Now I Understand
I’m trying to understand this:
In 2008, the wise, progressive and super-smart voters of California, voted AGAINST gay marriage and FOR Barack Obama.
In 2012, the cousin-fucking, retarded, banjo-playing idiots of North Carolina voted AGAINST gay marriage.
In 2012, the president of the United States voiced his support for gay marriage. May ninth, 2012. Not when he was campaigning. Not when he was a community organizer. Never before in his public life has our current president ever said “Yeah, people who love each other should be treated like everyone else by the government. They should be able to get a permit from the government to… um… love each other… or something. They should be treated equally.”
He said this today. In 2012. The first time.
But the people in North Carolina who decided to vote are ignorant, cousin-fucking retards and our 49 year old president is a hero because at 49, he has said in public that everyone should be treated equally.
Please explain this to me. I am not getting this.
Today’s Two Minutes of Hate: The Voters of North Carolina. Let’s all scream at them at the top of our Facebook lungs for two minutes, shall we?
Comments
10 Responses to “Now I Understand”
Leave a Reply
-
Blog: dean cameron whining Topics:
I think he was always in favor of equality for gay people, but he was afraid of the backlash among many of his core supporters (black and hispanic people who attend church)and he knew the religious nutjobs and teabaggers would jump on it immediately and dwell on yet another non-issue. They will probably accuse him of being gay now because as you know, you can’t support ending the drug war unless you’re a drug addict, and you can’t support equality for homosexuals unless you’re gay… at least in what little mind these rednecks have.
I don’t think he said it as a political move. I think he was basically backed into a corner and shamed into admitting the position he held the whole time.
Not that this helps clarify things at all, but Obama actually did say that before, on the record, back in 1996. He’s spent 16 years going away from that view, and then back to it.
Hooray for politics! And cowardice! And hypocrisy! And other things I should not be saying hooray to! (But not to the voters of North Carolina, or California…they can both suck it. Hooray for them sucking it!)
Obviously, you are smart enough to actually figure this out. (And, for the record, the progressive voters of California include a group which is very religious and very affected by a protracted and intense campaign sponsored by the Mormon church over in Utah, which was bummed by the idea of gay marriage when they weren’t allowed to have the sister-wives thang.)
People are excited because he said what they figured he believed all along. And he said it at a fairly dangerous time for him, right before re-election. I am sure there are people scrambling to figure out whether it cost him more than it hurt him. I know Matt Damon was on the fence and probably has to vote for him again, now.
The real truth is that people are excited because it is something a leader would do, say what was right regardless of the cost. And we no longer expect our politicians to be leaders. Ron Paul says stuff like this constantly, so he is ignored in the media as unrealistic.
You know that’s not true. He said it was because of jesus. Quit apologizing for him.
He’s a cynical coward and people are saying he’s a hero. He’s 49. It’s 2012.
Because he’s so likable and a democrat, people project what they want on to him so, like my friend Paul in the other comment said “he’s probably always been for it but had to do it today’”.
Especially because we know that many many many christians like Obama, and African American Christians are really pro-gay.
How is it dangerous for him? It’s not dangerous for him at all. Matt Damon (say it right in your head like Team America… thank you!) will vote for him now. He’s being called a hero. How in the world is that dangerous for him?
Could it be that he’s a christian and he’s actually opposed to it? Even though he said today that his jesus made him do it? If he’s not religious, is that even worse?
How is it dangerous? Was he flying to Vegas with you?
oh oh oh… and I’m actually baffled by the math on the voters. The same election (you’re japanese?) that gave us Obama in 2008 gave us no gay marriage in 2008. That’s the math. Those are the voters.
It’s not dangerous for him. Here’s my side of the bet: If Obama does not get elected this year. I will re-apply to Ticketmaster. I will call them and actually beg for my job back. I will record it and put it on my web site.
I was not even a little apologizing for him. I’ve been disgusted and disappointed since he claimed we couldn’t afford close Gitmo and that we needed a righteous way in Afganni.
I was trying to explain why people were excited.
Either way, I like more rights for more people, even if it is currently at the level of lip server (mmmmm, lip service).
I’d like to see drugs legalized next, please. Seems like that would hit a bunch of problems at once.
I hear by sentence you to working in a room with a bunch of Hollywood liberals.
Colin, I wasn’t directing the apologizing comment to you. Sorry. I know you’re not. I just disagree that it’s somehow “dangerous” for him to say he supports gay marriage.
Your sentence is a just and fair one and I am ready to do my penance.