Posted by
Jason Cunningham on Monday, December 22, 2008 4:41:02 AM
So they lost, and they can't stop making excuses: it was the blacks' fault, it was religious conservatives' fault, it was Bush's fault (okay, I made that last one up, but I wouldn't put it past them, since they blame nearly everything on W).
And now they need to vent, so they've seized on President-elect Obama's selection of Rick Warren as inauguration prayer-giver. I'm sure most of you are at least somewhat familiar with Warren; he's a pastor, an "evangelical" one (like there should be any other kind), and like any sane pastor, he's opposed to same-sex marriage. Which means, in the minds of homosexuals, that he's a narrow-minded homophobic bigot (an opinion that, in my mind, means he's doing his job).
So all the homosexuals are crying about having a legitimate, honest-to-goodness, Bible-believing pastor (as opposed to a fake pastor such as, say, Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson) participate in the next president's inauguration, and leading the charge is Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts. It's worth noting first that Mr. Frank is best known for being the only openly homosexual member of Congress; in fact, it's safe to say that it's the only thing he's known for, since he's been about as productive in his line of work as Homer Simpson is in his.
Concerning Obama's selection of Pastor Warren, Mr. Frank said (on CNN's "Late Edition"): "Giving that kind of mark of approval and honor to someone who has frankly spoken in ways I and many others have found personally very offensive, I thought that was a mistake for the president-elect to do." Oh, right, but giving "approval and honor" to those who violate the laws of both God and nature is okay. I gotcha.
Listen, Mr. Frank: What I, as a rational being, find offensive is that most Americans find nothing at all wrong with a behavior the inherent wrongness of which should be clearly, ridiculously, painfully obvious; that they've bought into the homosexual movement's guilt-trip strategy hook, line and sinker (trumping even blacks' use of guilt, which went a long way in helping Obama get elected). If your dignity is "offended" at having someone speak the plain truth, oh well.
It's worth noting as well that the left-loving Los Angeles Times published an editorial on this just a few days ago. You might be surprised to learn, as I was at first, that the Times was okay with Warren's selection. Then again, you may be dismayed, as I was, to learn that the Times' "approval" of Warren had mostly to do with the fact that Warren is active in liberal pet areas such as defense of the environment (implying that evangelicals not involved in such things are complete wastes (instead of just being half-wastes like Warren). And to top it all off, the editorial's headline stated that "after all, it's just a prayer." Just a prayer? It was a prayer (and God's strength thereby) that enabled Samson to bring a temple down on the heads of the Philistines.
Excuse me while I say a prayer concerning the Los Angeles Times.