Figuratively.
The title does not refer to the Great Unreported Sex Scandal that the L.A. Times is supposedly sitting on. Rather, it refers to an op-ed by our friend David E., complaining that Obama is trying to have it both ways on gay issues.
Pronounced "Patter-EE-koh"
E-mail: Just use my moniker Patterico, followed by the @ symbol, followed by gmail.com
Disclaimer: Simpsons avatar may resemble a younger Patterico...
The statements made on this web site reflect the personal opinions of the author. They are not made in any official capacity, and do not represent the opinions of the author's employer.
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 |
| 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 |
| 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 |
| 29 | 30 | 31 | ||||
Powered by WordPress.
The gay agenda has always been a millstone around the Democratic Party’s neck. Rightly or wrongly, Obama sees this. He has enough problem with electability to parade his gay sympathies.
Banjo (b5278d) — 10/31/2007 @ 7:22 amYou want to talk about “millstones”?
David Ehrenstein (b743cb) — 10/31/2007 @ 8:51 amInteresting how this will play with Andrew Sullivan. To date, he’s been more or less in Obama’s corner, calling Obama his “only source of hope” or words to that effect.
DubiousD (d5d032) — 10/31/2007 @ 9:17 amDid Patterico just say Obama goes both ways?
Kevin (4890ef) — 10/31/2007 @ 10:49 amDavid may be giving Obama too much credit even in this article. Obama is a Chicago Machine hack and his thinking on the subject stopped at “money or votes?” Put not your faith in princes, gay or black people.
nk (7aed24) — 10/31/2007 @ 11:02 am“Go read it?” Phooey. It’s Ehrenstein.
1] [ ] claims to be gay-friendly, but has not supported a Constitutional amendment to require public gay sex as a qualification for office, and is therefore a Racist, Homophobic, Christianist Wingnut who cannot be even considered as a possibility for Upholding the Public Trust.
2] George W. Bush is a RHCW who should be hauled before an International Court and executing for disturbing the rest of the peaceful, generous Saddam Hussein.
Expand each of those paragraphs to 200 words or so and you have the gist of any Ehrenstein piece that doesn’t directly address the movie business. Reading them is redundant and pointless.
Regards,
Ric Locke (0d9ad6) — 10/31/2007 @ 12:39 pmRic