Wayne Besen - Author, Activist, Columnist, Public Speaker

Wednesday, February 06, 2008

(Weekly Column)

As the nail biter of a presidential race becomes more uncertain, the only thing guaranteed is a good cry on Inauguration Day. Electing our first woman or black president will bring sobs of joy, just as the election of a Republican will usher in wallowing wails of woe.

However, there is one more issue that is worthy of tears, and that is how few Americans could imagine a gay President of the United States. At the age of 37, if I proclaimed that one day I would run for president, people would offer patronizing or quizzical looks, before they suggested a random drug test. They would say, "We won't see a gay president in your lifetime."

However, if John McCain wins the prize he will be inaugurated at the age of 71. If I ran for president at the same age as McCain, that would mean I could count on 34 more years of social change, which may be enough time for a gay or lesbian American to be a viable presidential candidate.

If this sounds implausible, consider that it was 34 years ago that homosexuality was removed from the American Psychiatric Association's list of mental disorders. The APA decision was only four years after the Stonewall riots. Since this time, we have lived though AIDS, passed a multitude of gay rights laws, have had openly gay members of Congress and witnessed same-sex marriage become a reality in Massachusetts.

Clearly, it is not inconceivable that in 34 years - 2042 - a gay person could theoretically become president. It is likely that our Barack Obama is now in grade school. This gifted gay individual will be charismatic and able to appeal to mainstream Americans to win the greatest prize in politics.

The question is, how are those of us who don't have a snowball's chance in hell of becoming president, paving the way for this young man or woman to achieve his or her dreams?

In order for our Obama to fulfill his or her potential, it is essential that the GLBT movement runs serious presidential candidates in the next election cycle. That's right, "candidates" in the plural -- meaning we run a Democrat and a Republican.

The Democrat would play the role of Jesse Jackson -- a trailblazer that will lose badly, but earn respect and lay the groundwork for the future. This sacrificial lamb will be known as "the gay candidate," so when our gay Obama is finally ready -- he or she can transcend sexual orientation and win -- or lose -- on the merits.

It is also crucial we run a credible Republican, in order to articulate the case for gay rights in front of conservative audiences. This not only would make the other candidates uncomfortable in their gay bashing, but this candidate could serve as a role model.

However, as the old sports cliche goes, "if you stay on the sidelines, you aren't in the game." By not having a gay candidate run, we accede the field to all heterosexual candidates and we are therefore largely invisible. Now, I can understand not running a gay candidate this time around in the Democratic primary, since the field was already crowded with history makers. But in the future, this is unacceptable and we ought to aim for fair representation in the next election cycle.

The bottom line is, that until we first have our Jesse Jackson, we will never have our Barack Obama. Just having an openly gay person on-stage allows young people to dream and imagine a world of unlimited possibilities.

The GLBT political groups ought to make it a priority to find the best Republican and Democratic candidates to run next time around. Aside from the historical aspect, it would be amazing publicity. Each time a gay candidate walked on-stage to debate, it would be worth millions of dollars of free advertising for the GLBT movement. I can't think of a better investment and use of our advocacy dollars.

There are three hundred million people in America, so no on can credibly argue that we can't find at least one gay or lesbian person up to the task. After all, you can't convince me that Rep. Barney Frank or former Human Rights Campaign leader Elizabeth Birch can't do a better job than Gary Bauer or Alan Keyes.

One stereotype is that gay people like theatre - so it is past time we come out from behind the curtain. By playing supporting on-stage roles in the next presidential election, our leaders can set the stage for our leading man or woman in the future.

24 Comments:

Wayne, I don't see that happening. First of all, you have to be married to win any race nowadays, and you have to be christian and profess a belief system, the unspoken litmus test for any candidate. No other country conducts its campaigns or elections like this. What we need is a straight democrat who has a chance of winning and who believes in full equality. So far, neither of the two we have believe in that.
posted by Anonymous, at 2/06/2008 7:59 AM

Robert,
Wayne thinks that in 34 years - - - there might be room for a gay candidate and the electoral panorama may have changed by then. It's possible. I think that all this religious stuff in this country is a fad and is bound to change in 25 years' time. You forget that we are dealing with America, which swings violently to the right and to the left. It would be nice to achieve normalcy status in 31 years for us I mean.
posted by Anonymous, at 2/06/2008 12:59 PM

If Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano would decide to come out publicly as lesbian, we'd have a viable Democratic candidate. She's already a potential VP candidate this time around.
posted by Anonymous, at 2/06/2008 7:25 PM

Richard, maybe, but my personal gut feeling is, it won't happen by then. With republicans and democrats vying for office every four years and as long as there is a republican party that will NEVER believe in LGBT equality, I don't see how any potential Gay candidate stands a chance. The Log Cabiners have not succeeded in changing their party from within, not one iota, in fact its become more extreme than ever. There are few straight democrats in favor of full equality and those who are would never get the nod, just look at Kucinich, Gravel. Look at California, Girly Man twice vetoed marriage equality. New York state which has marriage equality legislation pending won't pass as long as the republicans control the state senate headed by that evil piece of work, Joseph Bruno. When he steps down, another will take his place. I'm not as confident as Wayne about the possibilities 30 or so years hence. We've waited far too long for our full civil rights, we need them NOW and we won't get them with the likes of Clinton or Obama either. We have to stop supporting them altogether until they learn their lesson. I don't like my vote being taken for granted, let them earn it. This country should have been the leader, not the trailer if it purports to be a democracy and a believer in the constitution that all men are created equal. We're NOT, never have been, never will be as long as these clowns run the show.
posted by Anonymous, at 2/07/2008 8:09 AM

Wayne for president! I'd vote for him - ESPECIALLY over Obama and Hillary!
posted by S., at 2/07/2008 8:49 AM

The question is not about this or that individual candidate. Even, or should I say especially, the most populist sounding candidates entered politics simply to get rich and quickly sell out to the highest bidder and then the next highest bidder, etc. LBJ. Nixon and the Clintons are clear examples. The question is who controls the parties, who has the clout, who calls the shots?

Neither party is controlled by their constituent groups. In the Democratic Party many self appointed ‘leaders’ who should know better mistake participation in speech making, lunch taking and getting ‘atta girls’ and ‘atta boys’ clout. They ‘re people who claim to represent working people, unions, environmentalists, GLBT groups, immigrants, African Americans, civil libertarians and the aged, etc. Even if they had identical agendas and their clout was squared they wouldn’t have a tenth of the power of the rich and the corporations. The rich are everywhere and ever-present in political life and their money gets them what they want. Votes, delegate counts, platforms and campaign promises are just hype. Money rules.

Gore Vidal described their politics when he said“"[t]here is only one party in the United States, the Property Party...and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat. Republicans are a bit stupider, more rigid, more doctrinaire in their laissez-faire capitalism than the Democrats, who are cuter, prettier, a bit more corrupt—until recently... and more willing than the Republicans to make small adjustments when the poor, the black, the anti-imperialists get out of hand. But, essentially, there is no difference between the two parties."
posted by Anonymous, at 2/07/2008 1:06 PM

scott - I might vote for some one like Wayne, Matt Foreman, Jackson or Sharpton depending on their program, but I wouldn't consider it if they ran as Democrats.
posted by Anonymous, at 2/07/2008 1:13 PM

For all of those who think change doesn't happen quickly once the ball really gets rolling just look across the pond at Britain. Just 20 or 30 years ago they were MUCH more socially conservative than we were when it came to gay issues. Now they are very progressive and even their conservative Tory party is becoming much more gay friendly knowing that the gay bashing ways of the past just won't win elections.

Things can change very quickly once the scales begin to tip.

I'm very optimistic it could happen here.
posted by Anonymous, at 2/07/2008 11:21 PM

Bill, I'm with you on that. I unregistered as a democrat years ago and joined the Greens, not the perfect party but damn better than the two parties we keep electing every four years. Of course, Gore Vidal's statement is not far from the truth. Come November, I doubt if my views will have changed much to induce me to get behind either of the two contenders who really don't want me to have full equality.
posted by Anonymous, at 2/08/2008 8:21 AM

anonymous, across the pond in the UK its a very different animal you're dealing with. The British never really had the kind of religious loonies that seem to find fertile ground in the U.S. and the middle east. Their Labour (Democratic) party was always further to the left than our own although Blair was a centrist, much like the Clintons. Having said that, I give credit to Blair for pushing ahead on granting LGB people all the rights and privileges of marriage at the national (federal) level, supported by over 80% of the populace with little resistance from the established Anglican church. The Tory party (republican lite) for the most part supports equality, unprecedented in their history with openly gay shadow government members in its midst. That will never happen in our own even though the Log Cabiners believe they can change it from within, very wishful thinking that will never come to fruition.

Then there is the question of those states which prohibit same-sex marriages or civil unions. How would Clinton or Obama address that having said they'd support civil unions at the federal level?

Unlike the US, the UK's government is centralized in London where legislation is enacted that covers the entire nation, an easier system than our complex system of federalism with 50 states acting like independent countries. Would that we were that fortunate.
posted by Anonymous, at 2/08/2008 8:36 AM

情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,按摩棒,震動按摩棒,微調按摩棒,情趣按摩棒,逼真按摩棒,G點,跳蛋,跳蛋,跳蛋,性感內衣,飛機杯,充氣娃娃,情趣娃娃,角色扮演,性感睡衣,SM,潤滑液,威而柔,香水,精油,芳香精油,自慰套,自慰,性感吊帶襪,吊帶襪,情趣用品加盟 AIO交友愛情館,情人歡愉用品,美女視訊,情色交友,視訊交友,辣妹視訊,美女交友,嘟嘟成人網,成人網站,A片,A片下載,免費A片,免費A片下載情人歡愉用品,情趣用品,成人網站,情人節禮物,情人節,AIO交友愛情館,情色,情色貼圖,情色文學,情色交友,色情聊天室,色情小說,七夕情人節,色情,情色電影,色情網站,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,情色視訊,免費視訊聊天,美女視訊,視訊美女,美女交友,美女,情色交友,成人交友,自拍,本土自拍,情人視訊網,視訊交友90739,生日禮物,情色論壇,正妹牆,免費A片下載,AV女優,成人影片,色情A片,成人論壇,情趣,免費成人影片,成人電影,成人影城,愛情公寓,成人影片,保險套,舊情人,微風成人,成人,成人遊戲,成人光碟,色情遊戲,跳蛋,按摩棒,一夜情,男同志聊天室,肛交,口交,性交,援交,免費視訊交友,視訊交友,一葉情貼圖片區,性愛,視訊,視訊聊天,A片,A片下載,免費A片,嘟嘟成人網,寄情築園小遊戲,女同志聊天室,免費視訊聊天室,一夜情聊天室,聊天室愛情公寓,情色,舊情人,情色貼圖,情色文學,情色交友,色情聊天室,色情小說,一葉情貼圖片區,情色小說,色情,色情遊戲,情色視訊,情色電影,aio交友愛情館,色情a片,一夜情,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,免費視訊聊天,免費視訊,視訊,視訊美女,美女視訊,視訊交友,視訊聊天,免費視訊聊天室,情人視訊網,影音視訊聊天室,視訊交友90739,成人影片,成人交友,美女交友,微風成人,嘟嘟成人網,成人貼圖,成人電影,A片
posted by Anonymous, at 10/12/2008 1:03 PM

This comment has been removed by the author.
posted by 說妳美美美睫美甲紋繡預約0915551807, at 3/31/2009 10:14 AM

Parasite Eve cosplay
World of Warcraft cosplay
Ah! My Goddess Cosplay
Tomb Raider cosplay
Death Note Amane Misa cosplay
kipi Amane Misa cosplay
Yuna cosplay
Tekken 5 cosplay
Dead Or Alive cosplay
Tenjho Tenge cosplay
Dragon Ball cosplay
Gundam Seed cosplay
Gurren cosplay
Kiddy Grade cosplay
Gintama Sarutobi Ayame cosplay
Al Azif cosplay
Ranka Lee cosplay
Final Fantasy X Lulu cosplay
Cardcaptor Sakura cosplay
D.Gray-Man cosplay
Shakugan No Shana cosplay
Shoujo Kakumei Utena cosplay
cosplay
gaming blog
gaming forum
CD Key Store
Gaming
posted by Anonymous, at 6/15/2009 4:38 AM

This comment has been removed by the author.
posted by 說妳美美美睫美甲紋繡預約0915551807, at 1/09/2010 9:45 PM

This comment has been removed by the author.
posted by 說妳美美美睫美甲紋繡預約0915551807, at 1/09/2010 9:46 PM

童裝飾品
posted by Unknown, at 2/04/2010 3:26 AM

This comment has been removed by the author.
posted by 說妳美美美睫美甲紋繡預約0915551807, at 6/25/2010 5:26 AM

I think to be a public speaker is quiet difficult, as my life coach told me, you should love one thing then do it better, but how to continuously to love this thing is really difficult.
posted by Backstreet Cinema, at 8/06/2011 6:19 AM

This comment has been removed by the author.
posted by 說妳美美美睫美甲紋繡預約0915551807, at 8/06/2011 8:54 AM

This comment has been removed by the author.
posted by 說妳美美美睫美甲紋繡預約0915551807, at 7/16/2013 11:48 AM

This comment has been removed by the author.
posted by 說妳美美美睫美甲紋繡預約0915551807, at 5/14/2014 12:36 PM

This comment has been removed by the author.
posted by 福爾摩思多益雅思補習班(02) 2365-3288, at 3/28/2015 2:18 AM

This comment has been removed by the author.
posted by 說妳美美美睫美甲紋繡預約0915551807, at 5/24/2015 9:27 PM