Comments on: Update: Obama disses marriage law as Justice defends it

By: Andrew M. Bednar

Andrew M. Bednar — Mon, 25 Oct 2010 17:36:13 +0000

I’ve always voted Democrat, but they make me sick to, next time around “screw Obama”.

By: Gary Rosche

Gary Rosche — Wed, 19 Aug 2009 01:10:20 +0000

Obama issued the following statement: “my Administration will continue to examine and implement measures that will help extend rights and benefits to LGBT couples under existing law.” That EXISTING LAW is DOMA which he is defending as constitutional in court. DOMA specifically outlaws extending ANY rights or benefits of marriage to LGBT couples. That makes Obama a two faced liar. Being angry about being lied to doesn’t make us Republicans, it makes us civil rights activists pissed that our “fiercest advocate” turned out to be a cowardly liar. If you don’t get that then you’re a fool.

By: Trace Eggers

Trace Eggers — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 22:43:19 +0000

Obama has such pretty words. Let’s just sit back and listen to how nice he talks to the gay community. Ahhh, he so understands us.

Ya gotta help me with this. Please, how can any gay man or woman still support this used car salesman?

By: Chris Sullivan

Chris Sullivan — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 19:55:09 +0000

Just because the United Church of Christ supports GLBT rites doesn’t mean they don’t have their share of oddballs.

By: James Withers

James Withers — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 19:34:29 +0000

DaveW,

“…he went to that scary church…”

You mean the same church that supports gay rights and has out gay members? That “scary” church?

http://www.washblade.com/thelatest/thelatest.cfm?blog_id=17266

Sincerely,
James

By: DaveW

DaveW — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 19:07:31 +0000

Who are you people? How could anyone reading this not be angered by his DOJ’s move? He is NOT OBLIGATED to defend this law….that is simply a LIE made up by some staffer trying to provide cover. Another staffer got it right saying they were following history.

Since when does a civil-right platform running president defend history by attacking civil rights? If he meant one word of what he says, the DOJ would be NO SHOWS at these trials.

Obligated my xxx, he absolutely is NOT.

Obama is no friend of ours. He doesn’t have gay friends, he went to that scary church, he hangs out with homophobes and oh by the way he keeps appointing people that go against what he ran as so why are we surprised?????????????? Remember when he wanted the corrupt Senator from N.H. on his staff? The one that in no way would have supported the stimulus, the one later found to have set up his whole family in business at government expense in that abandoned Air Force base?

This man shows time and again why we should ignore every promise he makes.

If you voted for him, I could be saying I told you so, but instead I’m sad.

By: Drewski

Drewski — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:15:49 +0000

So, Tara and Ballston, you’re saying that neither GOPers nor dissatisfied Dems have any right to speak up? Both of you ignore one monumental truth–if you can keep gays as second-class citizens, then state initiatives to attack civil rights law can make their way into the Federal system with the same “we can reasonably argue to keep it” mentality. This is something that most foreigners don’t understand about DOMA–its potential to be used to dismantle existing civil rights. It’s the kernel of a doctrine which could re-establish Plessy v Ferguson (separate but equal). Do you not see that upholding DOMA creates the opportunity to dismantle civil rights laws piece by piece? “Well, if DOMA is OK, then why do we have to have a law saying that women can’t be barred from working traditionally male jobs?” Upholding the status quo can be used as a tool to turn back the clock. If everything I’ve said sounds paranoid or alarmist, then please, Tara or Ballston, you explain to me why Obama WILL NOT do as each of the four preceding Presidents did? Why is Obama so insistent on having AG Holder defend this piece of crap? You don’t make an effort to defend something you don’t believe if you have the option not to.

By: Chris Sullivan

Chris Sullivan — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 18:09:58 +0000

Obama DID NOT have to file a brief in favor of DOMA – that is a LIE!

Read:
http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/choice-to-defend-doma-and-its.html

MORMON Bush holdover W. Scott Simpson helped write and file anti-gay brief.

Obama, while stating that while he does not agree with DOMA, is nonetheless asserting that it IS constitutional.

As USUAL, he is talking out of both sides of his mouth – playing all sides against themselves and hoping to come out on top.

Sen. Kristin Gillibrand has done more for gay rites than Obama has with hsi feel good speeches (which seems to be the only thing he DOES have to offer the GLBT community).

NO MONEY – NO VOTES – while there is still NO ACTION!

By: Morgan

Morgan — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:04:25 +0000

ps2os2,
what you are missing is that until the Congress changes the law, even if Obama disses it, he IS OBLIGED TO FOLLOW, TO OBEY AND TO DEFEND IN COURT IF NEED BE EXISTING LAW. He is not allowed or entitled to make up law as he goes along, any more than US Supreme Court justice Sonia Sotomayor or any one else who is not a legislator is allowed to. ONLY CONGRESS HAS THE RIGHT AND THE POWER as the legislative branch to make or change law. Obama can campaign for a change in law, he is allowed to do that, he is allowed TO SIGN A BILL INTO LAW OR TO VETO A BILL. But he has NO legislative power. As head of the executive branch, he can direct, ask, lead, visit foreign heads of state, address Congress, ask Congress to convene for national emergencies, be commander in chief etc. But he CAN NOT personally make up law much as we want him to, that is NOT his job or his power.

By: Warren

Warren — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 12:58:09 +0000

“Disses” nice, would you say that if he was white…

I fully support this president even if it appears he is taking baby steps. He is politically living up to his word by building a consensus. This is a democracy not a dictatorship!