcoming case that challenges the constitutionality of DOMA? That’s a direct result of the community’s outrage to the first DOMA memo, and it’s an important result.

It is anticipated that the groups invited by the DOJ include Lambda Legal and GLAD (Gay and Lesbian Advocates and Defenders). The case they’re discussing directly challenges Section 3 of DOMA, which states that for the purposes of federal law “the word ‘marriage’ means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife.” Given the relatively slow progress on repealing DOMA legislatively, a legitimate legal challenge to Section 3 of DOMA could be an important development. Including smart, pro-equality legal minds in the discussions is progress for the Department of Justice. So kudos to all who applied pressure after the first disastrous DOMA memo. Let’s keep it up.

This frustration may lead to an embarrassing situation for the President, where former supporters mount the largest anti-Obama pep rally not fronted by Sarah Palin.

This week, an array of GLBT leaders expressed their dismay with the President by pulling out of a Democratic National Committee fundraiser. The action is in protest of a noxious legal brief submitted by the Department of Justice. It implausibly defended the heinous Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) by using anti-gay arguments that likely drew a standing ovation from Rev. Pat Robertson.

DOJ’s paper included a comparison of gay relationships to incest and opposed same-sex relationships on the absurd basis that it would cost taxpayers money (Don’t gay people pay taxes?). HRC also sent a pointed letter to Obama highlighting the betrayal felt by the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community.

“I cannot overstate the pain that we feel as human beings and as families when we read an argument, presented in federal court, implying that our own marriages have no more constitutional standing than incestuous ones,” wrote HRC’s President, Joe Solmonese.

The deteriorating situation is exacerbated by confusion about who will push for equality. The Obama administration claims to be awaiting congressional action on a number of issues, including ending employment discrimination, eliminating DOMA and repealing Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell. Meanwhile, Senate majority leader Harry Reid is waiting for Obama to act, as well as the House of Representatives. The GLBT community has become a hot potato that the Democrats do not seem to want to touch.

Aggravating matters was John Berry, the highest-ranking gay official in the administration. In an interview with The Advocate, he said that Obama’s timetable to enact his pro-gay campaign promises is “before the sun sets on this administration.”

So, now we have to wait 4-8 years, while watching him suck up to Rick Warren on Day 1?

For what seemed like forever, Democrats told us that when the big bad Republicans went away, our lives would improve. Well, the Republican nightmare is over, so why do I still feel like I’m in the middle of a political Friday the 13th movie?

The Democrats took our money, our votes and our volunteer hours and now they tell us to wait patiently, like good little gays. As far as I’m concerned, if the donkeys can’t deliver now, they can kiss my ass. The Democrats run the show in Washington and if they will not act like a majority party, then they do not deserve to be one.

This is not about making unreasonable policy demands, but about the Democrats recognizing the daily struggles faced by gay people. A new report by The National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs said, “violence against lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) people increased 2% from 2007 to 2008, continuing the trend of a 24% total increase in 2007.”

Recently, I read about a lesbian who was barred from visiting her partner in a Fresno hospital, and as a result her partner received the wrong medication. Last week, I was in conservative Western Michigan where I spoke to young people who were nearly driven to suicide as a result of anti-gay attitudes.

We need a president who recognizes these evils and demonstrates the courage and leadership to enact the change he so eloquently promised during his campaign.

If Obama continues down the current path it will come at a steep price. When Bill Clinton settled for Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell, it solidified the growing perception that he was “Slick Willie.” By turning his back on the gay community, Obama will play into the idea, stoked by Hillary Clinton and exploited by John McCain, that he is a man of beautiful, yet empty words.

What Obama fails to understand is that when poetry does not translate into policy, and hope turns hollow, the American people will begin to tune him out.

I’m still undecided about the wisdom of a march on Washington, but I am decidedly fed up with my political “friends” marching all over my dignity and taking my support for granted.  If the majority party does not cough up the votes to protect our families, we should close down our generous coffers.

TAPPER: Does the president stand by the legal brief that the Justice Department filed last week that argued in favor the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act?

GIBBS: Well, as you know, that the Justice Department is charged with upholding the law of the land, even though the president believes that that law should be repealed.

TAPPER: I understand that, but a lot of legal experts say that the brief didn’t have to be as comprehensive and make all the arguments that it made, such as comparing same-sex unions to incestuous ones, in one controversial paragraph…

GIBBS: Well…

TAPPER: …that’s upset a lot of the president’s supporters. Does the president stand by the content, the arguments made in that brief?

GIBBS: Well, again, it’s the president’s Justice Department. And, again, we have the role of upholding the law of the land while the president has stated and will work with Congress to change that law.