I'm just pandering to my base ... something I do constantly
Posted on 05/15/2012 3:39:14 AM PDT by tobyhill
This is not what Barack Obama expected for a coming-out party. The “historic” revelation that he is now fully evolved, as from tadpole to frog, and now grooves on same-sex marriage, was meant to be marked with quiet ceremony. No music, no flowers, no kiss, no dancing, not even a cupcake.
Rage and outrage over same-sex marriage would take everybody’s mind off the dreary economy, which whimpers on. Everybody was then supposed to shut up and get back to work (for those with work).
Instead, the president gets his photograph (with a rainbow halo) on the cover of Newsweek magazine as “the first gay president,” all the Sunday-morning political talk shows were devoted to endless gasbaggery about gays and marriage, and even Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the heartthrob of the Upper East Side, complained that the president’s coming-out might have set back the campaign for “full equality” for gay caballeros.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Even family members of homosexuals never get past the “ick” factor. Anyone who considers what they do to each other has to be nauseous from it; there is nothing remotely “normal” about it. Law enforcement in particular can tell you stories to turn your stomach (and convince you how sick these people really are).
When one encourages or sanctions less than the best behavior you get more of the the less than best behavior. It is called enabling and Obama is the Enabler In Chief.
This is such an obvious political loser for Obama that I have to wonder why he did it. There must be some ace-in-the-hole the rest of us aren’t seeing... something beyond the money-bomb from Hollywood.
The media is already 95% in his corner so he didn’t need to do this to get them... but maybe this was aimed directly at them anyway, just to be sure.
And there’s always the possibility it was a just plain stupid move. When you’re trapped in a leftist echo-chamber it’s always tempting to believe the leftist cheers and think they represent the people.
Why would you want to “get past” the ick factor?
Its sick and broken behavior. It certainly does not merit being accepted or normal.
so now Demoncrats can ‘evolve’
but Republicans can only ‘flip flop’
got it.
It seems to me that a lot of Romney’s campaign cash has likely come from homosexuals, so-called Log Cabin Republicans, and Obama had to move further into their camp to try to win back both their dollars and their votes. Yes, it is very icky when the two contenders for POTUS are vying for the favor of Sodomites, and both claiming to serve Jesus Christ.
I'm just pandering to my base ... something I do constantly
I think what makes the homosexual lobby most interested in this is the word "marriage". The homosexual lobby has been systematically taking innocent words and giving them a homosexual connotation. If they can corrupt one more word, they are winning.
Nothing in current law would prevent two adults from entering into a contract that includes a means to dissolve the contract if desired by one or both parties. The contract could provide for mingling of their assets and for splitting assets if the contract was dissolved. It could contain provisions for proper conduct of the parties during the contract and specify that improper conduct was grounds for dissolving the contract. Any disagreement occurring when dissolving a contract would be handled in civil court.
This contract sounds a lot like marriage, or at least a pre-nup, but has a major flaw for the homosexual lobby. The word "marriage" remains uncontaminated by a homosexual double meaning. The list of words that have acquired a homosexual double meaning is long and growing. "Gay" was one of the earliest. Partner, buddy, friend, rainbow is a short list of words that now draw a snicker.
It boils down to this: I WANT MY LANGUAGE BACK!!
We are a free country (though less so now), so homosexuals should be able to live their lives. I only ask that they invent new words for their homosexual activities instead of stealing and redefining existing words.
Yeah......what you said.
The first thing to do is to knock down the “homophobic” label.
Disgust at the behavior is NOT a “phobia” or “fear”.
Neither is refusal to endorse the lifestyle or behavior a “phobia”.
Neither is it “hate”.
Start referring to liberals as TRUTHophobics!
...as they FEAR the TRUTH.
It was a subversive joke on "bourgeois" middle-class values designed to deliberately "dirty" their minds.
I should say it reminds me of this because, though it is certainly the evil intent of many subversive elements it may not be the case among others caught up in the "hip" element of "coming out."
Defining ourselves to one another based on sexuality subverts the innocent.
It truly is a corruption of the word “marriage.”
“This is such an obvious political loser for Obama that I have to wonder why he did it”
He did it because he is incapable of any other. When Jimmy Carter’s world was crumbling all around him (and us)I wondered why he didn’t dig in and fix things. I was only 22 so I didn’t know that Jimmah literally wasn’t ‘reasonable’. He WAS trying but only in a narrow leftist sense. He is a prisoner of his own stupidity.
Smoking will take 7 years off your life expectancy, having a “gay” lifestyle will take 20 or more years off. Why won’t the media and libs talk about that? They want to control all other behavior and lifestyles. No wonder they want to be in charge of healthcare, what better way to decide what illness gets the most funding!
The elephant in the room is that virtually all heterosexuals, liberals as well as conservatives, do not view homosexuality as being equal to heterosexuality. No nice words from libs claiming they think it’s the same will alter the truth. How many heterosexual parents, if given the choice between hetero or homo, would press a button that would make their newborns homosexuals? I would suspect next to none. The truth is: no heterosexual wants their children to be homosexual. They may love them however they turn out, but that is not the same as not caring about their childs sexual identification.
It's all about LOVE!
baraq probably did this because:
He needed the holly weird money.
His media probably has a large gay population so this insures that they will campaign for him
Lastly it is another finger in the eye for traditional Americans. He can’t help insulting us. It’s in his nature.
The elephant in the room is that virtually all heterosexuals, liberals as well as conservatives, do not view homosexuality as being equal to heterosexuality. No nice words from libs claiming they think it’s the same will alter the truth. How many heterosexual parents, if given the choice between hetero or homo, would press a button that would make their newborns homosexuals? I would suspect next to none. The truth is: no heterosexual wants their children to be homosexual. They may love them however they turn out, but that is not the same as not caring about their childs sexual identification.
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.