There doesn’t seem to be an issue on which Obama hasn’t changed his position in the course of this campaign. Sometimes it’s on successive days. Now, that it’s become evident to all and sundry that the “surge” has succeeded, his advisers and surrogates are trying to say that he never really was against the surge.
Even though he has long promised to begin preparations for withdrawal from Iraq the moment he takes the oath of office, he may well reconsider that now. But, then again, maybe he won’t listen to the military and hold to his long-standing plan of rapid withdrawal.
During the campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination, he said he was opposed to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and wanted to negotiate while dispatching senior economic adviser Austan Goolsbee to Canada to tell our neighbors to the north that the candidate didn’t really didn’t mean what he said.
Now, it looks like he’s doing the same thing on gay marriage. While he says he opposes gay marriage, favoring retaining the traditional definition (seeing it as the union of one man and one woman), he has come out against California’s Proposition 8, the ballot initiative which would amend the state’s constitution to define marriage as believes he should be defined.
Yet, should that proposition fail (as he would like it to), the state Supreme Court’s decision mandating gay marriage would stand, thus giving us gay marriage in the Golden State. Not just that, in a letter to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club, he congratulated those who “who have shown your love for each other by getting married these last few weeks.” If he’s congratulated this gay people on getting married, seems he’s defining their unions as marriage.
It looks like he favors gay marriage, only he says that he doesn’t.
Can’t this man take a stand on any issue?
In a more detailed post, Dale Carpenter explores Obama’s puzzling position on same-sex marriage. Just read the whole thing!
Typical conservative. Either you’re too stupid to understand nuance or you’re too much of a wingnut shrill to acknowledge it.
“Nuance”, of course, being the nice way to say “hypocrisy”.
Sort of like how liberal gays claim anyone who supports state or Federal constitutional amendments and discriminates against gays is homophobic and hateful — except when their Democrat massas do it, at which point it becomes “nuanced”.
Now it seems he’s going to “alter” (read: flip-flop) on his Iraq policy. But, of course, that’s part of his hysterical sprint way the hell over to the center. The KOSholes must be apoplectic.
“Nuance” is liberal for bullshit.
To me he appears to be the ultimate cynical politician. He is an extreme lefty, he would like to attract some moderates, so he changes all his lefty positions.
Interesting, the one issue where he tacks further to the left is gay marriage. I guess he feels that he has the black vote, so they’ll just swallow that bitter pill. (news flash to nutroots – The Black community isn’t in favor of gay rights, let alone gay marriage. They really don’t like it when gays equate the gay struggle to the black struggle).
So if, God forbid he wins this election, all those new positions he has taken this summer will go out the window. Even the commitment to Gay marriage, like all Democrats, that is one area where you talk the talk, but never ever walk the walk.
The Dhimmicrats are all praying he’s the next great liberal Mahdi, but he is and will always remain a slick Chicago Democratic Party politician; “…say anything to get elected, and look out for your real friends.” Just like slick Willie before him, he’ll tack and triangulate all over the legislative map til “Reform” is just a hollow slogan and “Hope” will be just for Hope’s sake. As with the “famous” Pelosi-Reid 2006 Congressional agenda, nothing will happen and no fingers will be impolitely-pointed by the Democrats at the Democrats. They’ll just mail-out more fear-mongering flyers to the G/L community “blaming” the Right and the GOP and begging for more money to fight the good battle once again in 2010 and 2012.
IF the GOP doesn’t deliberately provoke the G/L community this general election, they just might get that 30% GPW’s betting-on.
In Great Britain, there were 16,106 same sex marriages the first year that gays/lesbians were allowed to marry in 2006. In 2007, there were 8,728, a 46% drop.
In Massachusetts, there were 6,121 same sex marriages in 2004; 2,060 in 2005 and 1,442 in 2006. In 2007 there were 867 for the first eight months of the year. Nearly 2/3 of the Massachusetts same sex marriages were lesbian couples. And compared to straight marriages where almost half were under couples under 30, gay marriage partners tended to be older with about 1/3 in their 40s. Once the initial burst of confetti gets swept up, there appears to be a significant drop in the number of gays/lesbians who want to legally tie the knot.
About the only group who really wants same sex marriage is menopausal lesbians. And after the way Obama treated Mrs Clinton, I don’t think that they are going to vote for him this November.
Sen. Messiah Barack is FOR same-sex marriage by his position on Prop. 8. And the letter to the Alice B. Toklas club-BTW, who is Alice B. Toklas?-club congratulating those who have “married” is proof positive. And, the infamous Trintiy United Church of Christ is for same-sex marriage. It is the official policy of the United Church of Christ. So, why is hedging, bobbing and weaving on this issue? Because if he was honest, he would lose the election. At the end of the day, it is one of soooooo many reasons why no sane, thinking person can vote for this charlatan.
#7: Not every gay who wants to be married would get married right away. One would assume they would find a serious partner first.
Obama is a committed socialist. His “community organizer” period was aimed at organzing the peasants to game the system and to gain practical experience at “organizing” useful communities. His next phase was to gain political power. His goal is to be elected and get the socialism ball rolling. He is in the party that will do whatever it can to create all manner of “free” programs.
Obama’s flip-flops are nuanced, indeed. He will say what it takes to grab the power. Then he will tack hard left and let the state get its fists on everything imaginal.