Dear Rachel Maddow, Goodbye.

We are so done. Whatever respect I still had for you has gone when you lied last night, saying that the president is against what happened in NY. Sheer lie. You’ve got a brilliant potential, but until you’ll grow up and stop undermining the most progressive president we had in decades and one of the most progressives presidents ever – I have no interest in what you have to say. Good luck appointing a Republican president and Republican congress. We’ll see how long all the things that PBO did for gay rights will stay in place.
*
*
BTW, Remember when PBO asked David Paterson to quit so Cuomo can run and win the election? Remember the scandal-of-the-day back then? Stupid unprofessional left have no idea how politics works, and that a real civil rights change ALWAYS comes from the people in the streets, or as PBO said again and again: “Change never starts in Washington, change comes to Washington”.

Congrats, New York, congrats civil rights movement, congrats America. This is a great day.

*

*

About these ads

364 thoughts on “Dear Rachel Maddow, Goodbye.

  1. I guess if she’s flooded with lots of e-mail about her lie she will apologize for her outlandish comment about the President. She is as Rhandi Rhodes described from her days at Air America one of those nasty and mean professional lefties….

  2. I cannot believe Rachel misspoke poke like that. The President clearly stated at the LGBT Fundraiser that he believed gay marriage was a state issue. Rachel needs to apologize on Monday for me to watch her show ever again.

  3. She clearly did not see the President urge NY to pass thr bill at the LGTB fundraiser on Jun 23. That this is a state issue And for people that talk about the legality of biracial marrige. It did not come to pass until a Supreme Court case.

  4. Brava, BWD. Rachel is immature and unrealistic and she has blown her chance to have a positive influence on any of the issues she professes to care about. Lie and overreact and smart people start tuning you out. I never did watch her show because, frankly, I don’t waste my time listening to opinions of people I don’t trust. She may be smart, but she misuses her intelligence and her public platform and she has the emotional maturity of a petulant child.

    We are the people that can be counted on to tell the truth. And while none of us, individually, may have as big a microphone as Rachel, we are millions strong. Millions of us working together to tell the truth in every community in every state in the country. We can and we will.

  5. here too. am done. she is immature, and soon will be irrelevant. actions have consequences. she will hear from us. turned off.

  6. As I said on Chipsticks’ site: President Obama just hit on a battalion of Irish warriors !

    More red heads, more of the time !

    My mom is a red head – she would certainly enjoy this picture ….

  7. I turned off Maddow weeks ago.There is no hope for her. She has gone the way of KO.
    But,it is not just Maddow. It is almost like all the liberals on tv have got together and decided to have a little bash Obama club. Yes, I am convinced it is a master plan. I wanted to reach in to the tv screen last night and slap Bill Maher, truly! They all act as if this President has done absolutely nothing, and yes,.. they will pay the price later on for their misguided mis-interpretations.

  8. To my mind, she did not misspeak. She gets overly emotional when it comes to this issue and loses her mind. Remember this was the same woman that said he would never do anything about DADT. She is childish, petulant, hence I have no use for her.

    I think all of us need to take action by writing this woman, and not only that but send those letters to her colleagues and her bosses. Whether they do anything about it or not, they will know that we are calling out her lies.

    I would also like to see us do a video that we could push to make go viral. Just like she and the others relish showing videos of Mitt Romney and others flip flopping, let’s show the PLs in all their glory with their lies, disrespect and distortions of this president.

    And by the way, from hereon, I will never say her name again. Not only do I not watch her, I will give her no power.

  9. Let’s all call the pl radio shows on Monday and tell them off!
    I mean this, it is getting out of hand and it would sure make us feel better.

  10. I think everyone here should send her a note and copy her bosses and colleagues.

    She needs an open letter.

  11. And bill maher said last night that the president does not do anything progressive and that his base will not show up for him???
    I am done with him, too!

    We need to all be together and active on this. They’re deliberately trying to ruin his presidency!

  12. You are right. Until we begin to make them hear from us in record numbers about their childish tantrums, they will continue this mess.

    Someone with a platform similar to her needs to call her out big time.

  13. I’m glad that BWD gently and astutely reminded the PL that they were ready to throw a hissy fit when they learned that President Obama had endorsed Andrew Cuomo for governor. Now they are singing his praises. President Obama also endorsed Gillibrand for senator, and the PL were upset about that too. Now it appears that Gillibrand and Cuomo are the new heroes of the PL. How conveniently short are their memories when it comes to bashing the President?

  14. Here’s a very thoughtful post from Steve Benen on the marriage equality vote in NY.

    THE ARC OF HISTORY BENDS TOWARDS JUSTICE IN NEW YORK:

    Six down, 44 to go ………

    Because of New York’s large population, the new law “essentially doubles the number of Americans who can gain access to same-sex marriage licenses.”

    And it’s another step towards the ultimate goal of true equality. The number of states with marriage equality keeps growing. The number of Americans who support marriage equality keeps growing. The number of policymakers willing to endorse marriage equality keeps growing. The head of Focus on the Family was recently asked about same-sex marriage, and he practically conceded defeat, saying, “We’ve probably lost that.”

    I agree. Equality is inevitable. As the arc of history continues to bend toward justice, most of the country now believes two consenting adults should be legally permitted to get married if they want to. It’s exceptionally unlikely that trend will ever reverse — civil-rights trajectories simply never move that way. Society becomes less prejudiced, less hateful, and less bigoted over time.

    And there’s not much the right can do about it.

    http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/political-animal/2011_06/the_arc_of_history_bends_towar030499.php#

  15. Exactly. But we can remind them of their short or perceived short memories. We need to do a compilation of their lies and distortions, hissy fits, instructions on what they think PBO should or should not say before a speech and throw it back in their faces.

  16. Will write her but Maddow, despite her intelligence, had never been a Cronkhite. Neither steady, measured, nor able to see the bigger picture. No matter what the issue she misses the nuance of our president’s strategy or the broader historical context in which he makes his decision. And few give him credit as a moral man, trying to do what he believes to be right. She is too snarky, swept up in the cant du jour. Let’s call them out and keep workng neighbor to nrleughbot, block by block.

    We are fortunate to have BWD, Chipsticks, the many who write here and on the sites in the blog roll. Yes We Can Together!

  17. Bill Maher decided to feature a Bash Obama fest last night too. And there was only moderate Michael Smerconish to defend the President. I thought it was a little bit delicious though when Richard Engel came on and shut Maher up about the reality of the situation in Afghanistan after Maher was complaining that Obama didn’t yank every single serviceperson out of there yesterday. So many of these professional complainers have no clue about the facts and the multiple considerations of the subject they’re ranting about.

  18. And the Republicans are all real busy today writing thank you notes to Rachel and Maher. They couldn’t ask for more helpful political partners.

  19. Happy birthday BWD!!!!! Chipsticks has a great video for BWD!!! We love you.

  20. I didn’t see Rachel’s comment, but I have a feeling that it is difficult for Rachel to be objective on this topic. I feel that she has a tremendous responsibility as one of the few folks from the left with a national profile, but I would also caution that we should not throw the baby out with the bath water where she is concerned.

    I often disagree with Rachel (her take on the Afghanistan didn’t really flaot my boat and was rather myopic and that fake oval Office Address moment was a disaster).

    But I will say that I appreciate her tenacity as a journalist dealing with actual facts and researching actual stories. It is when she veers into her personal opinions and deep held emotions that usually gets her into trouble! :oP

    P.S. Didn’t know it was your birthday BWD . . . have a great one . . . and thanks again for this blog!

  21. I can accept everything but lying. Even when I have disagreed with her, I always, always respected her opinion, because she’s smart, passionate and her heart couldn’t be in a more right place. But lying about a president who has done so much for gay rights, and never said anything even remotely close to being against what happened in NY yesterday? Nope. I’m done with her.

  22. Happy, Happy Birthday Blackwaterdog. I love what you do for us and this mighty country. A true Warrior Princess who believes in defending our democracy.
    Have a good, no have a spectacular birthday. <3

  23. Happy Birthday, Blackwaterdog!

    Have you seen the birthday video for you at theobamadiary?

    Hope this day is filled with all the wonderful things you so deserve.

  24. LOVE YOU, BWD. I don’t have cable and never watch this BS so I don’t know exactly what’s going on there but I’ve seen videos from time to time and read reports like this and I honestly don’t get it. Why these people have to distort the truth about someone who is clearly on their side and working every single day on their behalf is beyond me. It makes NO sense and must be some sort of commando mentality that trickles down from the ones who sign their paychecks. Because in the end it’s about their myopia and their paychecks. As long as you keep you watching this tripe they all have power. So I really urge you to speak up and make your views known.

  25. Totally disagree. Are you so blinded you are unable to judge when President Obama has made mistakes. This is one of them among many. I hope he will learn as he goes and become a more effective president. When he campaigns on issues we should expect him to stick to his word, like support gay marriage. Another issue he has failed, supporting union rights. We have had tens of thousands protesting all over our country, some reaching close to 100,000 thousand, yet he has said/done very little.

    Maddow was right to call him out. I continue to support her.

  26. BWD, I send you lots of love and best wishes for a fabulous birthday full of friends, family and a lovely fresh cake!!!! You are a gift to us and we are very grateful for your intelligence, great humor and dedication to serving our community. ABRAZOS!!!!

  27. Well . . . seeing as I haven’t been watching her show and haven’t seen the comment in question (I have seen her guest spots on other shows or internet clips) . . . I guess I’m actually done with her too . . . I just didn’t do it with the flair that you did BWD! :o)

    Don’t worry . . . Rachel will come around before election day . . . they always do . . . President Obama has done such a good job that folks feel like they have to try to knock him down a peg to avoid being called “obamabots” or whatever dumb name they are using now.

    Simple fact is that President Obama is already the best President this country ever had, and he still has more than a year left! It is just not fashionable in our modern, criticism based society to acknolwedge that, but it is just true!

    P.S. Thanks for the personal response . . . you made me get a fan girl flutter there! lol

  28. Have a wonderful birthday, blackwaterdog…and thank you for your tireless efforts; you give so much.

  29. The problem with people like Rachel is that it’s not enough to support their cause on principle, they have this childish need for you to BELIEVE in the tenets of their cause. To think like they do. They want PBO to say that he believes that “marriage”, (they want him to use that word) can also be between same sex people, which he doesn’t. He’s not against same sex people getting married, he just doesn’t believe in it himself. And that lack of belief drives them crazy. They want to force THEIR personal beliefs onto the President which is ironic because that’s exactly what they don’t want HIM to do!

    Like I’m not a religious guy. I think it can be destructive and misleading in a lot of cases. But I’m not against anyone practicing religion. Any American should be free to worship any way they choose evn though I don’t personally believe in it. A religious person doesn’t need me to believe in their religion in order for them to worship. I don’t force my lack of faith on them and they don’t force their faith onto me. We both accept and tolerate one another. But some in the LGBT community just cannot accept that. They want every single person that supports their causes to BELIEVE in the cause not just on principle, but believe that they’re correct and pure. It’s childish and counter-productive. And for Rachel Maddow to try and shame the most gay-friendly President in history because he stands with them on principle but not in faith is shameful.

    Gay Thought Police. Exactly what homophobic right-wingers have been screaming about for decades…

  30. BWD – I followed you faithfully at “that other place” and when you moved I came here. I have been so happy ever since.
    HAPPY BIRTHDAY!

  31. Finally you see the light. She’s childish and says really stupid shit sometimes. I stopped liking her over 1 1/2 ago.

  32. BWD, you are so right for her to join the BASH THE PRESIDENT PARADE LIKE THE GREED OVER PEOPLE PARTY, is the bitter end. Wrote a letter to her about the comment the President coming for their money at the NY event really got me mad told to keep her damn money . We and my family will back back the only President that gives a damn about all the people no matter what color or creed or gender they are. and by the way a very Happy Birthday and have many many more.

  33. “Calling out” is a two way street . . . and you need to be sure that what you are saying is actually true when you do the calling! :o)

    President Obama, without the approval of the all knowing pundits, has made more headway on progressive issues than any President in U.S. history.

    That is just a fact . . . we can quibble on strategy . . . but let’s stay grounded in reality as well.

    P.S. You forgot to wish BWD a Happy Birthday!

  34. First, happy birthday Blackwaterdog!

    I was LIVID when I started reading on Twitter about Maddow’s comment. I can report with pleasure that the pushback was fast and fierce. She was called out on her lie immediately including by some very high profile bloggers. I agree that we need to also email Maddow and call her out on her lie.

    I stopped watching Maddow a long time ago (along with the rest of the so-called PL pundits on TV) because she was too “sometimey” as my mother says. Like the rest of the emoprogs Maddow reported emotion as fact. I’m not surprised that lying has been added to the mix. Intelligence doesn’t automatically give you a good judgment or wisdom card. She and her colleagues often came across to me as self-serving and calculating.

    Why people get their politics from entertainers like Bill Maher or Jon Stewart never ceases to amaze me.

    We don’t these petulant, backstabbing children to speak for us. We can do it ourselves.

  35. @ angela wade – I had been following his campaign very closely and don’t remember him making any promises about ssm. As for “his-not-supporting-unions”, how about you talk to the unions first ?

    Ironically, you have blog post titled “Democrats And Their Inability To Circle The Wagons”. LOL.

  36. Wade, you are so wrong in more ways you can count. One the President has done more than any other President for gay rights.He has always been for civil unions and he stopped defending DOMA. As always this President can’t do enough fast enough no matter what he does. We had a jerk who got us in this mess and the Greed over People party do and say what the hell they want but their a those who bash the President.

  37. Never. He said he would repeal DADT and has done much more besides that. When the emoprogs sit home in 2012 and Repubs are back in power let’s see how fast they repeal everything this president has done to support the LGBT community. You only have to look to Florida, MIchigan, Ohio and Wisconsin to see what the future holds under Republicans.

  38. Great commentary StarkyLuv!
    “And for Rachel Maddow to try and shame the most gay-friendly President in history because he stands with them on principle but not in faith is shameful.”
    I would not have been able to say it better.

  39. I think you nailed it there. I had so many arguments with out-of-control gays on gos that couldn’t get it all right now this very minute and it is all PBO’s fault that I gave up supporting them. I just tuned out and I am still tuned out. Meh.

  40. Happy Birthday BWD!

    I did a little bit of pushback to a few folks on the Old Orange who couldn’t help but take not-so-subtle jabs at the President by stating that Andrew Cuomo and Gillibrand are the “fierce advocates.”

    I told them first of all that it is no political sacrifice for Cuomo and Gillibrand to openly express their support for same-sex marriage – given that it’s their constituency as elected officials in a deep blue “progressive” state with a significant proportion of LGBT voters.

    Secondly, President Obama paved the way for and endorsed both of these candidates for election – even when the progressive community was not open to either of them. Fierce advocacy comes in different ways – from behind the scenes laying the groundwork to front and center activism. I voted for President Obama, Governor Cuomo and Senators Gillibrand/Schumer, all of whom (in addition to mayor Bloomberg) played their respective roles in bringing this about.

  41. I wrote her a very long email…I never write anyone..but enough is enough!!

    I am so fed up with the constant ..”it is never enough” from the left..I could scream!!

    There has never been a president that has done more than this one for gay rights…it is so tiirng to keep saying this over and over.

    Anyway..I am over Rachel Maddow.

  42. President Obama campaigned and asked people “not to give the republicans back the keys” there is nothing he can do about people giving them back the keys. He didn’t lead a movement but he also didn’t stand in the way of people forming a movement. He’s the President and NOT a activist…..he can’t lead a movement against his own administration, that’s what actavist are suppose to do. Everybody wants him to do their job, the actavist want him to be the leader of their cause and the congress wants him to pass laws….it’s time people get in their lane and do what they’re suppose to do from that place.

  43. dotster…I saw that last night and thought Engel was brilliant. All I could say to myself as I listened to Maher was ,”Oh my god…you are so shortsighted!” Engel has the cred, Maher does not.In fact, now that I think about it….Rachel knows and respects Richard Engel…maybe he can school her about the political realities of how things in the real world work. Funny…it didn’t look like those happy people in the streets gave a tinkers damn about what PBO thought as they celebrated their glorious victory last night in the streets of NY. They don’t need PBO’s personal validation…his actions on LBGT issues should speak for themselves. Anyone else would have given lipservice, at least he actually works on the issues at the Federal level that will make their lives better.Last time I checked, he was the President of the United States, NOT the President and the GOV of all 50 states! Congradulations to LGBT people everywhere on this momentous victory that has been long overdue. You were the change that you wanted.

  44. I am not done with Rachel Maddow.

    She has done and said a few things that made me mad and made me to call up MSNBC at 212-664-4444 and strongly let her and her team have it.

    I didn’t like the crude and crass behavior of RM on giving her presidential address to the nation back during BP oil spill in 2010. I don’t like her condescending attitude on addressing many of the stands the president has taken where Afghanistan and Iraq were concerned. Her mockery of the speech the president made in Dec of 2009 was infuriating. Then her comments yesterday for the president not wanting what happened in NY yesterday was a flat out lie.

    My attitude is calling and writing. Disengagement? No. The professional left, the few of them have the microphones and the websites, and they are the ones that get invited to speak for the left.

    This is why I really love what BWD is doing with this site. But it must also not limit Us. We have to call, write and organize to change minds. The media is not going to do it and the right echo chamber media machine want the political system all to themselves.

    I love the Call The Media directive on this site. That we should and must DO.

    So friends lets let RW have it today.

    People call her at 212-664-4444. People write MSNBC at RM blog. Being a LGBT isn’t a license to lie and emotionally distort facts.

    LGBT community just want their own rights. I get that. That in itself, should not be an exclusivity to what is needed for all Americans; jobs, infratructure, better education, energy policy, etc.

    We have just got to be willing to take it to whomever, friends and foe alike.

    My late Dad’s motto and mine:

    Not to Equal, But To Excel.

  45. “supporting union rights. We have had tens of thousands protesting all over our country, some reaching close to 100,000 thousand, yet he has said/done very little. ”

    WTF? You must be listening to alot of the PL. The president did speak on the union issue you just wasn’t listening. You probably busy listening to the PL.Why would the president get involved in a state issue?

  46. My commentaries are in no way, shape, or form in a slight to BWD. I am saying, let Us try and make it difficult for those who distort, lie or misinform people about what the president said.

    BWD has provide this site for many of Us. I know where she stands.

    The rest of Us, let Us support BWD with out relentless effort in making RM and anyone else that lies about the president that we are not only watching them, but lies have consequences.

  47. I second all this, hopefruit. I’m a fellow New Yorker, and Andrew Cuomo was elected with 65% of the vote! He can do just about anything he pleases. We like him, we all loved his father. There are a lot of conservative areas in this state, but NYC is as blue as it gets (overlooking Bloomberg for the moment) and that’s half the population of the state.

    A very happy birthday, BWD! Thanks for this wonderful site.

  48. Hi Angela
    I differ greatly w/your assessment of PBO’s ability to keep his word. He is only 1/3 of government. Sometimes he gets a few dems to support him but no repugslugs. I think a careful review of this record with regard to unions and gay marriage will show amazing progress in unexpected ways. I think it is dangerous to expect perfection form any politician especially when they are operating with one hand tied behind their back. It feels like you might need to so some careful research.

  49. Happy Birthday, BWD:) I hope you get whatever fills you with joy and laughter. Enjoy your special day!

  50. Starky, I agree entirely with your post. I would like to use some of your comments in my e-mail to Rachel. I hope it’s ok. Great post>>

  51. Happy Birthday, BWD! And thank you for all you do to support our President. I often wish people would be quiet for a moment and reflect before they speak out. I remember hearing the President say that his views on gay marriage were evolving. What a brave thing to say in this culture of 100% or nothing! President Obama understands the struggle of people who will accept nothing but equal status and he supports them in any way he can. Societies change over time and it is everyone’s responsibility to make sure that we will move towards more equality and justice for all. But we don’t get there by denouncing those steadily walking with us even if their pace is slower than that of the most ardent advocate moving with the single-minded intensity. President Obama is the President of all Americans, and his thoughtful, compassionate and unifying mindset is an immeasurable asset for moving the country forward.

  52. I agree. I understand our concern with all the misrepresentations out there, but these people take so much energy from better things. How many people actually watch Rachel? I am surrounded by liberal democrats and don’t know a soul who wouldn’t have to take a minute to bring her to mind. People are too busy to pay these people much attention. And not angry enough to want to engage all their rage. Did I get it right that someone posted here recently that only 3 million people watch cable news? And of that, a small proportion are watching MSNBC. If that’s true, they’re irrelevant. I think it’s important to push back, and the msm in general is a nightmare, but in my circles I don’t see a soul paying attention to these ranters.

  53. Congratulations BWD. This is exactly what we need to do: fight back! Deny them the ratings and attention they seek . I sent her a similar email on Wednesday when I saw her reaction to the President’s address regarding Afghanistan on The Last Word with LOD.

    **************************************
    Rachel,

    I won’t be watching your show anymore. This is unfortunate, because I used to like your reality based analysis of politics. Sadly, over the past 2 years, bashing President Obama has become de rigueur to be part of the cool kids club and it has been painfully disappointing to see you toe that line. I should have given up on you a long time ago. By the time you pulled your PB stunt, I was only watching sporadically. But you know what, as I was watching you respond to President Obama’s address tonight (on The Last Word) I suddenly realised that even by being a sporadic viewer, I was enabling you and your fellow PL colleagues, including LOD, CU and ES.

    So long Rachel. I dare say I will not miss your show. Why put myself through the grief, especially since I can find excellent political reporting and analysis on the following blogs:

    p m carpenter’s commentary
    ThePeoplesView.net
    The Washington Monthly (Steve Benen)
    The Obama Diary
    The only adult in the room

    I sincerely hope you don’t succeed in your goal of derailing President Obama’s prospect for re-election in 2012.

    *********************************

    For the longest time, I kept going back to watching those PL shows on MSNBC even though doing so was at times gut-churning, depressing and discouraging; but NO MORE. And you know what?… It’s so liberating !

    Those people have no interest in seeing PBO re-elected, so I have decided to turn off the TV to stop giving them the ratings and the power to continue their dis-information campaign against President Obama and his administration. The more viewers they lose, the more irrelevant they become.

    Instead, I will focus my energy on spreading the word about PBO’s true record of accomplishments and getting him re-elected in 2012.

    Fired up and ready to go !
    Obama / Biden 2012

  54. Good morning BWD if i had a million dollar i would share with you for all the work you do. I can only just come here and help out where i can and surround my self with wonderful people. All collected and gathered by you and your effort. Happy Birthday Lady. I love you and hope you have many many more.

  55. I heard Richard Wolfe defending PBO also, on Stephanie Miller’s show about Afghanistan. He said you can’t draw down all troops overnight, even i fyou wanted to. There are a lot os issues like removal of equipment and other things to consider.

  56. Rachel was not only blasted on twitter last. The comments on Huff Post was also blasting her. The best way is to stop watching for a while and i hope someone call her out on her lie.

  57. I tend to agree with Nashville. Rachel should get a tweet-spanking for this, but she remains a good liberal. No one takes the Rethugs down like her and at a time of wall to wall conservative media in radio, tv and print, i’m glad she is there even if she shoves a foot in her mouth now and then.

  58. HAPPY BIRTHDAY BWD! The video tribute to you by Chipsticks over at TOD is just too precious! I hope your day is filled with smiles and laughter.

  59. Anglea,
    You need to pay attention to the details because the media does not. Last week, the President and the Labor Relations board filed suit against Boeing because of their union busting in the production of their new plane. In addition,also last week, the President and HIS labor relations board changed the rules for negotiating contracts to make it easier. The new rules will take effect in 30 days. Please go to the AFLCIO website and find out for yourself. I am going to a protest next week to PROTEST my GOP governor and his union busting/public education killing ways. You are totally incorrect. You are blaming the WRONG PERSON. I am an ACTIVE union member. The GOP is killing us all around the country. The President appointed Andy Stern (former SIEU President) to the labor relations board amid STIFF criticism from the GOP. GW Bush was the most anti union President in our history, besides Reagan that is. Where are you getting your information?
    Are you basing your information on Ed Shultz? I am really confused.

  60. Rachel Maddow has been off my list since practically the day after the inauguration in ’09. She has stupidly prostituted her integrity and intellect to win viewers and attention.

    Good riddance.

    Congratulations, NY!

  61. Dedicated to our Wonderful BWD…..coming to you from PBO & Michelle favorite artist

    Steve Wonder.

    We Love you BWD:-)

    Say it loud “HAPPY BIRTHDAY TO YOU”

  62. I won’t stop watching Rachel. I think 99 percent of the time she’s standing by what our President is doing, certainly she has blasted the airwaves with what he’s already done to inform people he’s not just bush-whacking. You have to realize gay issues are a big priority for Rachel for all the obvious reasons, though that does NOT excuse what she said last night, and this was one of those few times I wrote Rachel to ask how she could distort what the President said. Frankly, I was taken aback when I heard what she said, and it pissed me off.

    Having said that, I will repeat, she’s one of our better anchors and mostly she does her homework. Write her, express your disdain for her distortion, and realize she is extremely myopic about this issue and needs to be informed that she is. She may be so extreme as to think if she uses our President as a wedge to get people riled up, that gay issues will progress faster. She couldn’t be more wrong if that was her MO with that segment last night. Rather, I think she only pissed off a lot of people. Did she even listen to the accolades given to the President by leading gays(?). I think she jumped the gun with some kind of emotion diatribe. Maybe today she will think about how her message was not only wrong, it turned off many and certainly what she said was not helpful to the cause.

    I like Rachel. No one is right all of the time.

  63. You are right evonic President Obama is and has been the most Gay-friendly President will the gay comunity ever had, Bubut not to worried The latino, and black comunities strongly support this president, for those comunities the gay issues are not their concern.
    BWD said better if they want a Republican President they are welcome. We should not panic and focus on the President he needs our support and he has it.

  64. I will also send her an email but most importantly, I will let my clicker to the talking. I used to like Rachel Maddow and thought she was very smart. She is cut from the same cloth as Dan Choi. I am very happy and proud of the State of NY but it is one of a few states that has allowed Gay Marriage. The tide is turning that NO one should be discriminated because of their sexual orientation anywhere in this country. NO one should have their basic rights voted away by a majority vote.

  65. I rarely watch her anymore and I think that I watched Ed Schultz twice and became disgusted. Sometimes as she begins her rant you just want to scream “Get to the point already!” Unfortunately, people like her, Olbermann, Schultz, et al, are beginning to chase away the moderates in the party. I was afraid that MSNBC would tack even further to the left once Olbermann began his show because of a ratings war. Everybody loses in this one.

  66. Angela,
    I will try this again,. My post did not go through. I am a union member. You are completely WRONG about the President and unions. He is helping us fight the union busting every day. Is he walking the streets? Of course not. That is OUR job. Change has to come from us! I will be doing it next week to protest my UNION busting governor. He appointed Andy Stern to the labor relations board, amid still GOP criticism. The President has approved and worked with Hilda Solis, Labor Secretary, and the labor relations board to make it easier for unions to organize. He did these things becasue he is committed to unions. The unions at GM were given an important seat at the table. Here:
    (from Afl-CIO website blog just this week:

    Legislature Nearing State Budget Deal
    As this week concludes, and only six days are left before the budget deadline, the Legislature is almost at a budget agreement. The 2011-2012 state spending plan is rumored to be $27.149 billion. The deal, which has primarily excluded any input from House or Senate Democrats, consists of all cuts, and only a small portion of the State’s growing surplus.

    Pennsylvania’s Public Schools are Under Attack
    As the June 30th budget deadline draws near, so does the intensity to move several pieces of unrelated legislation. This year, Pennsylvania’s public schools are under attack. Governor Corbett is demanding legislation that requires referendum for school district property tax hikes above the rate of inflation. The Pennsylvania AFL-CIO OPPOSES such legislation and will support all amendments that offer exceptions to the backend referendum, specifically those dealing with special education, pensions and construction.
    There is also an 11th hour push to pass “Taxpayer Funded School Voucher” legislation. We are urging all union members to contact their State Senator and State Representative to oppose any efforts to impose “Taxpayer Funded School Vouchers”, or any efforts to amend voucher language into an EITC (Educational Improvement Tax Credit) bill in any form in Pennsylvania.

    Taxpayer funded vouchers COST MONEY. Any school voucher proposal will cost money – even a “limited” voucher directed to students attending or living in the boundaries of a specific school or school district, such as Year 1 and Year 2 of either Senate Bill 1 or legislation similar to Representative Christiana’s proposal. Initial cost projections for such a voucher proposal could be at least $400 million annually, creating an unfunded liability for Pennsylvania taxpayers.

    Taxpayer funded vouchers HARM STUDENTS. Voucher proponents state they are the only way to “rescue” students from failing schools. In fact, less than 10% of students currently attending a “low performing” public school would utilize a voucher under SB 1 or similar legislation targeted at such schools or school districts. Yet limited resources would be siphoned from these public schools for a small number of students, rather than being used to provide EVERY student with real education reform – qualified teachers in every classroom, greater parental involvement to promote student achievement, quality early childhood education, tutoring programs, and supervised after-school programs that provide extended learning opportunities in a safe environment.

    Taxpayer funded vouchers have NO ACCOUNTABILITY. Voucher schemes send taxpayer dollars to private school operators with no requirements that they demonstrate how they are doing teaching students. Private schools that receive taxpayer dollars would not be required to implement the PSSA (Pennsylvania System of School Assessment) like public schools. Although some private schools do administer assessments, they are not required to do so, and the results are not public information. Taxpayers could be paying for students to go to schools that are academically worse than their current public schools.

    ” The National Labor Relations Board, thanks to appointments made by President Obama, approved new rules in union elections this week that will speed up the election process to help prevent employers from harassing and intimidating workers trying to form unions. Under the new rules, legal challenges over voter eligibility issues will not take place until after the union election is held; this will eliminate delay tactics used by companies that conduct anti-union campaigns to harass, intimidate and fire union supporters.

    Both Pennsylvania AFL-CIO President Bloomingdale and Secretary-Treasurer Snyder praised the changes which are consistent with the intent of the National Labor Relations Act, which is to encourage workers to form unions for a better life, not prevent them from forming unions. The rules will be implemented after a 75-day public comment period. They could be revised during this comment period.

    In a major victory for organized labor which could grow our ranks by as many as 40,000 new members, Transportation Safety Administration employees elected the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE) as their exclusive union representative with an 8903-8447 vote over the National Treasury Employees Union. AFGE National President John Gage in a statement said his union is delighted that the Transportation Security Officers, (TSO’s) now will have the full union representation they rightly deserve. AFGE thanks the TSO’s for their support and faith in our union”.

    Labor leaders appreciate what the Presdeint has done and know that he supports them and us.
    Focus your outrage on the people that are causing the problem please.

  67. Happy BIRTHDAY, BWD…wow. You do so much for all of us. I wish for you all the glory of peace on this special day.

  68. Sorry, the whole message was not supposed to come through here. I was agitated.

  69. He never ever campaigned on gay marriage. He only said he supported civil unions and he would repeal DADT. Promise kept.

  70. http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2011/02/obama-on-wisconsin-budget-protests-an-assault-on-workers.html Please note Mr. Boehner’s response, and then ask all those auto workers and their suppliers how they feel about having jobs that were going to get kicked to the curb.Then ask the manufacturing sector in America how they feel as good union jobs are coming back to them.Was this because of the magic fairy? No, it was because of the hard behind the scenes work that the President does every single day to put Americans back to work in good paying jobs that can support their families and the communities they live in. Just because the President isn’t bombastic in everything he does, does not mean he’s not working toward that end.Please go check out What is Working site…I’m certain that there are union jobs in there somewhere.Is the President perfect? No…but if you put that expectation on him then it is you who will ALWAYS be disappointed.Come join the grown ups in the room.The man is not a dictator,he is a reasoned, intelligent adult who not only has to fix the past, but pave the way for the future.With two hands tied behind his back, it would seem.It’s unrealistic to believe that you would get everything you want…or maybe you always did, and that’s the problem I could be wrong but I sense some entitlement creeping in here..I would be interested to know what other mistakes this President has made….as you feel he has made many. If you think he has let you down, then I think you weren’t listening, and I want you to imagine what the country would look like had things gone the other way….and what it would look like if they go the other way in 2012….what he has challenged ALL OF US to do,is to be the catalyst for our own change. He is not your father, he is the President of ALL Americans…left, right and center.I wish certain things were handled differently in some cases myself, but I see that this is the first President in my lifetime….and if that’s you in the picture, I will tell you that I am a good deal older than you…you look like my daughter’s age…that has worked so hard and tirelessly for the people that elected him to serve this great country.And despite every catastrophic thing that he has had to deal with along the way, he has still fought harder for you than anyone else …..and the fact that it doesn’t seem to be enough, says more about you, than it does about him.I hope that you stay here with this community of people that BWD has drawn to her…it is a wonderful, caring, intelligent community. Though we disagree at times,we are free to discuss..but facts are the order of the day.I hope you stay and participate and begin to understand just HOW EFFECTIVE this President truly is. Welcome.

  71. Maddow was not the last straw for me; indeed, the straw that ultimately broke the camel’s back for me was delivered long ago. How can supposedly smart politically astute people end up behaving like political neophytes in words and in actions? How can you fix your mouth to say that President Obama has been a disappointment or that President Obama didn’t want the civil rights victory that happened last night in New York’s statehouse? How can a President that spent whatever political capital he had in pushing forward a Health Care Bill and DADT and Wall Street Reform and every other goddamn bill that has vexed so many Presidents in the past, be considered a disappointment? These fuckers act like that President Obama awoke one morning and went down to the Health Care Bill store and picked up a HCB like one would pick up a newspaper. So apparently whatever President Obama achieved in his two and a half years in office was not really that hard and that any old President could have done it if they wanted to. See people, my greatest joy will come when these people have their “uh oh” moment, and they realize that President Obama is not in office anymore. So to all the Maddows, Mahers, Schultzs, Olbermans, and the Professional Left, criticize President Obama all you want to, but you had better have something better to offer to the people.

  72. And we all understand why you were righteously agitated, Maggy. Feel free to blast away any day.

  73. I think the best ratings Rachel has gotten so far is just over 1.5 million, at best 2 million. When you think that 750,000 people voted for Nader, you can imagine how completely ineffective she is at reaching a substantial part of the electorate. This is what happens when you let children with brains in front of an audience.

  74. Happy Birthday BWD!

    Just as the Republicans are trying to sabotage the economy by opposing anything that would help its recovery these talk show personalities are doing the same thing with this administration.

    You think about it. KO’s show became popular because of the discontent with GWB and there didn’t seem to be a voice on our side. So from his show spawned all these other celebrity host. Rachel, Ed and LO got their start this way.

    Without GWB to bash they have now transferred that to PBO. They want to keep their viewers coming back for more so they stay in constant panic and controversy. Rachel has a decent staff that does their homework regarding “most” other policy matters but when it comes to LGBT policy she looses sight of reality and goes completely off the rails.

    These people don’t speak for me or the majority of progressives. They bring on people that basically look and talk just like them to reinforce their own opinions. Other than an occassional special event when I will tune in these people stopped getting rating from me a long time ago. Conservative media don’t eat their own the way we that we do.

  75. Here’s a bit of info regarding R Maddow……No wonder!!!

    Distinguishing herself from others on the left, Maddow said she’s a “national security liberal” and in a different interview that she’s not “a partisan.”[35][36] The New York Times called her a “defense policy wonk” who is writing a book on the role of the military in postwar American politics.[35][33] During the 2008 presidential election, Maddow did not formally support any candidate. Concerning Barack Obama’s candidacy, Maddow said during the primaries, “I have never and still don’t think of myself as an Obama supporter, either professionally or actually.”[37]

  76. Thanks. You explained it the way I would have if I had the time or the inclination. Can’t be bothered with cry baby adults.

  77. Happy Birthday BWD! The talking heads have not had a home in my teevee for six months now, don’t miss them at all.

  78. I didn’t watch Rachel because I don’t watch cable “news” very much at all, but like Kay in SF wrote, Rachel can be good for our side.

    But on gay issues she has been wrong about PBO’s intentions and efforts. He has made ENORMOUS progress for the LGBT community in two years.

    Just watch his speech from July 23rd and consider these quotes:

    “I believe that gay couples deserve the same legal rights as every other couple in this country.”

    “DOMA is wrong; it’s unfair…and that it is why the Justice Department will no longer defend it in court.”

    Obviously, he will defer to the states on marriage. It is necessary politically. But I know where his heart is, and Rachel could not have been more unfair. This is why BWD said Rachel lied.

    A final point. If the other day, PBO had endorsed the effort in New York, it very well could have given the wavering Republicans a reason NOT to vote for gay marriage in NY.

  79. Does Bill Maher think none of us will remember that he was pro Bush’s Iraq war until it was apparent that we were not winning it?

  80. Happy Birthday BWD!

    What a cute video of the President singing Happy Birthday. Have a terrific day and think only good thoughts. Everyday is a gift and you are OUR gift.

  81. These PL pundits don’t care whether or not a Republican is in office. Michael Moore didn’t suffer when Bush was in office – in fact, he became rather famous and made money off his movies. These pundits are quite wealthy and do not benefit from Wall Street reform or Health Care Reform. They are selfish because they perch from positions of relative wealth and power.That’s why Olbermann didn’t find it necessary to vote – he would have been perfectly fine with a John McCain/Palin Presidency. And just like the far-right MSM punditry deceives poor disenfranchised Republicans into buying their crap, the far-left MSM punditry tries to deceive poor Democrats into following them.

    Rachel Maddow is from Massachusets – she could have gotten married years ago if she wanted. But she hasn’t – because that is not a priority for her. Obviously, she has been able to live a prosperous and fulfilling life without being married. Just as Cornel and Tarvis haven’t spent a day in inner city Detroit or Harlem working on the ground with the people who live there. But they will prance around from one cable network to the next braying and neighing about what the President has or hasn’t done. These pundits are inauthentic as spokespersons for the groups they claim to represent.

  82. I echo your thoughts as I believe Gays should be able to have Civil Unions, but Churches should be able to accept or reject marrying them in their own church. Many still believe God designed Man and Woman to compliment each other and procreate children. This belief encompasses marriage being of both man and woman. It does not mean that two men or two women would not make great parents or should not marry one another. I feel President Obama has his own personal feelings based on his own personal religious history and he does not let his own beliefs interfere with his governing. To me it involves the separation of church and state so trying to force someone to believe as you do does not work nor should it work.

  83. Me, too. I completely tuned out after Prop 8. It was pretty difficult to find anyone on the streets opposing Prop 8 in my town (here in CA), but there were hundreds of people on every corner supporting Prop 8. I had no idea which side was good or bad, and it was hard to find info on it. There was one day through the entire Prop 8 drama that I saw a young man of about 23, standing by himself with a hand scribbled sign, opposing Prop 8. I

    Then, when it passed, all the gays came out of the woodwork screaming about how unfair it was that something they didn’t do everything in their power to stop actually went through. I’m sure there were many who worked against the proposition, but the ones with the microphones didn’t do a thing. Although they were the first people to start complaining after the fact. They saw the streets flooded with the same people that I did. But they waited for someone else to do something about something they believed in. And to be honest, I was petitioning for other issues, and I thought to myself “if they don’t care about it, then I’ll spend my energies elsewhere”.

    The loudest ones have been the laziest ones.

  84. She resolves her guilt about the REAL reason that she can’t bring herself to “actually” support him by bending over backwards with that dolt Michael Steele. Sounds familiar? Yes it does — like the baggers who LOVE them some Herman Cain….

  85. Birthday Greetings all the way from the Caribbean. Don’t let these irrational,kneejerkers upset you on YOUR day .Pay them no mind,as my old aunt used to say. And for the coming year,- love,laughter and light . For the blog pysche..don’t let ‘them ‘ get to you, ..soldier on smartly, keep their feet to their fire with every nuance, and don’t let up for one second.
    Enjoy. Warm hugs.

  86. Good ole common sense would tell you you can’t just withdraw a presence after you’ve changed the landscape. These pundits-cum-amateur politicians are certifiably ridiculous and very short sighted. It’s why they don’t get my time.

  87. The problem with these people who never work to get things done, but rather just sit on TV complaining about every other hard working person – they don’t understand what it actually takes to make things happen. It’s an immaturity that is breathtaking. And deep down, they admire Republicans and their bullying ways; and were probably bullied as kids, or not part of the “cool crowd”. The shame is that they don’t hold any value in integrity or process or keeping promises. They would rather that President Obama play politics with every issue, and go after the cheap thrills of saying the right thing at the right time, but never actually accomplishing anything. They’d be thrilled with that. They are like grade school kids who have never learned temperance or the virtue of perseverance and playing by the rules.

  88. After that statement, I’m done with Maddow too. In no way has the president ever indicated that he is “against” gay marriage.

    You watch — if he wins a second term, gay marriage will be on the table at the federal level.

  89. Not true Angela Wade. The president has always made his position about gay marriage very clear from the beginning. He is for all civil unions and all the same rights as marriage but thinks marriage is between a man and woman. He has never said anything other than that throughout the campaign and today. He did say that his beliefs are evolving but he is not there yet. I believe he would DO nothing to stop gay marriage and would not get in the way of any state going in that direction. He has also stopped his administration defending DOMA in courts.

  90. Yes, their memories are really short. Thom Hartmann was going on about Elliot Spitzer the other day, saying he could have been FDR as President if he hadn’t been derailed (notice, it wasn’t Elliot’s fault). But,I can assure you,Thom Hartmann probably said similar things about President Obama, and he would be just as disappointed in “President Spitzer” today because Spitzer would have been facing the same headwinds, and he wouldn’t have had the integrity of President Obama to still get stuff done.

  91. Don’t listen to PL talk radio but more than willing to call in however many and let my voice be heard. Anyone has names and numbers they can impart?

  92. Hey donna , thats a good observation. have’nt thought of it that way.

  93. She really seems to have a short attention span, doesn’t she? When Don’t Ask Don’t Tell was repealed she seemed to be Obama’s biggest fan for a while. Now it’s all, what have you done for me lately again.

  94. I agree that what this is really about is Gay Rights people trying to re-define the notion of “marriage” – which is a religious notion bottom line. I’m not religious either, but I respect the right of religious people to preserve the idea of marriage as between a man and a woman, and to not allow the state to effectively re-define for them and for the state a purely religious institution to a commonplace civil idea.

    Civil unions accord the same menu of rights permitted to married couples and that is what Gay rights advocates need to be focused on, as these are protections that are within the province of government, NOT the ability to redefine for everyone what marriage is. Instead, they want to now push the envelope and force the government to tread in the realm of the religious to redefine a purely religious notion into civic terms, rather than seeking its civil analog. What kind of warped sausage will come from this no one really knows, but the government has no business here: separation of church and state, remember.

    I honestly think by taking civil unions into the realm of gay marriage, there could be some serious backlash and unintended consequences behind this thrust. Gay Marriage is an oxymoron, no matter how much the thought police want to chide folks to be-lie-ving that it isn’t.

    Rachel is very smart, but smarts don’t equal Wisdom. Ever. When will this American society grasp this concept?

  95. Get Rachel Maddow again! Get her again! I’m so dog tired of this woman I could scream. Enough already! Enough! I want her gone from MSNBC! Tired of this ish! Did you hear me, tired!

    Lying liars and the lies they tell! I want Rachel Maddow out!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    PS…Happy Birthday, BWD! I didn’t know we share the same birthday? Cool!

  96. Excuse me, but in this instance I think you are over-reacting. I agree that on LGBT issues she can get “overwrought” but she is spot on about a whole bunch of different issues and she has taken time to remind everyone of how much Pres. Obama has done. It’s a good thing to let her know you object to what she said but to then say, “She’s dead to me.” seems like a bridge too far.

  97. Happy Birthday BWD! I also used to follow you at that other place we no longer go to. Followed you here and you introduced me to The Obama Diary. So thank you also for that and for all the information you bring us each and every day. I don’t comment that much but I am here every day. Thank you again for all you do.

  98. It would have been nice also if you’d told her you’ll now rely on her old radio colleague, Randi Rhodes, one of the few sensible and enlightened people in msm. We don’t have to limit ourselves to the net, print, and tv political personalities. Randi is fantastically funny, smart, direct, and loyal. Just my 2 cents :-D

  99. Charmed-
    I agree with what you said about everyone expecting PBO to do their job and that they do not see where it would be totally inappropriate for him to take over their position. They all expect him to lead them. A President has a tightly defined job. Just like we have a role as supporters of PBO to fill.
    To the person saying PBO has failed the Gays-
    I followed the two year campaign daily and never heard PBO say he supported Gay marriage. He said he supported Civil Unions and Civil Rights. He said Watch me! as far as his support of Gay issues. He has more than fulfilled his promises. Besides everything PBO supports engenders an immediate response from the GOP against it even if they personally were for it before he came out in support of it. I think PBO has learned it is better not to step into situations that are out of his jurisdiction as it would only create havoc and stir up more opposition due to those who oppose everything he stands for. The GOP have not been strong Gay supporters and PBO has done more to advance the causes than any other president.

  100. Happy Bday to BWD! and in her honor I suggest we all donate to the Obama campaign today. The final push is on before the deadline. Let’s show them that Obama’s real base supports him with vigor. I want to make clear that the MSM meme that Obama has lost his base is a big fat lie. So donate if you can, whatever you can. I think BWD would like that gift more than anything.

  101. Not that shocking. There are actually a lot of liberals and dem voters that still frequent huffpuff. I go on there occassionally myself which is where I found the article. However I watched her show online and saw nothing about that comment she made that the president was against what happened in NY. My suspicion is that they edited it out as they realized that this would anger a lot of people.

  102. africa, nicely stated. Everyone at the station needs to know that we will not patron a station that allows that kind of propaganda.

  103. I TOLD OFA’ers and BWD bloggers THAT RACHEL MADDOWS, ED SHULTZ, and Keith Olberman are a part of the Corporate MSM and they do their MASTERS bidding. I have never liked Rachel or Ed. Nor Bill Mahr on HBO. They have never fully supported this president. If Hillary was in the Whitehouse it would be a different story or would it seeings how their MASTERS are of the FAR RIGHT lunacy persuasion.

    I also informed ya’ll that I stopped watching MSM in 2003. We all know what happen that year (The Iraq invasion and the MSM hysteria behind it). Give yourself a BREAK….DON’T WATCH!!!

  104. hopefruit2, as always, very reasoned words. Nothing but truth, and I do so appreciate your knowledge.

  105. Starky although I’m a man of FAITH I totally agree with your post. Some in the Gay community are over reaching and biting the hand that feeds it and that is the most Progressive Prez on LGBT rights in US history. They better take note before its too late.

  106. I’m with BWD. Someone like Rachel has a lot of credibility – so to issue a statement like “the President is against what happened in NY”, as though it’s the truth – that is unforgivable. Many people will believe her, as though she’s got some inside information,when we have actually seen this President put his entire presidency on the line for gay causes (especially with the military folks during a time of war), and we’ve seen that he has more integrity in his little finger than most of these so-called pundits combined! She’s lost me as a viewer. There was just no need for this. And in an election year! The fact that she’s been sucking up to Michael Steele was bad enough. But to malign the President like this – she’s lost all credibility, and so what good is she as a journalist after that?

  107. ………..and I re-iterates SOME GAYS folks. Because there are plenty of GAY voters that support President Obama. Rachel Maddow and Dan Choi don’t represent that entire demographic.

  108. Donna, great points. I realized long ago, these shows are staged like an American Idol or DWTS, even as inauthentic as WWF bouts. It is pure entertainment and we have been duped in the past for relying on them for educated analysis. Thank goodness for BWD, WSY, TOD and so many other rational sites, we no longer have to consign our time to this drivel. I rarely turn on my tv, atleast haven’t relied on it in over a year….only in a major event. Otherwise, click click click I go with the keyboard.

  109. So true EDP4BHO. I am a big Randi Rhodes fan and listen to her everyday. Randi tells the truth and knows what this president is doing against all GOP odds. We don’t need our OWN side fighting against us.

  110. You might want to check out this site: http://whatthefuckhasobamadonesofar.com/

    To say the President hasn’t done much, or to imply that he’s not kept his promises is uninformed and disingenuous. And please don’t forget that in the 2010 campaign, he went to Wisconsin and clearly laid out what were the consequences of voting Republican, and implored voters not to give Republicans their futures, since the effects of a Republican win would be felt for years to come. Now, you want to lay the destruction of unions on his doorstep, and ask him why he hasn’t done anything for union rights? Unbelievable.

  111. If she said PBO is “against what happened in NY”, then indeed she is totally mistaken. I must say, however, that I was troubled by our Pres’ comment that it is a state issue. Isn’t that like saying other civil rights (like the marriage of his father and mother which would have been illegal in many states at the time of his birth) are up to the states? I would rather he had said again that civil unions are a civil right and that DOMA needs to be overturned.

  112. Happy birthday, BWD. Strangely, kind of glad they ran you off of that orange place. Look what you have been able to build instead….a masterpiece. Hey, the proverbial lemons into lemonade adage. God bless :-D

  113. That Rachel is self-serving should come as a surprise to no one here. All pundits in the media are self-serving to one extent or the other, or they wouldn’t be there for starters. It just so happens that in Rachel’s case she is one of the more intellectually astute among the punditocracy. But again, I think we’ve come at the cross-roads where being smart only makes you marginally better than the simpletons who are denounced for their ignorance and misguided beliefs.

    We really need to start placing a premium on holistic thinking, which in my view, is “WISDOM.” President Obama actually has this attribute which people recognize is necessary during challenging times. [He is a politician with this attribute which makes him very shrewd also. He is well aware that the economic clout that Gay Rights movement has is not to be dismissed but courted if he is to be re-elected in 2012. So he walks a fine line here]. Smart people are just as capable of making dumb decision and saying/doing dumb things as their simpleton counterparts. This happens all the time. So no surprise here that Rachel is acting out the “smart people can be, do, and say dumb sh*t to” paradigm. And she will continue to as long as any media outlet gives her the platform for just that. Why? Because the MEDIA will always, always, follow this: what they giveth on one hand, they’re taking away with the other.

  114. Brilliant take on PBO’s thought processing. If the so-called left msm were as smart as they pretend to be, they would realize this truth, but then, as you say, they have to march to their orders. Thing is, how long before they have compromised until they are literally banished for inauthenticity?.

  115. President Obama stated that long time ago, that civil unions ,civil right and Doma needs to be overturned. In fact he stated that as soon as Congress brings it up and it pass he will sign it. He is not only the president for gays, their are a lot of people who still don’t want gays to marry. The polling is something you can’t go off , if you polled every single voter and not selected voters you will find the numbers change by states, so the idea is to advocate in each state and make it right issue not a moral one. If he was in oppostion he would have never approved of any of their rights. I hope when his time in office is up and their is a president who do not believe in their right and try to rescend them they are as vocal in bashing them as they are to this president. They are killing their own cause rhetoric.

  116. Wade, is not very educated on the subject, Plus she don’t know much about obama,
    we here at BWD do our reseach before we type. Wade Go to whitehouse.gov. and see what is happenning, then go to youtube and see ALL his speeches, that is a beginning of learning about what is true and whats not. Never make the mistake of listening to the msm for your information.

  117. You know, I had tivoed Rachel and watched it last night and do not remember her saying what is being talked about today. At the end of the show the vote in NY was underway and my delete or keep the show popped up so I wonder if she said what she did at the very end of the show and I didn’t hear it due to time having run out on my recording? Otherwise, it could have been that I know she has some personal issues she is NOT acting on facts about and I just automatically overlooked the comments. Either way I do not remember hearing that. She does irritate me at times but I know she is a fact finder that can affect GOP lies.

    BWD, Happy Birthday to you, Happy Birthday to you, Happy Birthday, Happy Birthday, Happy Birthday to you!!!!! :) May you have a wonderful day!

  118. Marital rights are given by the individual states. Wedding officiants always say “by the power granted to me by the state of _____ I now pronounce you…”

  119. With all due respect Angela. Blindness comes only to those that can’t speak “TRUTH”

    The facts are here:

    The progress made by this President in less than 3years is quite unbelievable, some of the ungrateful people refuse to acknowledge his progress, that is Blindness.

    President Obama pushed for the repeal of “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” in his first State of the Union address, and followed through to sign the Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell Repeal Act of 2010 into law.

    The President signed into law the FY2010 National Defense Authorization Act which included the Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act.

    President Obama signed a memorandum expanding federal benefits for the same-sex partners of Foreign Service and executive branch government employees.

    The President issued a Presidential Memorandum directing the HHS Secretary to ensure that those hospitals that receive Medicare and Medicaid funds will give gay and lesbian patients and their families the compassion, dignity and respect they deserve in difficult times, as well as widows and widowers with no children, members of religious orders, and others whom otherwise may not have been able to receive visits from good friends and loved ones who are not immediate relatives, or select them to make decisions on their behalf in case of incapacitation.

    President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim June 2011 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month. I call upon the people of the United States to eliminate prejudice everywhere it exists, and to celebrate the great diversity of the American people.

    Name any Presidents that have done so much for LGBT in such a short period of time?

    There’s no mistake here, just lack of genuine journalism from Maddow and blind followers that are unable to see Facts.

  120. This idea to use the civil rights as a moral equivalence is absurb. the civil rights for AA was also human rights abuses. Both groups have had rights denied, but not on the same level and to now make that an issue, will divide us more.

  121. That is a good thing for your health, stop watching these naysayers, its is profitable to bash the President these days. I stopped watching Rachel after the Inaugaration, because she was so disrepectfull of the President having the Pastor Rick Warren to give the prayer. She was so over the top, actually she did not advance her cause as far as I was concerned. Maddow thinks she is smarter than the President, she believed that America was not ready for a black President, however it is she who was not ready for a black President, and cannot stand the fact that he is the President. She hates him for this reason, that is why she now has to lie to belittle him every time there is some success for him, she to wants him to fail like Rush does.

  122. She isn’t just sucking up to Michael Steele, she was falling all over herself praising Jon Huntsman for being in favor of civil unions, but attacking PBO for the same thing. Now she just lies. I keep reading comments from people that she is so brilliant, too bad her extreme childish behavior trumps her “brilliance”, I know 5 yr old who are more mature.

  123. Excuse me, if you are referring to me, please note that there is no direct quote, “She’s dead to me,” in my post I said I will never say her name again because it gives her power. By refusing to say someone’s name does not render them dead. I just don’t prefer to elevate her anymore, and this is how I choose to do it.

    All of us are humans and we have emotions, but when a person has a platform as she does, she has a responsibility to at least temper those emotions. And her condenscending, disrespectful attitude to this president does not endear her to me anymore.

    I don’t care if she criticizes the president, it is the manner in which she and tons of others do it. They always have to tell him what they think he should say, how he should say it, how she should think and behave. What gives? I personally do not care for the disrespect. Nobody is above criticism, including PBO because he too, is human and is by no means perfect. He is the first to let the world know that. But it is the manner in which she does it with her know-it-all-attitude. PBO did not get to where he is by taking instructions from a lot of these people who seem to think they know his innter thoughts, etc.

    I hope this post is not duplicated or messed up. My computer is acting up.

  124. To me President Obama represents the most “people” concerned President I can remember in my lifetime. He represents us, the regular American, not the corporations not the rich Americans. He represents us all be it male, female, gay, straight, African American, White, Native American, Asian American, Jewish, Muslim, Catholic, Protestant, Agnostic, Atheist, employed, unemployed, etc. etc. His ONE American theme comes out in everything he says and does. He walks his talk.

    Over and over again I hear people saying he didn’t represent the Change he spoke of. When I hear that it usually involves the person saying it not listening to what he did say but it involves their projecting what change they expected themselves. I have never in my lifetime witnessed a more open, honest display of a person trying to fulfill their promises regardless of the unsurmountable obstacles the Senate, House, MSM, opposition party, and even so called supporters have placed in the way.

    I am not only in his corner, but am in awe of his achievements inspite of the obstacles. I also am so grateful for his willingness to go on fighting for us inspite of the ingratitude he faces.

  125. I am not defending Rachel. I have stated over and over about cable media. It is all about ratings. I have quit watching Rachel several times over the past couple of years and only gave her another chance during the mid-terms. She went too far this time and I think she knows it. She has been silent on Twitter ever since her comments last night.

  126. yes she is being blasted on twitter, Huff post and some on orange place. its as if she does’nt want others to celebrate in our country progress, they make it a we against them issue. Its sad i know a lot of hetrosexuals who are happy for them.

  127. “The loudest ones have been the laziest ones.” Speak!! Lol, preaching from the ivory tower with bullhorns does not equate to actions. They take the credit from those who are actually pounding the streets, reaching out to people, and this is not only reserved for LGBT issues.

    It relates to most issues. For example, a good number of those people who proclaim themselves to be the “BASE,” how many of them actually campaigned for this president, knock on doors, donated or I dare say even voted? It is fashionable to talk about how they supported this “corporatist, lying, one-termer” president, when in fact we don’t even know if they even supported him from the get go.

    Go figure

  128. Seriously? Seriously? Way to keep us off the ball, folks. Has anyone noticed that we’ve spent the better part of the last two weeks spending an inordinate amount of time on the gay marriage issue? I’m gay and I can tell you this, I’m sick to death of focusing on this one micro-issue. Look at this from Maddow’s wiki page: Concerning Barack Obama’s candidacy, Maddow said during the primaries, “I have never and still don’t think of myself as an Obama supporter, either professionally or actually.” The woman has never supported our President. She fawns all over Michael Steele. She claims to be a Democrat. I personally don’t believe it, but that’s me.

    I just read over on The Obama Diary that a conservative super pac is going to spend $20 million dollars over the next two months on advertising trying to shape the narrative on the economy and jobs. Jobs and the economy are what matters. We have to fight back against those ads. I’m just sick of how this one issue has dominated our narrative when there are very real and critical issues out there we need to be discussing.

  129. Mahr can be amusing, but he is another one whose ego and sense of self-importance is out of control. Dude is way too impressed with his own opinions. And in general, his sexism and proselytizing of atheism is a turn off for me.

  130. I agree with your point that we have expected him to do accomplish way to much in such a short time in office. It took us 8 years to get in this mess and President Obama cannot be expected to clean this mess up overnight, but I disagree with the assumption that Maddow’s view of him not supporting gay marriage is in a way not showing support for him. In my opinion, it was a valid point.

  131. John cole at bj

    One of the most vexing things for gays, I imagine, is Obama’s constantly “evolving” position on gay marriage. I don’t for one minute think he is actually opposed to gay marriage, but is waiting for the moment when he can say “Look, the public clearly supports this, and I have changed my mind, etc. blah blah blah.” That’s just how he operates. He’s for permanent change, not pyrrhic victories. DADT didn’t end simply because of strong leadership by Obama, but because the public dragged our elected elites across the finish line.

    http://www.balloon-juice.com/2011/06/25/ill-be-damned-2/#comments

  132. Just watch his speech from July 23rd and consider these quotes:

    “I believe that gay couples deserve the same legal rights as every other couple in this country.”

    “DOMA is wrong; it’s unfair…and that it is why the Justice Department will no longer defend it in court.”

  133. He made comments about civil unions (not the specific term same sex marrige). Except from the following article (http://articles.sfgate.com/2008-07-02/news/17171328_1_same-sex-marriage-civil-unions-ban-on-gay-marriage)
    On Tuesday, Obama spokeswoman Shannon Gilson released this statement:
    “Senator Obama supports civil unions, and he has consistently opposed federal and state constitutional marriage amendments because as we have seen in some states, enshrining a definition of marriage into the constitution can allow states to roll back the civil rights and benefits that are provided in domestic partnerships and civil unions.”
    Also, in your last comment regarding my recent post titled Democrats And Their Inability To Circle The Wagons”. There is a difference in a commentator speaking on Obama’s stance on issues and whether he is sticking to his campaign promises versus a Democrat standing by a colleague who albeit displayed abhorrent behavior legally did not do anything wrong. Huge difference. Apples and oranges.

  134. History will show that no one did more to set the stage for the passage of this groundbreaking civil rights bill than President Obama did when he successfully fulfilled his campaign promise to end the discriminatory Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy in the military. President Truman’s decision to desegregate our armed forces destined that change in society. President Obama’s signing of legislation ending discrimination based on sexuality in the military has done the same.

    Anyone who wants to learn how dreams come true instead of simply being wished for needs to read this New York Times story, The Road to Gay Marriage in New York.

    The story gets to the gist of how a unified sense of purpose had to take control over and supplant the naked idealism which had previously fractured the cause of Gay Marriage equality in New York state.
    Sadly the ink from Governor Cuomo’s pen had hardly dried on the bill before some gay idealists (like Rachael Maddow) returned to the backbiting and bloodletting that had truly made them part of the problem and not the solution.

    When President Obama repeats his old saw of wisdom ‘Let not the perfect become the enemy of the good’ he might henceforth be tempted to add the afterthought ‘the way Rachael Maddow and Jon Stewart do’. For it is an undeniable fact that their childish and relentless self righteous snickering has consistently worked against their stated objectives. Whenever the president puts forth a goal that is clearly for the common good they harshly critisize him for not adding the words ‘RIGHT NOW!’

    History will show that no one did more to set the stage for the passage of this groundbreaking civil rights bill than President Obama did when he successfully fulfilled his campaign promise to end the discriminatory Don’t Ask Don’t Tell policy in the military. President Truman’s decision to desegregate our armed forces destined that change in society. President Obama’s signing of legislation ending discrimination based on sexuality in the military has done the same.

    ‘Right Now Rachael’ proved her ineptness as a liberal leader to me with her ‘My version of the State of the Union’ earlier this year, in which she snarkily delivered a rebuttal to President Obama’s SOTU. She essentially promised that in the next year of a ‘Maddow presidency’ every problem on the face of the earth would be solved, not another drop of oil ever burned and we would all ride to work on pink ponies, where we would be paid to have pillow fights.

    And while I’m balancing the books here, hey Jon Stewart, when President Obama was on your show he asked you a question you have yet to answer, ‘why didn’t you have your rally to restore sanity in August of 2008 instead of 2010?

    I’ll end with an excerpt from the NYT story that the link and picture above are from…
    -Mr. Cuomo was diplomatic but candid with gay-rights advocates in early March when he summoned them to the Capitol’s Red Room, a ceremonial chamber with stained-glass windows and wood-paneled walls.

    The advocates had contributed to the defeat of same-sex marriage in 2009, he told them, with their rampant infighting and disorganization. He had seen it firsthand, as attorney general, when organizers had given him wildly divergent advice about which senators to lobby and when, sometimes in bewildering back-to-back telephone calls.
    “You can either focus on the goal, or we can spend a lot of time competing and destroying ourselves,” the governor said.
    This time around, the lobbying had to be done the Cuomo way: with meticulous, top-down coordination. “I will be personally involved,” he said.
    The gay-rights advocates agreed, or at least acquiesced. Five groups pushing for same-sex marriage merged into a single coalition, hired a prominent lobbying firm with ties to Mr. Cuomo’s office and gave themselves a new name: New Yorkers United for Marriage.

    Those who veered from the script faced swift reprimand. When Assemblyman Daniel J. O’Donnell, an openly gay Democrat from Manhattan, introduced a same-sex marriage bill in May without first alerting the governor’s office, he was upbraided by Mr. Cohen. “What do you think you’re doing?” the governor’s aide barked over the phone.-

    Rachael Maddow, Jon Stewart, consider yourselves reprimanded.

  135. I, too, want to wish you “Happy Birthday,” BWD. I guess you won’t tell us how many candles are on your birthday cake. Now will ya? :)

    Also, let me say that I agree 100% with what you said about Rachel Maddow. I was always a little wary of Ms. Maddow, but I permanently stopped watching her show about a year ago after she pulled that “fake president” stunt. She does not impress me—intelligent or not. All of the pundits of the so called “librul” media are totally disgusting. I have two degrees in journalism and used to work as a reporter for a newspaper in South Carolina many, many years ago. Today, it is sad to say this, but there is no Fourth Estate or true journalism left in U.S. media today. Someone on another blog called it right: what we have in the news industry today is “infotainment.” That’s exactly what we have – a business that entertains rather than informs. We The People must seize the “new media” and design our own form of journalism using today’s advanced and emerging technologies. We must begin to do this now if we are to ensure that President Obama gets another term as president.

  136. Yep Africa therein lies the problem with folks who set their media pundits up as their ‘heroes’… they believe the BS those media folk spout. Perfect example: Angela Wade BELIEVES Rachel Maddow over her own lying eyes of what the President has done. Never mind that he supports and always has supported Civil Unions- he in fact held a ‘discussion’ during the primaries that was hosted by Chris Matthews at a University EXACTLY on this subject- that he did not support ‘marriage’ but that he did support ALL Rights that a civil union would bring.. that was all the way back in 2007.. but NOPE Ms. Angela Wade believes her hero Rachel Maddow’s revisionist history. As to her LIE about POTUS’s support of UNIONS.. really Angela, please show me exactly where President Obama has spoken out against UNIONS?? Show me exactly how in Michigan all the unions got busted because President O demanded they cease existing. What is now going on in WI and other states between those republican governors and the people of those states- is up to the people of those states to deal with, this is not a Presidential issue.. no matter how much you, Angela and Ms. Maddow think it ought to be. Get a mop and get off your ass and quit waiting for superman to do the job of the people. Bashing and LYING about President Obama will get you nothing but MORE republican governors and ultimately a republican President.

    \And now my two cents on Rachel Maddow: As some folks here know, I stopped watching teevee over two years ago, when the pundits lied literally about everything.. I stopped giving them my time, its too valuable to be used by propogandists… which imo is all the national media amounts to. I’ve watched a few clips of Maddow over the last year or so, however long she’s been the PL’s little darling.. and regardless of her exceptional education, have been no more impressed with her than with any other ‘news star’. Her supposed ‘brilliance’ is belied by her profession. Yeah thats my opinion.. real advocates, real activists are not sitting on teevee bashing.. she is nothing more than a talking head, a pretty face who can put a sentence together and is getting PAID HUGELY for her ‘acting job’. Of course she lies, of course she plays with YOUR emotions.. that is HER JOB. She READS what the folks who pay her want her to ‘report’. I’m sorry but anyone who finds their heroes in the pundit world- is being played, manipulated and used.. but hey you’re all making Rachel Maddow hella rich.

    If folks are REALLY FED UP with the malarky that passes for NEWS and Reporting nationally- then lets get on with the national boycott of all their sponsors- put our own ACTION where our mouths are and at least unite on that effort… either that or suck it up and expect that we will have a lying media for as long as we pay them to lie to us.

  137. Rachel has done something that I will not tolerate from anyone, and that is to look me in the eye and lie on someone. She needs to apologize the President and to those who saw and heard her lie. That is going too far for me. I will not be watching her. And I have told her so in my letter. That hurts very much.

  138. I am beginning to believe this obsession with gay marriage was coordinated by Hamher/choi, Rove,s PAC and the msm. If you noticed this started at the nutroots convention. This issue of gay marriage has provided cover for the repugs efforts to destroy the economy, one would think the total collapse of our economy would be an important issue for the msm. Compared to that, gay marriage is hardly even a blip on anyone’s radar. Meanwhile, the R candidates are slamming PBO an the economy and Rove’s group is paying 20 million to attack PBO on the economy. These are not unrelated events.

  139. I want to say, “BWD, have a beautiful day today and celebrate your Beautiful Birthday with laughter, beautiful music, beautiful food, beautiful flowers, and with beautiful family and friends. I wish you a very beautiful day.” Please enjoy every smile and hug coming your way. Thank you BWD.

  140. True Tien Le. Their $20million lies about the economy will start to be believed by the American public. Unfortunately average everyday citizens will forget about their Governors and state legislators and the Rethug lead House that is actually doing everything possible to derail ecomomic recovery. And it will work because there is NO push back from spineless Dems and absolutely no representation in the MSM for the PBO administration.

    If Democrats don’t get themselves together then we will suffer a worse fate than 2010. I really feel the Democratic Party is at a crossroads at this time in history. We are on the right side of history and the major issues that Americans care about , but is seems we are about to let that advantage fade away into the sunset.

    Frankly I am becoming very discouraged with the Dem party today. I only support President Obama. I’m on the verge of becoming an Independent. Not because I like anything the Rethugs have to offer I consider myself a Pragmatic Progressive and I am finding the Dem party is lacking that type of thought and orientation. Sadly the PL and so called Progressive pundits in the MEDIA have completely turned me off thru sensationalism and propoganda. They are no different from the Rightwing extremist. PBO’s only hope is to at least have 70% to 75% of Dems supporting him at the polls in 2012 and have at least 55% of Independents in his corner. The way the Democratic Party is consuming its own it will be a tall task. We will see how much Rachel’s demonstration effects the Liberal electorate. Stay tuned………..Obama/Biden 2012!!

  141. They want it both ways: gas prices too high? Obama’s fault. Releases oil reserves due to disruption of supplies, prices go down? Obama’s fault. It’s always Obama’s fault no matter what. Keep pushing back against the lies. Romney says more job losses under Obama and Bush: early job losses were all attributable to Bush economy. Post the graph of jobs added under our president everywhere!

  142. Karl Rove and his FAR RIGHT Henchmen are masters. Add the fake concern for African American unemployment and you get a since that they are DIVIDING to CONQUER which is what they are masters at. Folks we use to have an electoral advantage on the US map. Lets see if it holds. :( Obama/Biden 2012!!

  143. Rachel has always been a Chicken Little (the sky is falling, the sky is falling). Also I think there is an undercurrent of racism among all these PL: he’s too “arrogant” “uppity” he’s not listening to what they say, etc.

  144. They’re called Wedge Issues for a reason. They divide, distract, and detract from the real issues of the day: JOBS, STUDENT EDUCATIONAL DEBT, JOBS, JOBS, JOBS!!!

  145. Late to the celebration I may be, but my wishes are no less sincere –

    xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx BWD, HAVE A WONDERFUL BIRTHDAY!! xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

    Finding your positive site was a balm for my battered Obama soul, and my wish today for you is that your soul will be nourished, and that you will feel an extra measure of satisfaction and fulfilment that your vision has nourished the hearts and minds of soooo many others! Enjoy the rest of your day, and thank YOU!

  146. Happy Birthday Southern Girl and BWD! Many blessings and keep up the good fight. Yes We Can!

  147. I suppose I’d better go read what Rachel is doing now. I gave her up cold turkey when she ridiculed the President in an insulting way, comparing him/his actions to some ‘poem’ Gandhi had written. It was TOTALLY uncalled for and disrespectful in the extreme, and though I’d never seen red before, I saw ‘red’ then. Truthfully, I’ve asked myself more than once, ‘What exactly does she have against him?’ and I never did give myself an answer.

  148. To Observerinvancouver: Although I’m very disappointed in Rachel’s comments, I also agree with you that her value is great in so many areas. I just can’t ‘throw the baby out with the bath water.” I am absolutely going to write her and express my unhappiness with her comments, but unless she disappoints me on a whole range of issues, I will continue to watch the show.

    I am a 100% supporter of President Obama. I love him as President and I love that he is the finest man we’ve EVER had in the White House. And if there are a few things he does that I disagree with, that does NOT spoil my support.

  149. I think the GLBT community is only 1.7% of the population by the last census (up to 3%); it’s an issue that motivates conservatives in the culture wars and diverts from economic issues

  150. So we have to take up the reins and demand that the DNC do something with all that money they’re raking in. http://www.democrats.org/contact Say it loud and clearly…they must counter those super pac ads with our version of how to get America back to work and not let the Republicans dominate the airwaves with their crap. Be as angry about that as everyone was about Rachel.

  151. I’m a monthly contributor to the DNC. It’s about time I know where my money is going when the GOP is ramping up these super PACs. Hell, I’ll kick in extra money if it’ll go to hard-hitting ads.

  152. Happy,. Happy, happy BWD, Please relax We know it’s very upseting speacially when somebody lies about the facts. PBO did not run on a gay marriege issue, and by the please check at people’s View by TiMT and what he called maddow. so happy birthday and have many more.

  153. Tien Le, I feel ya!

    Oh gosh I’m so happy NY passed this Marriage thing, and I can imagine how soul destroying inequality can be… but there is now: TEA Party in Space (TPIS)!

    I got spoiled by all that breaking down like a fraction that Progressives do so well & helping everyone understand every angle of an issue. I missed that with Space policy (but I squinted my eyes & pretended it was there anyway!).

    But oh how I wish we could spread the joy :)

  154. That reminds me! I forgot to tell you guys that President Obama killed the Space Program! odearmewhatshallwedo!

  155. What you just said!
    I was done with her when she felt she had to give her own version of his Oval Office speech that time! She thinks she is soooo much smarter them him!
    Like I said, what you said – Africa

  156. FIRED UP…!!

    READY TO GO..!!! :D

    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    +++++++++++++#######+++++++++++++++++
    +++++++++++############+++++++++++++++
    ++++++++++###############+++++++++++++
    +++++++++#####++++++++###++++++++++++
    ++++++++###++++++++++++###+++++++++++
    ++++++++##++++++++++++++###++++++++++
    +++++++##+++++++++++++++####+++++++++
    +++++++#+++++++++++++++++###+++++++++
    ++++++##+++++++++++++++++####++++++++
    ++++++#+++++++++++++++##++@##++++++++
    +++++##++++++++++++############+++++++
    +++++##++++++++#+++##+####+####+++++++
    +++++##++++#####+++#++#####+####+++++++
    +++++##+++##+###+++#+++****++####+++++
    +++++##+++++#++#+++#+++++++++##++++++
    +++++##++++@++++++++#+++++++##+#+++++
    +++++#+++++++++++++++#++++++##+#+++++
    ++++++#+++++++++++++#++++++####++++++
    ++++++##+++++++++++####++++####+++++++
    ++++++++++++++++@#+###++++++####+++++
    +++++##+#+++++++++++++++++++##+#+++++
    +++++#++++++++++++++##++++++####+++++
    +++++#+@++++++++++######++++##+++++++
    +++++#+#+#+++++++##+++#+++++##+++++++
    ++++++#++#++++++##+++###++++##+++++++
    +++++++#++++++++++++++++++#####++++++
    +++++++++#+++++++++++#++++#####++++++
    +++++++++++#+++++++++++++############++
    ++++++++++++#+++++++++++#############++
    +++++++++++++#++++++++###############++
    ++++++++++++++##++++########+########++
    +++++++++++++#++###########++########++
    +++++++++++###+++#########++#########++
    ++++++++#######++++######+++#########++
    ++++++#########+++++++##++++#########++
    +++++##########+++++###++++##########++
    +++############+++++#++++++##########++
    ++##############++++#++++++##########++
    ++##############++++++++++###########++
    +###############++++++++++###########++
    +############### ++++ +++++###########++
    +###############++++++#++############++
    +################+++++#++############++

  157. People who aren’t religious themselves are always surprised by how much blasphemy outrages the true believers.

  158. Susan, I think people are also upset that people like Rachel (the PL) will bash President Obama seemingly for everything (just for the sake of it and ratings)…they criticized him when folks said he had asked David Paterson to not run so that Cumo could run and win and get “same sex marriage rights” passed. These people get so caught up in their single issues, that they can only see the “moment”. Time and time again, President Obama has proven that he is not only a politician, but he is also a strategist…he sees the big picture. Considering all this given to the president to “fix” and then stuff that has happened since he took office, anybody in their “right” mind would know that it will take longer than 2 1/2 years to fix…it will take more than one term. And at the rate Rachel & Co. are going, they are going to make it harder for us to get a 2nd term…they are being counterproductive and think this is what has us to the point of being done with Rachel and the rest them. Why don’t they go after the people who actually pass laws? Why don’t they attack the Repugs? They are simply not helping…they are hindering!

  159. Our entire MSM is a gigantic reality show, only with actors who call themselves journalists. They do a great disservice to the profession.

    Thank God for some of the foreign press.

  160. Yep…I told my gay friends the same thing (you said theo67) and they agreed that not enough was done by “them” to educate the masses…they just sat back and waited for someone else to do the work…

  161. I remember the No on 8 campaign as being slipshod and amateurish, to say the least. I think it was just assumed that a blue state that was going to Obama by 30 points wouldn’t approve Prop 8.

    Of course now if a proposition was put on the ballot to repeal 8 the polling indicates that it would win quite comfortably.

  162. You are right, but she also doesn’t get the Afghanistan thing, and was very disparaging about Obama’s speech Wednesday night, going so far as to say “pretty words”, etc. Only the guest beside her was more rational and able to understand what the president is saying and I even foung Laurence more understanding, but she continued to push her anti-Obama agenda in areas where she feels she is right. It’s when she strays from facts, that she becomes ineffective.

    I thought her reporting on C-Street was fabulous, and other reports as well were excellent, but in the last 6 months or so she has become emotionally critical of the President, and that is why she’s much less effective and causes former supporters to leave watching her show. I check in from time to time, but I used to never miss it.

  163. I’ve been around along time now, and I totally concur with everything you say.

  164. Whatever…..You do realize this example does not answer what you originally stated… Anywho Ms. Maddow is a proven liar. I do not watch her show and will never so I guess it all evens out. I stand with this president.

  165. Constitutionally he’s right. Marriage is a state reserved power. He’s just saying what’s in the constitution.

  166. Not surprised and there will be more lies. BWD stay blessed on this day, I hope you live to see many many more and thank you for this blog. Our side has very few places to commiserate so I thank you. Bless.

  167. These people don’t listen…they think they know “everything”, so they don’t bother to listen. President Obama never proclaimed to be “progressive”…he never even said he was liberal (that came from the media and the republicans trying to label him)…his classmates at Harvard said he was a moderate democrat. Bill Maher and the rest of the 7% PL are a minority…just like the fringe right (teabaggers). The majority of Americans are moderate, most folks are either slightly to the right of center or slightly to the left of center. Jovie, because I there are more of us than them…they CAN NOT RUIN POB’S PRESIDENCY! President Obama “got this” and we “got him”…he’s going to make it…he is going to go down in history has being one of the greatest if not the greatest president of all times. GOD IS ON HIS SIDE!

    Stay Strong

  168. How do you see comments others make on her twitter? I couldn’t find this when I tried to look, and i’ve followed her for about a year. Can someone tell me?

  169. I don’t listen to PL talk radio either, so the requested info would be great.

  170. I emailed and said I thought she was utterly irresponsible by making that claim, and it stands in a category with Glenn Beck and his “President Obama does not like white people” comment. Thus, since I would never watch Beck espouse incendiary garbage such as that, I certainly could no longer watch her, since she appears willing to go down the road of irresponsible, hyperbolic, foolishness. It may have been harsh to dump her in with Beck, but I wanted to make a point.

  171. Thank you Theo and Africatimes2 for expressing so well what I think. I gained my political consciousness during the civil rights movement. People went and organized to change things. Besides filing court cases, boycotts, marching and protesting(sit-ins and freedom-rides), people went out and did voter education and voter registration. There were no advocacy media or tv talking heads constantly bashing Presidents. The movement prompted Presidents JFK and LBJ, and Congress to act. It was not the Presidents who initiated the civil rights changes.

  172. I consider myself to be progressive… very progressive. But the truth of the matter is that when I see the so-called progressive pundits on tv or the so-called progressives on blogs that shall remain nameless, I start to wonder what i have in common with them, and if there is sustainable solidarity. I have a strong desire to disassociate myself from them, not because I am running to the evil center of moderation ;) … but because I start to wonder about their objectives and, frankly, their sanity. They say that they want to push the president to be more progressive, but for a bunch of really bright people, they seem frighteningly disconnected from the realities of governing when you have the Party of No in the House and a fragile majority in the Senate, along with an entire network dedicated to destroying this president. I fail to see how doing the work for the rapid right wing strengthens this president or the Democrats down ballot.

  173. DTTM, I love your final point. President Obama is a lightning rod. Anything he says–especially if it’s a perceived about-face abut a controversial subject–will get massive play, and the backlash would be widespread and well coordinated. There would be tremendous pressure for the NY Republicans to vote in lock step against gay marriage, to prevent President Obama from chalking up another “win.”

    On this subject, the tide is slowly turning on its own. Attempts to force it to go faster are not only futile but probably counterproductive.

  174. Happy B-day, BWD…may you have more love, more joy, more happiness, more peace, good health and wealth, this birthday and many more to come!

  175. RIGHT ON ROCK!

    Fear not dearly beloved, this too shall pass! And in the immortal words of the great Will Rogers…

    “I BELONG TO NO ORGANIZED POLITICAL PARTY, I AM A DEMOCRAT”

    We’ve been through worse before, way worse, and we’re gonna get it together and …

    GIVE EM HELL IN 2012!

  176. Actually Africa that is an outstanding idea.. a letter to the National Media from WE the People of the US… listing each pundit and at least one of his/her lies on POTUS/VP/FLOTUS and the Administration. One or more of their lies/distortions.. and a letter as to how tired WE are at their misrepresentation … and we need to make this letter viral- getting as many signatures from the people across this nation who are FED UP with a lying Manipulative media.. and then send it to each national media- owners and pundits.. and to their sponsors… and tell them we are paying attention to facts only.. that we are the power in this country- NOT a lying media and that they work at OUR WILL. anyhoo.. thats just my wee rant on this subject in a nutshell…

  177. I hope Prosser is thrown off the bench. Justice Bradley should charge him with assault!

  178. First, Angela it is not becoming of people who call themselves progressives to lie! The president has said repeatedly that he supports union rights. He appointed a Secretary of Labor who not only supports union rights but is herself from a strong family of union supporters.I personally heard him make a strong statement in support of the right of Wisconsin public employees to be represented by their union. It is idiotic for you to expect the President to join the picket line. In fact the real people protesting said exactly the same thing: they saw no reason for the President to come join in the protest becuse it would have given Walker an excuse to say that it was all about Obama. To say that the President “has said/done very little” for labor unions is a lie!

    Second, On the issue of gay marriage, the President has always said that he strongly supports civil unions, but was conflicted over the term marriage; probably because of some of his religious convictions. He never, ever campaigned on a pledge to support gay marriages, Never! Besides what difference will it make if President Obama says he is for gay marriage? Marriages are governed by state laws not federal laws. The President saying he supports gay marriage will not make them legal in Mississsippi, Texas or any other states. DOMA, the only federal law engineered by Republicans –and signed by the beloved Bill Clinton who was never subjected to this type of vicious attacks from the so called progressives–is being challenged on Constitutional grounds; as it should be. Until the law is either repealed by the Congress, or declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, the President is required to enforce it. As you know, the President authorized the AG to stop defending DOMA because he believes it’s unconstitutional.

    As BWD said it so well, Maddow did not criticize the president based on facts, or ideological differences. She simply lied by saying the President opposed the gay marriage law passed in New York. The President never said that. Just he didn’t say that about Iowa or Massachusetts, or Vermont.

  179. Oh Thom Hartmann, Mr. Perspicacity himself. The same dude that admitted it didn’t occur to him, didn’t even cross his mind that “show me your papers Trump Chump” was engaging in racist dog whistles and dragging the bottom of hate, fear and bigotry with the best of the teabagger scum brigade. That Thom Hartmann!

  180. Agreed, africatimes2. There’s nothing but soundbites. MSNBC and the rest of the cable networks, they fork out video clips of soundbites on Youtube and their websites for their audience.

    They say just enough about politics and their support for Dems and POTUS to get their veiwers hyped up and keep the viewers coming back. It’s all for show, ratings, and profit.

  181. Happy Birthday BWD, your work here is of the highest calibre and much appreciated.

    Congrats on your success and another productive year.

  182. Pudding and Delilah,
    I DO agree with your points and I share all your concerns. But I don’t put Rachel in the same category as a “Hamsher” or a “Choi” or others like them. I’m terrified of the lefties who pick on President Obama relentlessly, but I just don’t see Rachel doing it often. Yeah, I get mad at her when she does, but I still think overall she’s a help rather than a hindrance. I wrote to her also, and asked her to correct her misstatement. Also, as several people have pointed out, sometimes the guests will speak up and offer a different , corrective opinion. I see it with Keith, Ed, and Lawrence too.

  183. Happy Birthday BWD! I hope you take time from the demands of politics and this space to enjoy yourself with family and friends. We really love you! We deeply appreciate your hard work and passionate commitment to telling the truth about this incredible man we elected President. Enjoy your special day!

  184. I’m late to the party today. BWD, I hope you’re having a great birthday. Thank you so much for all that you do.

    I attended an OFA training session today. One OFA staffer brought his mom and dad who live in England. They love our President and will working to get information to the ex-patriots living in England.

    This young man’s mom said: “Your president is the answer to peace, harmony and balance in this world.”

    She said his re-election is not just critical for America, it is critical for the world.

    Her words blew me away.

  185. Yes. Michele. Very impressed with her own intelligence and supposed dry wit. She is one of those kinds of elitist and I guess she is now old news. Bye Rachel.

  186. I disagree. I think that marriage has some secular meaning and the state has conferred an entire panoply of rights to married couples which should not be dependent on the sexual orientation of the couple. Government is already in the business of marriage with respect to the tax code, immigration laws, etc., and thus I personally think that it’s unconstitutional for gay people to be singled out as ineligible for those marriage rights by mere virtue of something which they cannot change, sexual orientation. I do think that people have every right to refuse to attend gay weddings or be members of religious institutions which marry gay couples if that is offensive to their faiths or beliefs, but it’s not thought-policing to favor gay marriage. My two cents.

  187. I wish that I had been taking the names down of all the posters I’ve agreed with on this thread. Suffice it to say. You are some phenomenal human beings standing by our President’s side. With you all in his corner he could not possibly lose. PBO 2012!

  188. I really feel you, bwd. Rachel has gotten completely over the top and seems to be mistaking stridency for passion. She needs to dial it back, bigtime. But until she does, I certainly won’t bear witness to this continuing tantrum. Thanks for saying what needed to be said about folks who are turning a time of huge progress and great change to one sour, long, whine-fest in which we’re allowed to appreciate or celebrate nothing until utopia is achieved. I never signed up for that, and this counter-productive, ineffective advocacy gets no one nowhere.

  189. Happy Birthday BWD…Thank you so much for all you do.

    Your passion and defense of the President warms my heart.

  190. Happy Birthday, BWD!! :-)

    I just did something I rarely do: I got into a political debate on a (normally) pro-Obama Facebook page. They linked to an article about how “progressives are demanding more from Obama” and when they cited Bill Maher, I’d pretty much had it. So, here’s what I said:

    It must be nice for Mr. Maher to have that bully pulpit where he can shoot his ignorant mouth off and have no real responsibility for the consequences of anything he says. (Remember, this is the same guy who was for the Iraq war before he was against it, the same guy who is also anti-vaccination and pro-racial profiling.) Yeah. Someone I sure want to listen to. /end sarcasm

    The president is one guy. He’s not Santa Claus or the Tooth Fairy. He’s not the president of progressive interests, but the president of all Americans. You want change? Work for it. Don’t expect Super Barack to sweep in and make unicorns and rainbows appear. He’s one guy doing the best he can in the most toxic political environment I can remember or have studied. And frankly, with “friends” like Mr. Maher, who needs enemies?

    I don’t think for a minute that it’ll make a huge amount of difference, but I also have learned—thanks to this site—how important we all are and how necessary it is to speak up.

    Returning to my regularly scheduled lurking—rest assured, though, I read this page every day.

    -Krista :)

  191. Absolute nonsense!!! utter balderdash!!!

    if “support” means shouting empty platitudes behind the podium, then sure the President does not do platitudes. you seem totally oblivious to how politics works or blind to the unprecedented vitriol that follows every single action of this president from both right and left. Who exactly signed all those human/civil rights depriving pieces of legislation–DADT, DOMA, repeal of Glass Steagall, Welfare Reform, Telecommunications deregulation? The darling of the professional left, Bill Clinton!!!!

    Who’s working to overturn those blunders? President Obama, and in the face of vitriol and unprecedented opposition. yet you come on here and spout lies and nonsense in support of Maddow’s lies.

    The bottom line is that the Professional left makes more money when there is a Repug in the White House. The PL needs the benjamins and they want to get rid of President Obama. David Sirota, Jane hamsher, Olbermann, Huffington (Repug wolf in sheep’s clothing), Maher — these loudmouths all made their fame and money during Bush’s presidency. Now they feel stagnant and hence want their gravy train to come back. It is all documented.

  192. Angela Wade…when President Obama campaigned, he said he was for civil union…that’s it that’s all. President Obama endorsed Cuomo and Gillibrand…both endorsements brought on a whole lot of criticism from the progressives…Cuomo and Gillibrand were very instructmental in getting the law passed…it will take more than one person to make changes…we all have a responsibility…it will take more than 100,000…it took how many years to get in the mess we are in…it is going to take time to make changes…it is ging to take time to right the wrongs…ROME WAS NT BUILT IN A DAY!!!

    Rachel and Co would be more helpful if they laern to use their words for the betterment not the detriment…

  193. “No one is right all the time”

    But Rachel and Co expect President Obama to be right all the time. He can do right 362 days a year and they will moan and groan about the 3 days he does wrong. And as my mother would say, “there is way to do all things”.

  194. Yes, Betsy and thanks. You just listed some of the other issues she’s made off-putting remarks about. Like you, I have dropped off watching most of her segments. I go to her website to watch her videos, instead, when I have the time. I have given up watching cable news since the beginning of May. I just happened to watch her live, last night glued to the news so I could find out the outcome of the Bill in NY. Maybe I’m missing more negatives from her than I realize. Maybe that’s another reason I should at least watch her live, so I can slap down anything I believe she’s distorting. When I’m not out of pocket as I am now and will be for a while.

    On this issue, I’m convinced without the President’s support for DADT, etc., gay rights would be hanging in limbo for at least another decade.

    Well, I got my dander up, but she’s one anchor that hits the right chord at least most of the time. Maybe she needs another meeting with our President. lol!

  195. Another dark sider is Nate Silver:

    http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/25/cuomos-presidential-moment-forms-contrast-with-obama/

    He has a series of tweets at @fivethirtyeight that argue that President Obama is a mediocre president and wonders how Jimmy Carter, LBJ, and Bill Clinton would have done if they had assumed the presidency in 2009. And then he asks the same question about other politicians like Gore and Kerry and then broadens the list to all post WWII presidents. Sometimes these tweets tells us a lot about what is really (not) going on in the brains of these pundits.

    If you get a chance, hit Nate Silver up on twitter and tell him just how foolish he is . .

  196. I quit Maddow when she ran the hit piece about the President “breaking his promise” on trying Guantanamo detainees. Zero mention of the Congress’ role in passing legislation to prevent transfer of detainees to be tried in federal courts, the press conference where the AG talked about how frustrated they were—nothing. She is smart enough to know better so why does she mislead this way?

  197. This is when Maddow lost me, a former daily viewer who couldn’t wait for the weekend to pass to see the next segment;

    NOTE [this is not a positive segment, but it does underline BWD's position]

    http://maddowblog.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2010/12/08/5611227-maddow-obamas-presidency-at-risk-of-becoming-a-punch-line#comments

    I was so hurt by her attack on the president that I stated my views (Vic C), and took time off, but her attack killed something in me towards her show (When all is said and done, she is doing a ‘show’ while Prez O is governing millions! I’ve said before that I have no way of explaining it, but you attack this President undeservedly, and somehow it resonates inside of me. The only time I pay her any attention these days is when someone here or at TOD shares a meaningful segment.

  198. You “support” Maddow in her Obama bashing when you have no clue as to Obama’s clearly stated positions on gay marriage??? Yowzer . .

  199. LOL, thank you. I usually don’t engage in FB arguments but I get so sick of the manufactured outrage that PBO isn’t doing enough, yadda yadda. And Bill Maher hops on two or three of my last good nerves anyway, so…yeah. I had to speak up. :-D

  200. Does anyone remember who was Ms Maddow’s favorite
    ‘uncle” on MSNBC? He was always on her show.

    Her favorite “uncle” was none other than Pat Buchannan. He too was not ready for a black President.

  201. GN, you make a compelling argument about the substantial role government plays in the institution of marriage. The complication, of course, is the federal system. As it stands to day, the legal license to marry is controlled by each of the fifty states. I do agree with you that denial of the right to marry is unconstitutional. Until the U.S. Supreme Court rules on this question we are just left in limbo, because I don’t think there are enough votes in Congress to amend the the Civil Rights Act to include a prohibition against states denying gay citizens the right to marry.

    So, as it stands today, it’s to the sate governments, as just happened in New York, that activism to address this inequality should be focused on. Hopefully, with all the cases percolating in the courts, the Supreme Court will soon issue a definitive decision on the Constitutionality of gay marriage.

    As for the other “panoply of rights to married couples” that are conferred by the Federal government, I think President Obama has been doing a superb job, using Executive Orders to prevent discrimination against gay couples in areas like immigration, hospital visitation, medicare, etc. No objective person can argue that the President is anti-gay, given his record of trying to advance equality in those areas that he has some authority over.

    I am not religious and therefore I do not particularly like the marriage of church and state when it comes to the institution of marriage. Like you said, those who don’t like gay marriage “have every right to refuse to attend gay weddings or be members of religious institutions which marry gay couples.” Sadly, your impeccable logic does not sway the people of faith who are so convinced that marriage is a sacred union of man and woman mandated by God.

    Personally, I think the real resolution to the gay marriage must come from the Supreme Court , just as was the case with interracial marriage that was finally resolved by the 1967, Loving decision. The Obama decision not to defend that ill-conceived DOMA, enacted by a zealous Congress, tells me all I need to know about the President’s stance on gay marriage. If the courts rule that state laws that deny gay people the right to marry are unconstitutional, I am absolutely certain that President Obama would support that decision; just as LBJ did in the Loving decision. I don’t know if LBJ, who grew up in the Segregated South and its mores, was for or against interracial marriage. No one asked him to take a public stand for or against interracial marriage. Rather, he let the actions of his Justice Dept,, and especially the briefs of his SG, speak for him. If President Obama was so anti-gay, just because he has not publicly endorsed gay marriage, I just don’t see how he would have asked the AG to stop defending DOMA. Seriously, do the people attacking the President really believe that the crop of Republicans running to replace him would have done the same thing– that is stop defending DOMA because it was unconstitutional?

    I do, of course, understand the limitations of my analogizing interracial marriage and gay marriage. Interracial marriage at the time of Loving was not particularly a hot political issue in the black because. Unlike gay marriage, it affected relatively a very small segment of the population. Obviously the white community, and especially in the south was vehemently against interracial marriage. But it never made it as a major issue in political discourse. Other than the moral question of denying individuals the right to happiness, and the opportunity to debunk the doctrine of whites supremacy, interracial marriage was not a major galvanizing issue in the Black community; the same as gay marriage is in the gay community to day.

  202. B I N G O! Rachel Maddow hates our President. She will never appologise to her viewers for what she said, at least sometimes Keith Olberman would come back and appologise for something incorrect he said.

    We as viewing consumers are always suckered by these rich blowhards that does nothing to advance the Democratic cause, every last one of them are fitlthy rich and could care less what harm they cause to the rest of us, they will thrive under any Administration. The citizens of Wisconsin are experiencing the results of their advice to stay home and show Obama. Ed Shultz advice was do not vote. I for one has stopped watching these media elites since 2009.

  203. I just sent my email to Rachel. I think we need to send emails to Schultz and Cenk.

  204. Ladies and Gentlemen…

    ­.. I just watched and listened to Rachel’s show last night in it’s entirety podcasted on I -Tunes, and SHE DID say this. Her exact quote was…

    …”In terms of his position on this issue right now, President Obama is against what just happened..­.”

    And before she made that statement, she was almost applauding the Republican­s because of their 4 “YES” votes while ignoring their 28 “NO” votes while minimizing the Democrats’ 29 “YES” votes and emphasizin­g their 1 “NO” vote and that this bill didn’t pass when Democrats controlled the NY Congress 18 months ago.

    After going to the mat defending her on Huff-n-Puff-ington Post because I simply didn’t recall her making such an over-emoti­onal and irrational statement, I am SUPREMELY disappoint­ed in Rachel Maddow, one of few news journalist­s I respected, for making this kind of statement against President Obama in THAT context and especially at THIS time.

    How dare she make such a statement when the President said that he believed that the passage of Gay marriage is up TO THE STATES and that under HIS Presidency, he has worked for LBGT social equality more than ANY President in history and is the 1st President to hire a transgendered woman to work in his administration.

    I will watch her show on Monday to see how or IF she addresses this… and how or if she addresses this will directly influence whether I watch her show again for a long time, if I ever watch her again. I know many of you have already made your decisions in this respect… but I will wait until Monday. Although no matter what she says, I don’t think I’ll ever view “Ms. Maddow” the same way again after being one of her biggest fans.

    This is comparable to a best friend stealing your wallet after you gave him or her a good paying job. It would take a long time for them to earn your trust again… and it will take a long time for me and others to trust Rachel again.

  205. I sure hope Rachel and others read this article. Thank you for bringing it to our attention. This applies not just to gay rights, but to everything the pundnuts and whiners think the President could do instantaneously.

  206. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, GN. I disagree with several of your premises though in your argument. Sorry for the long-winded response but here goes…

    1.) The “secular meaning” that you ascribe to marriage doesn’t change the fact that the notion is religious in origin and marriage does not take on secular meaning just because a secular entity -e.g., the government, recognizes this religious compact and gives it some special status. Marriage existed, between a man and a woman, well before governments came along into existence and will continue to long after governments go. I fail to see how the government’s conferring privileges through the tax code, immigration laws and what not upon heterosexual couples has any fundamental bearing on marriage’s original religious meaning and intent.
    I think you take issue with the government’s demonstrated preference for heterosexual unions over homosexual unions. Fair enough. I don’t agree that the solution to resolving the discrepancy in favoritism lies in re-defining what marriage means –which is the apparent strategy of Gay Rights activists these days. I think from a purely secular standpoint though, [ and a lot of folks on the p.c. bandwagon try to tip-toe around this issue ], same sex couples cannot biologically reproduce. It is impossible at this juncture in human evolution. Yes, even in 2011 you still need male sperm and a female egg to reproduce. So it is not so far fetched for the government to give a preference for those couplings that actually contribute to the propagation of society. Without people in a society, the government has no one to govern. From a self-preservation stand-point I can see the government favoring unions that produce future generations of offspring- i.e.,future tax-payers/wage-slaves, what have you, over unions that cannot.

    2.) It is far from settled within the medical community that sexual orientation is a fixed biological or genetic trait. I think there is a lot of propaganda that has been put out there in the past several years to advance the theory and false equivalency that sexual orientation is akin to being born a certain skin color, or with other fixed physical attributes which are pretty much immutable AT BIRTH. Who one chooses to have sex with is a private decision, hopefully to be made long after one has been born and been blessed with safe passage through adolescence, in adulthood. But sexual orientation is a state of being that only manifests when engaging in a sexual act with another person of the same sex, thus it cannot be compared to a physical trait. A behavior is NOT a physical trait. This is another elephant in the room that people conveniently elide in this discussion taking it for granted that the opposite is true. I don’t think it strengthens, but weakens the argument for gay marriage.

    3.) The right to marry is constitutionally protected. Everyone over the age of majority and under no mental incapacity can marry — that includes people who are only sexually attracted to the same sex, that consider themselves gay. HOWEVER that right is circumscribed by the government in the form of non-recognition of certain unions and denial of privileges to said unrecognized unions. The government can constitutionally discriminate when it comes to the issues of marriage – i.e., so even though I have the ability to marry, I can’t marry Sally, I can only marry Joe, I can’t marry my son, but I can marry my neighbor’s younger one even though I might be considered a “cougar” for it ;), I can’t marry the mentally disabled adult who I love dearly, I can’t marry more than one man at a time, and so on and so on. I get a limited range of options when I marry, along with everybody else. So in this respect, the government is discriminating equally against everybody, in that their choice of a marriage partner is limited to some extent or another.

    Finally, I am a bit perplexed as to why civil unions are deemed inferior by Gay Rights activists, and why they’re not championing the governments role in affording a similar or equivalent “panoply of rights” (as you put it) given to heterosexual married couples but for gay civil unions. It seems to me this would be the most straight-forward, sensible thing to do given that they are seeking to petition a secular entity for approval and accord of privileges for a type of union that has existed outside of marriage, albeit alongside it, probably for ages.

    And yes, the thought police on this topic will hear of nothing else but gay marriage- which really is an oxymoron (and I don’t need to be a religious neo-con to point that out).

    BUT I am SICK and TIRED of special interests hijacking the stage and the debate and attention of politicians away from what really is the MAJOR ISSUE OF OUR DAY AND OF THESE TIMES: PEOPLE’S LIVELIHOODS! That means, JOBS. Without livelihoods to build on, marriage becomes a dying prospect for EVERYONE in America, including gays!

    My 10cents.

  207. As an older person I really need a review and and edit button before posting. What I meat to say was that the issue of interracial marriage, though important, was not high on the agenda in the Black community during the freedom struggles of the 1960′s. Any way, I hope you got the point.

  208. The lack of comprehensive skills among “some” bloggers is astounding. This isn’t about PBO’s stance on gay marriage… this is about a false statement made by Rachel Maddow relevant to President Obama’s OPINION on the Gay marriage bill passing in NY. She said that “he was against what just happened” in reference to THE VOTE RESULTS… and that is a LIE. Now, you show me anywhere where President Obama said that he was against the passage of Gay marriage in NY… or in ANY of the other 5 states where it has already passed, and THEN you can talk. Otherwise, you’re as emotionally clueless as Rachel was in making that comment.

    I’ve already made one mistake today defending her because I thought she COULDN’T HAVE made such a self-centered, misrepresentative comment about a President who’s done more for the Gay community than ANY President in history… so there’s no way I’m going to make the same mistake by challenging YOU to find ANY statement made by President Obama that indicates that he was “against” the bill passing in NY or ANY OTHER state. Because the FACT that he’s NEVER said anything like that is something I’m 100% sure of.

  209. I really believe Rachel wants to prove to the world that she is smarter than President Obama. She may be very smart intellectually, but she is emotionally immature, and
    her emotions take the wheel, she goes off the rails. She loses perspective, not to mention reason. Although a good political analyst she is no match for PBO’s political skills,. She tends to give too much deference to the Republican way of doing business. She should be paying attention to President Obama for tips on how to “rope the dopes”. As smart as she is I am surprised she is more creative in her approaches. She strikes me as being extremely competitve, hates being wrong, and has demonstrated at times a very arrogant attitude (her mock address to the nation re the BP oil spill for instance). Just my instincts, I sense she is competing with him, and because he keeps winning battles, and they don’t play out the way she called them, and his approach is not “Republican” enough for her, she is evermore emotional and less rational.

    I also deplore the “step-n-fetch” attitudes of so many in the MSM. I am not willing to put up with that insidious bullshit, let alone pay a cable provider so that I can listen to their demeaning half truths and lies. Comcast will be hearing from me on Monday, I can not wait to tell them why I am cancelling their service.

  210. Bravo, Bravo!, ZIZI! Your ability to plainly speak TRUTH to people who think we are idiots is absolutely breathtaking! Clearly, as you so ably articulated, the vicious bashing of President Obama has absolutely nothing to do with real issues that they are supposedly in favor of. Any sane, objective, political observer knows that it is a blatant lie to assert that President Obama –who is more progressive than their darling Bill Clinton– equals Bush. Your proposition that it’s all about them making money makes a great deal of sense to me. Otherwise, why are they on a mission to destroy this president–probably one of the most progressive presidents in history– when the crop of right wing teabagger-Republicans are vowing to take the country, not just to where George W. Bush left it, but to the period before FDR’s New Deal? Why?

    Even before he took the oath of office, President Obama was already under relentless attacks from the right, led by people like Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck, all determined to undermine, and de-legitimize him. At least they were honest: they announced that their mission was to make him “fail,” and as we are finding out, they don’t care if making him “fail” results in the destruction of the country.

    So why, in the world, with a vicious war against the President already raging from the right, did the so called left decide to open a left flank, to join the right flank, in attacking and trying to undermine and destroy this President? They opened the left flank, even before he raised his right hand to pledge to defend the Constitution and to ensure that the laws were faithfully executed.

    I am with you ZIZI, one must never rule out the money motive, simply because the notion, as you so ably demonstrated, that their attacks on President Obama are all about his policy failures does not pass the smell test.

  211. Trust me, you won’t even notice they’re gone. They make that little impact once you get over the initial ‘addiction’.

  212. MM, I must respectfully disagree! Marriage is for the most part a secular institution. Priests, Preachers, Rabbis, etc., always invoke the power vested into them by such and such state before pronouncing couples husband and wife. On top of the “panoply of rights,” listed by GN, that the state (government) “confers” on heterosexual couples, there are many other aspects of the institution of marriage (and by extension the resulting family) that support GN’s contention that marriage is primarily a secular institution. Here are some more examples that strongly support GN’s compelling argument: dissolution of marriage, child custody, Alimony, inheritance, visitation of family members in critical condition, and finally the good old capitalist nature of the family:division of property following divorce. All the things I listed that concern marriage are carried out by the state(government). Besides you really don’t have to go to Church, Temple, Mosque, or other religious edifices to get married and enjoy all the same rights as those married in religious settings. All you need to do is go to the Court House and a judge will legally pronounce you husband and wife. Or, you can go Las Vegas and accomplish the same results. So, except for the walk to alter, and the recitation of “till death do us apart” for Christians, marriage is for the most part a secular (read state sanctioned) institution.

    To be brutally honest with you MM, and I say this as a full fledged heterosexual, I was deeply offended by your equating homosexuality with incest, mental retardation, and child marriage. Surely, you must know that if gay marriages are allowed, the same reasonable restrictions that apply to heterosexual marriages will apply to homosexual marriages. That is to say gays will not be allowed to marry siblings, minors or those with severe mental retardation. This is what is at the heart of the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. By the way, looking back, the arguments used by those opposed to interracial marriage, they too invoked the bible (Noah’s curse upon Ham and his descendants) or the biological inferiority of Blacks. I even read one opponent who argued that allowing Blacks and whites to intermarry would be the same as allowing humans to marry apes, chimpanzee, and orangutans. While I try to understand those who believe in the rights of gay people to be treated equally, but are hesitant because they equate marriage with family and procreation, I just don’t understand people who are bent on denigrating gay people. If that’s what what their religion teaches them, then I am proud to say that I don’t belong to any organized religion. But I also know some deeply religious people who absolutely see no reason why gay couples, who love each other, shouldn’t be married.

    Finally, MM, I don’t think that fighting for the Civil Rights of Gay people should diminish our fight for Jobs. The job crisis we are currently facing was a result of idiotic right wing policies that allowed predatory capitalism to flourish. Denying gay people the right to marry will not create a single job! So, while I can grudgingly respect your religious views about gay marriage, I must vigorously reject your attempt to see the fight for gay civil rights as taking away from the fight for jobs. The two struggles are not mutually exclusive.

  213. Completely. Done. Sent her an email which was not nasty, but firm. I ‘schooled’ Rachel, since she ‘schools’ everyone else.

    I’m done.

  214. Missed your birthday, BWD. I hope it was a day filled with love and celebration. And lots of cake.

    We love you, you know.

  215. Unfortunately, it’s one statement in a long line of statements that we have forgiven that have been damaging to this President. This, for me, is the last straw.

    It’s all about framing. I am never going to advocate for blind cheerleading — we’re liberals, for God’s sake. We are nuanced thinkers. But here is the balance I would like to see from the progressives who have a microphone: start by framing with the good news, at least.

    ‘President Obama has been the most progressive on LGBT issues than any President in American history. He has done more for placing gays in his administration. He has extended family rights and has been in strong support of all of the legal ramifications of civil unions. That being said, we would love to hear him totally support gay marriage…..” OR

    “The Afghan draw down was much larger and bolder than the generals wanted. The President has fullfilled his promise to bring troops home. Look at the troops in place in both wars at the end of the Bush Administration, and you can obviously see the trajectory of this President. Showing strong leadership as Commander-in-Chief. That being said, what would be the conditions that could even speed up this draw down so that we can return more of our treasure back to our domestic needs….”

    Something like that. Every time they open their mouths. Create background noise for the un-engaged that says, “we’re moving in the right direction. On everything. I heard it on TV. It could be better, and will be better with our support…..”

    Instead, Rachel and the rest show air their displeasure and carpet bomb this President as if he’s done nothing right.

  216. When Miss Madow mocked President Obama’s oval office address to the nation concerning the BP oil spill, we were done with her then. The HYDRA has many heads people. The level of hatred and distain that Ms Maddow and many on the left have for President Obama matches and sometimes exceeds the level on the right. Ms Maddow is a brilliant subversive example of just that.

  217. She thinks she owns him and he answers to her. Afterall, she is the smartist person in the room and who is he or we to question. In the land of the blind, the one eyed man (woman) is King. People make way too much of this indiviual who happens to be a Rhodes Scholar. Then again,so is Gretchen Carlson on Fox and Friends. What do they have in common? They are experts at making money.

  218. I’m sure nobody will read this, this far down. But dismissing smart commentators because of one disagreement with Obama is INSANE. It’s not any different from the reactionary politics this site claims to be against.

    Yes, Maddow is wrong here in regards to Obama, and we should let her know. But that’s it; the utter disdain everyone is showing because of this is remarkable. What are you, the tea party? STOP IT. Geez. Maddow is not subverting anyone. Stop with the conspiracies.

  219. Maddow is childish spoiled brat no it all like Jon Stewart and with all the lying rightwing hate on the air we don’t need the likes of her muddling the waters with her uninformed whining.

  220. Bravo, Preach, and Preach some more!

    I *love* your past and present analyses…

    You know, a few threads back, BWD asked this question:

    Where’s our Frank Luntz?

    Hmmm…You could be our “Frank Luntz!”

    Or, maybe, WE should have a “George Lakoff”:

    The New Obama Narrative… http://tinyurl.com/4orx5kw

    Whaddaya think? ;) lol

    And, no disapproval here; you’re invaluable! ::Virtual Hug::

    YES.WE.CAN…DO.(Much)More, Together!
    I’M IN…FIRED UP & GOIN’! ;)

  221. That was a very lucid post Starky. So lucid in fact, that I had to post it on Huff-n-Puffington Post to give some insight to the asses… oops, I meant “masses” (LOL) of the fake progressive gay and gay rights bloggers who just won’t accept “reason” as an option. Hopefully it’ll hit “some” of them in the face like a bucket of ice cold water and wake them up.

  222. Nathan,

    I don’t think GN’s argument becomes compelling just because you characterize it as such. GN’s contention that marriage is a secular institution because as you put it, the government ‘carries out’ a lot of functions in the name of marriage, still side-steps my earlier point that marriage doesn’t become secular because of the government’s extensive involvement with this peculiar contract. The Rabbis, priests. ministers and all who invoke the state where they may bless a union, DON’T derive their authority from the state– secular authority at that, to do so. In reality it is the other way around where the state governments recognize the religious right of officials to make a marriage union, and for them to go and record said union as part of the civic record. I will concede here that the state has gone off and mirrored the religious marriage practice by allowing for courthouse marriages (many of which I have witnessed myself) but here again, it is the union of man and woman in marriage that is the only kind of civil analog available historically and in a majority of states today. So yes, you have a civil marriage that is heterosexual. Civil unions could serve this very same purpose for same-sex couples.

    You may be deeply offended by the fact that the government does set parameters on who we as people chose to marry, but as I said the discrimination applies to everyone here no matter the color, ethnicity, or gender of each individual who contemplates entering the marriage compact.

    And I set forth a perfectly rational explanation, which usually goes without rebuttal as it was here, for why the government does not recognize same-sex marriage. Is it really a foregone conclusion now that the fact that a couple CANNOT EVER reproduce, is an irrational basis for the government to deny recognition and privileges to these kinds of couples? [The government is not off its rocker when it recognizes what all humans have known since time immemorial, the presumption that a man and a woman produce either a female or a male as offspring- maybe both or multiples, whether it happens 100% of the time or not, procreation is inherent in only this kind of human coupling]. I think not.

    Furthermore, if we are to compare apples to apples here, and I don’t think that we can, were the arguments decrying interracial marriage “rational arguments,” ? You seem to point to the most fringe anti-miscegenation ideas to make what I believe is your fundamental point: all prohibitions then and now on one’s choice of marriage partner are equally irrational. Correct me if I’m wrong here, but I disagree.
    The fact is a man and a woman of any race can procreate. Natural law permits it. Society may not like it –white society in America, ill-informed religious zealots may not like it, but it can be and is done all the tiem. Heck, it was the basis of chattel-slavery here in the U.S. once import of African slaves had been outlawed. And I could go into the whole thing about the descendents of Ham issue but scholars of the Torah, and Hebrew — what the ill-informed wing-nuts believe is the basis for their anti-miscegenation agenda– have already dispensed with this incorrect notion. In short, there was no rational basis for outlawing interracial marriage. Social reasons? Yes. Compelling social reason? Probably not. BUT, Can you honestly say there is no rational (or “reasonable” as you put it) basis for the government not recognizing gay marriage?

    What the Gay Rights movement really boils down to is changing the social mores on what marriage is, which are religious in origin – Judeo-Christian to be exact, with respect to gays, via the government. Tenth Amendment issues present an obstacle here.

    I think in your offense that you’ve taken to my points, you still have not addressed some critical lines of inquiry.

    [By the way, the Equal Protection clause extends to protected classes, with the highest scrutiny given to racial minorities- traditionally disenfranchised groups. Intermediate scrutiny is the highest level of scrutiny given to gender matters].

    Anyway, now it is my turn to take offense here. One’s sexual orientation is not an objective, physical attribute that can be observed or verified, like skin color/ethnicity by anyone, least of all the government. (It relies purely on one’s self-identification and nothing more. This is the real monkey-wrench for Gay Rights activists because the government would be essentially overhauling an entire system to grant recognition, privileges and protections to a tiny but vocal, flexible classification of individuals whose grouping relies on some intangible, nebulous, concept of gender-identity; which I might add, to which they can abandon or assume membership in at will, anytime or multiple times for that matter.). The insidious presumption and false equivalency otherwise, is typical of the kind of intellectual dishonesty that I find is rampant in this particular discussion. Gay people have NEVER BEEN ENSLAVED as a group because they were gay. (Makes sense, because there is NO WAY to identify gay people sufficiently enough to enslave them). Gay people can, and have, for ages been able to go out into the world without anyone knowing what it is that they do in their bedrooms, (as it should be) and still share in the panoply of “Human Rights” in America. They could apply for jobs and if they were white and male, or white and female, get them. They could marry or stay single like everyone else subject to the same proscriptions as everyone else. They could travel, they could sit in the front of buses, they could eat in open spaces at restaurants, and a host of other things so long as they kept their sexual activities private. Mind you, sexual activities are private to begin with, whether one self-identifies as a heterosexual or homosexual, and whether people have in recent times begun to flaunt their sexuality publicly or not. Which raises another conundrum that also goes ignored when this subject is broached…

    Do we really want to politicize private acts like one’s sexual preference/activities? I mean because once we do, you realize that sexuality will forever be removed from the private domain– where (as in Lawrence v. Texas) it is still entitled to at least some protections from governmental intrusion, to the public domain where the government is now the agent, regulator, and definer of whatever sexual liaisons it deems permissible for the times? That’s a tricky proposition for everybody when you really give pause and consideration to the meaning of all of this.

    Now to speak from personal experience. I have met in my lifetime a host of people who at one point or another identified themselves as gay, and then for some reason or other they changed back. I have a couple of close friends who are definitely “gay.”
    I have known plenty of gay white males who were among the most racist folks you could ever encounter, some openly, and others who were in the closet about their racial prejudices along with their sexuality. (Many of them are likely Log Cabin Republicans). Come to think of it, most of the gay people I know are also very affluent. Some gay people are nice. Some aren’t. But that goes for people in general. But something I noticed in my particular encounters with gay people that is a common strain of thinking, that I can no longer just dismiss as I was more inclined to do in my twenties.

    The thinking goes much like this a little more or less: I’m really only concerned about me and mine and to heck with everyone else. And it is so ironic now that many of these same selfishly oriented people populate the ranks of activists who now need the collective “everyone else” to galvanize support for their cause for gay marriage.

    Now back to the regularly scheduled discourse: JOBS. JOBS. JOBS.

  223. MM:
    Thank you for your long and passionate response that touched on may issues that time and space won’t allow me to respond to all of them adequately.

    On the main point of our disagreement, I suppose we have to agree to disagree. While I do, and indeed did, concede that religion plays a part in marriage, I still maintain that marriage is, for the most part, governed by secular laws, and, therefore, is for the most part, a secular institution. I see you conveniently side-stepped addressing issues like inheritance, divorce — and attendant issues of child custody division of property-all of which are part of the marriage institution, and all of which are performed solely by the state (government). I also contend that if marriage was purely a religious institutions, the Mormons would be allowed to practice polygamy in keeping with their religious views. You also keep asserting that historically marriage is a religious institution because it pre-dates the creation of government; I am not so sure if this is entirely accurate, but it would require more time and space to engage you fully in this one. so I will put it aside for now.

    It seems to me that your bottom line is not really about religion. Rather, it as about what you regard as natural law, i.e., that only a man and a woman can produce off-springs, and therefore only a man and a woman are entitled to marriage. That may have been the case in the past (although even then it was not 100%), when it was forbidden to have children out of wedlock. We know of course that marriage is not a necessary pre-condition for procreation. Furthermore, there are many heterosexual couples who get married not for procreation, but because of love and a desire for companionship. For example: older heterosexual couples who may have lost previous spouses, either through death or divorce, routinely get married without any plan of producing offsprings; some married heterosexual couples prefer to adopt rather than have children of their own; and, though may have wanted children, many infertile couples get married only to find out they can’t have children. I say all this to point out that, even for heterosexuals, marriage and procreation do not always go hand in hand.

    One point that you made that I absolutely agree with is that we must avoid analogizing the brutal oppression of Black people during slavery and after, up until to to-day, with societal discrimination against gay people. The two are not remotely comparable. I hope I never conveyed that impression in my previous post. What I was trying to say when referencing interracial marriage was to point out how absurd reasoning based biased ideas was offered by those who opposed interracial marriage. I am sure you also know from your extensive knowledge of history that people used both religion and science to justify the enslavement and racial oppression of Black people.

    Lastly, I cannot dispute the existence of white racism in the gay community. Gays like most Americans are a product of this society, which for most of its history, taught people to believe in the ideology of white supremacy. I am, however, always careful not to generalize about all gay people. Moreover, there many gay people who are not white. Many are African Americans, Hispanic, Asian and other racial groups. And while you assert that gays are selfish, that has not been my experience with many gay people I know. I think here you tended to lump together gay activists that belong to the PL with the entire gay community. That is absolutely unfair! There are many thoughtful gay people who are fighting for jobs, who strongly support and defend President Obama, and who are engaged in a whole host of issues that go beyond their fight for equal treatment under the law. But like every other group, It is absolutely understandable to be passionate in the struggle to end oppression that you are personally experiencing. Besides, since being racist or selfish does not bar heterosexuals from being married, I am not sure that raising the issues of racism and selfishness, in the context of discussing the right of gays to marry, is germane.

    I am sure that for gay people, discrimination is not an academic issue; It’s very personal. As a heterosexual, who could not begin to know what they have to go through, all I can do is not judge them; instead, I try to support them the best I can. I only question those who are unfairly attacking this President who is committed to removing discriminatory barriers against gay people.

  224. CoyoteMarti,

    I am sorry to say but the President was 100% right! Without a Supreme Court ruling, clearly stating that state laws that prevent gay people from marrying are unconstitutional, or an act of Congress that mandates the civil rights of gays to marry, the Federal government, and the President in particular, can’t do very much about it. Yes, before 1967, interracial marriage was forbidden in many states, though it was legal in the majority of the states, including Hawaii. So your allusion to the president’s parents, was, in my judgement a cheap shot, because it in no way invalidates what what the President said. If Hawaii barred interracial marriage at the time of his parents’ marriage, while California allowed it, the President would still be right that this was a state issue. Even with the passage of the Civil Rights act of 1964, marriage was still a state issue. It was not included in that law.

    As for DOMA the President has indicated that he believes that it’s unconstitutional and that’s why he has ordered the Justice Dept. to stop defending it in court. Does he need to keep repeating this even when the question is about how to legalize gay marriages? By the way, the existence of DOMA did not prevent Iowa, Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, and now New York from legalizing same sex marriages.

    The only way the issue of gay marriage will be effectively resolved on a national level is for the Supreme Court to rule that state laws that prohibit gay marriages are unconstitutional. In the meantime, the most practical way to bring about gay marriage is to go about it state by state. The more states that allow gay marriage the more likely that the courts will rule in favor of the rights of gays to marry in any state. Constantly bashing President Obama will not bring about gay marriage in all states.

  225. Yes, Nathan we will have to agree to disagree. Just a few things though:
    1.) I didn’t side-step the issues of divorce, inheritance, etc. my arguments rest on some commonly understood legal presumptions, and realities that I shouldn’t have assumed you were aware of. First, distribution of property in the event of inheritance only involves the state when the deceased has not drafted a legally valid instrument, a will or trust, disposing of his/her property prior to death. By doing so, the deceased pretty much cuts the state out of the equation. No government involvement, unless they leave like their entire estate to a dog as in the Leona Helmsley case. The deceased can be single or married it doesn’t matter. If they have a legally valid will at death their property will be disposed of by a surrogate court according to that will. Plus, these days many people use insurance forms and other non-probate kinds of instruments to designate who they want their property to go to upon death. Again this leaves the government out of their personal affairs. Second, a spouse is a spouse is a spouse. If civil unions are recognized by state law, entrants into this union would be lawfully recognized as a spouse, regardless of gender, and the usual laws of divorce, child support, yadayadadayada would still apply, and would be equally applied to both spouses, again regardless of gender as is presently the case among heterosexual married couples. [I imagine where the terms Husband and Wife are used in statutes they can more easily substitute them with spouse. But here again, citizens of respective states may not be okay with this change. And their opinions whether religious or not are no less valid than those who are arguing for changes in nomenclature to accommodate a new scheme of legal rights and privileges for those identifying themselves along sexual-orientation lines.

    2.) The law presumes no matter how old a couple is when they marry that they can always have children. Quaint as this may seem, remember the biblical story of Abraham and Sarah? They were waaay old when they finally gave birth to their first born. I suspect this is where this presumption comes from. Our laws are based on Judeo-Christian tenets. This is just an inescapable fact. [I'm not religious, but the strains of it are everywhere in our laws].

    3.) And like the laws of the U.S. the notion of “marriage” is also grounded in Judeo-Christian ideas, meaning a man and a woman joined in matrimony sanctioned by some higher being through one of that being’s ordained agents.
    And the marriage contract, is the legal representation the secular government grants by way of a certificate to the joined man and woman. I say this in conjunction with my second point above, to mean that the idea of man and woman unified, to be fruitful and multiply, is so fundamental and ineluctable to the term “marriage,” and largely explains why state governments need not have listed marrying someone of the same sex as preclusive to entering the institution in the first place. I actually don’t think your point about the government’s non-recognition of Mormon polygamy means that marriage is evolved into a secular concept apart from religion. Actually I think it just proves my point about how Judeo-Christian ideas undergird American law. So in addition to the plain fact that polygamy, is the legalized equivalent of’ baby-mama drama’ and the headache the government has in actively administering rights to limited but contractually obliged resources, polygamy violates the Judeo-Christian idea of one-man and one-woman as representative of the ONE GOD concept. Monotheism and Monogamy are as American as apple-pie.

    4.) Your description of the Loving v. Virginia decision and grasp of it’s meaning and context was absolutely offensive whether intended or not. But it is not unusual for me to hear of interracial marriage, segregation, and racial slavery’s legacy constantly invoked within the same breath as gay rights. I will not stop calling out people on it when they do it. IT IS OFFENSIVE!!! But not because I’m ultra-sensitive, I’m not, but because it completely lacks any serious command of American history and the peculiar form of racial slavery that took place here.

    5.) The bottom line of my arguments mostly boil down to these few questions and not what you think I think: What’s in it for the government, as the collective representative body of American/state tax-payers, by giving special status to “individuals” who self-identify as a particular sexual-orientation, and then use that classification to then partake in the marriage institution? And, at what cost? Do the benefits outweigh the costs and vice-versa? Dollars and cents are what I’m talking about here, because that’s all anything boils down to in America; Not feelings, not intangibles. ( Remember, the government does benefit from heterosexual unions, whether they produce offspring or not, because there is a rational governmental presumption that offspring will result only from this kind of union -”future taxpayers”, and none other, and more often than not does in fact do so. Hence the government’s giving out cookies for married folks, not single folks, not gay folks who are technically a variation of single folks for legal purposes, because by themselves they are incapable of reproducing. This is not a hard concept here, and really doesn’t require splitting hairs by looking for the exceptions to the rule, or the rule as in practice).

    [FYI all of my close "gay" friends are of color and while I sympathize with their personal struggles in the whole coming out process, it is really a "personal" matter and journey, and highly individualized. (But this shouldn't really matter because I expect you will give no more credence to how I identify myself on the internet than I you, or is warranted for the NETS anyway). Yet again, highlighting the utterly baffling complexity that is courted by merging the concepts of gays and marriage in the U.S., far from the overly simplistic equal protection arguments advanced by gay marriage proponents. Oddly enough, but dismissed outright is the option of civil unions that steer clear of this quagmire, although not without posing their own set of challenges].

    I look forward to further discussions with you on these matters.

  226. THNX 2 SouthernGirl2,i would’ve not known if it weren’t u. There’s a reason why MSNBC got rid of Keith Olberman and not Rachel Maddow or Big Ed,it’s obvious that Rachel is Liberal but she can also influence many liberals who think that President Obama walks on water or that he’s the first AA/Biracial President therefore he’s obligated to fight for people’s choice when they r in bed! Pres Obama’s prudence,temper and judgment is part of many qualities he’s become the most liked President in the entire globe since JFK + he’s the only President who’s won a Nobel Peace Prize while in office. Solution= Boycott MSNBC/NBC/CNBC . OBAMA2012 4MOREYRS

  227. MM wrote:
    “Our laws are based on Judeo-Christian tenets.”

    This is quite the simplification of how the “marriage” laws evolved and why they came to be the way they are today. Marriage did not begin with the founding of the United States. Nor did it begin with the founding of today’s organized churches.
    Before the Christian era, they was a form of marriage, usually taking the form of a contracted union resulting from what was intended often to be a peace “treaty” between tribes. In effect, it had its basis in the governments of two tribes effecting a contract through its nobility, being the group that owned assets.
    This did not change a lot after the Christian era began. It still was often a form of “treaty” between governments involving the nobility of the two State entities, or an arranged marriage between families involving property and approved by a king.
    The churches then began to intermediate between the two and intruded itself in arranging dowries and solemnizing the agreement with a church ceremony…for a fee.
    Marriage evolved into primarily a contracted property agreement. The marriage is arranged, the terms of the dowry set, and the agreement is solemnized in a church before a priest of whatever denomination you choose for a fee. The marriage was not to be torn asunder because it would undo the property agreement; and a male heir had to be produced to inherit the combined property resulting from the agreement. We had arranged marriages in the world up to and right through most of the 1800′s.
    This is where the problem settles in a gay marriage. There will be no male blood heir (or any blood heirs, male or female, in today’s modern world) to finally inherit the combined marriage property.
    For simplification only, we can use “Him” and “Her” for the two partners in a gay marriage.
    In a heterosexual marriage, their blood children will ordinarily inherit from both “Him” and “Her”. This is satisfactory to the two sets of in-laws.
    In a homosexual marriage, “His” assets may end up going to “Her” and “She” can them leave them to anyone “She” chooses. Thus the assets have left the blood lines of “His” family (or vice versa, of course). This change of property ownership out of the blood family is the underlying issue.
    The laws involving property are based in the states. Taxes on the inheritance are based both in the state and the Federal government. Whether one can avoid having the State or Federal government involved in probate based on Federal and State laws, the church plays no part in this and only has a ceremonial role in the “marriage” itself. The church may have other motives for promoting a heterosexual marriage as opposed to a homosexual marriage – desire for children to be raised in their particular religion who will become donors to the church itself – that will incidentally maintain the old blood line inheritance method.
    Once civil marriages became law, the gig was over for the churches. A church marriage is a ceremonial event only, still for a fee, as the new civil property laws will prevail whether the marriage is homosexual or heterosexual, whether the marriage is held in a church or not. Wherever the marriage ceremony is held, one still requires a civil marriage license, which subjects the marriage to the various civil property laws, divorce laws and probate laws of the local area, the state government, and the Federal government re taxes.
    Even the laws regarding dissolution of a marriage have changed, and I can’t think of any state where divorce is still prohibited, and in many there is a way to expedite a dissolution barring arguments over children and property; if the parties agree over child custody and property division, the divorce can occur within weeks or a few months. Again, it is a state matter and has nothing to do with the church, no matter how hard the church may protest that marriage is “til death do us part and the State probates our will to make a property settlement upon death”. The state prevails from beginning to end – from license to divorce or probate.

  228. I made the decision in 2010 to completely turn off all news organizations. There isn’t anything newsworthy on television that I cannot get fresh with back-up documentation and proof via the Internet. With the internet there is also the opportunity for different perspectives, rather than a pundit-type one-sided storyline that represents 21st Century news reporting. I know that Rachel has a lot of liberal supporters, but her goofy approach to providing important news stories was always a turn-off for me. It’s almost as though she shoots herself in the foot with the silliness. She’s often been caught in a lie or untruth, and has had to come back with a half-hearted apology. If you Google “Rachel apologizes,” you’ll see how many instances she has been called out for her lies.

    She really looked like a fool when two weeks prior to the capture of Osama bin Laden,
    she complained that the president authorized strikes in Pakistan. After the capture, a blogger wrote “Rachel Maddow owes president Obama an apology. Weeks ago she complained that the president authorized strikes in Pakistan. Those strikes have borne fruits.”

    And when MSNBC employed Michael Steele, that was the final nail in the coffin for me. It’s a wrap re MSNBC, in general.

  229. I’m tired of being apologized to. She said what she meant. I get to weigh how I feel about it on balance with everything else she says. I like her felt she had potential but she clearly belongs to the school of thought that says her opinions are “normal” and anyone who disagrees is a cretin. Haven’t watched her show since last summer. Don’t miss it.

  230. Janice,

    I couldn’t agree more. Michael Steele? What are they thinking? I used to watch Rachel avidly, but was tapering off when Michael Steele became a regular and a ‘favorite’ of hers. I can’t sit through a whole show anymore. I also have trouble with Ed Schultz and his willingness to diss the President. I liken them all to armchair quarterbacks who think they know more than the coach. It drives me crazy. I think PBO is the best thing that’s happened to our country since JFK, and I know that’s trite at this point. I sincerely love the man and his family and so admire his calmness and ability to think every situation through thoroughly before acting on it.

    Love this site. You all think like I do and are so inspirational to me. Thank you.

  231. Because I checked the “follow-up” comments box, my email account has been filled with comments regarding this topic… so much so that I had to create a separate filter for emails from this site to go into a seaprate “TOAITR” folder.

    All I can say is that I’ve never created a better filter… because the commentary by many, if not all who have responded to this topic have been nothing short of brilliant. There are posts here that have simply overwhelmed me in their lucidness, candidness, and intelligence. I have NEVER been THIS impressed so often from reading blogs. I’m a TRUE liberal and a REAL progressive just like many of you… and like many of you, I also genuinely admire and respect this President. Not just because he’s THE POTUS, but as a human being and as a Man. In the face of all the adversity he’s encountered, challenges he’s faced, the loads of “elephant crap” he’s had to clean up and incessant fake Progressives whining without the benefit of logic and reason, he has rose above them in EVERY aspect… all while accomplishing more in 2 years FOR “the people” than almost every President before him had accomplished in 4 years and more than most before him had accomplished in 8 years.

    After all of the willful ignorance against this President I’ve read and combated on various sites over the past 2 years or so, THIS site is like the brilliance of the sun to the darkness of an impending storm by comparison. In other words… “DAMN, YOU PEEPS ARE SMARTER DANNA MUG!!”… and signing up on here has been one of the best socio-political decision I’ve ever made.

    Thank you BWD for this site. As much as I’ve said, words can’t really express how much I appreciate it and YOU for creating it. One Love.

  232. Apparently, the Internetz continue to be abuzz about Maddow’s lie about the President and his position on New York’s passage of gay marriage. While her defenders are quick to defend, neither she nor they are able to prove that he said anything about being displeased about New York’s new gay marriage law. The bottom line is that she lied, and has lost credibility. Here are some of the WEESEEYOU exchanges from Twitter:

    WEESeeYou W.E.E. See You…
    @ @CptRobespierre Earlier u asked what her quote was, now ur saying u heard her full quote? #SEOD Aight, post her full quote w/a link.
    12 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply »

    WEESeeYou W.E.E. See You…
    Defenders of @maddow it’s simple: Show where POTUS said that he is “against what just happened” re: NY passing SSM law
    14 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply »

    WEESeeYou W.E.E. See You…
    @ @chadmcveigh This isn’t abt POTUS view on SSM. This is about @maddow saying he was “against what just happened” re: NY passing SSM law.
    17 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply »

    WEESeeYou W.E.E. See You…
    @ @CptRobespierre A-HA! So you agree that @maddow lied.
    18 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply »

    WEESeeYou W.E.E. See You…
    @ @TheScottFinley @AngryBlackLady @MaddowBlog EXACTLY! Not only what @maddow said was a LIE but it was unnecessary!
    19 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply »

    WEESeeYou W.E.E. See You…
    @ @CptRobespierre Why can’t you provide proof that President Obama said that he is against NY passing the SSM law?
    21 minutes ago Favorite Retweet Reply

  233. Very good. I haven’t thought about watchin’ Rachel show tonight after being a loyal viewer over the past couple of years. And to be honest, I’m not suffering from any “withdrawal” symptoms at all. I watched her last night to see if she’d apologize, or at least retract her misrepresentative statement about PBO and she didn’t even come close; opting to re-hash the “Republican hypocritical oppositon vs. Obama” story again… as if she REALLY gives a damn. She seemed nervous and uncharacteristically uncomfortable last night… probably due to hearing and reading all the backlash she received over the weekend., but being too “proud” and narcissistic to say anything about that OR anything about the gay marriage voting results in NY. No biggie to me that she looked nervous though… she can STILL go to propagandist media hell as far as i”m concerned until further notice.

  234. Well, since it seems a majority of people here have the save opinion, I thought I’d be different and present some things one may not have thought of.

    science is coming closer and closer to deciphering what one is born, yes I said born, gay and why one is not. (come back in 10 years and check thins post and I think you will feel regret at what you have said). Have you ever noticed that one who is gay seems to take on some traits of the opposite sex? Let’s take Rachel for instance-since you hate her so much. I myself cannot say I’m fond of her but it is for real reasons and not decimation.

    Do you think of her as a normal female who has just decided to be gay? Or does she have characteristics that might be associated with the opposite sex? The newest science is pretty consistent that a deviation has taken place in the individual. For instance, mannerisms, expertise in things normally know for by the opposite sex, more androgynous features. why I’ve noticed these things in myself..and for years was always perplexed as to why I was so different. This is way before sexual attraction begins to develop.

    I excelled in math, science, sports, loved boys toys, hated dresses-yes, there was an alteration happening her that was far greater than who I would choose to be attracted to. The newest science talks about certain individuals who have had excess testosterone during gestation-before we were ever born.And this takes place in a number of women, some to a lesser degree, some to a higher degree. I never liked being mistaken for a boy-so for me perhaps not so much. Others, so much, they feel they would be better off being boys.

    Now, I’m asking you to put your self in someone else’s shoes. How confusing do you think this might be? It can get pretty frustrating at times…and if one is different in any way, it can lead to ridicule. So, many of our life’s are a struggle and it takes courage to be your self. Now, most of these girls exposed to the excess testosterone, will also probably be more attracted to someone of their own sex.

    So, you are thinking “So what”. Well, for us, it’s not a choice. And we have all the desires you do. And marriage for many is one of them. Some say, it doesn’t count if we can procreate. I know many heterosexual couples who cannot procreate-should we take away their right to marriage?

    And I’m sorry if we look a bit odd to you. Some overweight people do, some not so attractive people look a bit odd too. But we are all humans. Did you know in aptitude tests, we tend to score more like boys. Did you knw our brains process information like a combination of woman and men? Parts of the brain structure is even a bit of a combination.

    Does this mean we are not human? We have no feelings? So much feelings, that sometimes, when you notice these other changes before the person does, the feel so bad, they go home and hang themselves. Human? yes. Feelings? yes.

    Ok, move ahead several years. we too fall in love. And sometimes it’s so great we want to love that person and do all the things offered to the straight people. Now I have no desire to marry but I must put myself in the shoes of others. And I do it not to support Rachel, because just like all people, she has chosen to not be so sincere or empathetic as she comes across. It can happen to straight people too-I just personally don’t find it appealing.

    But remember they are humans just like you and they don’t want to be given a consolation prize of “civil unions”. They want to be married like other humans. Remember we have been made fun of, been made to feel not quite human …and all for something we did not ask to be. Can you not find it in your heart to finally let us feel human?

    If there are some of you that are so into your religion, and that includes the president, you have the right to find marriage to be between a man and a woman. What Rachel said, and remember , I am NOT a fan of hers, is that the president is for marriage between a man and a woman. The vote in NY was for marriage between the same sexes. This is against his official stance. So, what she said was fact. According to his belief system, he is allowed this opinion. However it is his official opinion.

    Why are you so mad at her for stating his official position? That’s only the truth. And it’s his right to have that opinion.

    You know, I don’t think there is anything wrong with being gay. We are all different in so many different ways. It yields for diversity. But I do have to say, when I look in the mirror, I cry sometimes, because I wish I would see someone a little more feminine. Not all gays feel that way, but I do. I like being good in math and science and other things and talents..but I sure would like to look like Angelina Jolie a bit more. I did not ask to come out this way.

    Maybe next time you run across one of us, you could be a little more understanding. Maybe you could feel what it was like to be in my shoes.

    Sincerely,

    Gigi Jacobs
    Bodybygigi@hotmail.com

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s