Why does Obama hate gays?

fossten

Dedicated LVC Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
12,460
Reaction score
6
Location
Louisville
Axelrod tries to explain how Obama is against gay marriage but also for it.

Poor Ax, tasked here with salvaging some sort of logic from a stance which everyone knows is taken purely for reasons of political expediency. Fox News has a handy list of Obama quotes on Prop 8 and gay rights over the past few years, from which I’ve gleaned the following: (a) He opposes same-sex marriage and (b) believes that states should be able to set their own marriage rules, but (c) if a state decides to set its own rules by adopting his position, then, according to a White House spokesman, it’s “divisive and discriminatory.” (Fun footnote to that last point: During the campaign, The One told Jake Tapper that he had no problem with what California was doing.) If he thinks restricting gay marriage is perniciously discriminatory, why on earth would he support letting California do it? And if, as Axelrod says, he thinks it was “mean-spirited” to pass Prop 8, where does that leave us vis-a-vis O’s continuing opposition to gay marriage? Barack Obama — hateful hyper-federalist?

***

Exit question:

If you want to overturn child pedophilia laws in a particular state, do you only need to find a child-humping judge?
 
There is no substance to the federal judge's decision to overturn prop #8.
Any one with half a brain knows this issue will wind up in the ussc, and any ruling before that time will be deemed null and void.
My personal feeling is that the surpreme court will ultimately leave it up to the descression of each state.
Bob.
 
Any one with half a brain knows this issue will wind up in the ussc, and any ruling before that time will be deemed null and void.
alg_supreme_court_kagan.jpg


006_ginsburg.jpg


2009_0526_Getty_Sotomayor.jpg


And Breyer and Kennedy- but few would recognize their pictures.
 
That... Thing is so hideous, I can't stop staring. It's like a train wreck in super slow motion....

You haven't seen anything yet.
Wait until this political operative starts her activism from behind the bench for the next 30-40 years.
 
So what do you think the surpreme court will ultimately decide on this issue?
Bob.
 

Members online

No members online now.
Back
Top