The Magic Caf
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Man, it'd be funny if (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9~10 [Next]
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
I agree with you landmark and disagree with the President's politically pragmatic, and therefore understandable, position that the matter should be left to the states. But I nonetheless believe that his personal support for gay marriage, however belated, will provide an impetus to an eventual constitutional amendment or Supreme Court decision that will finally prohibit all discrimination based on gender or sexual preference.

Good thoughts,

Bob
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1199 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On 2012-05-09 19:36, mastermindreader wrote:
=we understand that civil rights aren't determined by a majority vote. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 would not have passed if it had been put up to a popular vote. There will never be a shortage of bigots.


Which is why it's REALLY funny that a biracial constitutional scholar took a "separate but equal" position on this issue for so long.

Having said that, I'm glad that we have the first president in office to take this position.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1199 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On 2012-05-09 19:56, landmark wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-05-09 19:36, mastermindreader wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-05-09 18:27, Woland wrote:
Interesting that despite the polling data, Lobo, it appears that every State referendum on the issue has defined marriage as meaning one man and one woman. As in North Carolina yesterday, with a 61% to 39% vote.

One of the great things about our democracy is that we understand that civil rights aren't determined by a majority vote. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 would not have passed if it had been put up to a popular vote. There will never be a shortage of bigots.

Bob, that's why Obama's position on gay rights is so disappointing:

Quote:
ABC News has only released one brief clip of Obama's conversation about gay marriage today, but it seems fairly clear from the network's coverage that his announcement amounts to much less than meets the eye. He now believes that gay couples should be able to marry. He doesn't believe they have a right to do so. This is like saying that black children and white children ought to attend the same schools, but if the people of Alabama reject that notion—what are you gonna do?

The key language in the ABC News write-up is this:

The president stressed that this is a personal position, and that he still supports the concept of states deciding the issue on their own.

On this afternoon's special broadcast, Jake Tapper echoed that point: "The president said he thought this was a state-by-state issue."

Well, before Roe v. Wade, abortion was a state-by-state issue, too. So was slavery. There are 44 states in which gay men and women are currently barred from marrying one another. Obama's position is that, while he would have voted the other way, those 44 states are perfectly within their rights to arbitrarily restrict the access of certain individuals to marriage rights based solely on their sexual orientation.


More here.


Even more blatantly, before Loving v. Virginia, interracial marriage was a state-by-state issue, with many of the opponents using the same arguments that many gay marriage opponents use today.
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Quote:
On 2012-05-09 20:13, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-05-09 19:36, mastermindreader wrote:
=we understand that civil rights aren't determined by a majority vote. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 would not have passed if it had been put up to a popular vote. There will never be a shortage of bigots.


Which is why it's REALLY funny that a biracial constitutional scholar took a "separate but equal" position on this issue for so long.

Having said that, I'm glad that we have the first president in office to take this position.

I think his former "separate but equal" position was another example of the political pragmatism that has driven some of us on the left crazy. I think he is finally beginning to realize that pragmatism and compromise are meaningless when the other side will oppose him no matter what his positions are - even if they are virtually identical to positions previously supported by his adversaries.

(Did you notice how the tea party guy who defeated Dick Lugar for the Senate nomination defined "bipartisanship" earlier today? He stated that it meant getting Democrats to agree with GOP positions! It wasn't said tongue in cheek. He was actually serious.)
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Predictably, the Fox Nation headline and Rush Limbaugh have declared that the President has just "declared war on marriage!"

I guarantee that if they were around in 1964 they would have declared that when Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act he "declared war on white people!"
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2556 Posts

Profile of critter
Krem 2 news just reported the story and said Obama will be doing a fund raiser in Hollywood "where many of those in attendance will be from the gay and lesbian community." Sometimes stereotypes are true, but it was still funny to hear it from the news anchor all serious like.
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Quote:
On 2012-05-10 02:12, critter wrote:
Krem 2 news just reported the story and said Obama will be doing a fund raiser in Hollywood "where many of those in attendance will be from the gay and lesbian community." Sometimes stereotypes are true, but it was still funny to hear it from the news anchor all serious like.

He could hold the fundraiser at a GOP convention, and there would still be many from the gay and lesbian community in attendance ... Just they wouldn't be 'out'. Smile
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2556 Posts

Profile of critter
"Next week, Mitt Romney will be having a fund-raiser in Idaho, where many in attendance will be racist lumberjacks." Smile
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
After years of waffling, President Obama has just adopted another one of Vice President Cheney's long-standing political positions.

The fund-raising may have a lot to do with it. The President seems to have avoided taking this position in order not to offend the African-American pastors upon whom much of his urban GOTV effort depends. What may have tipped the balance is the difficulty he is having in raising money for his re-election campaign, and the perception that adopting at least this one of Dick Cheney's views will prove popular with major donors in the entertainment industry.

And as landmark and Bob have noted, all the President did was endorse the status quo, in which although a handful of states have enabled same-sex marriage legislatively, about 30 or so have banned it via referendums and state-constitutional amendments.
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Or perhaps, instead of spinning it, you can just look back at his positive record for gay rights since the beginning of his administration and take him at his word that he has evolved, as have a large percentage of Americans, on the issue.

There is also a glaring contradiction in your post- In the first sentence you state that "President Obama has just adopted another one of Vice President Cheney's long-standing political positions." The word "another" clearly implies that he has previously adopted other Cheney positions.

And yet in the second paragraph, in which you falsely state that he is having difficulty raising money, you write that adopting "at least this one of Dick Cheney's views will prove popular with major donors in the entertainment industry." (Talk about stereotyping!)

So which is it? Has he adopted yet another of Cheney's positions, or at least this one? You can't have it both ways.

Unless you're just spinning, of course.
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Quote:
There is also a glaring contradiction in your post- In the first sentence you state that "President Obama has just adopted another one of Vice President Cheney's long-standing political positions." The word "another" clearly implies that he has previously adopted other Cheney positions.

And yet in the second paragraph, in which you falsely state that he is having difficulty raising money, you write that adopting "at least this one of Dick Cheney's views will prove popular with major donors in the entertainment industry." (Talk about stereotyping!)


Hi Bob,

No contradictions. The President's position on same-sex marriage is not the only one of Vice President Cheney's positions that he has come to adopt. In his management of the drone-war and in the trial of the September Eleventh terrorists by military tribunal, as well as by keeping Camp Gitmo open, the President is adopting in practice various positions espoused by Dick Cheney against which he ran in his 2008 campaign for the Presidency.

Vice President Cheney's views on the conduct of the war have not been very popular with Hollywood donors, but the marriage position will be. That is not a stereotype of anyone or anything. Just a description of the facts on the ground. So in adopting "another one" of Vice President Cheney's positions, the President has hit on one that will be popular with some of his major donors, if not all of them. Even though it is a position that will antagonize many key individuals in another community whose votes were essential to his success in several key states.
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Woland wrote:

Quote:
What may have tipped the balance is the difficulty he is having in raising money for his re-election campaign...


Even Fox news seems to disagree that the President is having problems with fundraising:

Quote:
The Obama campaign is dismissing speculation that it may be poised to raise $1 billion by November. But Brendan Glavin, data manager with the Campaign Finance Institute, said Obama appears to be "on pace" to at least surpass the $750 million he raised in 2008, which would set another record.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/01/......uShleb2a
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Of course that's what the campaign says, Bob, but the President has already told Congressional candidates that he will have no money to spare for them, as he did in 2008, and he has been spending money almost as fast as he has been taking it in, despite the fact that until recently, there was not even a probably-presumptive GOP nominee. And you may be right about this one. At least you are no longer disputing what I wrote about the President and Vice President Cheney's positions! Smile
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
It's not just what the campaign says. Read the entire Fox article that I linked to. It's republican organizations that are saying Obama is on pace to break all records for fund raising.
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Thanks, Bob, I am sure that the campaign's probably illegal disconnection of all controls on internet contributions is helping.
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1199 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On 2012-05-10 06:08, mastermindreader wrote:
Or perhaps, instead of spinning it, you can just look back at his positive record for gay rights since the beginning of his administration and take him at his word that he has evolved, as have a large percentage of Americans, on the issue.


Ohhh Bob. *You* don't even believe that "evolving position" nonsense coming out of the White House.

Quote:
On 2012-05-09 20:24, mastermindreader wrote:
I think his former "separate but equal" position was another example of...political pragmatism
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
The Associated Press seems to be thinking along the lines I sketched out. Here's the headline:

Quote:
Obama, backing gay marriage, on fundraising tour


And the lede:

Quote:
The president made his historical endorsement on the eve of a sold-out fundraiser Thursday evening at the Los Angeles home of movie star George Clooney.

The timing of the event is creating a blockbuster confluence of high celebrity, big money and committed activism. Hollywood is home to some of the most high-profile backers of gay marriage and the 150 donors who are paying $40,000 to attend Clooney's dinner Thursday night will no doubt feel newly invigorated by Obama's watershed announcement the day before.

Overall, the dinner is expected to raise close to $15 million — about $6 million from the guests and the rest from a campaign contest for small-dollar donors, the winners of which get to participate in the dinner. It is an unprecedented amount for a single event. And it means that in one single evening the Obama camp and the Democratic Party will collect more than Mitt Romney, the presumed Republican challenger, has amassed in his best single month of fundraising.


Incidentally, this move may also show that the President's campaign is relying on a get-out-the-base strategy, rather than an attempt to win over the "middle" -- an approach that you and I agreed (in another thread, I think) makes a lot of practical sense.
EsnRedshirt
View Profile
Special user
Newark, CA
895 Posts

Profile of EsnRedshirt
You know, now that Obama's come out as supporting gay marriage- is anyone going to not vote for him now who would have voted for him before? I think the answer is "No." He will not lose a single vote.
Self-proclaimed Jack-of-all-trades and google expert*.

* = Take any advice from this person with a grain of salt.
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
I disagree. But I think he will gain more voters than he will lose.
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Well over the course of his first administration he did away with Don't Ask Don't Tell and stopped defending DOMA. Here are just a few dozen other examples of LGBT related law and policy he's implemented as his position evolved to where it is now:

http://www.equalitygiving.org/Accomplish......Equality

No spin. Just the facts.

But the deniers will continue to deny him credit for anything. I ask again- what was Romney's position on gay rights when he was running for governor of Massachusetts?
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Man, it'd be funny if (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9~10 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2022 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.06 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL