Quick Hit: Just a Stumbling Block.

image credit



Filed under Uncategorized

13 responses to “Quick Hit: Just a Stumbling Block.

  1. Brandon

    Are any Obama supporters particularly bothered by the fact that this has always been his position but he never was willing to publicly admit that it was until he determined it was in his political interests to do so? Did anyone actually believe him when he said his position was still continuing to “evolve?” Seems to me he was looking at polling and the fact that his fundraising was down significantly and he figured with the election coming up now was the time announce his position to try to fill up the coffers and hopefully energize some of his base who had not been pleased with how he had handled the issue. There was nothing at all surprising about what he said, yet some people seem to think that he has demonstrated brave leadership on the issue by confirming what everyone already knew.

    • Sean

      First – I am in no way ever an Obama fan. second – he’s a politician, everything he does and says is perfomed from that perspective. Every politician cafefully words things in a manor to appeal to the greatest number of people. I think it says something that he felt comfortable enough to speak in favor of equal rights despite some recent events. Given all that, I am quite pleased that he actually got on national TV and as sitting President announced his view. That is the brave leadership part in my opinion. It was a calculated political risk, everything is.

    • CV Rick

      Brandon, it never bothers me when a leader considers all perspectives and takes sound advice to change a position he’s held. You can disbelieve all you’d like, but his stated position has moved from no on marriage equality to yes on marriage equality and the vote in North Carolina shows that this move may cost him votes among those who might have been straddling the election fence.

      I don’t like the word “brave” when used in the context of making a statement on ending discrimination and extending equal rights to citizens. It shouldn’t be brave, it should be merely common sense.

      I like a leader who can understand nuance and not dig in his heels and refuse to change in the face of logic.

      Obama is the kind of leader who will make a decision, even one which will cost him votes or support. Imagine if bin Laden hadn’t been in that Pakistani compound – – that was a decision that would’ve cost him the presidency, but he made it and he acted at the right time. It’s a decision that Bush would have never made . . . .

      • Brandon

        Hi Rick – Well, his stated position has gone from yes, no, yes, dating back to 1996. A tweet from James Antle I came across sums up his evolution quite nicely “Obama may be the only person in America who supported gay marriage in 1996 but opposed it in 2011.” And that was my point in all of this. I don’t think he has considered all the perspectives and taken sound advice and then changed his opinion. He’s always been for it, but determined it wasn’t in his political interest once his national profile increased to be for it.

        A liberal Democrat that did not support same sex marriage? Did anyone actually believe that? For an issue that is near and dear to his gay supporters, and many others in his base, they sure seemed pretty content to give him a pass with a wink and a nod knowing that he didn’t really mean what he was saying. But hey, what were they going to do, vote for the Republican candidate instead? But by continuing to “evolve” he could attempt to keep more centrist, blue-collar Dems in the fold who he might have been at a bigger risk for losing if he changed his stance. I guess now it is worth the risk to get the campaign money flowing again.

        I really don’t see how you conclude that Bush would not have ordered the Bin Laden raid. Any American president would have ordered that raid, heck, even Jimmy Carter. It was a big decision to make and I have commended him for making the call, but it is certainly not unique to his bold leadership.

      • CV Rick

        I might not have been clear, Brandon. I’ll try again. His stated position was no, and now it’s yes. Thanks for reading.

      • Brandon

        I might not have been clear, Rick. I’ll try again. His stated position in 1996 per the Outlines newspaper primary election questionnaire was yes. “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages,and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages.” Then it went to no and now it is back to yes. Thanks for reading.

      • CV Rick

        I guess you didn’t really get it, Brandon. You see I’m not a conspiracy theory addict and I take honest people at their word, and once someone displays dishonesty I never trust them again. However, President Obama has proven good to his word in every possible way. Even where he failed to live up to his campaign statements he tried and was stopped by other branches of government.

        So, finally, I reiterate. He was against marriage equality and now he’s changed his position and is for it.

        Thanks again. Hope you get it this time.

      • Brandon

        It’s not a conspiracy, Rick. What don’t you understand about his answer to the 1996 questionnaire that stated his position in the affirmative? Was that a misrepresentation of his position? The White House has not denied the authenticity of the document when Carney was questioned. This isn’t some urban legend or George W Bush Texas Air National Guard fraud. Are you just dismissing this because it is a piece of inconvenient information? Do you think this is all made up? You seem to think it is some kind of conspiracy but I fail to see what evidence supports that assertion.

      • CV Rick

        Brandon, you might have noticed that I haven’t addressed any documents from the 1990s. I wonder if you noticed that. It’s probably because I don’t care.

        I’ll give you an example, Brandon. If I ran for president and I was asked if I think marijuana should be made legal, I would probably say that the law is very clear about drugs and that the states themselves make their own laws about it and as president I would enforce those federal laws that are applicable, therefore marijuana will remain illegal. Then if enough states changed their laws I would be put in a position where I would say that now I think that marijuana laws should remain unenforced and that this prohibition should end. But you or other angry men on the internet would find some kind of post I did back in the mid-1990’s where I had all along claimed that this drug should be legalized.

        Speaking in one capacity or another changes what you are allowed to do or influence and that nuance is difficult for single-minded and dull-witted opponents to understand. So, putting it more simply so you can follow – he was against it, now he’s for it.

        Thank you.

      • Brandon

        Well Rick, thank you for finally admitting that you don’t care. It clearly shows the hoops that some folks want to jump through to keep convincing themselves that Obama has gone through some kind of grand evolution on the issue. Far from being angry or single-minded, I find all of this quite humorous – the level of cognitive dissonance is impressive.

        The announcement of his “changed” opinion merely confirmed what everyone already knew his opinion to be. Hey, anyone is free to change his mind on an issue, even if it means going from being for it, to being against it and then being for it again. Thanks.

      • g2-318e424ded6ca77114109444964fa363

        I see you completely misunderstood. I’m unsurprised.

      • Brandon

        It’s not a misunderstanding Rick. I didn’t find your marijuana example particularly relevant to this situation. If you had never claimed that marijuana should be legal in the mid-1990’s in a blog post, or in an official campaign questionnaire answering your position on various issues, then it would be incorrect to claim that you had previously supported legalization all along if you gave the answer you listed as if you were running for president. It seems Obama’s opinion on the question didn’t matter until he held an elective national office because prior to that , he didn’t have enough influence and capacity, or it wasn’t politically feasible to address.

  2. Improbable Joe

    I hate to agree with Brandon, but he’s sort of right here. His principles are crap, and he’s kind of dumb IMO, but at least he has some concept of an ethical center. The blind support for Obama shows a lack of principle.

    Obama isn’t actually a liberal/progressive, he’s more of an old-school moderate Republican. Worse, he’s a coward who only takes stands where they don’t matter, and where they can’t hurt him. If Obama had made a statement against Amendment One three weeks ago, it would have had the same effect as it has this past week on Republicans who hate him with a passion that reeks of stupidity… but progressives could have used Obama’s statement and star power for a get-out-the-vote effort in NC that might have swung the vote or at least made a fight out of it. Instead, Obama looked at the poll numbers and said “fuck the gays” until after the vote, and then took their side without having to take the risk of supporting the losing vote.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s