For change to happen, the "other side" is EXACTLY who you must talk to.

[Bonobo]

Does anyone disagree?

Well then, check yourself out. Is your attitude going to help win over the other side? Or is it just going to cement their position and cause a further chilling of relations?

So, do you want change? Or do you want to "win"?

This goes for ANY ISSUE, not just the ones currently flying around GDP.

[Lucian]

1. Fuck the "other side".

Change for the better will happen without the "other side".

[shintao]

92. I agree!

I need people I can watch whine & stick needles in. I've got 16 years to unload, and I might blow the outhouse over!!

[shintao]

94. Tilion?

Isn't that what Bush answered when ask how much the Iraq War cost?? "Tilion?" LOL

[Maven]

2. How many times does the distinction between TALK and HONOR need to be made?

How many fucking times?

[Bonobo]

5. Distinction without a difference.

It is a matter of perspective.

[Maven]

8. No it isn't.

It's a clear distinction and a clear difference. Sorry the truth doesn't jibe with your apology for moral cowardice. Which is exactly what the "let's just hear all sides and not choose" position is.

I suppose you think that Rick Warren is entitled to his "perspective" too.

[Bonobo]

13. Yes, Warren IS entitled to his own perspective.

I do not think anyone has the right to take away anyone else's freedom to think for themselves.

[Maven]

19. What?

Good, let him have his fucking "perspective" that I and every other GLBT person is akin to a pedophile. It doesn't mean we need to put him on a fucking pedestal.

[Bonobo]

23. He is not on my pedestal. Is he on yours? No. So who exactly is putting him on a pedestal?

Only those that were his fans originally, that's who.

[Maven]

31. Don't be so naive. People will see the inauguration, they'll see his association with BO,

a guy who is (rightly) beloved by the country right now, and many who have never heard of him before will think of him as a mainstream religious figure. Not to mention the additional exposure it will give him to sell more books and do more media appearances, like the weeks-long talk show tour he's been on since the invitation was announced. You know what he did on those appearances? He REITERATED his foul ideas about GLBT people.

[Bonobo]

34. On the completely other hand...

He has been exposed as a racist, bigoted scumbag. Many would not have known that either if he had not been highlighted.

For ideas to be judged as either good or bad, first they must be exposed to the light of day.

[Maven]

42. His ideas are nothing new, and no one, least of all Obama will denounce him for them

And, no I don't mean express "disagreement" with his "viewpoint" that GLBT people are subhuman. Can you imagine if people characterized racist views as a different "perspective" we should listen to?

It's still too acceptable to be a virulent homophobe in America, and that is EXACTLY the problem with Obama honoring Warren with this selection.

[Bonobo]

45. I didn't say people should listen to his perspective. I said he had a right to it.

I hate his perspective and I think if it is discussed and shown for what it is -a hateful, rotten, immoral thing - then we will win over the good, but deluded people on the other side (at least a certain percentage of them).

[Maven]

50. To even call it a perspective is a dangerous lie.

That is my point.

Obama's rationale for doing this makes the insult worse, not better. Hate is not an "opinion" on an equal footing with acceptance.

[Bonobo]

54. It doesn't matter what you call it. It exists anyway.

Please address my "denounce" post. (eg. How can you do anything but entrench their position if you DENOUNCE them as evil rats?)

We are talking about strategy for change here. If we both want it, that is.

[Maven]

103. It does matter what you call it.

That's the point I'm making.

[elleng]

3. Was just discussing this with my daughter.

Obama and Joe know JUST HOW TO DO THIS, and those so-called friends who holler about it either have no idea how our government and politics are run, OR want them to fail.

(Read up on how O did at the Harvard Law Review.)

[Skittles]

4. have we not fucking learned anything?

THERE IS NO "WORKING" with those lying, stealing, thieving corrupt fascist BASTARDS. PERIOD. We must TAKE AMERICA BACK FROM THEM.

[Lucian]

7. Amen!

If I could recommend a post, I'd surely recommend this one!

[Andy823]

10. That's what

The right wing wackos are saying right now about Obama and those of us who voted for him. Can't you see that this country will always be divided if we all think the same way, and are not willing to try and work together for change!

[elleng]

30. Thanks, Andy.

.

[Bonobo]

11. Funny, I want to say the exact same thing to you!

When will we learn that shoving the other person's face into the dirt wins nothing but an enemy.

Your rhetoric sounds uncomfortably like the talk I hear from the worst of the other side.

Obama's approach is not the Pelosi/Reid one that you think it is.

It is not a policy of appeasement, nor "keeping the powder dry".

It is a strategy for winning and making the extremists disappear while pulling the other side into the majority.

People are not static, unchanging things, as you seem to think. They can and do change. To affect change, you must reach as many as you can.

[Maven]

15. Shoving the other person's face in the fucking dirt?

They want to shove OUR faces in the dirt. They DO shove our faces in the dirt, with their laws and with their FISTS whenever they get the chance. THEY are the aggressors, NOT US. You are seriously wacked.

[Bonobo]

No, we are winning.

You seem determined to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, though.

[Maven]

20. No, you seem determined to blame the people who are under attack

for the attacks themselves. It's SICK. As if we're the cause of the conflict, for objecting when a piece of SHIT like Rick Warren is given a presidential honor by the man we helped elect. DISGUSTING.

[Bonobo]

21. Gay marriage is increasingly becoming inevitable. So how are we losing?

I live in Massachusetts. We have won the battle here. It was a great start. How do you see it going in the other direction?

[Maven]

24. California. That's how!

You know, the state where we just lost rights partly thanks to Rick Warren? You think this is going to help unify the country? It isn't. As soon as Obama does anything of substance that is remotely pro-gay Rick Warren and everyone like him will go to battle against him and against our rights. They're already doing it now. So I suppose your solution is for Obama never to do anything to advance GLBT rights. Wouldn't want to push away the other side and their "perspective" would we?

[Bonobo]

27. It would not pass if the vote were tomorrow. And it will come up again, and soon.

[Maven]

46. And Rick Warren will be there to fight against it, with an even larger set of devotees

Thanks in part to Obama.

[Bonobo]

49. Totally wrong.

[Maven]

51. Hit a wall, did you?

[Bonobo]

53. Not really, but I can't figure why you think there would be more...

Obama is hugely popular right now. 84% going in.

How do you figure there would be more support for Prop 8 at this point?

[Maven]

56. And Obama's own words were used to help pass Prop 8.

Regardless of the statement he sent out against it. Because no one saw it.

[Bonobo]

61. I have reached a wall here on this point. But not on the larger point.

[NYC_SKP]

60. We'll fight harder, have more on our side.

But we won't have more on our side if what the middle sees is a flame war between the two factions.

Right is on our side, hate and fear is on theirs.

There's a lower limit to the numbers who will back Warren as he becomes more and more exposed.

There's a higher limit to those who will back us, but only if we approach them with truth and reason.

Truth and REASON are on our side.

[Maven]

75. So far Democratic appeasement and fear of engagement on GLBT rights

has gotten us DOMA, the scuttling of ENDA and "go to hell, gays" amendments in 30+ states.

I see little "fighting" by the Democratic establishment (or many Democrats, really) on behalf of equality. I frankly never expected Obama to do much to *help* us. But I did expect him not to do anything to hurt us. And giving Rick Warren more credibility does hurt us, in ways that are hard to quantify but are nevertheless very real.

[stillcool]

74. What about the people in California?

do they have responsibility? Is there any way to gain support from the people who actually vote, or can any gay bashing preacher come into that state and garner support?

[NYC_SKP]

85. California's gonna come around, and it will be truth and reason that will turn it.

And, sadly, any gay bashing preacher can garner support, or provide $$$ support from out of state.

The ball was dropped in my state.

Some will disagree, but we were complacent and underestimated the chance prop h8 had of succeeding.

[stillcool]

135. I was shocked...never in a million years..

would I have thought California, of all states would do such a thing. To me, it seems like the same people that go after gay marriage, are the ones who want to overturn Roe v Wade. I remember the brouhaha that occurred here after the courts decision that the original marriage law was unconstitutional. The ads on the radio were incessant, and creepy when they were trying to get the legislature to amend the constitution. They sure know how to make noise..but that's what those kind do best.

[NYC_SKP]

144. The pro 8 ad campaign was huge and clever.

They said Californians were going to "have to accept gay marraige" and that it would be required to be taught in schools.

They seemed to have twice the ads, they lied, and they had two pieces of effective "evidence".

One was that a teacher had taken her students to witness a gay marriage.

The other was live footage of SF mayor Newsome saying:

"The doors wide open now. Its gonna happen, whether you like it or not!"

Considering all the different types of folks throughout this state, the right campaign of lies had a chance to succeed unless there was a resolute and well funded counter attack.

[shintao]

108. THE CALIFORNIA COURT THREW IT OUT ALREADY!!

With all the big O excitement I guess you missed the news. The second time the Supreme Court has thrown it out based on discrimination.

What should transpire now by the nationa gays is sue the Mormons claiming they are not exempt from taxes because they are a political enity. Gays don't seem to have any fire under them. ie. Log Cabin Replugs.

[Maven]

110. What? No they didn't.

It's going before the Court soon. It hasn't been thrown out yet.

[shintao]

136. WHAT!!! Yes it did!!! :)

In a 4-3 120-page ruling issue, the justices wrote that "responsibly to care for and raise children does not depend upon the individual's sexual orientation."

"We therefore conclude that in view of the substance and significance of the fundamental constitutional right to form a family relationship, the California Constitution properly must be interpreted to guarantee this basic civil right to all Californians, whether gay or heterosexual, and to same-sex couples as well as to opposite-sex couples," Chief Justice Ronald George wrote for the majority.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/05/15/same.sex.marriage/

[stillcool]

139. that's from May 2008

[shintao]

147. Ahhh. Me Bad!!

That was the first overturned case, prior to the current CA vote. Thanks for noting that & sorry .............

[Maven]

146. That's the original decision undone by Prop 8.

[Skittles]

18. Obama kissing repuke ass will get us NOTHING

N O T H I N G

[Chulanowa]

58. Invite them along, and if they don't want to come, sucks to be them

I'm sorry, but we don't need to bust our asses to please the people responsible for the snuff film our country's been in for the last eight years. They can either walk along with us or they can stay where they are and try to accomplish their fucked-up, hateful, greedy little agendas.

[Bonobo]

70. Our way or the highway. Love it or leave it. Sure. nt

[Chulanowa]

77. Not exactly

More like "We're the majority, and this is the way we're going. You can come along, or do your own thing, whatever"

All that compromising with extremists does is drag you to their level. Sorry if this doesn't make you very happy, but fact of the matter is that current Democrats are basically the "center" while the Republicans are way the fuck out in right-wing bat country. if we meet them "in the middle" we're still bowing to their agenda. That's bad for the nation, if you haven't been paying attention for the last rough decade or so

They should be reaching out to us, not the other way around.

[Bonobo]

86. I agree with lots of what you said. Especially abvout what constitutes the center.

Right now Dems are centrist, not left. I think this is due to Clinton. It is complex, but I think he dragged the left to the center. I also think that Obama will do the opposite. He will bring the center to the left by showing that left values are actually the family values we all care about.

By appearing to come from the center, Obama will drag the center to the left. Whereas Clinton started from the left and was forced to run to the center after he tipped his hand.

[ravencalling]

159. Just wanted to say..

I would like to shove the other guy's face in the dirt. Okay? And then after having done that, I will apologize, and try to make up.

[Hippo_Tron]

66. Out of curiosity, how do you propose we take back America from them?

I'm not saying you're wrong but I'm curious as to how you think we should go about this.

[Maven]

104. I thought we did when we won the presidency and solid majorities in both houses of Congress.

Was there something else we have to do to win?

[Hippo_Tron]

107. Well we won them in part due to massive outreach efforts to religious voters

[Maven]

113. LOL.

It just never ends.

Give them everything they want then. Even when we win, we don't fucking win.

[shintao]

122. One step at a time........

The first thing needing done is create a national workers union to stand up to corporations & put the power of government into the peoples hands again. Necons have convienced themselves that individualism is the answer - NOT. They have no power.

Second thing to do is socialize the government system so we can compete with foreign countries and give our workers the benefits they are paying for and not receiving.

Socialization will regulate corporations and make them pay a fair share of the taxes in America. It will end wars being used to prop up the economy, and give America a new direction and goals to achieve. The infrastructure of America is at the top of the list through which profits are made in transportation systems needing updating badly. More enterprises will create a need for power plants and desalination plants on the three coasts, and an inland water system to distribute water to barren lands.

[Skittles]

157. PROSECUTE THE BASTARDS

[shintao]

101. Absolutely!

They know no shame either. Geeze, I couldn't stand myself. Just mentioning replug makes me want to go take another bath.

[Lorien]

150. No, we have learned nothing

Apparently if Obama says that we should "look ahead" and not hold the criminals accountable, then that's exactly what every one of us should eagerly agree with because, well, he said so-and he now IS the Democratic party.

[shintao]

152. Obama can kiss my Sweet Bippy!

Obama wants to move on, but he said the job of investigating and prosecuting this is the Justice Departments responsibility. Unlike Bush, he appoints someone to a job and lets them do the job he assigns them. Obama will move forward, and the JD will move back.

[Andy823]

6. I agree with you,

Of course I am sure that you will be getting a lot of replies from those who don't!

I think Obama has a plan and I think he will be able to get this country back on track over time. Now he will "never" get everybody on his side, there will always be the radicals on both sides that will be upset no matteer what he does, but if he can get the majority of americans to work together no matter what their political view may be, he will give this country what it needs most, a president that is for "all" the people, not just one party!

[geckosfeet]

9. Winnings good. Thanks.

The other side kept dems out of committee meetings and stacked the judiciary and other government posts with political appointees. They changed things.

Winning, AND positive change means running the scoundrels out of town.

[Andy823]

14. No it means

We should make sure the voters see that Obama is trying to work with everyone, and when the next elections come up, the voters will get rid of those who aren't willing to work across the isle. That's what we need to do , and that's what Obama will be able to accomplish, IF we help him.

[geckosfeet]

36. Many of them have proved that they will not work with the other side.

And their constituents will vote them out if they do. As they see it, it's their job to obstruct. I do not see any virtue in extending a hand only to have it repeatedly bitten by them.

I trust Biden and Obama to do the best they can with what they have to work with. But there are some republicans in congress and the senate, and supreme court justices, who are openly hostile to this administration. They will oppose them at every turn - no matter what they propose short of capitulation.

[NYC_SKP]

12. Anyone with any experience with at-risk youth would agree with you.

Anyone who had to get members of rival gangs to work cooperatively in a classroom would understand.

Anyone who can maintain two conflicting concepts simultaneously can understand.

Anyone who is willing to try to see matters from more than one perspective can understand.

Peacemakers, successful ones, can understand.

I understand.

Recommended.

:patriot:

[Bonobo]

17. Thank you so much.

I appreciate your words very much.

[Number23]

26. Great post.

[Lint Head]

16. The republican party is dead. Bury them.

:dem:

[Maven]

22. No, the OP would rather resurrect them and pay heed to their "perspectives"

in service of some warped sense of unity.

[Bonobo]

25. Ridiculous and patently untrue. Now you are creating out of whole cloth. nt

[elleng]

28. There's a word that persists here,

and at least tells me that a lot of people don't know how to talk to others.

There is NO GOOD REASON continually to use the 'f' word; its so overused so conveys nothing anymore.

[NYC_SKP]

32. True, that.

Thank you for pointing it out, it does nothing.

:hi:

[NYC_SKP]

29. To the naysayers, meeting hatred with hatred will never, ever, succeed.

Y'all just don't get it.

Bonobo and Barack Obama get it.

You could ignore, disrespect, shout down and try to undermine the other side forever and all you would accomplish is more hatred across the board.

That strategy has never worked, it cannot work.

You are blinded, it's a good thing you aren't representative of the liberal or progressive community at large.

[Maven]

35. It's easy to be sanguine when you're not being attacked

I am not fighting to take away Rick Warren's rights or defame his character. HE is doing those things to me. The hatred is HIS.

Rick Warren and his ilk will NEVER help us get equal rights, no matter how nice and welcoming we are to him. NEVER. EVER. He profits from hatred.

[Bonobo]

40. Rick Warren may not. But what if we can tear away 20% of his "followers"? Or even 10%?

[Maven]

44. How can you possibly tear away his followers when you don't want to offend them

by denouncing what Rick Warren stands for?

How can you tear away his followers when you increase his popularity among evangelicals, helping to make him the de facto leader of their flock?

[Bonobo]

48. Rather than "denouncing them", which would only force them to entrench their position...

It would be better to show them that they are not being true to the spirit of Jesus' teachings (for example).

I think you must speak in their language and lead them to the correct position rather than confronting them and "denouncing them".

How can you expect to win them over by denouncing them?

Better to show the pain their position causes. Show loving gay families, etc.

You won't get them all, but you will get some of them and plant the seeds for more change in the future.

[Maven]

55. LOL. You really have no idea what we're dealing with. The kind of self-reinforcing mindfuck.

You're talking like we're dealing with reasonable people who can evaluate *evidence* and change their views.

You should read this excellent post by Chovexani, who has first-hand experience. It's called "Why Arguing with Fundies is a Waste of Time:"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=221&topic_id=113252&mesg_id=113252

Really, you're either showing incredible naivete or you're insulting my intelligence.

[Bonobo]

Yes, some of them are just like that. But surely even you don't think it is all of them, do you?

I am not naive. I am not insulting your intelligence.

I am rather enjoying having a discussion with you and not being called a homophobic piece of shit and being put on ignore.

Thank you for keeping the dialog open. I am trying to have one.

I think DU needs to become "Dialectic Underground". Maybe I will post a thread on it.

[Maven]

83. I can't say whether it is in fact all of them.

I can say that in order to believe what they believe you have to reject reason and empirical thinking altogether, and that there are mechanisms built into their ideology to keep them from "slipping up" and thinking rationally. And, I can say that those with direct experience with their "movement" find the idea that if we just explain it to them, they'll get it, laughable.

In any case, if you want to undermine their faith in Warren the last thing you do is give him more positive attention and the imprimatur of the most popular political figure in several decades.

[Bonobo]

89. Obama's approach is counterintuitive in that sense, I suppose.

But he is not "rehabilitating" Warren as I think you see it. After all, do you really think anyone on our side will change their viewpoint and join the "Warren" side? No. They will not. Instead, we will take some of their side over to us. Because we are in the right.
I think he is showing that we can work together, obliquely, NOT on the issue that we disagree with, but on the issues we can find agreement on.

Let's look at the abortion issue as another example. They frame it as murder, we frame it as a civil rights issue of privacy. But we can both agree that we don't want abortions to occur or even teen pregnancies. So our disagreement is unimportant. The goal is more important.

[Maven]

99. Making Warren more of a celebrity will help consolidate power behind him.

You say the approach is "counterintuitive." I say it's dishonest. I believe it is an effort to advance Obama's other agenda items at our expense, i.e., more of the same back-stabbing we've come to expect from the Democratic Party.

"Let's look at the abortion issue as another example. They frame it as murder, we frame it as a civil rights issue of privacy. But we can both agree that we don't want abortions to occur or even teen pregnancies. So our disagreement is unimportant. The goal is more important."

Wow, I don't even know where to begin with this.

Framing abortion as murder is unimportant? Tell that to an abortion provider whose clinic has been bombed. That's not to mention that merely focusing on the goal and not confronting their framing means we've already lost! Murder will always win over nebulous concerns over privacy. "Partial-birth abortion" ring any bells? How did ignoring the frame work out there? Just words and symbolism right?

And having the same goal doesn't matter if the means to achieve it are a source of conflict. What good does it do to say "we both want to reduce the number of abortions" if they think condoms are evil, all the while characterizing us as murderers?

[Bonobo]

105. By all means, yes, reframe the issue.

But screaming "No, you're wrong" is not the same thing. It will get us nowhere.

Reframe abortion issue = "Anti-choice" not "Anti-Abortion". Or "Pro-choice" not "Pro-Abortion", see?

That is reframing. And I am all for that. What I am not for is the ineffectual back and forth 50/50 politics of division that have been whipped up by the media to pigeonhole and control us.

[Maven]

120. There is no grey when it comes to equality.

It really is an either/or.

The politics of division as you call it is not merely a media myth. It is a very real struggle between people who want to be recognized and valued in society and people who want to demean and oppress. There is no "split the difference" approach that will work. One or the other group will ultimately be marginalized.

[NYC_SKP]

52. I agree.

But this doesn't change the fact that throwing negativity toward hatred is rarely successful in realizing lasting change.

The OP advocates engaging the other side in dialogue as a successful strategy.

This doesn't mean being "nice and welcoming", but it does suggest that shutting out the "other side" or returning fire might not be as successful as keeping communication open.

These threads have a way of ratcheting up (by both sides) until the point of the OP is lost.

I'm going to try not to let myself get trapped by that.

And I'm going to always try to place myself in the shoes of anyone being attacked and to maintain some empathy.

Even the most irrational responses here (again, by both sides) usually come from people who are feeling real pain.

[Bonobo]

57. I also want to add that I agree. I do not understand how painful it must be, Harvey.

Perhaps I can not understand.
I am very, very sorry for your pain. Honestly. And I want change, the same as you.

But I am talking strategy here, as NYC says.

[Maven]

64. Please don't condescend to me.

I don't appreciate it. If you cared at all you would listen to how I and a lot of other GLBT people feel about this and stop telling us, in a paternalistic and condescending way, that we're too hysterical to decide what's best for us so you'll handle the "strategy." No thanks.

[Bonobo]

68. I apologize if it came off that way. Not intended at all.

Text dialog is difficult because we cannot see eachother. I assure you there is no condescension here.

[Maven]

59. I am not irrational. Quite the opposite.

I'm merely furious at the amount of intellectual dishonesty that has been thrown around here in the last few weeks to justify the unjustifiable.

Dialogue, YES. Spotlight and presidential honors, NO. A very clear distinction.

[NYC_SKP]

72. Again, I agree.

I never supported Warren at the inauguration, nor is it mentioned in the OP.

I didn't mean to call you personally irrational, but I do generally find anger to be irrational, whether it's me or an angry parent or anyone else.

Hey, there's not going to be peace between EVERY faction, but there can be productive dialogue.

I know what you're saying, I'm trying to take the high road and keep it peaceful while getting us all ahead.

I'm not going to defend Obama carte blanche, I'm speaking in general, universal, terms.

[Balderdash]

63. You think that you represent progressives and liberals?

I applaud Obama's efforts to include the other side. I don't
agree that giving a bigot a place of honor is the right way to
do it, period. Invite him to the White House, have him for a
slumber party but don't honor him at OUR party.

[Luminous Animal]

84. Give me one thing to respect Warren for.

Unbelievable. If Warren had said that Jews were equivalent to pedophiles there would be such an uproar on this board that all the icons would turn into little exes.

If David Duke had been invited, Obama would be given no quarter.

Everyone starts off with the assumption that Warren is "merely" against same sex marriage. He is not. He is against gays, lesbians, trannies, bisexuals, any and all manifestations of queerdom in its entirety. He wants to obliterate us. He wants us to no longer exist. He is partnering with extremists in his Purpose Driven Nations (One Nation, One God, One Law) who are throwing people in jail, not only queers, but anyone who supports queers in word and/or deed.

His faith-based HIV/AIDS abstinence only U.S. government funded programs in Africa, touted by the corporate media as a gentler kindler evangelicalism, are killing people both gay and straight.

He is a queer-basher and hater through and through and has the power to rouse other queer-bashers. People like him are to be marginalized. Not honored. Not invited to stand on the podium at one of the most historical events in U.S. history.

[Bonobo]

97. Who said anything about respecting him?

[Luminous Animal]

111. NYC_SKP

Quote: "You could ignore, disrespect, shout down and try to undermine the other side forever and all you would accomplish is more hatred across the board." (Emphasis mine.)


NYC_SKP is advising that disrespect is a divisive tactic. In Warren's case, I call bullshit. Homophobia, like racism, kills people. It needs to be denounced. All good people must come to the aid of their brothers and sisters and declare that this hatred that breeds violence will not stand.

[eridani]

115. Refusing to submit to bullying = "hatred"

As Mr. Spock always used to say "That isn't logical."

[shintao]

151. Executions seem to work just fine!!

Well, it sure doesn't hurt anything to undermine, and walk across necon faces. I think socialism is the answer her to bring us all together in common brotherhood again. Of course socialism has to be prepared for in advance by a cleansing to insure evil capitalism never returns again to darken Americas doorway.

[Sebastian Doyle]

33. How do you reason with people who are not reasonable in the first place?

For the last 28 years, this country has gone straight to Hell in a handbasket. Both in terms of domestic and foreign policy. And while the Clinton years may have seemed on the surface to be better than the Reagan & Poppy years, and certainly not as blatantly horrible as the Chimpministration, still a lot of damage was done by Team Clinton/DLC.

NAFTA (and all of its sequels). Welfare "reform". The 1996 Telecommunications Act which gave us FAUX Noise and Clear Channel. The repeal of Glass-Steagol which made the current fucked up economic state possible. And the forcing of the Democratic party to the right, which gave Chimp plenty of spineless "Democratic" enablers to do his worst all over the planet.

So it's kind of hard to "reach across the aisle" when all the reaching has gone in the WRONG direction for nearly three fucking decades.

Obama says "a good idea is a good idea whether it comes from a Democrat or a Republican." Theoretically, that's a true statement. But when the fuck was the last time a Republican HAD a good idea? Or even a DLC'er, for that matter?

The good ideas, unfortunately are the ones that have been ignored most of the time. (i.e. HR676, which is essentially the same good idea Harry Truman had 60 years ago).

[Bonobo]

37. One essential logical fallacy in your thinking, if you will forgive me for saying so.

Your post assumes that people do not change. I am sure you know that some do and some don't, right?

Some will always be wrong-headed creeps and some will change, right?

Well, how do we win the ones that might change over without speaking (and listening) to them?

There simply is no other choice but to try.

The alternative has NO hope of working.

[EraOfResponsibility]

41. Right on

That attitude is what drives Obama's bipartisanship, I believe.

[Luminous Animal]

102. Warren will not change...

his power, reputation, and much of his income is invested in not changing. His power is killing people. His ideas are killing people. His government funded programs are killing people. He needs to be exposed, not honored. In a despicable (and wholly portended by the LGBTQ community)turn of events, he's been given a wider platform with the corporate media giving him access and accolades as a reasonable man.

The more so-called LGBTQ allies consider his ideas worthy enough to be reasoned with, the more his totally unreasonable ideas gains legitimacy.

[Sebastian Doyle]

153. Any "sane" republicans that still existed probably are not Repukes anymore.

At least not in the last election, they weren't. Those people might be open to at least partial reality, as their votes would indicate.

On the other hand, anybody who actually thought Sarah fucking Palin was qualified to be President of the United States.... well those people are BEYOND hope. There is no reaching them. They have no connection to reality whatsoever, or they would never have done anything so delusional.

[EraOfResponsibility]

38. Very good point, Bonobo

[bridgit]

39. There it is! Take the issue, any issue; your issue whomever you are...

and position it in such a way that even people who do not give a tinker's damn *about* your issue will consider it. Changing the ways one positions their issue enhances the likelihood of "winning"...by winning viable consideration for your issue...change is more able to occur. Smashing pegs designed for receptacles meant for still other pegs really only makes splinters. That's when someone is made to extricate hope, change and winning from the jacked-up jaw of what should have been reconciliation...imo of course

[Bonobo]

43. Yes indeed.

By the way, that is a Mark Ryden work in your sig, right? I love his work!!!

http://markryden.com/paintings/index.html

[bridgit]

47. Yep, peace, cheers, thanks *and* for you...'the big one'!

:)

[JeffreyWilliamson]

62. Leviticus 20:13

"If a man lie with a male as he lies with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination. They shall surely be put to death. Their blood shall be upon them."

Dominion Theology:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominion_Theology

"Dominion Theology is a grouping of theological systems with the common belief that society should be governed exclusively by the law of God as codified in the Bible, to the exclusion of secular law."

How, in your esteemed wisdom, should we talk to this other side? Should we honor them? Should we give them a place at the table?

You know, you show up in the other threads and comment, you start a thread like this.

You just don't get it, do you?

THEY WANT US TO DIE.

[Bonobo]

69. "They"?

You mean every one of them?

Shouldn't we at least try to "peel off" the ones that aren't looking to commit murder?

[JeffreyWilliamson]

76. Yes "They"...

We are talking about equality...

Should we have invited the Grand Dragon of the KKK to give their opinion about the Voting Rights Act? To make sure that they had a seat at the table? Just to "peel off the ones" that weren't looking to commit murder?

Should we invite the owner of the Stormfront Forums to give a benediction at the Inauguration, just to make sure that white supremacists have a seat at the table? Just to "peel off the ones that aren't looking to commit murder"?

You have to draw a line, somewhere.

It's a shame that some people are hesitating to draw that line. But hey, no problem, their rights aren't in danger, right?

[Bonobo]

80. A really excellent point. Quite right.

But the line is a dangerous one to draw and must be done very carefully. If you are not careful, you will find yourself on a slippery slope and running afoul of the kind of breach of civil liberties (this time the other side) that you were yourself a victim of.

[JeffreyWilliamson]

88. I'll concede that in a general sense, because I agree in that general sense...

I don't want to see someone with deep religious values forced to accept something that goes against their faith. While I think that civil marriage should be legal for all, I don't think that any church should be forced to accept a ceremony blessing one.

But breaching someone's civil liberties is a different thing than offering up a prime speaking position to someone who hates. Rick Warren will be free to hate whether or not he has that platform tomorrow.

Regardless of whether the good Reverand has his right to hate in public or private, I do not have the right to have my relationship of years recognized either way.

See, Rick Warren has a voice tomorrow. I, and many others here, while being very, very happy about the change that is coming to America, don't feel that we have a voice at all right now.

That's why these threads hurt. And I am open to the idea that the constant threads from our side are getting on peoples' nerves as well. I come here a lot to read up on current political events, and while I'm a BIG advocate for my own equality, as well as that of others, I do get a little tired myself of having to sift through 3 dozen threads upset about the same thing each time I log on.

[Bonobo]

96. Sounds like we really agree with each other.

These fucking internet discussion boards do not leave much room for grey. Everything is read into as if no one has a complex thought in their heads. Everything is flattened out, rendered in black and white. Emotional content is misread as are intentions.

I am fucking sorry as hell that some people hate me so much because they read the wrong thing into my posts.

Some people have been so cruel to me about a personal tragedy recently in my life on this board.

My sister, Maddie Joan, died very recently. We argued, in public, on DU during the primaries and now some in the GLBT community are saying that I drove her off the board and then she died (implying I don't know what). THAT is how cruel some here are. They seem to take delight in that level of pain. Anyone who can do that is not human in my eyes. But I digress... :(

[JeffreyWilliamson]

121. Okay, I'll not only concede a point, I'll agree...

Especially after reading downthread. You are right in that these types of forums don't really offer room for that grey area. You are also correct in observing that our culture hasn't either. With us or against us, patriot or traitor, we've created a very polarized atmosphere for a generation or so.

Very sorry to hear about your personal loss. I might disagree with you, but I won't be one of those GLBT posters. Debating issues is how we can help to educate one another. What debate you had with your sister should be honored for that reason, not used as a tool against you.

I do disagree that we should reach out to some people, and I doubt I'll change my mind. Regardless, dinner's calling. I'll read your posts in "those" threads with a little more consideration next time.

[Doctor_J]

65. You must be fucking joking

The other side now consists entirely of radical anti-American fascists who would rather destroy the country than have Obama succeed.

In response to your your ridiculous either/or, if we "win", then things do change.

[stillcool]

67. If you want to pass legislation

then yes. You need to talk to everyone to gain support. Especially if your Congress critter or Senator is an obstructionist. If you want to piss and moan..no. If you want your state to pass gay marriage laws..then yes. You need to talk to everyone and gain support. If not, then no. If you want..

[janx]

71. YES, with one caveat:

There are usually more than two "sides" to any given situation; there are multiple perspectives and vantage points. Our popular culture has taught us for too many years that the either/or fallacy is acceptable. It's not.

Obama appears to know this and to be interested in many viewpoints. This is civil discussion and critical thinking. It is what rhetoric, persuasion, and argument are supposed to be about. Our popular culture seems to view things in terms of food fights, cable television "infotainment," and football games, of winners and losers, of good guys and bad guys.

[Bonobo]

73. Good point.

But I am not the one here who typifies overly dualistic thinking.

[janx]

87. I understand and appreciate that!

:hi:

It's going to take some time to show people that the pop culture of the last 20 plus years--the either/or fallacy on steroids--has been a culture of ignorance.

There are young adults in this country that have known nothing other than dualistic thinking, of either-or. They were raised seeing these things in the media. I've been talking to my young adult children a lot about this recently. To listen to what someone has to say is not necessarily to agree with that person, but if you don't listen, if you only throw mud and then stick your head in the sand, you're certainly not going to gain anyone's respect.

[stillcool]

78. The Art of Politics is lost

Now it's all or nothing, black and white, either or, my way or no way, he did it first.

[janx]

106. Right, and it's not just politics.

It's rational thought. People don't learn anything by insisting that there's always "the other side" or by clinging to the "us versus them" mentality. They don't learn anything and they don't give other people an opportunity to learn from them. :shrug:

We parrot language ("these people"), and the language becomes some kind of reality, changing our thought. Never has Orwell's "Politics and the English Language" been more relevant.

[stillcool]

143. many of them don't 'do' anything either..

I called people in the run-up to the election that sounded horrified that I was calling for the Obama campaign, as if they would get the cooties through the phone line. But I didn't stop calling.

[Maven]

93. The truth and a lie are not two "sides" of the same issue.

That idea in itself is a big lie, and it's a lie that the Bush Administration, for example, used to push their untruths in the media for years.

The statement that gays and lesbians are like pedophiles is a demonstrable and dangerous lie. It is not merely a different "side."

When you present truth and lies as "viewpoints" of equivalent value you lose truth altogether.

The idea that hatred of GLBT people is merely a different "point of view" with which to disagree is an insult in itself.

[Bonobo]

100. First of all, the other side would not admit that they "hate" anyone.

They honestly, honestly do not think they are "hating". But you are right that they must be made to see the injustice of their position.

The only thing is that it can't be achieved through force or simply denunciation. They must be shown by example. We must be better than them. Then we will win.

[Maven]

109. We ARE better than they are.

We don't spend our time using the political system to oppress them. They do spend their time working to oppress us.

The examples are right in front of them. They choose to hate and they won't see the invalidity of their views just because we're nice people. "Love the sinner, hate the sin..." etc. etc. All the neat little cognitive hoops they've devised to avoid the truth about what they believe.

[Bonobo]

114. Again, totally agree. 100% percent.

Cognitive loops is a good way to describe the sollipsistic(?) system they've got to justify their "hatred of the sin, not the sinner".

But it doesn't mean it can't be broken. People escape from even the worst of cult-think, like Scientology. The way to show them they are wrong is not by saying they are wrong, but by demonstrating it (showing HOW we are bigger-minded and better).

[Maven]

117. This isn't therapy, this is politics.

I didn't sign up to the Obama campaign to do outreach to those trapped in the evangelical mindset. I signed up in part to be protected from what they want to do to me and to this country.

Not to mention that you keep perpetrating the delusion that these people will respond in any meaningful numbers to evidence that we are "better."

Again, it's easy for you to be generous and forgiving when it's not your life and your livelihood on the line. The truth is it's not your place to forgive when it comes to this issue.

[Bonobo]

123. Forgiveness doesn't have anything to do with it. Pragmatism does.

I won't repeat my mistake of condescension by saying I am sorry for your pain again, but it doesn't matter if it is "easier" for me or not. Nor is it YOUR place to tell ME that I have no place to have a point of view on the issue.

If I am in an easier position to help work for full rights for GBLTs because I can convince people that they are wrong, I will do so with or without your permission. But I don't think screaming at them that they suck will get the job done. I'll try talking I think if I ever do meet someone here in Northampton that thinks that way.

[Maven]

129. I said it's not your place to forgive and to encourage empathy

when you're not a target.

By all means, talk to people. Let's have a big national dialogue about gay rights in America. It's high time. But don't tell me that in order to do that it's necessary to give one side--the *wrong* side, and I say that without any compunction, despite your insistence that human rights is a grey area--the seal of approval after we just voted for someone in part to minimize the damage done by that very side.

That is a lie, and I will keep calling it a lie no matter what words ("unity," "pragmatism," "dialogue") are used to disguise it.

[Bonobo]

131. I hear you loud and clear.

AND, I think we have reached a wall. I have expressed my opinion and you have expressed yours. Thank you for hanging in there. I enjoyed the conversation and I still think that if we could speak face to face, we could come even closer to agreeing.

THAT is always a hope as long as the dialogue remains open. That's what makes dialogue so "hopeful".

[Maven]

132. Why? We've reached no resolution.

If anything this discussion has proven the opposite.

Goodnight.

[Bonobo]

134. No, we have not reached resolution.

God knows I tried. And so did you, I think.

I think what it proves is that Discussion Boards suck for reaching resolution. As I said, they flatten things out...

[janx]

116. It's not a different point of view; it's ignorance.

But if you are unwilling to listen to others, no matter how ignorant they are, you won't gain their respect, and they won't listen to you. They'll remain ignorant.

[HughMoran]

79. While your point is well taken (obvious)

Your post is rather pedantic - in the "showy" and yet "boring" sense.

[Bonobo]

81. I am sorry you don't like my style but that is really beside the point.

Thanks for the personal insult though!

By the way, do you know what "pedantic" means? It seems not.

[HughMoran]

82. I was teasing you

But, here is the definition I quoted :D

2. Being showy of one’s knowledge, often in a boring manner.

[Bonobo]

91. OK, but my OP was so short...

Here is what my dictionary says about a pedant:

"a person who is excessively concerned with minor details and rules or with displaying academic learning."

[HughMoran]

95. Well, I did start off by agreeing with you

pedantic has many colloquial usages - just look at the many alternate definitions when you Google it.

[PurityOfEssence]

90. Talking to your own side has its occasional merits, too...

If Obama and his team hadn't sidestepped or ducked so many liberal issues during their reaching out to the right, it wouldn't have caused such a stir.

The cheesy way of looking at it is that many of us on the left feel jilted. Another way of looking at it is that such pliable accommodation being made while liberal issues are either stalled, curtailed or scrapped shoots down the whole concept of who and what this administration will be. If one actively courts reactionaries without advancing liberal causes, one is more and more conservative in the balance. Hero-worshipers may love individuals for who they are, but the rest of us judge individuals on their actions.

Where are the progressives in this administration? After awhile, "reaching out" isn't really that much of a reach if one isn't that politically far away when the policies are examined.

Style matters. They seemed to seriously get this when they apologized to Feinstein for their clumsiness, but they've made a disturbing number or seemingly tone-deaf moves of late, and it could hurt at this critical juncture.

Even IF all these courtings of the right are just window-dressing, it's unwise to get too far afield without solidifying one's base, and they don't seem to get the message that there's SERIOUS discord in that base. Maybe they think that lefties are just saps and they're playing us for suckers, but I think it's a bit more complicated than that: I think they're too afraid of their shadows to make some leftward moves, and I think they overestimate the well of goodwill among their base.

We've been told over and over how people just KNOW what he's going to do, but it's not based on much. His voting record is uber-cautious and pretty center to center-right. Now it's time for action, and so many people have such extreme certainty about what he's going to do that there's bound to be a lot of disappointment when the piper calls his tune.

Much of what helped the "win" was being in the middle and convincing everyone that they were on their side. That doesn't work when governing.

There's plenty of frustration at dealing with the other side, but much of that is due to the stiff-arming of OUR side.

[Life Long Dem]

98. Obama is uniting the nation...

If your against uniting the nation then look for excuses saying otherwise.

I think we are looking at a PUMA style group going on. Just as PUMA ignored Hillary, this group as well, doesn't care about gay rights. They are tools used to counter Obama's effort in uniting the nation. Obama's message from the beginning and he is going to go off message now? Heck he is even wanting to unite with repubs!

[RichGirl]

112. I TOTALLY agree with you!

Among the many mistakes made by the Bush Adm...is the fact that they kept everything inside their own circle and didn't care what anyone else thought.

If Obama put all his focus on the left and pleasing the left it would be the fast track to being a one-term president.

I have friends and family members who are republicans...not the crazy freeper birth certificates types, thank God! I'm happy that they too are feeling good about Obama and it's because they see that he cares about them too.

[mmonk]

118. Some things aren't up for discussion such as the Constitution,

Bill of Rights, the Geneva convention, division of powers, separation of Church and State.......

[Bonobo]

127. Unless you are ready to kill, EVERYTHING is up for discussion. nt

[mmonk]

160. I will not bend over and kiss any tyrant's ass. Sorry.

[dbackjon]

119. Not when the other side has ZERO interest in changing

FUCK RICK WARREN.

FUCK ANYONE THAT THINKS HAVING HIM ANYWHERE NEAR DC IS A GOOD IDEA



You can not have dialogue with these people. They are not going to change their hate.

[Bonobo]

124. Again I ask: Are you sure that "THEY" will never change?

Isn't it just a teeny bit possible that you are thinking of "THEM" in a kind of monolitihic way that is not a true reflection of human complexities? Maybe?

[dbackjon]

154. Not really. having dealt with these assholes all my life

there is not a chance in hell the Rick warren's of the world will ever, ever support gay rights.

[Dreamer Tatum]

125. I hate to burst your bubble

But many on "the other side" couldn't give a shit about Rick Warren or what he represents.

The mistake being made here is that people take that which they hate and cannot accept and
are attributing those beliefs and characteristics to EVERYONE on "the other side." That is
STUPID and WRONG and ACTUALLY EXACTLY WHAT THEY SWEAR "THE OTHER SIDE" DOES.

Is there a cohort of crazy religious people out there who think we should live our lives according
to their favorite interpretation of the Bible? Sure. Do they number in the millions? Maybe.

Are there people in between that caricature and us? Why, yes, and there are enough of them
to win every significant election forever.

The object is not to get everyone to vote Democratic...just enough to win. The rest will take care of
itself.

[Bonobo]

126. Whew! A clear thinker! Bravo!

[Dreamer Tatum]

128. Just doin' my part nt

[Maven]

130. As opposed to the unclear thinkers who don't agree with you?

[Bonobo]

133. Obviously...

Sorry if it hurts your feelings, but obviously since we disagree, I think your thinking is not clear, yes.

Similarly, you have accused me of being out of my mind, or words to that effect.

[Dreamer Tatum]

137. There are people on both sides who are utterly destroyed

at the very idea that someone doesn't agree wholeheartedly with them on everything.

It's not a political matter, it's a self-esteem issue.

[Maven]

138. Okay.

As long as we're playing that game, I think that your thinking is clouded by the privileges you enjoy as a straight male, which lead you to think your opinion is backed by greater insight than it actually is all the while blinding you to said privilege.

I don't think you are "out of your mind," just terribly misguided, although after going through it with you I think your intentions are better than your OP first indicated.

[Bonobo]

140. Well, you may be right.

You are certainly a smart guy. Maybe as smart as me!

We are ALL blind to our blindspots. Even you.

[Maven]

141. Ha!

Goodnight. :)

[stillcool]

142. those that were in favor of..

amending the constitution here, to declare marriage as between a man and a woman, changed their tune when they realized there was no support for it. Voters are the problem..in every state that passes amendments against gay rights.

[Undercurrent]

145. I agree.

We can move on from the Bush political/diplomatic philosophy of, "Your either with us or with the ___________ (fill in the blank -- terrorists, evil ones, enemies, Iranians, the other party etc)."

[Lorien]

148. If you talk to them and convince them that the Democratic positions are

good for them, that's the right kind of change. If you talk to them to assure them that they're positions are just as valid and will be a part of the plan, that will lead to just more of the same.

[leftofthedial]

149. I guess so,

if you consider the question, "Would you like a last cigarette and a blindfold?" to be talking.

[girl gone mad]

155. I disagree completely.

Want proof?

Bush changed just about everything, for the worse, and he hardly ever wasted time trying to compromise.

Sorry, but you don't need to collaborate with your opposition and form coalitions to create "change".

[Evoman]

156. Hahahahahaha.

Oh man.

Have you not SEEN any change in the past 8 years? I have. I've seen your country go from something prosperous to almost bankrupt. Change happened. Lots and lots of change. Maybe not change you like, but certainly change that the republicans and their supporters like, and they didn't seem to really need to talk to YOUR side.

For change to happen, the "other side" needs to be completely marginalized, their power stripped, and their bones ground to dust. For change to happen, the "other side" needs to ignored and trivialized.

But I'll let you in on a little secret.

There really is no other side. They are all really one side and buddy, unless you got about 10 mill sitting in the bank, it ain't yours.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

158. so stupid. nt

[sampsonblk]

161. That's just a slogan. Its not true and never has been - nt

[Th1onein]

162. I wholeheartedly agree!

I've said this for years.