Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Marr

(20,317 posts)

10. C'mon, you're supposed to be bleating about how "historic" it is.

Reply to n2doc (Original post)

Sun May 13, 2012, 12:36 AM

May 2012

Though I still don't see why. Wasn't that Obama's position all along? A politician reiterates his same old position with slightly sexier language (and no actual action implied at all) in an election season, and suddenly it's 'historic'?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

10 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Toon: That was our plan as well [View all] n2doc May 2012 OP

Ugly truth. MrSlayer May 2012 #1

civil rights aren't a states rights issue. KG May 2012 #2

kick n rec alfredo May 2012 #3

The U.S. Supreme Court will take care of it, just like they did in Loving v Virginia Tx4obama May 2012 #4

Loving v Virginia was a decision of the great Warren Court, which struggle4progress May 2012 #5

And it only took 43 years. progressoid May 2012 #7

With Todays Court? SoutherDem May 2012 #9

It's a good thing Lincoln didnt think the states should decide about slavery. nm rhett o rick May 2012 #6

was mostly to shut up the PatrynXX May 2012 #8

C'mon, you're supposed to be bleating about how "historic" it is. Marr May 2012 #10