Are you ready for the alternative Newsweek Obama gay-marriage covers?
posted at 6:08 pm on May 15, 2012 by Allahpundit
I can’t decide which I like better: The one of the rainbow flag flying over the White House (victory!) or the one of the omnipotent American father holding up the two male cake toppers, a beatific glow around him, the whole cultural world literally in his hands. But where’s the one of him desperately trying to cover Biden’s mouth on “Meet the Press” before he inadvertently forced O to “courageously” profess the belief he’d been cowardly hiding for decades? Or how about one showing a group of wealthy gay Democratic bundlers, young voters, and assorted limousine liberals presenting him with one of those giant sweepstakes-placard checks for $100 million? Alas, that degree of realism about what really motivated this “evolution” falls to one of the country’s three or four conservative editorial cartoonists to grapple with. Or what about this one from American Weasel, which nicely illustrates the possibility that Obama miscalculated on this issue?
Speaking of which, via Mediaite, here’s Sharpton and Bashir trying to puzzle out how anyone can think Obama “evolved” for political advantage when Romney’s been the big winner poll-wise so far. Answer: The key words there are “so far.” Once Biden pushed this issue front and center, O faced the dilemma of keeping up the lie about his beliefs while the media carped ever more loudly about it or coming clean and facing a backlash among older voters, black Democrats, and socially conservative independents. Like I said last week, he probably reasoned that it was better to ‘fess up now, collect millions in donations from his newly excited base, and count on voters’ attention spans to make them forget all about this come November than to let it drag out and potentially blow up in his face at an inopportune moment later on. Romney’s not going to stray too far afield to talk about SSM lest it complicate his economic message so Obama’s betting that by election day it’ll be more or less a non-issue. My hunch is that he’s probably right about that, especially if something happens between Israel and Iran, but eyeball this new data from ABC showing a gap, including among independents, between the number who strongly oppose Obama’s new position and the number who strongly support it. No surprise there. But will it endure?
Related Posts:
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: « Previous 1 2 3
I agree. The MSM has messaged this is the new norm. The next scandals will not be covered at all
Obama cannot be impeached with the current Senate.
Too bad the RINOs had planned to stuff it to the Tea Party, the anti amnesty crowd, and the anti gay marriage crowd. To go whole hog against the Executive branch, they need the support of the last group of Americans who demand rule of law
This IMHO is why the RINOs did not push the issue before the last election. They too wanted the tea party dead. Both RINO and Libs have been messaging that the Tea Party is dead. The funeral had been held last fall. Benghazi forced the Libs to release the Tea Party IRS data for cover.
And they did stage the release.
It did cool down the Benghazi momentum from the Whistleblowers
Plus, it throws a screw in the RINO plans.
entagor on May 19, 2013 at 5:51 PM
Workingclass Artist is right. You are focusing on the admin being able to pass their agenda( what you refer to as a “check”)…but what does it matter if no new regs get passed when you can simply do what you want( clearly) and there are absolutely NO consequences to your orders? Use that power to place all your “men” in the right positions?
The ends justify the means to them…no consequences mean they can move about with impunity and the worse that happens is some people call them bad names in the news and on blogs…small price to pay to wield the might of a government like ours with nothing stopping you.
Alinsky on May 19, 2013 at 5:53 PM
Ms. Clift should be tarred, feathered and run out of town on a rail…
Khun Joe on May 19, 2013 at 6:03 PM
It didn’t take long for the MSM to get over it’s phony outrage and get back in the groove. These liberals lie and the MSM swears to it.
savage24 on May 19, 2013 at 6:04 PM
The law certainly doesn’t matter to this administration.
Axion on May 19, 2013 at 7:07 PM
It’s time to put this old Witch out to pasture! She has been a chief liar for the Libs for many years and I think she has out-lived her usefulness!Give her the gold retirement watch and tell her it’s time to take a walk!!
Jersey Dan on May 19, 2013 at 7:23 PM
So, this must be the “Hope and Change” Obama was talking about when he asked for our votes. Where, if it can’t be proven (by an Obama-appointed prosecutor) to be illegal for the government to screw you, it’s OK for it to do so?
Glad we cleared that up.
Socratease on May 19, 2013 at 7:33 PM
No, workingclassaritist is not right. Executive orders can be undone by electing a new executive. Preventing Obama from advancing his legislative agenda is the best that we can get right now. It isn’t ideal, but the situation could be far worse.
ghostwriter on May 19, 2013 at 7:58 PM
First?
Paul-Cincy on May 19, 2013 at 8:04 PM
Because liberals are looking out for the little guy, anything they do is a okay.
racquetballer on May 19, 2013 at 10:45 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3