DVD Talk
Why Doesn't Obama Preach to Black Churches? [Archive] - DVD Talk Forum
 
Best Sellers
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
The Longest Day
Buy: $54.99 $24.99
9.
10.
DVD Blowouts
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Alien [Blu-ray]
Buy: $19.99 $9.99
8.
9.
10.

PDA
DVD Reviews

View Full Version : Why Doesn't Obama Preach to Black Churches?


creekdipper
05-13-12, 11:21 AM
Since (according to all news media outlets, including stalwartly-liberal icons such as the NYT and Wash. Post) the single largest group opposing "gay" marriage is African-Americans, why wouldn't the President use the bully pulpit to have some photo ops in black churches explaining his support for same-sex marriage and trying to show his most loyal constituents their moral errors?

After all, he'd be in extremely safe political territory and would be preaching to the largest community of homophobes, thereby doing the most good for justice and making the world a better place for his daughters. Preaching on college campuses doesn't exactly reach the biggest bigoted offenders...why not go into the belly of the beast?

And the black homophobic community would obviously take a moral dressing-down better from the Brother-in-Chief than from, say, Hilary or Hairless Joe.

OldDude
05-13-12, 11:27 AM
I think mostly because of the H-word (hypocrite).

He wants to get the votes of the gay community without losing the vote of the black community. The black community may be disappointed by his position, but as long as he doesn't harp on it when he speaks to them, they AREN'T disappointed enough to vote Republican. He gets to have his cake and eat it, too.

JumpCutz
05-13-12, 01:15 PM
He wants to get the votes of the gay community without losing the vote of the black community. The black community may be disappointed by his position, but as long as he doesn't harp on it when he speaks to them, they AREN'T disappointed enough to vote Republican. He gets to have his cake and eat it, too.

That Obama is one pretty shrewd politician aye? :thumbsup:

Groucho
05-13-12, 01:20 PM
Same reason that Romney doesn't preach about the evils of homosexuality to the Log Cabin Republicans I suppose.

Sean O'Hara
05-13-12, 01:29 PM
Black churches don't allow Muslim preachers, silly.

classicman2
05-13-12, 01:59 PM
Why doesn't Obama preach to The Mormon Temple in St. Lake City?

In fact: Why isn't he a member of The Twelve Apostles of the church?

;)

Psi
05-13-12, 01:59 PM
Since (according to all news media outlets, including stalwartly-liberal icons such as the NYT and Wash. Post) the single largest group opposing "gay" marriage is African-Americans, why wouldn't the President use the bully pulpit to have some photo ops in black churches explaining his support for same-sex marriage and trying to show his most loyal constituents their moral errors?

After all, he'd be in extremely safe political territory and would be preaching to the largest community of homophobes, thereby doing the most good for justice and making the world a better place for his daughters. Preaching on college campuses doesn't exactly reach the biggest bigoted offenders...why not go into the belly of the beast?

And the black homophobic community would obviously take a moral dressing-down better from the Brother-in-Chief than from, say, Hilary or Hairless Joe.

You and grundle would make a great couple.

Nick Danger
05-13-12, 02:25 PM
Why doesn't Romney go to Tea Party conventions to explain why they're wrong in their desire for smaller government? Romney believes that the government should protect the most helpless people. He would be talking to groups who are most likely to vote Republican anyway. He should point out their errors and really stick it in their eye.

Or he can try to find common ground, and avoid antagonizing them.

RunBandoRun
05-13-12, 02:29 PM
And not only that ....... why doesn't Obama join the Ku Klux Klan, the Posse Comitatus, the White Citizens' Council, and the Order? :lol:

Artman
05-13-12, 02:57 PM
Since (according to all news media outlets, including stalwartly-liberal icons such as the NYT and Wash. Post) the single largest group opposing "gay" marriage is African-Americans, why wouldn't the President use the bully pulpit to have some photo ops in black churches explaining his support for same-sex marriage and trying to show his most loyal constituents their moral errors?


I wouldn't put it past him...

Very sad how he's gone from the Fatherhood speech (his high point imo) to what we have today...

creekdipper
05-13-12, 06:50 PM
Why doesn't Romney go to Tea Party conventions to explain why they're wrong in their desire for smaller government? Romney believes that the government should protect the most helpless people. He would be talking to groups who are most likely to vote Republican anyway. He should point out their errors and really stick it in their eye.

Or he can try to find common ground, and avoid antagonizing them.

Tea Party people believe that government should protect THE MOST HELPLESS PEOPLE...such as unborn children...so what would be the point of Romney preaching to the choir?

Also, Tea Party people...unlike, say, Occupy people...believe in charity work and giving selflessly to those TRULY IN NEED. Liberals...who give less to charity...believe in imposing their own beliefs by having "government" forcefully confiscate money and then giving out "entitlements" to able-bodied people who will then keep the liberal "Robin Hoods" (emphasis on the word "hood") in office.

Therefore, your attempt to provide a suitable analogy fails.

creekdipper
05-13-12, 06:51 PM
Same reason that Romney doesn't preach about the evils of homosexuality to the Log Cabin Republicans I suppose.

Yes, Romney is really counting on those five votes to swing the election in his favor.

creekdipper
05-13-12, 07:05 PM
That Obama is one pretty shrewd politician aye? :thumbsup:

Yep.

Take the point, Joe & Arne. If you don't get waxed, I'm right behind ya.

Just call me a REMF.

Ky-Fi
05-13-12, 08:40 PM
What's that line, in European parliamentary systems, parties form coalitions, and in the US system coalitions form parties. There are certainly some strange bedfellows on both sides of the political spectrum, although I think you could make a good case that there are a lot more incongruous allies on the left.

Nick Danger
05-13-12, 09:24 PM
Tea Party people believe that government should protect THE MOST HELPLESS PEOPLE...such as unborn children...so what would be the point of Romney preaching to the choir?

Also, Tea Party people...unlike, say, Occupy people...believe in charity work and giving selflessly to those TRULY IN NEED. Liberals...who give less to charity...believe in imposing their own beliefs by having "government" forcefully confiscate money and then giving out "entitlements" to able-bodied people who will then keep the liberal "Robin Hoods" (emphasis on the word "hood") in office.

Therefore, your attempt to provide a suitable analogy fails.

Not really. Tea Party conservatives believe that the poor and the disabled should be helped by private charity. Those who believe in big government, including almost all politicians, think that the poor and disabled should be helped by the government.

The last time I paid attention, the Tea Party were primarily interested in fiscal issues, not abortion. Maybe they've been infiltrated and taken over by Christian conservatives since then.

creekdipper
05-14-12, 01:15 AM
Not really. Tea Party conservatives believe that the poor and the disabled should be helped by private charity. Those who believe in big government, including almost all politicians, think that the poor and disabled should be helped by the government.

The last time I paid attention, the Tea Party were primarily interested in fiscal issues, not abortion. Maybe they've been infiltrated and taken over by Christian conservatives since then.

Last point is no doubt pretty accurate. The Tea Partiers I know are also Christian conservatives, but there is undoubtedly a much broader coalition whose main issue is taxation. I still think most are religiously motivated as opposed to people who don't want to pay "their fair share" but perhaps not.

As to the first point, probably the same thing, so I willingly concede the point. Perhaps I was just misreading your post to indicate that Tea Party people aren't at all concerned about the poor rather just thinking that help should come from sources other than direct taxation by the government. My mistake...your points are well-taken, and I responded too hastily.

I guess most politicians believe in some type of safety net (and I think even most Tea Partiers would agree with that)...it's the size of the net that causes dissension in most cases (not counting extreme views from either side).

RayChuang
05-14-12, 07:36 AM
I think I know the reason: President Obama don't want a re-visit to the Jeremiah Wright controversy all over again.

JasonF
05-14-12, 08:31 AM
Not preaching, but:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/14/us/politics/on-marriage-obama-tried-to-limit-risk.html?_r=1&hp&pagewanted=all

Josh-da-man
05-14-12, 08:55 AM
I would rather not have the President taking the pulpit and "preaching" in churches even if I agree with the sermon.

CRM114
05-14-12, 09:11 AM
largest community of homophobes

Citation please.

Brother-in-Chief

-rolleyes-

creekdipper
05-14-12, 07:43 PM
Citation please.



Okay. Citizen's arayist!!!

How's that?

If you're looking for source of the polling info. cited, Google "African Americans largest group opposed to gay marriage. You'll immediately get links to articles posted on NYTimes.com, Huff Post, Washington Post, and many other liberal sources...all of whom would be the last to post such data if their polls did not demonstrate this to be true (at least, according to their polls). I'm assuming that you need to see the data for yourself, so knock yourself out. It's pretty widely disseminated.

creekdipper
05-14-12, 07:50 PM
-rolleyes-

But I'm talkin' 'bout Shaft!!! :shrug:

Artman
05-14-12, 11:39 PM
I guess this brings up the uncomfortable question - "did they not get the memo that homosexuality is the same as race?" Or is it possible most have rejected that comparison?

Supermallet
05-14-12, 11:57 PM
Most would argue the same bullshit, that being gay is a choice and that the bible specifically prohibits homosexuality, etc. They don't see it as "Hey, we were disadvantaged, now they are disadvantaged."

joeblow69
05-15-12, 12:06 AM
Most would argue the same bullshit, that being gay is a choice and that the bible specifically prohibits homosexuality..
Maybe this is a good place to post this. I'm not a religous person, but found this video really fascinating. It's an hour long (holy crap!) but this is one man's study into the 6 passages in the bible about homosexuality, and how they might not really mean what people think they do.
ezQjNJUSraY

DVD Polizei
05-15-12, 12:10 AM
Q: Why Doesn't Obama Preach to Black Churches?

A: Because they can't understand what he's saying.

Sean O'Hara
05-15-12, 12:10 AM
This is the problem with liberals -- they don't know how to argue. When rightwingers say, "Homosexuality is just a choice," the correct response isn't, "No it isn't!" It's, "Yeah, so what?" When rightwingers say, "If gay marriage, then polygamy," the correct response isn't, "No, they're different!" It's, "Yeah, so what?"

If you accept the rightwing premise that homosexuality has to be intrinsic for discrimination of homosexuals to be wrong, you're just giving up ground without a fight. If scientists proved tomorrow that homosexuality is indeed a preference, it would make no difference to the issue of whether homosexuals should be able to marry.

Artman
05-15-12, 12:16 AM
Most would argue the same bullshit, that being gay is a choice and that the bible specifically prohibits homosexuality, etc.

See that's the issue right there... it isn't the general term of "homosexuality", it's the sex acts, along with any other kind outside of marriage. The attraction isn't the issue, it's the behavior.

Sean O'Hara
05-15-12, 12:33 AM
See that's the issue right there... it isn't the general term of "homosexuality", it's the sex acts, along with any other kind outside of marriage. The attraction isn't the issue, it's the behavior.

How is the behavior an issue? Does it affect you in any way?

Artman
05-15-12, 12:56 AM
How is the behavior an issue? Does it affect you in any way?

No, and that's why this issue really needs to be broken down into very specific areas. It gets too ugly when it's in broad strokes like this online. I don't care one bit how my neighbors and coworkers live.

PopcornTreeCt
05-15-12, 01:01 AM
Why doesn't Obama preach to White churches?

Confusing race with religion isn't healthy.

Supermallet
05-15-12, 02:01 AM
See that's the issue right there... it isn't the general term of "homosexuality", it's the sex acts, along with any other kind outside of marriage. The attraction isn't the issue, it's the behavior.

There's nothing wrong with the sex act, inside or outside of marriage.

Sean O'Hara
05-15-12, 02:28 AM
No, and that's why this issue really needs to be broken down into very specific areas. It gets too ugly when it's in broad strokes like this online. I don't care one bit how my neighbors and coworkers live.

Yes, when we paint it in broad strokes, it looks like one side is saying, "Eww! Gay cooties! Icky." Let's try to find some aspect of this issue that, when removed from context, doesn't make that side look like a hipster who's upset that people enjoy things that he doesn't.

Artman
05-15-12, 03:39 AM
Let's try to find some aspect of this issue that, when removed from context, doesn't make that side look like a hipster who's upset that people enjoy things that he doesn't.

The issue isn't keeping anything from happening that isn't already. It's probably a combination of bad presentation and misreading...and a lot of emotion mixed in.

The Bus
05-15-12, 06:49 AM
<img src="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/65/Alan_Keyes.jpg">

RunBandoRun
05-15-12, 07:22 AM
No, and that's why this issue really needs to be broken down into very specific areas. It gets too ugly when it's in broad strokes like this online. I don't care one bit how my neighbors and coworkers live.

Then why are you agreeing with people who want to deny them the right to legally marry?

Hokeyboy
05-15-12, 07:42 AM
Also, Tea Party people...unlike, say, Occupy people...believe in charity work and giving selflessly to those TRULY IN NEED.
:lol: rotfl :lol:

"LET THEM DIE!"

Lastdaysofrain
05-15-12, 08:26 AM
Also, Tea Party people...unlike, say, Occupy people...believe in charity work and giving selflessly to those TRULY IN NEED.

As long as they are white

wishbone
05-15-12, 10:58 AM
That Obama is one pretty shrewd politician aye? :thumbsup:Politician, aye...Poll: most Americans think Obama's gay-marriage endorsement was politically motivated
By DONOVAN SLACK
5/14/12 7:44 PM EDT

More than two thirds of Americans believe President Obama's public endorsement of gay marriage was motivated by politics, according to a new CBS News/New York Times poll.

A total of 67 percent overall said it was a political maneuver. That includes 86 percent of Republicans, and -- more importantly -- 70 percent of independents.

Only 24 percent said they thought he did it "because he thought it was the right thing to do," CBS News reported (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57434069-503544/poll-one-in-four-less-likely-to-back-obama-over-same-sex-marriage/%20%20%20%20http:/www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/cbsnytpoll_051412.pdf).

Those numbers could be problematic for the president, whose sincerity has won him high marks from voters, and they likely reflect the fumbling by the White House of the gay marriage announcement. Obama only voiced his support after Vice President Joe Biden and Secretary of Education Arne Duncan both made public declarations of support -- moves that Obama aides have conceded forced the president's hand.

The poll also had some other potentially disturbing news for Team Obama. Presumptive nominee Mitt Romney is edging the president 46 to 43 percent in a head to head matchup. The lead is still within the poll's four-point margin of error.

But it could signal a slight down-tick in support for the president. He and Romney were dead-even at 46-46 in a CBS News/New York Times poll last month. Read CBS's full report on the poll here (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-57434153-503544/poll-romney-has-slight-edge-over-obama/?tag=contentMain;contentBody).http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/05/poll-most-americans-think-obamas-gaymarriage-endorsement-123445.html

OldDude
05-15-12, 11:09 AM
Politician, aye...http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/05/poll-most-americans-think-obamas-gaymarriage-endorsement-123445.html

A politician politically motivated? Who would have thought? Do we need a poll on whether bears shit in the woods?

Hokeyboy
05-15-12, 11:10 AM
:lol:

classicman2
05-15-12, 01:13 PM
Do polar bears shit in the woods?

clappj
05-15-12, 01:17 PM
Do polar bears shit in the woods?

In the snow.

creekdipper
05-15-12, 03:09 PM
In the snow.

Which covers the woods.

creekdipper
05-15-12, 03:11 PM
Considering that any CBS/NYTimes poll is going to spot a Dem 10 points, those numbers might be significant.

creekdipper
05-15-12, 03:13 PM
As long as they are white

Guess they've finally learned from all of the critics who keep saying that middle-class conservatives keep VOTING AGAINST THEIR SELF-INTEREST.

So they can be expected to follow the example of the groups who overwhelmingly vote for Obama due to his skin color.

(Not that there's anything wrong with that)

creekdipper
05-15-12, 03:16 PM
:lol: rotfl :lol:

"LET THEM DIE!"

You left out, "QUICKLY".

JasonF
05-15-12, 03:33 PM
Considering that any CBS/NYTimes poll is going to spot a Dem 10 points, those numbers might be significant.

That's the most idiotic thing I've read all day, and considering how many posts you've made today, that's saying something.

By the way, the methodology of this poll was shit.

wishbone
05-15-12, 03:49 PM
By the way, the methodology of this poll was shit.http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/6868/pollwx.jpg

JasonF
05-15-12, 05:14 PM
http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/6868/pollwx.jpg

That's not the methodology. Those are the results. This is the methodology:

This poll was conducted by telephone on May 11-13, 2012 among 615 adults nationwide, including 562 registered voters, who were first interviewed for a CBS News/New York Times Poll conducted April 13-17, 2012.

And this is what they did April 13-17:

This poll was conducted by telephone from April 13-17, 2012, among 957 adults nationwide. 852 interviews were conducted with registered voters, including 268 with voters who said they plan to vote or already have voted in a Republican primary.

So how did we go from 852 respondents to 562? Why are we re-polling a subset of a pre-existing sample? Why are we adding another 53 respondents on top of the 562 holdovers? It makes no sense, and we're not given any explanation.

Tracer Bullet
05-15-12, 05:20 PM
That's not the methodology. Those are the results.

:lol:

wishbone
05-15-12, 06:41 PM
So how did we go from 852 respondents to 562? Why are we re-polling a subset of a pre-existing sample? Why are we adding another 53 respondents on top of the 562 holdovers? It makes no sense, and we're not given any explanation.Some info on the sample -- and thank you for the reply Jason. :)Team Obama: NYT/CBS poll used 'biased sample'
By BYRON TAU
5/15/12 9:53 AM EDT

The Obama campaign is pushing back hard against a New York Times/CBS poll (http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/05/poll-most-americans-think-obamas-gaymarriage-endorsement-123445.html) that showed Mitt Romney with advantage with women and reported that voters overwhelmingly believed President Obama backed gay marriage last week for political reasons.

"We can't put the methodology of that poll aside," deputy campaign manager Stephanie Cutter told MSNBC's Chuck Todd. "It is a biased sample."

"Aside from being outlier, CBS/NYT poll used weird methodology -- same voters as last month, reached fewer of them, more IDed as GOP," campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt said on Twitter Monday.

At the heart of the dispute is the fact that the poll used a 'panel-back survey' (http://nationaljournal.com/2012-presidential-campaign/romney-edges-obama-in-panel-back-survey-20120514) polling a group of voters who have already been interviewed in previous polls. In this case, the drawback is that 852 registered voters were in interviewed last month, and just 562 agreed to be reinterviewed by the pollster.

Still, for a campaign that has openly professed dislike for process stories like this one, it's an unusually aggressive pushback against a single poll a poll that is indeed a bit of an outlier compared to other national polls.http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/05/team-obama-nytcbs-poll-used-biased-sample-123487.html

Artman
05-15-12, 11:19 PM
Then why are you agreeing with people who want to deny them the right to legally marry?

The issue isn't about keeping people from doing whatever or living however they want. This is what I was talking about regarding specifics... the only issue on the table is whether a state government should endorse something other than what they currently have.

My particular state already offers full benefits (which I supported), so for me that makes our current referendum an ideological one.

CRM114
05-16-12, 10:35 AM
Wait, so Repubs believe Obama's statement on gay marriage will both hurt him politically AND politically motivated? Sounds like Rush is back on the Oxy again.

Groucho
05-16-12, 10:44 AM
Just because a statement is politically motivated doesn't mean it won't misfire.

CRM114
05-16-12, 12:00 PM
Just because a statement is politically motivated doesn't mean it won't misfire.

That doesn't make sense. Obama's crew knew it wasn't the most astute political move given the fact that Obama has "opposed" it his entire Presidency. I think Obama took a gamble on this but I certainly don't think he believes this is a slam-dunk positive for him.

clappj
05-16-12, 01:20 PM
I think Obama took a gamble on this but I certainly don't think he believes this is a slam-dunk positive for him.

http://www.polyvore.com/cgi/img-thing?.out=jpg&size=l&tid=10415836