Gay Patriot Header Image

“The most polarizing President of the past four decades”

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 10:35 pm - April 6, 2009.
Filed under: Liberal Hypocrisy,Obama Watch

It’s not who you think it is.  Commentary‘s Peter Wehner reached this conclusion (the title quote) not as did counterparts in the MSM (when they reached a different conclusion) by considering their own reactions to former President George W. Bush and listening to the angry voices of their social peers, but by reading the polling data.

His data comes from poll commissioned by of the most respecte firms in the business, that of the Pew Research Center. Their findings reveal that:

For all of his hopes about bipartisanship, Barack Obama has the most polarized early job approval ratings of any president in the past four decades. The 61-point partisan gap in opinions about Obama’s job performance is the result of a combination of high Democratic ratings for the president — 88% job approval among Democrats — and relatively low approval ratings among Republicans (27%).

Guess blaming Bush and attacking Republicans hasn’t helped endear him to Republicans.  Ol’ Rahm might want to reconsider slamming Rush Limbaugh.  His buddy James Carville might want to reconsider going after the Governor of Alaska.  Wouldn’t be prudent.  Not gonna help the President live up to his campaign rhetoric.  (As one former President might say.)

Jay Cost believes Obama may pay a “political price for contributing to the rancor . . . not simply because his governing style has been highly partisan to date, but also because he explicitly promised during the campaign that it would not be.“   And the partisan edge to his Administration may cause many of the young voters so enthusiastic about his candidacy to turn away from him.

In his campaign, he tapped into the idealism of their youth, promising to be a different kind of politician, one who transcended politics.  Very early in his term, he has turned out to be quite the opposite.

So many faulted his predecessor for his go-it-alone approach.  (I grant that George W. Bush did not reach out as much to Congress, even when his own party ran he place, as he should have done.  See Jack Goldsmith’s The Terror Presidency: Law and Judgment Inside the Bush Administration for a good discussion of this.)  Imperfect though W was, he never bashed his domestic political adversaries rhetorically as his successor has done, especially not when he was abroad.

Americans are starting to take notice.  At the rate we’re going, Bush could be rehabilitated in time for his sixty-third birthday.  But, America will remain divided.

Partisan Gap In Hysteria

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 9:07 pm - April 6, 2009.
Filed under: Blogging,Hysteria on the Left

Glenn links this observation by Jehuda on The Rhetorican:

You know, for a political faction that is “irrelevant” and “out in the wilderness”, the Right seems to really get on the Left’s nerves.  It’s like the Left isn’t quite convinced that the current state of things will last very long.

Has this guy been reading our comments?

He’s definitely onto something.  Maybe it’s just in the nature of some leftists to resent their political adversaries, but they do seem quite insecure about their success.

Words to ponder.

Obama’s Benchmark for Measuring Tea Party Success

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 5:34 pm - April 6, 2009.
Filed under: Freedom,Tea Party

Michelle Malkin’s post today on those who would sabotage and/or smear the Tea Party protests got me wondering if there were a way to measure the success of these protests against increasing taxes and government spending.

And then, recalling how the Democratic National Committee (DNC) had inflated the number of signatures it had gathered on petitions supporting the president’s budget, I realized they provided us a benchmark.  Now, if 642,000 people, the amount of petitions the Democrats claimed to have by counting each signature three times, show up next Wednesday to protest that spendthrift budget–and it promise of future red ink and tax hikes, then we can consider the tea parties a resounding success.

We, however, don’t need that number to succeed.  We simply need to have more people protesting the president’s budget than signed petitions supporting it:  214,000.  Unlike the DNC’s Organizing for America which grew out of the Obama’s presidential campaign, the tea party effort is just getting started.  We don’t have a long-established organization in place with the resources of a national political party possessing a database of 13 million supporters.

Not just that, to sign a petition supporting the president’s budget, you didn’t need do so at any set time or in any set place as those protesting the budget at tea parties must do.

So, let’s exceed Obama’s number and get a quarter-million people to the protests.  Join me next Wednesday, April 15 from 3 to 7 PM at the Santa Monica pier.  My goal is to get ten GayPatriot readers & friends to the gathering.

If you can’t join me in Santa Monica next week, let me know your town and I’ll find a party for you!

The Reflexes of (Some of) Our Critics

While Ivan Pavlov’s studies of the digestive systems in mammals led the Russian scientist to a discovery about canine reflexes, my post referencing his experiment helped confirm one of my observations of the reflexes of some of our critics.

I noted how some on the left react to gay conservatives in the same manner that Pavlov’s trained dogs react to a dinner bell.  The canines drool.  The leftists hurl the same insult.  When I mentioned that observation, not one of our critics faulted those who have such a narrow-minded reaction to gay people who don’t subscribe to the gay political orthodoxy.

They all were quick to justify the name-calling.  It’s one thing to disagree with our ideas.  It’s quite another to ascribe our political views to some kind of psychological disorder.

It would be nice if those who spent so much time on this blog could at least acknowledge that we’re not self-hating.   I mean, why do they spend so much time on a blog where, they believe, self-haters post on a regular basis?

Just a thought.

Gay Marriage: its Advocates, Practitioners & Skeptics

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 4:07 am - April 6, 2009.
Filed under: Civil Discourse,Gay Marriage

At the heart of the two most serious books on either side of the gay marriage debate is a question we should all be asking as we wrestle with whether or not states should extend the benefits of marriage to same-sex couples.  Both Jonathan Rauch in Gay Marriage: Why It Is Good for Gays, Good for Straights, and Good for America and David Blankenhorn in The Future of Marriage consider whether such recognition strengthens the institution or undermines it.

Rauch, as his title suggests contends it strengthens marriage.  Blankenhorn disagrees.

It sometimes seems Rauch is alone in making that argument.  He understands the purposes of marriage and how the institution benefits society.  By contrast, most of his fellow gay marriage advocates see the institution as a right to which they are somehow entilted.

Yet, as I wrote on Saturday, while most advocates may not understand the meaning of the social change they’re promoting, many of the institution’s practitioners do, as this comment to Bruce’s post reveals.  The writers simply acknowledges that his 24-year gay relationship has been “monogamous.”

Would it that other advocates use that word which practically everyone in our culture understands inheres in the very definition of the institution*, but which all to which all too many advocates wish to give short shrift (if that) for fear of offending someone in the gay movement.  Or maybe it’s not just a fear of offending, it’s a rejection of the notion altogether.

No wonder some see gay marriage as an assault on traditional marriage.  Those who often promote it portray marriage as just a union of two loving individuals, dispensing with many of the qualities which have long defined the institution.

Yet, when we talk about gay marriage as most of its “practitioners” experience their relationships, we often get a different reaction from its skeptics as this comment to my post on the exclusion of gay conservatives from gay marriage confabs indicates:

I am a straight, conservative and married man. Until about a year ago, I – shamefully – was opposed to gay marriage. It was the line of reasoning in this blog that has caused the change in my heart. Thank you and please keep up the fight. Seems to me that married gay people, serious about their own vows, would only strengthen the institution of marriage.

This reader helps make the case for Jonathan Rauch’s argument.

In the end, I believe it boils down to whether or not we see gay marriage as a political goal or a social ideal.  If we talk about it as a social ideal, as does Jonathan Rauch, we might realize more quickly the political goal.

(more…)

Changing my Blog Moniker

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 3:56 am - April 6, 2009.
Filed under: Blogging

After long thought, I have decided to follow up on an idea I first articulated in a post in October 2006 and change my blogging moniker.  As soon as we work out the technical details, I will start blogging under the new moniker, possibly as soon as this week.

Unifying Leaders Don’t Blame their Predecessor . . .
. . . or attack their political adversaries

Posted by GayPatriotWest at 3:45 am - April 6, 2009.
Filed under: Obama Hopenchange,Obama Watch

That’s just not, to borrow a word from the President Obama’s rhetorical lexicon, taking responsibility for the task at hand.  Instead it’s part of that old “pattern in Washington where everybody is always looking for somebody else to blame.

The President partially undermined the strong points in his Strasbourg speech by repeatedly criticizing his predecessor. This is not the first time he has blamed Bush.  Nor is it the only time he or his team has attacked Republicans.

In her column in Friday’s Wall Street Journal, Kimberley A. Strassel shows how, with a generous assist from the White House, Democrats are going after one of the GOP’s “up-and-coming talents,” House Minority Whip Eric Cantor. They have run TV ads criticizing this thoughtful conservative. A Democratic front group even ran “robocalls in five districts” attacking his wife.

Strassel concludes that “the coordinated takedown attempt [of Cantor] is yet more proof that the Obama-led Democrats aren’t nearly as interested in changing the ‘tone’ as they are in holding on to power.”  No wonder polls show that in the first few months of this “post-partisan” Administration, Americans are becoming increasingly polarized.