“Letter from 2012 in Obama’s America.”

In 2008, Focus on the Family wrote this letter from the future, warning their members about life in 2012 if Barack Obama were elected president. It’s hilarious. Comedy gold. Everybody’s gay, children watch porn, electricity is all but illegal, prayer isn’t allowed…it’s a hoot. If it wasn’t for The Daily Show and The Colbert Report, I don’t think there’d be any media outlet that would later revisit and evaluate these sorts of claims. I wonder what Focus on the Family is claiming Obama will do with his next four years? And who would believe them? 

19 thoughts on ““Letter from 2012 in Obama’s America.””

  1. I like how they’re careful to point out at the beginning that they’re not saying that any of these things actually *would* happen, or really even *could* happen, but if they did happen, this is what would happen. I guess it wouldn’t be very Christian of them to get people hyped up with a lot of hysterical exaggerations.

  2. I think your post is pretty disingenuous given these two paragraphs in the letter:

    This letter is not “predicting” that all of the imaginative future “events” named in this letter
    will happen. But it is saying that each one of these changes could happen and also that
    each change would be the natural outcome of (a) published legal opinions by liberal
    judges, (b) trends seen in states with liberal-dominated courts such as California and
    Massachusetts, (c) recent promises, practices and legislative initiatives of the current
    liberal leadership of the Democratic Party and (d) Senator Obama’s actions, voting record
    and public promises to the far-Left groups that won the nomination for him.

    Of course, there are many evangelical Christians supporting Senator Obama as well as
    many supporting Senator McCain. Christians on both sides should continue to respect
    and cherish one another’s friendship as well as the freedom people have in the United
    States to differ on these issues and to freely speak their opinions about them to one
    another.

    It’s a very respectful, level-headed letter.

  3. You have to be flipping insane to think that a letter which suggests that compulsorily homosexual training for first graders is consistent with President Obama’s “actions, voting record and public promises to the far-left groups that won the nomination for him” is “respectful” and “level-headed” simply on the basis that the letter doesn’t technically say that it WILL happen, only that it’s plausible that it COULD happen.

    It’d be like me publishing a letter saying that I’m not predicting that Mitt Romney will necessarily assemble his mythical 47% of shiftless losers around like Michigan and then have them ritualistically drowned one at a time until he’s successfully restored America’s capitalistic virtues, it’s only plausible and consistent with his statements to the far-right groups that secured the nomination for him. Whatchya think, Hans? Respectful and level-headed?

    Incidentally, someone should alert Focus on the Family that just because they have absolutely crazy-go-nuts primaries on the GOP side where people who dress up in 18th century garb angrily demand a variety of public pledges on taxes, abortion and immigration doesn’t mean that’s how we handle things on our side of the fence. The “far-left groups” didn’t somehow win the nomination for Obama, and if they had as much influence as the writer claims (or, you know, existed), we presumably would have ended up with a far-left nominee. Obama was widely recognized inside and outside the party as more moderate than Hillary Clinton — and don’t get me started on a head to head between him, say, Dennis Kucinich.

  4. A couple was arrested in Florida this week for having sex on a restaurant table in sight of families with children.

    Assuming they choose to vote, which candidate do you really think people like this will vote for?

    Yeah…that’s what I thought.

  5. Claire- two can play your idiotic game. Snoop Dogg’s first album set the tone for his misogynistic and violent rap career. Hmmm… hates women (remember “Bi***es aint S**t”) espouses violence… who do you think he’s planning to vote for?

  6. Um, tomr? did you read the whole thread? whose “idiotic game” is this? I think it’s your friend I.Publius. The subsequent posts from me and Ben C are kind of making *your* point, but for I.Pub’s sake. or are you just not a good reader?

  7. Obama is going to get beat so bad it ain’t funny.I have never seen so many people that have CHANGED from 2008.The Democrats are going to think its 2010 all over again.

  8. Sorry Claire, I thought you were insinuating a racist leaning among Romney followers… Oh… You were. I read correctly, and offered a counterpoint.

  9. In classic right-wing style, you seem quite assured of your own correctness, when in fact no, you didn’t read correctly. Claire wasn’t insinuating a racist leaning among Romney supporters. That would be idiotic. That would also be what I Publius was doing. What she was doing was, by way of obviously absurd example, trying to demonstrate that the rhetorical technique is a terrible one.

  10. Ben… What in the heck is ”classic right wing style?” Maybe I missed the racial meaning of two people on a table. Sounded to me like typical college activity. I doubt if you or Claire are any better at reading than I am, but if that helps you continue the myth of the ”greater intelligence of the liberal,”’ don’t let me get in the way.

  11. As usual, the obamalemmings skirt the main issue — that amoral people are a critical part of the modern Democrat party base. When voters who have no moral compass go to the polls in droves, as they did in 2008, Democrats do well. Every election since 2008 has told a different story, and 2012 will continue along that same path.

    Buh-bye, Barry O.

Comments are closed.