Gay Marriage, Obama speaks (Video) Update: or does he?

On today’s show Jim discussed gay marriage and the reason why President Obama himself has not taken a public stand for or against it.

In an interview today with ABC News President Obama said the following:

“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,”

The question now is does this help or hurt his campaign to be re-elected as The President of The United States?

The Full Video can be found here:

video platform video management video solutions video player

UPDATE (Jim): Obama equivocated in the interview not shown. The President suddenly a Federalist on gay marriage but not health care? Convenient.

Despite his evolution on the matter, Obama contends that he still supports states’ right to decide the issue. So perhaps one day someone covering the White House can ask Jay Carney or the president why gay marriage deserves special consideration? Even Adam Sewer at the hopelessly left-wing Mother Jones correctly notes: “Obama has endorsed marriage equality federalism—not the notion that marriage for gays and lesbians is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution that can never be taken away.”

Which begs an obvious question: If Obama has endorsed federalism and believes that states have the right to define marriage, then why doesn’t he support the ability of states to extricate themselves from Obamacare? Why don’t states have the right to dictate their immigration laws? And does he “personally” believe that states should be able decide the issue of abortion? Roe v. Wade exists, but so does the Defense of Marriage Act.

So which is it? For or against? Why it’s politics.

30 replies
  1. Dimsdale
    Dimsdale says:

    It’s stereotypical liberalism/progressivism!!!? You know, “do as I say, not as I do” and “our way or the highway” legislation.? It is “Demoscrisy”!
    And “the notion that marriage for gays and lesbians is a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution”?? Does the Constitution address marriage at all, either heterosexual or homsexual, or was it simply assumed that only men and women should be married?

    • justanefriend
      justanefriend says:

      Well, maybe its time to go back and change the slavery laws. Maybe black Americans will remember what having no rights is like. Let’s just turn back the clock so women can’t vote. In fact, maybe they shouldn’t be able to vote since they marry and get divorced at such a high rate that we have millions of fatherless children in America that I have to pay for. Yeah, that’s what we should do. Let’s just keep going back in time. Take away everyone’s rights…then we’ll have a nice, flat world… where no one is happy…but hey, we’ll have slaves and be able to beat women legally. That’ll be fun, won’t it?

      • Dimsdale
        Dimsdale says:

        Ah, reductio ad absurdum rears its head again!? Nobody is talking about going backwards, just how to deal with this issue.? As ?bama states, it is “up to the states”, and not by the sleazy tactic of having a single judge or deceptive backroom practice of passing legislation nobody wants as has been the practice up to now, but an actual vote of the people as in a state wide referendum.? Oddly enough, despite all the assurances that the majority of people agree with the concept of state approved gay marriage, it has never passed in a fair vote of the people, even in California of all places!? They didn’t dare give us the vote in Mass, and apparently CT is the same.?
        If everyone is for it, why can’t we vote on it and get this over with once and for all?

  2. Linda Mae
    Linda Mae says:

    This is like Kabuki Theatre.? Act 1 – Rumblings from the press – gay marriage????
    Act 2:? Ask Romney? (I told my husband when I first heard Romney’s response that Mitt should have replied it was his personal view but that since it was a State’s Rights issue, it had no place on the national stage.? Mitt didn’t hear me!
    Act 3? Biden speaks…
    Act 4 Obama fesses up plus cites the states rights issue and adds religion for an encore.
    Act 5:? We – the American Public have once again been played – bamboozled royally.?
    Now I think Mitt should have added his need to concentrate on the economy – not speculate on issues which were not the purview of the feds. END OF TOPIC.? CURTAIN DOWN!

  3. stinkfoot
    stinkfoot says:

    It’s the Barack Hussein Obama’s “Get Them To Talk About Anything But My Presidency” reelection campaign road show.

  4. SoundOffSister
    SoundOffSister says:

    “…those soldiers or airmen or marines or sailors who are out there fighting on MY behalf…”
    Silly me…and all this time I thought they were fighting for their country.

    • Dimsdale
      Dimsdale says:

      The narcissism is all consuming, isn’t it?? How long before he refers to us as “his subjects”?? Wait!? It will be “His subjects”!

      • JBS
        JBS says:

        I hate to break it to you . . .
        Another term and Obama the First, Petty Prince of Petulantism, will induct us all as his feudal serfs. The MSM will not remark on the growing size of his royal head.

    • stinkfoot
      stinkfoot says:

      I recall a famous historic leader whose military swore allegiance to him personally and not to the country or its constitution… that leader was named Adolph Hitler.

    • justanefriend
      justanefriend says:

      Oh, brother. Lady, take a stand. Join up, get in there and fight. What? Too old? Didn’t have the courage to join when you were young? Oh, I can fight for you but I can’t get married? Go to college and get a degree. Learn, stupid. Rights are for everyone, not who YOU want to give or not give rights to.

  5. justanefriend
    justanefriend says:

    Oh, my….America IS the dumbest land on Earth. You people sound like complete idiots. Maybe THAT’S why America was bombed and people HATE us. You talk stupid, you’re fat, and ugly, uneducated, and make comments that make absolutely NO SENSE at all. Get a gun, THAT’S legal… and just shoot yourself.

    • Steve M
      Steve M says:

      Take a step back. Breathe. People have different?opinions, and if your intent here is to bully people into submission with ad-hominem attacks – and foolish straw-man arguments – you will be asked to leave and banned from the site.

      • stinkfoot
        stinkfoot says:

        Attempts to use personal attacks or otherwise derail a topic is tantamount to an admission that it’s all they have- certainly no one can produce any credible counterpoints that extoll the virtues of the current administrations track record.? Akin to the reelection campaign strategist without mud to sling, dissenting views here have nothing and justanefiend is furnishing the most eloquent proof of that here.? In a way it’s quite amusing.

      • Lynn
        Lynn says:

        Ha, Ha, Justanefriend, sounds Crystal clear to me. Steve, Save yourself and us a lot of grief and pull the plug now.? Rules are you have to comment on the post, not rant inanely. Notice, I did not say insanely, that would not be PC.

    • winnie
      winnie says:

      Go ahead and have an opinion…you don’t have to be offensive while doing it, though.? Perhaps an anger management class is in order.

    • Plainvillian
      Plainvillian says:

      If America is so evil, distasteful and beneath your vast intellect, why don’t you relocate to some socialist paradise like North Korea or Cuba?

  6. dennis
    dennis says:

    Once again when a liberal cannot win on the facts of an issue they revert to attacking the other person. Remember it is better to keep silent when you are thought to be ignorant on a subject ,than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

  7. gillie28
    gillie28 says:

    Wow, I actually thought it was irony (at first).? Calling conservatives names seems to be the “message du jour.”? Personally, I think a class action law suit is in order against people like the?poster above and?Howard Dean who, among other things, referred to people who have fiscally conservative views as “racist.”??

  8. RoBrDona
    RoBrDona says:

    All I can think of is the O as Mel Brooks in History of the World Part I saying “It’s good to be the King” while filling up Piss-Boy’s bucket.?

  9. Jeff S
    Jeff S says:

    Do I hear a little John Kerry?here …??” I was against gay marriage before I was for it”?

  10. yeah
    yeah says:

    Oh, who’s that ignoramus we used to see a while back…looks like she changed her name to junstainefriend, hah!? Peg ‘er IP,? Steve!
    that reality, its a pain aint it crystal?

    • Steve M
      Steve M says:

      Calm down, breathe. Again, there is no need to call people names or refer to former commenters. It’s not putting you or the conservative movement in a good light.

      • Lynn
        Lynn says:

        Sorry, Steve, I did not read to the end when I wrote above. Obviously, everyone drew the same conclusion. I’m breathing and laughing at the same time.? Works for me.

  11. Linda Mae
    Linda Mae says:

    What a wonderful example of the liberal attack strategy:? SIN
    I’ve posted it before but it just fits the situation so perfectly.
    What do liberals do when they haven’t a clue?
    S – Switch the topic
    I – Ignore the facts
    N – Name call
    What should we do?? Laugh!?

Comments are closed.