WH getting blowback from African-American churches over gay-marriage stance

posted at 10:01 am on May 14, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Barney Frank told the panel on ABC’s This Week that “I don’t think anyone’s vote was changed” when Barack Obama endorsed the legalization of same-sex marriage — but that might be too optimistic an analysis.  The New York Times reports that the White House went on a charm offensive with leaders of faith organizations, including and perhaps especially African-American churches where opposition to gay marriage runs high. So far, the charm offensive has had mixed results:

About two hours after declaring his support for same-sex marriage last week, President Obama gathered eight or so African-American ministers on a conference call to explain himself. He had struggled with the decision, he said, but had come to believe it was the right one.

The ministers, though, were not all as enthusiastic. A vocal few made it clear that the president’s stand on gay marriage might make it difficult for them to support his re-election. …

In the end, Mr. Coates, who supports civil marriages for gay men and lesbians, said that most of the pastors, regardless of their views on this issue, agreed to “work aggressively” on behalf of the president’s campaign. But not everyone. “Gay marriage is contrary to their understanding of Scripture,” Mr. Coates said. “There are people who are really wrestling with this.”

This was the danger of going on the record, a danger Obama’s allies on the Left apparently discounted.  Obama drove turnout in 2008 in part through the enthusiastic participation of these very same churches.  Having now sided with the people who call these black pastors and congregations “bigots,” especially in North Carolina where two-thirds of black voters supported Amendment One, Obama is not at risk of having them flip to Mitt Romney — but he does risk losing that enthusiasm, fundraising, and organization.

It’s not just about the policy itself, either.  The churches now wonder whether Obama will back efforts to force churches to perform same-sex marriages, a topic which one religious leader broached with the President during one of the calls:

“Some of the faith communities are going to be afraid that this is an attack against religious liberty,” Mr. Hunter remembered telling the president.

“Absolutely not,” Mr. Obama insisted. “That’s not where we’re going, and that’s not what I want.”

Really? The Obama administration’s track record on religious freedom singularly argues otherwise.  Most recently, the White House stabbed their allies in health-care reform in the Catholic Church in the back by using the ObamaCare law that the US Conference of Catholic Bishops supported to create a mandate that requires church organizations to pay for contraception, sterilization, and abortifacients.  Even more to the point, the Obama administration tried to apply the ADA to force a church to rehire a minister they’d terminated, an attempt that got a 9-0 rebuke from the Supreme Court.

The only time this President is solicitous of religious freedom and principles is when he’s trying to cover his own rear end.

On the other hand, Obama’s declaration has resulted in a lot of enthusiasm at churches … for Romney, as Andrew Malcolm explains:

Near the end of the competitive part of the recent Republican presidential primary season, Gov. Mitt Romney began showing growing support among evangelical voters. The Mormon had been losing that influential portion of the GOP base by lopsided proportions. Not anymore.

Thank you, Barack Obama. …

In a major examination of evangelical support for Romney the Deseret News Sunday quoted several Southern academics. Dave Woodard of Clemson University called Obama’s carefully-staged statement a gift for Romney highlighting his candidacy’s uniqueness in supporting traditional marriage.

“I don’t think there’s any doubt he’s sealed the deal,” with most evangelical voters, Woodard told the paper. “I think he can make up for any other problems he has with them with just this one issue.”

Woodard added: “There is beginning to be some genuine enthusiasm for Mitt Romney. They’re not just going to talk about his Sunday morning activities. He has the convictions on the issues they like.”

Newsweek may have crowned Obama with a secular halo this weekend, but he’s not getting hosannas from the churches — and that might be all it takes to send Obama into retirement in January 2013.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Vaccuous analysis to arrive at a conclusion you already desired before performing the supposed analysis. These posts are so disappointingly predictable, lacking any real insight into anything.

underceij on May 14, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Memo to African Americans: He is not really one of you.

xrayiiis on May 14, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Sure. But would they make the same collective effort to get to the polls?

apostic on May 14, 2012 at 10:36 AM

In Illinois 2-my old district-definitely. To the racists sheeple there-Obama is the god of gods.

annoyinglittletwerp on May 14, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Obama screwed the pooch on this one.

First we hear he’s gay, and now, this??

Right Mover on May 14, 2012 at 10:42 AM

just because the 0ne says that it’s not an attack on Religious Liberty, it must be so. He’s the anointed one in the church of liberalism.

kirkill on May 14, 2012 at 10:43 AM

libfreeordie

You know nothing. Your comment against me has no standing. You don’t know me, you don’t know who you are dealing with on this, I suggest you stop with the misinformation against me. I will stop short of hurling an insult your way. You don’t need my help in looking any worse then you normally do.

Bmore on May 14, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Will someone please explain to me how pastors can work aggressively on a political campaign without jeopardizing their tax exempt status?

jhkotter on May 14, 2012 at 10:15 AM

I’ve been asking, nee shouting! this very question for many years.
(crickets)
~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on May 14, 2012 at 10:44 AM

Memo to African Americans: He is not really one of you.

xrayiiis on May 14, 2012 at 10:42 AM

FTFY

VegasRick on May 14, 2012 at 10:44 AM

The Dems will not lose any significant portion of the black vote no matter what they do. If they were worried about fallout from Obama’s evolving opinion, they wouldn’t have come out with the announcement the first day after the vote in North Carolina.

ksmoola1 on May 14, 2012 at 10:45 AM

MessesWithTexas on May 14, 2012 at 10:39

Agreed.

50sGuy on May 14, 2012 at 10:45 AM

My view on gay marriage is; I don’t care if they enter in to some sort of civil union, just don’t call it marriage. Maybe gayage, or for the hardcore gays — queerage.

Dasher on May 14, 2012 at 10:46 AM

When you have Trig Truther Sullivan singing Obama’s praises as the Gay President, I’m sure all sorts of alarm bells go off. It’s not that Blacks will vote for Romney. They just won’t vote in enough numbers to cost O several swing states. Keep it up Sully!

EMD on May 14, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Barney is half right. Nobody who wasn’t going to vote for Obama anyway is going to vote for him now because of this flip-flop. BUT – there are plenty who will decide not to vote for him (either by staying home or voting Romney) as a result of the flip-flop. For Obama it was lose-lose decision to make. Anybody seen George McGovern latelyl?

tommyboy on May 14, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Blowback? Puh-leese.
Many blacks would vote for Zombie Hitler if he was the right color.

annoyinglittletwerp on May 14, 2012 at 10:28 AM

How about the Jews, are they still voting for Leftist en mass? People who live in monolithic houses shouldn’t throw stones.

Kjeil on May 14, 2012 at 10:48 AM

Listen to his words…they lie. See? He’s not a liar, just his words.

He says he wants to be very “consistent”. So BEFORE he was a Presidential candidate, he was for Gay Marriage. Then in 2008, when he was running for President, he was certain that marriage was only between a Man and Woman. Now…he needs $ and he’s sinking like a rock.

God Bless America, and please help us.

– Psalm 109:8

kirkill on May 14, 2012 at 10:48 AM

The President, the Vice President, & now the House Minority Leader have all in the last few days claimed that their alleged Christian faith compels them to endorse sinful lifestyles.

For example, here’s the President, on homosexual marriage:

When we think about our faith, the thing at root that we think about is, not only Christ sacrificing himself on our behalf, but it’s also the Golden Rule, you know, treat others the way you would want to be treated.

The Golden Rule ought to mean that we seek to lead folks away from the dangerous & unhealthy practice of homosexuality.

Jesus is never quoted in the Bible about homosexuality, but he endorsed the Old Testament Scriptures many times.

itsnotaboutme on May 14, 2012 at 10:48 AM

Barney is half right. Nobody who wasn’t going to vote for Obama anyway is going to vote for him now because of this flip-flop. BUT – there are plenty who will decide not to vote for him (either by staying home or voting Romney) as a result of the flip-flop. For Obama it was lose-lose decision to make. Anybody seen George McGovern lately?

tommyboy on May 14, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Somehow, I doubt that the DNC erected a new wing on the Missouri State Hospital grounds in honor of Senator Thomas Eagleton, former VP Candidate (briefly).
Jeebus … That was historic and ignominious, yet has pretty much disappeared.
~(Ä)~

Karl Magnus on May 14, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Another vaccuous analysis by me to arrive at a conclusion you already knew a leftist piece of garbage such as myself would arrive at before performing the supposed analysis. My, and other leftist pieces of garbages’ posts are so disappointingly predictable, lacking any real insight into anything.

underceij on May 14, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Fixed, for concern trolls everywhere.

MNHawk on May 14, 2012 at 10:59 AM

Kjeil on May 14, 2012 at 10:48 AM

I’m a cradle conservative who was introduced to my Calvinist husband by another right-leaning Jew. When I was growing up, the head of the Cook County republicans was also Jewish.
Jews are FAR less monolithic in their voting habits than blacks.

annoyinglittletwerp on May 14, 2012 at 11:00 AM

Why does BHO hate churches and church going people..?

d1carter on May 14, 2012 at 11:01 AM

African Americans support Obama because Democrats support Obama and African Americans are Democrats.

libfreeordie on May 14, 2012 at 10:33 AM

Perfect example of circular reasoning, not saying that it isn’t real, but it does demonstrate that voting booth decisions are highly illogical.

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on May 14, 2012 at 11:01 AM

There’s no way BO is affirming his support for gay marriage on principle- he does nothing on principle. But, you guys, giddy with excitement for the blow-back are not standing on principle either.

Rush has pointed out that everytime this issue comes up for a vote, it’s the conservative viewpoint that wins. So, you’re within the majority but, for a group that prides itself on being the party of principle, you shouldn’t be so cavalier. Being popular is not a principled stance and it is in no way a standard by which a law is deemed constitutional. The way I see it, if it’s not constitutional it’s not a law.

Traditions and culture can change for the better- or at least the change can be innocuous. This is one of those. Let them be gay, folks. There’s nothing inherently illegal (i.e. violating of rights) when a man marries a man. that’s all that matters with regard to government and the integrity of the politics of freedom.

Wish this part of the right’s platform would change.

beselfish on May 14, 2012 at 11:07 AM

Meh. The most we can hope for is increased apathy in the A-A community. A few less voters here and there going to the polls to vote for Hope’n’Change Fear’n’Despair. I doubt it will be enough to swing any states, though.

We most certainly will not see a significant percentage of African-Americans suddenly voting R because of this issue. Anyone who is suggesting otherwise (if anyone is) is smoking crack.

nukemhill on May 14, 2012 at 11:08 AM

My recollection, and the bishops’ recollection, is that the USCCB opposed the final legislation that was passed into law:

http://old.usccb.org/healthcare/2010-USCCB-health-care-reform-summary.pdf

3/23/10: Statement by President of USCCB
Cardinal George recalls the bishops‟ long commitment to health care reform and applauds the effort to expand health care to all, but explains that because the new law did not meet the three criteria, the bishops opposed its passage.

jdp629 on May 14, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Jews are FAR less monolithic in their voting habits than blacks.

We know both groups are monolithic and the Blacks are more monolithic but not my much

WASHINGTON – American Jews expressed flagrant support for Democratic candidates for Congress, contributing to a turnaround in the House of Representatives. According to a CNN sampling of voters, 87 percent of Jewish voters voted Democrat.

Kjeil on May 14, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Blowback. Huh-huh-hh-huh-huh…….

/beavis

CurtZHP on May 14, 2012 at 10:02 AM

I think you mean “/Butt-Head”. Beavis’s laugh was “Heh heh heh mmm heh”.

Yeah, I”m being nit-picky.

DethMetalCookieMonst on May 14, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Whoops forgot the link
this is a bit dated but it makes the point

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3325529,00.html

Kjeil on May 14, 2012 at 11:10 AM

So doesn’t this mean he supports the lifestyle?

The specific acts?

Man this is great maybe he can promote this at rallies this Fall?

Go Barackie!!!!! You Wockie!!!!

PappyD61 on May 14, 2012 at 11:10 AM

This is perhaps the last straw with many black voters.

They’ll never move to Romney, they’ll just stay home, to voice their “disappointment” in the the Empty Suit President.

ICanSeeNovFromMyHouse on May 14, 2012 at 11:11 AM

The first comment is so vacuous. It is not a question of voting for Romney, it is a question of not voting at all. Certainly Romney has no appeal to that and other interest groups.

Circular reasoning is not necessarily wrong or useless, as anyone who knows any history can show from quotations of the mighty. People will continue to say and do what they have always said and done because that is they way they have always done it. Circular? very. Useful quite.

Denver Bob on May 14, 2012 at 11:12 AM

OT: In 2008, Obama carried Maine, 58%-40%. The latest polling has him up by only 8 points (50%-42%).

steebo77 on May 14, 2012 at 11:17 AM

In leadership, timing is everything

Tuesday: North Carolina voters endorse President Obama’s stand on gay marriage.

Wednesday: President Obama changes his stand.

J_Crater on May 14, 2012 at 11:19 AM

“Absolutely not,” Mr. Obama insisted. “That’s not where we’re going, and that’s not what I want.”

That’s the same lie he told the Catholic Bishops to get them to sign on to Obamacare.

tommyboy on May 14, 2012 at 11:20 AM

OT: In 2008, Obama carried Michigan, 57%-41%. The latest polling has him up by only 5 points (45%-40%).

steebo77 on May 14, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Kjeil on May 14, 2012 at 11:09 AM

Reformed Jews are Dems first-Jews second.
My parents were conservative Reformed Jews-very rare.
Usually-the more ‘frum’(religious) a Jew is-the more conservative he is.
Most orthodox Jews vote conservative.

annoyinglittletwerp on May 14, 2012 at 11:21 AM

This is exactly how it happens, how the foundations crumble.

Having long ago chosen racial preference over principle the last vestiges of any remaining Biblical capital they may have once had will disappear and these black ministers will sell out completely and so mortgage their congregations’ future.

The black community used to be the most reliably Biblically-oriented segment of the American population but that is no longer the case and their community is displaying all the social demographics of that transition.

Thanks Barak Hussein, the Democrat Party, and the mainstream media. May your legacy follow you to that deep dark place in eternity.

Cleombrotus on May 14, 2012 at 11:23 AM

libfreeordie

Yeah, I didn’t think so. Bye.

Bmore on May 14, 2012 at 11:26 AM

Why does BHO hate churches and church going people..?

d1carter on May 14, 2012 at 11:01 AM

Because he and his ilk think religion is the opiate of the people.

Hosanna on May 14, 2012 at 11:26 AM

Blacks are going to vote Democrat even if the Dems had a plank that was a subsidy for new plantations in the South and all the jobs were set asides for blacks.

docflash on May 14, 2012 at 11:27 AM

In leadership, timing is everything

Tuesday: North Carolina voters endorse President Obama’s stand on gay marriage.

Wednesday: President Obama changes his stand.

J_Crater on May 14, 2012 at 11:19 AM

We just found out that he has a “wide stance”.

VegasRick on May 14, 2012 at 11:28 AM

***

That was when I realized the SSM movement was about subverting religious organizations.

Obama would have no problem forcing churches to peform these ceremonies.

WisRich on May 14, 2012 at 10:14 AM

Exactly. That and the insistence that homosexuality be celebrated in schools from kindergarten through 12th grade.

The issue is not same sex marriage.
The issue is the subjugation of religion to the state.

Connecticut on May 14, 2012 at 10:17 AM

Got that right.

Shifting gears, Romney et al. should view this as an opportunity to gather up black conservatives, give them some speaking authority, and dispatch them to potentially receptive black precincts to communicate a message that pasty-faced Romney can’t. Education is a big deal to some blacks. These black surrogates should go into these areas and scream about school choice. Federal aid for college is useless if the black kids can’t do the work after 13 years in substandard schools. Get blacks turned on teachers’ unions–even if in inner cities they’re controlled by blacks.

How about energy? What do blacks have in common with environmentalists? Even that a**hat Van Jones can’t fill their gas tanks.

Even if it cuts into Obama a little, it’s worth it. To get Romney in and then deliver on a national movement for school choice could undermine Dems with blacks by 2016 and beyond.

BuckeyeSam on May 14, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Because he and his ilk think religion is the opiate of the people.

Hosanna on May 14, 2012 at 11:26 AM

And he and his ilk think that they should be the opiate of the people.

VegasRick on May 14, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Coming in 5…4…3…2…: “I was taken out of context.”
or “My position has evolved again.” or “That’s my personal view, but I won’t work to make it happen.” or “Those black churches that are against me I will throw under the bus — who needs those bigots.”

Christian Conservative on May 14, 2012 at 11:33 AM

annoyinglittletwerp on May 14, 2012 at 11:21 AM

You don’t need to defender yourself to me, I agree with you. I’m just asking for some consideration when you feel the need to talk to me as a group member rather than as an individual.

I know this thread is about beating up liberal blacks Christians for voting for Obama, what about the fact that far more Liberal whites are voting for him? That’s where his power is. Millions more whites will vote for him than blacks, what’s their excuse?

I think maybe about 8 percent of the Black community is conservative.

Kjeil on May 14, 2012 at 11:34 AM

So, this time blacks won’t vote their race but will vote based on the issues?
(My apologies if that question caused such side-splitting, fall-over laughter in you that you hurt yourself.)

TeaPartyNation on May 14, 2012 at 11:35 AM

I’ve never understand how Democrats get the black vote anyway.

Democrats filibustered civil rights.
Democrats were the KKK.
Democrats filibustered making lynching a federal crime.
Democrats fought AGAINST civil rights, Repulicans fought FOR them.
Dr. King was a Republican.

Wagthatdog on May 14, 2012 at 11:35 AM

We’re talking about the guy that goes to GD America churches right?

Wagthatdog on May 14, 2012 at 11:36 AM

The black community used to be the most reliably Biblically-oriented segment of the American population but that is no longer the case and their community is displaying all the social demographics of that transition.

This hasn’t been the case since at least the 60′s.

Kjeil on May 14, 2012 at 11:36 AM

And he and his ilk think that they should be the opiate of the people.

VegasRick on May 14, 2012 at 11:31 AM

Correct, I meant to add that. Religion looks too much like competition to them.

Hosanna on May 14, 2012 at 11:37 AM

BuckeyeSam on May 14, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Allen West
Herman Cain
J.C. Watts
Condi Rice
Angela McGlowan
Alveda King
And so on……………

Great idea Sam!

VegasRick on May 14, 2012 at 11:38 AM

How is that so different from Mitt Romney who believes he’ll get 95% of the social con vote no matter what? I’m just saying, if you’re going to criticize Obama for thinking like this, he doesn’t have a monopoly on crass political considerations.

gryphon202 on May 14, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Because most of the 95% of conservatives for Mitt are voting on policy and opposition to 0bama’s, and most of the 95% of blacks for 0bama are voting on skin color instead of policy?

One decision is political choice; the other is crass racism.

cane_loader on May 14, 2012 at 11:39 AM

I’ve never understand how Democrats get the black vote anyway.

Democrats filibustered civil rights.
Democrats were the KKK.
Democrats filibustered making lynching a federal crime.
Democrats fought AGAINST civil rights, Repulicans fought FOR them.
Dr. King was a Republican.

Many blacks WERE Republicans because of the southern democrats activities you list.

IIRC, during the 1960 presidential campaign, King received a call from Kennedy who promised to move on civil rights legislation if King supported him and worked to get blacks re-register as dems and vote for him. That evidently worked and the Left in government,education and media has reworked history to make blacks believe it was the rich white GOP that was racist and fought against civil rights.

hawkeye54 on May 14, 2012 at 11:42 AM

Maybe Obama will nuance this and declare its his white half that supports Gay Marriage while his black half is opposed.

jp on May 14, 2012 at 11:45 AM

These posts are so disappointingly predictable, lacking any real insight into anything.

underceij

Oh, great one, we are not worthy of your presence on this little blog site.

We breatlessly await your deep thoughts on the subject at hand.

If your username is any indication of smartness, you suck.

Typicalwhitewoman on May 14, 2012 at 11:50 AM

Things are getting tough for our “White,African-American,Gay President”….

Baxter Greene on May 14, 2012 at 11:52 AM

LOL – like obama cares – he is not interested in support from Christians.

Pork-Chop on May 14, 2012 at 11:54 AM

It’s a stupid trade, a tiny fraction of more votes from the gay activist community in deep blue states that will go for Obama anyway in exchange for very likely tepid turnout among African Americans in crucial swing states.

I don’t doubt Obama still gets 90% plus of African American votes, but even a few points of drop in black turnout will easily offset any gains he made with this stand and hand states over like North Carolina, Virginia, Ohio and Pennsylvania to Romney.

BradTank on May 14, 2012 at 11:56 AM

Obama screwed the pooch on this one.

First we hear he’s gay, and now, this??

Right Mover on May 14, 2012 at 10:42 AM

sautéed the pooch dotcha mean …

conservative tarheel on May 14, 2012 at 11:59 AM

Won’t effect the black vote much, maybe a tiny bit; Hispanic and Asian, yes.

Philly on May 14, 2012 at 12:00 PM

IMHO enough pressure will be brought
by “Rev.” Sharpton an d “Rev” Jackson
to shame the churches into supporting
the Iwon…

conservative tarheel on May 14, 2012 at 12:02 PM

“Some of the faith communities are going to be afraid that this is an attack against religious liberty,” Mr. Hunter remembered telling the president.

“Absolutely not,” Mr. Obama insisted. “That’s not where we’re going, and that’s not what I want.”

In spite of the massive race based voting by the black community last cycle am I really supposed to believe that all those pastors are so stupid that they believe he won’t fold and pander to the gay community if he thinks it will help him?

It may not be BO’s intention but he will let the pitchfork crowd beat at the doors of the churches and he will do nothing to stop them.

katiejane on May 14, 2012 at 12:06 PM

Obama……….The First Gay President.

For today, I am just going to live in the enjoyment of this label.

ORconservative on May 14, 2012 at 12:13 PM

Here is a link to a black SBC pastor’s blog. He disagrees with Obama, and says he wont’ vote for him again.

http://dwightmckissic.wordpress.com/2012/05/09/response-to-president-obamas-decision-to-endorse-same-sex-marriages/

Kjeil on May 14, 2012 at 12:15 PM

Just today I was talking to my sister about the prospect of her getting a pink slip Thursday. Told her not to worry because the one has a laser like focus on all things economic. Heck. She should be happy because if she were gay she would have Barry on her side of the marriage issue. It really reassured her. Winning!!!!!

TheGarbone on May 14, 2012 at 12:16 PM

I suppose that is one way to get your face on the $3 bill.

crosspatch on May 14, 2012 at 12:18 PM

Funny how Obaama only reached out to black church leaders. What about the rest of America?…

Urban Infidel on May 14, 2012 at 12:19 PM

This stupid magazine may have put the final nail in the re-election coffin of this first-black-president-failure. They are all completely intellectually vacant.

TX-96 on May 14, 2012 at 12:20 PM

especially in North Carolina where two-thirds of black voters supported Amendment One

a little pet peeve. i am tired of people calling it “amendment one.” the supporters of it called it the “marriage amendment” or “defense of marriage act,” the bill that made the ballot vote possible. the opponents wanted to not remind people that the amendment is about marriage, so they called it “amendment one” when it was the only amendment on the ballot, so naming it “one” makes no sense. saying “vote against the marriage amendment” sounds bad so opponents used a different name.

(the opponents didn’t want to remind people about marriage because they wanted people to instead think about increased domestic violence, children losing health care, and hate/bigotry. those are the three lies they told about supporters of the amendment… the truth? supporters were simply supporting marriage.)

but whatever. it passed, so i am happy

Sachiko on May 14, 2012 at 12:21 PM

Will someone please explain to me how pastors can work aggressively on a political campaign without jeopardizing their tax exempt status?

jhkotter on May 14, 2012 at 10:15 AM

2 reasons,
#1. They are democrats, they always cheat.
#2. The press is all for oblunder they dont care what
the constitution or the irs says.

ColdWarrior57 on May 14, 2012 at 12:26 PM

“I don’t think there’s any doubt he’s sealed the deal,” with most evangelical voters, Woodard told the paper. “I think he can make up for any other problems he has with them with just this one issue.”

Really? These people are so against gay marriage that just Obama coming out in support of it is enough to make them go from “Romney’s almost no different from Obama” to “F*** year Romney!”? Why? Why the hell is whether or not gays can get married more important to these people than the economy, jobs or a socialist president trying to destroy the country? No different from people who vote Democrat just because they (supposedly) support gay marriage IMO. Single issue voters really shouldn’t vote.

Cyhort on May 14, 2012 at 12:27 PM

That’s the same lie he told the Catholic Bishops to get them to sign on to Obamacare.

tommyboy on May 14, 2012 at 11:20 AM

Actually it’s the same lie he used to get the Catholic Bishops and wavering Democrat congress people like Bart Stupack to sign on to Obamacare. The congress people bought it and got back-stabbed. The Bishops didn’t and in the end did not sign on to or endorse Obamacare.

Trafalgar on May 14, 2012 at 12:29 PM

There is an old tale about a peasant who, while hoeing in his field during the spring thaw, came across a snake. He raised his hoe to kill it, but the snake begged for mercy. “I’m too frozen to do you any harm,” it cried. The farmer, full of compassion, picked up the half-dead serpent and put it into his tunic, against his chest. As he began to work, the snake got warmer and warmer. Suddenly the snake bit the peasant, who frantically reached in and pulled it out, throwing it to the ground. “Why?” asked the man. “I befriended you. I trusted you.”

“True,” hissed the snake as it slithered away. But don’t blame me. You knew I was a snake when you picked me up.”

It is distressing that so many people of faith are so willing to compromise their faith and conviction for an amorphous slogan of hope and change. Perhaps it is not compromise at all. Perhaps they never really had either faith or conviction. No matter. Once they take this to their bosom and embrace politics over faith and principle, it will be only a matter of time before they find that their willingness to compromise their faith has taken them farther than they wanted to go, kept them longer than they wanted to stay, and cost them more than they wanted to pay. They know it’s a snake, yet they’re willing to embrace it with the promise that it won’t bite them later. Good luck with that.

Harrell on May 14, 2012 at 12:29 PM

Newsweek may have crowned Obama with a secular halo this weekend, but he’s not getting hosannas from the churches — and that might be all it takes to send Obama into retirement in January 2013.

I think this was planned as a point of attack.

If you didn’t vote for Obama in 2008, it’s because you were a racist.

If you don’t vote for Obama in 2012, it’s because you’re a homophobe.

ButterflyDragon on May 14, 2012 at 12:32 PM

A picture of Obama with a rainbow halo and the title THE FIRST GAY PRESIDENT?

That is f*cking childish and stupid, Hotair.

Dave Rywall on May 14, 2012 at 12:35 PM

What the f*ck – Newsweek ran that?

That is f*cking childish and stupid, Newsweek.

Dave Rywall on May 14, 2012 at 12:36 PM

Dave Rywall on May 14, 2012 at 12:35 PM

It’s on the cover of Newsweek.

Urban Infidel on May 14, 2012 at 12:37 PM

My best friend’s neighbor committed suicide over the weekend… went broke, his world destroyed, couldn’t find employment, benefits ran out, bank took his house, but, by killing himself, his wife and kids are now eligible for all kinds of free government handouts.

I have this question about gay marriage Obama:
WHERE ARE THE JOBS?

theCork on May 14, 2012 at 12:40 PM

A picture of Obama with a rainbow halo and the title THE FIRST GAY PRESIDENT?

That is f*cking childish and stupid, Hotair.

Dave Rywall on May 14, 2012 at 12:35 PM

ahaha

spinach.chin on May 14, 2012 at 12:43 PM

Dave Rywall on May 14, 2012 at 12:35 PM

Haha. I’ll enjoy that one all day too.

ORconservative on May 14, 2012 at 12:44 PM

No black voter will embrace Romney over the gay-marriage admission, but quite a few may decide they have better things to do in November that walking to the polls. Worry not, though – their votes will be cast anyway.

Archivarix on May 14, 2012 at 10:15 AM

^ This… ^ *sigh*

“Ask not what your TEA PArty can do for you…” ~ DeepWheat

DeepWheat on May 14, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Heh. Blowback.

And for once in his life, Barney’s Frank is right. Nobody’s vote changed. There’s not a large cadre of single-issue gay fiscal conservatives that will compromise their fiscal preferences for advancing the homosexual cause.

CycloneCDB on May 14, 2012 at 12:54 PM

And the problem is that if Romney does that he risks energizing the majority of Americans who tacitly support gay marriage.

libfreeordie on May 14, 2012 at 10:33 AM

Ah, yes. The gay majority. The one that keeps winning all those state votes.

/sarc

tom on May 14, 2012 at 12:54 PM

A picture of Obama with a rainbow halo and the title THE FIRST GAY PRESIDENT?

That is f*cking childish and stupid, Hotair.

Dave Rywall on May 14, 2012 at 12:35 PM

Wow. How embarrassing, Rywall.

theCork on May 14, 2012 at 12:55 PM

. . . back to voting present,huh Mr. President?

BigAlSouth on May 14, 2012 at 12:59 PM

A vocal few made it clear that the president’s stand on gay marriage might make it difficult for them to support his re-election. …

But they will support his re-election because he’s, you know, black.

Raaaaacist!!!!!

pain train on May 14, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Wow. How embarrassing, Rywall.

theCork on May 14, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Egg, face.

Some assembly required.

This is a microcosm of what life must be like for an uninformed libtard (but I repeat myself).

pain train on May 14, 2012 at 1:07 PM

A picture of Obama with a rainbow halo and the title THE FIRST GAY PRESIDENT?
 
That is f*cking childish and stupid, Hotair.
 
Dave Rywall on May 14, 2012 at 12:35 PM

 

Only a f*cking partisan jacka*s would suggest that.
 
Dave Rywall on October 12, 2010 at 4:42 PM

rogerb on May 14, 2012 at 1:10 PM

I ask for a correction on this part, please.

Most recently, the White House stabbed their allies in health-care reform in the Catholic Church in the back by using the ObamaCare law that the US Conference of Catholic Bishops supported to create a mandate that requires church organizations to pay for contraception, sterilization, and abortifacients.

The USCCB withdrew support from the Obamacare legislation based on the abortion funding. The Catholic Health Association rebelled against them and supported it, insisting that it did not fund abortion.

gocatholic on May 14, 2012 at 1:14 PM

Dave Rywall on May 14, 2012 at 12:35 PM

It’s on the cover of Newsweek.

Urban Infidel on May 14, 2012 at 12:37 PM
——
Yes, I know. Please refer to my retraction and redirection of my annoyance posted 60 seconds later.

Dave Rywall on May 14, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Yes, I know. Please refer to my retraction and redirection of my annoyance posted 60 seconds later.

Dave Rywall on May 14, 2012 at 1:34 PM

Fairly certain it has nothing to do with the actual error and everything to do with everyone delighting in the fact that you look like a knee-jerk reactionary who doesn’t consider, even for a second, that the truth does not neatly fit your desired narrative, but is in fact pretty much the opposite. You know, a liberal.

CycloneCDB on May 14, 2012 at 1:42 PM

I’ll also add that (again for people who actually spend time around black folks) that no matter what people do in the booth the actual sentiment within the black community re Obama has always been more complicated than conservatives give credit for. African Americans support Obama because Democrats support Obama and African Americans are Democrats.

libfreeordie on May 14, 2012 at 10:33 AM

Yeah because you are the ONLY person here who “knows” blacks and have black family members. I think it is the height of ignorance to think that African Americans can’t think for themselves. Maybe you only know “democratic blacks because that is who you hang with.

And the problem is that if Romney does that he risks energizing the majority of Americans who tacitly support gay marriage.

libfreeordie on May 14, 2012 at 10:33 AM

This majority is so energized that the stay home everytime a state bans gay marriage…

melle1228 on May 14, 2012 at 1:52 PM

This will result in more than just “a few black voters staying home from the polls.”

Libs’ organization always trump conservatives’ when it comes to GOTV. Take way the enthusiasm factor from the black pastors who organize it, and you may see Obama’s support in the African American community drop from 93% to 75%–with 18% staying home(just guessing). THis could be huge in states where the inner cities rely on strong GOTV efforts and then carry the state against a conservative suburbia and rural vote.

If PA were not in play before, it is now.

rwenger43 on May 14, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Fairly certain it has nothing to do with the actual error and everything to do with everyone delighting in the fact that you look like a knee-jerk reactionary who doesn’t consider, even for a second, that the truth does not neatly fit your desired narrative, but is in fact pretty much the opposite. You know, a liberal.

CycloneCDB on May 14, 2012 at 1:42 PM
———
This time, definitely a knee jerk reactionary.

That you actually truly believe your side of the aisle doesn’t knee jerk shows how utterly detached you are from being able to objectively assess the reality around you. I’ve got plenty of evidence here of calling bullsh*t on the left and the right. How about you.

Dave Rywall on May 14, 2012 at 3:13 PM

My view on gay marriage is; I don’t care if they enter in to some sort of civil union, just don’t call it marriage. Maybe gayage, or for the hardcore gays — queerage.

Dasher on May 14, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Nope. It’s gotta be MARRIAGE and nothing else. I mean, that’s the whole point isn’t it?

Finbar on May 14, 2012 at 3:33 PM

Obama screwed the pooch on this one.

Nahanni on May 14, 2012 at 10:33 AM

As if poor Bo didn’t have enough to worry about when Obama asks what’s for dinner, now he has to watch out for his cornhole, too.

Pray for Bo.

Gator Country on May 14, 2012 at 4:14 PM

My view on gay marriage is; I don’t care if they enter in to some sort of civil union, just don’t call it marriage. Maybe gayage, or for the hardcore gays — queerage.

Dasher on May 14, 2012 at 10:46 AM

Nope. It’s gotta be MARRIAGE and nothing else. I mean, that’s the whole point isn’t it?

Finbar on May 14, 2012 at 3:33 PM

Right. This is only the start, and it will absolutely lead to forcing churches to do gay marriages and ‘correct’ their teachings on homosexuality.

slickwillie2001 on May 14, 2012 at 4:15 PM

a. Conviction of Religious beliefs.
b. Blind allegiance to race.
c. or…..Obama bsucks.

The choice is clear to win your vote.

There – fify!!

Sweet_Thang on May 14, 2012 at 4:33 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3