The Associated Press:

The Obama administration’s declaration that it plans to use foreign assistance, international diplomacy and political asylum to promote gay rights abroad is a momentous step that could dangerously backfire if not pursued with delicacy and an appreciation of how the challenges faced by gays and lesbians vary by nation, human rights activists said.

President Barack Obama, in a memorandum to executive departments, and Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, during a speech before the U.N. Human Rights Council, issued a coordinated denunciation Tuesday of anti-gay discrimination, stating that equal treatment of gay, lesbian and transgender people was an explicit U.S. foreign policy goal.

The White House said the twin moves represented the U.S. government’s first comprehensive strategy to combat sexual orientation-based human rights abuses around the world. Gay rights groups cheered the actions, noting that gays and lesbians can be arrested, tortured and even executed in some countries.

Wayne Besen, founder of Truth Wins Out, a group that monitors religious organizations with anti-gay views, listed Russia, Nigeria, Cameroon, Uganda, Iran and Zimbabwe among the nations that had recently “declared war on sexual minorities” and said that he hoped they would be chastened by the administration’s blunt talk.

“This was one of those times where our nation demonstrated true international leadership and made me incredibly proud to be an American,” Besen said. “There were no carefully crafted and focus grouped code words that sugarcoated the abuses — just the honest truth spoken from the heart.”

Good, President Obama, though it’s a tad rich given that that US itself remains a homophobic country in many respects. But good.

As Commander in Chief, I have pledged to repeal the “don’t ask, don’t tell” law because it weakens our national security, diminishes our military readiness, and violates fundamental American principles of fairness and equality by preventing patriotic Americans who are gay from serving openly in our armed forces.  At the same time, as Commander in Chief, I am committed to ensuring that we understand the implications of this transition, and maintain good order and discipline within our military ranks. That is why I directed the Department of Defense earlier this year to begin preparing for a transition to a new policy.

Today’s report confirms that a strong majority of our military men and women and their families—more than two thirds—are prepared to serve alongside Americans who are openly gay and lesbian.  This report also confirms that, by every measure—from unit cohesion to recruitment and retention to family readiness—we can transition to a new policy in a responsible manner that ensures our military strength and national security. And for the first time since this law was enacted 17 years ago today, both the Secretary of Defense and the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff have publicly endorsed ending this policy.

With our nation at war and so many Americans serving on the front lines, our troops and their families deserve the certainty that can only come when an act of Congress ends this discriminatory policy once and for all.  The House of Representatives has already passed the necessary legislation.  Today I call on the Senate to act as soon as possible so I can sign this repeal into law this year and ensure that Americans who are willing to risk their lives for their country are treated fairly and equally.  Our troops represent the virtues of selfless sacrifice and love of country that have enabled our freedoms. I am absolutely confident that they will adapt to this change and remain the best led, best trained, best equipped fighting force the world has ever known.

An opinion piece by Kate Zernike in Sunday’s New York Times reveals the true nature and motivation of many Tea Party activists. Surprisingly, they are better educated than the general public, more likely to be employed and more likely to describe their economic situation as very or fairly good.

So, why all the anger over healthcare, the economy and bailouts for these well-to-do malcontents?

Perhaps, because all the ostensible bleating over economic issues is, for many Tea Baggers, a cover for their real passions – race baiting, anti-immigrant sentiment, opposition to LGBT equality and promoting America as a fundamentalist Christian nation. Consider these facts reported in Zernike’s New York Times op-ed about the wonderful “patriots” whining and screaming across the land:
(Read More)

Truth Wins Out praised President Obama today for signing a memorandum requiring hospitals to allow gays and lesbians to have non-family visitors and to grant their partners medical power of attorney.

“This caring and compassionate action by the Obama administration will stop needless trauma and suffering for gay and lesbian families,” said Truth Wins Out Executive Director Wayne Besen. “Today, Obama lived up to his promise of creating positive change. We look forward to continued progress and urge the President to move forward in ending all legal discrimination against LGBT Americans.”

The president ordered the Department of Health and Human Services to prohibit discrimination in hospital visitation. The memo is scheduled to be made public Friday morning, according to an administration official and another source familiar with the White House decision. An official said the new rule will affect any hospital that receives Medicare or Medicaid funding.

In a Wall Street Journal op-ed, Richard Socarides makes some excellent points about ending the military’s disastrous Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell policy. Socarides was special assistant to President Bill Clinton and senior White House adviser on LGBT equality from 1997-1999. Of special interest to our readers, he is also the son of NARTH co-founder Charles Socarides.

Occasionally, I run into Richard around the neighborhood – like at Joe’s Coffee in the morning. He’s a very nice guy, as well as someone who is extremely smart and articulate. We are fortunate to have him fighting on our side.

Here are a few excerpts from his Wall Street Journal commentary:

As a candidate for president, Barack Obama told the country’s leading gay rights group, the Human Rights Campaign, “America is ready to get rid of the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy. All that is required is leadership.” Now he is about to decide whether he will make good on his promise to end what he called a “policy of discrimination.”

….

What is especially troubling, however, is Mr. Obama’s oversensitivity to a dwindling minority of bigots on this issue. Hundreds of military careers have been destroyed on his watch for no valid reason. The country has been deprived of the talents of these service members and has wasted millions of dollars on their training.

….

Gay Americans have been among the president’s most ardent supporters. Their enthusiasm, and that of their families and friends, could be crucial in this year’s elections. The president’s action‚Äîor inaction‚Äîon Don’t Ask Don’t Tell will be noticed.

An increasingly frustrated bloc of gay voters‚Äîangry over marriage setbacks in California, Maine, New Jersey and New York and emboldened by Ted Olson’s and David Boies’s high-profile effort to declare unconstitutional laws that prohibit gay marriage‚Äîare growing impatient for equality. As Mr. Olson said in federal district court in San Francisco recently, discriminatory laws serve only to “label gay and lesbian persons as different, inferior, unequal and disfavored.”

In the big Prop 8 trial in California, President Barack Obama’s position against marriage equality is directly harming our community and being thrown in our faces.

Our opponents are saying, “Mr. Obama is not a bigot and he believes that marriage is between a man and a woman. So, how can the proponents of Prop 8 be bigots if they share the same views as the President?”

Well, actually he is a politician who believes in getting elected.

During his run for Illinois state Senate in 1996, Barack Obama stated his unequivocal support for marriage equality, according to an exclusive story in the Jan. 14, 2009 Windy City Times newspaper:

President-elect Obama’s answer to a 1996 Outlines newspaper question on marriage was: “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages.” There was no use of the phrase “civil unions”.

It seems the Windy City Times showed that Obama is a pol with his finger in the wind on this issue.

LGBT groups, including Truth Wins Out, want Obama to take a stand on the Prop 8 trial. Equality California said Friday that it has collected 91,000 signatures on a petition urging the president to file a brief supporting a challenge to the measure. The White House has not responded. (typical)

Mr. Obama, it is time to get off the sidelines. It is time to stand up and do what it right. We are not holding our breath. But, for once, will you please surprise us? The right wing hates you anyway. They think you are a communist and some even hold the view that you are an illegal alien or the anti-Christ.

You will never win over these crazy, irrational people. Never. Ever.

Please, stop trying to do so. If a person hates LGBT people, they are likely not voting for you anyway. Don’t you get it?

As the Tea Party gains prominence, it almost assures that your 2012 Republican opponent (maybe Sarah Palin or Sen. Jim DeMint) will overwhelmingly win the fringe vote. So, why not do what is moral and just, by rallying the people who actually care about your presidency and support you?

We are waiting, Mr. President, and so far we are pained by your silence. Your words are being used as a justification for our oppression. Only you can change this.

No one doubts that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) made a huge gaffe when he said that Barack Obama could become the nation’ first African American president because he was “light skinned” and had “no negro dialect, unless he wanted to have one.”

Obviously, this was a poor choice of words and Reid expressed immediate regret — offering an apology that was accepted by President Obama. Reid will continue his efforts this week to be contrite and make things right, as he should.

However, the reaction by leading Republicans who called for Reid to resign was nauseating. It was astounding to witness a party built on a “Southern Strategy” of appealing to disaffected white males suddenly pretending to be the NAACP.

On ABC’s This Week with George Stephanopoulos, Liz Cheney called Reid’ comments racist and played the tiresome conservative victim card.

“Can I just point out, I think one of the things that makes the American people frustrated, time and time again, liberals excuse racism from other liberals,” Cheney said. “The comments were outrageous…I don’t think racism is OK, George, whether you’re saying it in private or in public…”

Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele said that Reid should resign from office and accused the Democrats of hypocrisy, because Sen. Trent Lott (R-MS) was forced to step down from his perch as Senate Majority Leader in 2002 after he made racially insensitive remarks.

“There is this standard where Democrats feel that they can say these things and they can apologize when it comes from the mouths of their own,” Steele said in an interview with Fox News Sunday. “But if it comes from anyone else, it is racism.”

In today’ Republican Party, all is cynical and nothing is sacred. There is little profound and much that is profane. Such political pathology is reflected in the mindless attacks on Reid. To buy the GOP’ indignation, one must be completely ignorant of history, devoid of basic reasoning and have no understanding of context.

In the case of Reid, his comment was an aberration that contrasted with his history of supporting equality. Indeed, the actual comment was in favor of Obama’ candidacy and spoke to his viability. A true racist would never have endorsed the idea of an African American president, because by definition such a person believes that other races are inferior and not capable of leading this nation.

Conversely, Sen. Lott (pictured left) had a history of flirting with racism and other forms of bigotry. He began his political career in 1968 working for Rep. William M. Colmer, a segregationist from Pascagoula.

The Washington Post revealed that Lott had appeared as the keynote speaker at a 1992 meeting of the Council of Conservative Citizens (CCC) in Greenwood, Mississippi. This was a racist organization that barely concealed their belief in white supremacy. The organization’ magazine, The Citizens Informer, had featured a large photograph of Senator Lott at the CCC conference and quoted him as telling attendees that “we need more meetings like this” and “the people in this room stand for the right principles and the right philosophy. Let’s take it in the right direction and our children will be the beneficiaries.”

So, by the time Lott appeared at former Dixiecrat Strom Thurmond’ (R-SC) 100^th birthday party on December 5, 2002, an unmistakable pattern of intolerance had already been established. At this celebration, Lott said: “When Strom Thurmond ran for president, we voted for him. We’re proud of it. And if the rest of the country had followed our lead, we wouldn’t have had all these problems over the years, either.”

Thurmond’ presidential campaign in 1948 had explicitly been about racial segregation. So, there was no way that Lott could have been “proud” of this presidential run and conclude that America would have been better off with a Thurmond victory unless he believed that segregation was good for America. This was more than simply a poor word choice. It was the seeming endorsement of a noxious, overarching worldview that had nearly destroyed this nation.

Lott denies that he supports discrimination and is a racist. However, one cannot separate his comments from the context in which they came. Compare this to Reid, who did no more than use an old fashioned, anachronistic vocabulary word. His comments were regrettable for sure, but certainly not part of a pattern of racism.

To criticize Reid in a vacuum is vacuous and the histrionics of Liz Cheney and Michael Steele blatantly ignore history. The GOP has long trivialized genuine racism and used crass political opportunism to exploit race for political gain. Now, they are doing the exact same thing, except this time they are pretending to be the guardians of diversity. Their act is embarrassingly transparent and the only “races” these phonies care about are the ones that will put Republicans back in power.

Is there nothing this amoral crowd won’t say or do to win elections?

The New York Times reports that the Obama administration has inserted language into the federal jobs Web site explicitly banning employment discrimination based on gender identity. This is excellent news and Obama should be praised for taking this step. While there is so much more work to do, let’s rejoice today and enjoy our progress.

Of course, social conservatives became nearly deranged over the move:

“We at the Family Research Council oppose including gender identity as a category of protection,” said Peter S. Sprigg, senior fellow for policy studies. Mr. Sprigg said his group believed that what it calls “gender identity disorder” should be “treated with therapy to help people be comfortable with their biological sex rather than affirming and celebrating and protecting those who want to deny their biological sex.”

Actually, Sprigg and everyone who “thinks” like him are the ones in need of therapy. To paraphrase a Seinfeld episode, they need, “a serious team of shrinks for a major intervention, maybe even from Austria itself.”

The transgender community is a small minority that has hurt no one. They simply want to work, make a living and be left alone. The fact that Sprigg feels threatened by these individuals says more about his mental health, or lack thereof. People who are secure in their gender identity or sexual orientation know they are not directly affected by such matters. It is only closet cases and mental cases who feel they must suppress the transgender community and gratuitously insult them.

Do people like Sprigg really think that if trans-Americans receive support and acceptance, a large number of people will suddenly jump up and run off to the doctor to change genders?

Really, what exactly is it that this man fears? I don’t get it.

Bottom line: The new language will help those who are transgender, which is terrific and fully embraced and supported by Truth Wins Out. It will have zero impact on people like me – and most other straight and gay people. It will drive people like Sprigg – who seems to have more issues than a New York magazine stand – absolutely nuts.

My question to Sprigg is, “Dude, how does this affect you?”