Skip to main content

View Diary: Brendan Eich and Tolerance (162 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Obama depends. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    homogenius

    If he actually opposed gay marriage like he claimed, then yes he was. If it was a statement to provide political cover, then no.

    What did Eich do? As CEO? Nothing, he resigned.

    What could he have done as CEO? Besides ruin Mozilla's brand? Plenty.

    The biggest difference between Obama and Eich, however, was that one of those days in the intervening period was the day that Obama changed his mind. Therefore, we can talk about Obama's bigotry in the past tense, and Eich's in the present.

    •  Again (0+ / 0-)

      You do not know:

      "If it was a statement to provide political cover, then no."

      AND:

      "was the day that Obama changed his mind. "

      What makes that the magic day? Was Obama a raging bigot the day before and did you vote for him?

      See this isn't binary at all.

      •  I already covered what I didn't know. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Tonedevil

        Thus the 'If...then...' clause.

        What makes that the magic day? It's the day he changed from being an anti-gay bigot to not, at least on that particular topic. What's so hard to understand about it? A day that hasn't yet happened for Eich.

        It is binary.

        I'm seriously confused. In once case you have someone who stopped being a bigot, in the other case you have someone who still is a bigot.

        And somehow you're trying to equate the two.

        It's pretty weird.

    •  So Obama is either a bigot or a liar. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dallasdunlap

      Got it.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site