Same-sex marriage: Pres. Buckwheat blows his sissies a kiss

By William PLEASANT w/ Sekou OSEI

We guess all of you had a chance to witness the latest stand-up comedy routine as policy statement by President Barack Obama. We got a chance to hear and see his proclamation last Wednesday night (May 16) on ABC that he supports same-sex marriage. Naturally, we also witnessed the US Liberal Establishment cheer this long-awaited declaration of pro-gay sympathy as a defining moment in the Obama presidency. Obama fixed a national "problem" on a television show, they say.

So, the federal government's failure to bless gay marriage is a fundamental contradiction of life in the USA? Pres. Buckwheat would like you to think so. The "same-sex marriage issue" has ascended to the same level of social urgency as wanton police violence against the poor, unemployment, mass incarceration of Black, Latino and Asian youths, an irrational for-the-rich health care system, sub-prime mortgage rip-offs and the extra-judicial murder of US citizens abroad (and soon coming LIVE to your neighborhood, too)...Oh no! The the most pressing issue facing the increasingly abused and confused US populace is the RIGHT of two people of the same gender to enter a state-brokered and regulated sexual contract.

According to a new PEW poll, gay marriage ranked 18^th in the list of important issues, coming far behind the economy, jobs, health care and war.

Obama announced on ABC that, “for me personally, it’s is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married,” adding that his position on the issue had "evolved" over the course of his presidency.

The Obama regime's Department of Mindfuck sought to frame their leader's remarks as a reaction to the "unscripted" gay-friendly statements from Vice President Joseph Biden the weekend before. We can see that the timing of Obama's proclamation had all the earmarks of a calculated political maneuver—an attempt to divert attention from the real economic and social crisis, while bolstering Obama’s support among the more privileged section of the white, liberal intelligentsia for whom issues such as gay rights and marriage are principal moral fetishes posing as political demands. He was simply pandering to his monied base on cue from his fund-raising managers. Moreover, Pres. Buckwheat does not want his gay and gay-friendly supporters kicking up a storm over the "same-sex marriage issue" through the summer and into the fall election season. In one swoop, he shrewdly set up the Republicans to have a premature wad-bust on the issue, AND GOT PAID FOR IT. Gay marriage is effectively off the table for the final lap of the 2012 campaign season. Touche', Mitt Romney!

Last week the New York Times set the tone for the response of the liberal establishment in its Thursday, post-epiphany edition. The Times proclaimed that with his statement, Obama “took the moral high ground on what may be the great civil rights struggle of our time.”

A companion article in the Times oozed that Obama’s approval of gay marriage “was by any measure a watershed.” The Times continued, “The very riskiness of what Mr. Obama did—some commentators were invoking Lyndon B. Johnson embrace of the civil rights in 1964, with all the attendant political perils—made it hard to understate the historic significance of what took place at the White House on Wednesday.”

The Associated Press further explained that, “Hollywood is home to some of the most high-profile backers of gay marriage, and the 150 donors who are paying $400,000 each to attend Clooney’s dinner Thursday night will no doubt feel newly invigorated by Obama’s watershed announcement the day before.” The AP added that targeted Obama donors would roll with a number of fundraisers in the next several days. Big $$$. Gay marriage will be the dominant issue, “culminating in yet another fund-raising event Monday in New York sponsored by gay and Latino Obama supporters.” The near-hysterical enthusiasm among these parasitical and opportunistic constituencies within the Democratic Party will add but another "leftist" veneer to the Obama regime.

The attempt by the New York Times to present the issue of gay marriage as historically on par with the mass struggles for civil rights during the 1960s is, as a political matter, absurd. We say this not from the perspective of the vulgar Marxists (Stalinists), who conjure up hierarchies of “issues”; nor as Black cultural nationalists minstrels who vehemently insist that their version of the "Black Thang" is the morally and historically most worthy of the Democratic Party's patronage--Negroes über alles! These are the same folks who whine that mere "sexual deviants" are upstaging their buckdance. That is absolutely not where we are coming from.

From a Marxian perspective, there is no competition between gay/lesbian civil rights and Black/Latino/Native/Asian civil rights. Civil rights are class-in-itself demands in the same way that organized labor demands are merely pleadings to the BOSS for fairness. Even if these concessions are granted, nothing changes in the social structure of power. The current structure of social power is in fact terracidal. It must be overthrown. The demand for civil right does not address this political and historical imperative.

Only opportunists (social democrats, retro-Black nationalistic posers and Marxist vulgarians) get their noses out of joint when a new pig challenges them at the Democratic Party's slop-n-crumb trough. Obama's new pigs are not representative of the poor and working class lesbian/gay folks who populate this country but a minority of patronage-hungry political oafs in drag, dedicated to creating a FAGGIT MICRO-NATIONALISM for their and only their opportunistic aspirations, as a vested caucus within the Democratic Party. They are just Obama's sissies. [QUOTE US!]

Pres. Obama threw the sissies and only them a kiss on ABC TV. At no time did he address the real history of state-organized abuse of lesbian/gay people. At no time did he admit that the US government carried out well-funded campaigns to purge itself of "deviants." Did Obama allude to or apologize for these human rights abuses during the ABC TV interview?

HELL NO!

Well, he has never even considered an apology for the atrocities of slavery and ethnic cleansing/genocide visited upon the Blacks and Native and Latino Peoples either.

Offering a half-ass personal epiphany regarding same-sex marriage
can in no way be construed as even lukewarm support the actual gay/lesbian civil rights agenda. 

Nonetheless, the glitterati of the "lesbian/gay community (whatever that means, except as a luscious advertising market and donor base to the DP)" has soiled its panties in joy, according to the NEW YORK TIMES. Obama said he has no problem with TWO LADIES or TWO GUYS getting married. So what?

That is not revolutionary. Tactically speaking, it isn't even progressive. Same-sex  marriage  operatively means that more county registry offices will collect more marriage license fees. We can expect Men's Warehouse to add bridal gowns to its stock. And likewise, Divorce lawyers will reap a new market for their brand of court room mayhem. Right? Think about it.

Marxists have the equivalent take on hetero-sexual marriage as "same-sex" marriage. Marriage is a VERY BACKWARDS sexual contract, policed by the state. Marriage was developed to assure property transfer to the descendants of deceased MEN--i.e., it allowed for a legal contract (church and/or state) record to be lodged as to the legitimacy of the heirs of the parents--in the form of a contract of sexual fidelity between the male and female partners. (The essence of the contract is that the female assures the male that all children resulting from HER COITUS are ONLY the biological offspring of her male contractual partner. It assures that no BASTARDS--acts of infidelity/breech of contract by females expressed as children--get to take a piece of the pie in surrogate/chancellery court against the estate of the male contractor.) .

Marriage is for men, especially rich men.

Same-sex marriage (a post-infantile version of playing "mama and daddy") only allows state policing of property transfer upon disability and/or death of contracting parties. A marriage is not required to allow that to happen. In actuality, an adult man and an adult woman, or a woman and a woman/man and a man may make any kind of contract they may choose that is non-criminal. It does not have to be a marriage--an open invitation to total state abuse and commercial exploitation.

The Democratic Party's mania over same-sex marriage has nothing to do with even rhetorically addressing nor ameliorating the suffering of poor and working class social/sexual outlaws--fashionably designated as gays and lesbians or QUEERS.

The specific repression against lesbian and gays is not the denial of access to legal marriage.

For Marxists, all "Legal" Marriage is utterly patriarchal and reactionary, same-sex or otherwise. That is why the comparison between the struggle for "same-sex marriage" is historically, socially and politically absurd when compared to the Black/Latino/Native resistance in the US. It is a joke when compared to the anti-imperialistic political and armed liberation tendencies in the US and elsewhere.

Actually, legal marriage is a tool of repression against all--gay or "straight."

In the end, you have a GAY/LESBIAN opportunistic proto-caucus within the Democratic Party urging acceptance of a LESBIAN/GAY VERSION of a patriarchal, bourgeois contract format, owned and operated by the state. Ironically, these alleged social/sexual outlaws now DEMAND the right to permit the police to get in their panties, too. That is all the social equality they and the Democratic Party have to offer lesbians and gays at this time. But the outlaws doing all the talking now are just privileged-class social deviants and their petite-bourgeois camp followers who see a chance for their tickets to be punched by Obama's Democratic Party. The "same-sex marriage issue" is just their crack in the door.

That is what DEMOCRATIC PARTY opportunism looks like.

The so-called lesbian/gay leadership is as thick and corrupt as the Black/Latino/Native so-called leadership. They are all pathetic geeks in the Democratic Party sideshow. But Barack Obama is the ringmaster of this circus. He is also determined to hold on to his job at any cost.

Meanwhile, the poor and working class, despite how they get their erotic jollies, are ground into the mud.

Rainbow. Right?

Lesbians and gays are sub-cultures which have endured two centuries of specific STATE repression in the United States. There has been de jure repression against them, as a response to their practical social deviation from patriarchy and the bourgeois labor replication regimen, i.e., the command that females are divinely mandated to replenish the cannon-fodder pool with slave babies.

The poor and working class lesbian/gay demand for relief from specific repression is historically lawful and progressive. And it is incumbent upon ALL MARXISTS and progressive social elements to support their demand for relief. Poor and working class lesbians and gays must be supported in their struggle for human rights and democratic inclusion. BUT THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE THEORY NOR PRACTICE OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY USA, Barack Obama nor his wannabe amen corner on the social/sexual fringe.

When the poor of America cry out for bread, peace and justice Obama answers with austerity measures, more military conflict and increasing police repression.

Likewise, when grassroots gay/lesbian people cry out for relief all that Obama has to say to them is: "Well, now I feel like you can get legally married. But it's just a feelin'. Dig?"

The Democratic Party can only answer its electoral base, the poor, with betrayal and dismissal. That is its job in the system of decaying global monopoly capitalism.

The rebellion of the slaves will be the war of the landscapes.

Remember: History is on our side, not time.

--30--