Skip to main content

View Diary: I support Edwards. I rejoice over Obama. (244 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I Was Looking For A Tip Jar... (6+ / 0-)

    ... for this great diary, but ran into gay marriage?  Ugh...

    I guess I'll be disappointing somebody - but gay marriage isn't on my radar for issues this election.

    I got burned out on it last cycle.

    •  It's a civil rights issue -- (5+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      sd4david, nape, serrano, Newzie, SonicT

      -- and civil rights issues are always on my radar.  They never go out of style!

      •   A civil rights issue (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Yeah, by all means - let's get it all fired up.

        Let's pump up the ONE SINGLE ISSUE that a Republican could possibly ride to victory.

        It's gay marriage, stupid!  I don't think so.

        Instead, we first need to secure the civil rights that affect everybody.  Then we get a couple solid appointments to the Supreme Court - and bring the right case forward.

        Voila - you'll actually get gay marriage and can live happily ever after.

        So not only am I thinking of you - I'm thinking of you actually winning once and for all.

        P.S. My real point was that gay marriage had nothing whatsoever to do with the diary.  And I don't believe that's in serious dispute.

        •  Ah, the ol' "winnable strategies" canard (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Mike Erwin

          Abandoning principle in the futile belief that if we give up a few "less important" [to you!] rights, the ruling junta will permit us to keep some other "more important" [to you!] rights.  Um.  Yeah.  How's that working out for you?  

          Civil rights is not now nor has it ever been about one single issue or a list of issues -- it's a "how" thing rather than a "what" thing.  Any firm commitment to equal rights is demolished by bullet-pointing asterisked exceptions to equal rights ("All human beings are created equal.*  [NOTE: *except for gays, lesbians, bisexuals, and transsexuals, void where prohibited by law, may incur substantial penalty for early contract termination, other restrictions may apply.]"

          We can't build a progressive platform based on fear of what conservatives might attack if we put it out there.  We stand for what we believe in because we believe in it, not because it's the least offensive thing others disagree with.

          •  Abandoning Principles? (0+ / 0-)

            Since when did gays lose the right to marry?

            Oh, that's right - you never had it!

            And if you believe that RIGHT NOW is your chance - I suspect that you're bound to be disappointed.

            Obviously this is more important to you than me - but thus far you haven't put anything on the table beyond generalized whining.

            No president or congress is going to decide this issue.  You DO realize that don't you?

            When this right is fully established it will be a product of the Supreme Court - where these issues are always decided in the final analysis.

            So get the right court case and push it all the way to the top.  I'm not sure who's holding you back.  But it's not me, Hillary, Obama or Edwards.

            But in meantime - don't play the purity card on me.  It's completely irrelevant and has no effect.

            AND REMEMBER - the only reason we're discussing this is because it was not appropriate in the diary it was placed in.  

            And since you ignored that point, I'll re-quote from my previous post.  

            "P.S. My real point was that gay marriage had nothing whatsoever to do with the diary.  And I don't believe that's in serious dispute."

            •  Who's "you" in your argument? (0+ / 0-)

              Why are civil rights more important to me than you?  I think you've made some broad assumptions about why equal rights matter to me.

              By the way, who appoints Supreme Court justices?  Any idea why presidents matter in terms of Supreme Court decision processes?  

              As to what's relevant in a discussion about presidential elections, I guess anything that falls under the general umbrella of presidential powers fits, no?  Perhaps you disagree with that as well.

              I think most of us are thrilled about the outcome of the Iowa caucuses.  Yet nothing is 100% good or 100% bad (except Dick Cheney, Karl Rove, Dubya, et al.!).

            •  The right to marry is a human right (0+ / 0-)

              The government (and the churches, for that matter) can't give it, and can't take it away. The government simply refuses to recognize the right and tries to violate it.

              No returns for privilege; full returns for labor! Labor has a right to all that it creates.

              by Mike Erwin on Sat Jan 05, 2008 at 09:10:58 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site