The politics of Obama’s same sex marriage decision are pretty interesting, and some of the most interesting parts are the media politics. Anyone who’s on the right side of an issue at the start gets no credit in the DC press. But if you have a long public “struggle” with your conscience, consulting others along the way and being extremely serious about the whole thing, acres of trees will die to document every moment in your come-to-Jesus journey. We’re just getting started, but here’s the Post’s first effort:
Obama often described his process as an “evolution,” telling interviewers and advocates that he was “wrestling” or “struggling” with the question of marriage. He told ABC’s Robin Roberts that his thinking changed in part based on conversations with gay staffers, friends and soldiers, as well as dinner-table chats with his family.[…]
And the timeline that he and his aides have described remains muddled. Administration officials said Obama made his decision earlier this year and was looking for a good way to announce it. But the president suggested in his interview that he made up his mind much earlier, after the state of New York legalized same-sex marriage in the summer of 2011.
“That’s part of the — the evolution that I went through,” he told Roberts. “I asked myself — right after that New York vote took place, if I had been a state senator, which I was for a time — how would I have voted? And I had to admit to myself, ‘You know what? I think that — I would have voted yes.’ ”
We’ll be done with this the day after publication of Bob Woodward’s 800 page insider story, replete with blind quotes from the true players along with the definitive account of what was said at Sally Quinn’s dinner party this weekend. Until then, expect a lot more of this.
Just to be clear, I’m thrilled with Obama’s decision, and I’m glad to see a Democrat getting the same “wrestling with his conscience” treatment that’s mainly the province of Lindsay Graham, John McCain and the Senators from Maine.
r€nato
Did this get noted already?
One wag suggested that the priests didn’t want to watch a girl play…
jrg
To me, the most disgusting part about all this is that the fundies who are howling about gay marriage right now, while the country’s more or less divided on the issue will abandon their “moral convictions” as soon as the majority see them as bigots.
…And not a fucking soul will ask them if their 11th hour conversion was self-serving. “do unto others”, indeed.
cmorenc
The only “wrestling with conscience” Graham, McCain, and the Maine twins have done since Obama took office is how much of a “wrestling” show their conscience will let them get away with before voting with the wingnuts anyway, without too obviously giving away that it’s been fake all along
Yutsano
@cmorenc: Answer: as much as they want, because as always IOKIYAR.
The Republic of Stupidity
@r€nato:
Somehow, I find the school’s name – Our Lady of Sorrows – very appropriate…
Linda Featheringill
Interesting post! I don’t try to keep up with the media all that much but I think you may have analyzed this situation correctly.
Obama, love the guy, but he does move very s l o w l y sometimes. If this particular drama gets a lot of press, I just might forgive him. :-)
Seriously, it would be very nice to have the eccentricity of the MSM work in our favor for a change.
ETA:
Blessings on you, Joe Biden. Don’t change, dude.
jibeaux
If you want to watch a spirited defense of marriage equality from someone who’s been on the right side for a while, check out Cory Booker on Rachel Maddow. Tell you what, that man is going places.
jibeaux
Okay, what triggered moderation? Test: I’m not allowed to talk about Cory Booker?
NCSteve
You should also be glad that the White House had the skill to play the MSM like a fiddle on this one. Starting with the idea that Biden “accidentally” committed candor which forced Obama’s hand and made him do this sooner than he wanted. Mmm hm. Mmm hm. Right.
jibeaux
Okay, what triggered moderation? Test: I’m not allowed to talk about the current mayor of Newark, NJ?
jibeaux
Sigh. Watch the current mayor of Newark, NJ on Maddow. His name sounds like Bory Cooker.
ruemara
meh. Considering that this was his position as then-senator Obama, I think this was about as carefully orchestrated as vaudeville striptease act. Some denouement, but the real art is in how you pull things off. He was only “wrestling” with how long the American voting public would take to get to majority favoring gay marriage.
Jerzy Russian
@r€nato:
I went to a Catholic school many years ago, and although they were ass-backwards, they were never this ass-backwards. Catholics seem to be evolving, but in the wrong way.
Clime Acts
So you are entirely comfortable with the fact that Obama’s “evolution” and “struggle” with this matter is entirely a fraud, given that he had publicly stated his approval of gay marriage as early as 1996?
Yet when Romney pretends to have DE-volved on gay marriage, you rip him to shreds.
Interesting…
Redshift
@NCSteve: Yeah, every time I heard a reporter talk about how the timing of this was “forced” by Biden, the words that went through my mind were “hook, line, and sinker.” These guys are *good*.
giltay
That’s pretty much the parable of the prodigal son in a nutshell. “It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found.”
Clime Acts
@ruemara:
Lying to the American public, and misrepresenting one’s political and ideological background is OK if you are Barack Obama…
…I see.
Marcellus Shale, Public Dick
my cynicism at the calculus involved and the timing of the announcement comes from an entirely different place.
the whole part about talking to his daughters, to my ear, sounded like a fuck you, black jimmy carter on this, wishamotherfuckerwould, moment.
consider that jimmy carter(white one) was criticized by st reagan’s minions for taking policy on nuclear proliferation from talks with his daughter.
John D
@Jerzy Russian: Just to be clear, this is not a Catholic school. It is run by the Society of St. Pius X, which *left* the Catholic Church over Vatican II back in the 60s.
middlewest
@Clime Acts: Whoops! Looks like someone got their Romney supporter persona mixed up with their purity troll persona. Tough break.
Lolis
@Clime Acts:
Grow up and welcome to politics. Feigned naivete gets you nowhere.
Shawn in ShowMe
@ruemara:
I see the potential for a new tag here. 11-Dimensional Chess is so 2010.
jibeaux
@Clime Acts: I know that you’re not worth engaging, but for fuck’s sake Mitt Romney doesn’t claim to have devolved. He’s never evolved. In 1994 he briefly ran a campaign claiming he would be better than Ted Kennedy on gay rights. This is because he is Mitt Romney, and if he hasn’t at some point taken both sides of an issue it could cause a rift in the space-time continuum. So he checked that off and went back to being a complete fucking troglodyte. And if the Log Cabin Fucking Republicans want to vote for a party which hates them and will not accept their existence for, at a minimum, another generation because they are unsatisfied with the timing of Barack Obama’s announcement of support, then they should fucking well do that. I’m sure they’ll find some discreet like-minded voices of support and comfort on craigslist.
amk
@jibeaux: Ah, cole’s vista fuck-up moments. No you can’t use his name here. Be inventive seems to be cole’s non-solution.
Clime Acts
@middlewest:
Obama is a fraud on gay marriage, and you’re ok with that. Which makes your accusations of Romney being a fraud on other matters exactly worthless.
And consider that I’m a gay man. Which, applying the ABL standard of Balloon Juice credibility by which she represents the AA perspective on all things and speaks for ALL black Americans, means that I represent the GAY perspective on all things gay and speak for ALL gay Americans. Ergo you must respect and honor my opinion.
Thank you in advance.
Steve
@Clime Acts: Have you evolved out of your position that Trayvon Martin’s mom is a grifter? Just wondering.
Chyron HR
@Clime Acts:
It’s very “telling” that when a black man is reluctant to say gay marriage is okay, you’re livid when he finally does, but when a white man says that you and your partner shouldn’t be allowed to be married, you’re fine with it.
Clime Acts
@Lolis:
Spare me. I’m one of the few on this board who is NOT naive. The problem is that Bots drop their standards of integrity and consistency like soiled panties when it comes to their particular favorite.
Tis a joke.
Yutsano
@jibeaux: The mayor of Newark has a name that also means a person who organizes bets for sporting events. It will suck mightily if he goes for higher office.
jibeaux
@amk: He Who Shall Not Be Named But He Once Ran Into A Burning House To Save His Neighbors
In other news, I apologize for feeding the troll, who is truly awful. Can we change it back to one of those threads where we make up awesome things Mitt Romney’s done? That was fun.
Clime Acts
@jibeaux:
Barack Obama supported gay marriage in the 90s. Good for him, that’s great. Then he claimed to not support it as he geared up to run for prez. Now he supports it again. He was against telecom immunity before he was against it. Is this because he is Barack obama, a notorious flip flopper and must maintain the integrity of the continuum?
Sounds like taking both sides of an issue…like, you know, Mitt does. But you’re ok with that because…
Shawn in ShowMe
Ever notice you never see Clime Acts and a DougJ front page post at the same time? Just saying.
Chyron HR
@Clime Acts:
As demonstrated by your utterly baffled reaction when he fired one of his advisers for having gay cooties.
“WHY??????”
Clime Acts
@Chyron HR:
RRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAACCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCCIIIIIIIIIIIISSSSSSSSST.
jibeaux
@Clime Acts: Clearly, the tie goes to the guy currently against you.
Clime Acts
@Chyron HR:
Wrong again, maroon.
The bafflement expressed in your linked comment is as to why the hire was made in the first place.
Try reading comprehension classes.
Also: Nice try distracting from the issue here.
Anya
@Marcellus Shale, Public Dick: I don’t think he said he consulted with his daughters about his decision. Instead, when he mentioned his daughters he was pointing out the the fact that younger generations have different prespective on this. So, basically, Parenting Expert Bristol Palin is dissapointed that the President is not teaching his kids bigotry. Here’s what he said:
jibeaux
I mean, I can’t fault Clime Acts of course. Sometimes there’s a guy offering me a cookie, and a guy offering me a bag of dressage horse shit. I always choose the shit, because I WANTED THE COOKIE FIVE MINUTES AGO, DAMMIT.
amk
@jibeaux: That mayor guy = wanna be Arsonist ? (with my rethug/pox news pundtwit cap)
yeah, the birther, the deather, racist pig 3-fer troll is worth shit.
Shawn in ShowMe
@Clime Acts:
CCCCOUUUUUNNNTTTTEERRRRRTTTOOOOPPPSSS.
amk
@jibeaux: There you go. cole would approve, fuck him.
Anya
Is Clime Acts supposed to be a Romney supporter in the midst of all of us mindless Obots, or is he a disaffected liberal who’s so heart sick by a President who did not live up to his lofty expectations? I am getting confused.
jrg
The troll is just upset that Obama gets to take the credit for supporting gay marriage after gay republicans such as the troll worked so hard to advance the cause in the broader population.
Chyron HR
@Clime Acts:
I’ve seen enough posts by True Progressives to understand that you guys think Obama and Romney are identical from a political standpoint. “Obamney” and all that, right?
And yet you spend all day here bitching about Obama, while not demonstrating any particular beef with Romney.
So, hey, you tell us. What exactly is it that differentiates Obama and Romney in your mind, if not the colors of their skin?
Villago Delenda Est
The vermin of the Village.
Wipe them out. All of them.
On edit: That includes unrepentant Naderites like a certain troll here.
Clime Acts
@Chyron HR:
Yes, clearly, I spend ALL DAY here, bitching about Obama.
My overall point, is that bots on this blog do the country NO good by not holding Obama and other Democrats to an equitable standard of political conduct.
I pull from the Left. You genuflect from the right.
Rafer Janders
To me it’s pretty clear: he’s lying. I’m of the same cohort as Obama (middle-aged liberal Democrats with two or more Ivy League degrees, international backgrounds, urban white collar professionals working in government/law/finance etc.) and there is simply no one I know, not one single solitary individual, who is in any way conflicted about marriage equality, at least for the last ten years. Even my friends who are conservative Republicans and worked in the Bush White House or currently for the Romney campaign support marriage equality. Even my Irish Catholic suburban Republican-voting family members support marriage equality. If Obama was in any way sincerely opposed to it, he’d be unique among his peer group.
(Not to mention the fact that he claimed to support marriage equality in an interview he gave all the way back in 1996. It’s not credible to claim that, in contrast to the rest of the country, he alone became more conservative on this topic over the last 16 years).
Clime Acts
@jrg:
Been gay my entire life, asshole.
I don’t need your permission, so fuck off.
Chyron HR
@Clime Acts:
I believe it’s 10 AM where you are. Shall we check back and see which site you’re still trolling this afternoon?
Or do you you mean that in between denouncing Obama here, you go over to RedState/BigBrietbart/Wherever and bitch about Romney? If that’s the case, it should be easy for you to provide one of those links, like you’re always asking us for.
Clime Acts
@Villago Delenda Est:
Never voted for or supported the election of Ralph Nader in any way. Fuck off, troll.
Your non response to my questions regarding Obama’s cravenness on gay marriage is duly noted.
Ash Can
@Yutsano: We’ll just have to call him Cory B. That’s distinctive enough.
(And if the word “Cory” lands me in moderation now, I’m going to go set fires in the trash cans behind WP’s garage.)
Clime Acts
@Chyron HR:
thanks for your continuuing non response to Obama’s craveness. duly noted.
Rafer Janders
As a dramatic storyline, the Prince Hal to King Henry, Prince Gautama to the Buddha, etc. transformation is always more interesting than a main character who’s been virtuous all along.
Chyron HR
@Clime Acts:
Really? You’re not even going to try to come up with some kind of token explanation for why Mitt “I want to change the constitution so that Clime Acts and his partner can’t be married” Romney is A-OK in your book, while you think Barack “Okay, you got me, I support gay marriage” Obama is scum?
jrg
@Clime Acts:
But you needed Dubya’s permission, right troll?
General Stuck
Aside from making sound decisions while presidenting, the choreography of doing things is an art form of sorts, and the successful presidents, measured by maintaining high approvals and favorables, are also pretty good actors when the curtain goes up.
Obama is a politician, he is also a decent man with his head screwed on straight, and basically a solid mainstream democrat, imo. But he is a politician, and does politician things to get what he wants. Liberal progressive heroes are for starry eyed dreamers and fantasists, that usually end up on the cutting room floor.
Bullshit in politics is unavoidable at times, if you want to win. And how a president arranges and manages that bullshit, often makes the difference between success and failure. With an ignoble understanding that in politics, perception is often more important that reality.
I don’t know for sure, whether or how much the gay marriage ‘evolving’ was orchestrated, or not. Nor whether Joe Biden was in on the act, or was his usual loveable foot in mouth self. And the fact that it is hard to discern, is a mark that the play went off as it should have for maximum political effect.
There are no heroes in politics. There are only people who want something, and people who want something else.
Villago Delenda Est
@Clime Acts:
Did I mention any names, shitstain?
You’re as much dogshit as Jor Arpaio.
DIAF.
Clime Acts
@Rafer Janders:
Especially if the transformation is completely bogus.
Suffern ACE
@jibeaux: He’s done something I want and that’s the last straw.
amk
@Chyron HR: The 3-fer romnitroll mutates for each post to make its ‘argument’.
Clime Acts
@Chyron HR:
Please link to where I ever wrote that Romney was a-ok.
Thanks.
ruemara
@Clime Acts: Oh man. That’s a load of bullshit. At no point do you fail to not come out in favour of why Obama is a bad man. You do not miss an opportunity. Ever. If you got paid to bash, you’d be employee of the year. If you missed a spot at pointing out why X = Obama is worse than Y, the fucking sun would not shine. You’re the Mo of the forum, but with less fashion panache and heart, the gadfly of Balloon Juice that no one needed. You’re 8% miscellaneous comment, 92% OBAMA BAD OBOT BAD. With 3 more notes, you’d be a crappy pop song and less of an endless whine.
And as far as the whole, “lying is ok when Obama does it” + a half dozen Obots screeches for good measure, who the fuck cares what you think? His position, for those who actually know wtf they are talking about, was clear. He’s always governed that way. The fact that damned near 40% of the key voting public is too full of gheyphobia to be ok with a truly progressive candidate that just shrugs about gay rights is goddamned reality. You don’t like him, we all get it. You don’t like that anyone likes him, we get that too. I don’t know why people even begin to engage with you like there’s a debate. Just don’t pretend that you have actual depth.
jrg
@Rafer Janders: I think you’re right. The troll has kind of a point, too… But if Obama had supported marriage equality before a couple of years ago, it would have been political suicide. Do you really think we’d be further along with Gramps and Snooki running the show?
Does the end justify the means? I don’t know… The world’s not a perfect place. But given the choice between that and neither a justifiable end nor justifiable means, I’ll take the lesser of the two evils.
Clime Acts
@jrg:
Please specify what you are babbling about, troll.
Thanks.
Also too: thank you for NOT clearing up how Obama’s craveness on this issue provides a bracing moment of clarity, illustrating how very different he is from Romney.
Chyron HR
@Clime Acts:
Link to any post you’ve made criticizing Romney. Just one. On any site you like. As “Tim, Interrupted”, “Kola Noscopy”, or any other name you’re on the record as using.
Clime Acts
@Villago Delenda Est:
hahahaha…you’ve got nothing but your usual name calling. pathetic.
I laugh at you and point, also too.
jrg
@Clime Acts: If you’re too dumb to understand that the party you’re supporting hates you and wants the government to control your personal affairs, I’m not going to waste my time trying to explain any further. I’ve stated my case. Your case, to the extent you even have one, is idiotic at best.
Anya
@Rafer Janders:
Are they the same friends who use gays as a wedge issue to drive bigots to the voting booth? Imma let Rachel respond to this.
jibeaux
@Suffern ACE: Ha ha!
Clime Acts
@ruemara:
You witless fool, lacking all self awareness:
Your rant is entirely a projection; a mirror image of your obsession with barack obama’s political career.
You try to make my calls for consistent standards for politicians into a bullshit accusation that I dislike BO PERSONALLY, and you fail.
I dislike craveness, lack of integrity, lying, and public displays of false revelations, especially in politicans, whether they are R or D.
You’re OK with all of the above as long as it’s a D; especially if it’s Barack.
Own it.
Rafer Janders
@Anya:
Yep, the same ones. Hey, I didn’t say they weren’t evil…
General Stuck
Somebody has a raging case of Obama Derangement Syndrome this morning. Even more than usual.
Chyron HR
@Clime Acts:
It’s nice that you never resort to “name calling”. That would be very “pathetic”.
Clime Acts
@Chyron HR:
still waiting for your link to where I said romney was a-ok.
Thanks.
as for criticizing romney, I’ve called him a number of insulting names. I don’t focus on his particular and many downsides because this is allegedly a progressive blog and there are a few thousand bots here who take care of the Mitt bashing on an hourly basis. I don’t really think my voice there is needed.
Never have understood the alleged value of trashing opposing candidates with such regular vigor on a blog when you are preaching to a converted choir, hardly in danger of voting for the opposiition. Far better to work on improving and holding to account the representatives of one’s “side,” don’t you think?
Rafer Janders
@jrg:
Oh, I’m not at all saying it wasn’t the smart strategic thing to do politically. I understand the motivation, and if that’s what it took, that’s what it took. I’m just pointing out that it was in fact political calculation and not a sincere opposition to marriage equality.
Chyron HR
@Clime Acts:
Still waiting for a link to one of that number of anti-Romney posts. There’s so many, it should be easy. Hell, you could have just denounced him at any time in this thread, but you still haven’t. Go figure.
And as I recall the last time I bothered linked to your post praising Romney for being the REAL pro-gay candidate, you started whining that it was an incredibly subtle parody that my “stupid Obot brain” couldn’t understand (not that you ever “pathetically” resort to “name calling”). So what’s the point?
amk
@General Stuck: Chains were yanked y’day by PBO and the pig is squealing.
Clime Acts
@jrg:
I’m a registered Democrat, state of Massachusetts, Suffolk county, dumb shit. I first registered Dem in 1976 in Kansas and voted for Jimmy Carter.
Unlike you, I like the idea of pulling my party back toward the progressive side of things, and calling bullshit wherever I see it.
Unlike you, I don’t believe it’s a good thing for the country that voters be obsessed with PERSONALITIES over policy; unlike you, I don’t need Barack Obama’s imagined approval to complete me.
I’m a gay man. I believe BO is a craven opportunist forced into his clumsy “bigotry is cool in states that like it that way” gay marriage announcement by Joe Biden’s accidental honesty.
One would imagine I could say that out loud at Balloon Juice without being excoriated for it.
One would be wrong.
PaulW
Obama’s public statement supporting gay marriage feels akin to the moment when Lincoln announced the Emancipation Proclamation after Antietam. While the Proclamation itself was politically weak – it only freed the slaves in seceded states, which obviously weren’t keen on the whole freeing concept – it had a profound effect on the Northerner/Union forces because they now had a unifying cause. People who once never considered themselves radical abolitionists openly talked like radicals. From Burns’ Civil War book: At a Washington dinner, John Hay (Lincoln’s Secretary) noted “everyone seemed to feel a new sort of exhilarating life… They gleefully called each other abolitionists and seemed to enjoy the novel accusation of appropriating that horrible name.” (p.167)
Clime Acts
@General Stuck:
Got nothin’, eh Stuck?
Clime Acts
@Chyron HR:
It always starts from the Bots first, yourself most very certainly included. I respond in kind when moved to do so.
Still got nothing, eh?
General Stuck
@amk:
Teehee:-)
Chyron HR
@Clime Acts:
It’s really easy. You can even work Obummer in there, like “Of course I think Romney is terrible, but I can’t approve of Obama either.”
But, no. You can’t even bring yourself to say that. For some unexplained reason.
Clime Acts
@ruemara:@PaulW:
omg…lol
Anya
@Rafer Janders: But as Rachel Maddow said, it does not matter what they believe in private or what they say at the dinner table, as long as they use hatred and bigotry as a political weapon. Obama can say he’s struggling with this and that, as long as he’s advancing the cause then I am fine with this. If however, he uses the gay community or any other minority to attract the votes of bigots then he must be defeated. That’s my yard stick.
Anyway, heading to the salon. Unemployment sucks.
Steve
@Rafer Janders: I don’t question that Obama’s slow journey towards acceptance of marriage equality is a phony narrative, nor do I question your description of your friends and colleagues. But still, the polls seem to tell us that something like 100-150 million Americans are opposed to marriage equality. Do you have a theory as to where they are all hiding?
Clime Acts
@Chyron HR:
Hey dumbass, from this very thread:
his particluar and many downsides…
his particular and many downsides…
his particular and many downsides…
Did you get that?
Then read the rest of the sentence after that phrase, and the one after that. Read. Comprehend. Process.
Now please consider continuing your explanation of why BO’s craveness on gay rights is groovy. Thanks.
Suffern ACE
@Clime Acts: Yep. One guy is the head of a party that appears to be evolving in a way I want on this issue and is taking his cues from that. The other is leading a party that is opposed to that evolution. So yeah, both are evolving their positions to match what their party member positions are. Boo hoo if it’s a political calculation. I’m not certain why you are crying, Gladys, but it simply is not something I’d waste time fretting about.
Rafer Janders
@Anya:
Well, I agree with you, as a matter of fact. On all counts.
Anya
@General Stuck: Bless his heart, he’s got to be in constant agony! The past few years must’ve been really hard for him.
Clime Acts
@Suffern ACE:
Homophobic. Fuck off, bigot.
jrg
Chyron HR: I like how your original request continues to be met with crickets.
Troll is one stupid motherfucker if he thinks the rest of us believe he’s anything other than a sock puppet.
Chyron HR
@Clime Acts:
Really? You think that counts? Okay, fine. I’ll accept “There’s things I don’t like about Romney even though I can’t name any specific thing right now”. If I ever accused you of being a Republican pretending to be a liberal (as opposed to being a liberal who pushes Republican memes because they make a convenient stick with which to beat Obama), I apologize and renounce my incorrect statement.
Now please provide a link to where I said Obama’s waffling on gay marriage was groovy. I think you might have trouble with that one because what I actually think is that it was eye-rollingly transparent that he was lying when he said he was “evolving” on the issue, and my reaction to his announcement was relief that he was finally coming out of the closet (if you will).
But, hey, I’m an “Obotomized obot botulist” (whatever a “botulist” is supposed to be) with “botulism”, so I must have thought it was groovy, right? No other explanation is possible or permissible in True Progressive country.
Mnemosyne
One of the books in the Kindle $3.99 or less bin this month is a book about FDR called Cautious Crusade, which talks about how FDR had to be very careful about how he brough the US into WWII against the Nazis because there was a lot of support for the Nazis and for Germany even among ordinary US citizens.
Clearly, this shows that all of WWII was a SHAM and a FRAUD because FDR didn’t come out and make a speech about how he hated the Nazis from day 1 and always wanted to kick their asses. Instead, he used tact and manipulation to get the American people to the place he himself already was. That BASTARD!
Mnemosyne
@Rafer Janders:
So … you would have preferred it if Obama had been genuinely opposed to equality? I haz a confused.
rikyrah
@Marcellus Shale, Public Dick:
BWA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
Suffern ACE
@Clime Acts: I don’t know. If you can use your sexuality to shield yourself from accusations that perhaps your three day tantrum on every post on this topic are a bit misplaced, I think I can draw upon my internal self hatred to lob an insult.
How about this. We can agree that this evolution is not actually a big deal worth a banquet and a parade since it is really isn’t a huge deal. You then can agree that the new status quo is now more lukewarm than tepid now that one of the ice cubes has melted. But geez, take a breath.
Mnemosyne
@Clime Acts:
Because when one of your allies moves in the direction you’ve been asking them to move for the past three years, the best possible strategy is to reject that move, viciously attack them, and demand to know why they lied to America.
No wonder Democrats keep losing if you’re the stellar example you claim to be. Any victory must be immediately turned into a loss.
Some Loser
Please Clime Acts, try something new. Your constant ODS outrage shtick is getting old. Maybe you can do your posts in the form of a haiku.
Some Loser
@Mnemosyne: Don’t misrepresent his position. He only turns wins into losses when the president is black?
Mike Lamb
@Clime Acts: Horse-fucking-shit. You read threads, take a look at the “popular” opinion, and then take the opposite position. Contrarian through and through with no critical thinking whatsoever. You’re thinking never “evolved” beyond high school.
ruemara
@Clime Acts: I maybe witless, I may be a fool, but at least I am not naive enough to parse the fact that someone supporting gay rights is smart enough to evade the issue until he gets into a position to help gay rights, as lying. And @Clime Acts: there’s the 8% misc, that always sounds like a prepubescent coated in her best Twilight body spray, sneaking a look at Mom’s supernatural romance novels under the bedsheets after 11pm.
You’re just a big whatever to me, Clime. You’ve got your banal shit, and then you got what you do. I wish you actually brought something to the table, but seriously, even in responding to you, I’m just feeding the sad ego needs you have that lead you back here, where even negative attention is attention.
Soonergrunt
Don’t know, but I just cleared you.
JustMe
I don’t believe it’s a good thing for the country that voters be obsessed with PERSONALITIES over policy
Neither do I, but you go into elections with the voters you have, not the voters you wish you had.
Assuming your goal is to win rather than merely feel virtuous.
Rafer Janders
@Mnemosyne:
No, I’m just saying that Obama is personally progressive, he was for marriage equality all along (at least since 1996) and the talk since then about “evolution” has been a sham as part of a political strategy. I don’t be believe he ever actually opposed marriage equality on a personal level, but pretended he did in order not to alienate potential voters. It’s Kabuki theatre. All of which I’m perfectly fine with if it was done in order to eventually advance civil rights for all.
Clime Acts
@ruemara:
yeah, yeah…blah blah, fuck off
Clime Acts
@Rafer Janders:
So “inauthenticity” is bad when it’s the Rombot, but good when it’s the Obamabot.
I see.
Reggie Mantle
I never cease to be amazed at some people. Obama finally does what they’ve been demanding he do and they’re STILL bitter and pissed off and, one assumes, aren’t going to vote for him.
Steve
@Some Loser: I don’t know why you would jump to that conclusion. Just because he calls Trayvon Martin’s mom a grifter doesn’t mean he has anything against black people. Lots of non-racists have been going around criticizing the dead kid’s mom, right?
A Humble Lurker
@Clime Acts: So, what has Romney done for the gays that would excuse his lack of forthrightness?
Obama has:
Issued a memorandum that mandates hospitals that accept medicare and medicaid has to let gay couples have visitation.
Signed the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act.
Ended DADT.
AND came out in favor of gay marriage, AFTER all that. I’d say what he’d done is a better look into what he believes than what he’s said or not said. And because he was able to get all that done because he didn’t come out publicly in favor of gay marriage, I don’t mind it.
Is Romney the same? Has he been lying about his support for the gays in order to help them? What pro-gay legislation has he put into effect as Governor of Massachusetts?
We don’t dislike Romney’s dishonesty because he’s a Republican, we dislike it because it extends to his deeds, or lack thereof. The man has no conviction.
Mike Lamb
@Clime Acts: Ok, let’s just stipulate that Obama is “inauthentic” on his “evolution”. Are you and the LGBT community better or worse off for it? And please don’t throw in your bullshit argument that Obama thinks it’s cool if states ban gay marriage.
If Obama had been “authentic” throughout his presidential campaign re: marriage equality, doesn’t get elected (not an altogether implausible scenario), would you be better or worse off?
Is there no difference between a candidate that will say literally anything on any position in order to get elected and a candidate backing off a particular position in order to ultimately advance his agenda at a later date?
Mnemosyne
@Rafer Janders:
Ah, okay, that makes sense now. IMO, it would be one thing if Obama had, say, opposed DADT repeal or not issued executive orders requiring domestic partners of LGBT federal employees to be covered under federal health insurance and then magically came along with this announcement. That would have been craven politicking. But making the moves within the administration’s power towards equality before the interview makes it all happen on the continuum of support with both words and deeds, so it doesn’t bother me that the deeds came first.
Clime Acts
@Steve:
hahaha…pretty sure there are lots of white grifters out there too. But then we weren’t talking about them, were we?
Got nothin’ but the RACISSSSSSSSSSSSST accusation, eh?
Chyron HR
@Clime Acts:
I’m very surprised to see that it’s almost 1 PM, and you’re still sitting around trolling this thread. It’s almost like you spend all day here bitching about Obama or something.
But since you’re still around, please provide a link to the post where I said that Obama’s cravenness on gay rights is groovy.
Thanks.
Rafer Janders
@Mnemosyne:
Same with me. It was all of a piece with working towards the larger goal.
Steve
@Clime Acts: Never said you were racist. Said you called Trayvon Martin’s mom a grifter. Pointed out that not a lot of non-racists go around attacking the dead kid’s mom. But folks can draw their own conclusions.
Clime Acts
@A Humble Lurker:
I don’t disagree with any of what you’ve said here. And I appreciate the acknowledgement of the fact that he’s been disingenuous about his “evolution” regarding gay marriage, which is entirely a fraud.
I don’t know that Rombot has done anything for us gay folks specifically and I don’t believe I’ve argued that he has…
I do NOT agree that Obama acknowledging his pro-marriage stance, which he first took on, admirably so in 1996, would have hurt his ability to accomplish the other items on your list, had he advocated on behalf of his position and presented it as a strength rather than a weakness.
Also, it’s not only that he didn’t acknowledge his pro gay marriage beliefs “publicly,” it’s that he said just the opposite when he began running for president, that we was against it, but evolving. Bullshit. That is what is commonly known as a lie, a flip flop if you will.
I guess the overriding question is how much of a politician’s integrity are willing to watch him or her sell before you draw a line?
Clime Acts
@Mike Lamb:
Thank you for acknowledging that Obama was a fraud on his “evolution.” He lied, if you will. I know it’s unpopular to be so blunt, but let’s go there, as we are willing to do with the Rombot.
I maintain his lie was unnecessary and demeaning to him and to those to whom he lied and who played along. I don’t believe his favoring gay marriage would have neccesarily cost him the election. Where do you draw a line on a politician’s integrity? And the “evolution” bullshit is beyond the pale.
Why couldn’t he have acknowledged his pro-gay marriage stance and been a strong defender of it? Frankly, I’m surprised the press hasn’t leaned more heavily on him for that bit of flip floppery.
He also flipped on telecom immunity let us not forget. How many flips are forgiveable? Who continues to push from the Left?
Mnemosyne
@Clime Acts:
Given how many moves Obama made for gay equality before this interview, how much integrity did he really sell?
Though I do love that you’re completely convinced that being openly in favor of gay marriage would not have hurt Obama in 2008. I guess Prop 8 never happened in your reality.
Clime Acts
@Chyron HR:
And here you are as well. And you post on far more threads than do I.
I run my own business from home. What’s your excuse?
My paraphrase of your statement was just that: a paraphrase. I’ll agree to stop paraphrasing YOU if you agree to stop paraphrasing me.
Thanks.
Clime Acts
@Mnemosyne:
can you read? I included the word “neccesarily.” Why are you so unconvinced of BO’s ability to use his speaking gifts in service of things he actually believes as well as things he doesn’t?
it’s a matter of how many lies you are willing to have your candidate tell in the interest of gaining office. My bar is higher than yours, agreed?
Obama said he did not favor gay marriage when he ran in 2008. That was a lie.
Some Loser
@Clime Acts: Why do you hate black people?
Mnemosyne
@Clime Acts:
I know — a politician used politics and diplomacy to get what he wanted! The horror! It’s completely unprecedented in the entire history of politics!
Clearly, we all need to get together and agree not to vote for Obama in November because of this horrible, horrible betrayal of LGBT people. I mean, it’s not like LGBT people really care about stupid shit like being allowed to serve in the armed forces, or getting to visit their partner in the hospital, or having their partner have health insurance. What they really care about is useless political rhetoric that sounds good, not, like, actions.
It would have been so much better LGBT people for Obama’s campaign to go down in flames and have President McCain in charge because politics is all about what you say, not what you do.
Clime Acts
@Some Loser:
It’s difficult to say exactly…I think it all began with a childhood trauma…
…no, no, I couldn’t…I wouldn’t presume to burden you all with my personal problems here.
amk, ruemara, catsy, and a hundred others do enough of that already.
But I DO thank you for asking!
Mnemosyne
@Clime Acts:
Funny, I don’t remember you referring to George Zimmerman as a “grifter” when he opened up a PayPal account and raised $200K for his defense. Why don’t you point us to the comment where you said that so you can show us all that you’re not a racist who accuses grieving mothers of “grifting” but thinks it’s A-OK for guys who murder black teenagers to raise money from their crime?
Clime Acts
@Mnemosyne:
If you’re ok with that, why do you squirt an ovary every time the Rombot lies or dissembles or flip flops? After all, it’s only politics!
I hold to a higher standard for “my” side. Sorry you don’t.
And going forward it would be consistent of you to stop mocking the Rombot for similar maneuvers. I’m sure you won’t.
Clime Acts
@Mnemosyne:
You’re descending into madness again, dear. Take your medication in the proper dosage, please.
I raised the issue of Trayvon’s mother’s alleged grifting in response to accusations against Zimmerman of doing the same. I asked how it was different and never got an answer.
Lots of “racisssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssst” though, which is one of the few pathetic arrows in your ragged quiver.
BTW, could you please explain why it was wrong of Zimmerman to raise money for his legal defense? Thanks.
Liz
Listen Cole, I love the site but half if these 100+ comments are from Clime Acts. It’s too annoying to deal with
Clime Acts
@Liz:
oh FFS, fuck off. Don’t read them if you don’t like them.
Better yet, email Cole and tell him of your concerns, twit.
Clime Acts
@Liz:
Then you should probably not read BJ anymore, dear.
Some Loser
@Clime Acts: Are you one of those self-hating coloreds?
Mnemosyne
@Clime Acts:
Yep, and this guy is just a shrewd businessman, but Martin’s mother is a “grifter” trying to profit from her son’s death. You’re definitely proving your point here, Timmy.
Well, that’s kind of the funny thing — he claimed on the website that he was raising it for his legal defense, but he told the court that he needed lower bail because he didn’t have enough money to make bail when he actually had $200K in his pocket. Courts don’t really like it when you conceal income from them in order to claim lower bail, but I’m sure you’ll have a really great excuse for that, too.
Mike Lamb
@Clime Acts: Tell me how in this particular context you aren’t arguing form over substance. As far as I can tell, you believe Obama favored marriage equality all along (or at least as a public official, since 1996). You are pissed that he was not upfront about it during his presidential campaign, while now claiming that his position evolved (when in fact he held the same position the entire time).
It also seems that you are taking tremendous liberties with electoral results that would have occurred with a hypothetical Obama who didn’t “evolve” and who argued that his position on marriage equality was a strength. It also appears that you have to take such liberties in order to bash Obama in this case. Would you feel better if Obama had not “evolved” and lost the election?
Now, as far as the comparisons to Romney and flip-flopping.–please tell me the policy areas where you, based on Obama’s statements, don’t know what Obama believes. Conversely, tell me what areas Romney, based on his public statements and with the exception of marriage equality, where you DO know what Romney believes. Assuming you are honest in your response, is that not a relevant distinction?
...now I try to be amused
@r€nato:
I guess Paige Sultzbach is the championship game MVP by default (in a manner of speaking), since Our Lady of Soreass wouldn’t play against her.
Brachiator
@Mnemosyne:
Just bought it for $1.99. Thanks for the tip and the link. Also bought James McPherson’s “Drawn with the Sword: Reflections on the American Civil War.”
Just about the only useful post in this thread, which has been dragged down by Clime’s useless ramblings.
@Rafer Janders:
A politician makes a political decision. A bit of a trivial observation. I don’t see that attempting to gauge sincerity is meaningful in any way.
I also don’t see that looking at the political calculation renders Obama’s announcement any less meaningful. Much is often said about Reagan supposedly not even mentioning AIDS during his administration (which is not true, by the way). And what he said or didn’t say was unrelated to AIDS research. However, had he said more, and come across as more sympathetic, it may have made a huge difference with respect to public perception and acceptance.
Clime Acts
@Mike Lamb:
I have been addressing a very specific instance of Obama lying and prevaricating: His bogus “evolution” on gay rights. He did NOT evolve, he lied about doing it. And then when he finally came out as personally supporting it, his hand forced by Joe Biden apparently, or is he lying about that too, he qualified it (of course) by saying he supports the right of each state to decide (read: discriminate/hate) as they see fit.
I want to know why O doing this is ok and Romney doing it is an abomination. There are no end of BJ front page posts mocking Romney as a flip flopper with no soul?
I am not defending Romney, I am calling attention to the bogus double standards of certain dominant commenters here on BJ.
I would like my candidates to NOT lie, period. Where do YOU draw the line?
Mnemosyne
@Clime Acts:
Because O signaled his support by implementing specific policies to benefit LGBT people while prevaricating on one specific part of a broad issue.
Romney lied about supporting gay rights when he actually opposed them.
I realize that you would have been much happier if LGBT servicemembers were still being thrown out for the crime of being gay and hospitals could still bar LGBT people from visiting their sick partners but Obama had said the right thing. For you, words are more important than actions, and as long as people say the right words in the order you want to hear them, you don’t care if anything actually gets done that benefits anyone. For you, rhetoric is far, far more important than action.
Mnemosyne
@Mnemosyne:
Can I please be released from moderation? Kthxbai.
Brachiator
@Clime Acts:
Why do you keep going on about this? Are you really so stupid?
You don’t have a valid point to make. None at all.
I don’t care whether Obama supposedly lied about his evolution. I don’t care whether Romney flip flops on the issue. You indulge in foolish, wrongheaded false equivalence here.
I get it. “Obama bad.” You keep hammering that one nail. But you don’t have a point. Not a gay poing. Not a progressive point. Not even a Republican point.
But you don’t exasperate anymore. Don’t even raise any real hackles. You’re not a burr under a saddle. Just a sad pimple on the ass of the universe. Easily popped, but prone to pop up again.
Have a nice day, and a good weekend. I look forward to seeing more of your weak shit again, soon. You clearly need the attention, and people who respond to you probably keep you from doing real harm.
FlipYrWhig
My guess is that Obama liked the “civil unions” position that Howard Dean ultimately embraced — which was after the 1996 questionnaire on which Obama indicated support for same-sex marriage — but came to accept that differentiating between straight “marriage” and gay “civil unions” was foolish. There really are a lot of people who support marriage-like rights for same-sex couples but who have qualms about calling it “marriage.” If there was an “evolution,” that’s a possible one: from “same-sex couples should have marriage equality (but won’t because it squicks out straight people)” to “same-sex couples should have civil unions (because it’s better to have that than nothing)” to “same-sex couples should have marriage equality (because enough support is building among straight people to make it possible).”. Such a path would also correspond to an evolving sense of the difference between principle and what is politically tenable, or between what rights people should have and what course to take to improve their lives here and now.
Rafer Janders
@Brachiator:
Again, I agree. I’m just noting that his “evolution”, such as it was, was entirely political-strategy driven and not at all the result of any personal or moral growth, at least since 1996, and therefore that the ongoing media narrative regarding such personal evolution mentioned above is examining something that did not, in fact, actually happen.
Or, in other words, if he didn’t in truth personally support marriage equality before yesterday, then he’s the only big city living, white collar professional, Ivy League educated liberal Democrat who didn’t that I’ve ever met.
FlipYrWhig
@Rafer Janders: You never met anyone who thought that same-sex couples should have civil unions that stopped short of full-on marriage in order to avoid antagonizing churchy types in and out of government?
Mike Lamb
@Clime Acts: He lied about his evolution–he didn’t evolve, he’s always favored marriage equality–so stipulated. Again, how are you not arguing form over substance?
Maybe you don’t like that he discussed state’s rights, but he’s correct in his statement. Until something goes up to SCOTUS, states can discriminate on this issue (and he’s come out against such discrimination).
And once again, the difference is that we don’t know where Romney sits on issues, because he never takes an actual position. He has no beliefs that aren’t for sale. You simply cannot equate that with Obama claiming to have “evolved” even though he supported marriage equality the whole time. It’s like equating perjury and lying about to someone about their Christmas gift.
Rafer Janders
@FlipYrWhig:
Sure. I’ve met those people. But in the last six years, at least, absolutely none of them have been big-city living, very well educated, very well travelled, liberal Democrat, Ivy League educated lawyers, especially ones who’ve taught constitutional law. In that group, at least, opinion has been unanimous.
Brachiator
@Rafer Janders:
Again, this is a trivial observation.
It was political. Big deal. Do you think it was an effective political strategy?
And of course, the implication that there is a simple opposition between personal or moral growth and political strategy is also false.
The notion that you can reliably know a person’s beliefs from their class and professional affiliations is not logical.
Mnemosyne
@FlipYrWhig:
I used to be a civil unions supporter myself, until some of the civil unions laws passed and it became clear that they wouldn’t be honored across state lines. So an evolution along those lines seems fairly plausible to me.
Clime Acts
@Mnemosyne:
OK, so you agree that he LIED. That he misrepresented who he is and what he believes for the sake of political expediency.
But you are OK with the lie, because you like him. Got it.
Wonder what else he might be lying about…
Oh also, he lied about Telecom Immunity, which he declared he was against, then voted FOR.
Pattern?
Clime Acts
@Brachiator:
Touch a nerve, douche?
Clime Acts
@Mike Lamb:
Oh…thanks, Mike, for belittling my civil rights and equality under the law. Thank you.
Mike Lamb
@Clime Acts: Oh sweet Jesus, get off of it. I did no such thing. You are having poutrage because Obama didn’t press for marriage equality as a candidate and has not “evolved”, at all, but rather, he’s just coming back to the position he had all along.
You are trying to equate Obama’s not-really-a-flip-flop (assuming you still take Obama at face value for what he said in 1996) to Romney’s blatant, constant, and genetic habit of changing his position on every major issue. It’s just not the same no matter how hard you try to justify today’s tantrum against Obama.
Brachiator
@Clime Acts:
No.
You clearly overestimate your importance.
I understand that you are suffering from delusions of adequacy, but you got nothing.
Again, best wishes, and be sure to take your medication. Get away from the computer for a while. Go out and get some air.
Pull out that journal you keep and add some more of the lines that you love to so obsessively repeat. “Obama bad. Everyone who disagrees with me is an Obot.”
But try to moderate your obsessions. I’m sure it gets weary for the staff when you go into a Starbucks and when asked what you want, and instead of a coherent response they hear, “Obama bad. You are all Obots.”
Dude, they just want to serve you some coffee.
Clime Acts
@Brachiator:
hahaha…rich, coming from YOU.
Clime Acts
@Mike Lamb:
How the hell is it not a flip flop to first say you are FOR something, then against, then for again?
It’s a flip flop flip actually.
Is it OK because he was LYING about his flip flops which means they don’t count or something? So, what if romney is lying about his flip flops, which he likely is doing on some of the social issues to kiss right wing ass? That OK with you?
Because if you LIE about FLIP FLOPPING we’re cool. ???
Also too: telecom immunity, to name one other prominent Obama flip flop.
It would be great if Obama would just stand for something and hold to it fast as a core belief. You know, like he did his religion before he dumped Rev. Wright for politically expedient purposes…oh, sorry, that won’t work either…
He changed his position, twice, under transparently bogus circumstances, but you are ok with it because he’s not romney.
Brachiator
@Clime Acts: So, let’s sum up here.
Obama’s statement about gay marriage has changed the game. It has energized his supporters, and brought in some who were previously reluctant to support him fully this year.
More importantly, it has put Romney on the ropes. Instead of the phony pivot toward the center, he has instead had to move further to the right. This has also intensified the perception that he is weak, and is afraid of the GOP fundamentalists and the Tea Party. That he so cravenly has caved to them and keeps having to appease him makes him appear weak, and undermines his surface cockiness.
In short, Obama’s handling of this has been masterful.
Now, if you wish you may continue with your tiresome and irrelevant warbles about flip flops and standing for something. I know it matters greatly to you. For some unknown reason.
Mike Lamb
@Clime Acts: Let’s do the math…
You have stated that you took Obama at face value when he supported marriage equality in 1996.
You say he is lying when claims to have “evolved” with respect to recent statement re: marriage equality.
By process of elimination, that means, according to you, he was NEVER against marriage equality, regardless of public statements.
Ergo, there is no real flip flop based on what YOU, not me, are saying about Obama.
Mike Lamb
@Clime Acts: And to add, I don’t care about flip-flops per se. People’s views can change (note, this is not to say that I believe that Obama has actually gone from pro-marriage equality to pro-civil unions to pro-marriage equality again).
With regards to Romney, it’s not about flip-flopping, it’s about flat ass, consistent lying on nearly every subject.
Clime Acts
@Brachiator:
So is it fair to say you approve of craven political flip flopping, and a politician’s lack of a integral core? And that you don’t understand why someone would be interested in politicians NOT doing the former and maintaining the latter?
It would be appropriate then for you to shut your trap in threads addressing these matters regarding Mitt Romney. You have no standing to object to HIS brand of flips and HIS lack of a core.
Clime Acts
@Mike Lamb:
Nice try. However, my objection primarily has NOT been to what this man alleges to be thinking, but to the false, bogus, and deceitful “evolution” narrative, which is merely a convenient lie which you bots are pretending at times to believe.
His core beliefs cannot be discerned, and he has blatantly lied, selling out in the process a group of his strongest supporters. Which he continues to do by clinging to the states’ right to hate escape plan.
Which is the type of behavior many of you allege about Romney. Maybe Mitt would be the most LGBT friendly prez EVAH too! Perhaps he is just lying now like Obama did…and by your reasoning we’re all cool with that. Or should be.
Mike Lamb
@Clime Acts: Keep moving those goal posts. I’m just going by what you are claiming.
So again, it’s form over substance for you–the “evolution” schtick is a lie, which therefore invalidates the fact that he’s the first US President to support marriage equality publicly. Got it.
And if the “evolution” is a lie, that clearly implies he was pro-marriage equality the entire time, and therefore you can discern his core beliefs.
Mnemosyne
@Clime Acts:
So, according to you, we can’t discern what his core beliefs are through his actual actions, only through his words, because his words are more important than his actions. No one could possibly decide that Obama is in favor of LGBT rights as a core belief simply because of the multiple actions he’s taken to advance those rights. We can only tell if it’s a core belief based on the public statements that he makes.
You’re really not helping yourself here.
Clime Acts
@Mike Lamb:
He lied and dissembled and distorted and misled and flip flopped. Just like Mitt does.
I understand that you are OK with one doing it but not the other. This isn’t difficult.
I’m not comfortable with either. So it seems like I’m the one with consistent standards of political behavior, not you. You like being lied to…as long as it’s obama doing the lying.
Let’s see, they called Clinton “Slick Willie.” What shall we call Barack? Thoughts?
You didn’t answer my question: How do you know Mitt’s not just lying about the issues to which you object, in order to get elected, just like Obama? Maybe once in office, he’ll be awesome!
Clime Acts
@Mike Lamb:
there is no way to know if that is true. He says NOW that he supports it, in words only, but he qualified quickly and he’s a known liar, so who knows what he’ll say in six months?
Kind of like Mitt.
Clime Acts
@Mnemosyne:
It’s so cute that you stalk me, Mnem.
Barack only “said” he supports marriage rights. He had taken so action whatsoever to support that claim with deeds. And he lied about it twice before, or he told the truth once and then lied, or something…who knows? I can’t keep up.
I submit that lying IS an action that has consequences. One’s word becomes worthless.
Like on Telecom Immunity and a host of other issues.
Mike Lamb
@Clime Acts: That’s just stupid. I tried conversing with you in good faith, but you just confirmed what many already stated–that’s not possible. Obama is, objectively, the first US President to support publucly marriage equality. You can’t argue otherwise. Sure, you can lie and dissemble to feed your ODS, but it is unavailing. The fact that you try speaks volumes about you and your “position”. I return to my earlier statement–you are the kid in high school who takes every contrarian position. Good day.