A ship this large doesn’t turn on a dime.
4 Likes
The distinction is irrelevant to me. I knew full well he was lying and voted for him anyway with the expectation that at some point during his first term he would stop being phony and show his true position. Granted, the second part was mostly just faith, but I ended up being right.
1 Like
the accepted ‘truth’ that the black community was the most homophobic was always an exaggeration.
1 Like
" If he said he was for gay marriage and lost the election we’d be in a far worse position with President McCain and VP Palin"
…in pretty much every conceivable way.
2 Likes
Look at Alabama. I don’t think we are completely out of the woods on this issue. That we are still fighting this and other human rights issues is evidence of the power of regressive politics. Mostly, what has been proven here is that it is possible to change public opinion. It all comes down to timing and sensitivity.
Truth be known, isn’t it the fight, itself, that has been the goal of those opposed to what has been a reality since time immemorial. This is the problem of politics in a nutshell. What I most respect about PBO – he is the most adept modern president in the acceptance of what is and has been remarkably successful in reducing resistance to change that is necessary for us moving ahead culturally. We all know very little progress would have happened if we had a republican administration.
I am looking forward to the period from now until the next presidential election. It is a great opportunity and President Obama, as always, is stepping up to a vast range of issues.
Thank you, David Axelrod, you have kept the wheel tried and true.
David Axelrod could be arguably called a brilliant strategist, considering his presidential campaign success. However, he is know to put his own very large foot into his very large mouth on occasion, this being one of them. The comments are not flattering to the President, or should I say, they are easily interpreted as exposing a derogatory take on one facet of presidential politicking–though I think David’s intent was to bolster the image of the president as a supporter of marriage equality. It is, though, a window to understanding the scope of compromise that has arced across this president’s two terms. Like it or not, the spirit of compromise & bipartisanship are a large part of what defines the Obama presidency. Through David Axelrod’s daylight, we get a small glimpse of just how deep and wide that streak of compromise runs.
1 Like
Let me guess: Quotations of Chairman Hazelwood?
1 Like
Same to you. How do you equate his coming out in favor later, as lying
I love Axelrod and I just ordered the book.
1 Like
Without a doubt
Joe is often considered a loose cannon. I consider him a savvy player, and his act is very deliberate.
Marriage “equality” is not a done deal. For those who remember, abortion or “choice” as the fancy term is, was legalized by Roe v Wade in 1964. That was the high-water mark. Since then, abortion opponents have been slowly and very surely damaging it until it is not there in many places. Ruth Ginsberg, who is on the SC, considers R v W a huge mistake. The momentum for choice was there in the states. R v W destroyed the momentum, and gave opponents a target.
Marriage “equality” can and might suffer the same fate. Lawyers in the states are going to find ways to weaken and damage it. A lot of people, myself included, favor civil unions, and favor leaving “marriage” to the churches. I am a UU. We would marry any couple, save an incestuous one.
Marriage “equality” may have another unintended consequence - plural marriage, which is a horrible disaster of many different ways.
1 Like
You ended up being right AFTER public opinion had shifted. The people led. The “leaders” — Obama very much included — followed.
Hardly a profile in courage, given that fundamental civil rights were in the balance.
Astonishing how willing some are, even now, to say, “it’s cool, LBGTQ people, just sit tight a few more years until it’s politically expedient, and then we will openly voice support for your fundamental civil rights.”
Nick, Nick, Nick. [two-hand face-palm.]
Can’t you do better than baseless r-w fear-smears from Mike *uckabee’s pulpit?
Obama may not be much of a bullshitter, but the article enforces the thinking of what a liar he is. He lies and lies and lies. By the way, anybody still got their health plan? Biggest fucking liar in the history of the world.
Why not address my main point, that judicial solutions are not long-term good for a social issue? The judicial solution in the marriage situation is grounded in a very strong constitutional point, clearly - equal treatment. However, the coming ruling in favor of marriage equality will have unintended consequences. And besides, some of the anti-polygamy statutes are already falling. In Utah, certain cohabitation laws are now null-and-void.
Man, the truth just hurts like hell when its smacks you between the eyes, doesn’t it?
I usually disagree with Nick, sometimes violently, but here you’re misreading him. He’s saying that the State should not be involved in marriage at all. A position with which I am in full agreement. The State should be able only to certify civil unions and should get out of the “marriage” biz altogether.
Absolutely. Let the church do what it wishes. The state should do a religion-neutral union, and each church can do additional rites as it wishes. A “catholic marriage” would simply be a rite in the catholic church. The civil union would be the legal contract which would have a place in civil law. Inheritance, visitation, the rights of the parent with children, all would be subject to the civil union at the courthouse. This is what is done in a number of countries.
1 Like
Okay, I’m with you so far…
Nah, I’m reading him okay.
But here is where we disagree. I’m fine with the state continuing to issue Marriage licenses and being required to issue them to same-sex couples as well as opposite gender couples. Nick’s polygamy dropping is the key here. It’s well-known r-w hysteria, melded with what might otherwise be read as a rational comment.
1 Like