<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" standalone="yes"?><oembed><version><![CDATA[1.0]]></version><provider_name><![CDATA[The Dish]]></provider_name><provider_url><![CDATA[http://dish.andrewsullivan.com]]></provider_url><author_name><![CDATA[Andrew Sullivan]]></author_name><author_url><![CDATA[https://dish.andrewsullivan.com/author/sullydish/]]></author_url><title><![CDATA[With But Not Of&nbsp;Warren]]></title><type><![CDATA[link]]></type><html><![CDATA[
<p>Marc Ambinder&#8217;s <a href="http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/12/the_furiuous_reaction_of_parti.php">response</a> to the statement and incident:   </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Warren&#8217;s views might be hurtful to gays; Obama does not think they are harmful. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>To which one can only add: well, Obama&#8217;s marriage wasn&#8217;t just voided by a campaign in which Warren played a part, was it? If that isn&#8217;t tangibly harmful to gay people, what is? But the deeper truth is that while Obama does not share Warren&#8217;s opposition to any civil recognition for gay couples, he does believe that gay couples belong in a separate but equal institution. To my mind, this is not civil equality &#8211; and Obama cannot claim to be a &quot;fierce proponent&quot; of such equality, as he did today, without telling an untruth. </p>
]]></html></oembed>