Obama attacks tens of millions of voters who voted for him as being "backwards on equality".
Well it hasn't taken long for Team Obama to capitalize on Obama's extremely recent politically coming out announcement. The first video ad contrasting Obama pro gay marriage position versus Mitt Romney's pro traditional marriage position is already on the internet.
I still can't help from wondering what the hell is Obama thinking. Yeah, his base loves the "new" position of Obama, but he already had them in his back pocket. Watching Obama's video yesterday reminded me a lot of the final scene in the movie Thelma and Louise. Just replace Thelma an Louise with David Axlerod and Barack Obama going over the cliff in a political suicide pact. The new ad attacking Romney for supporting tradition marriage is only going to rally mainstream and tradition Christian valued voters around Romeny. Obama's announcement yesterday was politically insane, but him now attacking Romney for him sharing the views that most Americans share on traditional marriage defies logic. Obama can't change the core issue of this election, which is the economy. It will continue to be the 800 pound gorilla in the room that isn't going anywhere anytime soon. How stupid can the Obama camp be? Do they not realize by them attacking Mitt Romney as being "Backwards on Equality" for his stance in defending traditional marriage, they are attacking the very same voters who support traditional marriage but also voted for Obama in 2008? So he is in essence calling his own supporters backward thinkers. Far be it for me to point out to the left Obama's very possible fatal inflicted wound. It doesn't really matter, it's not like he can take back what he said now. It's already out of the closet so to speak. The politically smart thing for Obama to have done was for him to come out in favor of gay marriage if he truly believed it AFTER the election if he would have won. That is what Governor Martin O'Malley of my state of Maryland did after he won his second term. I can't stand O'Malley's gutts,but I have to give him credit for being politically astute. I'm enjoying this, because I can't see how this can not backfire on Obama. This was simple a very, very dumb political gamble with huge room for loss and no room for upward gain.
I still can't help from wondering what the hell is Obama thinking. Yeah, his base loves the "new" position of Obama, but he already had them in his back pocket. Watching Obama's video yesterday reminded me a lot of the final scene in the movie Thelma and Louise. Just replace Thelma an Louise with David Axlerod and Barack Obama going over the cliff in a political suicide pact. The new ad attacking Romney for supporting tradition marriage is only going to rally mainstream and tradition Christian valued voters around Romeny. Obama's announcement yesterday was politically insane, but him now attacking Romney for him sharing the views that most Americans share on traditional marriage defies logic. Obama can't change the core issue of this election, which is the economy. It will continue to be the 800 pound gorilla in the room that isn't going anywhere anytime soon. How stupid can the Obama camp be? Do they not realize by them attacking Mitt Romney as being "Backwards on Equality" for his stance in defending traditional marriage, they are attacking the very same voters who support traditional marriage but also voted for Obama in 2008? So he is in essence calling his own supporters backward thinkers. Far be it for me to point out to the left Obama's very possible fatal inflicted wound. It doesn't really matter, it's not like he can take back what he said now. It's already out of the closet so to speak. The politically smart thing for Obama to have done was for him to come out in favor of gay marriage if he truly believed it AFTER the election if he would have won. That is what Governor Martin O'Malley of my state of Maryland did after he won his second term. I can't stand O'Malley's gutts,but I have to give him credit for being politically astute. I'm enjoying this, because I can't see how this can not backfire on Obama. This was simple a very, very dumb political gamble with huge room for loss and no room for upward gain.
posted by Alpha Conservative Male at 12:42 PM
17 Comments:
I disagree with you AC. Obama's base is not as energized as they were in '08. He's has a lot of unfulfilled promises.(see: Gitmo, transparency,etc.). Most college Republicans, Democrats, and young people in general support marriage equality. Obama's coming out grabs the youth vote who may have been discouraged...and to your point about the black christian vote. This won't change anything. These are the people who went through the Civil Rights movement and has passed down what it feels like to be second class citizens in this country. I'm pretty sure they will still vote for Obama over Romney. This will hurt with non-black Christians. Independents won't care.
After all of his well known positions during the 08' election, no one should be surprised. All the hoop-la surrounding the election of the first black president has now turned to shame. We knew that Obama was a socialist, and still he was elected. We knew that he harboured racial animosity, and still he was elected. We knew about his elitism, his narcissistic personality, his weakness in government, and on and on. I always knew it was only a matter of time before he began to validate the fags. This fagot crap is pushing America to a new low.
Homosexuality harms every American citizen, effectively harming children the most. You can only imagine the lasting negative effects Obama has set upon our children's future. I think its about time conservative males got off the politically correct wagon and strongly oppose this issue. Its time to call a spade a spade, and a fag, a fag.
Banning gay marriage is not enough because the degenerates have taken their gay-rights way to far. A perverted unclean sexual act has no rights. Homosexual activity should be a criminal act. As a conservative male I am ready and willing to speak out and demand that this demoralization of America society be turned on its head. When they claim that fags should be treated equally, the responce should be condemnation, reproach and shame. Any legal efforts for equality should be met with proposed legislation to criminalize all fagot demands.
I call on all like minded level headed conservatives to get off the verbal P.C. bandwagon and fight back with the use of terms such as fag, degenerate, filthy pervert, dog like, and similar terms. Push any candidate running for office that if elected their political agenda will include the criminalization of homosexuality.
This is Why Obama will loose.
SB 48, signed by Gov. Jerry Brown in 2011, mandates that children from kindergarten through 12th grade, in all "instruction in social sciences," admire "the role and contributions of...lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans." In January 2012, California public school districts must implement the new requirements of SB 48 through "supplemental materials" (i.e., handouts, homosexual biographies, classroom discussions, essays and other homework, outside speakers, videos, dramas, etc.); the printed textbooks will come in a few years. As a result of SB 48, all public school districts in California are under the following orders:
1) Textbooks and instructional materials must positively promote "lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Americans" as "role" models;
2) Children as young as 6 years old will be taught to admire homosexuality, same-sex "marriages," bisexuality, and transsexuality (cross-dressing and "sex change" operations);
3) Children will be taught to support the political activism of so-called "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Intersex and Questioning" (LGBTIQ) political groups, as the bill requires "particular emphasis on portraying the role of these groups in contemporary society";
4) Teachers will be made to positively portray homosexuality, same-sex "marriages," bisexuality, and transsexuality, because to be silent can bring the charge of "reflecting adversely" or "promoting a discriminatory bias";
5) School boards will be required to select textbooks and other instructional materials that positively portray "LGBT" lifestyles, because to be silent on these subjects opens them up to charges of "reflecting adversely" or "promoting a discriminatory bias"; 6) Parents will not be notified, nor will they be able to exempt their children, from this new core curriculum.
I wonder if this anonymous person who calls him/herself a "conservative", and using homophobic slurs, is a member of the Westboro Baptist Church?
I'll make it easy for anybody, who opposes same-sex marriage. Let gays and lesbians get married and mind our own business. If they want to be miserable like straight, married couples, let them. Of course, that just a joke.
Anonymous said-"Homosexual activity should be a criminal act."
Are you referring to gay male sex in general? I find it puzzling when it comes to homosexual sex, that most homophobes would condemn gay male sex, but for some odd reason, they get aroused when it's lesbian sex.
Milburn "I disagree with you AC. Obama's base is not as energized as they were in '08. He's has a lot of unfulfilled promises.(see: Gitmo, transparency,etc.). Most college Republicans, Democrats, and young people in general support marriage equality. "
Let first start off by saying that there is no such thing as marriage "equality". Marriage is how it was created and defined. Second, in North Carolina in the area that are known for being college area, the young people voted in favor of the amneding their state constitution to define Marriage as a union between one man and one woman. In 32 states where this issue has went to the ballot, the people have voted overwhelmingly to uphold the meaning of marriage.
Milburn "These are the people who went through the Civil Rights movement and has passed down what it feels like to be second class citizens in this country. I'm pretty sure they will still vote for Obama over Romney. This will hurt with non-black Christians. Independents won't care."
That comparison irritates the hell out of me. The black civil rights movement had nothing in common with what gays want to do. Just comparing the two is a slap in the face of blacks. When gay marriage supporters can tell me that gays had police attack dogs sicked on them. water hoses used on them, having to get their food in restaurants at the back of the restaurant, had to eat a lunch counters, because they couldn't be seated, had to sit in the back of buses and at the back of movie theaters, then we'll talk. It's stunning how the black civil rights movement has been exploited by groups that have nothing in common with it.
anon "After all of his well known positions during the 08' election, no one should be surprised. All the hoop-la surrounding the election of the first black president has now turned to shame. We knew that Obama was a socialist, and still he was elected. We knew that he harboured racial animosity, and still he was elected. We knew about his elitism, his narcissistic personality, his weakness in government, and on and on. I always knew it was only a matter of time before he began to validate the fags. This fagot crap is pushing America to a new low. "
We tried to tell them, but they were so taken by Obama, common sense just went right over their head. These people who claimed to be Christians didn't care when the evidence was presented to them about Obama supporting Infanticide. There is nothing moral, decent or Christan about Obama. I knew from day one that he was for gay marriage. In his book, the Audicity of Hope, he even said that the reason he joined Trinity United Church was because of it's "black value system". He didn't join it because he accepted Christ into his life. The facts were right there for people to see.
anon "I'll make it easy for anybody, who opposes same-sex marriage. Let gays and lesbians get married and mind our own business. If they want to be miserable like straight, married couples, let them. Of course, that just a joke."
If Marriage was a union that man created, this wouldn't even be an issue. But it wasn't, and that is why it is an issue. I have no problem with what two people do behind closed doors. If gays want to have similar benefits like what married people have, I'm ok with that, just call their union anything else but marriage. Further, I've noticed a change in the terminology of gay marriage. I guess the term "gay marriage" carried to much of a stigma attached to it, so now the new term is "same sex marriage". It's amazing how certain social engineering tricks don't get past me. Because I am not a PC kind of a guy. I will continue to say gay marriage, either way it's said, it's still a contradiction to the definition of marriage. People who tend to hold marriage as sacred tend to be the ones fighting to preserve it. On the flip, people who see marriage in a lackadaisical manner aren't really concerned about it or it being altered.
First off, full disclosure. I am not "for" gay marriage, however, it am not against it. Simply put, I don't care, and it's none of my business what gay people do.
CB;"That comparison irritates the hell out of me. The black civil rights movement had nothing in common with what gays want to do. Just comparing the two is a slap in the face of blacks".
That's bull. The conservative spin that there's no difference implies that gays (or anyone else for that matter) should be "forbidden" from having what they see as equal rights under "THE LAW." Contrary to what you might believe, in this country a "marriage" is a "LEGAL" matter. Thus, gay people believe that the "LAW" discriminates against them because they're homosexual. In a free society that declares "liberty and justice for all", an equal right to marry should no be such a hard concept to understand.
Homosexuality is simply a human fact of life. What two consenting adult humans do with each other "sexually" should not concern you.
Here's what one of your posters said;
Anon;"A perverted unclean sexual act has no rights. Homosexual activity should be a criminal act".
So Tyrone, which statement irritates more? Gay people comparing their quest for equal rights with the Civil Rights Movement. Or, this guys statement of wanting to put gay people in jail? If memory serves me correctly, you didn't seem irritated when conservatives claimed Dr. King was "conservative." Co-opting Dr. King and the Civil rights Movement for the moral high ground and political gain is something conservatives have been attempting for a few years now. Yet, for some reason, others who do it "irritates" you? Get real dude...
p allen "First off, full disclosure. I am not "for" gay marriage, however, it am not against it. Simply put, I don't care, and it's none of my business what gay people do."
Good for you. It's none of my business what they do either. When it comes to them trying to alter the definition and union of marriage then and only then do I care. I think I made that clear.
p allen "That's bull. The conservative spin that there's no difference implies that gays (or anyone else for that matter) should be "forbidden" from having what they see as equal rights under "THE LAW." Contrary to what you might believe, in this country a "marriage" is a "LEGAL" matter. Thus, gay people believe that the "LAW" discriminates against them because they're homosexual. In a free society that declares "liberty and justice for all", an equal right to marry should no be such a hard concept to understand. "
So you are telling me that most blacks see this issue as being similar to the civil rights movement of blacks even though most blacks don't support gay marriage. You do know that is a massive contradiction right allen?
Since it's a contradiction, it can't be true. Most blacks do not see the gay marriage thing as being similar to the black civil rights movement. Blacks in North Carolina voted 2 to 1 to define their constitution as being between a man and woman, so I must not be talking bull, because THEY WERE THE ONES WHO VOTED FOR IT! If blacks believed there was a connection, blacks would obviously support gay marriage as a solidarity issue. This isn't a legal issue, because gay men and woman have the right to marry members of the opposite sex like everybody else. If society wanted to marry members of the same sex and they pushed for it, then that would be an entirely different issue. So spin on that. The laws are created by the state legislators and enforced by their governors. Laws that have been signed into law can either be accepted by the citizens or they can be overturned and a new law can be created via referendum. Even Obama said that the gay marriage issue needs to be handled by the states. For once he's right.
p allen "Homosexuality is simply a human fact of life. What two consenting adult humans do with each other "sexually" should not concern you.
Here's what one of your posters said;
Anon;"A perverted unclean sexual act has no rights. Homosexual activity should be a criminal act".
So Tyrone, which statement irritates more? Gay people comparing their quest for equal rights with the Civil Rights Movement. Or, this guys statement of wanting to put gay people in jail? If memory serves me correctly, you didn't seem irritated when conservatives claimed Dr. King was "conservative." Co-opting Dr. King and the Civil rights Movement for the moral high ground and political gain is something conservatives have been attempting for a few years now. Yet, for some reason, others who do it "irritates" you? Get real dude..."
lol, If god came out of the heavens and said that Dr. King was a conservative, then I would actually care. This isn't about King but Marriage. Stay on topic allen, distractions don't work. Besides, marriage is an institution and Dr. King was merely a human being. Also for the record, conservatives were saying that Dr. King was a registered Republican not a conservative. I also remember me saying that it doesn't matter what party he was affiliated with. As I stated before, the people who tend to support gay marriage are not religious and the people who support the definition of marriage are.Again, if man created marriage, this wouldn't be an issue. If it was up to me. I would make it where marriage was taken out of the government's hands totally. That would end this once and for all.
Let's see...according to liberals, if you oppose to same-sex marriage, you're homophobic.
If you oppose miscegenation, you're a racist. I don't know. I've known people who are for racial equality, but when a member of their family is to marry outside of their race, they're not too comfortable about it. Are they acting racist?
Well, if anyone opposes to people who want to marry their animals, you don't like animals, according to PETA. I'm just joking here, by the way.
On a serious note, as the title of this post, "Obama attacks tens of millions of voters who voted for him as being 'backwards on equality'". The way I see it, Obama has never been for equality in the first place. Who is he to accuse his voters of "being backwards"? Since he was elected, race relations has not improved and he is politicizing race whenever he gets the chance, such as the recent Trayvon Martin case. He is using race as a crutch. Now he is using the gay agenda as another crutch to further his campaign to get more votes. I think he has lost the Jewish vote since he has not shown an ounce effort to support Israel.
CB;"So you are telling me that most blacks see this issue as being similar to the civil rights movement of blacks even though most blacks don't support gay marriage".
NO. I'm telling you that "gay people" see this issue as being similar to the Civil Rights Movement. If you put your personal feelings and ideas aside you'll see what I'm saying.
Look, I'm going to be completely honest. Personally, when it comes to sex, I think that men should have sex with women, and women should have sex with men. Yet, male homosexuality to me is quite disgusting. But so is a morbidly obese woman. However that's not to say that I'm homophobic against male homosexuals, or bias against obese women, it's just something that I can't digest.
That being said, for me to fully understand why homosexuals would want to marry, and use the idea of the Civil Rights Movement to support their issue, I had to first put aside my personal feelings. As I pointed out before, "marriage" is a "legal" construct. In this country it requires a license, and affords the couple certain rights under the "LAW." So I set aside my personal thoughts on homosexuality and asked;
-"do the laws and given rights of this country apply to every person?"
-"Constitutionally, does being homosexual preclude a person from any specific or granted rights?"
When I realized that "marriage" is basically a "legal" construct I began to see what gay people were saying. Where the law (a.k.a. THE GOVERNMENT) oversees and grants, license and further rights, the law states it must be blind. This is the reason why some states are passing "laws to prevent" gay marriage. (You ask what are the similarities with the Civil Rights struggle? hint: why did some states pass Jim Crow Laws?) When the "law" became the overseer of marriage, under that construct the logical order is that ALL CITIZENS OF EVERY CREED, COLOR, GENDER, RELIGION AND SEXUALITY are eligible under that "LAW" to reap the benefits of marriage.
Thus, under the rights set forth in the Constitution of the United States of America and the Bill of Rights, every person has the right to marry whoever they choose.
CB;"Again, if man created marriage, this wouldn't be an issue. If it was up to me. I would make it where marriage was taken out of the government's hands totally. That would end this once and for all".
My point exactly! The law (the government) grants the license, the rights and oversees the institution of marriage. As long as the government has its hands in it, they have to handle it by the laws set forth under its own rules. Strangely, that is something I agree with you on! I too don't believe the government should have anything to do with marriage. Marriage should be left to the religious community. If a religion wants to discriminate against gays, so be it. However, the law (government) can't.
I just remembered something that was posted by someone named 'Glexsk' on one of your threads back in January 2012.
Glexsk;"Tyrone, you are very confused about who you are politically. No true conservative -- be it paleo, neo, crunchy, religious, or fiscal or whatever -- will ever truly support an intelligent, gay, black man such as yourself".
I made a snide remark after reading it, but I was just wondering if you would address their accusation since you didn't do it at the time.
Just asking...
Allen posting what a troll named Glexsk addressed to me "Tyrone, you are very confused about who you are politically. No true conservative -- be it paleo, neo, crunchy, religious, or fiscal or whatever -- will ever truly support an intelligent, gay, black man such as yourself".
I made a snide remark after reading it, but I was just wondering if you would address their accusation since you didn't do it at the time.
Some comments allen aren't worth wasting intelligence on, that was one of them. I don't even recall this person Glexsk, but obviously he's clueless and deranged. So that there will be no misunderstanding, pondering etc. I am a black, straight, paleoconservative male who lives in Baltimore. Some liberal trolls who can't stand the fact that I am conservative and black make insane remarks like what his person did, sometimes depending on the language used, I will post them and some I will delete. Even though I posted it, it wasn't worth me replying to and feeding his mentality.
lol lol lol. Thats funny allen. I knew alpha was black when I started posting here. I dont even know what a paleoconservative is. But dont make me guess that hes straight out of baltimore.
Gerald T-
I am not comparing the gay marriage battle to the civil rights movement because I do not believe that they are the same. I am say that Obama is black so Black people will continue to vote for him.
Second marriage is not a religious institution. It existed way before Christianity. You can get married in a court room and dont need to believe in any god to get married. Its a legal institution that affords the participants additional legal rights.
Finally a bill wont pass now because the majority is voting for the rights of a minority. History has proven that when there's a controversial issue the majority vote overshadows the voice of the minority.
Gerald T "lol lol lol. Thats funny allen. I knew alpha was black when I started posting here. I dont even know what a paleoconservative is. But dont make me guess that hes straight out of baltimore."
Sigh, Let me help you with your mind Gerald. Paleo is latin for the word old aka traditional. So a Paleocon is known as a traditional or old school conservative. You all use the term "neocon", with neo being the latin word for "new" or "new age". Putting it together a neocon or neoconservative translates into a new age conservative. Just keep rereading it, hopefully it will sink in.
Post a Comment
<< Home