Breaking: Obama supports gay marriage

LOL. Everyone needs to be fired in Drip's world.

Are you going to fire Tina Brown for the NewsWeek cover, because she's who'd have to go?

What is so wrong, or offensive, about these covers that someone should be fired?

 

What bias are you speaking of?

I'll hang up and listen cause this could be fun.....

 

Yes, yes, Republicans are the only ones who have used social issues as a wedge to drive for votes for the past three decades..... :

And it is funny - Obama is the anti-Bill Clinton.

When Clinton was running for re-election in 1996 right wingers tried the whole "he's cheating on his wife" and "he has slimy friends" approach and Clinton's response "They are bringing all this other stuff up because they don't want to talk about my record."

With Obama it is "I want to keep bringing all this other stuff up because I hope the Republicans aren't smart enough to start talking about my record."

If I am Mitt Romney I take a page from Clinton's book - leave all the other stuff alone and go after Obama where he is most vulnerable and that is his utterly clueless and in many ways shockingly amateur lack of ability to deal with the economic issues that face our country.

He has been an absolute disaster in this area, a deer in the headlights and he still has no clue and no plan.

Like I said - he is the opposite of Clinton in many, many ways as Clinton was intelligent, thoughtful and masterful, not too mention pragmatic, in his handling of economic issues and it is why, despite his late-night blow jobs from fatty interns, he will go down in history as one of the better presidents of our lifetime.

I never thought it could get worse and more incompetent than the George W. Bush era, but Obama has managed that trick and the fact that so many people are still so blindly loyal to him is alarming.

 

I'm going to guess in Missouri, there is a significant percentage of the population that is going to show up to vote out a Senator who is OK with the gays marrying. McCaskill, in a highly Democratic year, didn't get 50 percent of the vote in her state. I wish she would do a presser wearing nothing but a rainbow flag and an Indigo Girls cap, but you and I both know that she would be out on her ear if she went strong on marriage equality. And she wouldn't be replaced with a candidate friendlier to same-sex marriage. (Heck, at least McCaskill voted to end Don't Ask Don't Tell.)

 

You can certainly criticize Obama for many things, but the idea that he is not intelligent - and you have gone to this well before - is just absolutely laughable.

 

Interesting article about how the President tried to "contain the possible damage" after his announcement:

 

He is book smart.

He has no common sense and no ability to translate all of that so-called intelligence into coherent thoughts that go deeper than "change, change, change"

And if you have ever heard him speak minus a teleprompter, you'd understand just how much of a clueless puppet this guy really is.

And before you start giving me his educational resume, remember, George W. Bush graduated from Yale, so that don't mean shit to me.

 

Is there any wiggle room between being "OK with gays marrying" and not OK with forcing everyone to treat a same-sex marriage as the absolute equivalent of a heterosexual marital union? I ask this with all sincerity ... is someone who is troubled in that way just antiquated/bigoted?

 

"In over his head" and "amateur" are the talking points.

Let's stay on script, please.

 

What's interesting is that churches appear to be getting behind Romney now.

 

He does, and he did. And he was accused of "talking down to people" and "speaking like a professor instead of a candidate for office." Go review the 2008 Democratic primary debate coverage.

 

Of course they are. As it ever was. They loved W. because he was one of their own, but that was just gravy. They care about, first and foremost, the policy and getting their agendas (and I don't use "agendas" perjoratively) advanced, not identity politics.