Obama team gaming out open support for gay marriage among top Democrats?

posted at 1:55 pm on March 23, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Greg Sargent gets the leak from a Democratic strategist in the loop on what could best be described as focus-group testing to change Barack Obama’s stated values system.  In the 2008 campaign, Obama opposed gay marriage while supporting civil unions and decrying discrimination, a rather safe position even in the Democratic Party.  No one really believed it, though, and almost ever since taking office Obama and his team have talked about his “evolving” state of mind on the issue of gay marriage.  Now it seems that Obama wants to have party honchos test out his, er, theory of evolution:

Obama’s top political advisers have held serious discussions with leading Democrats about the upsides and downsides of coming out for gay marriage before the fall election, a Democratic strategist who has discussed these matters directly with Obama’s campaign inner circle tells me.

This does not mean that it will happen, and there are plenty of reasons to assume it won’t. Indeed, it would be political malpractice if Obama’s top advisers didn’t discuss every permutation and possibility, no matter how far fetched. However, the fact that it has been discussed seriously at high levels means it’s not out of the question.

Well, sure, it’s good to get the messaging right when laying out a statement on values.  On the other hand, Obama has already made a statement on these values — he supports the definition of marriage being between one man and one woman.  Have those values “evolved”?  If they have, then shouldn’t Obama be honest and say so?  This sounds like Obama has either changed his mind, wasn’t honest before, or cares less about the issue than in leveraging it for the best political outcome.

That’s what makes this sound so ridiculous:

Those advisers are convinced that Obama will make this call based on his gut, and ultimately without regard to the fine-grained political analysis of the situation, the source says.

If that were true, he wouldn’t need to check with “leading Democrats,” or send his advisers out to do so.  Obama would prepare a statement explaining his position and its evolution, which he could do with his advisers alone.  Asking whether or not to do so isn’t making a “gut” call — it’s practically the polar opposite of a gut call.

Greg seems to think this could be a game changer among Democrats, who would be invigorated for the fall election “far beyond the gay community.”  That’s only true if one believes Obama actually changed his mind, “evolving” or otherwise.  Most people have assumed that Obama supports gay marriage personally, and that all of the talk about “evolving” thoughts were just a dodge for the sake of political expediency — and a focus-group-tested switch would just be more of the same.


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

Comment pages: 1 2

Dear God, make it stop!

GhoulAid on March 23, 2012 at 1:57 PM

Priorities

Schadenfreude on March 23, 2012 at 1:59 PM

BHO is gonna be doing a lot of ‘testing things’ between now and election time to see if anything sticks…

Ltlgeneral64 on March 23, 2012 at 1:59 PM

“… — it’s practically the polar opposite of a gut call.”

“Don’t call my bluff…!” - Obowma

Seven Percent Solution on March 23, 2012 at 2:01 PM

Yep, he is leading from behind once again. Courage..?

d1carter on March 23, 2012 at 2:01 PM

Ding ding ding ltgeneral

cmsinaz on March 23, 2012 at 2:02 PM

This and pot legalization. Republicans should have been in front of these issues. But, as usual, stupidity rules the day in this party.

lorien1973 on March 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM

It’s only an effective strategy if it puts him in oppostion to the Republican nominee’s position.

I’m not sure it will.

exit question: black oppose gay marriage by a wide margin. does obama risk suppressing black turn out with this move?

DrW on March 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM

“Learning on the job”

NapaConservative on March 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM

Obama’s top political advisers have held serious discussions with leading Democrats about the upsides and downsides of coming out for gay marriage before the fall election, a Democratic strategist who has discussed these matters directly with Obama’s campaign inner circle tells me.

FIFY.

HeckOnWheels on March 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM

Majority of gays will vote for Hussein regardless ,
just like illegals , idiots and blacks.

burrata on March 23, 2012 at 2:06 PM

Can you say “etch a sketch”?

Blue Collar Todd on March 23, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Gay marriage: About 273rd on the list of what’s important right now. Or maybe I have that too high on the list.

Right Mover on March 23, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Alternative headline: Obama found a perfect way to consolidate the Republican base by giving common ground to Mormons, Catholics, and Evangelicals.

Archivarix on March 23, 2012 at 2:09 PM

Heh, heh, heh… Any efforts on his part to reinforce his far left bona fides are welcome.

Gay marriage was a real winner in California, wasn’t it?

obladioblada on March 23, 2012 at 2:10 PM

Majority of gays will vote for Hussein regardless ,

burrata on March 23, 2012 at 2:06 PM

Gays voting for a Muslim are like chicken voting for Col. Sanders.

Archivarix on March 23, 2012 at 2:10 PM

Obama will make this call based on his gut,

Bwahahahahahaha, please stop.

Meanwhile the economy is still in the tank, unemployment is stuck above 8%, the US has no foreign policy, the DOJ is a racist dump, the EPA is going to bankrupt the middle class…

But yes. Let’s focus on gays and ‘free’ contraception for over-privileged sluts.

CorporatePiggy on March 23, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Sounds rather similar to the political philosophy of one William Jefferson Clinton….. float trial balloons before “settling” on a position.

Bitter Clinger on March 23, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Barry wouldn’t know a “gut” call if it came up and bit him on the leg!

The Obamassiah! NO ISSUE he cannot STRADDLE!

GarandFan on March 23, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Evolution baby.

WisRich on March 23, 2012 at 2:12 PM

Gays voting for a Muslim are like chicken voting for Col. Sanders.

Archivarix on March 23, 2012 at 2:10 PM

Gays voting for a Republican is like blacks voting for David Duke.

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Obama team gaming out open support for gay marriage among top Democrats

Ed,

Talk about your dangling modifiers!

I think Barney Franks and Stuart Smalley would make a nice couple though.

pain train on March 23, 2012 at 2:14 PM

Majority of gays will vote for Hussein regardless ,
just like illegals , idiots and blacks.

burrata on March 23, 2012 at 2:06 PM

correct! how does this win over anyone in the middle or right? is owe’bama having trouble with his base and thinks this will energize it? maybe so, i don’t know…

on a separate note, how do illegals vote?

Dr. Demento on March 23, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Last gasp.

moonsbreath on March 23, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Gay marriage: About 273rd on the list of what’s important right now. Or maybe I have that too high on the list.

Right Mover

I can see 273 things in my glove compartment more important than gay marriage.

More like 972,864th on the list of important things.

Zombie on March 23, 2012 at 2:15 PM

Oh, Reggie

Jeddite on March 23, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Good luck with that in Montana, Missouri, Nebraska senate races champ.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Willard is for gay marriage…oops, sorry someone shook the Etch-A-Sketch. He’s against it now.

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:16 PM

Good luck with that in Montana, Missouri, Nebraska senate races champ.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 2:16 PM

I agree that Montana and Nebraska are hopeless causes when it comes to critical thinking, but Missouri is coming around nicely.

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Gays voting for a Republican is like blacks voting for David Duke.

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:14 PM

In the middle of what? Communism and socialism?

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 2:17 PM

He must be having a lot of problems with the base, to be considering taking such an unpopular issue with most voters.

Signs of desperation.

Rebar on March 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM

I agree that Montana and Nebraska are hopeless causes when it comes to critical thinking

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Agreed. Montana has a Democrat governor and 2 Democrat senator. Common sense is in obviously in short supply out there.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM

It’s an attempt at reframing the election campaign. President Obama wants to throw out a red-button social issue in order to steer the national conversation away from foreign policy and the state of the economy.

It’s actually a very good tactical move since social conservatives on the right would jump all over it. The MSM would also be happy to oblige since it would give them an excuse to shove more substantive (and damaging to Obama) issues aside while they furnish wall-to-wall coverage of comparatively inconsequential gay rights memes.

My prediction? He’ll get away with it. Why? Because Republicans don’t know how to walk around a trap.

troyriser_gopftw on March 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Common sense is in obviously in short supply out there.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM

Resist we much!!

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 2:19 PM

In the middle of what? Communism and socialism?

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 2:17 PM

Yes, because not hating gays with every fiber of my being is akin to socialism/communism. Yeah, makes sense.

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:19 PM

This and pot legalization. Republicans should have been in front of these issues. But, as usual, stupidity rules the day in this party.

lorien1973 on March 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM

I like you more and more….

libfreeordie on March 23, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Despite all the combined effort of the DEMOCRAT-MEDIA COMPLEX to convince everyone that homosexual “marriage” is ragingly POPULAR amongst the vast multitude…

the lie is revealed.

If it were Obama would be preaching from the roof tops.

But he’s not.

Jack Bauer on March 23, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Yes, because not hating gays with every fiber of my being is akin to socialism/communism. Yeah, makes sense.

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:19 PM

No you’re just a leftist troll pretending to be in the middle. The fact you think anyone who opposes gay marriage hates gays with every fiber of their being proves it.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 2:20 PM

Gays voting for a Muslim are like chicken voting for Col. Sanders.

Archivarix on March 23, 2012 at 2:10 PM

LOL :)
But gays are a demographic that votes based on hatred , just like other useless idiots that worship Obama .
So why is Hussein even going there ?

burrata on March 23, 2012 at 2:21 PM

Lorien1973, I never expect our party to act intelligently in certain areas and this is one of those areas. Frustrating, but what can ya do?

McDuck on March 23, 2012 at 2:21 PM

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:19 PM

Opposing homosexual marriage does not equat to “hating gays”.

That’s a progressive/leftist meme, that someone “in the middle” wouldn’t be peddling.

Rebar on March 23, 2012 at 2:21 PM

So the words “gay” and “queer” have been co-opted. But, “marriage” too? What’s next. “Parent”? “Child”? “Pet”? “Job”? “Employed”? “Own”? “Rent”? “Contract”?

Whether gays can get married to each other. That’s the line in the culture wars, guys. Gays can serve openly in the military, score one for the “gay marriage” crowd. Guy gets convicted of a hate crime against his gay dormmate for surreptitiously videotaping him. 2-0 in favor of the “gay marriage” crowd. Federal legislation to protect gays in housing and employment? That will be 3-0. Then gay marriage will be 4-0. It will all happen in 20 years, tops.

Paul-Cincy on March 23, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Gays voting for a Republican is like blacks voting for David Duke Robert Byrd .

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:14 PM

burrata on March 23, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Black voter opposition to gay marriage has been grossly overstated, many of those exit polls from CA were revised to suggest that black prop 8 support wasn’t the deciding factor. I think same sex marriage is ridiculous as a cause, it should be same-sex civil unions that have the same legal rights as the state protected relationship some call “marriage.” Not everyone wants to call their relationship a marriage, but they still want the benefits from the state. So yeah whatever I guess. Obama should push for federal same-sex civil union law, everyone wins.

libfreeordie on March 23, 2012 at 2:23 PM

What the’s record in voter initiatives for gay marriage? 0-30 I believe.

Yesssir, the American public is screaming for a president to push gay marriage as a policy initiative.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Gays voting for a Republican is like blacks voting for David Duke.

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:14 PM

i vote for bush both times. you kiss my gay @$$. it hurts when not all of us are gay little lemmings doesn’t it?

GhoulAid on March 23, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Gays voting for a Republican is like blacks voting for David Duke.
inthemiddle

Gay comprise, at most, 3% of the voting public.

A substantial proportion of them them do not engage in “litmus test” voting, only supporting candidates who have a specific take on a specific position. Instead, like most voters, they vote according to their general philosophy or personal interest.

I know one guy who is both gay and a pagan. He revealed casually during one conversation that he had voted for Reagan both times. I asked why. He said — I wanted lower taxes!

There you have it.

San Francisco has the highest proportion of gay voters of any city in the world. In every single election since the ’70s, there has been at least one gay candidate for mayor each time. Question: How many have won?

Answer: None.

Even in San Francisco, the gay vote is way overstated.

They have an outsized influence on popular culture, but as for actual numbers in the ballot box, they may sway the vote about 1% toward Democrats.

Zombie on March 23, 2012 at 2:25 PM

Gay comprise = gay voters comprise

typo

Zombie on March 23, 2012 at 2:26 PM

I think same sex marriage is ridiculous as a cause, it should be same-sex civil unions that have the same legal rights as the state protected relationship some call “marriage.”

libfreeordie on March 23, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Now, that I can agree with you on. There’s hope for you yet.

Bitter Clinger on March 23, 2012 at 2:27 PM

Most audacious political move in over 500 years!

jukin3 on March 23, 2012 at 2:27 PM

I’m not against gay marriage, but I do understand the reasons against so I don’t advocate.

However, why is nobody mentioning that the EU human rights court declared that gay marriage is NOT a right, that if governments give their okay for gay marriage, churches will have to perform gay marriages no matter what the govt promises….this has thrown a monkey wrench into Britain’s plan to go for gay marriage.

MaggiePoo on March 23, 2012 at 2:28 PM

He must be having a lot of problems with the base, to be considering taking such an unpopular issue with most voters.

Signs of desperation.

Rebar on March 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM

What Team Obama is gaming right now is whether or not the ginning up of the activist liberal base via an endorsement of gay marriage would be enough to offset any possible loss of voter turnout among the Democrats’ African-American base, plus Blue and swing-state Latino voters, if the president comes out for gay marriage.

Remember, one of the main reasons Proposition 8 passed in California in 2008 was because of the huge turnout of African-American voters, who went for Obama but also voted for the repeal of the court-ordered gay marriage law in the state. If Obama comes out for gay marriage he’d love to do it as quietly as possible as to not anger that part of his base, but he (or at least Axlerod) knows that the Democrats’ activist left would trumpet this as one of the major issues of 2012, under the belief that they could frame the Republican nominee as a hateful bigot.

If the polling shows African-American voters in key states will climb over broken glass to vote for Obama this November no matter what law he signs, and if they decide it’s not going to kill them among religious Latino voters in those same states, then he’ll support gay marriage. But if the polls show it will kill voter turnout, or even make some of those voters switch over to Romney or Sastorum, he’s not going to say a word in public, and hope that further court rulings will solve the problem for him.

jon1979 on March 23, 2012 at 2:28 PM

I am an Independent, and this is a nothing burger to me. How many states have civil unions already for same sex couples? They can call themselves married if they want, it’s a free country you can call yourself anything you want, and no one can stop you.

This is Obama trying to find something to get his base excited about.

He’s already handed N.O.W. Fluke, and the Greenies got a tariff slapped on China and the keystone pipeline was blocked. It looks like team Obama is just going down their pandering check list. The only reason they are checking with Dem lawmakers is, because it could hurt them in local races. This isn’t popular among black people but who are they going to vote for Romney/ I believe that the republicans will hold the house, and they have a serious shot at taking back the leadership of the senate.

Dr Evil on March 23, 2012 at 2:29 PM

What the’s record in voter initiatives for gay marriage? 0-30 I believe.

Yesssir, the American public is screaming for a president to push gay marriage as a policy initiative.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 2:24 PM

Luckily, the courts and state-elected legislatures are deciding that the civil rights of a minority group are not to be decided on by the majority. That’s why we are getting more and more states approving gay marriage. Three just this year. Must be painful knowing you’re losing the battle, huh? Quick! Better find a new boogeyman group soon!

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:29 PM

correct! how does this win over anyone in the middle or right?

Obama is not in the business of winning over anyone, least of all middle or right Americans .

is owe’bama having trouble with his base and thinks this will energize it? maybe so, i don’t know…

He is not doing it for the base. He is doing this for media narrative to paint Republicans as being against civil rights of gays. Just as he framed free contraception as a women’s health issue.

on a separate note, how do illegals vote?

Dr. Demento on March 23, 2012 at 2:15 PM

come to CA, I’ll show you . It’s common knowledge and no one cares.

burrata on March 23, 2012 at 2:29 PM

jon1979 on March 23, 2012 at 2:28 PM

I’m more than happy to let Obama have political cover on this issue until he is re-elected and then come out for gay marriage guns blazing. Think of the heads exploding on the Right!

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Luckily, the courts and state-elected legislatures are deciding that the civil rights of a minority group are not to be decided on by the majority. That’s why we are getting more and more states approving gay marriage. Three just this year. Must be painful knowing you’re losing the battle, huh? Quick! Better find a new boogeyman group soon!

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Uh, nobody’s civil rights are being violated. Gay people can get married…just to someone of the opposite sex.

Bitter Clinger on March 23, 2012 at 2:31 PM

Luckily, the courts and state-elected legislatures are deciding that the civil rights of a minority group are not to be decided on by the majority. That’s why we are getting more and more states approving gay marriage. Three just this year. Must be painful knowing you’re losing the battle, huh? Quick! Better find a new boogeyman group soon!

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:29 PM

Btw, I spend a lot of time in upstate New York and folks are not happy with the 3 GOP New York Senators who flipped their votes to approve it in New York last summer.

Bitter Clinger on March 23, 2012 at 2:33 PM

libfreeordie, so separate but equal is now OK with you? Sorry for putting it so bluntly but that is the way I see it. Civil unions are much, much better than nothing, but unless it is all called marriage or the word marriage is also dropped with respect to opposite-sex unions, it is still discriminatory. (Note: This is all about civil marriage. I have no desire to say what churches can and can’t do.)

McDuck on March 23, 2012 at 2:33 PM

Gay marriage: just the thing to talk about while the country faces a stealth socialist takeover of the federal government and teeters over a fiscal precipice. Helps pass the time, I guess, while waiting for the inevitable crash.

troyriser_gopftw on March 23, 2012 at 2:34 PM

I’m more than happy to let Obama have political cover on this issue until he is re-elected and then come out for gay marriage guns blazing. Think of the heads exploding on the Right!

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:30 PM

Profile in courage

Bitter Clinger on March 23, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Uh, nobody’s civil rights are being violated. Gay people can get married…just to someone of the opposite sex.

Bitter Clinger on March 23, 2012 at 2:31 PM

That ridiculous argument has been hauled out by bigots for years. Before Virginia v. Loving, people said “Blacks have the same rights as white people! Black people can’t marry whites, and vice versa. So, uh, it’s not discrimination.”

Thanks for the laugh.

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Contraception
Abortion
War on Women
Gay marriage
….. Anyone see an election year trend going on here??

Soon to follow:

Taxes on the Rich
Racism
99% fairness
…..All the way up to November

THEY will STEAL the DIALOGUE with the help of the SCUM-So Called Unbiased Media. This is where the battle for the voters is at. Controlling the dialogue. This must be exposed along with these frauds who control OUR government. Since when does doing the peoples work involve tackling social/moral issues ? BS to all of it.

FlaMurph on March 23, 2012 at 2:35 PM

Btw, I spend a lot of time in upstate New York and folks are not happy with the 3 GOP New York Senators who flipped their votes to approve it in New York last summer.

Bitter Clinger on March 23, 2012 at 2:33 PM

The science is settled. Your little anecdotal story proves that all gays should never be allowed to marry. Thanks for the verification.

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Gays voting for a Republican is like blacks voting for David Duke Robert Byrd .

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:14 PM

burrata on March 23, 2012 at 2:23 PM

Rats! You beat me to that!

Archivarix on March 23, 2012 at 2:36 PM

I’m not a SoCon, but Obama would be incredibly stupid to pursue gay marriage. Here’s to hoping he does, you can’t even get gay marriage to pass in states like California.

Also, even traditional Democrat constituencies HATE gay marriage: African-Americans, Hispanics, blue collar Union members, etc.

Romney would win in a rout.
Please Obama, just do it.

BradTank on March 23, 2012 at 2:38 PM

San Francisco has the highest proportion of gay voters of any city in the world. In every single election since the ’70s, there has been at least one gay candidate for mayor each time. Question: How many have won?

Answer: None.

Zombie on March 23, 2012 at 2:25 PM

The jury is still out on Gavin Newsom.

NapaConservative on March 23, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Obama team gaming out open support for gay marriage among top Democrats?

He’s probably also seeking out a bunch of homosexual-marriage-supporting HotAir commenters for their thoughts.

itsnotaboutme on March 23, 2012 at 2:42 PM

inthemiddle

Where in the Constitution is marriage mentioned?

Nowhere.

What does the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution say?

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

Thus, each state has the exclusive power to define what is or is not marriage within that state.

That’s pretty much everything you need to know about the legal framework of this issue.

If a state votes to define marriage as between a man and a man, then the Federal government cannot challenge it.

On that you and I surely agree.

But if a state votes to define a marriage as between a man and a woman, then the Federal government cannot challenge that either.

But, hypocritically, you find that intolerable.

And before you start making assumptions, I myself voted against Prop. 8 (i.e. I voted in favor of gay marriage), but feel it’s more important that the rule of law and the Constitution remain intact rather than I “get my way” on some minor cultural point.

Zombie on March 23, 2012 at 2:44 PM

Might help him win the 2 NH electoral votes in Nov. Our (almost) completely red legislature caved on repealing gay marriage the other day.

crowhop on March 23, 2012 at 2:44 PM

That ridiculous argument has been hauled out by bigots for years. Before Virginia v. Loving, people said “Blacks have the same rights as white people! Black people can’t marry whites, and vice versa. So, uh, it’s not discrimination.”

Thanks for the laugh.

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:34 PM

Moron:

Blacks could not marry whites. Whites could marry whites. Therefore the laws were different based on race.

Gay men can marry women. Straight men can marry women. Gay men cannot marry men. Straight men cannot marry men. Same law applies to everyone equally.

Now being someone “in the middle” you can understand this right? I mean it’s not like your’re some rabid leftist spewing out cliche talking points that have nothing to do with gay marriage. I mean how could you be, you’re in the middle and all.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 2:45 PM

Look for more of these issues including amnesty. He will have to throw out as much as possible to have a chance of winning. The polling office will be working overtime.

aniptofar on March 23, 2012 at 2:45 PM

The science is settled. Your little anecdotal story proves that all gays should never be allowed to marry. Thanks for the verification.

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:36 PM

Yeah, I’m against gay marriage, even voted against it in Ohio about 10 years ago. Go ahead, call me a bigot if it’ll make you feel better.

Bitter Clinger on March 23, 2012 at 2:46 PM

The jury is still out on Gavin Newsom.

NapaConservative

Are you kidding? Not only has been been married a few times, but he also cheats on his wives with other women.

He may dress a bit flamboyantly, but he’s a hound-dog through and through.

Zombie on March 23, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Think of the heads exploding on the Right!

inthemiddle on March 23, 2012 at 2:30 PM

But you’re in the middle. How can you cheer one side over the other? Oh wait I get it. You’re in the middle of Stalin and Mao. Makes sense now.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Now being someone “in the middle” you can understand this right? I mean it’s not like your’re some rabid leftist spewing out cliche talking points that have nothing to do with gay marriage. I mean how could you be, you’re in the middle and all.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 2:45 PM

Me thinks “inthemiddle” is in the middle of a sex change operation.

NapaConservative on March 23, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Yeah, I’m against gay marriage, even voted against it in Ohio about 10 years ago. Go ahead, call me a bigot if it’ll make you feel better.

Bitter Clinger on March 23, 2012 at 2:46 PM

In truth, the ballot langauge in Ohio was to define marriage as “one man-one woman”. So I voted against bigomy, too.

Bitter Clinger on March 23, 2012 at 2:48 PM

Me thinks “inthemiddle” is in the middle of a sex change operation.

NapaConservative on March 23, 2012 at 2:47 PM

Good point.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 2:49 PM

Are you kidding? Not only has been been married a few times, but he also cheats on his wives with other women.

He may dress a bit flamboyantly, but he’s a hound-dog through and through.

Zombie on March 23, 2012 at 2:46 PM

Let’s just say that he hopes certain people keep their mouths shut forever.

NapaConservative on March 23, 2012 at 2:49 PM

Obama’s on a roll today. He’s telling Jews and Hispanics in Florida they’re all racists today by siding with the Race Pimp, Inc (co-CEOs Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton) on the Trayvon thing. Now he’s going to alienate the 55%-65% of people who have consistently voted against gay marriage, even in California.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 2:50 PM

Gay marriage: About 273rd on the list of what’s important right now. Or maybe I have that too high on the list.

Right Mover on March 23, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Was it more important when conservatives in 29 states pushed through constitutional amendments banning same-sex marriage?

Time Lord on March 23, 2012 at 2:55 PM

Whatever he decides, I hope this blows up in 0bama’s face.

Democrats are the most bigoted, closed minded group that there is. If he comes out in support of gay marriage, he’s lose the support of every Southern Democrat and most of his blue collar Union base.

You know, the NASCAR fans that Retard4Life always refers to.

UltimateBob on March 23, 2012 at 2:57 PM

We have gay marriage in mass.(as if you didn’t know).

although I would vote against it if we had a referendum on it, Our courts say its here to stay.

Having said that I will tell you what has happened here since it started. the answer is NOTHING.

although in theory it sounds bad, unless you have dealings with someone in that lifestyle(although I know a couple of gay and lesbian people) it means didley squat.

Occasionly you see a marriage announcement. More common are divorce proceedings because we inquiring midnds want to know.

Other than that no big deal.

gerry-mittbot-bringing understanding to the masses

gerrym51 on March 23, 2012 at 2:57 PM

Obama team gaming out open support for gay marriage among top Democrats?
posted at 1:55 pm on March 23, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

Evolution.

I know that in 2008 Obama publicly said that he was against gay marriage, but that was just his public persona necessary to win more votes in the election.

Just under the thin veneer, though, it was obvious that Obama was very pro-gay…

Obama Pride

“While we have come a long way since the Stonewall riots in 1969, we still have a lot of work to do. Too often, the issue of LGBT rights is exploited by those seeking to divide us. But at its core, this issue is about who we are as Americans. It’s about whether this nation is going to live up to its founding promise of equality by treating all its citizens with dignity and respect.”

— Senator Barack Obama

Obama Pride is a national network made up of LGBT Obama supporters across the country who are dedicated to making sure Barack Obama is our next President. As November draws nearer, we continue to build this network of supporters in all 50 states and we need your help. Every LGBT vote counts this election season and because of that, we have a lot of work to do! After all, you can cast – or find – the deciding vote this November.

There are many ways in which you, your friends and all LGBT Americans can get involved in the Obama Pride Movement. We need leaders like you to become part of the network of supporters who are finding, registering, and turning out voters for Barack this November.

ITguy on March 23, 2012 at 3:02 PM

If Obama comes out in favor of Gay Marriage, that would be the most audacious plan in the last 500 1000 years!

Haiku Guy on March 23, 2012 at 3:05 PM

Now he’s going to alienate the 55%-65% of people who have consistently voted against gay marriage, even in California.

angryed on March 23, 2012 at 2:50 PM

A few years ago. It’s a sinking ship. Conservative Democrats are bailing hardcore on opposing same-sex marriage and a majority of the public approves. The MN and NC amendments referendums are in serious jeopardy, and it looks as if voters in ME, WA and MD will be approving same-sex marriage at the polls this November.

I think Obama’s positioning is focused on two things. One, there will less youth enthusiasm this year and so Obama will be more dependent upon older voters, who tend to not support same-sex marriage. Two, blacks are largely skeptical of same-sex marriage and Obama’s endorsement will cause a stir in the black community.

ZachV on March 23, 2012 at 3:06 PM

here’s the translation…barry’s money isn’t coming in as fast as he’d like (he like’s LOTS of MONEY)….so gays are a large bunch of wealthy people (relatively)…so the GUT in barry is will he gain more $$$ that lose marginal votes


Those advisers are convinced that Obama will make this call based on his gut, and ultimately without regard to the fine-grained political analysis of the situation, the source says.

my gut is that it is a tough call. on the $$$ call it is a simple YES…but on the voting thing…maybe slight NEG esp. among blacks.

So it is gay $$$$$$$$ vs. black votes…my answer is..yeah, he’ll go for it…a New America…Liberation of the oppressed peoples…SHOW ME THE MONEY

r keller on March 23, 2012 at 3:06 PM

I know that in 2008 Obama publicly said that he was against gay marriage, but that was just his public persona necessary to win more votes in the election.

Just under the thin veneer, though, it was obvious that Obama was very pro-gay…

ITguy on March 23, 2012 at 3:02 PM

He’s just trying to have it both ways, as usual.

UltimateBob on March 23, 2012 at 3:07 PM

I guess the big campaign issue is now gay marriage. So if, say, President Obama starts floating ideas about ‘immigration reform’ out of the blue in order to draw attention away from his miserable performance record, impending economic collapse, unnecessarily high energy prices, and the shambles of our foreign policy, does that mean our focus must then be placed on immigration?

Do you people salivate at the sound of a bell, too? The gay marriage issue doesn’t matter right now. We can work it out later. This whole gay marriage discussion is moot if President Obama wins reelection. He throws out a piece of red meat and you’re all over it. It’s a diversion, a distraction, a B-movie ‘Hey, look over there!’ trick, and you’re falling for it.

Eyes on the prize, please.

troyriser_gopftw on March 23, 2012 at 3:12 PM

I said last week, when Barry came out against the NC law, that they were going to make this campaign about “the new civil rights”.

That EU ruling on Civil Unions was the excuse they were waiting for.

This is why thy truly wanted Santo.

Anything But Barry

budfox on March 23, 2012 at 3:13 PM

How in the Hades can you be 50 years old and your stance on the issue of gay marriage is evolving? Really, a core value for most, regardless of your position—evolving? Presidente Windsock!

hillsoftx on March 23, 2012 at 3:19 PM

Breaking it to Moochelle will be the tough part but if he’s going to the dark side 5 yrs. from now, he might as well do it now.

rik on March 23, 2012 at 3:23 PM

A few years ago. It’s a sinking ship. Conservative Democrats are bailing hardcore on opposing same-sex marriage and a majority of the public approves. The MN and NC amendments referendums are in serious jeopardy, and it looks as if voters in ME, WA and MD will be approving same-sex marriage at the polls this November.

ZachV on March 23, 2012 at 3:06 PM

Wishcasting from a single-issue voter who is OK with the government enslaving him as long as he can have a gay-sex marriage certificate.

What we need to remember is that Obama is surrounded by fanatics and zealots like ZachV and Sandra Fluke, who will do anything and rationalize anything as long as they get their handouts.

What society is realizing is that ZachV and Sandra Fluke both want society to pay their bills for their engagement in nonproductive activities and to punish churches.

northdallasthirty on March 23, 2012 at 3:30 PM

This and pot legalization. Republicans should have been in front of these issues. But, as usual, stupidity rules the day in this party.

lorien1973 on March 23, 2012 at 2:04 PM

Isn’t there something to be said for Representatives to represent the public’s values on morals issues rather than try to tell the public what their values should be? In a representative democracy, as the public’s positions naturally change, public policy will follow naturally. When the process is short circuited by court rulings like Roe V Wade that get so far beyond where the public stands you get backlash, confrontation etc.

One of the complaints the GOP faithful make against progressives is that they have an agenda and everything must bow to that agenda. That was not the ideal our founders had of a representative government that reflects the public’s views rather than a government that reflects the governing class’s views. The progressives keep pushing for Court-mandated change because the public is not yet in a consensus to go the progressive direction.

KW64 on March 23, 2012 at 3:31 PM

Breaking it to Moochelle will be the tough part but if he’s going to the dark side 5 yrs. from now, he might as well do it now.

rik on March 23, 2012 at 3:23 PM

My guess is that she knows.
That is why she needs so many lavish vacations, expensive frequent parties, high end outfits and shoes and hand-bags and stuff….she is cashing in on her ” sacrifices”

burrata on March 23, 2012 at 3:33 PM

libfreeordie on March 23, 2012 at 2:23 PM

I am not convinced that its about having the same legal rights. Let’s look at federal taxes for instance.

For 2 gay’s living together, if each makes a little less than $200 k they will both file as single, not married. They both will pay at the next to the highest tax bracket. Now, a married couple with one making a little less than $200K and the other a tad of $50K will end up being taxed at the highest rate all else being equal. How about access to your loved one in a hospital. Since HIPPA you darn well better have Health care power of attorney’s or you won’t get information and be allowed in the decision making loop even for a spouse. Gay’s can execute the same and take care of that problem. I will agree that in the case of inheritance some changes should be made as I can pass on property with less issues than a Gay couple. Drop the inheritance tax and that would solve itself.

chemman on March 23, 2012 at 3:33 PM

Can’t'cha just hear the rattling of the etch-a-sketch in his brain ??
If it = a chance to demonize the Right, I’ll wager he’ll go for it.
I stand with the 10th Amendment thang.
Wonder if he’s read that ???
Or perhaps his oath is something else subject to his gut ???

pambi on March 23, 2012 at 3:35 PM

It’s an attempt at reframing the election campaign. President Obama wants to throw out a red-button social issue in order to steer the national conversation away from foreign policy and the state of the economy.

It’s actually a very good tactical move since social conservatives on the right would jump all over it. The MSM would also be happy to oblige since it would give them an excuse to shove more substantive (and damaging to Obama) issues aside while they furnish wall-to-wall coverage of comparatively inconsequential gay rights memes.

troyriser_gopftw on March 23, 2012 at 2:18 PM

I agree to an extent. But Obama really has money problems. IMO this is more about fundraising from rich liberals than issue raising.

It’s also true that Obama and team desperately want the election to be about something other than the economy. However, Obama is going to inadvertently motivate social conservatives who may be inclined to stay home in lieu of voting for Romney in the general election. Moreover, blacks and Hispanics have shown they are not motivated by this issue and are more inclined to vote against it. (See Cali prop 8)

FreeManOtis on March 23, 2012 at 3:36 PM

I’ll bet he wishes he had never started lying about this to begin with.

Pretty sure he did it on advice from an advisor in order to lock down the Hispanic and black church-goer Democrat vote in the primary. Now it’s tough for him to flip back after pandering to the traditional marriage portion of his own party.

Living a life of lies is very tiring.

forest on March 23, 2012 at 3:37 PM

I think same sex marriage is ridiculous as a cause, it should be same-sex civil unions that have the same legal rights as the state protected relationship some call “marriage.” Not everyone wants to call their relationship a marriage, but they still want the benefits from the state. So yeah whatever I guess. Obama should push for federal same-sex civil union law, everyone wins.

libfreeordie on March 23, 2012 at 2:23 PM

I’m with you on this.

If Barry takes this stance, it helps his centrist creds. If he goes full-tilt marriage, then we know he has polling telling him to gin the base.

budfox on March 23, 2012 at 3:38 PM

Comment pages: 1 2