I've always been always been GGG for Dan Savage, but he's being too harsh here on the President.
First, the President's remarks show political courage.
While polls show a slight plurality of the public in favor of Same Sex Marriage, I suspect that, currently, it is a slight net loser among voters who will use this as their deciding issue.
It slightly dampens enthusiasm among blacks and gives unenthusiastic evangelic bigots a reason to hold their nose and vote for an LDSer.
But, more importantly, Savage is wrong in his lack of enthusiasm for a state by state approach.
If we repeal DOMA and allow federal recognition of each state's individual decision, then we will eventually win what is, in reality, a long range war of attrition.
Society evolves over time, and state by state recognition of either same sex marriage or civil unions, either through the passage of legislation, or by judicial fiat, will ultimately aide in the evolution of attitudes necessary to change the state by state snowball effect into a gradual avalanche.
Each new step builds upon the next, making the next easier, in much the way that Lyndon Johnson anticipated (using the subtle metaphor of talking a virgin out of her cherry) when he steered the toothless 1957 Civil Rights Act through the US Senate, while ever lying in wait for the next opportunity to present itself (as it eventually did with the Kennedy assassination) and meanwhile manipulating events behind the scene (as proven in transcripts of his phone conversations with Dr. King) to set the stage for the eventual triumph of decency .
As such, a Presidential endorsement, even an equivocal one, creates momentum for more change and gradually changing the attitudes of society through evolution and attrition. So, stop complaining Dan. Obama Comes Out for Same-Sex Marriage—But His Evolution Is Incomplete | Slog slog.thestranger.com
Let's give a hand to Jim Alesi, who courageously stood up for the right to trespass on someone else's property and then sue them, and who eventually supported Same Sex Marriage when he was finally given permission to do so. Alesi: ‘I Am Not Running For Re-Election’ www.capitaltonight.com
Mary Alice Miller: Why not require males to wait 3 days before having sex? They can go to a clinic, sign forms requesting sex, get an exam and the requisite counseling on the consequences of their actions, sign a consent stating they are sure, then come back 3 days later. Considering the myriad consequences, it sounds reasonable.
Gate: Is that the interval men would get ? Every three days? I know plenty of folks who'd gladly that deal. Kirby: Wait 3 days for a Utah abortion? Why not wait to have sex, too? | The Salt Lake Tribune www.sltrib.com
Chait takes the moral equivalence of the parties' argument and shoots it with a Lugar:
"Lugar lists three issues here as evidence that the Democrats are equally in hoc to unflinching dogma as are Republicans: entitlement cuts, tort reform, and trade agreements. Certainly some Democrats take liberal positions on these issues. But, in fact, Barack Obama has enacted entitlement cuts and proposed others, has offered to support tort reform multiple times, and has signed several free trade agreements. If these issues are the equivalent to the Republican mania on climate change, immigration, and taxes, it shows just how asymmetrical the two parties are at the moment." http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/05/lugars-demise-and-the-constitutional-crisis.html nymag.com
Liberal stupidity extends even to our millionaires, who one would think would know better. http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/05/liberal-donors-ethical-confusion.html nymag.com
Chait asks conservatives if they will indentify whether there is, in their minds, "any legitimate approach to opposing an unspecified spending cut?"
Don't expect a more detailed answer than "no" anytime soon. http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/05/obamas-low-down-dirty-use-of-statistics.html nymag.com
Just noticed that, pending litigation, NYC has gone from 8 to 6 Democratic Congressional primaries as Mark Escoffery-Bey (running against Serrano) and Aniello Grimaldi (running against Engel) are both off at the Board.
And someone has filed an "opportunity to ballot" to run in the 6th CD Independence Party—if it survives, I'm predicting a Halloran victory in that primary.
The Old Grey Lady; always first with the fast breaking news (cough). Among Russian Immigrants in New York, Affinity for Republicans www.nytimes.com
Come, let us visit the alternate reality world of which Gary Tilzer, in which Russian voters cast landslide votes against Barack Obama to send a message to the local Brooklyn Democrats, rather than the other way around.
The multiple levels of deceit here (which I'll bet are geared to selling a particular client's narrative) are stunning in their audacity.
In Tilzer's world, the egregious slicing and dicing of the Russian community to benefit Marty Golden is portrayed as being the fault of the Democrats.
In Tilzer's world, Russian support for the GOP is a recent phenomenon, when in reality Donnie Halperin worried about it in 1984.
In Tilzer's world, this bizarro narrative is supported by citing the Russian vote in three different races involving Democrats running against Democrats, rather than Republicans.
In perhaps the most stunning example of insincerity, Tilzer ignores the ideological affinity between Russians and Orthodox Jews he cited himself only about a week ago.
While it is true that Russian voters will chose ethnic affinity over ideology, the GOP trend the Times cites is primarily about ideology.
Finally, Tilzer ignores the fact that the new Asian districts he complains about (which exist only because the VRA covers race and not ethnicity), were created by the courts and by Republican, as well as by Democrats. True News: NYT Claim that The Russian Are Voting for the GOP is Not A Communist Plot But A Fantasy truenewsfromchangenyc.blogspot.com