• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gay leaders furious with Obama

I would have thought the Gay leaders would have been livid.

But what do I know?
 
Actually, this is a stroke of genius on the part of Obama. With a selection like this, he looks to build a bridge to evangelicals for the democrat base in the future. Its not as if gays are going to leave the democrat party over this singular event. Its really a win-win for Obama and the Democrat party.
 
WI Crippler said:
Actually, this is a stroke of genius on the part of Obama. With a selection like this, he looks to build a bridge to evangelicals for the democrat base in the future. Its not as if gays are going to leave the democrat party over this singular event. Its really a win-win for Obama and the Democrat party.
Click to expand...

Oh? So evangelicals who didn't choose to vote for Obama in November will crossover to the Democratic Party because Obama chose Warren to give the invocation speech?

What a joke!
 
JMak said:
Oh? So evangelicals who didn't choose to vote for Obama in November will crossover to the Democratic Party because Obama chose Warren to give the invocation speech?

What a joke!
Click to expand...

That's not what he said. He said Obama just built a bridge. Bridges are built in every election. GWB built a bridge for Republicans with Hispanics during 2000. Then Republicans blasted it down from 2001 to 2006. In 2008 Obama picked up the pieces and brought Cuban Republicans over to the Democratic party. Another example of attempted bridge building is picking Palin to get at Hillary's '18 million cracks'. However this attempt failed because women for the most part in this country aren't about to be swayed by a far right Republican personality like Palin.
 
JMak said:
Oh? So evangelicals who didn't choose to vote for Obama in November will crossover to the Democratic Party because Obama chose Warren to give the invocation speech?

What a joke!
Click to expand...

Some may. I'm not saying the evangelical base has left the Republican party by any means. But by doing this Obama avoids two controversies. One, he'll further drive a nail into the idea that he's a secret muslim. Two, he isn't picking a certain controversial figure from his own church. He's picking somebody that "bridges" the gap between their perceptions of him and who he really is.

I said before, Obama will get a fair shake from me. I'm not jumping to slay him, nor praise him one way or the other. His actions will determine what I think of the man. This particular action shows he is very aware of how people are perceiving him. I'd hate to have a president that only worried about that kind of stuff at the cost of policy, but I wouldn't mind having one that at least acknowledges it.
 
Hatuey said:
That's not what he said. He said Obama just built a bridge.
Click to expand...

No, he said, "he looks to build a bridge to evangelicals for the democrat base in the future."

This selection constitutes a bridge for them to cross. I merely scoffed at the idea that a selection for reading the invocation would suddenly motivate evangelicals to cross that bridge.

Bridges are built in every election. GWB built a bridge for Republicans with Hispanics during 2000.
Click to expand...

And we saw them cross over. The poster's point is that some will cross, not just that a bridge was built.
 
chevydriver1123 said:
Gee who didnt see this coming
Click to expand...

But I thought, according to many posters here that Obama was going to shove homosexuality down our throats and make it mandatory in schools. That he'll force kids to learn and accept it. Also, that Obama would enshrine socialistic homosexuality as a fundamental right in America!

Obama's a diehard liberal with reckless leftist policies according to some here. But then they also argue that the left shouldn't support Obama because he's not.

Wait. My brain hurts.
 
JMak said:
No, he said, "he looks to build a bridge to evangelicals for the democrat base in the future."
Click to expand...

And you don't think that's what he's doing?

This selection constitutes a bridge for them to cross. I merely scoffed at the idea that a selection for reading the invocation would suddenly motivate evangelicals to cross that bridge.
Click to expand...

And that's still not what he said.

And we saw them cross over. The poster's point is that some will cross, not just that a bridge was built.
Click to expand...

"he looks to build a bridge to evangelicals for the democrat base in the future.
Click to expand...

At what point does he say evangelicals will actually cross over? I'll let you consider how you just contradicted yourself.
 
JMak said:
Oh? So evangelicals who didn't choose to vote for Obama in November will crossover to the Democratic Party because Obama chose Warren to give the invocation speech?

What a joke!
Click to expand...
The Dems don't seem to be able to see the difference between getting someone to change their political, philosophical and religious positions, and getting someone to buy a different brand of hamburger.

Although, looking at the last election cycle, from primaries to general election, I suppose a lot of the populace no longer sees the difference either.
 
obvious Child said:
But I thought, according to many posters here that Obama was going to shove homosexuality down our throats and make it mandatory in schools. That he'll force kids to learn and accept it. Also, that Obama would enshrine socialistic homosexuality as a fundamental right in America!

Obama's a diehard liberal with reckless leftist policies according to some here. But then they also argue that the left shouldn't support Obama because he's not.

Wait. My brain hurts.
Click to expand...

Well just to let you know I never bought into that sensationalist crap. The point of my comment is that Obama has once again flip flopped on a position and Im not just surprised. He went from die hard liberal to centrist.
 
Hatuey said:
Another example of attempted bridge building is picking Palin to get at Hillary's '18 million cracks'. However this attempt failed
Click to expand...

a bridge to nowhere, if you will.
 
chevydriver1123 said:
Well just to let you know I never bought into that sensationalist crap. The point of my comment is that Obama has once again flip flopped on a position and Im not just surprised. He went from die hard liberal to centrist.
Click to expand...

What position did he flip flop on?
 
Well is it not much of a bad thing compared to other "religious leaders" Rick warren is pretty resonable.

On a side point has anyone else noticed he looks like what you would expect a con man to look like?
 
Obama said during the Saddleback Debate that marriage is defined as a union between a man and a woman. So why are gays surprised. Besides Rick Warren is a friend of Obama's. Warren also was a major advocate of prop 8 in California and is a staunch pro-life evangelical. Warren has done a lot of work on AIDS in Africa as well.

Obama was just pretending to be a flaming liberal during the campaign to get the loony left vote.
 
Last edited:
Obama said he was going to welcome everyone, whether they agreed with him or not. He was going to work with them, I believe he said this during his acceptance speech.

This is simply what he is doing. I do not agree with his choice, but if he believes it is the right choice, then so be it.
 
chevydriver1123 said:
Well just to let you know I never bought into that sensationalist crap. The point of my comment is that Obama has once again flip flopped on a position and Im not just surprised. He went from die hard liberal to centrist.
Click to expand...

Possibly. Or he was simply doing what all politicians do during an election: pander to their base to get votes and then forsake the positions that got them those votes. I suspected this from Obama immediately after someone in Harper's office leaked the NAFTA memo.
 
I think it's hilarious. See buttercups, NO ONE wants you around. Gag on it..........literally.
 
Is Rick Warren going to be the new Billy Graham? Sort of the official minister of the US?
 
sazerac said:
Is Rick Warren going to be the new Billy Graham? Sort of the official minister of the US?
Click to expand...

I was thinking more like the spokesman for McDonald's. :mrgreen:
 
Too much fuss for a prayer in the inauguration day. This priest won't preach anything, so why to make complaints?

On the other hand, what the gays were expecting about...a lesbian priest? Oh come on, this is a decent and very important event and the world must witness a great image of this nation, because in case you are not aware,for many people here in US and in most of the countries of the world homosexuality is not only a wrong choice but is also an insult. In other countries you call homosexual to a straight guy and you will earn a black eye, or a cut in your belly or even death. I think Obama did the right thing, and that his vision goes beyond the US borders.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom