Surprise: Obama supported gay marriage in 1996

posted at 6:45 pm on January 13, 2009 by Allahpundit

Via Ben Smith, the Windy City Times rifles through some old file cabinets and strikes gold. Such was The One’s flip-flopping during the campaign (especially on this subject) that I couldn’t remember at first if we already knew this or not. Initially I thought we did, then realized that I was confusing this new questionnaire with a different questionnaire that he also filled out in 1996. Remember that one? Where he said he supported a total handgun ban, then claimed to Politico that a staffer had filled out the document unknowingly on his behalf, then got caught lying because a second copy showed his handwritten revisions on the document? Good times.

Anyway, this one’s different. And we did, sort of, already know it was true: The Windy City Times reported in October that its 1996 election guide listed Obama as pro-gay marriage, but since the questionnaire on which it was based had been lost, there was a chance they’d simply misinterpreted his position. Well, now it’s been found; see for yourself how unambiguous it was. In fact, read the whole piece, not just because it incorporates a second questionnaire where he reemphasizes his willingness to support a gay marriage resolution (see question 7) but because the author interviewed him in 2004 and found his objections to GM to be more strategic than religious, as they supposedly are now. Exit question: Pretend for a minute that there’s more to Obama’s thinking on this than naked political expedience. Why, precisely, have his views grown more conservative over time? And why, as I asked once before, is he letting his religious objection dictate his policy position when he’s explicitly rejected that sort of reasoning in the past?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

I also support gay marriage. Or rather, I don’t support any federal ban on it.

Obama is a slick politician. (aka liar)

therightwinger on January 13, 2009 at 6:47 PM

OMG!

there’s also gambling in Rick’s Cafe.

Drunk Report on January 13, 2009 at 6:47 PM

And does this really shock anyone?
It sure doesn’t me.

tee866 on January 13, 2009 at 6:49 PM

OMG!

there’s also gambling in Rick’s Cafe.

Not fair…I was going to say that…

RedSoxNation on January 13, 2009 at 6:50 PM

there’s also gambling in Rick’s Cafe.

Obama sticks his neck out for no one.

keep the change on January 13, 2009 at 6:50 PM

Biden lied, marriage died.

madmonkphotog on January 13, 2009 at 6:51 PM

Obama lies? NOOOOOOO! The Messiah, never!

Obama lies so much that it’s the norm. Such as Biden is a liar, but it’s just Joe being Joe.

Will any republican bring it up?
Which republican currently in the house or senate will speak up? *Crickets*

Amazing how Ben Smith just discovered this.
Either way, McCain would ignore the story if it came out during the general election and defend Obama from such a charge.

jencab on January 13, 2009 at 6:53 PM

Aw, come on. Surely you can’t expect someone who changes his positions from day to day, and week to week, to be held to what he said last century.

Buy Danish on January 13, 2009 at 6:55 PM

Oh happy gays are here again.
Is there anyone who doubted that Barack Obama supports gay marriage.I mean really….you would have to be a chump to believe he was against it.
By the end of his first term gay marriage will be legal throughout the country and he will end the “don’t ask don’t tell” policy in the military.
Wait until you see a soldier suing the Army for the right to wear a dress.

NeoKong on January 13, 2009 at 6:56 PM

Has the idiot messiah ever said anything he didn’t contradict or retract later? Pathetic.

progressoverpeace on January 13, 2009 at 6:58 PM

Keep digging boys…we need to continue developing the narrative on Obama that he is not a man of his word, and that he will say anything to get re-elected. At some point, the narrative will take over and his speeches will lose credibility. This will be especially true if his economic programs push the country further into recession. He can only blame Bush for so long before people turn. Let’s hope we can make the turn in 2012, as opposed to 2016.

RedSoxNation on January 13, 2009 at 7:01 PM

Keep digging boys…we need to continue developing the narrative on Obama that he is not a man of his word, and that he will say anything to get re-elected.

RedSoxNation on January 13, 2009 at 7:01 PM

The MSM has already praised this aspect of the idiot messiah. They love to talk about how brilliant a campaigner he is, saying exactly what is needed at the moment. Give up on using rational arguments to change the pea-brains of BHO voters. They don’t do rationality.

progressoverpeace on January 13, 2009 at 7:04 PM

Pretend for a minute that there’s more to Obama’s thinking on this than naked political expedience.

Words very apropos on topic…

Why, precisely, have his views grown more conservative over time?

They haven’t. He just wants to get reerected reelected.

And why, as I asked once before, is he letting his religious objection dictate his policy position when he’s explicitly rejected that sort of reasoning in the past?

He isn’t. This guy is a secularist. Just wait a little while. He’ll revert to being himself after the 2nd term is assured.

In the first term “it’s the economy, stupid”.

In the second term “it’s socialism/communism and social issues, stupid”, but after the reelection.

Entelechy on January 13, 2009 at 7:05 PM

I support it now–provided it is voted for by voters or by legislatures, not judicially imposed. So perhaps Mr. Obama can explain why he threw gay marriage supporters under the bus to get elected.

Mr. Joe on January 13, 2009 at 7:05 PM

Obama reminds me of the “Wizard of Oz” . . . a tiny insignificant little man behind a large, loud facade.

rplat on January 13, 2009 at 7:06 PM

a tiny insignificant little man behind a large, loud facade.

rplat on January 13, 2009 at 7:06 PM

This boy king, and his court, will screw you/us royally.

Entelechy on January 13, 2009 at 7:07 PM

Aw, come on. Surely you can’t expect someone who changes his positions from day to day, and week to week, to be held to what he said last century.

Buy Danish on January 13, 2009 at 6:55 PM

Dude, last millennium. I think our standards are a bit too high. Let’s cut him some slack.

Weight of Glory on January 13, 2009 at 7:07 PM

I was for gay marriage before I was against it.

Do dems go through some sort of liar, idiot school before entering politics?

katy on January 13, 2009 at 7:09 PM

Via Ben Smith, the Windy City Times rifles through some old file cabinets and strikes gold.

Weren’t the media supposed to be doing those sorts of things like, 2 years ago?

ddrintn on January 13, 2009 at 7:10 PM

Isn’t it interesting that these little nuggets from the past are suddenly surfacing…

Right after the election?

Kinda makes ya go… hmmmmmm….

Romeo13 on January 13, 2009 at 7:13 PM

I wonder what issue (defense, Gitmo, economy tanking even more, never going to church, Michelle’s lack of fashion sense for a woman with a big behind…) will be his first official blunder? One that the press can’t sugar coat and the populous can’t ignore.

He is the beginning of the end I fear.

Sweetness0726 on January 13, 2009 at 7:15 PM

Weren’t the media supposed to be doing those sorts of things like, 2 years ago?

ddrintn on January 13, 2009 at 7:10 PM

Report back, please, when you find out how someone was able to do that from someone’s crotch.

Entelechy on January 13, 2009 at 7:15 PM

GASP

AbaddonsReign on January 13, 2009 at 7:16 PM

I wonder what issue (defense, Gitmo, economy tanking even more, never going to church, Michelle’s lack of fashion sense for a woman with a big behind…) will be his first official blunder? One that the press can’t sugar coat and the populous can’t ignore.

He is the beginning of the end I fear.

Sweetness0726 on January 13, 2009 at 7:15 PM

And when we criticize, how long will it take to hear the term racism substituted for the words “criticism and accountability”?

Sweetness0726 on January 13, 2009 at 7:19 PM


Surprise: Obama supported gay homosexual marriage in 1996

…………. fixed if for ‘ya.

Seven Percent Solution on January 13, 2009 at 7:20 PM

Romeo13 on January 13, 2009 at 7:13 PM

Reminds me of the movie with Ben Stiller -The Heartbreak Kid.
The dems are beginning to realise they picked a nut job and ther’re going to spend the next few years covering their butts by a slow seepage of crap come out over time.

katy on January 13, 2009 at 7:21 PM

Well, seeing as nothing was really investigated before the election…I am sure we will find many more of these gems as the months go by.
Besides, he had the gay vote anyway, what man wouldn’t want to grab those ears and….

right2bright on January 13, 2009 at 7:24 PM

Yeah, but ZOMG did you hear that Palin has her own tanning bed and that she’s the actual mother of Trig!!11111!!!!!

gwelf on January 13, 2009 at 7:29 PM

And sex goes on in the champagne room of strip joints!

SouthernGent on January 13, 2009 at 7:31 PM

gwelf on January 13, 2009 at 7:29 PM

Exactly, we know Joe the Plumber didn’t have a license, behind in his taxes, but what does the next president think about gay marriage?….”I dunnno, duhhhh”, is the answer of the press.

right2bright on January 13, 2009 at 7:32 PM

Explains why “Bishop” Robinson is invited to do an invocation at one of the Inaugural Events.

So much for the Facade of Moderation.

kingsjester on January 13, 2009 at 7:32 PM

Report back, please, when you find out how someone was able to do that from someone’s crotch.

Entelechy on January 13, 2009 at 7:15 PM

+ 1 Zing!

Hawkins1701 on January 13, 2009 at 7:33 PM

Change.

Meaning “I will change my stance on anything and everything as the political winds dictate.”

Bishop on January 13, 2009 at 7:35 PM

I there’s anything that we’ve all learned in the last year it’s that what Obama says today, can go down the collective memory hole tomorrow.

What he said 12 years ago is just…

That’s not the Obama I knew…

BigWyo on January 13, 2009 at 7:38 PM

And when we criticize, how long will it take to hear the term racism substituted for the words “criticism and accountability”?

Er . . . there’s no “how long” about it. It’s been the modus operandi of his whole campaign.

And it happens here on HA, too. Posters asking for accountability for the birth certificate, for instance, are told by some that they wouldn’t do that if he weren’t black.

Alana on January 13, 2009 at 7:38 PM

Surprise: Obama supported same-sex marriage in 1996

Surprise: Obama supports same-sex marriage in 2009! He just couldn’t admit it before the election!

Surprise!

Kensington on January 13, 2009 at 7:50 PM

Obama supported gay marriage in 1996

And in 1996 it had never been put through the referendum process in state after state where it has gone down in flames. Even in California where you’d think that sodomy would be declared the official state “alternative lifestyle.”

Obama is a filthy politician with a national audience, not just the local Chicago/Illinois element to which he was responding in 1996. In short, the bastard’s views haven’t changed, just the audience. He’s going to backpeddle on this just like every one of his campaign promises. At some point even the mentally challenged (PC term Obama supporters) are going to react to the fact that the bastard doesn’t ever deliver.

highhopes on January 13, 2009 at 7:52 PM

Of course mr puss’n’boots supports ghey weddings, after all he married a man, baby Misshy is James Brown reincarnated and wearing a cheezy dress. Barrack back mountain indeed. How ’bout ‘a fist full’o obama? I’m beginning to fiddle in delight as the one implodes, boo yeh!

GlocknRoll on January 13, 2009 at 7:54 PM

Being both for and against gay marriage – the Obama equivalent of voting present?

TooTall on January 13, 2009 at 7:56 PM

Remind me again, Barry’s a Christian muslim atheist?

christene on January 13, 2009 at 7:58 PM

What is truly pathetic is all the azzhats in my ‘hood putting out flyers to have a big O coronation block party. I am thinking of blasting out Back in Black and and flyin’ the Stars and Bars just to incite a riot. What a bunch of mindless goons, marching in step with the annoiter, pfffft farts

GlocknRoll on January 13, 2009 at 7:58 PM

Once again, I see where Obama is coming from. An presidential election should be on real issues–like say socialism or resisting Islam–not some nonsense about whether we cave into the Neanderthals opposed to gay marriage as they die off. While I’m totally willing to oppose Obama on economic policy and foreign policy, I’m not even willing to utter the slightest quibble about his fancy footwork on gay marriage.

And anyway, any reasonable person who listened to Obama realized that he supported gay marriage all along. I have no sympathy for the fools who thought otherwise. Maybe they should pay attention. I also wasn’t fooled in the least when George W said he was concerned about global warming in 2000. If I could remember 1980, I’d bet I could remember some Reagan statements that didn’t reflect Reagan’s true beliefs.

thuja on January 13, 2009 at 8:00 PM

thuja on January 13, 2009 at 8:00 PM

Any reasonable person that has been paying attention knows that he has be quoted saying the exact opposite. Maybe you should pay attention.

BigWyo on January 13, 2009 at 8:12 PM

of course he really supports same sex marriage, you just can’t say so because of the religious bigots in this country. hopefully by the end of his 2nd term and as more old homophobe bigots die off he can publicly support it….

Noneya on January 13, 2009 at 8:14 PM

thuja on January 13, 2009 at 8:00 PM

Any reasonable person that has been paying attention knows that he has be quoted saying the exact opposite. Maybe you should pay attention.

BigWyo on January 13, 2009 at 8:12 PM

We all know that people who win elections will misrepresent their views on one subject or another. I’m not sure whether it is deliberate dishonesty or momentary ideological fantasy. And so you have to look at what beliefs just doesn’t make sense for a politician to have. Given the ideological fervour for gay marriage of the upper middle class whites who voted for Obama and given that Obama shares their world view, it would be extremely odd if Obama didn’t support gay marriage.

thuja on January 13, 2009 at 8:18 PM

Obama The First Gay President

faraway on January 13, 2009 at 8:26 PM

That is so gay.

John The Baptist on January 13, 2009 at 8:32 PM

Once again, I see where Obama is coming from. An presidential election should be on real issues–like say socialism or resisting Islam–not some nonsense about whether we cave into the Neanderthals opposed to gay marriage as they die off.

thuja on January 13, 2009 at 8:00 PM

Let’s see: you have Neanderthal heterosexuals and married gay couples. I’d say the latter is in more danger of dying off first.

ddrintn on January 13, 2009 at 9:14 PM

Let’s see: you have Neanderthal heterosexuals and married gay couples. I’d say the latter is in more danger of dying off first.

ddrintn on January 13, 2009 at 9:14 PM

It’s not a breeding war. The Neanderthals can breed like roaches, but their kids are still going to support gay marriage. The facts about gay people win when people take the time to be rational about homosexuality.

thuja on January 13, 2009 at 9:30 PM

It’s not a breeding war. The Neanderthals can breed like roaches, but their kids are still going to support gay marriage. The facts about gay people win when people take the time to be rational about homosexuality.

thuja on January 13, 2009 at 9:30 PM

Ahhhh…you’re talking about “dying off” in a triumphalist forces-of-history-and-righteousness-are-irresistable sense. Gotcha. Look, I have mixed feelings about gay marriage. Maybe my own view will triumph in the end, and it will always remain a gray area.

ddrintn on January 13, 2009 at 9:33 PM

Allah,

Never attribute to “political expedience” what you can more easily attribute to “just plain dumb fuckery”.

We can jus’ call it, “BeatsMe’s Razor”.

Tuning Spork on January 13, 2009 at 9:46 PM

Ahhhh…you’re talking about “dying off” in a triumphalist forces-of-history-and-righteousness-are-irresistable sense. Gotcha. Look, I have mixed feelings about gay marriage. Maybe my own view will triumph in the end, and it will always remain a gray area.

ddrintn on January 13, 2009 at 9:33 PM

Yes, you are right. I have to admit that I do have some problem with being so triumphalist. I’m not sure that anything is given. Who knows? Islam may triumph and not only will the old, murdering homophobia return, but slavery will also return. We just don’t know the future.

Furthermore, triumphalist rhetoric is overly smug and I don’t really like it. I use in this particular case, because the voting trends are pretty clear about the increasingly greater support for gay rights. And I really do believe that there are more important issues to discuss. I hate it when people who would favor lower taxes vote leftist because of the gay issue.

If we were ever to meet in person, I don’t think you’d find me overly smug. At least, that is one of my fondest wishes.

thuja on January 13, 2009 at 9:56 PM

George Costanza: Jerry, just remember, it’s not a lie if you believe it.

PappaMac on January 13, 2009 at 10:11 PM

Report back, please, when you find out how someone was able to do that from someone’s crotch.

Entelechy on January 13, 2009 at 7:15 PM

Ha! Not bad.

hopefully by the end of his 2nd term and as more old homophobe bigots die off he can publicly support it….

Noneya on January 13, 2009 at 8:14 PM

That’s sweet. It’s not about changing hearts and minds but about hoping people die, quickly, all for some peoples’ love. It’s like a fairly tale.

Esthier on January 13, 2009 at 10:41 PM

but their kids are still going to support gay marriage.

thuja on January 13, 2009 at 9:30 PM

Not all kids rebel, and like it or not, even completely rational people find homosexuality “icky”. I’m not saying that’s an appropriate viewpoint. I’m just acknowledging the truth.

I think it’s going to be at least another decade, especially considering gay marriage couldn’t even pass in California this year, and they’re normally at least a decade ahead of the rest of us.

Esthier on January 13, 2009 at 10:44 PM

Ahead???? Ahead?

Might want to re-think that one.

John The Baptist on January 13, 2009 at 10:57 PM

It’s not a breeding war. The Neanderthals can breed like roaches, but their kids are still going to support gay marriage. The facts about gay people win when people take the time to be rational about homosexuality.

The facts? The facts are indeed altering of opinion–but against–not for—-such deathstyles.

You can be an evolutionist , it doesn’t take faith, to see the error. In fact, a logical conclusion is that it’s a birth defect and should be treated with pity, but not promotion.

It is logically, physically, naturally, spiritually and in every other way, a PERVERSION that is bad for the individual, their family, and society as a whole.

John The Baptist on January 13, 2009 at 11:03 PM

Ahead???? Ahead?

Might want to re-think that one.

John The Baptist on January 13, 2009 at 10:57 PM

By ahead I only mean leading the charge. They normally start things in California that the rest of the country eventually adopts. That’s not a moral judgment.

Esthier on January 13, 2009 at 11:15 PM

Good thing we know this now.

WisCon on January 13, 2009 at 11:51 PM

Why is gay marriage so scary to some people? I’m sure those pesky homosexuals being married will do oh so much damage to the fabric of society.

therightwinger on January 14, 2009 at 12:26 AM

Why is gay marriage so scary to some people? I’m sure those pesky homosexuals being married will do oh so much damage to the fabric of society.

therightwinger on January 14, 2009 at 12:26 AM

Seriously. Can’t we just stick to his flip flopping on this one?

Esthier on January 14, 2009 at 12:31 AM

I think it’s going to be at least another decade, especially considering gay marriage couldn’t even pass in California this year, and they’re normally at least a decade ahead of the rest of us.

Esthier on January 13, 2009 at 10:44 PM

If you mean CA is a decade ahead of the country in moral and financial bankruptcy, I would agree.

jbh45 on January 14, 2009 at 7:57 AM

With advances in gene research, this will be a non-topic in the next 20 years or so. Prospective parents will not only choose the sex of their offspring, but will be able to delete errant chromosomes of all kinds. Gays are born gay due to an errant chromosome much like the children with Down’s Syndrome. Think about it. Who would choose to have a gay child? Gays will be nonexistant with the advance of science……..

adamsmith on January 14, 2009 at 9:18 AM

Why is gay marriage so scary to some people? I’m sure those pesky homosexuals being married will do oh so much damage to the fabric of society.

therightwinger on January 14, 2009 at 12:26 AM

Because the end goal of homosexual marriage isn’t homosexual marriage, it’s the denial of religious freedom and parental choice.

Everywhere homosexual marriage has been passed, it has been passed by judicial fiat. And then the lawsuits come. Catholic adoption agencies have to shut down their services when they refuse to adopt out to homosexuals on religious grounds.

School curriculum is introduced to sell homosexuality, an abberrant, damaging lifestyle, as the moral and legitimate equivalent to heterosexual relationships. Any parents who oppose it are told to go screw by school administrators.

Homosexual marriage is about control and limiting liberty. That is why it is dangerous, not because the government is handing out benefits to two deranged human beings who think their relationship is somehow normal and healthy because it makes their parts tingle.

BKennedy on January 14, 2009 at 9:42 AM

Why is gay marriage so scary to some people? I’m sure those pesky homosexuals being married will do oh so much damage to the fabric of society.

You should be sure, because it surely will.

John The Baptist on January 14, 2009 at 3:11 PM

Because the end goal of homosexual marriage isn’t homosexual marriage, it’s the denial of religious freedom and parental choice.

Everywhere homosexual marriage has been passed, it has been passed by judicial fiat. And then the lawsuits come. Catholic adoption agencies have to shut down their services when they refuse to adopt out to homosexuals on religious grounds.

School curriculum is introduced to sell homosexuality, an abberrant, damaging lifestyle, as the moral and legitimate equivalent to heterosexual relationships. Any parents who oppose it are told to go screw by school administrators.

Homosexual marriage is about control and limiting liberty. That is why it is dangerous, not because the government is handing out benefits to two deranged human beings who think their relationship is somehow normal and healthy because it makes their parts tingle.

Wow! What a breath of fresh (hot) air here!!!! True words indeed BKennedy.

Wish more could see it….would see it.

John The Baptist on January 14, 2009 at 3:13 PM