Obama names 7 gays to transition team

No Brian, ignorance and elitism has divided this country...........and it has been the mantel of the last 8 years.

Perhaps, Brian, that is the way you enjoy to live, divided, but I guarantee that the majorit of this nation has had enough of that mentality and made sure the leadership of this country reflects that idea.

If you want to live in a nation divided by a caste system, might I suggest moving to India.

Oh, sorry GoldenGate. I failed to realize that during Clinton there was no elitism or ignorance. I believe that the gay community has made more advancements to for their cause during the last 8 years than during the 8 that Clinton was in office. Actually the majority of the country has always spoken about how they feel about homosexuality. But since the gay movement doesn't like it, it keeps pushing and pushing and pushing. If your screen name reflects of where you live then I believe that the MAJORITY spoke about a certain issue recently, but the gay community will keep on nagging and nagging even though the MAJORITY has spoken LOUD AND CLEAR.

Don't feed the trolls!

I failed to realize that during Clinton there was no elitism or ignorance. I believe that the gay community has made more advancements to for their cause during the last 8 years than during the 8 that Clinton was in office.

Like what? The gay movement for the last eight years for the most part has been at a stand still with California being one of the few glimmers of hope.

Actually the majority of the country has always spoken about how they feel about homosexuality. But since the gay movement doesn't like it, it keeps pushing and pushing and pushing. If your screen name reflects of where you live then I believe that the MAJORITY spoke about a certain issue recently, but the gay community will keep on nagging and nagging even though the MAJORITY has spoken LOUD AND CLEAR

And this means what?? The same argument was made for giving African Americans the write to vote, and being recognized as actual United States citizens. Civil Rights has always been a minority movement.

Not feeding any trolls...................I'm plum out of ignorance anyway.......and we all know they feed off it and need it to survive and thrive.

Shut off the supply and eventually they'll fade off.

Well Bush tried it first.

Michael E. Guest (born 1957) was the U.S. Ambassador to Romania, appointed by President George W. Bush.^[1] Guest was sworn in by U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell on September 18, 2001 and took up his duties on September 24, 2001. During his speech at Guest's swearing-in ceremony in the State Department Diplomatic Reception Room, Powell explicitly noted the presence of and positively recognized Guest's life partner, Alex Nevarez. LGBT rights groups viewed Guest's appointment, and Powell's remarks, as historic and indicative of greater recognition of gay State Department employees and same-sex partners. Socially conservative groups expressed opposition to Guest's appointment and to Powell's gesture.^[2]

Brian,

So giving a job to a qualified person who happens to be gay (which the majority of the population has supported in surveys) in your book equals marriage? You seem to lack a clear definition of marriage.

Sure can you say Clintonites, theres no real change in government, at least yet. Seems like Carter from the history books and many of those Clinton people that America was happy to turf out and replace with G Bush. Aint America grand, hahaha. Love being an Independent.

archon-prime, why are you so hateful?  Homosexuality is not a political movement.  It's a minority of HUMAN BEINGS segregated from society because of something they can't control.  All social movements started with the minority.  Have an open-mind.  I hope you get over your anger for things that are different from yourself.

Personally, I like to think that this has absolutely sh*t to do with gay people.  Those men were not chosen because they're gay, but because that's who Obama thought was best suited for the position. If anything at all, it shows that Obama doesn't have prejudice towards homosexuals and that is indeed a promising sign. 

Oh, sorry GoldenGate. I failed to realize that during Clinton there was no elitism or ignorance. I believe that the gay community has made more advancements to for their cause during the last 8 years than during the 8 that Clinton was in office. Actually the majority of the country has always spoken about how they feel about homosexuality. But since the gay movement doesn't like it, it keeps pushing and pushing and pushing. If your screen name reflects of where you live then I believe that the MAJORITY spoke about a certain issue recently, but the gay community will keep on nagging and nagging even though the MAJORITY has spoken LOUD AND CLEAR.

So a majority of people supporting discrimination makes discrimination OK? Was slavery OK because at one point in time most Americans — certainly most Americans in the region implementing slavery — thought it was OK? How about segregated schools? The Salem witch trials? McCarthyism? The Holocaust? (I have no idea if the majority of Germans supported what Hitler did.)

Well Kc77,

Let's take a look at your analogy. So you compare the Civil Rights movements to the gay right movement? Please. The most you'll get is a laugh out of that ridicoulus comparison. One group was based being discriminated based on color/race while the other is being judged by the lifestyle they CHOOSE to live. Are there cases in which you see people that have no control of their homosexula urges? Absolutely. Then it's  considered a disorder and we , the MAJORITY as a society have developed programs to deal with such things. Just as much as wanting to have a sex with a child is a disorder so is homosexuality when deliberately chosen.

If we're going to start on the rights of homosexuals and defend their lifestyle,.....then why stop there? Let's fight for the rights of the people who feel totally comfortable and un-ashamed of practicing bestiality, or the necrophiliac, or whomever else feels we are as a society, as a whole and as a MAJORITY is trampling over his/her desires.

And one last food for thought/analogy for you. If you had the last two gay men on earth or women  for that matter, all alone in an island...Could they survive an procreate on their own? NO. They'd both die eventually and their kind would cease to be.

That right there lets you know, that gay love, relationship, partnership or whatever you wanna call it, was NOT meant to be. If it was; and w/o bringing God into this discussion, nature, life, or a supreme being would have made it possible for homosexuals to procreate.

No matter,  whether you like it or not that's  a small fact that will always be staring you in the face regardless of time or place. Some things are just not meant to be. But I DO understand the homosexual community's plight. How do you go about fighting for what you conceive as a right w/o trampling on the rights of others is a tough cookie to break and a hard reality to deal with.

If we're going to start on the rights of homosexuals and defend their lifestyle,.....then why stop there? Let's fight for the rights of the people who feel totally comfortable and un-ashamed of practicing bestiality, or the necrophiliac, or whomever else feels we are as a society, as a whole and as a MAJORITY is trampling over his/her desires.

Why do people continue to make this analogy? An animal cannot consent to sex. A dead person cannot consent to sex. A child cannot legally consent to sex. An adult man or woman can. So why do so many people think this is comparable?

And one last food for thought/analogy for you. If you had the last two gay men on earth or women for that matter, all alone in an island...Could they survive an procreate on their own? NO. They'd both die eventually and their kind would cease to be.

What's your point? Two prepubescent children couldn't procreate - are they lesser beings because of it? How about impotent men? Should they allowed to be married?

Why do people continue to make this analogy? An animal cannot consent to sex. A dead person cannot consent to sex. A child cannot legally consent to sex. An adult man or woman can. So why do so many people think this is comparable?

Well, the'yre all "ewww, icky!", so obvioulsy, they must be legally equivalent.

In other news, I find it funny that the troll thinks homosexuality is equivalent to sterility.

archon-prime, why are you so hateful?

Why are you so ignorant?

Discussing the issues isn't hate.

Homosexuality is not a political movement.  

Yet there is a homosexual Political movement.

It's a minority of HUMAN BEINGS segregated from society because of something they can't control.

There is no segregation of gays in this country. No one prevents them from having romantic partners.

I hope you get over your anger for things that are different from yourself.

I hope you get over the "group-think" mentality of attacking those you don't know with charges of anger & hate. It's a very pre-teen girlie behavior that so many "adults" have incorporated into their own.

So a majority of people supporting discrimination makes discrimination OK?

Marriage isn't a "Civil" right as defined in The Constitution.

Please inform me of my ignorance.  How is it ignorant to show support for a group of people that are persecuted by others?   Homosexuals having the right to marry will not harm you or anyone else in any way, shape or form.  But you still don't want them to have the same basic rights that you have.  I wasn't attacking you earlier by stating "I hope you get over your anger for things that are different from yourself". I was genuinely saying that without an open mind, you'll never fully enjoy the things this life has to offer.  

Don't fall back on that argument of "you dont' know me".  We have every right to respond AND judge you based on the comments you've posted.  That's you way you've chosen to express yourself, so deal with it.  You're the one hating on others, we understand that and feel bad for your close-mindedness.  We just want you to respect others for their lifestyle like they respect you for yours.  You don't have to have gay sex with anyone, you don't have to even pretend to be comfortable to homosexuality, just understand that two CONSENTING adults with the same genitalia should have the same rights that you and I have.  

They're not harming anyone, but you're harming them.  That's morally WRONG. 

A. Becker and PwrsKnowledge,

You can make all the arguments you want and make any analogy to defend homosexuality. It's your right as an american and as a human being. I don't detest, dislike or think of homosexuals as a disease. I beleive homosexuality is a disease for some and a choice to give up morality by others. I know that there are plenty of gay men and women that have a lot good to offer to society and I have found gay people that are great people. I just don't agree with homosexuality. That's it. Why must the gay movement keep on trying to shove it down people's throats. Isn't it enough that the majority of citizens of this country let you practice that lifestyle? I guess not, because regardless of how many laws we enact to protect gay people, regardless of how much we have done to teach children to accept gay people; you guys always want more. Not only do you want acceptance, but you want us to change the notion of what we believe is a cornerstone of our society, which is that marriage is between a man and a woman, period. Sorry but it feels more and more every day that you want to push your beliefs on the rest, you want us to give up our morals. Just realize that the more you push to have your "rights" the more you infringe on ours.

I beleive homosexuality is a disease for some and a choice to give up morality by others.

Man, so how do you tell the people with the gay infection apart from the people who just up and chose to "give up morality"? Or, do you simply pick, choose, and judge from up on high to your heart's content?

Isn't it enough that the majority of citizens of this country let you practice that lifestyle?

I know, right? Gay people should just be glad that only very few people feel compelled to drag them to death behind trucks, right?

Not only do you want acceptance, but you want us to change the notion of what we believe is a cornerstone of our society, which is that marriage is between a man and a woman, period.

Interracial marriage was once deemed against a "cornerstone of our society." History repeats itself. You've simply forgotten, or never knew, it.

Just realize that the more you push to have your "rights" the more you infringe on ours.

Feel free to concretely state how gay marriage will infringe on your rights -- except for that "right" to treat marriage like an exclusive club membership. :-)

archon-prime, why are you so hateful?

Please inform me of my ignorance.

I already have.

 Now I'll explain it to you: You begin conversation with a statement like "why are you so hateful" you're ignorant.

  How is it ignorant to show support for a group of people that are persecuted by others?  

Gays are not persecuted in this country. Try not to exaggerate.

Homosexuals having the right to marry will not harm you or anyone else in any way, shape or form.

Homosexuals redefining marriage for their own self-esteem cheapens the millennia old practice of heterosexual marriage.

 But you still don't want them to have the same basic rights that you have.

Gays have EVERY right I have. Marriage is not a Constitutionally protected right.

 I wasn't attacking you earlier by stating "I hope you get over your anger for things that are different from yourself". I was genuinely saying that without an open mind, you'll never fully enjoy the things this life has to offer.  

Yeah, you were attacking. Be honest with yourself if not the rest of us.

Don't fall back on that argument of "you dont' know me".  

Wouldn't want to bring reason into it after all!

We have every right to respond AND judge you based on the comments you've posted.  That's you way you've chosen to express yourself, so deal with it.  You're the one hating on others, we understand that and feel bad for your close-mindedness.

You keep talking about hate, anger and being close-minded yet, you seem unable to point out what falls into any of those hysterical criteria you've attacked and labelled.

 We just want you to respect others for their lifestyle like they respect you for yours.

Again, YOU DON'T KNOW ME or whom I respect.

As I believe "marriage" is a union of man & woman only, the gay agendists have already proven they do not respect my beliefs or those of the greater society that believe likewise.

 You don't have to have gay sex with anyone, you don't have to even pretend to be comfortable to homosexuality, just understand that two CONSENTING adults with the same genitalia should have the same rights that you and I have.  

They already do have the same rights I have.

Why do you believe they should have special rights?

They're not harming anyone, but you're harming them.  

How are gays being harmed?

Interracial marriage was once deemed against a "cornerstone of our society." History repeats itself.

The canard is repeated.

The gays I know tell me of the so called marriage penalty or tax.  The militant gays that organized protests after the vote are just disgruntled people.  Liberal attack on something they want to accomplish.  Once they get their way they will find something else to attack.  Like religion.  The Mormons?  By far most people on this planet want nothing to do with homo's, but if it is not flaunted people do not care.  It's the in your face homo that gives all gays a bad rap!

Well Kc77,

Let's take a look at your analogy. So you compare the Civil Rights movements to the gay right movement? Please. The most you'll get is a laugh out of that ridicoulus comparison. One group was based being discriminated based on color/race while the other is being judged by the lifestyle they CHOOSE to live. Are there cases in which you see people that have no control of their homosexula urges? Absolutely. Then it's  considered a disorder and we , the MAJORITY as a society have developed programs to deal with such things. Just as much as wanting to have a sex with a child is a disorder so is homosexuality when deliberately chosen.

Oh Iwillbleedsothestripesstayred, not that your handle isn't enough to draw some rather disturbing conclusions about you, I don't really have to offer a retort to your whole post when the first paragraph is riddled with errors. First question I have for you is,  how do YOU know that sexual orientation is a preference? Is there some reputable doctor / psychologist that you have read in order to draw that conclusion? My guess is that you haven't, rather your post is a mere example of someone posing nonsensical analogies as a legitimate vehicle for hatred.

Yes, the civil rights movement is analogous to the "gay rights movement". Why? Because both of them are fighting ignorance, hatred, and quite frankly stupidity.

Some people disagree with me and say that there's no comparison. I on the other hand refuse to put a degree on hatred. It's irrelevant. Whether you put the civil rights movement at a 9 or put the gay rights movement as something lower, needless people have died for the mere right to exist and to experience  the same rights that those of us not in the minority class enjoy. So to me, that fact that YOU choose to put a degree, a threshold to hatred in comparing the two is laughable at the least, and disturbing at it's best.  However, the more accurate classification for your post is, as I've said before, is an example of someone posing nonsensical analogies as a legitimate vehicle for hatred.

Back in the 50's when a man was deemed homosexual he was given treatment.  The treatment was electrical shock therapy.  The psychotherapist would show the man homosexual pornography.  When the viewer got excited he was given a bolt of electricity!  My main question is where did the psycotherapist get gay porn?

The Christmas songs are happy and gay.  When did homosexuality become gays?

Iwillbleedsothestripesstayred  Why must the gay movement keep on trying to shove it down people's throats. Isn't it enough that the majority of citizens of this country let you practice that lifestyle?

You have got to be kidding me. I have had to put up with rightwing horse&^%$ being shoved down my throat for the last 8 years - I don't have any choice but to be tolerant (because it is STILL being shoved down my throat - HEY! Freudian slip there, buddy?). I hope it is enough that the majority of citizens allow you the benefit of your civil rights which have been.......not so quietly stripped from we the people. I just want to know why this has to be an issue - period.  

When did homosexuality become gays?

The word "gay" was co-opted as to begin the campaign of acceptance propaganda strategy.

By using "gay" instead of "queer", or even "homosexual", the public image of homosexuality could be one day be molded into an acceptable lifestyle to the greater heterosexual society.

Simply put it's a marketing strategy.

Yeah somehow I dont think Obama has a master list of "Must Have Quota Fillers"

I hardly think being gay is a consideration....it's so and so who has this experience and happens to be gay.

One of these days we'll drop the incessent need to emphasize the first of everything as if its some means to erase the black mark of ignorance in this country and to prove that yes, in this land of the brave and free..............you've had to prove your race worthy before your character.

Keep in mind the Blade is a publication of the gay community;  It's reporting news for its readership.

Oh, I'm a subscriber to Blade, I understand that.  I was just saying - while it is great for the gay community to finally see some of our members actively involved in politics, especially the higher positions, I don't think that their sexuality played into their acquiring their position.  I'll be the first to tell you that sometimes the gay community celebrates the oddest things as "victories", when really being gay is a secondary happenstance.  :)

Agree completely, Ryann_O.  This is very similar to the battles for inclusion fought by ethnic minorities last century.  The Italian newspaper would note Italians in office, etc.

- double post - delete please

I do not like the term gay marriage.  I can tolerate homosexual marriage.  How homosexuals changed their name to gay needs to be explained to me.

Wake up.......we've already hit bottom.........the spiral you're feeling........is going up.

I'll wait and see. Maybe I'm just experiencing inertia :)

Hmm 4 Obama news conferences....4 positive days on Wall Street for a total of 1200 points gain........hasn't seen that in months......

Nice inertia.

;)

1. The market upward rally would have happened regardless of whom would have gotten elected.

2. If you didn't noticed the market had these type of days even before Obama was elected.

3. Obama has not taken office yet. He can advise, urge, plea, etc. Congress to approve bailouts , but that's about it. So the changes that you have seen in the economy are hardly his doing.

Get your facts straight before you stick your foot in your mouth.

Unfortunately we as the right have had to deal with "See?? The market went down because Obama got elected!" ...Now that he has assembled an experienced and mostly trusted economic team, taken positive steps...we see a rise in the market....we have the right to crow the rise as well as deal with the slander of loss....

Iwillbleed - 1) No, in general the market goes up when a democrat is elected (knowing the whole economy gets better - pie enlarging economics) and down when they expect a republican elected (pie-slicing economics; selected businesses get better at the expense of others; or note that there has been little growth and the market is still down from 2000)

2) actually, No; we have set a record for recent years of the # of conecutive positive days

3) The market responds when they think there is a clear winner; in 1992 the market started slowly up as it appeared Clinton would be elected, in 2000 it went down as it appeared Bush would win; I don't really understand the up and down this year unless it's because Obama is such an unknown quantity that only now, with his economic team picks, is the market ready to accept him as a traditional democrat meaning the market as a whole will go up.

After reading this page, it's seems really sad, that out of all this crazy anti-american hate, you are the only one opposing it. Being alone on this page is probably all right .Does not say much for the education  systems in this country. Could be the dope and hollywood porn they pass off as movies. Something went wrong..... in the 60s, I think. It is a no winner to argue with these, but, eh! Have at it "will bleed". I found it usually better to have no leftys for friends, buy nothing from blue states,[almost nothing] and fight against the leftist dems and repubs by working with conservative, traditional americans. Pay little attention to what they say. The Obama transition will hurt the country, but, I think sanity will prevail and they will lose control in the mid terms. 

Hmm 4 Obama news conferences....4 positive days on Wall Street for a total of 1200 points gain........hasn't seen that in months......

Historically the market gains around the Thanksgiving holiday. Huge gains. Nothing to do with Obama news conferences. More like, wow people are thinking retail...

I'm amused people think Obama had nothing to do with the post election slump and everything to do with the Thanksgiving surge. Clearly many do not invest.

Nothing to do with Obama news conferences. More like, wow people are thinking retail...

I rather doubt that the current slump in consumer spending makes the peri-Thanksgiving rally purely a seasonal phenomena.

I'm amused people think Obama had nothing to do with the post election slump and everything to do with the Thanksgiving surge. Clearly many do not invest.

Meh. I'm willing to attribute both to simple high volatility, though I think Obama's economic speeches certainly had an impact in terms of the number of consecutive rally days.

IF we were truly progressive, it wouldn´t even be worth mentioning

...ah, I cannot wait to see that day. 

You miss the point.

In the past, qualified people who were openly gay were shut out of positions, or told to stay in the closet. Or they were the exception to the rule.

In the Obama administration, the question will be "Can you do the job exceptionally well?" and irrelevant crap like sexual orientation doesn't keep you out of the job if the answer is "Yes."

well said, MC

Kim,

How naive is your notion tha under Obama "Can you do the job exceptionally well?" will be the standard that applicants will be judged by. I'm not saying that the motto would have been adopted by MCain either, but to state such comment is the same to say that the KKK would select a black man or minority and give him some position in their org, (if one could call it that). Politics are politics and will never change due to the fact that' it's all ran by corruption and greed. Elected officials put people in positions according to the suitability to accomplish the duties of the position but the willingness to follow or not go against  their agenda first.

In the Obama administration, the question will be "Can you do the job exceptionally well?" and irrelevant crap like sexual orientation doesn't keep you out of the job if the answer is "Yes."

Well Said. A person's sexual orientation has nothing to do with if they can do their job well or not. On the other hand I still think this is something to celebrate. Sadly we have not yet reached the point where this is not an issue in our society and, in spite of what some would have one believe, we won't by not acknowledging this. It's the same with some people who say that we shouldn't mention a person is the first black or women or gay, etc to achieve a certain status, as if that will somehow make the prejudices go away. It won't. We have to first openly acknowledge achievements like this, before they can become commonplace.

Goofing off too much. After the election especially I've had a blog hangover and not been online as much.

How you?

;-)

your ability to do your job depends on your ability to do your job, no one should argue that.

im in favour of tolerance of intolerance

be tolerant of someone elses intolerance instead of being intolerant of the intolerance.

Indeed, we still have not gotten over our childish and public obsession with people's sexual orientations or extramarital affairs.

yeah why should it matter,  just ask spitzer

Spitzer was dishonest - and was it legal?  Being gay has nothing to do with deceitful behaviour.

To YOU and others in this forum the issue of sexual orientation doesn't matter when judging a person's character. To me it does, and carries as much wait as adultery.

Beleive me. I'm not. I judge people by the content of their character, and since to me sexual orientation has to do with character as well as morals then I choose to pass judgment on those that follow a life style that I don't approve. We all pass judgment on one another, from democrats to conservatives to the bum on the street. I will not lose any sleep trying to prove to homosexuals that they have chosen the wrong path. If I'm approached about it and asked for my views on the subject, I will let you know such, but that's the extent of it. I'm not the one that makes the final judgment.

What, no unqualified cronies???

Seven that are out at least. Bigots beware...gays are everywhere

That's tellin' them!  Don't the scairdy cats ever read history?

True than Steve. Next headline:

"Obama appoints 4 Hispanics, 3 African-Americans, 2 Asians and a partridge in a pear tree".

I'm happy we're an accepting country. But then again, in my generation I never thought we weren't. The few wackos don't count either. They'll never change.