Breaking: Obama supports gay marriage

I hate the word homophobic. A phobia is an irrational, often paralyzing fear*. Homophobia is used most often to refer to those who don't embrace, say, same-sex marriage. It's a neat semantic trick, because it morphs opposition to some such thing or another into a psychological disfunction. But that doesn't mean it's appropriate ...


*From the Wikipedia: A phobia (from the Greek: φόβος, Phóbos, meaning "fear" or "morbid fear") is, when used in the context of clinical psychology, a type of anxiety disorder, usually defined as a persistent fear of an object or situation in which the sufferer commits to great lengths in avoiding, typically disproportional to the actual danger posed, often being recognized as irrational. In the event the phobia cannot be avoided entirely the sufferer will endure the situation or object with marked distress and significant interference in social or occupational activities.

 

Not nearly as moronic as Barak Obama sounds when he is not reading one and is asked any question that requires more thought than "Who do you think will win in the Final Four - Kentucky or Kansas....."

 

You forgot the first part of the noun. Homo- is simply a prefix meaning "same", while hetero- is the antonym, obviously meaning "opposite". So "homophobia" is a malaprop at best meaning literally, "fear of all things that are similar."

So that means homophobes fear Creed and Pearl Jam.

 

If you're going to call somebody moronic, you should at least spell his name correctly. Of course, we shouldn't expect much out of somebody still trotting out WND talking points from four years ago.

 

Oh chit ... my situation's more serious than I thought!

 

WND? Does that even still exist?

I mean you would know as you seem to read it more than anybody I know.

And it isn't a talking point, the guy talks like he has a mouth full of shit, mostly because he is full of shit and he has duped a whole lot of people into believing he is something that he is not.

The fact that you are hanging on so tightly to the candidate you thought you were supporting four years ago as opposed to taking a look at the reality of the past four years is not my problem, it is yours.

But hey, he will win because the Republicans were too stupid to groom a real candidate over the past two years and are too stupid to form a message on the one issue they can win -- Obama's miserable record of dealing with economic issues.

And that's fine with me because the only difference between Romney and Obama is Obama openly admits he is a big-government loving nanny state dictator while Romney thinks the same exact way but knows he needs to talk like a "conservative" even though there is no longer any such thing as a true conservative in the Republican party.......

 

Who is hanging on so tightly? Choosing the least bad of two candidates doesn't fit that definition.

And while I disagree with Obama on several things - and think he's been spineless when dealing with the idiots now leading the GOP - he's a obviously a very intelligent man. With or without a Teleprompter.

 

Well then, in your estimation - is George W. Bush, a man who graduated from Yale, has been the ceo of oil companies and a baseball team, the governor of one of the largest states and the president - is he "obviously a very intelligent man" as well?

 

Doesn't look like he's getting much credit for his "evolution":

So, while he's still ahead of the curve, it shows why he should have had the political courage to just do the right thing much earlier, and not when he couldn't avoid doing it any longer.

They must be so pissed at Joe Biden right now.

 

My response is "related" to Zag's.

There is no conflict in stating that Obama is smart, and that he also relies heavily on his TelePrompter.

He's better on the TelePrompter. That's not wrong to say, and it's not even an insult. Lot's of smart people rely on them.

And, especially on topics outside his comfort zone, it helps keep him on message. In a debate, or adversarial, situation, he's good -- like when he spoke to the Republicans at their gathering and got into it with them.

But, you can't be argumentative with voters, it's a turnoff. So, when he discusses the idea of being "over taxed" with a voterm and he's working off the cuff, you get this:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/44/2010/04/obamas-17-minute-2500-word-res.html

The other thing is how some mistakes turn into a narrative of their own: Dan Quayle and potatoe, George HW Bush and supermarket checkout scanners, George Bush and his mangled English.

They are proof that these guys are idiots and/or out of touch.

But, Obama's 57 states, and 2,500 word, 17 minute long answer are the exceptions to the rule proving how smart President Obama is.

I'm happy to say President Obama is smart. I'd venture to say Jimmy Carter might be one of our "smartest" presidents. So what?

"Smart enough" is good enough, if they are a good leader, make good decisions, surround themselves with talented people, have common sense, can understand big issues on a macro level, etc.

 

How do you figure that? How does the age of the person make a difference?

 

Sure.

And YF, they are all better on Teleprompter. Twenty years ago, I did weekend TV sports anchoring. I was better on a Teleprompter than off it when the camera was aimed at me. I don't know anybody who is good off it as on it. Even Reagan - The Great Communicator - was better on it than off it. Clinton was better on it too.

That's why the gobshites who bring it up about Obama are so damned idiotic.