Gay Obama-haters

[Críostóir]

Would it be okay to hate Obama 'cause he's hot... but straight?

Naw. You can be sad about it, but don't hate. Otherwise I'd have to hate Demetri Martin.

 

[MisterMajestic]

Yes, as a matter of fact I am gay and also a white supremecist.

Gays in general are not the problem with the white race. The ones who do not reproduce are.

I want to grow up and have a family and children one day, even though I'm gay. Race before sexual orientation is important to me.

Want to know some more interesting facts?

I am gay, and I also endorsed Prop. 8.

As far as I know, having different political opinions doesn't make me ineligible for this board, neither does supporting anti-(gay marriage) legislation.

I am gay, so I should have as much right as anyone else on this board. I can be gay and have conservative views, can I not?

When you grow up? Exactly how old are you? Are your Parents White Supremacists?

Are the KKK meetings open to the public or do you all meet @ secret locations?

 

[Críostóir]

When you grow up? Exactly how old are you? Are your Parents White Supremacists?

I think the implication is that being gay and sexually active is intrinsically childish, and that he'll grow up and live a live of married misery like everyone else at some point.

Note he doesn't consider how rotten that would be to his putative wife. But then...hard to be a white supremacist without being a scumbag, so it's not really all that surprising.

 

[Kulindahr]

I think the implication is that being gay and sexually active is intrinsically childish, and that he'll grow up and live a live of married misery like everyone else at some point.

Note he doesn't consider how rotten that would be to his putative wife. But then...hard to be a white supremacist without being a scumbag, so it's not really all that surprising.

I have yet to meet a white supremacist whose view of women is much different from that of a hard-core Muslim: toy for men, with brains.

 

[Apollo]

I'm just ready to get a conservative back in the white house. I liked Bush, but he was too moderate.

Conservatives are not against gay rights. They want leave it up to the states to decide. Which is fair and what the constitution says. I don't see anything wrong with that.

How the hell was Bush moderate?

And if Bush had his way, he would have halted all forms of gay rights in their tracks.

 

[Críostóir]

I think Obama is too conservative. But the only POTUS candidate I didn't think was too conservative was Dennis Kucinich, and he's crazy (in ways that have nothing to do with his position on the political spectra*).

*Yeah, spectra. Left-Right is only one of them.

 

[NineOfClubs]

We are a nation, not a smattering of loosely affiliated independent states. It's the Federal rights that really count, from joining the army to the 1100+ enumerated Federal benefits that come with marriage. One gay man living in Georgia should enjoy the same level of citizenship as one living in Massachussets, and the same rights that everyone straight enjoys across the whole country under the nation's laws. Conservative administrations make that dream impossible to realize because conservatives would rather hold fast to prejudiced ideals than respect the existence of real people. There are gay people who think that having that is more important than the rights of our people. Can't be helped, some folks just have different priorities I guess...

In a way, I disagree.

We're a Federal Republic. The States, in actually, have more rights.

If one State were to grant me, as a gay man, more rights--then I might want to move there, to receive those rights. (My own State has done reasonably well) We all need to work in our own jurisdictions to change things. The Federal government has been, and continues to be, slow to respond to our demands...

Maybe if more States led, in this fight, the lazy Feds would follow.

 

[NineOfClubs]

Mobility is a luxury.

Sure, stay in Shitsville, 'cuz you're too damn lazy to move....

I don't get it.

We'll never be a homogenous Nation State. There'll always be states or regions with different laws and norms.

Go to those places that suit your desires.

Why did all the gays go to San Francisco? And the Mormons to Utah? Duh.

 

[Kulindahr]

For future reference: Sarah Palin = Conservative. Sarah Palin = Baptist. Baptist = racist, sexist, homophobic, intolerant, etc, etc, etc. Can you see where I'm going with this, darkcap2008?

I hope that's sarcasm.

I believe you'll find that we have a Baptist on board who has spent a great deal of his life fighting for gay rights....

Personally, I don't believe in a right to live in a society where some people don't have rights.

That's a fascinating proposition!

You might like my idea for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution, which would provide that all law must be interpreted in favor of the maximum of individual rights/liberty, and that any law which provides more liberty shall trump a law that doesn't.

Thus, in a state-v-federal situation over gay rights, if a state law granted more individual liberty than the federal law, the state law would trump the federal one -- and not just for that state, but for the entire nation, if the case went to the Supremes.

And in DADT, the law clearly restricts the individual liberty of some -- and without even having to look at the reason, that would cause the law to be tossed.

Mobility is a luxury.

Yes.
It's an interesting one, though: the rich can relocate with impunity... as can the extremely poor. The rich have the resources to do it with movers, etc., and not much concern over the price of real estate where they're going; the extremely poor just walk.

 

[KTheLibra]

The only reason Bush didn't do more to strip away gay rights was because he was too stupid and lazy to go about it.

As for Obama, I don't HATE him, but I do think he's extremely naive and inexperienced. Oh, and he talks out of both sides of his mouth to try and please everyone like a pussy, and it always ends up coming around and biting him in the ass.

 

[KTheLibra]

Also, please not that I am not opposed to Obama as president solely because I am a white supremacist.

Even if I wasn't one, I would never support him.

He's immoral. He supports abortion, which is murder IMO.

That's interesting, because your "fellow" Conservatives would consider your homosexuality very immoral as well. Interesting.

 

[Kulindahr]

Conservatives are not against gay rights. They want leave it up to the states to decide. Which is fair and what the constitution says. I don't see anything wrong with that.

That's not true.

Amendment IX provides that any rights that aren't enumerated belong to the people. They're protected by the Constitution just as much as the enumerated rights, and that makes them a federal matter.

 

[01solara]

Keep in mind that while Bush SAID he was gonna ban gay marriage, nothing really happened with that issue after he got elected (or was it re-elected? I forget). I'm willing to bet he only said that one to get votes. Dick Cheney couldn't allow him to ban gay marriage because his daughter's a lesbian.

For future reference: Sarah Palin = Conservative. Sarah Palin = Baptist. Baptist = racist, sexist, homophobic, intolerant, etc, etc, etc. Can you see where I'm going with this, darkcap2008?

Sarah Palin = articulate conservative. Articulate conservative = scared shitless liberals. Scared shitless liberals = intolerance (read these boards if you think liberals are tolerant) and pure hatred toward Palin's children by hateful liberals. Can you see where I'm going with this?

 

[Kulindahr]

Sarah Palin = articulate conservative. Articulate conservative = scared shitless liberals. Scared shitless liberals = intolerance (read these boards if you think liberals are tolerant) and pure hatred toward Palin's children by hateful liberals. Can you see where I'm going with this?

Um, more liberals are laughing at her than are scared.

And what about us Libertarians who think she's a ditzy dame?

 

[palemale]

Sarah Palin = articulate conservative. Articulate conservative = scared shitless liberals. Scared shitless liberals = intolerance (read these boards if you think liberals are tolerant) and pure hatred toward Palin's children by hateful liberals. Can you see where I'm going with this?

LOL. Only the inarticulate conservatives think Palin is an articulate conservative. The articulate conservative intellectuals go to sleep at night grinding their teeth into dust thinking about a Palin for President campaign in the 2012 general election.

 

[01solara]

LOL. Only the inarticulate conservatives think Palin is an articulate conservative. The articulate conservative intellectuals go to sleep at night grinding their teeth into dust thinking about a Palin for President campaign in the 2012 general election.

Ever watched OBAMA try to speak without his teleprompter. He stammers and stumbles and can't even speak in complete sentences. Ever see him take questions when he doesn't know what they will be in advance. Remember the last town hall meeting all questions and questioners were selected in advance and no republicans were allowed. Even Helen Thomas a left wing republican hating dolt (she probably predates dinosaurs and currently bears a striking resemblance to one) recognizes that freedom of the press is being lost under his watch. She in fact said he was worse than Nixon in this regard. When Senator Kyl from AZ dared question his pork platter masquerading as a stimulus, threatening letters to the state of AZ were sent out to let them know they would be cut off of the federal teat as punishment. He is a Chicago Thug plain and simple. Cut from the same cloth as Richard Daley and Rod the seat seller governor. He studied at the feet of radicals and domestic terrorists what else would you expect. Watch his speeches he sounds more like a dictator than an American president. All his talk about what he will and will not accept and his general authoritarian tone sound more like a Hugo Chavez style dictator than can be believed. Hopefully people will wake up before it's too late. If not we in heap big trouble. If you think he really cares about gays other than their vote every 4 years you are sadly mistaken. He would sell his own mother if he could get elected from it. Sadly this is true of more politicians than not in both parties but he takes it further than most.

 

[palemale]

01solara, GET A GRIP!!! lol. You need to turn Rush Limbaugh off and get a life. You spew these crazy, fact-challenged diatribes that are nonsense. "It is a tale, told by an idiort, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing." Shakespeare, Macbeth.

If you are incapable of recognizing how intellectually inferior Palin is to Obama (indeed she is inferior intellectually to must high school graduates), then you are [Inappropriate text: Removed by Moderator]

P.S. Have you asked yourself how Palin would be able to run the country if she doesn't have the ability to run the state of Alaska?

 

[noah617]

Ever watched OBAMA try to speak without his teleprompter.

First off, nice topic change. You said Palin was so articulate she scared liberals shitless. You can't defend that statement so you have to switch to Obama.

To answer the question though I've listened to Obama speak numerous times without a teleprompter and he's quite good. He may not spit every word out as fast as you may like, but I like a speaker who actually thinks before he talks.

Ever see him take questions when he doesn't know what they will be in advance.

Tons of times, from the debates, to legitimate media interviews, even to Fox. He does quite well. That's why you don't see his interviews being played over and over again for people to laugh at, unlike some other scarily articulate candidate.

Remember the last town hall meeting all questions and questioners were selected in advance and no republicans were allowed.

No I don't recall that. I remember one where some of the questions from the internet were selected by staff and half the audience was made up of people who got their tickets from the Democratic party but the other half were handed out by the school. Not ideal no, but there were some Republicans there and he got some tough questions.

Even Helen Thomas a left wing republican hating dolt (she probably predates dinosaurs and currently bears a striking resemblance to one) recognizes that freedom of the press is being lost under his watch. She in fact said he was worse than Nixon in this regard.

Oh please. The press should be out doing their job and not just be sitting around waiting for some White House spokesman to hand feed them stories. Specifically, in what way is freedom of the press being lost? I seem to remember Bush press conferences where Ms Thomas was booted from her seat and the President called on pre-chosen people and refused to allow any follow up questions.

When Senator Kyl from AZ dared question his pork platter masquerading as a stimulus, threatening letters to the state of AZ were sent out to let them know they would be cut off of the federal teat as punishment.

They were asked whether they wanted the funds or not because their Senator was saying they didn't. I guess they should just sit back and take all the shit from people and not call them on their hypocricy.

He is a Chicago Thug plain and simple. Cut from the same cloth as Richard Daley and Rod the seat seller governor.

Waaaaah the President is being mean to us.

He studied at the feet of radicals and domestic terrorists what else would you expect. Watch his speeches he sounds more like a dictator than an American president. All his talk about what he will and will not accept and his general authoritarian tone sound more like a Hugo Chavez style dictator than can be believed. Hopefully people will wake up before it's too late. If not we in heap big trouble.

Paranoid much? The majority of his speeches are so middle of the road they piss Dems off. He's constantly saying things like "some say this and some say that and both sides have legitimate issues blah blah blah"

That said though I must say your defense of Palin's ability to articulate to the point of scaring liberals shitless is impressive.

 

[JB3]

F
Oh please. The press should be out doing their job and not just be sitting around waiting for some White House spokesman to hand feed them stories. Specifically, in what way is freedom of the press being lost? I seem to remember Bush press conferences where Ms Thomas was booted from her seat and the President called on pre-chosen people and refused to allow any follow up questions.

This was in regards to the President's staff sending Nico Pitney of the Huffington Post a request to ask a specific question during an Obama press conference. It was pre-arranged, communist-style. The press have a right to be offended (and Americans should be offended), because legitimate questions were not allowed to be asked because this pre-selected question was.

Note, this is very different than pre-selecting questioners; Obama does this, Bush did it, Clinton did it. What Obama's staff did involves telling members of the press which questions to ask, which then controls the news for that particular day of the week. If the press goes along with it (which legitimate journalists will not, no matter how much they love Obama), all negative stories about the administration and anything that may distract from the president's agenda will be set aside for whatever pre-selected topics and questions the administration chooses. Regardless of what side you root for, that is a scary thought. If you can't trust the media to be the watchdog, what can you trust?

 

[noah617]

This was in regards to the President's staff sending Nico Pitney of the Huffington Post a request to ask a specific question during an Obama press conference. It was pre-arranged, communist-style. The press have a right to be offended (and Americans should be offended), because legitimate questions were not allowed to be asked because this pre-selected question was.

Never happened. There was no discussion about what question would be asked, and in fact the actual question was one of the tougher one's of the night. At the time of the press conference the situation in Iran was the most pressing issue. Nico Pitney had a blog going that was updated vitually around the clock with information garnered from emails, tweets etc. from inside Iran. For a while there it was the go-to source for information out of Iran. Yes he was told ahead of time that he would be allowed to ask a question and that it should be from an Iranian citizen but the question itself was unknown until it was asked. I think that's fairly obvious from Obama's response.

For the record, this is what he asked:

"Under which conditions would you accept the election of Ahmadinejad, and if you do accept it without any significant changes in the conditions there isn't that a betrayal of what the demonstrators there are working for?"

Not exactly a softball if you ask me.

Telling a reporter ahead of time that he will be allowed to ask a question isn't the most ethical thing in the world, but answering a question in a high profile forum like that from an actual on the ground Iranian who's living the crisis is a pretty powerful tool.

Note, this is very different than pre-selecting questioners; Obama does this, Bush did it, Clinton did it. What Obama's staff did involves telling members of the press which questions to ask, which then controls the news for that particular day of the week. If the press goes along with it (which legitimate journalists will not, no matter how much they love Obama), all negative stories about the administration and anything that may distract from the president's agenda will be set aside for whatever pre-selected topics and questions the administration chooses. Regardless of what side you root for, that is a scary thought. If you can't trust the media to be the watchdog, what can you trust?

There is absolutely no evidence that questions at the news conference were pre-screened. If you recall the actual press conference, aside from Pitney's question, it was a series of redundant questions about whether Obama should have been more outspoken sooner about our support for the Iranian people and whether or not he was still smoking. A guy from Fox basically called him a pussy. It was not a friendly news conference and the reporters wasted time asking trivial questions.

The press shouldn't be relying on press conferences and briefings for their news anyway. No matter what they ask, they're still going to get the answer an administration chooses to feed them. The press has grown lazy and is more interested in trivial "gotcha" questions and pissing contests over turf than actually reporting news.

That said, your overall point about the danger of planted questions is a valid one. I just don't agree that it is happening now.