• Welcome To LPSG
    Welcome to LPSG.com. If you are here because you are looking for the most amazing open-minded fun-spirited sexy adult community then you have found the right place. We also happen to have some of the sexiest members you'll ever meet. Signup below and come join us.


Presidential Hopefuls & LGBT Issues

B_VinylBoy

Banned
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,365
Reaction score
35
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
We all know that the economy & job creation is the number one issue facing most Americans. But it's definitely not the only issue...

A very interesting article was released by the Dallas Voice, which provides a chart featuring Obama, the GOP presidential hopefuls and where they stand on key LGBT issues in our country. Suffice to say, there isn't a lot of surprises on this chart (except for who is on the top of the list), but it's a good indicator of who has the LGBT community and their civil rights in mind more than the others.

As for Rick Perry? He charted in last place along with Bachmann, Gingrich, Santorum & McCotter. Romney doesn't do much better, which shows just how far right the GOP is going these days.

Ron Paul is somewhat respectable in 4th place.

Check the results here - CHART: Rick Perry 1 of 5 presidential candidates who scores a zero on LGBT issues

How will this and other civil rights issues play out this electoral season?
 

lurker37160

Experimental Member
Joined
Aug 23, 2007
Posts
528
Reaction score
17
Points
163
Location
Murfreesboro (Tennessee, United States)
LGBT issues are not why someone one should vote or should not vote for any candidate. It's such a small piece of the puzzle. Same thing with abortion.


We all know that the economy & job creation is the number one issue facing most Americans. But it's definitely not the only issue...

A very interesting article was released by the Dallas Voice, which provides a chart featuring Obama, the GOP presidential hopefuls and where they stand on key LGBT issues in our country. Suffice to say, there isn't a lot of surprises on this chart (except for who is on the top of the list), but it's a good indicator of who has the LGBT community and their civil rights in mind more than the others.

As for Rick Perry? He charted in last place along with Bachmann, Gingrich, Santorum & McCotter. Romney doesn't do much better, which shows just how far right the GOP is going these days.

Ron Paul is somewhat respectable in 4th place.

Check the results here - CHART: Rick Perry 1 of 5 presidential candidates who scores a zero on LGBT issues

How will this and other civil rights issues play out this electoral season?
 

B_VinylBoy

Banned
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,365
Reaction score
35
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
LGBT issues are not why someone one should vote or should not vote for any candidate. It's such a small piece of the puzzle. Same thing with abortion.

What someone decides to focus on when voting is entirely up to them. For me, civil rights issues are not "small pieces" of the puzzle... it's a major tell as to how politicians are going to focus on other issues. There isn't a single politician running for office right now that isn't at least trying to blame someone (or some group) for the problems of this nation. If they're willing to repeatedly make certain folks the targets of their angst, that's a big indicator of who is most likely to get shafted when they focus on the big issues such as the economy and job creation. Is there any surprise that the politicians who are pro-life don't seem to care if women get paid less than men for the same work? That's why they vote against bills that push for wage equality. Is there any shock that the politicians who don't support LGBT issues are the ones who will also push to repeal legislation that makes it illegal to discriminate against someone for a job based on sexual orientation?

This thread may not be directly about the economy or job creation, but don't downplay its significance. If you're not up to focus on this, please move on and make your own thread.
 

atlclgurl

Lurker
Joined
May 20, 2011
Posts
271
Reaction score
0
Points
51
Most pols blow with the wind when it comes to the LBGT communities and their voting power.

Obama courted the gay vote and then promptly ignored LGBT issues for the first couple years of his presidency, which caused much consernation and the boycotting of a DNC fundraiser. Here's link that discusses this: Outraged By Obama Legal Brief, Gay Democratic Donors Boycotting DNC Bash - Political Punch

While I give the Obama administration props for the ending of DADT, I don't give them ALL the credit as they jumped on the bandwagon only when it was clear that the wagon was leaving, either with or without them on it.

It is true the Obama could not abolish DADT without approval of the legislative branch he could have, and should have, issued and executive order stopping all of the "You're gay... get the hell out, right now!" crap. But, alas he did not. He's also on record as saying that his views on gay marraige are "evolving". Oh, so I guess that means he doesn't favor gay marriage but might be talking into supporting it (if politically expedient).

If it sounds like I'm beating up on Obama, I'm not really, just pointing out that while he is certainly better than any of the Repubs, he's not really a dedicated friend to the LGBT community, he's more of a fair weather friend.

Of course, the Repubs are no friends at all...
 
Joined
Mar 14, 2006
Posts
357
Reaction score
0
Points
161
Vinyl boy, you are pushing for equal pay, but what constitutional basis are you with that? The government is one thing, but how fair is it to tell a business or corporation who they can hire at what price?

I am overweight and I know (and statistics show) I will have job descrimination because of this fact. Where are the people standing up for bigger people? Also, jobs advertisements are stating to state if you are unemployed, do not apply. Where are the people standing up for the unemployed? It is all degrees and there is no constitutional amendment for a company to extend equal pay or benefits to anyone.
 

atlclgurl

Lurker
Joined
May 20, 2011
Posts
271
Reaction score
0
Points
51
Vinyl boy, you are pushing for equal pay, but what constitutional basis are you with that? The government is one thing, but how fair is it to tell a business or corporation who they can hire at what price?

I am overweight and I know (and statistics show) I will have job descrimination because of this fact. Where are the people standing up for bigger people? Also, jobs advertisements are stating to state if you are unemployed, do not apply. Where are the people standing up for the unemployed? It is all degrees and there is no constitutional amendment for a company to extend equal pay or benefits to anyone.


Equal Protection Clause - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

atlclgurl

Lurker
Joined
May 20, 2011
Posts
271
Reaction score
0
Points
51
"no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws".[

Under this clause, if there is any law setting pay in the first place, which is unconstitutional, and then women are not given equal pay. But, there is no protection for pay in the constitution.


So? Just because one group continues to get discriminated against doesn't mean all groups should.

Ever heard of the Equal Right Amendment? Equal Rights Amendment

Besides, there have beem laws enacted which actively discriminated against gays and lesbians. DADT violated the 14th which is why the courts struck it down.

There are no laws mandating that men should get paid more than women, so (in theory at least) women COULD get the same pay as men.
 

B_VinylBoy

Banned
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,365
Reaction score
35
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Vinyl boy, you are pushing for equal pay, but what constitutional basis are you with that? The government is one thing, but how fair is it to tell a business or corporation who they can hire at what price?

Actually, I'm not using this thread to advocate for equal pay even though I do stand for it for obvious reasons. But I guess we should bring that to the table.

There is absolutely no reason why someone at a job should be receiving less for doing the same exact work under the same job titles. That has nothing to do with the rights of corporations, that's an ethics issue. Saying that it isn't fair to tell business this gives them the freedom to continually discriminate against people based on their sex and isn't that supposed to be illegal in this country?

I am overweight and I know (and statistics show) I will have job descrimination because of this fact. Where are the people standing up for bigger people?

Instead of asking me where it is, why don't you advocate for adding that as a stipulation to discrimination laws? However, if someone is gonna openly deny the equal treatment of women on this issue and obstruct that progress, obesity won't EVER stand a chance.

Also, jobs advertisements are stating to state if you are unemployed, do not apply. Where are the people standing up for the unemployed?

It's all disingenuous posturing from our Congress, who hasn't voted on a single jobs bill since Boehner became speaker of the house, and private corporations who are only out for their own profits and are perpetuating the problem by outsourcing and cutting higher paying jobs to create cheaper ones with lower wages and less benefits. Both of these entities go up against the government with the usual rhetoric about how they shouldn't be doing anything but getting out of the way of business.

It is all degrees and there is no constitutional amendment for a company to extend equal pay or benefits to anyone.

There are so many things we as citizens are granted that aren't listed in the constitution. So trying to use this as a reason to deny equal pay to women is a joke. Please, I've actually enjoyed debating with you on these threads. Don't be like the rest of the ideologically shallow and try to hide behind a piece of paper that is continually misinterpreted like holy scripture.

We all know this issue about non-equal pay is ethically wrong and it should be fixed. Period.
 
Joined
Mar 14, 2006
Posts
357
Reaction score
0
Points
161
Dont get me wrong, I personally stand for equal pay and equality across the board. In fact, working in sports information, I see apathy from men all the time towards women sports. You will be hard pressed to find men in my position as pro-women in athletics (although I do believe title IX needs to be tweeked).

And believe me, I am totally against DADT and any legislative gay bashing as it is. Those should be illegal. And marriage simply should be a church issue or whatever you believe in. I just do not find any legislative basis for equal pay for a private corporation. Again, public entities are one thing. Gay couples should be awarded the same rights as straight couples just as women are given the same rights as men, and legislatively, that I totally support.

In terms of benefits and pay, while I personally feel they should be equal, I do not think there is a legislative basis to dictate these things.
 

texas41-38

Sexy Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2006
Posts
772
Reaction score
59
Points
163
Location
Dallas-Ft, Worth
And the funny thing about Rick Perry, is he is sort of like Troy Aikman, those gay rumors are now decades old and just wont go away. I am expressing no opinion on either gentleman.
 

B_enzia35

Banned
Joined
Mar 12, 2011
Posts
866
Reaction score
10
Points
53
Location
Texas
I agree with lurker, it's such a small part of politics. As long as they concentrate on the right issues, then I have no problem with them. Bachmann is almost too much on the social issues...
 
Joined
Mar 14, 2006
Posts
357
Reaction score
0
Points
161
I agree with lurker, it's such a small part of politics. As long as they concentrate on the right issues, then I have no problem with them. Bachmann is almost too much on the social issues...

There is no other way for Bachmann to get elected, and hence why she is sinking in the polls.
 

NYCdude

1st Like
Joined
May 20, 2008
Posts
112
Reaction score
1
Points
163
You forgot his stance on DOMA. I understand Obama is halfway there just as he is with everything. And I understand that it was politically possible to repeal DADT, but isn't he probably the greatest President for LGBT community? Times are changing, yes, but he's still done more than anyone else.
 

NYCdude

1st Like
Joined
May 20, 2008
Posts
112
Reaction score
1
Points
163
Also, I may be wrong as I am not one of his supporters, but I'm pretty sure that chart is unfair to Ron Paul. Yes, he is against government-recognized gay marriage, but I also believe he is against government-recognized straight marriage, lol. Correct me if I'm wrong, but he just wants government out of everything.
 

Mensch1351

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 21, 2006
Posts
1,163
Reaction score
186
Points
283
Location
In the only other State that begins with "K"!
What someone decides to focus on when voting is entirely up to them. For me, civil rights issues are not "small pieces" of the puzzle... it's a major tell as to how politicians are going to focus on other issues. There isn't a single politician running for office right now that isn't at least trying to blame someone (or some group) for the problems of this nation. If they're willing to repeatedly make certain folks the targets of their angst, that's a big indicator of who is most likely to get shafted when they focus on the big issues such as the economy and job creation. Is there any surprise that the politicians who are pro-life don't seem to care if women get paid less than men for the same work? That's why they vote against bills that push for wage equality. Is there any shock that the politicians who don't support LGBT issues are the ones who will also push to repeal legislation that makes it illegal to discriminate against someone for a job based on sexual orientation?

This thread may not be directly about the economy or job creation, but don't downplay its significance. If you're not up to focus on this, please move on and make your own thread.

:notworthy::notworthy::notworthy: VERY astute perception!! (at least with those who are consistent in their philosophies and don't just blow with the political winds!!)
 
Joined
Mar 14, 2006
Posts
357
Reaction score
0
Points
161
Also, I may be wrong as I am not one of his supporters, but I'm pretty sure that chart is unfair to Ron Paul. Yes, he is against government-recognized gay marriage, but I also believe he is against government-recognized straight marriage, lol. Correct me if I'm wrong, but he just wants government out of everything.

and we have a winner.
 

B_VinylBoy

Banned
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,365
Reaction score
35
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Also, I may be wrong as I am not one of his supporters, but I'm pretty sure that chart is unfair to Ron Paul. Yes, he is against government-recognized gay marriage, but I also believe he is against government-recognized straight marriage, lol. Correct me if I'm wrong, but he just wants government out of everything.

That chart actually makes Ron Paul look much more reasonable that the mass majority of Republican candidates now looking for the GOP Nomination. He obviously isn't going to be as gung-ho for LGBT issues like the one in the top position (because Karger is actually gay), but with a few exceptions he has a seemingly respectable record. Alas, there are other issues that make me think the chart is being too kind to Paul. When someone is on record saying something as socially ignorant as, "Am I the only one sick of hearing about the 'rights' of AIDS carriers," that leaves room for concern. As if the nation is really trying to put their needs over everyone else's and completely ignoring anyone who looks, acts or thinks like Ron Paul.

Off The Bus: Ron Paul: New Republic's Allegations Of Bigotry and Homophobia

On a side note, this notion of "government out of everything" is empty, ideological tripe and thoroughly dishonest. A modern day, civilized country cannot run without government being involved in certain aspects of our lives. If you want that, go live in Somalia. If not, drop the silly campaign slogans because it certainly wasn't "Hope & Change" that pushed me to Obama. Despite the posturing, he does NOT want government out of everything. Look at his stances on the issues. Paul want it out of the way of "business" so that corporations can do whatever they please, with no consequence, and no federal or ethical stipulations attached... but let a woman try to defend her right to have an abortion and see how that "government out of everything" rhetoric completely changes.
 

FuzzyKen

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Posts
2,047
Reaction score
58
Points
193
If Ron Paul wants equality by denial of recognition of ALL relationships then Mr. Paul needs to come out and flat say that. I would love to hear Ron Paul talk about the Government getting out of the "Church Business" and organized religion. I would love to hear Ron Paul talk about equality in taxation for everyone.

Sadly, I am not going to hold my breath on any of this because it is never going to happen. Ron Paul may sound good, but he has no ability in fact to do what he says. The system will not let him. The limitations of the Presidency of the United States will not let him and everything he says to the contrary is a waste of my ear canals.
 

houtx48

Expert Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2006
Posts
6,918
Reaction score
206
Points
208
And the funny thing about Rick Perry, is he is sort of like Troy Aikman, those gay rumors are now decades old and just wont go away. I am expressing no opinion on either gentleman.
The last time Ricky Goodhair addressed the gay rumors he went so ballistic I think people thought he was protesting to much and it was funny to see him so upset. It probably would have been better to have said nothing.
 

B_VinylBoy

Banned
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,365
Reaction score
35
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
If Ron Paul wants equality by denial of recognition of ALL relationships then Mr. Paul needs to come out and flat say that. I would love to hear Ron Paul talk about the Government getting out of the "Church Business" and organized religion. I would love to hear Ron Paul talk about equality in taxation for everyone.

Now THAT would make my ears perk.

Sadly, I am not going to hold my breath on any of this because it is never going to happen. Ron Paul may sound good, but he has no ability in fact to do what he says. The system will not let him. The limitations of the Presidency of the United States will not let him and everything he says to the contrary is a waste of my ear canals.

Exactly. Obama is unfortunately learning this the hard way, which is why I get put off when people can't differentiate from the ideological preaching and what "should have happened", versus the reality of our Government and how it truly operates. It's going to take a series of presidents over a long period of time to eventually fix the problems of Government. No "one president" from any "one party" is going to get it done in "one term".
 
Last edited:

D_Percy_Prettywillie

Account Disabled
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Posts
748
Reaction score
16
Points
53
I'm going to first say that I'm against any form of discrimination in the legal system, anywhere it exists. I avidly support equity in pay, benefits, and anything else you can think of, for all people.

Now, being gay, you walk a fine line when it comes to gay marriage; do I want to get married some day and have it be recognized as legal (meaning it comes with all the benefits of any other marriage)? Of course I do. Unfortunately, for a lot of my friends, this is the one issue that elections ultimately boil down to; is Candidate X a friend of the LGBT community?

As much as I think inequity needs to be addressed in our laws, I do not think of it as paramount insofar as LGBT issues are concerned. Hate crime legislation is important and should be aggressively pursued. The legalization of gay marriage will happen eventually and that fight needs to be continued until its won.

But (forgive me) this isn't the 60's. I can ride all the same buses, drink from the same water fountains, eat at the same restaurants, and use the same public toilets as straight people can. I don't think it's fair to say LGBT issues are as immediately imperative on the national stage as the civil rights they were fighting for back then and a great many of my associates feel exactly the opposite.

We're a short ways away from abolishing prejudice from our laws and until we have, we shouldn't relent in that pursuit. Prejudice, however, is always going to exist in peoples hearts. The right candidate and the right legislation won't fix that.

What will? I think a good start is advancement of the idea that gay people aren't really any different than straight people- that we too consider multiple things about Candidates before we vote for them as we too live in this country, drive on its roads, send our kids to its schools, shop and provide for its economy etc.




JSZ
 

B_VinylBoy

Banned
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,365
Reaction score
35
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
VERY astute perception!! (at least with those who are consistent in their philosophies and don't just blow with the political winds!!)

Thanks. :redface:
Some of the wisest words of wisdom came from my mom when I was about to enter my senior year of HS... it was raw and brutally honest, but absolutely true. "If they think you're shit, what makes you think they'll give you anything else but shit?"

That's why I really pay attention to civil rights issues as diligently as possible, even when it's not the top of the list of concerns for the nation. You can tell a lot about what they're gonna do for policy by what they say about and how they treat different people naturally, when nothing of any real financial significance is on the line.
 

Hoss

Loved Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Posts
11,811
Reaction score
551
Points
148
Age
71
Location
Eastern town
Of course the list you give us VB has President Obama with 2 firm 'maybe's one on the subject of allowing discrimination against gays in private sector jobs. It would be nice if he'd just have the balls to flat out say yes or no instead of playing in the middle. As a men who must have faced discrimination, President Obama and Herman Cain are both quite sickening in their lack of regards for equal rights for all people.


Equality at all levels for all genders, sexuality, ethnic background, skin color, height, weight and every other item which makes each of us an individual and at the same time all very equal that's what I'd like to see.
 

B_VinylBoy

Banned
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,365
Reaction score
35
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
Of course the list you give us VB has President Obama with 2 firm 'maybe's one on the subject of allowing discrimination against gays in private sector jobs. It would be nice if he'd just have the balls to flat out say yes or no instead of playing in the middle. As a men who must have faced discrimination, President Obama and Herman Cain are both quite sickening in their lack of regards for equal rights for all people.

To even try and compare Obama's stances on civil rights to Herman Cain is insanely laughable. Herman Cain, who openly admits that he wouldn't hire a Muslim to his cabinet and would force them to go through some kind of loyalty test before considering them, from being an obvious opponent to LGBT people... to Obama who has signed into law DADT, instructed the current administration to not actively enforce DOMA, who has done much to embrace the Muslim community among continued backfire from those who were quick to label them all as "terrorists", to nominating the first Latino Supreme Court justice. I could go on, but we'll leave it at that for now. When you say "all people", you need to be more specific here. As far as I can see it, Cain & Obama aren't even on the same planet (never mind the same page) when it comes to civil rights issues.

When it comes to politics (or life in general), I don't demand or expect absolutes nor do I expect an all-or-nothing approach to important issues. We can talk about how it's a shame that Obama still has doubts in certain areas. Alas, he's far more open minded than Herman Cain so your posturing comes off somewhat misleading and dishonest.

Equality at all levels for all genders, sexuality, ethnic background, skin color, height, weight and every other item which makes each of us an individual and at the same time all very equal that's what I'd like to see.

We'd all like to see that... but that, my friend, has never happened in our history even with the Civil Rights Acts in place. That's because ultimately, despite all of the physical features we can attach to the term "equality" the gap between financial & societal equality continues to grow. In some ways we're a lot better than we were before, but obviously there's a LONG way to go.
 
Last edited:

Hoss

Loved Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Posts
11,811
Reaction score
551
Points
148
Age
71
Location
Eastern town
VinylBoy, I am not really attempting to compare Obama and Cain on their individual stance. I was stating that considering that both of them are from backgrounds that have likely given them discrimination they should both be better able at understanding the importance of equality. As I added President Obama made it even worse (imo) by putting a 'maybe' for the rights of LGBTs in the private sector. I don't applaud Cain, or the others for taking a firm stand against the rights but I am more angered by a candidate that won't just flat out say yes or no. BY not firmly placing himself he is simply (again imo) trying to gain votes from both sides.
 

B_VinylBoy

Banned
Joined
Nov 30, 2007
Posts
10,365
Reaction score
35
Points
123
Location
Boston, MA / New York, NY
VinylBoy, I am not really attempting to compare Obama and Cain on their individual stance. I was stating that considering that both of them are from backgrounds that have likely given them discrimination they should both be better able at understanding the importance of equality. As I added President Obama made it even worse (imo) by putting a 'maybe' for the rights of LGBTs in the private sector.

IMO, that shows me he's at least thinking about it. Herman Cain just comes outright and says no. Since when is thinking or trying to enlighten oneself "worse" than just outright denial? Your cynicism is glaring here.

I don't applaud Cain, or the others for taking a firm stand against the rights but I am more angered by a candidate that won't just flat out say yes or no. BY not firmly placing himself he is simply (again imo) trying to gain votes from both sides.

No kidding he's trying to gain votes from both sides. You kinda have to if you plan to win an election. However, if this is your argument for it then it's a pretty frail one. Anyone can tell (beyond the "D" or "R" next to their name) that one person's stance is decisively liberal and the other is exceedingly conservative despite the "maybes". If this is pandering to "both sides", then both Obama & Cain suck at it on this issue. Furthermore, if we are that obsessed to administer moral judgement we can pigeonhole the issue, see where any politician is technically indecisive and act as if there's some grand injustice going on because (s)he doesn't have the straight answers you're looking for. OR, we can look at a candidate's collective stances, understand that it may not perfect, but still realize that out of the choices one does shine above the rest. That's what I do.

As a gay man, I don't expect a heterosexual male to ever be in 100% alliance with what I say or do. I hold this view with all of my friends and close family, so why in the heck would I think differently when it comes to a politician?
 
Last edited:

Hoss

Loved Member
Joined
Aug 22, 2010
Posts
11,811
Reaction score
551
Points
148
Age
71
Location
Eastern town
IMO, that shows me he's at least thinking about it. Herman Cain just comes outright and says no. Since when is thinking or trying to enlighten oneself "worse" than just outright denial? Your cynicism is glaring here.



No kidding he's trying to gain votes from both sides. You kinda have to if you plan to win an election. However, if this is your argument for it then it's a pretty frail one. Anyone can tell (beyond the "D" or "R" next to their name) that one person's stance is decisively liberal and the other is exceedingly conservative despite the "maybes". If this is pandering to "both sides", then both Obama & Cain suck at it on this issue. We can pigeonhole the issue, see where any politician is technically indecisive and act as if there's some grand injustice going on because he doesn't have the straight answers you're looking for. OR, we can look at a candidate's collective stances, understand that it may not perfect, but still realize that out of the choices one does shine above the rest. That's what I do.

As a gay man, I don't expect a heterosexual male to ever be in 100% alliance with what I say or do. I view all of my friends and close family like this, so why in the heck would I think differently when it comes to a politician?

There clearly will be a forever disagreement on certain issues, so I will let that drop after this last comment following.

Your last paragraph incidentally is very telling. You don't expect complete alliance from heterosexual men and even see family and friends that way. Then how are you any different from them when you've instituted your own form of discrimination?
 

NYCdude

1st Like
Joined
May 20, 2008
Posts
112
Reaction score
1
Points
163
I'm not a Ron Paul supporter, like I said. I just thought the chart was unfair. I agree he's a nutjob who believes the civil war was just a ploy to centralize government, citing falsely that every other country got rid of slavery without a war. I'm an Obama supporter, but this chart only highlights why I can't stand him these last few months. He's halfway, nervous. He's dealing with assholes who can't stand the idea of him being in office. I think now he's gotta say fuck you and do something right for this country that is going down hill for all of us, let alone the LGBT. Think of how he crushed Donald Trump. I have more respect for Trump than half of congress. Start calling these people out. Introduce a major jobs program, go to their districts and call these half-wits out. If he stands up, I'm sure his halfway approach to gay marriage will improve, because you just sense he believes in it.