Today, President Obama completely wiped out Romney's primary news cycle. Again.
In a historic and gutsy move, he announced that his personal opinion is that same sex couples should be allowed to get married.
In a sit-down interview with ABC's Robin Roberts, Obama completed what has been a markedly long and oft-mocked evolution on the matter.
"I've always been adamant that gay and lesbian Americans should be treated fairly and equally," Obama told Roberts, in an interview that will air in full on ABC's "Good Morning America" Thursday.
"I have to tell you that over the course of several years as I have talked to friends and family and neighbors when I think about members of my own staff who are in incredibly committed monogamous relationships, same-sex relationships, who are raising kids together, when I think about those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on my behalf and yet feel constrained, even now that Don't Ask Don't Tell is gone, because they are not able to commit themselves in a marriage, at a certain point I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married."
“It’s interesting, some of this is also generational,” the president said. “You know when I go to college campuses, sometimes I talk to college Republicans who think that I have terrible policies on the economy, on foreign policy, but are very clear that when it comes to same sex equality or, you know, believe in equality. They are much more comfortable with it. You know, Malia and Sasha, they have friends whose parents are same-sex couples. There have been times where Michelle and I have been sitting around the dinner table and we’re talking about their friends and their parents and Malia and Sasha, it wouldn’t dawn on them that somehow their friends’ parents would be treated differently. It doesn’t make sense to them and frankly, that’s the kind of thing that prompts a change in perspective.”
The reaction from the right has been predictable. From Fox News : "OBAMA FLIP FLOPS, DECLARES WAR ON MARRIAGE!!" says one Twitter post. "GAY ALINKSY ACORN MARRIAGE #FoxNationHeadlines" says another.
Self appointed stand up comics weighed in with, "If only Mitt Romney had a gay surrogate who was experienced in talking to the press who could handle this issue..." and, " More US states allow sex with animals than allow gay marriage!" and our personal favorite, "Rick Santorum just divorced his wife and married his dog. Are you happy, Mr. President?"
From some of his Democratic colleagues from the Northwest :
Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore.: @repblumenauer Obama support for marriage equality huge step forward for America…. the tide is turning and the current running deeper and faster.
Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash.: @JayInslee I am proud to stand with President @BarackObama in our support for marriage equality.
The people who are angry about this are people who would not have voted for the President in November anyway. Conversely, he has energized Democrats and Independents and, of course, his base.
We will be watching to see how Mitt Romney reacts.
His position now is exactly the same as Dick Cheney aka Darth Vader and that's a fact. Both believe it should be ultimately left up to the states, which sides with the Constitution in this case.
Posted by: KS | May 09, 2012 at 07:14 PM
"Limbaugh: "We've Arrived At A Point Where The President Of The United States Is Going To Lead A War On Traditional Marriage"..says the man on his third wife...
Posted by: sparky | May 09, 2012 at 07:32 PM
Hmmm no KS, Darth never will support gays getting married even though his daughter is one. Nice try the gop is really in trouble now.
Posted by: Preston | May 09, 2012 at 08:14 PM
Wrong, Preston. Check it out and see for yourself, or you can keep deluding yourself.
Bummer, dude - This move will likely cost BO Virginia, North Carolina and now maybe even Ohio.
Posted by: KS | May 09, 2012 at 09:52 PM
Supporting gay marriage in the past, shake the Etch-a-Stretch, change the mind. Team Rmoney, doing its level best at lying with regularity.
Posted by: Finis Hominis | May 09, 2012 at 09:59 PM
FLIP FLOP !!!
Posted by: John Kerry | May 09, 2012 at 11:05 PM
Welcome to the 21st Century, Mr President.
KS is correct about former VP, Dick Cheney.
Folks here don't want to recognize strain of gay homophobia within the Obama coalition. Take a look at 2008 in California. Many of those same folks who overwhelmingly voted for Candidate Obama turned around and on the same day voted to take away the rights of Gays and Lesbians to marry.
So it never surprised me that Pres Obama has taken his time 'evolving' on the issue.
But it did disappoint me it took him so long.
But this is an important -although delayed- step forward for all people who support equal rights.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | May 10, 2012 at 05:06 AM
and yeah, for everyone who wants to talk about the politics of this and how it ensures a 'win' for one candidate you should really think about what you are saying.
this is dealing with the rights of people. it is not a political issue, it is a life issue. some issues transcend politics. equality is one of them.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | May 10, 2012 at 05:08 AM
here is probably the best comments on it from CONSERVATIVE legal scholar, former Bush Admin Official Ted Olson.
Bush Solicitor General Ted Olson Hails Obama Gay Marriage Shift
by John Avlon May 9, 2012 7:20 PM EDT
Conservative legal scholar Ted Olson, who teamed with Bush v. Gore rival David Boies to fight Proposition 8, talks to John Avlon about Obama’s new support for gay marriage, North Carolina’s new ban—and whether the Supreme Court will weigh in.
It has been a historic 24 hours, with marriage equality rejected in North Carolina and embraced by the president of the United States.
“I am gratified that the president has thrown his personal support and the authority of the presidency behind the goal of justice, equality, and decency for all citizens,” said Ted Olson, founder of the Federalist Society and former Bush administration solicitor general.
Olson gained fame for his pioneering partnership with David Boies, his one-time professional rival in Bush v. Gore who joined with him to argue that California’s Prop 8 gay-marriage ban is unconstitutional.
I called Olson on Wednesday to get the conservative legal leader’s take on the North Carolina gay-marriage ban at the ballot and the way it sets up a Supreme Court showdown, possibly as early as 2013—no matter who is president.
Olson has stern words for his fellow conservatives who flooded the polls on Tuesday, making North Carolina the 30th state to enshrine a ban on gay marriage in its state constitution.
“It is very sad to me that people who belong to the party of Abraham Lincoln are resisting so strenuously the equality and decency and integrity and treatment of our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters,” Olson said. “This seems to be one of the last major civil-rights battles of our country. And for people in our country to come out in numbers like this and say, ‘Well, we don’t want the persons next door—who are decent, God-fearing, taxpaying, obeying-the-law citizens who simply want to have happiness like the rest of us’—to say ‘No, I have that right and you can’t have it.’ That just seems mean to me.”
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | May 10, 2012 at 05:47 AM
and finally, David Weigal makes a great point about flip flopping noting when Senator Obama thought it was popular he was for equality, later when it looked to be unpopular he wasn't for it. now he is for it...
"You could look at this and think that the campaign's roll-out -- it started on Saturday! -- was undone by Joe Biden's loose talk. An alternate theory: The old, phony Obama position, useful as long as gay marriage was unpopular, had stopped being useful. Every interest group that took the anti side was lined up against Obama anyway, for sound reasons -- court appointments, the defense of DOMA. Polling on gay marriage had moved, narrowly, into the positive zone. The negatives of a flip-flop* were vanishing. And so the ruse came to an end.
*It's a flip-flop because Obama, running for a deep blue state Senate seat in 1996, was openly for gay marriage. He flipped in the U.S. Senate/presidential portion of his career."
for me, i don't care if a candidate flip flops. after all, when additional facts come to light sound positions can change. but the naked optics of being for it, then against it, and now for it...
the sad part is that a significant number of americans were impacted by his political calculation on this.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | May 10, 2012 at 05:56 AM
It's great to see the president get out in front of the politics.
Posted by: nameless | May 10, 2012 at 07:34 AM
It's great to see the president get out in front of the politics.
Posted by: nameless | May 10, 2012 at 07:34 AM
in front? he was riding the polls. otherwise he would have stuck with his prior stand he took when running for the Senate back in Chicago.
Read David Weigel.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | May 10, 2012 at 07:54 AM
Correct, PS. Pres. Zero's move was all about the money. The campaign contributions are down over 2008 and a number of the bundlers are gay. It was solely a political calculation and did not really sway any foreign leaders either. More important, he is now being perceived more than ever as someone who wants to do away with tradition and traditional values.
It's funny because civil unions (which a majority of the GOP supports) typically ensure as many rights as gay marriage - its the stigma of the word marriage that affects them. What about gay divorce ?
Posted by: KS | May 10, 2012 at 09:08 AM
"He is now being perceived . . . "
Honestly, KS, do you ever get out of Fox non-News?
The best comment I heard was that some rights are equal under the constitution and should not be left to the emotional flucuations of people. We didn't leave equal rights for Blacks up to the states and we shouldn't leave equal rights for G&L prople up to individual states either.
As for riding the polls? Who cares. They all do it. It is part of the job. That's not even a smart observation. Obama can't afford to lose a single vote. Is that breaking news?
Posted by: Truth-seeker | May 10, 2012 at 10:30 AM
i agree Truth seeker, the news is not how or why, but that he is at this position. When Romney arrives at a position the news is made when he flipflops.
Posted by: Montego | May 10, 2012 at 04:08 PM
As for riding the polls? Who cares. They all do it. It is part of the job. That's not even a smart observation. Obama can't afford to lose a single vote. Is that breaking news?
Posted by: Truth-seeker | May 10, 2012 at 10:30 AM
so what you are saying is that he was for it as a senate candidate when it was good, against it as a presidential candidate and as president when it was bad.
now that it is good he is for it. what happens if the polls go against it. as you say, he needs every vote.
is he gonna reverse himself again?
it would be one thing if we were talking about a tax policy or establishing an agency but these are RIGHTS of human beings that are being bandied about.
maybe it would matter to you, truth seeker, if you had some skin in the game. doesn't it bother you to see your friends or relatives who are gay or lesbian being treated in such a cavalier fashion? it bothers me. a lot.
i'll pause as you skedaddle.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | May 10, 2012 at 04:11 PM
The best comment I heard was that some rights are equal under the constitution and should not be left to the emotional flucuations of people. ... and we shouldn't leave equal rights for G&L prople up to individual states either. Posted by: Truth-seeker | May 10, 2012 at 10:30 AM
maybe it would matter to you, truth seeker, if you had some skin in the game. doesn't it bother you to see your friends or relatives who are gay or lesbian being treated in such a cavalier fashion?Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | May 10, 2012 at 04:11 PM
Navigating life and thinking on your own is really, really hard for you, isn't it?
Posted by: Truth-seeker | May 10, 2012 at 05:11 PM
The best comment I heard was that some rights are equal under the constitution and should not be left to the emotional flucuations of people. ... and we shouldn't leave equal rights for G&L prople up to individual states either. Posted by: Truth-seeker | May 10, 2012 at 10:30 AM
just interesting that you congratulate Pres Obama for riding the polls on this and excuse it as everyone does it. well, this isn't the keystone pipe decision. this is one of fundamental rights.
the issue is that he should have recognized Gay rights oh say, back in 2008?
he taught constitutional law, it's not like that issue isn't one he hadn't thought about before.
try and keep up. okay?
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | May 10, 2012 at 05:33 PM
I guess Gays and Lesbians need to keep a watch as this Barrack Obama continually evolves and grants/takes your rights away.
Obama on Gay Marriage
• 1996, running for Illinois state Senate: "I favor legalizing same-sex marriage."
• 2004, running for U.S. Senate: "Marriage is between a man and a woman.
• 2010, as president: "My feelings are constantly evolving" on gay mar riage.
• 2012, as president: "I think same-sex couples should be able to get married.
• 2014, ???????? maybe evolved again?
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | May 10, 2012 at 05:43 PM
Um, it's over. 4 more years and all, ya know?
Posted by: Coiler | May 10, 2012 at 06:17 PM
Puget, those quotes are incorrect. If I’m wrong please supply the quote, from a respectful site. Still I’m agreeing with everyone else. No matter how he got there, he’s there. And that’s not just news, it’s great news.
Posted by: Finis Hominis | May 10, 2012 at 06:30 PM
Plus today, Romney admitted he took part in harassing a gay man by cutting his hair off in high school. His laugh is a lot like Ted Bundy, creepy. Romney is done.
Posted by: Coiler | May 10, 2012 at 07:12 PM
Realizing Obama is appropriate; Romney’s creeping to the left on the LGBT issues.
Posted by: Finis Hominis | May 10, 2012 at 07:42 PM
here is then candidate obama in 2004
interesting to hear him to talk about how it was his faith that drove his position against gay marriage. at that point he has the bush position, no on gay marriage and yes on civil unions.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vhaThnPWB0A
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | May 10, 2012 at 07:59 PM
2012, gay marriage yes; civil unions…not an issue.
Posted by: Finis Hominis | May 10, 2012 at 08:04 PM
Puget, those quotes are incorrect. If I’m wrong please supply the quote, from a respectful site. Still I’m agreeing with everyone else. No matter how he got there, he’s there. And that’s not just news, it’s great news.
Posted by: Finis Hominis | May 10, 2012 at 06:30 PM
Happy to accomodate, Finis.
But I am surprised you even wanted to question it as Pres Obama's back and forth is fairly well documented among those who closely followed this issue.
I hope the folks at ThinkProgress.org are sufficiently to the left for you to accept.
here you go. it's actually even more tortured
here
The problem isn't the celebration that he evolved to recognizing rights of gays and lesbians to be equal under the law. I am happy he did, although he is very late to the party.
One wonders how long he will stay before he elects to evolve again. After all the track record on this issue -or his delivering on his major campaign issues is pretty dismal. Poor Sparky is still being spied upon via USAPatriot Act or those security helicopters she complained about (isn't it like 10 years of that?)
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | May 10, 2012 at 08:12 PM
Yah, I agree he said it; but his quote is being spun out of context. And I know, you of all people love that; and I would suggest to all, reading the document.
And, as you have an interest, if this is a flip flop I trust Obama to flip to the side of honor rather than Etch-a-Stretch it.
Posted by: Finis Hominis | May 10, 2012 at 08:27 PM
which quote?
you mean the one in 1996 on his form that he submitted with his signature? that one?
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | May 10, 2012 at 08:28 PM
check this out, Finis
"Now, incredibly, Obama says Gay marriage is a state issue. That's what they used to say about abortion and before that, slavery. Now Obama tells us that gay couples should be able to marry but he doesn't believe they have a right to do so. Obama would leave the question to the states--in other words -the status quo. This is like saying that public schools ought to be integrated but if the people of Mississippi disagree, well he says, "let the states decide"
If Obama believes that marriage quality is a constitutionally guaranteed civil right, as former Governor Gary Johnson does, than it can't be abridged by the states. Forty-four states currently ban gay marriage. Under Obama millions of Americans in most states will continue be denied the right to marry the person of their choice.
The courts will soon address the issue of whether the equal protection clause of the constitution guarantees gays the same access to marriage rights as heterosexual men and women as everyone else as Governor Johnson does-- including California's Proposition 8 case.
There is also a challenge to the Defense of Marriage Act, which bars gay men and woman from receiving federal marriage benefits and allows states to refuse to recognize valid gay marriages performed in other states. Judge Andrew Napolitano called this 'settled law" because the Federal Courts have upheld the validity of interracial marriages when some states sought to ban them on FOX. He's right. Obama new position on Gay marriage undercuts the pro-marriage arguments in those cases.
,Team Obama knows that African Americans overwhelmingly oppose gay marriage equality and fear that a more sweeping forthright stand by the President might put Ohio Colorado, North Carolina and Virginia out of reach. Obama could take a lesson in leadership from Governor Andrew Cuomo who brought Republicans and Democrats together to make same-sex marriage legal in New York State. Instead Obama tries to have it both ways.
Barack Obama is playing a cruel and cynical game with peoples lives and happiness. He did nothing to establish that gay marriage is a right yesterday."
From Roger Stone.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | May 10, 2012 at 08:29 PM
i like this one from where Barrrack Obama Whitehouse staff claimed the form was a fake...until that didn't work. read below:
"2011 (June 17) OPPOSED MARRIAGE IN 1996?: White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer told Netroots Nation that the president was not the one who filled out the pro-marriage equality questionnaire in 1996 (i.e. it was fake, though it had Obama’s signature). The White House distanced itself from Pfeiffer’s remarks, telling Metro Weekly, “Dan was not familiar with the history of the questionnaire that was brought up today.”
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | May 10, 2012 at 08:33 PM
Uhh sorry Puget, didn't read it. I don't read your multiple posts. Can you break your post down to your opinion?
Posted by: Finis Hominis | May 10, 2012 at 08:42 PM
Loved this quote from Mr. Etch a Sketch:
"Romney: "You don't change your positions to try and win states or certain sub-groups of Americans"
hah
Posted by: sparky | May 10, 2012 at 08:57 PM
So logically, he wants to appeal to a group. What grouping would that be? And what are its sub-groups which you hold in contempt? Please “Etch-a-Stretch” enlighten us.
Posted by: Finis Hominis | May 10, 2012 at 09:35 PM
When Romney gets called Mr. Etch-a-Sketch by Obomba, an appropriate retort by Mr. Romney would be; "Pot meet Kettle" - or you can't even think of something original, you have to rely on Rick Santorum - once again you are leading from behind !
Posted by: KS | May 10, 2012 at 10:43 PM
Uhh sorry Puget, didn't read it. I don't read your multiple posts. Can you break your post down to your opinion?
Posted by: Finis Hominis | May 10, 2012 at 08:42 PM
so Finis, you first state the quote was wrong. I provide background and source.
so Finis, you then state the quote was taken out of context. I provide background and source.
and rather than acknowledge that you then say you won't read the posts you requested. none of which take more than 3o seconds to read.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | May 11, 2012 at 05:25 AM
Can you break your post down to your opinion?
Posted by: Finis Hominis | May 10, 2012 at 08:42 PM
yes, welcome Pres Obama to the 21st Century and recognizing that the right to marry is important for all human beings, regardless of orientation.
given your track record on this important issue i hope you don't reverse course again if the polls mitigate against it. this isn't tax policy or the keystone pipeline. this is a fundamental right and should not be trifled with.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | May 11, 2012 at 06:00 AM
He is now being perceived . . . "
Honestly, KS, do you ever get out of Fox non-News?
The best comment I heard was that some rights are equal under the constitution and should not be left to the emotional flucuations of people.
As for riding the polls? Who cares. They all do it. It is part of the job. That's not even a smart observation. Obama can't afford to lose a single vote. Is that breaking news?
Posted by: Truth-seeker | May 10, 2012 at 10:30 AM
TS, If you ever stopped watched the MSNBC echo chamber and checked out Fox on the news and not the opinion shows (how often have you watched
FNC ?), you might see the big picture behind the curtain for what it really is- not the Media Matters/Americans for Progress curtain of deception. Newsflash - Obama lost some votes for coming around to support gay marriage in his own leading from behind way. He gained some money from Hollywood last night to fund Chicago-based political slime machine, but he also further galvanized the GOP.
Posted by: KS blathers the bitter truth | May 11, 2012 at 08:57 AM
Grammar correction -
TS, If you ever stopped watching the MSNBC echo chamber and checked out Fox on the news and not the opinion shows for a different point of view (how often have you watched FNC ?), you might see the big picture behind the curtain for what it really is- not the Media Matters/Americans for Progress curtain of deception.
Even if you took a reasoned approach that the truth lies somewhere in the middle, there would be a number of doubts cast on the MSNBC-Obama propaganda machine.
Posted by: KS blathers the bitter truth | May 11, 2012 at 09:02 AM
next you'll tell us joe scarborough is part of the "obama propaganda" machine
Posted by: mw | May 11, 2012 at 11:53 AM
Scarborough is not part of said machine - he differs in a number of views, but he is content by being surrounded by others who are like Mika, Sgt. Schultz, Matthews and Maddow. He is a McCain (progressive) Republican, who thinks the GOP is too far right as the other propagandists do - it seems like their views rub off on him at time, but he does criticize the fringe left (mainstream left) for their anti-free market policies.
Posted by: KS blathers the bitter truth | May 11, 2012 at 12:13 PM
President Obama has finally caught up to the VP Dick Cheney position from 2009.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers KS's point | May 11, 2012 at 04:07 PM
KS
Ever wonder why the folks didn't celebrate when the VP talked about his support for Gay Marriage?
Maybe it didn't fit the template?
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers KS's point | May 11, 2012 at 04:16 PM
Conversely it always leads to an anti-Rmoney - LOL and all Republicans are bad rant with TS and Finis with Coils and Sparkles bringing up the flanks.
Just exposing the other side of the coin with salient facts - You don't like debates ?
Posted by: KS blathers the bitter truth | May 11, 2012 at 06:20 PM
no they don't KS.
no they don't
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers some red meat for KS | May 11, 2012 at 07:06 PM
We can never hope to reach the same intelligent and focused level of commenting PS. That is why we read you and KS from afar and are envious.
ROFL
Posted by: Walt | May 11, 2012 at 08:54 PM
From the nights last to now, Rmoney has become a bulling ass. Couple the known “Etch-a-Stretch” behavior and you have a lire willing to say anything whether it hurts you or not. Are you sure you trust this person?
Posted by: Finis Hominis | May 11, 2012 at 10:10 PM
yes Finis, are you sure you trust this person...
Obama on Gay Marriage:
• 1996, running for Illinois state Senate: "I favor legalizing same-sex marriage."
• 2004, running for U.S. Senate: "Marriage is between a man and a woman.
• 2010, as president: "My feelings are constantly evolving" on gay marriage.
• 2012, as president: "I think same-sex couples should be able to get married.
• 2014, ???????? maybe evolved again?
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | May 12, 2012 at 03:36 AM
I'm mostly conservative but with some liberal views ("Classical liberal") and will note:
--Obama said it should be up to the states. This means he is an agreement with that well-known progressive, Dick Cheney (/ sarcasm).
(On YouTube you can find a vid from 2009 of Cheney saying his position. One of his daughters is gay.)
--This could cost Obama the election--conservatives rally to support Romney, after earlier dismissing him as a RINO. Some (social conservatives--again, I'm not among them) were saying they wouldn't vote for Mitt even it it meant Obama wins. They have now changed their tune. Swing states/the South could now go Romney's way. (Mitt is now up by 7 or 8 in national polls). Some feel the presence of gay marriage initiatives on state ballots may have helped to elect W in 00 and/or 04. I support gay marriage.
And Romney ("it's the economy...")
Was this political? Pretty much. He was going to lose some donors.
Imagine for example a Republican president making such a statement, when his donors hinted they might not support him. Obama has raised $$ due to this, especially from
Hollywood.
Posted by: Bob Nelson | May 12, 2012 at 08:04 AM
Bob, you shouldn't be mentioning these inconvenient facts. You've just discombobulated folks on this blog.
These same folks, mind you, that said nary a peep when the VP Cheney came out in support of Gay Marriage.
These same folks, mind you, that have watched this President go from supporting Gay Marriage to Not Supporting To Evolving and now back to supporting Gay Marriage.
Posted by: Puget Sound Blathers | May 12, 2012 at 08:14 AM
Mr. Hood you should rename this blog "PS and KS". They are the only ones who post here anymore. They do all the heavy lifting here and keep the discussion lively and interesting. The least you could do is let them have a byline. What do you think?
Posted by: Rick | May 12, 2012 at 09:18 AM