"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."
politics, marriage, barack obama
Finally! Let's hope this is just the beginning.
:) :) :) :) :)
Yay! About time, too.
Crying! If only it was up to the Executive Branch... Getting this through Congress will be an uphill battle (but one that should be fought!).
@empem Getting what through Congress? Obama gave his personal opinion and then threw it back to the states. No change in policy or statute - not even a recommendation for that. If he said he supports sunshine, it would have had the same net effect.
BREAKING NEWS: Obama's announcement causes a wave of bros to embrace other bros across America. "I love you, bro," they say, "in a gay way."
@melis Pro Homo
@melis Bros nicing bros.
Meanwhile, in NC.
@julia What is this I can't even.
@julia This is like a logic puzzle you would use to make a robot's head explode.
@julia Almost as bad as the post is the garish, eyeball-numbing dress and matching tie. And her grammar. And her poor grasp of history.
@julia Oh my lord. I heard on NPR that there was a party to celebrate the passing of the amendment yesterday in NC. They had a wedding cake. Just so upsetting. Oh you know, just havin' some cake to celebrate the quashing of the rights of people whose lives don't affect mine in ANY WAY. UGH.
@lalaland Yeah, that was pretty awful. As was the cake. As someone who takes baking seriously, I am appalled at how ugly the cake was. It was very poorly frosted.
God, does anyone on the gay-hating side have any TASTE?!
@EternalFootwoman I hope it doesn't take too long for somehow federal law to trump all this crazy state stuff; they're just plain on the wrong side of history. I want a lawyer-y Pinner to come here and talk about what it will take to change the insane, homophobic state laws.
@EternalFootwoman The party was so offensive, and the cake was just...ugh. The frosting bugged me too! I liked this from the Jezebel article: "How dare they use cake for the forces of evil."
@travelmugs My dad (who was a lawyer) used to argue that Article IV of the Constitution would force gay marriage to be de facto nationally recognized, once gay marriage was legal in any state.
Article IV states: "Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State." Therefore a marriage made in one state must be recognized in another.
Whether my dad's argument will ever see it's day in court or not, the fact that gay marriage is recognized in some states but banned in others creates a serious (and interesting) legal problem in light of Article IV.
@travelmugs Yeah I actually don't understand why the states are even allowed to make this decision? I mean if it's a civil rights thing, shouldn't it be federal?
@iceberg I that's exactly where the crux of the matter lies: IS gay marriage/rights a civil rights issue? I mean, obviously we think so but...
@H.E. Ladypants let me put my nerd pants on: marriages are valid if valid where celebrated and not violative of strong public policy. same-sex marriage is considered to violate strong public policy in some states but not others. (for example, before NY legalized same-sex marriage, i think it recognized same-sex marriages from other states/countries.)
examples of marriages that can violate strong public policies: marriages involving underage spouses (marriages involving 13 y.o.s have been held to violate strong public policies in some states), marriages involving close relatives (but cousins are usually fine--i think the line is somewhere around aunt/nephew or uncle/niece), and polygamous marriages are usually considered to violate strong public policy (but not necessarily for inheritance purposes).
@iceberg i think it's actually a good thing for marriage to be a state-law thing, at least for now. one of the arguments against DOMA right now is that the federal gov't has no business regulating marriage. we have marriage equality in six or seven states now--if we had to wait for the whole country to come around on this issue, we probably wouldn't have it anywhere.
@travelmugs in the long term, i think we are banking on the supreme court holding that sexual orientation is a kind of protected status under the equal protection clause, or on the supreme court beefing up its standards for rationality. right now, for example, it's very hard for laws that discriminate on the basis of race to be constitutional. but laws the discriminate on the basis of non-protected statuses--e.g. how much money you make (the tax code)--are constitutional so long as they are not "irrational."
traditionally, it does not take much for a law to be considered to have a "rational" basis. there was a big case in 1996, romer v. evans, where the court held that a colorado law outlawing anti-discrimination legislation protecting LGBT citizens was irrational. and the health care case, ironically, could help out LGBT americans by beefing up the standard for rationality.
i think it will happen. other law-pinners, feel free to contradict/correct me if i have made any mistakes.
@blahstudent that is, losing the health care case because the court decides obamacare is irrational could help us win on LGBT rights, because it would make it easier to show that a law is unconstitutionally irrational.
@blahstudent Yes! Marriages aren't recognized where they violate strong public policies. However, in order to make that a strong public policy, some sort of law must be put on the books saying that gay marriage is explicitly illegal.
Interestingly enough, some quick googling digs a some conservative arguments that without a DOMA or something similar Article IV would force other states to recognize gay marriage. It's kind of an interesting "oh shit, guys, watch out, it's the Constitution!" argument.
@H.E. Ladypants yeah! another interesting thing is that the current challenge to DOMA is against the part of the law that defines marriage for purposes of federal law only. they're not going after the part of DOMA that says states do not have to recognize SSM from other states yet.
@iceberg So marriage is up to the states. Sad but true fact -- it's the states that grant your marriage licenses, and states that decide who can get hitched. Marriage and the regulation of marriage falls within the rights of the states, so the federal government can't run in and be all "OMFG YOU MUST MARRY ALL TEH GEYS!" To challenge stuff like the North Carolinian Shitstorm (let's call it "Hurricane Shitstorm"), one needs to take it to federal court and challenge it by saying that it's a violation of the U.S. Constitution, and appeal it up to SCOTUS. i.e. We need to pull a gigantic Loving v. Virginia on Hurricane Shitstorm. However, to prevail, gay people will probably need to first get protected class status.
@blahstudent LAW PINNERS UNITE!
@julia Yes, this is happening in NC. But also in NC were several peaceful protests and demonstrations against the amendment, one of which I participated in. We marched through the downtown of my city and were joined by many people who hadn't started with. Many of the business owners downtown came out of their shops to encourage us and cheer us on. The amendment may have passed, but there are so many people in this state who will continue to fight for equal rights for everyone.
@spoondisaster Of course, the real problem with a Loving-style outcome is getting the current court to come out with any opinion other than "we find Justice Scalia's farts to be the fairest in (and law of) the land."
But that's not necessarily the worst thing, because as you say, the past decades have brought a lot of change in terms of how people feel on the ground. I had one poli sci class (as an undergrad, so much salt, etc, etc) where the prof's main thesis for the class was that grassroots-up change was so much more powerful than just a judge hitting a gavel. Her primary evidence was comparing what happened post-Roe (a previously unpoliticized issue suddenly gave way to the loud, powerful anti-abortion lobby, which hadn't existed before) to what happened with the Equal Rights Amendment (it didn't pass, but it helped advance the national conversation greatly towards gender equality).
So, even if the current Supremes decide not to recognize how far the country has come on this issue (in favor of transcribing some of J. Thomas's farts), when people say "8 passed only by a tiny margin! We've come so far!", they're not just being crazy people.
Everyone. Go look at the top headline on Fox Nation right now. Just... just don't leave me alone with it.
@MmeLibrarian It is the worst! I saw it on Twitter and thought "Ha ha, that is a funny goof!" and then I clicked on the link and just stared.
@MmeLibrarian the war on marriage is going to be so much more fun than all our other wars, though. like tulle all over the place.
I am telling myself that is so stupid, no one will take it seriously a la 'Terrorist fist jab'
@Katie Heaney The war on marriage will be fought exclusively by Bridezilla armies.
@MmeLibrarian Did they change it? Or am I looking at the wrong site? Right now Fox Nation says "OBAMA FLIP FLOPS ON GAY MARRIAGE," which just makes me want to go to the beach.
@MmeLibrarian Half the other links on the page are about boobs and women in bikinis. Way to be morally upstanding, Fox.
@dj pomegranate "I want to see our immaculately attired shock troops at all the bridal boutiques!"
@Katie Heaney "We need back up! They've got a whole platoon flinging Jordan almonds and we're being flanked by ring bearers who don't seem to know where to go and are running willy-nilly at the lines!"
@frigwiggin Nope. That's what I was referring to. And, yes, the beach would be nice.
@frigwiggin The headline I saw just says that too, but the Twitter link says "OBAMA DECLARES WAR ON MARRIAGE".
@I'm Right on Top of that, Rose HAHAHAHA
@Katie Heaney I am only down if the last great battle is a wedding cake fight
@MmeLibrarian Wait! No! Hold on! A few minutes ago, it said "Obama Flip Flops, Declares War on Marriage."
@MmeLibrarian Ahh, okay, the War on Marriage stuff was what I was missing. Which, bleah. Like straight marriage is so flippin' sacrosanct.
@MmeLibrarian I'm disappointed! I expected something unintentionally dirty yet mildly homophobic like "Obama Caves to Gays' Two-Fisted Battering: Has Limp-Wristed Grip on Nation's Pulse."
@EternalFootwoman Right? I went there at work, and I immediately minimized the page because I didn't want my co-workers thinking I'm on some sleazy site that has porn-y ads. I shouldn't have that instinctive reaction when I am on a "news" site.
@I'm Right on Top of that, Rose Can we have Ellen DeGeneres as our general? She'd be better than MacArthur.
@I'm Right on Top of that, Rose "Code mauve! Code mauve! They've deployed the mothers-of-the-bride brigade!"
@dj pomegranate If only 'Pinners had been writing the Bride Wars script. Would have made it 1000% more awesome.
Now, I need to go prepare some glitter grenades.
@dj pomegranate They're tossing bouquets! Employ your helmets!
@dj pomegranate "Deploy the bouquet grenades! Listen, private, if it comes down to it, I need you to pull the string that opens the balloon net. No, listen, I know the falling balloons might hit some of our guys, but we need to protect the sanctity, damn it!"
@everyone I think we need to make this movie happen guys
@EternalFootwoman UH- DRONE ATTACK EVERYONE. (Goddamn will the Best Man NEVER stop speaking? He's worse than the Father of the Bride.) Don your earplugs!
This is Lt. Col Packagehoneymoon. Does anybody copy? DOES ANYBODY COPY???? Extremely drunk hostile force on attack. REPEAT DRUNK WEDDING GUEST ATTACK. He's breathing on me employ gas masks STAT!
@I'm Right on Top of that, Rose: "We now take you live to a statement by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in the briefing room at Kleinfeld's..."
@TheUnchosenOne I hoped it was a fake :(
@MmeLibrarian That's weird, because I watched his little clip, and at no point did he say "I thing same sex couples should be able to get married. Also, I've spoken with Congress, and I'm declaring war on marriage. Troops will be deployed accordingly."
I know that "xxx declares war on xx" is a thing people say, but saying somebody has declared war on something means they have to DECLARE WAR.
You are all unspeakably delightful and I love each and every one of you.
@The Everpresent Wordsnatcher But do you love us enough to gay marry us?
@EternalFootwoman YES OF COURSE. (Only if you are ladies, as I am a lady as well and if I marry a gentleman it will not be gay marriage, it will be opposite marriage.)
@frigwiggin There are so many fun scenarios if you play with punctuation and letters!
Obama's Flip-flops Declare War on Gay Marriage: "It would allow them to band together to erase our kind!"
Obama's Flip-flops' Gay Marriage followed by...
Obama's Flip-flops' Gay Marriage Flops: Flip-Flop Flips, Flees
Obama's Flip-Flops at Gay Marriage: Gays shocked, offended by his flippant footwear
Obama Flip-flops, Declares War at Gay Marriage: Something wonderful out of a travesty as Obama declares war on Iran during gay wedding
@The Everpresent Wordsnatcher Excellent. If you married a gentleman and had an opposite marriage, we wouldn't get to use all these great bouquets, balloons, and glitter grenades stocked in the Gay Bunker.
@EternalFootwoman We would definitely have rally the troops and ambush the Opposite Wedding. No need to let glitter grenades go to waste. This is war, you know.
@EternalFootwoman I'm taking all your battle notes down and when someone asks me what I want at my eventual wedding, I'm handing it to them. MAKE IT SO, NUMBER ONE.
@The Everpresent Wordsnatcher Let's All Make... GLITTER GRENADES!
@PistolPackinMama Well guys, I'm behind the curve so I went to foxnews.com just now. Headline over picture of Obama and George Clooney: "$AME-$EX PAYOFF?"
Byline: "Is it coincidence that a day after President Obama endorses same-sex marriage, he's heading out to Hollywood for a $40,000-a-plate campaign fundraiser with George Clooney that's expected to raise $15 million?"
So, there's that. If your rage-o-meter was getting dangerously low, fill it on up!
I am SO happy about this, although I am trying hard to swallow the fear that he just cost himself the election with this endorsement.
@Sarah H. Me too.
@Sarah H. me too, please vote in nov. everyone!
@Sarah H. pretty much this. :/
@Sarah H. it's a tough call eh? he may have cost himself some votes but at the same time this will probably lead to more support from the gay community and lefties who feel that he has dropped the ball on this issue.
I read recently that obama's fundraising revenues increased hugely in the last month and also included donations from almost 200,000 first-time donaters. So I think there's a definite possibility (I hope!) that the positive consequences will outweigh the negative.
also I love how one anti-gay marriage dude in that article is like "this is a political move." please give me an example of anything obama can say or do that is not a political move, he is the POTUS! I loled.
@redheaded&crazie I agree with you about this helping to redeem himself with the liberals who have felt like he abandoned a bunch of issues during his first term. Although some independents/moderates (HA) may migrate to Romney (HA HA) because of this, I think he'll gain more in the process. Hopefully take it back to the "hope" days of his first campaign, where people had a faint glimmer that the candidate is more than just politics - that he has values and integrity.
@Sarah H. I don't think anyone who would have voted for him is changing their mind now. People who are opposed that stance weren't voting for him anyway, so I think it's ok. And I think maybe it will energize some who have been angry at what they may have viewed as complacency and get them to the polls. Fingers crossed
@Sarah H. That's my fear, too. My hope is, though, that this will actually energize younger voters who are more likely to stay at home due to apathy or feeling disenfranchised.
It could be awful. It could be shrewd.
@teenie yeah, well I'm definitely biased as I am a huge obama fangirl, but I think he is in a very delicate position politically, especially because you really can't estimate what the political cost of such a statement would be (and sadly given the current climate in the US I may be underestimating the negative impact, although I really do feel that it will have positive consequences for his campaign)
anyway I feel for the guy. I think he is walking a tightrope of "do I speak out about what I believe in - even though it may cost me politically - even though that political cost would likely seriously negatively affect the lives of a lot of people (i.e. if Mitt Romney wins the presidency)" but on the other hand knowing that you are losing support from not taking a stance. ahhhhhhh
@redheaded&crazie The Atlantic blog today says, "Many political handicappers won't be able to resist criticizing Obama for picking a fight in the culture war terrain that evangelical-strumming, Karl Rove-types have been trying to tease out for years. But President Obama is not prone to emotional leaps of faith and knee jerk shifts in policy. Their polls must show that the nation is ready to have this fight -- that most independents and Democrats think same-sex marriage should be a civil right."
So that's good, right?!
@redheaded&crazie Yeah, it's all sort of mess. Polling has consistently shown though that there is getting to be at least a plurality of support for marriage equality. Plus all the important battleground states aren't as scarily socially conservative as the red states. So really all that matters on this one (gahh electoral college)is what a few million independents in Ohio etc think. I feel on the whole that he will do well with those folks.
The total downside however, is ALLLLLL the crazy money/scare ads that will come out of the woodwork about this. Also we'll have to listen to the congress talk about this, which is as terrible as them talking about anything. It will be a change of pace from contraception though!
What's kind of nuts to me is how few Democrats support gay marriage. Something like only 65% - which is better than Republicans, obviously, but not that much better than nationwide which I think is about 50/50. I don't know what the figures are on Democrats supporting civil unions, and I expect it would be higher, but...I just don't get it. This has so many parallels with the Civil Rights and women's rights movements that it is BAFFLING to me how people who are on the correct side of those fights are so reluctant to say that this is a human rights issue that shouldn't even be up for a vote because, frankly, people are stupid and clearly can't be trusted to do right by their fellow citizens.
@dj pomegranate The problem with that is that while the polls show that support for same sex marriage is over 50% and growing, every election has shown the opposite. It's unclear to me if we should believe the polls at this point. Do people lie to the pollsters? Or is it that people who are less likely to vote have more liberal same sex marriage views? Either way, that's not a great sign.
@thebestjasmine Great point. I want to give Obama credit, though, for being a reasonable and calm decision-maker. I trust that he has enough understanding of the polls and confidence in his teams (and his other sources of information) that this is not a *totally* crazy move.
Actually, the real problem is the electoral system. Those of us living in CA or NY or TX or other non-swing states? Our votes don't matter.
The election is going to hinge on how a small subset of voters in a small subset of states votes. And same-sex marriage, sadly, is an issue that will motivate some voters who might've stayed home to put down that Big Gulp, tear themselves away from Fox News and power up their mobility scooters to go to the polls to vote against the butt-sehks.
@ejcsanfran That is true but I think it cuts both ways. It could also cause liberals who are pouty and threatening not to vote to get energized again. Obama's campaigning is (kind of sadly) one of his most impressive skills and I don't think the team would have set the stage for him to come out in support for marriage equality if they didn't see a benefit to it.
@redheaded&crazie: I'm reaching dangerously high levels of liking you, cut it out
@thebestjasmine I read somewhere that not only was the turnout in North Carolina extremely low, but that the amendment was passed by the smallest percentage of any similar anti-gay law. So there's that.
@ejcsanfran I've been wondering if the normalization of butt-thex among heterosexuals will reduce homophobia.
@thebestjasmine How representative is polling these days? Are they still having that problem of only polling elderly land line-having shut ins?
Someone in the campaign must have been doing the political math on this really recently. We've had pro-gay marriage/rights statements by Biden and three cabinet members in the past few weeks. Were they testing the waters for this announcement? Are they betting on a rising (if slowly) economy to attract most voters and little social values grenades like this to charge up the base?
@purefog Sadly, it's basically the opposite high turnout, high percentage passrate.
@laurel I don't think that the cellphone effect would account for higher support in polling than in actual elections. If anything it's similar to the Bradley Effect. I'm also not sure how much of the Bradley Effect is a real thing or just politico bullshit.
As for the Biden gaffe, I totally think it was planned. I read a really good book on this back in college called The Image; it explained that most leaks/gaffes like this are actually pretty well controlled. It's all a bit of pageantry to keep things seeming spontaneous.
@Too Much Internet aw shucks :) i'll do my best to channel bigoted ignorant assholery if that'll help!
--Sorry, but there is an entire industry that is dedicated to determining what the political cost of releasing a statement like this will be. I love Obama-- but he's (especially in a direct answer/rhetoric sense) backed off from supporting the LGBT community before. The math clearly supported this announcement.
(Probably because: Mitt Romney will be screeching back to the middle any time now, there's a decent chance health care is gonna go down HARD, which will hurt both of them, and the easiest way Obama loses this election is by people considering them so similar that we have a Bush/Kerry-no-one-cares-enough-to-get-out-of-bed situation. Also-- if he's pulling left on this, be prepared for him to decompensate on other issues (oops! Re: right to privacy/surveillance/guantanamo bay he may have already!).)
@sunshinefiasco so yeah, true true true. But, awesome thing! Alberta's recent provincial election had all the polls showing that a super conservative party was going to win by a dece amount, you know they had this whole anti-abortion, making bigoted comments, anti-global warming deal going on. And then come election day the comparably Liberal party won back their majority! And the polling companies were all like "WTF. We were so wrong. How did this happen."
so, YOU NEVER KNOW. hey you gotta decompensate on your issues to get elected right? the question is who can do it more successfully, yeah?
Look, I'm an outsider so easy for me to say. But whether or not Obama and Romney make themselves look similar to the moderates in the crowd, I think it's safe to say there would be pretty vast and brutal differences in their governments.
@redheaded&crazie maybe i'm just a pie-in-the-sky idealist! or more likely I don't even know what i'm talking about.
@sunshinefiasco There's an entire industry dedicated to determining political costs, yes. And that industry is often wrong. I don't know if they are this time, but every time this has been put up to a vote, the other side has won. I don't think that the math could clearly support this decision when you look at the overwhelming results from North Carolina (a state he wants to win again) from yesterday.
Yeah, they're wrong sometimes-- but it's the president, he likely has the most extensive and expert team, studying this specific thing for the longest. It's not a sure thing, but if he was unsure, he could have hung on for longer. This is a moved poised to back the quote "I've said from the very beginning of this campaign that..."
Yes, every time they put it up for a vote, the other side has won-- by less and less every single time. And the social conservatives' mean age ain't gettin' any lower. Secondly, the legal apparatus in any state has an unbelievable advantage over passing these laws by referendum (how many states would have voted down school segregation by referendum?).
Also-- a national political campaign for a candidate is completely different from trying to win a law-based campaign in North Carolina. If only because Democrats win by winning urban centers and minorities-- not by winning whoever had time to vote in North Carolina on a Tuesday (read: a lot of moms and old people).
@sunshinefiasco I really want you to be right. I just think that this wasn't supposed to happen now, and only did because of Biden. Less and less each time isn't really quite true -- North Carolina was by a huge margin, and that's a state that he won last time and really wants to win this time. I mean, I do not think that people who would normally vote for Obama won't vote for him because of this (for the most part, there are always crazies). I think that this will motivate the people who would be less likely to come out to vote in the first place to vote, and will get their churches to make them send Romney money and vote for him. Really, all that matters is Ohio and Florida, and a little bit of that might be enough to tip the scales in those states.
I'd be tempted to agree with you if Biden wasn't widely known as the human gaffe machine. It's pretty easy to distance yourself from anything that comes out of his mouth. Obama has managed to throughout his entire presidency. Besides, all Biden said was what he personally agrees with. Here's my Obama response-- "my position is still evolving."
Secondly, The south already doesn't like Romney, and a lot of the crazier churchgoing folk abhor his religion. I think a choice between a massachusetts liberal mormon and a kenyan gay-loving socialist might keep a lot of people home or voting for Ron Paul (in NC? most assuredly a republican Nader).
Thirdly, Obama didn't win NC on the white, crazy, church-going crowd. He's not trying to win it on them this time.
It's about damn time.
This is a great, if late, start to things, but it also kind of hurts that this feels like such a triumph when the person in power says, "okay, yeah, I guess you guys are like normal people too and can do what we've been doing since forever."
@frigwiggin Totally, it sucks that it is a big deal and something to be excited about instead of something obvious and "well, duh" but it makes me hopeful that others will start to say those words aloud too, because I think the power of those in the wrong comes believing that more people are with them than actually are, and every person that speaks out against those wrongheaded beliefs diminsishes them, and so that is good.
@frigwiggin so true. i hope i'm still alive to see the day when history students of the future gape in disbelief that this was still a civil rights issue in 2012. i think it's dan savage who always says that bigots have always been on the wrong side throughout history. the crawlingly slow pace of social progress is painful though.
@frigwiggin I've always hated that any of this is an issue. Maybe I just don't *get* people...
Funny how he doesn't grow a pair until reelection year
@Megano! Honestly, I figured he wouldn't full-out endorse during the election season, so this is surprising to me.
I'm just going to be over here smiling hugely.
(But seriously, 'bout time, Obama.)
You've got my vote, sir. Oh, wait, you already did. I'm still pleased!
The idiots posting comments on the Prez's official Facebook page are marvelous. "Adam and Steve" references abound, as well as lots of people who don't actually know what the Constitution says. Or what it is, for that matter. I think they think it's a type of fruit, and "upholding the Constitution" is a fancy way of saying "juggling."
@camanda Yeah, I get a bit baffled about all the "upholding the Constitution" bit sometimes. It's the world's shortest and just outlines how the government should be set up (branches, structure of those branches, ect.)
Of course, there are also the amendments but those seem to be forgotten about quite frequently. Along with the fact that we can add or subtract them at any time. (And have.)
@H.E. Ladypants It's really embarrassing, especially when you can read the text of it online, and these people apparently have Internet connections, since they're using them to post horrendously stupid and hateful bullshit on Facebook.
@camanda And there's also the fact that originalism doesn't work. Pick up the text of the constitution. Now pick up a constitutional law casebook. One is *much heavier* than the other.
For some reason this read like a scene from the West Wing to me. In my mind Toby Ziegler was standing just off-camera gaping and running poll numbers in his head, while Josh Lyman tried to repress an enormous smile because the president just decided to stick to his ethical guns.
@H.E. Ladypants Right? I've never seen the West Wing (I know, I know, whatever) but I did recently finish S1 of Boss with my boyfriend and I can only imagine unrealistic behind-the-scenes political drama to accompany this.
@H.E. Ladypants Hands in pockets, looking away and smiling...
@H.E. Ladypants I just started watching the West Wing this weekend and that's what I thought, too!
@H.E. Ladypants And now Sam and Josh can get married.
@Lucienne Ahahahaha. Please tell me there is fanfic of this somewhere.
@H.E. Ladypants Toby would TOTALLY be gaping and running poll numbers... but also if someone like CJ or Josh or Bartlet asked him he'd crack that little smile of his that totally means "I love you so much right now but have spent too long cultivating my gruff demeanor to express it well at all."
@H.E. Ladypants This is the internet, surely that is a rhetorical question!
... now that that's out of my system, i shall read comments. i love that it was the 'Pin that broke this news to me.
me to coworkers: guys obama came out in support of gay marriage!
coworkers: when you say came out ...
Thank you, Mr. President.
I will add this video of Obama to my List of Things to Watch When I Get Depressed about Homophobia folder. It's still hard to top Cory Booker's statements about gay marriage, though.
@wee_ramekin Damn, that was great.
@wee_ramekin I don't know a whole lot about Cory Booker, so there may be some scary "other" side to him I don't know about, but from what I've seen of him (which is actually A LOT for the Mayor of a mid-sized city that I don't live in), I think he's just wonderful.
@wee_ramekin Wow, that was fantastic. Thank you. :)
(Thought about you today, wee_rams! I was at Pier 1 and saw many wee ramekins there. Some in the shape of flowers. I hope the president cheered your day a bit!)
@wee_ramekin Cory Booker is such an awesome human being. I love his Twitter feed, which has mostly convinced me that Newark, NJ doesn't suck. (!)
Being a cynical and jaded Beltway denizen, I saw this coming after Biden's trial balloon earlier this week. I think it's great and all that the President's coming out (ha) and saying this, but unless Scalia and/or Kennedy retire/die or Democrats (real liberal ones) take the House and Senate, the President's personal views will have little impact on policy. There isn't even much he can do through Executive branch regulations, because DOMA.
@cuminafterall Sadly, it is all a bit showmanship. My own personal gripe is about ENDA though. Getting on your partners health plan is great and all but not when you can be fired/kicked out of your housing for being queer. I would REALLY like to see an executive order guaranteeing protection to LGBT federal contractors, which is something he can totally do! Buuut, no one really wants to talk about workplace and housing protections it seems.
There is so much he can do that he has not been doing. He can LEAD. He can CHALLENGE the people who have twisted the idea of "religious freedom" to mean "freedom to impose my religious beliefs on YOU."
He can get people to admit that the issue is actually pretty simple:
@cuminafterall His administration is already fighting (some parts of) DOMA in the courts, though.
@cuminafterall i think kennedy is on our side! he wrote the opinions in romer and lawrence, at least. i wouldn't count him out anyway.
@blahstudent GINSBURG STAY HEALTHY PLEASE STAY HEALTHY.
@thebestjasmine I adore ruth bader ginsburg and I want her to be on my supreme court forever
@realtalk My favorite RBG story: one time I was at an event in DC and she was there. And she was wearing a name tag that said "Ruth Bader Ginsburg" like not every single person in the room already knew that. The BEST BEST.
@blahstudent Kennedy can be awesome sometimes--he was on the good side in Massachusetts v. EPA, my pet case (not that the decision made much change, but still!)
I can't stop grinning like some kind of deranged loon. I'm seriously in love with the President, y'all.
@Scandyhoovian HARDCORE CRUSH.
@Scandyhoovian my tumblr tag for him is "president boyfriend"
Aww, Log Cabin Republicans. Have you gotten tired of shaking that tiny fist yet? Would you like a hug - or would that be too gay? [/self-satisfied smarm]
@Sgt. Exposition I gotta admit that the "Now Obama is in line with Vice President Cheney" jab was well played.
The rest is just sour grapes, also the Log Cabin Republicans are whack.
A moment not unlike the speech that made Martin Luther King cry. But now he has to back it up with action.
Let's get real. He also said that "personally" he supports it but that states should determine legality themselves. He also pulled this shit THE DAY AFTER it could have possibly affected a vote in one of those states. This is what we call "weak".
@tales I mean, there are four ballot initiatives about gay marriage for november (right?) so it can affect the vote in a lot more states, and this made for a big, theatrical moment.
@tales yeah. And it took him years to realize that every one deserves the same rights? Why doesn't he admit that it took him years to gain the courage to make such a milquetoast statement?
@tales While I agree with you, I do think that by saying this today, it places him in stark contrast with the dopes down in NC celebrating with nasty wedding cakes and less of a grasp on constitutionality and ethics than the average kindergartener.
Kind of like, "Well kiddos, I was hoping that you'd make the right choice yesterday, but unfortunately it's pretty obvious that you still need some things explained to you. Here's how it really is."
@queenieliz Because it's a campaign tactic designed to be one of like 3 things that sets him apart from Mitt Romney on a hot-button, answer in 5 words or less issue. He's also made similar statements before-- when pulling left was convenient for him.
What, it took him four years of presidency to grow enough of a spine to make a statement publicly agreeing with an opinion that every thinking person has held since it first became an issue? And not only that, but to fill the statement with so many unnecessary modifiers and awkward pauses that it would be difficult to imagine a more lackluster expression on something so vitally important to millions around the world? Color me unimpressed.
Your daily dose of party pooping brought to you free of charge by MlleML.
@MademoiselleML I honestly think it was strategic to wait this long -- he's basically waited until being confronted by tea party nutsos and Romney to come out and say it, and force his opponent to deal with it. Today was a particularly rough day for us after the NC debacle last night.
In the meantime, he's done a whole lot to end DADT and DOMA.
@S. Elizabeth I guess I see your point. As one of the 39% of North Carolinians who voted against yesterday, I sure would have appreciated his speaking up a little sooner. Who knows if it would have helped the whole amendment one debacle, but you never know. From this vantage point it just seems like too little too late.
@MademoiselleML I actually don't think it would have, considering that most democrats wouldn't vote for Amendment One anyway, and many republicans strongly dislike Obama. The statement's timing does, however, give the middle finger to North Carolina.
There's also something to be said for not wanting to make a statement about a matter that's left to the state (marriage is within a state's police power) as the POTUS; it would be pretty problematic for a president to take a stand on how residents of a state should vote on a matter that concerns their own state constitution. The last thing Obama needs is to be seen a president who infringes upon the rights of the states (it would really piss off the less crazy conservatives who truly believe in small government).
@S. Elizabeth I find the federal-state line so interesting, both as it applies in the US and of course Canada's federal-provincial version. Do you think it's more common for people to identify with their state or with the country as a whole? (and is there a distinction in this sense between right and left wingers?) I mean I know it's a lot of both. But damn people love their federal-state/province separation!
Speaking as someone who can't vote for Obama, I seriously, SERIOUSLY urge those of you who can to do so, please!! The rest of the world is still smarting from eight years of your Bush junior, and at the very least, we can finally stand to watch your president making a speech—nay, we actually ENJOY it—without feeling something akin to mortification, heartburn and disgust, all at once.
As one of your neighbours to the north, if you don't have the good sense to fight to get this president re-elected (signs suggest it's going to be a squeaker), I would really like to propose a swap: you can take our PM Stephen Harper (who would never in a million years actually come out and say he supported gay marriage: you should see the number of ministers who are closeted in his party...) and we'll gladly have Obama!
@sugarfree sadly a message that needs to be directed at our fellow Canadians as well - turnout was abysmal in our last election and look how that's working out for us.
IMPORTANT LATE-NIGHT REMINDER, PEEPS:
Money talks. So if you're inclined and/or able, go ahead and endorse this announcement with yo wallets and donate. I just did!
@The Everpresent Wordsnatcher Great point. I have $10 I could spend on BHO instead of my steady supply of Sun Chips.
You must be logged-in to post a comment.
Login To Your Account