Rdskn4Lyf21 Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Hate to break it to you, but I have a feeling no one cares about "traditional values" anymore. Oh well... I'd say there are a lot more of us than you'd think..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
prophet Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 I was unsure about voting at all in this election. I thought the forum was great. And McCain pretty much gave me some faith that he could be a good president. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PeterMP Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Hate to break it to you, but I have a feeling no one cares about "traditional values" anymore. Oh well... http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/08/15/value.voters/index.html Analysis: Candidates can't ignore values-based voters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoot Point Really Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Traditional values as defined by whom? Defined by those who cling to their religion and guns... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoot Point Really Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Hate to break it to you, but I have a feeling no one cares about "traditional values" anymore. Oh well... Ask yourself if Barack Obama would be misrepresenting his record if he agreed with you... Life and Marriage were two items up for debate at Saddleback, and Obama had to take a pass on one and Warren let him wiggle out of the other. McCain's camp should raise the issue of Warren asking McCain about PPro, but not Obama... It would be interesting to hear how Obama could support the court in this instance, and still remain consistent with the views he expressed over the weekend. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tastes Like Chicken Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 I don't know, especially with the tone of regret in his voice. Its like saying "I wish I never cheated on her with you and was still married to her instead of you." That takes big one's especially when you second wife looks like she wouldn't hesitate to cut them off. The BIG word above is pretty vital, no? He didn't say anything of the sort. He said nothing, other than "the failure of my first marriage." I am close friends with someone who feels that his biggest failure in life was the failure of his marriage. Did the marriage fail because he was adulterous? NO. But that doesn't mean that he regrets the failure any more or less. McCain did NOT admit to adultery. He showed regret that things didn't work out, and anyone who was watching saw how quickly he turned the subject to America's failings. And he knew the question ahead of time, he had time to prepare, discuss WHY HIS MARRIAGE FAILED, and show remorse or what he learned from the experience. Instead, he basically ignored it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 California already had a law supporting civil unions... California voters voted in favor of a more strict definition of marriage, not civil unions. The California judge struck down the will of the voters, and Obama supported the ruling of the court... Therefore, Obama's answer on gay marriage and civil unions at Saddleback doesn't hold water. To side with the court in California, you would have to say that it's a court's decision (not the will of the people) that matters and that civil unions aren't good enough. This is entirely wrong. The California Supreme Court struck down the ban on gay marriage because it violated the California Constitution. The Constitution can be changed, but until it IS changed, the Constitution takes precedence over a voter initiative. Thus to side with the court in California, you only would have to say that the California Constitution takes precedence over the "will of the people" in a single vote. There will be a vote in November to change the California Constitution. If that vote succeeds, the basis for the court's decision will be negated. By the way, the California Supreme Court contains 6 Republican judges and only 1 Democratic judge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 I thought both candidates did well. McCain did better, but is was a home-field advantage in terms of the crowd and the questions. The fact that he knew a lot of the questions in advance did not hurt him either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 By the way, the California Supreme Court contains 6 Republican judges and only 1 Democratic judge. Damn activitist liberal hippie judges... who says they can interpret their own consitution? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BRAVEONAWARPATH Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Defined by those who cling to their religion and guns... That's not what I really meant... but fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted August 18, 2008 Author Share Posted August 18, 2008 The BIG word above is pretty vital, no?He didn't say anything of the sort. Of course he didn't. But after being married for several years, I can tell you how some women would react to that. And that's what I meant.He said nothing, other than "the failure of my first marriage."I am close friends with someone who feels that his biggest failure in life was the failure of his marriage. Did the marriage fail because he was adulterous? NO. But that doesn't mean that he regrets the failure any more or less. Irrelevant. McCain's did fail because he committed adultery and abandoned her. McCain did NOT admit to adultery. He showed regret that things didn't work out, and anyone who was watching saw how quickly he turned the subject to America's failings.The question was about a "moral failing". His answer was his divorce.If he had divorced her for legitimate reasons it wouldn't be a moral failing on his part would it? And he knew the question ahead of time, he had time to prepare, discuss WHY HIS MARRIAGE FAILED, and show remorse or what he learned from the experience. Instead, he basically ignored it.I was under the impression that they did not know the questions ahead of time? Hence Obama's studdering and McCain's quip about them all being as hard as the first one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoot Point Really Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 This is entirely wrong. It isn't wrong... California had laws protecting "civil unions"... The Prop8 vote was defining marriage as between a man & a woman. Barack Obama claims that he doesn't support gay marriage, but supports civil unions. However, in his supporting the California Supreme Court, he did just the opposite since laws protecting civil unions were in place and Prop 8 only referred to marriage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoot Point Really Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 The fact that he knew a lot of the questions in advance did not hurt him either. Link? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 I was under the impression that they did not know the questions ahead of time? Hence Obama's studdering and McCain's quip about them all being as hard as the first one. That was the impression that Warren gave us. Apparently it wasn't true. Obama didn't know any of the questions in advance, but it is not so clear about McCain. McCain hadn't even left his hotel when Obama's quizzing began. :whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoot Point Really Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 "Moral failing" question doesn't really matter... They both screwed up in the past, but the things mentioned happened so long ago that it has no barring on whether or not they will be a good President. Move along... Nothing to see there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 Link? http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/18/us/politics/18mccain.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 It isn't wrong... California had laws protecting "civil unions"... The Prop8 vote was defining marriage as between a man & a woman. Barack Obama claims that he doesn't support gay marriage, but supports civil unions. However, in his supporting the California Supreme Court, he did just the opposite since laws protecting civil unions were in place and Prop 8 only referred to marriage. What I said was wrong was your mis-characterization of the substance of the California Supreme Court decision. Obama was a law professor. He understands that the Constitution takes precedence over voter initiatives until the Consitution itself is amended. In other words, you can support the California Supreme Court on this matter and still feel that civil unions are the best compromise as a public policy matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoot Point Really Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/18/us/politics/18mccain.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin That doesn't say he had the questions beforehand... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 It isn't wrong... California had laws protecting "civil unions"... The Prop8 vote was defining marriage as between a man & a woman. Barack Obama claims that he doesn't support gay marriage, but supports civil unions. However, in his supporting the California Supreme Court, he did just the opposite since laws protecting civil unions were in place and Prop 8 only referred to marriage.I don't think Obama ever said that he supported the California Supreme Court's decision. He said that he "respects" the decision:Barack Obama has always believed that same-sex couples should enjoy equal rights under the law, and he will continue to fight for civil unions as President. He respects the decision of the California Supreme Court, and continues to believe that states should make their own decisions when it comes to the issue of marriage. http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0508/Marriage_statements.html If you want to contrast that with McCain's stance, all Obama is really saying is that he respects the authority of the California Supreme Court to interpret the California Constitution. It's actually very similar to Schwarzenegger's statement on the issue: "I respect the Court's decision and as Governor, I will uphold its ruling. Also, as I have said in the past, I will not support an amendment to the constitution that would overturn this state Supreme Court ruling." http://gov.ca.gov/press-release/9610/ Actually, Schwarzenegger sounds even more pro-gay marriage than Obama there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoot Point Really Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 What I said was wrong was your mis-characterization of the substance of the California Supreme Court decision. Obama was a law professor. He understands that the Constitution takes precedence over voter initiatives until the Consitution itself is amended. In other words, you can support the California Supreme Court on this matter and still feel that civil unions are the best compromise as a public policy matter. So... I sense you are doing the same type of saddleback dance we saw the other night from Senator Obama. When did Barack Obama say that he is for the people of California "amending the Constitution" to support Marriage? Noogling this was too easy. I do wish Warren had asked the same question to Barack Obama that he did John McCain... The dancing there would've been something to watch. http://www.sacbee.com/111/story/1051404.html Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama, who previously said the issue of gay marriage should be left up to each state, has announced his opposition to a California ballot measure that would ban same-sex marriages.In a letter to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club read Sunday at the group's annual Pride Breakfast in San Francisco, the Illinois senator said he supports extending "fully equal rights and benefits to same-sex couples under both state and federal law." "And that is why I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution, and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of other states," Obama wrote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 That doesn't say he had the questions beforehand... True. It remains to be seen. Or at least it remains to be PROVEN. I seriously doubt that McCain's motorcade lacked tv or radio, and I seriously doubt that his aides were not watching Obama and telling him how it was going. :whoknows: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoot Point Really Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 I don't think Obama ever said that he supported the California Supreme Court's decision. It's well documented that Barack Obama opposed Proposition 8. I believe the words he used were "divisive and discriminatory"... Of course, more than half of California disagreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Predicto Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 So... I sense you are doing the same type of saddleback dance we saw the other night from Senator Obama. When did Barack Obama say that he is for the people of California "amending the Constitution" to support Marriage? What you call a "saddleback dance" I call constitutional law. I called you on misrepresenting the California Supreme Court decision. And you did just that. And I never claimed that Obama said anything specific. YOU are the one who is putting words in his mouth, not me. Of course, if you think that Obama is required to use exactly the preferred Smoot choice of words, it is unlikely that he is going to satisfy your needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DjTj Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 It's well documented that Barack Obama opposed Proposition 8. I believe the words he used were "divisive and discriminatory"... Of course, more than half of California disagreed.But opposing Proposition 8 isn't equivalent to supporting gay marriage. Obama's official statement was:"Senator Obama supports civil unions, and he has consistently opposed federal and state constitutional marriage amendments because as we have seen in some states, enshrining a definition of marriage into the constitution can allow states to roll back the civil rights and benefits that are provided in domestic partnerships and civil unions." http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/07/01/MN8J11I731.DTL And I'm not sure what you mean by half of California disagreeing. Prop 8 will not be voted upon until November, and recent polls show a majority against it: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/state/20080718-9999-1n18field.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smoot Point Really Posted August 18, 2008 Share Posted August 18, 2008 What you call a "saddleback dance" I call constitutional law. I called you on misrepresenting the California Supreme Court decision. And you did just that.And I never claimed that Obama said anything specific. YOU are the one who is putting words in his mouth, not me. Of course, if you think that Obama is required to use exactly the preferred Smoot choice of words, it is unlikely that he is going to satisfy your needs. You argued that Obama's decision was a matter of constitutional law and that he opposed it on the grounds that it was unconstitutional and he couldn't support it unless the California constitution was ammended.... However, I provided a link that quoted him as saying he wouldn't even support an attempt to ammend the constitution on the grounds that the language of Proposition 8 was "divisive" and "discriminatory". You aren't a constitutional expert and neither am I, so stop pretending... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.