Yes, we can.

[Ghoulish Delight]

One would assume both. And not just Presidential elections, but local elections as well. I imagine it gets factored into every decision the party makes and who it's targeting its message to.

[innerSpaceman]

I don't care if they take it into account or not. That's not my purpose. My purpose is Living With Myself.

I thank the lucky stars that living in California means I don't have to vote strategically. I didn't vote for Gore, btw. I voted for Nader. I would never have done that in a swing state.

Fvck the electoral college for making my vote meaningless ... but since it is, I'll accept the luxury of actually voting my conscience.


CP, I will check out that link and see if my conscience eases. I appreciate the philosophy behind his consiliatory desires, but if I'm not willing to budge on gay rights and reproductive rights, what do you think the chances are for the neanderthal homophobes and abortion foes?


We spoke a bit last weekend about the one-issue voters. I daresay most of those are abortion-issue voters who ignore everything else. Well, seeing as the presidential election is meaningless in California, and rather we have the most important ballot measure election I can recall in my lifetime where the issue of TAKING AWAY my rights to marry the one I love is at stake ... I am A One Issue Voter this time around.


So I doubt it will make much difference to me that Obama agrees I should be able to visit my loved one in a hospital. If he's going to stop short of supporting my rights to marry, which I CuRRenTly HaVE, then I'm not going to vote for him.


I understand he feels he can't make that committment in this Country in this day and age. The loss of my vote won't phase him.

[innerSpaceman]

Originally Posted by About.com (CP's link)

Obama said, "I'm a Christian. And so, although I try not to have my religious beliefs dominate or determine my political views on this issue, I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman."

Barack Obama ... said he would support civil unions between gay and lesbian couples, as well as letting individual states determine if marriage between gay and lesbian couples should be legalized.

"Giving them a set of basic rights would allow them to experience their relationship and live their lives in a way that doesn't cause discrimination," Obama said. "I think it is the right balance to strike in this society."

I am appalled.


This is precisely what I object to. Basing American liberties on religious beliefs. That is tantamount to treason in my book. Exactly the opposite should be the case. Our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness do not have a religious test. They are absolute.

Leaving it up to the States is pathetic. Many of the most important marriage rights are granted only at the federal level.


Furthermore, I agree with the California Supreme Court that separate cannot be equal. To say that it's ok for me to have all the rights and responsibilities of marriage without calling it that is an affront to my dignity and an insult I will not bear. Again, it is only religious belief that would snatch away my current right to have the same societal acceptance and honor that comes distinctly with marriage.



Sorry, CP, but your link did nothing but cement my opposition to Obama.


I hope he wins rather than McCain, but I cannot support his election.

[Tenigma]

Originally Posted by innerSpaceman

Sorry, CP, but your link did nothing but cement my opposition to Obama.

I hope he wins rather than McCain, but I cannot support his election.

You should know that elections often boil down to choosing the person who is either less offensive or a little more likeable than the other.

I'm really very disappointed in your decision, iSm. Voting is the ONE right you have in this country. And you choose to waste it.

[JWBear]

iSm... Hillary Clinton has the exact same position on gay marriage as Obama.

[innerSpaceman]

Originally Posted by JWBear

iSm... Hillary Clinton has the exact same position on gay marriage as Obama.

Then I likely would not have voted for her either.

In California, we have the blessing of our election not matter to the presidential candidates. So we are not bombarded with ads (which I wouldn't see anyway, since I don't watch TV) and they generally don't bother to campaign here.

As such, I have limited opportunities to hear them speak. If I'd seen Hillary speak about her stance on gay marriage rights, she would have lost my support then and there. I think I assumed as much about both candidates, but hearing it from their lips puts a chill in me that I cannot shake.


If Obama tries not to have his religious beliefs dominate or determine his stance on this matter, he needs to try harder. Because right now, he fails.

[flippyshark]

I very much wish that Obama (and Clinton) had the sense and moral rigor to fully support gay marriage. I also wish that Barack, in particular, did not feel the need to wave the God flag so high and so often. On the other hand, I'm in a major swing state (that tends red lately) so I'll have no problem casting my vote for Barry. Still, really society-at-large, get a fvckin' grip.

[scaeagles]

If it matters, I think the government should be out of the marriage business all together.

[Ghoulish Delight]

Originally Posted by scaeagles

If it matters, I think the government should be out of the marriage business all together.

I may or may not agree with that, but as long as it is, it should be available for all.

[Gemini Cricket]

Something is not right. We have a terrific candidate and a terrific VP candidate. We're coming off the worst eight years in our country's history. Six of those eight years the Congress, White House and even the Supreme Court were controlled by the Republicans and the last two years the R's have filibustered like tantrum throwing 4-year-olds, yet we're going to elect a Republican who voted with that leadership 90% of the time and a former sportscaster who wants to teach Adam and Eve as science? That's not odd as a difference of opinion, that's logically and mathematically queer.

Source

JWBear posted the above link in the Random Politics thread.

I'm not good at writing out what's in my brain. But what he writes is exactly what I am talking about.

1. Obama has no game plan right now. We're going to lose. He has much to his advantage, but he's reading from the Gore/Kerry Playbook and thinking he'll succeed where they didn't just because.

2. The press is not liberal. They are run by big corporations who benefited financially from the last 8 years and want to see 8 more. Forget that particle accelerator, CEOs like Rupert Murdoch are f*cking this country and this planet up just to make money.

3. There is no convincing the Christian conservative right of anything. They stick to their party like they do to their religion of choice. Ever try talking to someone about religion and try to sway them? It's impossible. That is now becoming true of a majority of people who vote Republican just because GOP candidates outwardly talk about Christianity and Christian beliefs. The Democrats are in the minority because a lot of them think with their brains and not their bibles and sway. Take iSm for example: liberal, Obama supporting but because he wants to be true to his conscience, he is protest voting. Republicans, conservatives do not do that, they don't stray from their way of thinking no matter what. It's much more black and white for them. And why? Because it's easier to look at things in black and white without having to think about what comes between. The ironic thing is that these politicians are looking to retain their jobs and don't give a sh!t about Christianity, family values. The corruption, the affairs, and the cover-ups that follow demonstrate that.


So what does Obama need to do? He needs to paint McCain as someone who is not a Maverick but someone who follows the Bush playbook. Bush is out of the spotlight for a reason. Because someone told him to vanish. The less we think about Bush, the less we think about comparing McCain to Bush.

I agree with Adam McKay that Obama needs to come up with a slogan that sums up what he feels about McCain and Palin. And repeat it, over and over and over. Something catchy and repeated like that can sway voters. It worked for Bush. Heck, it even worked for Johnny Cochran.

Obama needs to come out swinging and make the country forget that he was eaten alive by Palin. If he's got to dig in the dirt to do it, so be it. The opposing party already has mud under their fingernails. I want to be represented by someone with guts. Obama is not that person right now. I'll vote for him, but the idea of protest voting intrigues me too.