So your pissed because I have a point and you don't?

Well then, your lack of knowledge must make you correct. Someone please pass the hat to EdipisReks.

Well then, your lack of knowledge must make you correct. Someone please pass the hat to EdipisReks.

Your knowledge is demonstrated by a link to a video.

Billy it's easy to call you a jackass because what you said was racist no matter what spin you want to put on it.

OBAMA: Well, to answer the original question, I would love that child and seek to support them. I believe that marriage is between a man and a woman but I detest the bashing and vilifying of gays and lesbians. Most gays and lesbians are seeking basic recognition of their rights so they're not discriminated against in employment or renting a house, so they can see their partner in a hospital. These are rights for everybody, not just some people.

That answer your question?

last time i checked, Obama wasn't in favor of gay marriage rights. unless he was just lying when he said that.

You have it straight now? Or do you need further explanation for your fictitious bullshit?

Just for the record, I did not vote for McCain. I had at least as many issues with his platform as I have with Obama's. The problem I mainly have is with people who treat Obama as some kind of mythological hero. He is, like all career politicians, someone who traded honesty for power. He is not to be trusted out of hand.

Agreed...

Most gays and lesbians are seeking basic recognition of their rights so they're not discriminated against in employment or renting a house, so they can see their partner in a hospital. These are rights for everybody, not just some people.

What part of that did you not understand?

Or smart for separating Gay rights and marriage which is typically a religious institution. Makes it easier to circumnavigate the word Religion when dealing with the issues.

last time i checked, Obama wasn't in favor of gay marriage rights. unless he was just lying when he said that.

He endorsed voting no on Prop 8. Voting no meant to leave it as it was, i.e. gays are allowed to marry. Not surprisingly, McCain endorsed voting yes.

One Nation, Under God, Indivisible...

From many a source on the intraweb, if they're to be believed...

The Pledge of Allegiance was written by Francis Bellamy in 1892. "Under God" was not part of the original pledge, and was added by Congress in 1954 after a campaign by the Knights of Columbus in response to the "godless communist threat." Though oddly enough Bellamy was considered a Socialist. But anyway, here's a quote attributed to Bellamy about his Pledge...

It began as an intensive communing with salient points of our national history, from the Declaration of Independence onwards; with the makings of the Constitution...with the meaning of the Civil War; with the aspiration of the people...

The true reason for allegiance to the Flag is the 'republic for which it stands.' ...And what does that vast thing, the Republic mean? It is the concise political word for the Nation - the One Nation which the Civil War was fought to prove. To make that One Nation idea clear, we must specify that it is indivisible, as Webster and Lincoln used to repeat in their great speeches. And its future?

Combine that with "In God We Trust" being added to currency by Congress in 1955, again in response to the Red Scare, and you have a significant (recent) shift.

And religion keeps coming into play with the gay marriage debate because religious dogma and the Bible is always referenced when opposing it. That should have no effect on how couples are viewed by the law. If that means removing the word marriage from the issue, and speaking only in terms of civil unions with respect to law, then so be it.

that's playing it awfully fast and loose. endorsing a no vote on Prop 8 in no way endorses allowing homosexuals their full rights as human beings, it endorses not outlawing gay marriage outright. very different things, politically.

we weren't talking about McCain.

I agree that this is mostly political. That was why I mentioned McCain. He pretty much had to do the opposite to differentiate himself from his opponent.

thank you Captain Obvious

Back the fuck off Ian.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rJhQBZ1La0w]YouTube - Obama @ Saddleback Church -Defines Marriage[/ame]

California has one of the most progressive domestic partnership laws in the nation that offers all of the same rights and responsibilities as marriages under state law (Cal. Fam. Code

no

but i found the transcript

WARREN: There’s a lot more I’d like to ask on that. We have 15 other questions here. Define marriage.

OBAMA: I believe that marriage is the union between a man and a woman. Now, for me as a Christian — for me — for me as a Christian, it is also a sacred union. God’s in the

mix. But –

WARREN: Would you support a Constitutional Amendment with that definition?

OBAMA: No, I would not.

WARREN: Why not?

OBAMA: Because historically — because historically, we have not defined marriage in our constitution. It’s been a matter of state law. That has been our tradition. I mean, let’s break it down. The reason that people think there needs to be a constitutional amendment, some people believe, is because of the concern that — about same-sex marriage. I am not somebody who promotes same-sex marriage, but I do believe in civil unions. I do believe that we should not — that for gay partners to want to visit each other in the hospital for the state to say, you know what, that’s all right, I don’t think in any way inhibits my core beliefs about what marriage are. I think my faith is strong enough and my marriage is strong enough that I can afford those civil rights to others, even if I have a different perspective or different view.

Biden couldn't cover shit with a blanket. he is sleaze.

I like Joe Biden, but I seem to like career politicians more then most folks. I also have a great respect for the pain and loss he has endured in his personal life. Pain is the great character growth mechanism, which is why old people kick so much ass, as they've simply had more time to have their hearts broken over and over.

I get the feeling that I take the unpopular position of being the rare person in this discourse that actually respects politicians. I at one time ascribed to the idea that all politicians are dishonest assholes etc., but once I decided to accept the reality of politics I was then able to view politicians for what they are: people trying to do the best they can for the people they serve with the power they have. Sure, there are certainly politicians that really are dishonest sleazebags, but to sweep them all into the asshole category is lazy and apathetic, in my opinion.

Yes, I'm that person who just loves politics. I borrow heavily from the Chris Matthews school in this.

You can kiss my ass cheeks if you want asshat.

that is so precious and naive it makes me want to go find a child and kiss it on the cheek.

I'm not so sure it's PJ is the one that is naive although the comment about kissing a child on the cheek means you are learning.

me, naive? here is a good test for you, Mike. think of a politician. while you think of that politician, ask yourself "would Thomas Paine feel an urge to run this person through with a saber?" every time you answer no, an angel gets its wings.

I don't need a test.

that is so precious and naive it makes me want to go find a child and kiss it on the cheek.

I'm not so sure it's PJ is the one that is naive although the comment about kissing a child on the cheek means you are learning.

Yup. Basically I went through my "rip the system" phase, then I stopped listening to KMFDM. The political system as we have it now is reality, and I must accept reality for what it is. Once I accepted modern American politics, I was able to form opinions on politicians individually, as I encounter them, rather then sweep them all into the fucktard pile because they don't spend every waking minute in self-sacrifice attempting to tear down the exisiting Washington power structure. My respect and admiration for politicians doesn't come from a doe-eyed "gee, george bush just wants to keep us safe guys!!" place, but rather from post-cynicism.

to clarify, it is my belief, based on a rather strenuous study of history, that act of seeking office, of seeking to become a politician, to attain power over others, even if it is "for the good," whatever that means, sullies a person.

exactly.

Edited November 6, 200817 yr by EdipisReks
to correct a weird verbal image

to clarify, it is my belief, based on a rather strenuous study of history, that act of seeking office, of seeking to become a politician, to attain power over others, even if it is "for the good," whatever that means, sullies a person. even good men, like John Adams, become raving fucktards upon tasting it.

Sort of like becoming a mod/admin

i find the sentiment "we must accept [the political] reality for what it is" to be highly depressing.

its more an idea of accepting things for how they are in this moment, as opposed to constantly projecting into the future, or constantly reflecting on the past, rather then being OK with business-as-usual.

Studying history is not the same as experiencing events. Both can provide a learning experience but only one, if used to its fullest, lets you gain real understanding.

i thought this was interesting. it's a mathematically expanded election breakdown.

Thanks for that.

And can this be true - Palin thought Africa was a country?

.

Thanks for that.

And can this be true - Palin thought Africa was a country?

.

And our President Elect campaigned in 57 states as he himself stated.

The intolerance shown in this thread is astounding.