Completely disgusting. This not only refers to Obama's new position on homosexual so-called marriage, but the tepid, essentially uninformed, and uncomprehending Republican response. As per usual , the Democrats are evil, the Republicans stupid. About Obama, one more putz who justifies a political stand based on what children say. In his case it was his daughters, plus Michelle. Like Jimmy Carter and his daughter, or Newt Gingrich and his grandson. This is idiotic. Did Obama even consider doing some empirical research in arriving at his conclusion ? Of course not. He is in a position where he does not even need to do it himself. He could order a staff report and commission work by some of America's top experts. But, no, he relied upon anecdotal comments by underage kids. This is a complete outrage. It is completely irresponsible. No-one could see it coming ? Only if people did not want to see it coming. Obama was outspokenly in favor or homosexual unions before his senate run in 2006. Then he was against it. Now he is in favor, once again. Evolution of his views ? If so, then Romney has the defense that his views on various issues, like abortion, have also "evolved." Yeah, sure. Charles Darwin must be rolling over in his grave. Of course I am disgusted, why wouldn't I be disgusted ? Unhappy in Oregon Billy ============================================ Real Clear Politics Will Obama Pay for Gay Marriage Stance in November? By _Alexis Simendinger and Erin McPike_ (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/authors/?author=Alexis+Simendinger+and+Erin+McPike&id=24477) - May 10, 2012 |
President Obama's personal embrace of same-sex marriage could cost him votes in key swing states in November, he conceded during an _interview with ABC News_ (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/05/09/obama_announces_support_for_same_sex_marriage.html) on Wednesday. "In some places that are going to be pretty important on this electoral map, it may hurt me," Obama said. Political analysts said it is impossible to gauge in a vacuum whether the first-ever presidential endorsement of gay marriage will prove a net loss for Obama on Election Day, compared with the support his change of heart might mobilize, including among younger voters, who overwhelmingly back marriage equality, according to recent polling. “There are obvious risks in this, but I dispute the conventional wisdom that somehow this is a straightforward political loser,” said veteran Democratic political adviser Robert Shrum. “I think there are people who disagree with the president on this, and will vote for him anyway.” On Wednesday, many of the president’s admirers and some of his detractors described as “brave” and “a risk” his decision to shift from a self-described “evolving” position on a social issue that is both controversial and fast-moving. His job approval hovered at 47 percent as he sat down for the ABC interview, offering scant cushion for serious stumbles. America’s views on same-sex marriage are complex, blending cultural, legal, moral and religious arguments. _Gallup_ (http://www.gallup.com/poll/154529/Half-Americans-Support-Legal-Gay-Marriage.aspx) this month reported that 65 percent of Democrats and 57 percent of independents believe gays should be allowed to legally marry. Republicans were the most resistant, with 74 percent saying gay marriage should not be legal. Only six states and Washington, D.C., recognize same-sex marriages, while more than 30 states have erected barriers to marriage equality. Analysts suggest the president’s announcement could cost him votes in swing states that he narrowly won in 2008, including North Carolina (won by a 14,000-vote margin over John McCain), Ohio (262,000 votes), and perhaps Florida, where many senior citizens, considered reliable voters, oppose gay marriage. North Carolina voted Tuesday to ban gay marriage, a defeat so galling to gay rights advocates that they circulated a _petition_ (http://www.change.org/petitions/democratic-national-convention-committee-move-the-national-convent ion-out-of-north-carolina) asking the Democratic Party to protest by moving the party’s national nominating convention out of Charlotte. Colorado Republicans the same day blocked a measure that would have approved civil unions. The state’s Democratic governor announced he would call a _special legislative session_ (http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_20582571/fallout-legislative-implosion-over-colorado-civil-union-bill) to tackle civil unions and other bills left hanging. In 2008, Obama held his rousing convention in Denver, and went on to win Colorado by 215,000 votes. Catholics in Pennsylvania, Hispanics in swing states, African-Americans opposed to gay marriage on religious grounds, and older voters uncomfortable with gay rights could feel alienated by Obama’s personal views and opt to support Mitt Romney or another candidate, or simply stay home. But if they do, it is likely they had bigger differences with the president than just his stance on gay marriage. The president and his advisers had anticipated for several months that his position would likely have to shift prior to the convention in September if he hoped to avoid embarrassing battles while the party debated marriage equality as a plank in the party’s _platform._ (http://www.advocate.com/politics/marriage-equality/2012/05/03/11-democratic-chairs-urge-party-marriage-equ ality) As the campaign shifts into a more intense phase and Obama maintains a brisk schedule to raise campaign cash, he has appealed to wealthy Democrats who are active in the gay rights movement. Some have been slow to open their wallets for the super PACs that support Obama’s re-election, explaining publicly that they wanted to see movement from Obama on marriage and other issues. Obama’s gay rights supporters have commended the administration on at least two fronts: first, repealing with Congress the law barring openly gay members from military service, and second, the president’s decision to stand down on enforcement of the Defense of Marriage Act. That law, signed by President Clinton in 1996, defines marriage as the union of one man and one woman. On Thursday, some gay rights advocates will attend a $12 million Hollywood fundraiser at the Los Angeles home of actor George Clooney, co-hosted with DreamWorks Animation CEO Jeffrey Katzenberg. Next week in New York, the president will receive Barnard College’s Medal of Distinction and deliver the _commencement address_ (http://barnard.edu/march3announcement) , alongside fellow honoree Evan Wolfson, founder of advocacy group Freedom to Marry. And on Monday in New York, the president will attend a fundraiser for gay rights supporters. On June 6, leading into annual gay pride events in Los Angeles, the president expects to return to the West Coast to headline _an event_ (http://westhollywood.patch.com/articles/obama-coming-in-june-for-lgbt-fundraiser) for the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community, at which rocker Pink is expected to perform. The president’s campaign lost no time transforming Obama’s same-sex marriage endorsement into an appeal for contributions. By Wednesday evening, using email and social media, the campaign distributed a clip of the ABC interview and a partial transcript, accompanied by a _donation form_ (http://www.barackobama.com/) . House and Senate Democratic leaders were similarly quick to seek campaign contributions pegged to the president’s change of heart. “I decided it was time to affirm my personal belief that same-sex couples should be allowed to marry,” Obama said in the campaign statement emailed to the masses. “I respect the beliefs of others, and the right of religious institutions to act in accordance with their own doctrines. But I believe that in the eyes of the law, all Americans should be treated equally. And where states enact same-sex marriage, no federal act should invalidate them.” The president made clear that he is balancing his personal support for marriage equality nationwide against his belief that marriage laws remain an issue for the states to decide. Obama’s remarks also set up a clearer contrast with Mitt Romney and the Republican Party leadership. The presumptive GOP nominee, clearly tip-toeing through a mine field on his side of the partisan divide, explained his reaction with care Wednesday. "My view is that marriage itself is a relationship between a man and a woman, and that’s my own preference. I know other people have differing views,” _Romney said_ (http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2012/05/09/mitt_romney_marriage_is_between_a_man_and_a_woman.html) while campaigning in Oklahoma City. “This is a very tender and sensitive topic, as are many social issues, but I have the same view that I've had since running for office.” When two members of the Obama Cabinet and Vice President Biden registered their personal support for gay marriage, the president’s slow-walk beyond the political safety zone of civil unions picked up speed. Biden, in an interview Sunday on NBC’s “Meet the Press,” said he is “absolutely comfortable with the fact that men marrying men, women marrying women and heterosexual men marrying women are entitled to the same exact rights.” That unscripted moment of Biden candor, the lobbying from proponents of gay marriage (and their reticence in some cases to donate to the campaign or to pro-Obama super PACs) -- plus intense questioning by the media this week -- propelled the White House to hastily arrange a presidential interview with ABC News’s Robin Roberts on Wednesday to lay out his decision. "At a certain point, I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married,” Obama said. His switch, he explained, came over a span of years, prompted by discussions with Michelle Obama about faith and the Golden Rule, and dinner-time discussions with his daughters about friends whose parents are of the same gender. Like many Americans, Obama described being influenced in his thinking by “ members of my own staff who are in incredibly committed monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together; when I think about those soldiers or airmen or Marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that [the] ‘Don't Ask Don't Tell’ [law] is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage.” While some Republican leaders were notably subdued as they reacted to Obama’ s remarks Wednesday, some fiscal conservatives criticized the president for detouring into an issue they said distracted from a listless economy. Some social conservatives saw an opening to blast Obama for what they described as political pandering. “President Obama has consistently fought against protecting the institution of marriage from radical social engineering at both the state and federal level,” former GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum said in a statement. “The charade is now over, no doubt an attempt to galvanize his hard-core left supporters in advance of the November election.” Santorum, who may hope to run again in 2016, added, “I will continue to fight to make sure that the cultural elites don't further undermine the institution that gives the best opportunity for healthy, happy children and a just and prosperous society.” -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
