So, the the heck does this mean from this guy? I guess the columnist is sodomite?
Posted on 12/27/2008 6:33:57 PM PST by nobama08
As we saw during primary season, our president-elect is not free of his own brand of hubris and arrogance, and sometimes it comes before a fall: “You’re likable enough, Hillary” was the prelude to his defeat in New Hampshire. He has hit this same note again by assigning the invocation at his inauguration to the Rev. Rick Warren, the Orange County, Calif., megachurch preacher who has likened committed gay relationships to incest, polygamy and “an older guy marrying a child.” Bestowing this honor on Warren was a conscious — and glib — decision by Obama to spend political capital. It was made with the certitude that a leader with a mandate can do no wrong.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
“Overall, there are so few homosexuals that they simply don’t have the political clout that racial groups do.”
True. But they give big $$ to rats. Lots of disposable income. Actually, I think for that reason, they get a lot more attention than Blacks do from the rats per voter.
The degree of homosexual clout may be measured by two things: (1) AIDS was the first serious pandemic that a political group had the clout to prevent any quarantine or even any closure of sites that were known to spread the disease (bathhouses). It would be like the water carriers union preventing the shutdown of the town well when a cholera epidemic was raging; and (2) The dollars spent on AIDS research by the gvt is entirely disproportionate to the deaths and disability it causes relative to, say, cancer or heart disease.
But the cold political calculus is clear. The homosexuals who support BO are not just homosexuals—they are serious socialists. They would sooner support satan than a republican—so they have no place to go politically. What BO may be sacrificing is some measure of $$ contributions from the homosexual/socialist community. But that’s not much of a problem for him anyway, what with George Soros, trial lawyers, labor unions, and enormous foreign funding sources.
OTOH, by having Warren appear, he implements the strategy he outlined in his book: “Look clean cut and act polite and white folks will let you do what you want.” What he wants is not good.
Gays are like Jews in that their political significance to Democratic politicians is far more in the value of their fund-raising networks than the actual number of votes they can sway directly.
Very good points.
I’m curious though about your statement that the homosexuals who supported BO are socialists. Are you saying support in terms of major contributions or are you using it more casually? While I’m sure almost all of the activist homosexuals would vote for Satan before a Repub like you said, do you not think that there are some who vote Democrat simply because that’s what they think any good gay should do? I’m thinking of the more politically casual gays that I’ve met. Many of them wanted Hillary and have concerns about how the black community treats homosexuals. Could Obama completely ignoring them lead some to explore other options?
Not that the GOP should spend much time worrying about how to pick up the votes of homosexuals. Though wealthy, our votes still don’t count more than anyone else’s.
Good point.
So, the the heck does this mean from this guy? I guess the columnist is sodomite?
The homosexuals will never be happy. But homosexuality isn’t a happy condition.
not round here...
The editorial states, “Stoking this rage, no doubt, is the dawning realization that the old religious right is crumbling”
The Left loves to believe that the ‘yes’ on Proposition 8 vote is about fear and loathing. Also the right was supposed to be dead decades ago when the Left does what it always does, which is to get comfortable and actually put leftist ideology into practice, which brought us the Carter years, which then brought us Reagan.
The editorial talks about Hubris, but the real Hubris is being on the left. Conservatives vote for conservatives. The problem is currently with the Republican party - a problem that hopefully will be solved soon.
I like this response to the editorial on NYTimes.com:
QUOTE~~~QUOTE~~~QUOTE~~~QUOTE~~~QUOTE~~~QUOTE~~~QUOTE~~~
“I’ve been an advocate of gay marriage for 20 years but the behavior and uproar of the gay community has turned me against them and their causes the way no right-winger or religious nutjob could ever do.
How dare they make this inauguration all about them! Warren has said equally horrible things about the pro-choice community but you don’t see us demanding he be scalped. That’s because we’re focused on the policy.
Gays have only themselves to blame for the passage of Prop 8. They did ZERO outreach to the black and latino communities. They were so arrogant that they did not mount a proper opposition to Prop 8. When it passed they started looking for people to blame—stalking donors to Prop 8 and castigating blacks.
The more the gay community rants and attacks their allies, the more they will harm their cause. Calling Obama a bigot, homophobe and traitor (as many have) doesn’t make me want to storm the barricades against Prop 8. It might also make Obama drag his feet in getting around to those issues.
— Yvonne, Charlotte, NC”
QUOTE~~~QUOTE~~~QUOTE~~~QUOTE~~~QUOTE~~~QUOTE~~~QUOTE~~~
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.