Chaney more progressive than Obama?

[dante3000]

http://current.com/items/90146283_what-he-said.htm

Basically, Chaney takes a more progressive stance on gay marriage than Obama. What a surprise, you have a gay daughter and suddenly it makes sense that they're not the harbingers of the apocalypse. Seriously, I hope all republicans have gay kids.

[thrillho]

*Cheney

[whateverrrr]

can you imagine coming out to that guy?

my best friend just came out to her dad who is this former marine, only drinks Red Dog beer and eats huge slabs of nearly raw meat, and he choked on his food when she told him. But if could have been the way she said it. "well dad, you are what you eat. and I'm a lesbian" probably wasn't the best way to do it.

[casey]

His new stance on this is unbelievably transparent. Republicans everywhere are foaming at the mouth to update their views in order to undermine the current Administration. Also, notice that Cheney never said the word "marriage" during his speech.

[benc]

Who is Chaney? Obama?

[kurtmanner]

I love how he comes out saying this after all that's been discussed within the Republican party for the last two months has been about increasing their appeal to a new generation. So, do you reaaally think Cheney feels this way? I don't.

[dante3000]

Who is Chaney? Obama?

They're from the Marvel Ultimate History of America.

Dick

[whateverrrr]

His new stance on this is unbelievably transparent. Republicans everywhere are foaming at the mouth to update their views in order to undermine the current Administration. Also, notice that Cheney never said the word "marriage" during his speech.

if he said union one more time...

[lokithelion]

Dante, I kind of expect better from you. The dude had eight years to say any of this shit, and now that the republicans are dying he's throwing everything at the wall. Notice he still speaks of her like being gay is some kind of illness that the family has had to deal with. Notice he believes the same thing that Obama does, that its a state by state issue. How is he more progressive? He had plenty of time to show how sympathetic he was to gay rights and the fucker spent all that time jacking off on the constitution.

Congrats you're political reporting is as nuanced as Perez Hilton's on this one.

[drabley]

Dante, I kind of expect better from you. The dude had eight years to say any of this shit, and now that the republicans are dying he's throwing everything at the wall. Notice he still speaks of her like being gay is some kind of illness that the family has had to deal with. Notice he believes the same thing that Obama does, that its a state by state issue. How is he more progressive? He had plenty of time to show how sympathetic he was to gay rights and the fucker spent all that time jacking off on the constitution.

Congrats you're political reporting is as nuanced as Perez Hilton's on this one.

I think the title was sarcasm. And the report itself was made with mockery.

[dante3000]

Dante, I kind of expect better from you. The dude had eight years to say any of this shit, and now that the republicans are dying he's throwing everything at the wall. Notice he still speaks of her like being gay is some kind of illness that the family has had to deal with. Notice he believes the same thing that Obama does, that its a state by state issue. How is he more progressive? He had plenty of time to show how sympathetic he was to gay rights and the fucker spent all that time jacking off on the constitution.

Congrats you're political reporting is as nuanced as Perez Hilton's on this one.

Don't assume I'm being 100% serious. I do however, believe it (and the adjoining piece by Anderson Cooper) show that Obama isn't taking the needed action, even doing what he promised on the campaign trail. I don't think Cheney would do any better (and likely far worse) if he was still in there with the Bush administration but I expected a lot better from this administration.

[sgoodcore]

I expect better as well, though Obama always supported Civil Unions. He has to fight one fight at a time. If I was him I might lay back to and leave it up to the courts somewhat. That is unless I saw the courts were making what I deemed to be unconstitutional decisions. And the guy did go to Notre Dame and talk-up the issue so you have to give him credit there.

[lokithelion]

Dante, I kind of expect better from you. The dude had eight years to say any of this shit, and now that the republicans are dying he's throwing everything at the wall. Notice he still speaks of her like being gay is some kind of illness that the family has had to deal with. Notice he believes the same thing that Obama does, that its a state by state issue. How is he more progressive? He had plenty of time to show how sympathetic he was to gay rights and the fucker spent all that time jacking off on the constitution.

Congrats you're political reporting is as nuanced as Perez Hilton's on this one.

Don't assume I'm being 100% serious. I do however, believe it (and the adjoining piece by Anderson Cooper) show that Obama isn't taking the needed action, even doing what he promised on the campaign trail. I don't think Cheney would do any better (and likely far worse) if he was still in there with the Bush administration but I expected a lot better from this administration.

Thank god. I've gotten so fucking sick of hearing this nugget of joy from my gay friends. Its the most retarded argument ever.

As for being disappointed by Obama less than six months into his four years. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHA!

I mean seriously, I wish he'd spend more time going for gay marriage instead of working on fixing the economy. Cause really the thing the middle class who are trying to figure out if they want to support progressive candidates or not in the next election need is an example of a president who puts aside dealing with what became this month 9% unemployment in this country in favor of helping people they don't understand get married.

Guys, I get it, we want some things now, but sadly this is a political wold and we've got to pick up the wreckage left from Bush and Dick's 8 year old economic temper tantrum before we move along to other things. Personally I think you'll see almost every state in the union have same sex marriage by the end of Obama's first four years. The amount of progress made this year along is staggering. If he's got to choose between same sex marriage or universal health care I'm going to root for universal health care on a national stage and keep fighting on a state front for same sex marriage.

Dude is only one person. Let the guy break in his president shoes before you get disappointed. That being said you should be writing weekly letters to your local congressman about why we keep kicking out translators who speak arabic from the Army. Don't Ask Don't Tell is a bigger issue than gay marriage. Its ingrained in the national identity right now. If you can convince middle America fags can die for their country, you can convince middle America fags can get married in their country.

-

[kyle]

Personally I think you'll see almost every state in the union have same sex marriage by the end of Obama's first four years.

I agree with nearly everything else you said, but this stood out for me. Californai, the most "progressive" state in the union can't even see past the bullshit and make the right call on this issue. I think we will see more and more states giving gays the right to marry but saying that almost every state will allow same sex marriages within 4 years is very optimistic. There is progress being made but there are still lots of hurdles so while I do believe that it is imminent that same sex marriages will one day be legal in every state I don't believe that it will happen that quickly.

[lostatsea]

Cheney is embracing this more and more every day

[sgoodcore]

Personally I think you'll see almost every state in the union have same sex marriage by the end of Obama's first four years.

I agree with nearly everything else you said, but this stood out for me. Californai, the most "progressive" state in the union can't even see past the bullshit and make the right call on this issue. I think we will see more and more states giving gays the right to marry but saying that almost every state will allow same sex marriages within 4 years is very optimistic. There is progress being made but there are still lots of hurdles so while I do believe that it is imminent that same sex marriages will one day be legal in every state I don't believe that it will happen that quickly.

While Iowa is not nearly as "back-country" as people in CA think, its passing of a gay marriage law is a harbinger of what's to come.

I know the Courage Campaign is going to work to get an amendment on the 2010 ballot in CA. Hopefully we can set things gay by then.

[lokithelion]

The turning point in states allowing gay marriage is going to be when a southern state does it. And honestly I wouldn't be shocked to see that happen.

[dante3000]

Loki you're being quite dense, condescending and black and white on this. It's really a little grating. Does a president need to pass a constitutional amendment to allow gay marriage in order to support it? No. However, repealing something like the "don't ask don't tell policy" would be a hell of a lot easier and send a very powerful message. As president he doesn't have to choose one thing or the other. Additionally, while the "don't ask don't tell policy" can be lifted through congress, it has also been stated that it can be done exclusively through the executive branch, saving time and effort for Obama. You can support homosexuals and fix the economy. The Bush presidency managed to restrict their rights and lift regulation.

As for california, you need to remember that we did have legalized gay marriage before many other states. The courts approved and then the "defense of marriage" people got Prop. 8 on the ballot. In every state that has voted on the issue gay marriage has lost. Currently, more courts are approving it for their states but that isn't to say the people won't vote on it and overturn the decision in a similar fashion. The lowest common denominator is scary.

[drabley]

The lowest common denominator is scary.

Far scarier than progressive sentiment could ever hope of being.

This is unrelated in specificity, but kind of illustrates my statement above.

The Netherlands is famous for its social tolerance. Recreational drugs, LGBT rights, prostitution, abortion, even euthanasia are all handled extremely liberally and are all social policies that can be viewed as "progressive" in comparison to our strict moral code. It is a country comprised of roughly 16.5m citizens and is roughly 16,000 square miles in size (20% of this is water) -- quite a dense population. The Netherlands ranks within the top ten of per capita GDP, at roughly $52k per head and the top 25 nationally at close to $800B. There are less than 12,000 prisoners within the entire country. They are closing prisons rather than building them. The government is even considering importing detainees from neighboring countries to stave off the job loss.

In comparison, the State of Florida has roughly 18.5m residents and is roughly 66,000 square miles in size -- roughly a third of the density of The Netherlands. Per capita GDP of Florida is roughly $42k per head. Florida alone has over 90,000 inmates. The State penal and judicial systems are in serious peril from overcrowding, recidivism, and underfunding.

I won't draw any conclusions from these above facts, but simply say that any arguements that social tolerance is in any way detrimental to a society at large are absolute horse shit.

Yes, the lowest common denominator is quite scary indeed.

[sgoodcore]

I contend if drugs were legal less people would use them. And if the stigma about drinking was changed less people under 21 would drink. That's why I very much want the US to implement some kind of government run facilities where drugs could be purchased and taxed.

[lokithelion]

Loki you're being quite dense, condescending and black and white on this. It's really a little grating. Does a president need to pass a constitutional amendment to allow gay marriage in order to support it? No. However, repealing something like the "don't ask don't tell policy" would be a hell of a lot easier and send a very powerful message. As president he doesn't have to choose one thing or the other. Additionally, while the "don't ask don't tell policy" can be lifted through congress, it has also been stated that it can be done exclusively through the executive branch, saving time and effort for Obama. You can support homosexuals and fix the economy. The Bush presidency managed to restrict their rights and lift regulation.

I totally agree with you, so I'm not sure where I'm being dense, though I agree I'm totally condescending on this. Mostly because idealists ignore the fact that we live in a political world and without playing that game you'll sadly not be in office long enough to get things done. So yeah, in this case it is a case of having to choose one. He's getting attacked from all sides and the story if he starts going for gay marriage is going to be 100% gay marriage, while ignoring the good he's done for the economy.

Am I thrilled with everything dude has done? Nope! I'm personally repulsed by his unwillingness to speak up on don't ask dont tell. Which I said before. I'm not sure why'd you'd bring up a point that I just made (i.e. repealing DADT would do more for gay rights) as if I didn't just say the same thing. At least read the shit I write before you respond to it. And frankly Barry has never said he supported same sex marriages. Just civil unions, so while that is a point of contention for me at least he's being consistent on that front. Come January if DADT is still around though I'm going to have some serious problems with the guy. But don't dock him for shit he's never supported. He said DADT should be ended. If it isn't by the end of the first year he's going to lose a lot of my support.

And frankly this is a black and white issue for a lot of Americans. It might not seem like it to you but the reality of the flyover country, or red states, if you will is that people don't give a shit about anything but their jobs. I wish civil rights was a bigger issue for them, but it aint. So yeah, right now the focus is going to be on the economy. Because for most Americans gay rights issues don't matter as much as where their next meal is coming from. You'll have to forgive me for understanding why the dude is focusing on the problem that could very easily fuck up this nation for the next fifty years. Is it sad most Americans don't care? Yes. Is it wrong of Barry to focus on the stuff 90% of the people who elected him care about instead of getting tied up in a massive political debate that would change the national subject, accomplish nothing that isnt already happening on a state level anyway, and would further embolden the lunatic far right fringe thats already got one assassination under their belt for the year and is just itching for something new to help them get more Tim McVey's? No. Its just being politically smart. I'm not stoked he's going it but, since its less than six months into dude being large and in charge I'm going to cut him some slack.

Seriously man, which one of us is being black or white on this? I can see why the situation at hand makes taking on support of gay marriage (which he's never supported, only civil unions) something that will make getting anything else done politically extremely hard while you're saying he either does it or is a major disappointment. I'm at least giving the cat a year in office before I jump his shit. You've got a list of things he has to do right off the bat or his somehow a failure. This is why progressive causes have a hard time getting traction. People turn their backs on you if you can't make a slow process happen over night.

As for california, you need to remember that we did have legalized gay marriage before many other states. The courts approved and then the "defense of marriage" people got Prop. 8 on the ballot. In every state that has voted on the issue gay marriage has lost. Currently, more courts are approving it for their states but that isn't to say the people won't vote on it and overturn the decision in a similar fashion. The lowest common denominator is scary.

California, I was for gay marriage before I was against it.

I agree you don't want to leave issues like this up to the people. The people don't understand the law, just like most Christians have never read the bible and don't understand what its talking about. We have a court system because the people are, for all meaningful purposes, fucking morons.

[silentgods]

[casey]

+1 when I can.

[lokithelion]

haha