Wednesday, July 18, 2012

This Transwoman Supports Obama

I seldom discuss politics here.

Weeks ago, I added the Trans United for Obama button to the blog without a word. The button spoke for itself; if you wanted to know more, click on the button and it took you to a website where you could learn more.

Today, I received the following e-mail.

I really do not like your placing an Obama button on your home page. There is no real freedom down the road of that ideology and I am opposed to this president and his snuffing out of individual initiative and honest dealing.

Even if we disagree, why turn your site into a political commercial -- as if there were only one way to see things. That is the common arrogance of the left.

I guess it is time to explain why I added the Trans United for Obama button to the blog.

I support candidates that support me or my cause; always have, always will. I am transgender and my cause is equal rights for transgenders.

Consider the records of President Obama and the presumed GOP presidential candidate, Mitt Romney.

More has been accomplished by the Obama administration for transgender rights than all 43 other presidents combined. Those accomplishments include:

  • Ending the Social Security Administration’s gender “no-match” letters and allowing for true gender passports.

  • Ensuring that transgender Americans can receive true gender passports without surgery.

  • Establishing guidelines to help protect transgender federal employees from discrimination in the workplace.

  • Making sure transgender veterans receive respectful care according to their true gender through the Veterans Health Administration.

Former Governor Romney's administration and friends in Massachusetts have less than a stellar record regarding transgender rights.

  • In 2006, Romney’s administration blocked publication of a state antibullying guide for Massachusetts public schools because officials objected to use of the terms “bisexual’’ and “transgender’’ in passages about protecting certain students from harassment.

  • As a reporter for the Boston Herald, Eric Fehrnstrom, now Romney's "most trusted" adviser, gleefully outed a Massachusetts transgender woman, Althea Garrison, ending her political career.

  • Unlike the Obama campaign website, no where on the Romney campaign website is there a mention of transgenders. However, in my opinion, Romney's championing a Federal Marriage Amendment to the Constitution defining marriage as between one man and one woman does not bode well for an expansion of transgender rights under a Romney administration. 

President Obama supports my cause, Governor Romney does not, so I support President Obama.

Enough said.

20 comments:

  1. And now a completely different opinion from a conservative femulator.

    "you have every right to post your support for the candidate that best fits your value system on your blog."

    (after all is still a free internet)

    ReplyDelete
  2. I just have a hard time supporting anybody that eight months before the election comes out supports Gay, Lesbian and Trans-gender rights. Now if he really is in favor of supporting our rights he should have done it after he was elected not to try and buy votes to get re-elected.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Just like most liberals, you place yourself above the good of the country. Pretty selfish... I to am a trans-woman, but I am an American first!!! What this this president has done to this country is shameful and obscene. Trans rights will always be there as long, and only as long as we have our freedoms afforded by the constitution, and doesn't matter who is president in that respect. For everything else he is a disaster, and will be defeated in November!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Stana,

    As a femulator I always try to dress 'right'. As a libertarian it may also be said that I 'bat right, throw right and think right'.

    I noticed the TU4O button appear on your blog and checked out their site. My position is the same as Joan Elizabeth's ~ you are entitled to your opinions, beliefs, speech and your right to support the candidate of your choice...especially on your blog.

    I also see merit in Sharon's point that Obama's 'evolving' position seems more calclated to fit the campaign for re-election than any deeply held beliefs. For 2 years he had a strong majority in both houses and did little legislatively to advance the causes you discuss. I wonder if the current push by the Democrats to paint the GOP as anti LGBT was because while only 19% of voters who identified as LGBT voted GOP in 2008 the percentage rose to 31% in 2010.

    If you check out GOProud (www.goproud.org) or the Log Cabin Republicans (www.logcabin.org) you may be surprised. GOProud is a relatively young organization that is committed to 'promoting freedom through limited government, free markets, and a respect for individual rights.' Its agenda 'emphasizes consdrvative and libertarian principals to improve the lives of all Americans but especially gay and lesbian Americans.'

    The Log Cabin Republicans have been active for over 30 years. They promote the core values of 'individual liberty, limited government, personal responsibility ...while advocating for the freedom and equality of gay and lesbian
    Americans'. Their motto is "Freedom Means Freedom for Everyone". I support that.

    You should check out their history. You may learn some things about Ronald Reagan that were not widely publicized.

    What concerns me is the lengths that some go to stretch things to try to show bias that may not exist. It is an exercise in '6 degrees of separation'.

    You try to connect the dots to show that Romney may be anti TG by showing that a reporter for a Boston newspaper, who now suppports Romney, confirmed well known beliefs that a Republican woman elected representative had been born a man. Ms Garrison was elected in her 10th run for public office in 1992 as a Republican in a very Democrat district/state. She lost her seat to a Democrat when she ran again and she lost several subsequent races, through 2011. I do not know if she lost because she was TG.

    Again, my concern is the innuendo that an observer claimed that in 1992 a reporter who confirmed rumors was gleeful for outing a TG Republican. Perhaps he was merely happy that his investigation found accurate documents. Also it is a stretch to connect that event to the end of her career since she continued to be active in politics. All I am saying is that when you use a biased source such as "Raw Story" as your source you should understand that they have an agenda and that their spin may take liberties with the facts.

    Support who you like but please try to avoid spreading the politics of hatred, divisiveness, class warfare, etc. by stretching things or failing to recognize when other stretch things to fit an agenda.

    Peace,
    Pat

    ReplyDelete
  5. As much as I love you and your blog, and I support your right to post what ever you want on it and I will not stop comming here just becuase of that icon, what I do object to is that he came out in support ONLY to get votes, if he believed it, he would have come out as soon as he was elected. I also put my country above the needs of my cross dressing.

    If he gets re elected, there will be no more USA as you have known it all your life.

    He will not run on his record. In his bid for his first election he said ( paraphrase ) if you have a record run on it and be proud, if you dont, debase and destroy the other guy and make people run from him so they come to you.

    Obama has no record to be proud of. Why else would 93 percent of his comercials be negative?

    I think Mitt should release his tax records when Obama releases all of his college transcripts.. What is he hiding from his college days.

    Sorry. A cocaine drug user will never get my vote. sorry.. ( read his book, he admits to hard drug use )

    I love you sweetie. I just dont agree that he deserves another chance. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me..

    Diane Leonard

    ReplyDelete
  6. You can support whom-ever you think has your best interests at heart. It is, after all, your blog.

    I was born a queer and can recall nothing else, I'll reserve my comments but know this; "O" will NOT get my vote and my decision is in no way tainted by my personality!

    ReplyDelete
  7. First I’d want to mention that I’m pleasantly surprised by the comments to this point. Good feeling knowing I’m not the only one with an opposing opinion…
    It is pretty that clear this guy (Obama) will do anything to win an election, which is pretty much the case with most of "our" elected officials regardless of party...so sad… But didn’t he promise over and over again to be different??? Well so much for "being a different kind of candidate and wanting to change the way things are done...and to be open and transparent..." He is a self-righteous ideology that will do anything to push his agenda without any regard for bipartisan support (healthcare is a perfect example). This was pushed through without a single vote from anyone that supported more conservative fiscal options and limiting the government’s role. The government can’t control its own expenses so now we are going to let them be in charge of healthcare which will be subsidized by additional taxes. Amtrak, the USPS, and the automobile and financial bailouts are additional examples of government inefficiency and just wasting money.
    An additional example of this administrations hypocrisy is when his "car czar" was the sole person that decided which car dealerships were able to stay open or were forced to close. The owners of most that were closed were Republican supporters while owners that had a record of supporting Democrats in the same market area were allowed to stay open and in many cases were allowed to grow the number of brands they owned.
    If the only reason that someone would vote for a person is because they are for gay people having the right to “marry” or for any other specific “transgender” issues then I guess your life is pretty good and hasn’t been affected by the 100% increase in gas prices, the 20-40% increase in food prices, the 50% reduction in house values, the 25% increase in unemployment, and the 25% increase in my property taxes just to name a few examples since this president came into office. He has done nothing to make this country better for the overall majority of the residents. Actually I’ve never seen the country more divided… Come on now…how many people will gay marriage really benefit anyway? 1-2%. Wow, that is what I would focus all my attention on if I couldn’t run on my record. This is all a distraction. I’m transgender but I’m still smart enough to support someone that actually has been a success in life instead of just someone that tells everyone he is a success without any record to back it up. BTW – I’m glad someone else commented on the banner. I’ve been wanting to comment but just tried to ignore, but since it was brought up I thought I’d opine…LOL
    Regards,
    Kandi

    ReplyDelete
  8. As a member of the LGBT community, and as a person who would probably be labeled as an "elitist, gay loving, commie, liberal" by some I am always more than a little upset when people talk about Obama only actually doing/saying anything about LGBT issues so soon before the election.

    The reality is that he and his administration have done more for LGBT equality, rights and protection than any other president in history. His coming out in favor of full marriage equality was simply a cherry on the top of an already extremely impressive record representing the concerns of all LGBT people.

    Check out: http://www.equalitygiving.org/Accomplishments-by-the-Administration-and-Congress-on-LGBT-Equality for a very nice summation of what our president has done.

    ReplyDelete
  9. I agree with everything Stana said. Perhaps more importantly, I couldn't possibly support a candidate whose party's core support takes positions which are inimical to the interests of our community and indeed to the interests of almost every community which isn't just like them.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Love you Stana, but I'm afraid I can't go with you on this one! I'm glad to see that there are other conservative CDs who agree. Being trans, I try to be as open minded as possible, but I will always be an American first and trans second.

    What good is the right to dress the way you choose in the workplace if you don't even have a job!

    There are bigger concerns than LGBT rights, such as the economy! There is no way that the interest rates, or taxes can stay as low as they are with the way this administration spends money. We've got to stop the bleeding and own some fiscal responsibility, which is something that Obama has proven that he is not capable of.

    I'm actually a Mormon who did NOT vote for Romney in the primary, but he will be my "lesser of two evils" on November 6th.

    Hugs,
    Stephanie J

    PS. If you couldn't already tell that Althea Garrison was trans, then you need to have your gaydar checked.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I am dedicated to your freedom, political or otherwise. In fact ,I love you and everything about you. I am dedicated to the freedom of everyone on this plane of existance.
    Love has no barriers,and loving my neighbor is one of my highest orders of the day. Every day.
    What you do with your blog ,I respect as your business. I will be here again tomorrow. You have made major ontributions to my freedom. I do not do politics any more. Stopped doing that in 1964.
    Blesings
    Marilyn

    ReplyDelete
  12. Stana -

    I love how you stirred up a hornet's nest of political commentary without meaning to. Sadly, America has become so polarized, that many people look upon an opposition candidate as a major threat to the American way of life. Your right to support the candidate of your choice is a right, not a politically granted privilege.

    Now, how do I feel about Obama vs. Romney? My friends will gladly note that I am loyal to no political party. I supported the removal of Clinton from office for lying under oath. I supported the idea of removing Bush from office because his administration violated the Constitution in regard to warrantless searches, imprisonment without due process, etc. in response to 9/11 fears. (Ron Paul was one of the few GOP voices who criticized Bush's actions - and I'd gladly vote for him.) And now, we're finding out that Romney's SEC testimony that he was not in charge of Bain conflicts with his (and his lawyer's) statements in regard to him being listed as CEO of Bain for 3 more years.

    If the GOP would remove Clinton because he lied under oath, then shouldn't the GOP keep Romney from totally embarrassing the party? Technically, he may have committed a felony - imagine what could happen if an investigation showed that he knew he was saying two different things under oath???

    But you're probably asking - where am I going? Well, political loyalists become blind sided when their own tribe member violates the law, and they also condemn others for not agreeing with them and their biases. You make a simple, and quite reasonable justification to support Obama based on his current position on Transgender rights. (I don't care how he got there, he's there now....) And I hope that you are able to maintain your loyalties in spite of the people who'd criticize you for having those loyalties....

    ReplyDelete
  13. @ Stephanie J

    Its good to hear of another mormon CD.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Stana,
    What are you trying to do, set a record for the number of comments on a blog entry? Well you sure stirred it up!
    I am with you on this one - both your right to post this as well as you reasons for doing so.
    The problem I have with the "debate" between the right and the left today (and I do it in other forums) is that (coming from the left admittedly) the right has convinced many people to vote against their own best interests. In short, the right has convinced people that their economic freedom (e.g. the ability to buy more stuff) is more important that their other rights (e.g. do what they want in the bedroom). Couple this with the right's peddling supply-side economics, which if examined deeply has been shown to be a failure and for reasons that are easily identifiable, you have the situation we have today where people vote against their own interests with the only outcome the enrich those that they vote for.
    So, Stana, I am with you and, yes, I do have an issue voting for the party whose allegiance is to Grover Norquist over that of the citizens of the country.
    And, yes, I am willing to pay more in taxes so this country will get back on track.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Leann -

    This is the problem we have in an economy based on consumption, where status and power are based on crude wealth.

    My therapist uses an analogy of a gorilla being behind one of two doors, and you get to pick one. The conservative keeps picking the same door every time, and the gorilla mauls the person. When asked why he picks the same door, the conservative says - well, the gorilla may choose to behind the other door one day. Well, the liberal chooses change at an earlier time frame than the conservative - and often benefits from that change - the gorilla is not behind door number 2....

    Choosing economic freedom is not enough - unless one has honest and competent regulation in the marketplace. It's amazing how many Americans denigrate Canada for being more socialist than we are. But they have a higher standard of living, better education, and greater access to health care. The trade off - they buy less cheap consumer goods than we do because of a national goods and services tax.

    So regardless of what side of the political aisle a person comes from, it's best to know the unvarnished facts, and perform your own analysis - and not let the talking heads pre-digest information for you.....

    And yes, I am willing to pay more taxes as long as spending is cut at the same time....

    ReplyDelete
  16. Stana,

    I am proud to say I support you and a President that is willing to commit to support the LGBT communities rather than one who is supported by a party that seeks to deny rights to the same community.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Stana,

    I think the diversity of opinion demonstrated by the comments about this post is a tribute to you and your wonderful blog. People may agree or disagree with you on a particular topic, but we all appreciate what you're doing here.

    I'm also impressed that although commenters have expressed strong opinions, the comments have been respectful. Perhaps there have been comments that you've decided weren't appropriate and have deleted them but I like to think that most of your visitors are respectful of each others' views and that's reflected in the comments on this and other topics.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Stana-I admire your courage and your willingness to use your position as a significant voice in the transgender community to advance political views that you believe in. I'm with you in supporting Obama, although my vote was determined long ago, more by core ideology than anything specific, re: trans issues, or civil rights. Ideological positions on Civil Rights issues were staked out long, long ago by both parties-and Obama's positions, sincere or not, belong to the larger commitment to the marginalized and oppressed in our society that is a core element of Democratic philosophy. However, I think it's silly to say he's an insincere politician courting votes, when he's as likely to alienate as many voters as he might gain by supporting the LGBT cause.(It's a little like saying scientists who believe in Global Warming do so in order to court the pernicious alternative energy industry. What sense does that make?)
    I'm not a starry-eyed Obama fan-nor a a true-believer in the party-but unfortunately it's all those of us on the left have got. (I've lived long enough to know there will never be an effective leftist third party in a country as deeply conservative as this one.) My feeling is that he's been a big disappointment-but I'm looking at it from a "far left"( far left in today's environment used to be what you'd call a "Ted Kennedy liberal") POV. As Rachel Maddow has said; "I'm a liberal, Obama is a centerist democrat". I'm both astounded and amused to hear suggestions that he's railroaded his agenda without considering the other party's views,(it's another of those mantras you hear all over) when-from my perspective-he wasted time, and lost a lot of ground, courting the GOP on healthcare, the budget, everything else-when those guys had made a conscious decision not to work with him on anything from Day 1. They made a smart, strategic decision-it's worked--and they've been laughing at him for his naivety and foolishness all along. I'm astounded at how effectively history has been re-written, re: not only Obama's mis-guided attempts to work w/ the GOP-but also the economic crash of 2008; how the blame for that debacle(and thus our current economic mess, which belongs to a generation of politicians held in sway by the tenets of de-regulation, has been cast upon Obama and OVER-regulation. It's an example of how effective (& well-funded) the GOP/Right/Corporate machine is, and how feckless the Democrats are in the face of it. Fox News truly is a phenomenon, and in terms of effectiveness and reach the left has nothing comparable (MSNBC? not in the same league.)
    Nevertheless, what count as political positions in this country are really caricatures of political thinking. Too many of us, left and right, simply parrot POV fed to us by a media devoted to polarization and conflict. We really need to begin the discussion again,turn off the TVs, leave our labels, left and right, at the door-- and ask each other-without consideration of election cycles, etc.--what kind of country do we really want? We have to remember that those who feed the beast of political polarization do so because conflict is profitable-and it serves those in power by keeping us at each others' throats, rather than working to serve the common good.
    For the most part, I found the opinions expressed in response to your post interesting and informative-if only to point out the diversity in the community. That's a good thing! And it makes for an interesting discussion I'll be thinking about all morning.

    ReplyDelete
  19. @Chris, if your therapist used that analogy, she/he is a bigot! But perhaps this was just one more negative remark made up by those on the left to demonize conservatives in hopes the sheep will follow suit. As for repetition, yes, more printed money is surely the right thing to do again! .

    I expect my leader to unite people. I will be disappointed again, no matter who wins the election. T his will be so,, because in politics today it's about buying a vote and manipulation the sheep for the same agenda and candidate wearing a different colored suit.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Great to hear that you support president Obama! :)

    Even though I'm not American.. as a Dutch European, having a Democratic president is usually better for the world. Conservatives in the US might think that Obama is the leftiest liberal ever, but compared to most European countries, Canada, New Zealand, etc... he's actually a centrist with only a few liberal views.

    However, I still think his heart is in the right place.. and I think him coming out for the LGBT-issues was done at great risk of alienating conservative Democrats. He has done more for the LGBT community than pretty much every Republican politician.

    Here's to hoping he'll win in November... and hoping that he will actually be more forceful as a truly Democratic president! :)

    ReplyDelete