Barack Obama has been listed on “Friends of Slog” for nearly two years. A commenter suggested that after today’s bombshell—gay marriage is like incest and child rape!—we vote on whether Obama gets to stay on the list of Slog’s friends or joins KUOW on Slog’s enemies list.
This poll, like all Slog polls, is scientifically sound and legally binding.
Loveschild sees all those white characters colored black in the Bible and says. That’s me!
Was it Audrey Lorde? I’m not exactly sure, but she said that you cannot tear down the Master’s house with the Master’s tools.
We know that he gave us a big fat huge fucking backhand when he defended DOMA. He just proved what I didn’t want to believe- he’s a politician just like the rest of them.
That said- I would defriend him, but I wouldn’t put him on the enemy list because I’m still crossing my fingers that he will do some good in healthcare, the middle east, and green energy.
We tried to warn you Obamatards, but you bought the Change(tm) rhetoric hook, line, and sinker.
Vote third-party in 2012 for candidates who actually stand up for the civil rights of ALL Americans, like Ralph Nader.
Why can’t SLOG just be indifferent? What is it about otherwise smart young people that makes them think that some politician is “on their side”? Ah well, life lesson learned. Now get on with your own work and stop identifying with politicians.
#49 that has always been his bullshit position. It’s already up to the states, so why would this be viewed as him advocating any further positive action on this? He wants states to be able to ban gay marriage more than he wants states to be able to allow it. It’s a pathetic last ditch position to stop the gay rights steam engine from forcing his bigoted state of choice to allow gay marriage and recognize the marriages of other states.
fuck him. fuck him right in the ear. i’m done with that asshole. so many times (in 4 months!) have i found myself saying “wtf obama?”
Dan, in the immortal words of WNYX’s Dave Foley, “JESUS, you’re an idiot.”
#40 – You’re right about #33’s pretty half-assed legal commentary. I’m totally pissed about this brief, primarily because of the horrible politics of the brief and what I think is some pretty shitty legal analysis.
That being said, the incest etc. commentary is being blown out of proportion. There is no “comparison” being made. What the brief attempts to do is identify the relevant principles of “Conflicts of Law” to argue against forcing state A to recognize a marriage just because state B does. And, frankly, they’re pretty right on about the general aspects of this area of the law. Traditionally, and this pre-dates the gay marriage debate, states are allowed to not recognize marriages from other states when it violates some aspect of the public policy of that state. The case law on those issues has tended to flow from questions of age or incest, because that’s been the typical area of dispute – and the states had clear public policy positions on those questions. The fact that the brief uses this case law doesn’t mean that the DOJ is comparing incest to being gay, it just means that these are the cases that have been used previously in the marriage context and that they support the principle being argued in the brief.
Nothing pisses me off more than when the right misconstrues, misstates, doesn’t understand, or blatantly misrepresents an argument to suit their interests. There are many, many, many reasons to be pissed about this brief and I feel very strongly on almost all of them, but this isn’t one that we should be extending. The DOJ didn’t say that gay=incest. It didn’t even imply it. It did say that states have public policies against gay marriage, just like they do incest, and that in the Conflict of Laws area related to marriage, that public policy implicates what marriages they have to recognize.
BTW, #33, this isn’t actually that related to the rational basis test, it’s a statement of what the law is related to state recognition of marriage and what laws control. #40 is correct about why the brief relies on rational basis (that GLBT is not a suspect class). The federal courts have always used rational basis on GLBT issues, including in Lawrence and Roemer. Until the Supreme Court applies strict scrutiny to GLBT folks, the lower courts won’t do it either and we need to win this debate about our rights on the rational basis front for the time being. But, again, those are two fairly unrelated points. Point 1: DOMA goes to state rights questions and Conflict of Law principles control, public policy determines marriage, and states have the public policy right to not recognize marriages they oppose. Point 2: If the law discriminates, it does so only under a rational basis level of review, and under rational basis, there is justification for this law. Levels of review go to what discrimination is acceptable and what discrimination isn’t acceptable under our system and GLBT people get rational basis review.
So, how do you like them Mormons burrowed into the Fed now?
@27: “John Aravosis (certified whackadoo)”
Here here. That guy is paranoid, borderline fuckwad. If you call him on his bullshit, he’ll delete your comments and call you a homophobe. I’m not a homophobe. I’ve frenched kissed a drag queen in a bar in the village while hardcore gay porn played on the monitors. I’ve been to the Eagle more times than most gay guys, where I saw plenty of cocks, had my packaged grabbed/stroked/rubbed/fondled, and best of all got super stoned in the courtyard out back. I’ve danced at neighbors and the (now closed) brass connection more times than I can count, flirting with drag queens the whole time. I’m there at the gay pride parade every year with my two young kids. My wife and I were married by our gay friend who introduced us.
Homophobe? Fuck you, John Aravosis , and anyone else who calls me a homophobe.
Dan, careful with the company you keep.
De-friend him already, you fagotty shit. It’s not like he’s gonna give a shit. You’re such a drama queen, exploit my son, look at me Bastard, Dan Savage. Grow some balls, faggot.
@60 seandr
I’m sure your kids will be real proud to talk about good ole dad’s experiences with french kissing drag queens. Like that will ever happen.
Why so defensive?
Just keep it in your wife’s warm —t and you’ll be good. Why worry about all this stuff that has no effect on your life whatsoever.
I deleted my Obama ’08 app from the phone today.
sigh.
@62: Just saying – John Aravosis is a nut.
I have far worse stories than kissing drag queens to hide from my kids.
And I was a little drunk last night when I posted that.
That is all.
@60: Aravosis isn’t the only person up in arms about this. Please read up.
I say that while SLOG isn’t specifically a gay rights forum, it has a strong enough association with that issue to justify a fat FUCK YOU to this administration. De-Friend! What does de-friending mean? I’m sure you’ll still vote him into a second term as the lesser-of-two-evils candidate, but the de-friend says he just shat the last of his “hope and change” cred into the dumpster of centrist pandering. This administration will do less for your rights than effin LBJ did for blacks, and now you know it top to bottom.
My hope (if that word isn’t totally useless by now) is that having an ostensible liberal at the podium, achieving some measurable successes on security and the economy (assuming those don’t blow up too), will keep fostering an environment in which more young Americans come around to the progressive light of reason. Maybe if he keeps staying mum on gayness to save political face with NAZIs, while civilian leaders push for gay equality, it will allow future leaders to set things right. Good Luck, y’all.
And in other things, can we put in a SLOG feature that lets us ignore all unregistered users?
Well, given that the administration *has* to defend DOMA, and there is no rational defense, maybe they’re just using the old stuff to show how ridiculous it all is. Otherwise, this just doesn’t make sense. You don’t want the admin to *really* try to defend it, do you?
If you’re a one issue voter and his stance on gay marriage offends you, sure.
I think this whole thing is a big troll to get conservatives to support repealing DOMA.
Think about it: every conservative commentator loves to get on Obama’s case about anything, especially hypocrisy, so all he has to do is break campaign promises and stand for things conservatives support. Then, they must either take him to task for changing his mind–effectively throwing their lot in with the anti-DOMA crowd–or they have to bite the bullet and say he’s doing the right thing. Either way, he’s forcing his opponents to waste political capital while advancing his own agendas.
I’m with Sullivan. I worked for Obama. I sent my money to Obama.
And I regret it. The wars are still going strong. The anti-gay sentiment is still going strong.
I won’t support him again.
71: Have fun with a Republican administration then, you ignorant asshole.
68: 95 percents of people on SLOG are one-issue voters. They live in a vacuum where the health of the country as a whole doesn’t really matter. Only they matter. It’s political narcissism typical of this generation.
Go ahead and in 2012, vote for Palin why don’t you.
Ever hear of ‘useful idiots’? That’s what the Far Left is to the Democrats. Just like the Far Right used to be for the Republicans until they let them take over the party.
So… When does he move to the enemy column?… It would seem the people have spoken. (Or is this just more Slog bullshit?)
I see you wimpy fags still have Obama in your friends column. What a bunch of fucking weak ass pansy liberal faggots you all are. You make me even sicker than Obama does.
I’m disappointed in Obama thus far and therefore I of course must be racist.