He’s like the top level of the Republican Party is, here. I’m sure he personally and quietly has no problem with repealing DADT and legal gay marriage. But gay rights are just one of the many things that 99% of the time isn’t worth any sacrifice on their part- there’s no worthwhile benefit in it for them. And the reactionary lower class part of the Republican ‘base’- which the leaders have absolute contempt for in private but need the votes of- hates gay people and gay marriage. The top tier here is all business Republicans: they look at everything through the morally lazy lens of cost/benefit/risk analysis.

So I’m sure Brown will vote Republican party line on gay rights issues where his vote isn’t decisive. And I don’t see any opportunity of his vote being decisive. The handful of conservative Democrats in the Senate, principally Ben Nelson, obstruct repeals. There are 40-45 Democratic votes in the Senate against another FMA, and about 200 in the House, and since 2/3 is needed that’s not going to happen either.

As a country we seem to elect the Party out of power into control of the agenda (though not necessarily majorities) in Washington every midterm election. So I’d say we’re looking at four years of mostly Republican control of the agenda from the midterms this November to roughly those of 2014. I think that amounts to almost everything involving gay rights, good or bad, getting stalemated or obstructed.

The exception might be repeal of DADT, on which popular opinion is about 70/30 and the conservative half of the electorate is sufficiently split to permit small positive motion, in increments (despite loud whining).

Eh, I don’t know about that. Far-righters are notorious for saying they do not support X when it means A, but changing their minds when X means B.

For example, I’m not convinced his statement should be read as a stand against FMA. He could means it more along the lines of: “I don’t think the Feds should be telling the states who can get married, if that means SSM bans are overturned in SCOTUS and we all have to acknowledge them queers.”

Both say he rejected the FMA but promised he would vote for it if the SCOTUS struck down state bans.

What I said is that this is a disingenuous position on his part. So, he’s willing to federally impose a definition if SCOTUS overturns the limited definition in the majority of the states?

As it stands, FMA would take too much effort and political capital to just prevent– what, six states from marrying gays with no federal recognition?

Of course it’s easy for him to make that decision, when the other states ban gay marriage.

DOMA+state bans currently in existence basically means a very minute benefit from passing the FMA, as most of the country has marriage bans.

There have been episodes in the past with Brown on gay issues, but I’m ready to wait and see. Gay allies in the Republican party, whether they come naturally or because they see political opportunity, are important… and positions evolve. Think Bill Weld. What we’re looking at here is not a potential “yes” vote on gay issues, but hopefully someone who will not work to fillibuster or who might even abstain, and that could be enough.

Thank you for the links.

However, your first link is a misreporting of the facts.

It is, I agree, easy to have one’s judgment clouded by partisanship. But I hope that I did not let my hope for lessened hostility too strongly flavor my analysis.

I agree Timothy, I think that Brown’s willingness to vote on our side probably depends on the specific issue up for vote.

Besides, if a Kennedy runs for this seat in 2012 (and I think that might happen) Brown may be SOL anyway.

Which is the same sh!t. DOMA already serves the purpose of blocking recognition federally.

Not pushing the amendment at the resounding majority of the states where amendments are put on the ballot, they pass. Gay marriage is not something that’s happening nationwide.

2- My mistake, they didn’t make it themselves. They just didn’t rebuke the calls NOM made.

http://www.towleroad.com/2010/01/nom-calls-attack-coakleys-prolgbt-positions-in-massachusetts.html

Kindly provide support for your claims.

1. When did McCain sponsor FMA?

2. When did Brown’s campaign make the calls you are claiming that it did?

I sent a note to Senator Boxer, a liberal California senator who supports repeal of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell. I told her that if she doesn’t work hard and publicly to force a vote on Don’t Ask Don’t Tell this year, I am not voting for her.

I am really sick and tired of liberal representatives and senators not forcing votes on these important issues and giving their anti-gay colleagues cover. I consider that approach aiding and abetting the anti-gay Democrats, and I think that pro-gay Demmocrats who play along with that game aren’t really pro-gay. So, why should I vote for them. In Boxer’s case, I think that she is going to need every vote she can get this time around.