Gay Marriage and Osama

When President Bush campaigned yesterday in Greeley, Colorado for the mother of the anti-gay marriage amendment, here's the billboard that greeted him:

[Via ProgressAction Now.]

< Gonzales and Chertoff to Make Crime Announcement | The Real Mike Jones >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    i knew it! (none / 0) (#1)
    by cpinva on Sun Nov 05, 2006 at 03:17:45 PM EST
    that's what this whole "war on terror" is all about. boy, that osama is one sneaky girlie-man!

    How does gay marriage help our cause? (none / 0) (#2)
    by Bigfoot on Sun Nov 05, 2006 at 04:26:59 PM EST
    Would someone kindly explain how the promotion of gay marriage helps the cause of the Democrats?  I can think of quite a few issues that are higher on the priority lists... to name a few..

    1. The war on terra
    2. The tremendous spending deficit
    3. The horrific illegal immigrant invasion
    4. The ghastly loss of manufacturing jobs in America.
    5. The pending crisis of social security.

    I could come up with a dozen more easily.  But here is the biggest reason I can think of for us to drop the gay marriage subject.  Nearly 100 percent of Republicans are against gay marriage, and about 70 percent of Democrats are against gay marriage.  

    There are bigger fish to fry.  When are we going to get serious and play chess with these GOP strategists?  The gay marriage issue can only hurt Democrats and help the GOP.  Anyone care to explain their "gay marriage" strategy for winning any elections?  

    C'est impossible! (none / 0) (#5)
    by Repack Rider on Sun Nov 05, 2006 at 07:19:19 PM EST
    Is it possible to be more obtuse about what the ad is about?

    The point is not that the Democrats are making gay marriage a campaign issue, it is that the Republicans have made it more important than the capture of the most wanted man in the world.

    I thought that only a Republican could be that obtuse.  I stand corrected.


    It doesn't...BUT (none / 0) (#14)
    by kdog on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 10:23:24 AM EST
    its the right thing to do if you believe in liberty, equality, and justice for all.

    Sometimes the right thing isn't popular.  


    ohmigawd! (none / 0) (#4)
    by Kitt on Sun Nov 05, 2006 at 06:10:24 PM EST
    I want that on a bumper sticker!  THAT is absolutely HILARIOUS  - and spot on!

    i submit that..... (none / 0) (#6)
    by cpinva on Sun Nov 05, 2006 at 11:09:32 PM EST
    people like bigfoot, jarobar and jim revel in their ability to be willfully oblivious to the obvious. if they say it isn't so, or it isn't there, then by golly, it isn't, facts be damned!

    Priority List for Walter (none / 0) (#7)
    by Bigfoot on Sun Nov 05, 2006 at 11:21:18 PM EST
    Yes Walter, capturing Bin Laden would be on the priority list way, way, way up ahead of promoting gay marriage.

    No one seemed to want to deal with my question...why does our political strategy for unseating republicans include making gay marriage legal?

    I can only assume no one can think of an answer.  I can't either.  Did Rove come up with this Democratic strategy, for Pete's sake?

    Dealing with the question... (none / 0) (#8)
    by LarryE on Mon Nov 06, 2006 at 01:10:28 AM EST
    ...the only way I can:


    Bigfoot, your "question" has already been dealt with. The billboard was not pushing same-sex marriage, it was mocking GOPpers for trying to make it a central issue.

    Can you name any Democrat who has made advocating same-sex marriage rights a centerpiece of their campaign? Or even a big part, hell, even a small part, of their campaign?

    Such advocacy simply is not part of the Dems "political strategy."

    However, I would like you to source your claim that "nearly 100 percent of Republicans ... and about 70 percent of Democrats" oppose same-sex marriage. The closest I can come to making sense of that is a Newsweek poll from last week, which reported 9% of Republicans and 34% of Democrats (and 24% overall) favoring "FULL marriage rights for gay and lesbian couples" (emphasis in original).

    However, that poll also included the option of civil unions, which gained the support of 27% of Republicans and 23% of Democrats (26% overall) - meaning 36% of Republicans and 57% of Democrats favor legal recognition of same-sex couples.

    In fact, combine those two categories and, the poll reports, you have 50% favoring legal recognition and only 40% opposed (the rest said "unsure").

    If that is the poll you relied on, by dumping "favor civil unions," "oppose any recognition," and "unsure" into one pile, you have seriously distorted the results.

    In line with that, in July a poll done for the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press and the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life asked people if they favored allowing gays and lesbians to marry legally. Some 35% said yes. And when pollsters adjusted the question to in effect include civil unions (which they described as "legal agreements with each other that would give them many of the same rights as married couples"), 52% approved.

    While support for same-sex marriage is a minority position (a significant minority, to be sure, but still a minority), support for some form of legal recognition is not.

    And here's one last thing for you to chew on: Well within my lifetime and perhaps yours, opposition to interracial marriage was higher than opposition to same-sex marriage is today. In fact, it wasn't until 1967 that laws against interracial marriages were struck down once and for all.

    Remember, that something is the minority position now does not mean it will be the minority position forever. Or would you have been among those who in the late 1950s were urging Democrats to drop that whole "civil rights" thing because it was "a political loser?"


    i think i know................ (none / 0) (#9)
    by cpinva on Mon Nov 06, 2006 at 07:43:24 AM EST
    what the problem is: subtlety. apparently, the majority of the population isn't very bright. the result is that subtlety is lost on them, they take everything literally, nuance is a lost cause.

    You guys just don't get it (none / 0) (#10)
    by swingvote on Mon Nov 06, 2006 at 07:51:30 AM EST
    If gays can marry, the terrorists will have won!

    Don't you realize that this whole thing is about homosexuals? Osama is still in the closet, but doesn't  his penchant for long flowing robes make it obvious that he "plays for the other team"? The guys in suicide vests are just a diversion. It's the guys in pink pedal pushers you really need to be worried about!

    Man, how clear does it have to be made for you?

    This ad is dead on. If W. had two active brain cells to rub together, or if Karl Rove was one-tenth as good as everyone thinks he is, George would have come out (no pun intended) and said point blank that we have better things to be worried about than whether Bob and Jim want to spend their lives together as man and wife.

    Bigfoot (none / 0) (#12)
    by Bigfoot on Mon Nov 06, 2006 at 12:04:13 PM EST
    Ooops I'll preview my post next time....

    Meant to say 100%....

    also should be "pen-knife"

    Sorry about that.

    You seem to be confused (none / 0) (#13)
    by aw on Mon Nov 06, 2006 at 12:23:39 PM EST
    about which party you actually support. Why should the Democrats take up the Republican causes that would deny rights to human beings, deny votes to US citizens (because they are not advocating that "anybody" who is not a citizen should vote)or pile on middle-income workers tax burdens (which is the exact opposite of what Democrats want).

    You also seem to be confused about which partly is being "killed" this year.

    In fact, I'd say you're a Republican.  The "right side of the issues" remark is a dead giveaway.

    True terrorism (none / 0) (#15)
    by yeah on Tue Nov 07, 2006 at 08:29:21 PM EST
    I think the designers for this ad intend to highlight how W. uses an honestly amazing brainwashing technique in which he gets what he wants by threatening that if he doesn't get what he wants, the terrorists will win, no matter how illogical or ridiculous, because he banks on a person's fear of being labelled 'terrorist', 'anti-american', and 'bad'.  It has worked since the WTC fell for him, ie: the Iraqi war.