National
Aggressive Obama meets passive Romney in foreign policy debate
No mention of LGBT human rights abuses abroad

Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney and President Obama squared off in a foreign policy debate (Blade file photo by Michael Key)
President Obama and Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney sparred over foreign policy Monday evening in their final debate and, as in the previous debates, neither candidate made a direct reference to LGBT issues.
During the debate at Lynn University in Boca Raton, Fla., Obama took an aggressive posture, challenging Romney for switching his positions on issues, while Romney appeared passive and agreed with Obama on several key points. Both candidates made explicit references to protecting the rights of women overseas. Romney brought up promoting “gender equity” in the Middle East when talking about U.S. strategy in the Arab world, and Obama said “protecting religious minorities and women” should be a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy.
Other references to social issues were more general. At one point, Obama mocked Romney for his social policies without naming any position on social issues in particular, saying, “Governor, when it comes to our foreign policy, you seem to want to import the foreign policies of the 1980s, just like the social policies of the 1950s and the economic policies of the 1920s.”
Later, Romney said protecting “human rights” overseas was essential — but didn’t enumerate any groups for which the human rights should be protected.
Jeff Krehely, vice president of LGBT research at the Center for American Progress, said prior to the debate any discussion of LGBT issues would likely have exposed Romney’s ignorance of LGBT human rights abuses overseas.
“It’s pretty clear that Gov. Romney would be an abysmal president for LGBT Americans, since he’s made a political calculation to abandon any support for affirmative LGBT federal rights at home,” Krehely said. “But it would be good for voters to know whether he’s even aware that being gay is actually a punishable crime in many countries, and if he would continue to implement existing U.S. State Department policies that are helping to change that. If he’s not willing to do so, it’s a pretty clear indication of how far right he has drifted and just how badly he wants to be president.”
Turmoil in Syria, where an estimated 30,000 people have been killed under the Assad regime, was a contentious point during the debate. Romney faulted the Obama administration for not taking a leadership role in ousting the dictator, but Obama said the United States organized “Friends of Syria” and is mobilizing humanitarian support. When moderator Bob Scheiffer asked Romney what more he would do in the country, he didn’t commit to any different policy and said he doesn’t think military involvement is appropriate at this time.
Romney also faulted Obama for not placing enough emphasis on the U.S. partnership with Israel and said other countries in the Middle East noticed that Obama didn’t visit Israel when making a trip to the region during an early part of his administration. But Obama recalled that he visited Israel as a candidate and toured the Holocaust museum at Yad Vashem “to remind myself of the nature of evil and why our bond with Israel will be unbreakable.”
The candidates also discussed the appropriate size for the U.S. military. Romney criticized Obama by saying our Navy is smaller now than any time since 1916 and the Air Force is older and smaller than any time since its founding in 1947. Obama responded by saying the military has evolved over time and “we also have fewer horses and bayonets.” The “horses and bayonets” line immediately became an Internet sensation.
Throughout the debate, Romney emphasized the threat of Iran becoming a nuclear power and often spoke about the need to protect U.S. interests abroad by building a strong economy at home. Notably, Romney beyond his opening statement avoided the recent controversy over terrorist attacks at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that resulted in the deaths of four Americans — including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens — despite his earlier attacks on Obama on that issue.
The general consensus of the debate was Obama came out on top. Following the debate, a CBS News poll of debate viewers found that 53 percent believed Obama won compared to 23 percent who gave victory to Romney and 24 percent who said it was a tie.
Many observers said Romney appeared to agree with Obama on much of his foreign policy, including on the issue of drone strikes in Afghanistan when Romney said he supports that move “entirely.” The Washington Post’s Chris Cilliiza wrote Romney, “struggled to differentiate how his foreign policy would offer a break with what Obama has pursued over the past four years.”
Jerame Davis, executive director of the National Stonewall Democrats, said Obama “won tonight’s debate.”
“Mitt Romney is not ready for the world stage, he is not qualified to lead our country, and he has proven time and again he will say anything to get elected,” Davis said. “Americans should not be fooled by a slick sales pitch from an empty suit. President Obama has the stature, temperament, knowledge and vision to be the leader of the free world. Mitt Romney does not.”
Richard Grenell, who’s gay and briefly served as foreign policy spokesperson for the Romney campaign, said the debate revealed the Democratic messaging that Romney isn’t yet prepared to lead the country is false.
“It’s clear the Obama narrative that Gov. Romney is too extreme and naïve on foreign policy issues has imploded,” Grenell said. “They’ve wasted six months and millions of dollars on a message that fell apart tonight. The Obama team has quickly pivoted to start a new narrative that Romney is agreeing with President Obama on foreign affairs. The Obama team is panicking because they sense that the president isn’t going to get re-elected.”
Federal Government
Gay Venezuelan man ‘forcibly disappeared’ to El Salvador files claim against White House
Andry Hernández Romero had asked for asylum in US
A gay Venezuelan asylum seeker who the U.S. “forcibly disappeared” to El Salvador has filed a claim against the federal government.
Immigrant Defenders Law Center, who represents Andry Hernández Romero, on Friday announced their client and five other Venezuelans who the Trump-Vance administration “forcibly removed” to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, filed “administrative claims” under the Federal Tort Claims Act.
The White House on Feb. 20, 2025, designated Tren de Aragua, a Venezuelan gang, as an “international terrorist organization.”
President Donald Trump less than a month later invoked the Alien Enemies Act of 1798, which the Associated Press notes allows the U.S. to deport “noncitizens without any legal recourse.” The White House then “forcibly removed” Hernández, who had been pursuing his asylum case in the U.S., and more than 250 other Venezuelans to El Salvador.
Immigrant Defenders Law Center disputed claims that Hernández is a Tren de Aragua member.
Hernández was held at El Salvador’s Terrorism Confinement Center, a maximum-security prison known by the Spanish acronym CECOT, until his release on July 18, 2025. Hernández, who is back in Venezuela, claims he suffered physical and sexual abuse while at CECOT.
“As a Venezuelan citizen with no criminal record anywhere in the world, I would like to tell not only the government of the United States but governments everywhere that no human being is illegal,” said Hernández in the Immigrant Defenders Law Center press release. “The practice of judging whole communities for the wrongdoing of a single individual must end. Governments should use their power to help every person in the nation become more aware and informed, to strengthen our cultures and build a stronger generation with principles and values — one that multiplies the positive instead of destroying unfulfilled dreams and opportunities.”
Immigrant Defenders Law Center filed claims on behalf of Hernández and the five other Venezuelans less than three months after American forces seized then-Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro and his wife, Cilia Flores, at their home in Caracas, the Venezuelan capital.
Maduro and Flores have pleaded not guilty to federal drug charges. Delcy Rodríguez, who was Maduro’s vice president, is Venezuela’s acting president.
‘Due process and accountability cannot be optional’
Immigrant Defenders Law Center on Friday also made the following demands:
- The Trump administration must officially release the names of all people the United States sent to CECOT to ensure that everyone has been or will be released.
- The federal government must clear the names of the 252 men wrongfully labeled as criminal gang members of Tren de Aragua.
- DHS (Department of Homeland Security) must end the practice of outsourcing torture through third‑country removals, restore humanitarian parole, and rebuild a functioning, humane asylum system.
- DHS must reinstate Temporary Protected Status for all individuals who cannot safely return to their home countries, halt mass deportations and unlawful raids and arrests, and guarantee due process for everyone navigating the immigration system.
- Congress must pass the Neighbors Not Enemies Act, which would repeal the Alien Enemies Act.
“In all my years as an immigration attorney, I have never seen a client simply vanish in the middle of their case with no explanation,” said Immigration Defenders Legal Fund Legal Services Director Melissa Shepard. “In court, the government couldn’t even explain where he was — he had been disappeared.”
“When the government detains and transfers people in secrecy, without transparency or access to the courts, it tears at the basic protections a democracy is supposed to guarantee,” added Shepard. “What this experience makes painfully clear is that due process and accountability cannot be optional. They are the only safeguards standing between people and the kind of lawlessness our clients suffered. We must end third country transfers, restore the asylum system, and humanitarian parole, and reinstate temporary protective status so this nightmare never happens again.”
The White House
Trump proclamation targets trans rights as State Dept. shifts visa policy
Recent policy actions from the White House limit transgender rights in sports, immigration visas, and overarching federal policy.
In a proclamation issued by the Trump White House Thursday night, the president said he would, among other things, “restore public safety” and continue “upholding the rule of law,” while promoting policies that restrict the rights of transgender people.
“We are keeping men out of women’s sports, enforcing Title IX as it was originally written, and ensuring colleges preserve — and, where possible, expand — scholarships and roster opportunities for female athletes,” the proclamation reads. “At the same time, we are restoring public safety and upholding the rule of law in every city so women, children, and families can feel safe and secure.”
The statement comes amid a broader series of actions by the Trump administration targeting transgender people across multiple federal policy areas, including education, health care, and immigration. A nearly complete list of policies the current administration has put forward can be found on KFF.org.
One day before the proclamation was issued, the U.S. State Department announced changes to visa regulations that could impact transgender and gender-nonconforming people seeking entry into the United States.
The policy, published March 11 and scheduled to take effect April 10, introduces changes to the Diversity Immigrant Visa Program, commonly known as the “DV Program.” The rule is framed by the department as an effort to strengthen oversight and prevent fraud within the visa lottery system, which allocates a limited number of immigrant visas annually to applicants from countries with historically low rates of immigration to the United States.
However, the updated language also standardizes the use of the term “sex” in federal regulations in place of “gender,” a change that LGBTQ advocates say could create additional barriers for transgender and gender-diverse applicants.
The policy states: “The Department of State (‘Department’) is amending regulations governing the Diversity Immigrant Visa Program (‘DV Program’) to improve the integrity of, and combat fraud in, the program. These amendments require a petitioner to the DV Program to provide valid, unexpired passport information and to upload a scan of the biographic and signature page in the electronic entry form or otherwise indicate that he or she is exempt from this requirement. Additionally, the Department is standardizing and amending its regulations to add the word ‘shall’ to simplify guidance for consular officers; ensure the use of the term ‘sex’ in lieu of ‘gender’; and replace the term ‘age’ in the DV Program regulations with the phrase ‘date of birth’ to accurately reflect the information collected and maintained by the Department during the immigrant visa process.”
Advocates say the shift toward using “sex” rather than “gender” in federal immigration rules reflects a broader push by the administration to roll back recognition of transgender identities in federal policy.
According to the National Center for Transgender Equality, an estimated 15,000 to 50,000 undocumented transgender immigrants currently live in the United States, with many entering the country to seek refuge from persecution and hostile governments in their home countries.
Florida
Fla. House passes ‘Anti-Diversity’ bill
Measure could open door to overturning local LGBTQ rights protections
The Florida House of Representatives on March 10 voted 77-37 to approve an “Anti-Diversity in Local Government” bill that opponents have called an extreme and sweeping measure that, among other things, could overturn local LGBTQ rights protections.
The House vote came six days after the Florida Senate voted 25-11 to pass the same bill, opening the way to send it to Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis, who supports the bill and has said he would sign it into law.
Equality Florida, a statewide LGBTQ advocacy organization that opposed the legislation, issued a statement saying the bill “would ban, repeal, and defund any local government programming, policy, or activity that provides ‘preferential treatment or special benefits’ or is designed or implemented with respect to race, color, sex, ethnicity, sexual orientation, or gender identity.”
The statement added that the bill would also threaten city and county officials with removal from office “for activities vaguely labeled as DEI,” with only limited exceptions.
“Written in broad and ambiguous language, the bill is the most extreme of its kind in the country, creating confusion and fear for local governments that recognize LGBTQ residents and other communities that contribute to strength and vibrancy of Florida cities,” the group said in a separate statement released on March 10.
The Miami Herald reports that state Sen. Clay Yarborough (R-Jacksonville), the lead sponsor of the bill in the Senate, said he added language to the bill that would allow the city of Orlando to continue to support the Pulse nightclub memorial, a site honoring 49 mostly LGBTQ people killed in the 2016 mass shooting at the LGBTQ nightclub.
But the Equality Florida statement expresses concern that the bill can be used to target LGBTQ programs and protections.
“Debate over the bill made expressly clear that LGBTQ people were a central target of the legislation,” the group’s statement says. “The public record, the bill sponsors’ own statements, and hours of legislative debate revealed the animus driving the effort to pressure local governments into pulling back from recognizing or resourcing programs targeting LGBTQ residents and other historically marginalized communities,” the statement says.
But the statement also notes that following outspoken requests by local officials, sponsors of the bill agreed to several amendments “ensuring local governments can continue to permit Pride festivals, even while navigating new restrictions on supporting or promoting them.”
The statement adds, “Florida’s LGBTQ community knows all too well how to fight back against unjust laws. Just as we did, following the passage of Florida’s notorious ‘Don’t Say Gay or Trans’ law, we will fight every step of the way to limit the impact of this legislation, including in the courts.”
-
Ukraine5 days agoUkrainian Supreme Court recognizes same-sex couple as a family
-
District of Columbia4 days agoCapital Stonewall Democrats set to celebrate 50th anniversary
-
Florida4 days agoFla. House passes ‘Anti-Diversity’ bill
-
Health4 days agoHousewives head to Capitol Hill to promote PrEP coverage
