Obama’s announcement: why now?
May 9th, 2012
07:15 PM ET

Obama’s announcement: why now?

,

(CNN) – Was the president planning on publicly expressing support for same-sex marriage before the election? It depends who you ask.

One senior administration official tells CNN President Obama’s advisors were deeply divided over whether it was prudent to make a public statement on the matter before voters weigh in next November.

That administration official added the president’s advisors did not feel he needed to make public remarks on the issue until Vice President Joe Biden expressed support of same-sex marriage over the weekend, touching off a renewed focus on the president’s continued hedging on the matter. Before today, the president has long maintained he believes in equal rights for same-sex couples but was continuing to ‘evolve’ on whether full marriage rights should be extended to them.

But other senior administration officials contend the president came to support same-sex marriage a few months ago and was planning to speak out in support of it before the Democratic National Convention in late summer and it was just a matter of when the right time would be. These officials say Biden’s comments simply expedited that timeline.

A top Democratic source told CNN one factor that tipped the decision in favor of speaking out: there was going to be a fight over whether same-sex marriage should be adopted among the party’s planks at the convention and Biden’s remarks added early fuel to the fire.

Senior administration officials also tell CNN same-sex marriage will by no means be a cornerstone of his campaign in part because he is not pushing any legislation. In his comments with ABC Wednesday, the president said that he continues to believe the issue of same-sex marriage should be dealt with at the state level. He emphasized that he was sharing his personal views.

A senior administration official tells CNN First Lady Michelle Obama was deeply influential in this decision. The official said the president discussed his decision with Mrs. Obama who shared the view he should speak out in support of same sex marriage.

After the interview the White House Director of the Office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships sent faith leaders an email emphasizing that the President said that he still considers the question of legalizing marriage a local issue. The email quotes the President telling ABC News: “I want to emphasize that I’ve got a lot of friends on the other side of this issue and I’m sure they’ll be calling me up. And I respect them and I understand their perspective in part because their impulse is the right one, which is they want to preserve and strengthen families.”

As for the politics of today’s announcement, senior administration officials say they haven’t entirely thought through the implications of how this may affect the election. Though they assume a healthy majority of voters likely already believed the president privately supported gay marriage as it’s a position that is tied to the Democratic Party as a whole.

Moreover, these administration officials made clear if presumptive presidential rival Mitt Romney attempts to make an issue of this, the Obama campaign is ready to point to the issue as one more example of what they consider to be the former Massachusetts governor’s extreme views. Romney said earlier Tuesday he continues to oppose same-sex marriage and civil unions. He’s also backed a Constitutional Amendment to define marriage as between a man and a woman, a proposal that has ginned up support with social conservatives in previous elections.


soundoff (114 Responses)
  1. Glory

    So, the spin takes on a new spin. I'm spinned out.

    May 9, 2012 at 7:19 pm |
    • Howard

      Thanks to traitors, like Clooney, Obama, the biased main stream media ... and, the Sodom and Gomorrah Hollywood crowd, America is falling to a new low, under the rule of immoral deviates, perverts, occupiers, terrorists, and communists. Sinners are worshipping a new Golden Calf ... his name is Barack Obama.

      May 10, 2012 at 3:24 pm |
  2. B Ammon

    Biden stuck his foot in Obamas mouth this time???

    May 9, 2012 at 7:57 pm |
    • Howard

      Obama should have stated his position of same sex marriage in 2007 ... instead of deceiving the American people.

      May 9, 2012 at 9:41 pm |
    • DEcember 2012

      IT'S THE RIGHT THING TO DO. ASK DICK CHENEY.

      May 10, 2012 at 12:08 am |
      • Pete

        @December,if ya remember,he only started respecting gays when his daughter Liz came out of the closet while in office,wasn't it.So he's not any better than these bible totin hypocrites we call republicans ,who are now railing against Pres.Obama on something he said he's always thought about,he never condemned it,never did.So now the balls in Romneys court,let the Mormon hypocrite worm his way out of this one,its gonna be fun watching,real fun!!LMAO!!!

        May 10, 2012 at 11:06 am |
      • John

        Pete Obama was for it, then against it, then was for "gay unions" now he is for it again. Do you consider him a hypocrite? I didn't think so. It shows your true colors... How can you trust anyone who goes full circle on issues? And you crazy libs are trying to bash Romney for flip flopping? And you are trying to call others hypocrites? You libs are classic, and not in a good way...

        May 10, 2012 at 1:19 pm |
      • Howard

        OBAMA IS USING THE POWER OF THE STATE, TO FORCE HIS RADICAL VIEW OF AMERICA ON ALL OF US. IF ... GOD FORBID ... HE BUYS A SECOND TERM ... AMERICA IS DOOMED.

        May 10, 2012 at 2:15 pm |
      • DEcember 2012

        IF CHENEY IS ON THE RECORD FOR BEING PRO-GAY MARRIAGE THEN THERE IS NOTHING MORE TO IT. OBAMA IS ALSO ON THE RECORD, JUST LIKE ROMNEY WAS ON THE RECORD FOR BEING PRO-GAY WHEN HE WAS RUNNING AGAINST KENNEDY.

        May 10, 2012 at 5:54 pm |
      • Pete

        @john,Pres.Obama says with people who are gay around him in office and beyond he said publicly that he's evolving,which is saying he is more for the idea.I can't say that's flip flopping,he's never said publicly as I can remember,having gay friends I would certainly have heard it because they all voted for him.Romney,now on the other hand considered that a major sin,he's said he's against it publicly and just on tv he was reminded how he cut the hair off of a boy while in school,they said he knew he was gay,that was MSNBC ,just on tonight,but that was school and how'd you remember that!!But that is what the Mormons believe that gays are a disease of sorts in defience of Gods teachings.I'm not a Mormon,but did some reading on them , just recently curious about Romney and his believes they only believe in God,Jesus is a diciple,not the son of God and other irregularities that are different from the NEW KING JAMES VERSION, I have at home.So let's see how it goes for the incumbent because from now till November,people will forget,unless they're gay...

        May 10, 2012 at 7:09 pm |
  3. 23 from Texas

    First Biden says that Obama has a big stick... then he comes out and says that he believes in gay relationships. Then pressure is put on Obama and he says he agrees with Biden. This all lines up to look a little bit gross. I am used to democratic affairs in the white house, but this one takes the cake.

    May 9, 2012 at 8:13 pm |
  4. Craig

    President Obama has a lot of guts!!! He's displayed this on more than one occasion as president. There's a lot at stake, such as his job and now, to come out in favor of same sex marriage six months before the election shows that the man is honest and doesn't care what others think when he's doing what's morally right. Poor Romney couldn't even support his staffer who resigned why?... because he's spineless.

    \

    May 9, 2012 at 8:29 pm |
  5. Tubby the Tuba Texas

    Took a lot of courage to make the call at this point in the election. However, you should not back away from what is right, may not be popular...but that is called leadership. A lot of this comes from religious beliefs, which the constitution gives us religious freedom....apparently the North Carolina people don't approve of the US constitution. What right do we as a people to deny another their freedom to do what makes them happy...which is also supported by the US constitution.

    May 9, 2012 at 8:42 pm |
  6. Liz the First

    It's always the right time to do the right thing! this is going to restore a lot of folks' faith in Obama that he is for fairness and equality for all Americans, a claim no rethug can make. I know it had to be a hard decision for him but it's definitely time and i applaud him. all those 'Christians' who are so filled with 'love'(what everyone else calls hate) for gays they think it's ok to deny them basic human rights need to ask themselves what Jesus would do. when did HE ever condemn anyone for being gay? whose rights would HE take away?

    May 9, 2012 at 9:30 pm |
    • Lizzie

      No it was not a hard decision, he needs the gay vote in November and this way he hopes that he will get it. It's nice to see that you still use namecalling and hate for those who do not agree with you.

      May 9, 2012 at 10:39 pm |
      • This guy

        There is no name calling. I am a christian, but I clearly feel that discriminating against a specific group of people is bigotry. The bible speaks about bigotry A LOT! Soo to hate someone or to tell them they are beneath you and don't deserve the same rights as you is a BIGOTED action. It is very hard as a politician to be honest and say things like gay people should be treated as equals, because any independents that aren't comfortable with gay people, or gay marriage might decide to vote for the other guy. Furthermore, Obama has already signed legislation and sent out executive orders to help the LGBT community, so those votes were already secure. It's just nice to see the president isn't a bigot.

        May 9, 2012 at 11:17 pm |
    • Alex

      He didn't deny anyone, but told them they were forgiven and to sin no more.

      May 10, 2012 at 8:14 am |
      • Sweetie

        Oops. Looks like we're in a threadjack. Can soobemdy bring us back to the original question why Obama apparently does so well among Mormons (at least those represented on the bloggernacle)?The dean of my college and my children all support Obama. That's quite a spectrum. From the very educated to the young and merely enthusiastic. And it's representative of the rest of the U.S. Something very important is happening, and with Romney out of the picture, it's happening in Mormondom just as it's happening elsewhere. I think Danithew's original observations are quite interesting.

        July 31, 2012 at 6:55 am |
      • Jenny

        Laurence,Thank you for the response. First of all I would like to aserdds Erik's comment, after which I will proceed to an intelligent discussion on the topic. Erik, you completely contradict yourself and prove to be a huge hypocrite. My response to Laurence was partially to this particular post but mainly to the theme of his on-going criticism of President Obama. So yes I am presenting an argument against his general point of view on this issue however I never attacked him personally. You on the other hand didn't aserdds any part of my response rather you just attacked me personally. I am however very impressed with your profile picture, copying and pasting a philosophers picture next to your name gives you more credibility than I could ever hope for (see what I did there, I attacked the man instead of his argument or in this case, lack thereof).Apologies for the distraction Laurence, in essence though, I've just been a bit off put by your posts for the past year. I know you like to avoid politics but you've opened yourself up to criticism with you're constant critiques of President Obama. I've known you and read you're writing for five years now and I cannot remember you ever criticizing President Bush. An unbiased observer can rationally assume from you're numerous posts during the past year that have scrutinized President Obama's moral integrity to the finest details, that you hold the President's behavior and actions as it relates to his morality to be quite important. Following this line of reasoning, one would assume you would have at the very least analyzed or presented some insight on President Bush's moral character in a similar manner. As a former student and consistent reader of this blog, I can safely say that you rarely if ever even touched on the subject of a man whose life and presidency was defined by moral ambiguity (this is pretty safe to say whether you supported him or not). Where was your outrage when a form of pseudo-McCarthyism existed under President Bush that resulted in the questioning of any American’s patriotism for disagreeing with the administrations policies? (Iraq, Patriot Act, Wire Tapping, Torture). Furthermore, you defended Sarah Palin twice in recent months and she is the epitome of the very ignorance and know-thing culture that you so often (accurately) deride in this country. Bringing this all back to your original thesis in the post, maybe I just haven't encountered the same people as you but I've not once heard a white person be accused of being a racist for not supporting Obama. Let’s assume for the sake of argument that this sentiment does exist in this country and people are viewed as racist if they don’t support Obama and his policies. What do you honestly expect Obama to do about this? The fact is that the palin supporting/gun totting/ubber-patriotic crowd in this country likely doesn’t support Obama simply because he’s black. This isn’t to say that all American’s who don’t support Obama are racist, it’s just acknowledging the frankly obvious reality of the situation. I don’t view you as being racist in the least bit and I apologize if it came off that way in my last post. I just don’t think you’re being even-handed or even rationale with your on-going criticisms of Obama. This criticism appears to be rooted in your opposition of his political policies but that shouldn’t turn into criticism of his moral character, which it clearly has. I look forward to hearing your response.Respectfully,Mr. Klein

        August 2, 2012 at 12:10 am |
    • Steveo

      Sorry Liz the First but you are incorrect. But, coming from a Christian perspective (remember The President calls himself a Christian too) The Bible (the Word of God) is the guideline and not the evolution of society. Yes, I know everyone does not believe but since when does human belief or disbelief change who God is or changes His word?

      Isaiah 5:20
      King James Version (KJV)

      20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

      This word is as true today as it was when it was first uttered!

      If you are Christian, you should know this! That is not hate ! You asked a question, "When did Jesus condemn homosexuality? First. the condemnation is found in the Old Testament book of Leviticus. When did Jesus ever oppose God's word?

      Secondly, it is also condemned in Romans chapter 1 starting at verse 26 (but read the entire chapter for the proper context). Romans was wriiten to the Gentile Church by Paul, the same Paul who was called to preach by Jesus Himself! Once again, Jesus DOES NOT oppose God's Word! As a Christian, you should know this!

      Based upon his own statement, the president has placed himself in opposition to God's word! That is not hate! It is standing for God's Word, which the world hates! As the world hated and hates Jesus, those who stand for Him will be hated as well! That is where the hate comes in!

      I will probably be accused of "forcing my religion down somebody's throat". I am forcing nothing to no one, just simply stating what the Bible says. Folk have every "right" to disagree or ignore it. They also have the "right" to the consequences!

      May 10, 2012 at 9:41 am |
    • Steveo

      Sorry Liz the First but you are incorrect. But, coming from a Christian perspective (remember The President calls himself a Christian too) The Bible (the Word of God) is the guideline and not the evolution of society. Yes, I know everyone does not believe but since when does human belief or disbelief change who God is or changes His word?

      Isaiah 5:20
      King James Version (KJV)

      20 Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!

      This word is as true today as it was when it was first uttered!

      If you are Christian, you should know this! That is not hate ! You asked a question, "When did Jesus condemn ho-mo-se-xuality? First. the condemnation is found in the Old Testament book of Leviticus. When did Jesus ever oppose God's word?

      Secondly, it is also condemned in Romans chapter 1 starting at verse 26 (but read the entire chapter for the proper context). Romans was wriiten to the Gentile Church by Paul, the same Paul who was called to preach by Jesus Himself! Once again, Jesus DOES NOT oppose God's Word! As a Christian, you should know this!

      Based upon his own statement, the president has placed himself in opposition to God's word! That is not hate! It is standing for God's Word, which the world hates! As the world hated and hates Jesus, those who stand for Him will be hated as well! That is where the hate comes in!

      I will probably be accused of "forcing my religion down somebody's throat". I am forcing nothing to no one, just simply stating what the Bible says. Folk have every "right" to disagree or ignore it. They also have the "right" to the consequences!

      May 10, 2012 at 9:45 am |
      • Chhobo

        You see Steveo, when people like you cherry pick at the bible while calling it the divine word, it just bothers me. You say that being gay is a sin because the bible says so..ok it does. My question is this,do you offer burnt animal sacrifices to god? Leviticus 23:18 "ye shall offer with the bread seven lambs without blemish of the first year, and one young bullock, and two rams, they shall be for a burnt offering unto the lord,with their meat offering, and their drink offerings, even an offfering made by fire, of sweet savour unto the lord" or wear clothes made out of different materials? you cant do that according to the bible..there is tons of other outdated nonsense in the Bible that modern christians choose to ignore while still holding the book and saying its Gods Word....So why do you get to choose what the truth is or not? Basically until a christian follows the bible word for word..( it would be really funny ) and not cherry pick what is true or not, just stop talking.

        May 10, 2012 at 10:28 am |
      • Steveo

        @Chhobo,

        Ahh, the atheistic Old Testament argument! I'm loving it (sorry McDonald's).

        1. Jesus Fulfilled ALL of the Old Testament requirements. He was the perfect lamb of God that was offered as a sacrfice (ONE TIME). What that means is the Old Testament sacrfices TEMPORARILY sufficed becuase it had to be done over and over again. The death of Jesus pleased God PERMANENTLY! No other sacifrice is required!

        2. You don't know the difference bewteen the Old Testament (given to the ancient Hebrews and not the gentile nations and the New Testament (Jesus said take it to the world). That is why folk liek you never present a New Testament argument. You are concerned rather about the prohibition concerning eating shellfish, the wearing of mixed garment, unclean animals, the sacrifice of animals, the 7 day banishment of menstrating women, the stoning of unruly children. Your forget 2 critical points

        a. They were all giving to the Hebrews
        b. The Old was replaced by the New by the blood of Christ!

        Typical "cherry pick" argument by someone who doesn't know the Bible!

        If you read any of Paul's writings you will see he chastised the the church for re embracing the law (the Old) and turning away from grace (the New). Lastly, the christian church was not established until the NEW TESTAMENT, Christainity did not exist under the OLD TESTAMENT

        BTW . I teach adult bible classes and in order to prepare, I have to study the Bible!

        May 10, 2012 at 2:07 pm |
      • jean2009

        The Bible also says the earth is flat and square with four corners, and cannot be shaken. Do you believe that too?
        Psalm 104:5 "Thou didst fix the earth on its foundation so that it can never be shaken."
        Revelations 7:1 "After this I saw four angels standing at the four corners of the earth. They were holding back the four winds of the earth to keep them from blowing on the land, the sea, or any tree."
        Please explain that to the people of Haiti, Japan, and the dinosaurs.

        May 10, 2012 at 7:49 pm |
      • Steveo

        Jean2009,

        1. The Bible was not written in english byt Hebrew (OT) , Greek and Aramaic (NT)
        2. 4 Corners repesents the North, Southm, East and West!
        3. The verse you provided from the OT is NOT referring to earthquakes. Earthquake are specifically mentioned elsewhere. Think about this Jean, we are on a planet in space. Yet this planet is STILL in it's orbit. While I attribute it to God, you attribute it to accident or chance!
        4. YES I do believe it!

        May 11, 2012 at 3:49 pm |
      • jean2009

        Steveo Chance probably not... I'm sure it can be explained by the physics of the Big Bang..

        May 11, 2012 at 9:44 pm |
      • Steveo

        jean2009
        Steveo Chance probably not... I'm sure it can be explained by the physics of the Big Bang..
        ------------------
        I'll not argue the big bang theory. The Bible states God created the sun. What is the sun but a large ball of explosive gas and heat! It is not outside the realm of possibility that ALL of nature went BOOM in response to God's commands during the creation process. To argue one way or the other is a glorious waste of time.

        All the Bible tells us is God created by speaking. The Bible never told us how nature reacted! All we know is God's commands were obeyed! How those commands were obeyed is a mystery! That is why I think the big bang is a possibly! All I know is it is a waste of time to argue it! Cannot prove it one way of the other. So big bang or not, God did exactly what He said!

        May 12, 2012 at 2:52 pm |
      • Kitty

        MAC,#158,If it wasne2€™t why does it hurt your feelings so much that Obama is named as the e2€œmost libaerl senator in 2007?e2€9d If you didne2€™t consider libaerlism a negative, why arene2€™t you the one trotting out proof of Obamae2€™s leftist credentials?I really don't care if he really is the most libaerl senator in the Senate. That's not the point. The point is that he ISN'T the most libaerl in the Senate. That would probably be Russ Feingold. The point is that you guys are attempting to smear Obama with a label that you guys have owned. You throw this label around to anyone who is a threat to you. And I'm merely pointing out how silly it is to do so.

        July 31, 2012 at 2:21 am |
      • Mareil

        Susan Rice is a complete HACK, and a mid-level carry-over/nobody from the Clinton Administration. Like most of the young Turks on Team Obama, she has abuetsloly no idea what she's talking about. You need look no further than the Obama spokesman who fingered a McCain advisor as a former lobbyist for the Georgia government, who used that as an excuse to accuse McCain of being "ensconsed in a culture of lobbyists." Bet it took him ALL DAY to think that one up.

        August 1, 2012 at 10:57 pm |
    • Martin

      For some who are tapping their pets ass and having sexual escapades with mummy. This is good news, the moral bar has been lowered ,after all how does the presidents explain to his kids that we will be discriminated against when we genuinely love these animals and our mothers .

      May 10, 2012 at 11:19 am |
      • jean2009

        Marriage licenses generally are issued for two adults who are legally of age; and in most cases the closest blood ties acceptable is to a second cousin. Therefore that shoots your strange perversions out of the water.

        May 10, 2012 at 8:03 pm |
      • DEcember 2012

        IT IS HILARIOUS THAT YOU WOULD BRING UP BESTIALITY WHEN BACK IN THE GOOD OLD DAYS, INTERRACIAL RELATIONSHIPS WERE CONSIDERED JUST THAT.

        May 11, 2012 at 10:01 am |
  7. Ann

    why now? because Dems and President Obama want to change the subject.. the attention to abortions and contraception has gone after the GOP primaries, and people started again to talk about economy. Axelrod thought it was time for a diversion. Here it is. Now!

    May 9, 2012 at 9:34 pm |
  8. Howard

    THE OBAMA STOOGES KEEP TELLING US HOW 'COOL' OBAMA IS ... WHILE HE CONTINUES TO LIE TO US, STEAL FROM US, AND PLUNGE US DEEPER AND DEEPER INTO DEBT !!!

    May 9, 2012 at 9:39 pm |
    • Craig

      What has he stolen from you? And, by the way, we are getting out of debt, slowly but surely.

      May 9, 2012 at 9:44 pm |
      • Dean

        Your opinion is so cute. But actually, the U.S. goes more into debt each day. What Obama has 'stolen' from future generations remains to be seen.

        May 10, 2012 at 2:46 pm |
    • Pete

      @Howard,get a life man!Where the Hell were you when Bush,Cheneys and company drove us into the abyss,8 lousy years wasn't it!!.Give me a break,you hypocrites constantly throw unfactual statements with nothing concrete to back it up.One of you ignorent Romney sheep made statements of Pres.Obama and how he's in trouble politically because he doesn't support gay rights,civil unions and so on and I said give him time ,he never said publicly he was against it either,and you hypocrites know it.Now that he's approves it publicly,you hypocrites are ranting about this too,doing a complete about face on the same issue.Romneys followers are dropping like flies and you nitwits know it because some of the same issues,but republicans as you are ,you're just too stubborn and ignorent to accept it.But ya know what,if I were born with that political stigma given to me,ya know being republican,I'd be more intelligent and politically correct in my future statements.Being republicans must be an extremely heavy cross to bare,not being accepted as intelligent and all,just sayin!!!LMAO!!!

      May 10, 2012 at 10:04 am |
      • John

        Pete, you keep throwing out that old line "where were you bla, bla, bla. Many of us spoke out against Bush when he was into his second term. BTW, he is now history. It doesn't matter if anyone spoke out or not – it is 3.5 years later and this country is hurting becaus eof the current administration. This issue is a prime example. As the saying goes, it is about the economy stupid.

        May 10, 2012 at 10:53 am |
      • Pete

        @ JOHN,you're probibly guilty of voting not once but twice for that moron,didn't ya!!You bring up subjects,go after people on them and when corned say just like this,its the economy or something else to devert from the original debate,the same debates you and Howard always run a ground on.It must be hard being republicans,always on the low pole of the political spectum,a heavy cross to bare,isn't it!!!And I also explained once before how a Democrate,Roosevelt with help,took 12 years to fix up the mess your republican Hoover put us into ,remember The GREAT DEPRESSION,just another in a great list of political blunders that your presidents put us into,only to be bailed out by intelligent patriotic Democrates putting people before profits....

        May 10, 2012 at 11:20 am |
      • John

        Pete, I usually do not call people names, but you are a complete idiot. First of all, I did not vote for Bush – not even once. So once again you are wrong. This issue was calculated by the WH for idiots like you to DEFLECT FROM THE ECONOMY and to deflect what a bad job this administration is doing. In your case it seemed it worked.

        May 10, 2012 at 11:35 am |
      • Pete

        @john,I know about the economic crisis we are having,do you think that capitalist Romney is going to put policies in place to help you.What crap have you been smoking buddy? Must be good if you're sidin with these republican morons,it takes time ,won't be done over night especiallly with the party of NO against him.And please,if I'm throwing out that line like ya say its because ya can't take facts or the truth and I have to beat it in your head for you....

        May 10, 2012 at 1:36 pm |
      • John

        I know the current administration is hurting us. Romney can either be a Reagan or maybe Bush Sr. but not Bush Jr – so yes, I think he has the economic skills to turn this economy and this country around.
        But, it will take a few years to clean up the mess that is being left, you know, maybe 3.5 years or more.... I am sure you will think it is reasonable for a sitting president to take 3 or 4 years to get their feet wet – right?

        May 10, 2012 at 1:59 pm |
      • John

        One more thing. It doesn't matter why Obama can't get it done. Every other post you put up you throw out another excuse what the job can't be done. Well, I agree, the job can't be done by this president. The reason really does not matter.

        May 10, 2012 at 2:01 pm |
      • jean2009

        @John I didn't hear you speaking out against Bush...not once.

        May 10, 2012 at 8:06 pm |
    • jean2009

      When Presidents take office on January 20th they are running under the previous president's budget through September 30th...their new budget starts on October 1.
      "When Bush 1 took responsibility for the budget on Oct 1, 1989, our nat debt was $2.9 trillion.
      When Clinton took responsibility for the budget on Oct 1, 1993, our nat debt was $4.4 trillion.
      When Bush took responsibility for the budget on Oct 1, 2001, our national debt was $5.8 trillion.
      When Obama took responsibility for the budget on Oct 1, 2009, our nat debt was $11.9 trillion.

      Our National Debt is now $14.65 trillion.

      The Nat Debt went up $1.5 trillion under Bush 1.
      The Nat Debt went up $1.4 trillion under Clinton.
      The Nat Debt went up $6.1 trillion under Bush 2.
      And the Nat Debt has gone up $2.75 trillion under Obama."

      Look up the national debt by Presidential term er Capita and GDP...also check the interest on the total debt and realize how much of the interest is on the previous balance.

      May 10, 2012 at 8:39 pm |
      • Steveo

        The Nat Debt went up $6.1 trillion under Bush 2.
        And the Nat Debt has gone up $2.75 trillion under Obama."
        --------
        is this a 8 year verses 3.5 year comparison?

        May 10, 2012 at 8:55 pm |
      • DEcember 2012

        WHAT ARE YOU TRYING TO SAY STEVEO? BUSH WAS INCOMPETENT DURING ALL HIS 8 YEARS OF OFFICE? HAHAHAHAA!!

        May 11, 2012 at 9:51 am |
      • Steveo

        December,

        Since you appear to have great diffficulty understanding me, I will type this as slowly as possible:

        IF Jean is comparing 8 years of Bush decificts to 3.5 years of Obama decifits, the comparion is false. How's that? I'm thinking that was easy to understand!

        May 11, 2012 at 10:38 am |
      • Steveo

        December 2012

        ***DEFICITS! Now I am typing slowly AND yelling!

        May 11, 2012 at 10:41 am |
      • jean2009

        Steveio The proof is in the interest we owe for Bush's unfunded debts....He got his greedy hands on the national credit card and charged 2 unfunded wars on all our social security and government workers retirement plans.

        May 11, 2012 at 9:50 pm |
      • Steveo

        Sorry jean2009, You did not answer the question! Are you comparing 8 years of Bush to 3.5 years of Obama. If you are, your comparison is faulty! IF your were close to fair you would compare the first 3.5 years of Bush to the first 3.5 years of Obama.

        May 12, 2012 at 2:30 pm |
  9. Steven Colo

    Everything I've read indicates that Obama will not gain or lose votes by his statement. It's simply what he believes.

    May 9, 2012 at 11:28 pm |
  10. DEcember 2012

    OBAMA IS DOING WHAT SO-CALLED CONSERVATIVES SHOULD BE DOING. KEEPING POLITICS AND GOVT OUT OF THE BEDROOM. WHAT'S NEXT? BANNING HOWARD AND JERRY'S LOVE AFFAIR? HAHAHAHAHAA!!!

    May 9, 2012 at 11:30 pm |
    • Pete

      @December 2012,I'd back ya up on that,but ya know how much they are alike, and they do make a cute couple and all..LMAO!!!But please,if you adopt kids, don't put them thru hell raising them republican,its not fair!!!

      May 10, 2012 at 10:11 am |
      • John

        You people aren't very smart apparently. What do you think this stance of "letting the states create their own laws" will happen when the abortion nuts realize the door was just opened real wide for them...

        May 10, 2012 at 10:55 am |
      • jean2009

        @John Have you forgotten that state's rights are usually challenged, in federal courts, when they are not consistent with other states?
        http://www.salon.com/2011/08/07/kilgore_states_rights/

        May 12, 2012 at 9:46 am |
  11. Ron

    Well, Obama's "personal opinion" is helpful. Buy why does he support states in discrimination? His parent's marriage would have been illegal in many states. The Supreme Court finally ruled that states cannot discriminate in regard to marriage. And the decision did not name race. If civil unions gave the same legal rights as marriage does we could just leave "marriage" to the churches. But regrettably civil unions do not bestow the same rights.

    May 9, 2012 at 11:49 pm |
    • DEcember 2012

      ????

      May 10, 2012 at 12:03 am |
    • Steveo

      You realize that "Loving v. Virginia" overturned state bans on interracial marriage which btw consisted of a man and a woman, right? So your statement about the marriage of the president's parents has been wrong since that Supreme Court decision (June of 1967)

      May 10, 2012 at 11:22 am |
      • DEcember 2012

        MAN AND WOMAN? SO WHAT WAS IT BEFORE INTERRACIAL MARRIAGES WERE MADE LEGAL? SOME OF THE RESPONSES WILL PROBABLY SICKEN YOU BUT I WILL STICK WITH UNEQUAL.

        WHEN WILL RELIGIOUS BLACK PEOPLE SEE THE HYPOCRISY IN THEIR POSITION AGAINST GAY MARRIAGE? DO WE NEED TO GO BACK TO THE GOOD OLD DAYS OF "TRADITION" WHEN BLACK PEOPLE WERE REGARDED AS BEASTS? WAKE UP.

        May 10, 2012 at 7:26 pm |
      • Steveo

        DEcember 2012,

        Are you a Christian? You want to know something? I don't know not one straight black person that compares the Civil Rights movement with the g-a-y lifestyle. Honestly, I don't! I,m sure this is not accidental. As for you calling Black Christians hypocrites, no problem. Jesus Christ, Himself was called names and we know those who follow him will be called names as well.

        As far as regarding black folks as beasts, good luck with that!

        May 10, 2012 at 8:10 pm |
      • DEcember 2012

        WHAT IS G-A-Y? ARE YOU STILL LIVING IN A WORLD THAT ACTUALLY CENSORS THE WORD GAY? CNN SURE DOES NOT BUT WHY DO YOU?

        AS MORE AND MORE BLACK PEOPLE MOVE MORE TOWARDS TOLERANCE, YOU ARE STUCK IN DOGMA AND YOU FAIL TO SEE THE CHANGE COMING. TRUE CHRISTIANS BELIEVE IN THE GOLDEN RULE, NOT THE OLD TESTAMENT. IT'S JUST A SHAME THAT THERE ARE STILL THOSE WHO CHOOSE TO REMAIN BLIND, CALLING THEIR NEIGHBORS LIVES A "LIFESTYLE" AND DENYING THEM THE EQUAL TREATMENT THEY DESERVE. HOW CAN BLACK PEOPLE TURN A BLIND EYE TO SUCH BLATANT DISCRIMINATION? HOW CAN YOU STAND YOURSELF STEVEO? HIDING BEHIND RELIGION TO EXCUSE YOUR HOMOPHOBIA? YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED TO EVEN SPEAK OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT WHEN YOU CLEARLY KNOW NOTHING OF WHAT IT IS ABOUT.

        YOU ARE A LOST CAUSE. I ALMOST FEEL SORRY FOR YOU.

        May 10, 2012 at 10:48 pm |
      • DEcember 2012

        NICE OF YOU TO PROVE ME WRONG CNN WITH THE MODERATION. HEHE.

        STEVEO,

        AS MORE AND MORE BLACK PEOPLE MOVE MORE TOWARDS TOLERANCE, YOU ARE STUCK IN DOGMA AND YOU FAIL TO SEE THE CHANGE COMING. TRUE CHRISTIANS BELIEVE IN THE GOLDEN RULE, NOT THE OLD TESTAMENT. IT'S JUST A SHAME THAT THERE ARE STILL THOSE WHO CHOOSE TO REMAIN BLIND, CALLING THEIR NEIGHBORS LIVES A "LIFESTYLE" AND DENYING THEM THE EQUAL TREATMENT THEY DESERVE. HOW CAN BLACK PEOPLE TURN A BLIND EYE TO SUCH BLATANT DISCRIMINATION? HOW CAN YOU STAND YOURSELF STEVEO? HIDING BEHIND RELIGION TO EXCUSE YOUR HOMOPHOBIA? YOU SHOULD BE ASHAMED TO EVEN SPEAK OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT WHEN YOU CLEARLY KNOW NOTHING OF WHAT IT IS ABOUT.

        YOU ARE A LOST CAUSE. I ALMOST FEEL SORRY FOR YOU.

        May 10, 2012 at 11:14 pm |
      • DEcember 2012

        STEVEO,

        IF YOU REALLY ARE BLACK, I SUGGEST YOU DO SOME RESEARCH ON WHAT YOUR PEOPLE HAD TO ENDURE AND WHAT THE LGBT FOLKS ARE FACING NOW. YOU HAVE NO CLUE ON WHAT THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT IS ALL ABOUT AND THAT'S REALLY SAD.

        May 11, 2012 at 9:56 am |
      • Steveo

        DEcember 2012,

        IF I'm really black? Since you have never met me, you will just have to take my word for it! I know about the Civil Rights movement, DEcember! I remember watching events on televison as a youngster! Sorry but I don't need you to school me there! I repeat...I know of NOT ONE straight black person who equates the Civil Rights movement! Not one! Do I actually need to let you know who always makes that comparision? If you are honest, you already know!

        I remember Matthew Shepard and what happened to him and folks like him are sad, and repulsive. As a Christian, I stand on God's word! He speaks against the g-a-y lifestyle. NOT ONE TIME has God spoken out against black or dark skin! THAT is the difference! SO, the comparison between the CR Movement and the g-a-y lifestyle is false!

        May 11, 2012 at 10:24 am |
      • DEcember 2012

        IF ALL YOU KNOW ABOUT THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT IS WHAT YOU SAW ON TV AND WHATEVER YOUR STRAIGHT BLACK FRIENDS SAY, THEN I REALLY FEEL SORRY FOR YOU. THE CIVIL RIGHTS CAUSE IS NOT SO NARROW AND MARTIN LUTHER KING JR DID NOT SPEAK ONLY FOR THE BLACK MAN.
        IF ALL YOU KNOW ABOUT GOD IS WHATEVER IS WRITTEN ON A BOOK I FEEL DOUBLY SORRY FOR YOU. IF YOU CAN'T EVEN UNDERSTAND THE CHRISTIAN GOLDEN RULE, THEN THERE IS NOTHING CHRISTIAN ABOUT YOU.

        May 11, 2012 at 12:22 pm |
      • Steveo

        DEcember,

        It appears now you understand why I typed g-a-y hehe! Look, people can choose to live whatever lifestyle they choose. I am notpeaking in bedrooms and taking names. I will tell you the g-a-y lifestyle is NOT endorsed by God! At te same time he does not endorse lying, murders, or adultery either! As a Christian, I know there will be a price to pay!
        Other Black folks can move whatever direction they please! My choice to to stand on God's word! Never popular but His word is ALWAYS right! Save yoru energy, no need to feel bad for me but, I feel bad for the direction we are headed (away from God).

        I said before we learn from the OT not live it. Romans (a NT book) Chapter 1 contains the NT prohibition to the g-a-y lifestyle. God gives al of us the freedom to make choices! I have made mine, I am sticking with Jesus! That is the ONLY way ANYBODY makes heaven!

        I'm not h-o-m-o-phobic, neither I am I adulterer phobic or liar phobic. I do have a fear though..the fear of what happens to the unrepentent! To the World, Jesus was a failure, to those of us who know, follow, and love Him, He is not!

        May 11, 2012 at 4:12 pm |
      • Steveo

        DEcember,

        Who say ALL i know about teh CR movement was what I saw on TV? Stop making assumptions. I said I remember watch events on TV. I do read you know! You say I am not a Christian. What does Christian mean? I 'll help you out! It means Christ like. Doesn't mean I am perfect! My goal is to follow Christ. Yes He loves all but He will also judge sin!

        Remember the woman caught in adultery. Jesus forgave her of the adultery. But He said something to her before she left! He said to her "Go and sin no more".

        We are have sinned! Yet there is a two fold problem:

        1. We fail to repent (or turn away from sin)
        2. We fall into a LIFESTYLE of sin!

        Yes Jesus loves but don't be fooled to even dare believe He TOLERATES a sinful LIFESTYLE!

        You never answered my question from earlier: Are YOU a BIBLE believing Christian?

        May 11, 2012 at 4:22 pm |
      • DEcember 2012

        HERE IS A CLUE STEVEO, HOMOSEXUALITY CANNOT BE ANY MORE A LIFESTYLE THAN YOU BEING BLACK JUST SOMETHING WHITE KIDS CAN IMITATE WITH RAP MUSIC. PEOPLE ARE BORN THAT WAY. I GUESS THE RELIGIOUSLY BRAINWASHED CAN NEVER REALIZE OR ACCEPT THIS BUT I WAS HOPING AT LEAST THAT SOMEONE WHO CLAIMS THEY ARE BLACK AND KNOW OF THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT WOULD HAVE AN INKLING OF WHAT THE LGBT PEOPLE ARE GOING THROUGH. I GUESS I'M WRONG. SUCH A PITY.

        May 11, 2012 at 8:47 pm |
      • jean2009

        Steveo are you implying the First Family is gay?

        May 11, 2012 at 9:54 pm |
      • Steveo

        @jean2009
        Steveo are you implying the First Family is gay?
        -----------------
        Where'd that come from? If you got that from anything I wrote, then you have not read anything that I wrote! I never said that and NEVER implied that! Not sure what you're taking about!

        May 12, 2012 at 2:24 pm |
  12. Steve

    This country always needs someone or something to hate. From women's right to vote, work, receive equal pay for equal jobs, to our black citizens rights to educaion, basic rights, freedom from fear and opression. There has always been and may always be some group of people struggling for equality in this land of the free. i don't understand it but I opserve it to be true. Glad the president spoke out. Glad he created the awareness.

    May 10, 2012 at 1:14 am |
    • Steveo

      "This country always needs someone or something to hate".
      ------------------
      Well said! Now when more Bible believing Christians have their say about the president's statement, let's see what hits the fan in return! I'm betting on hatred!

      May 10, 2012 at 10:24 am |
      • John

        Steveo, I was thinking of our posts from yesterday. How is it going?
        How do Christians (not that you can speak for all of them, but in general) see gay people? As sinners? I'll assume yes. I understand the problem some people (half the country) has with this issue and you know where I stand. I refuse to pull a Chris matthews and call people bigots who disagree with me, I feel I just have a different opinion. Anyway, do you really think this particular sin requires a law to stop people from getting married? Is there any other sin that really does not hurt others that we have laws against?

        May 10, 2012 at 1:26 pm |
      • Steveo

        @John,

        Lying is sin, murder is a sin, adultery is sin, stealing is sin! The Bible tells us we (all of mankind) have all sinned. God does not rank order sin, humans do! Our sins is what keeps us from His presence! God loves the sinner but will deal with the sin and harshly if we don't turn away from our sins.

        All sins hurt, John maybe not imediately but they will. look, We are not to belittle anybody, we are to love and be compassionate to everybody, in a Christ like manner (Christian means Christ like). I know we have work to do in that area! Look at how Jesus handled a sinner. He loved them but warned them that sin will lead to eternal seperation from God (Hell). Teh Bible has a few passages that details how God feels about the sin of the g-a-y lifestyle. He is not pleased with it not is He pleased with the sin of lying or even greed.

        The point is what President Obama supports, God does not! Yet it is no bigger or lesser sin than plain old lying!

        So John, those who shoot abortionists are in sin, those who blow up abortion clinics are in sin also. The right does not have any moral edge in this matter either!

        btw, I am well and hope you are as well! Hopefully this answers your questions. A pleasure chatting with you.

        May 10, 2012 at 2:26 pm |
      • John

        I'm fine also, thanks.
        Thanks for the information. I think gay people understand some others look at them as sinners and they accept it. Have you seen that commercial with Abe Lincoln? His wife asked him if the dress she was wearing made her look fat? Anyway, some lies are not bad, I understand they are sins, but sometimes a lie can be less harmful. I think if gay people are allowed to marry it would be less harmful than the situation that takes place today. I understand it is a sin, gay people understand it is a sin, but should it be against the law?
        One more thing, if you haven't picked up on it, people think I am a unique individual. My goal in life is not to get rich or powerful or anything like that. My goal is simply to be happy. And, given this, I want others to be happy also. But I do understand, for some people the term "gay marriage" is a oxymoron. I do not try to push my views on others, but I will give my opinion if I feel the need. I can disagree with people and continue to be friends with them. Unlike those on the far left and far right who seemingly want to kill people because they disagree with their opinion. You seem to be more like me and I appreciate that.

        May 10, 2012 at 3:57 pm |
      • Steveo

        John,

        My faith is more important than my politics! I am not far right either. I like issues and I like ideas. I don't care what party comes up with them! If It does not violate my faith, morals, and conviction, I 'm good with it! I have been reading you and you have been consistant in your words!

        We disagreed on something a day or two ago but the exchange was respectful and that is appreciated!

        May 10, 2012 at 4:18 pm |
  13. John

    I'm actually with the president on his most recent position of support for gay marriage.
    But, this is a non-issue in relation to the upcoming election. This election needs to be focused on the economy, healthcare and the border/illegal problems. We all know why this administration wants to talk about anything other than the issues I listed.

    May 10, 2012 at 7:03 am |
    • Pete

      @john,you republicans brought this up recently first because of the recent state votings,don't be hypocritical now,OK!!!Be a republican ,don't say what ya think!!!

      May 10, 2012 at 10:16 am |
      • John

        Once again you are wrong, no surprise here. I am not a repub and I never posted what you said I did. I have been supportive of gay marriage longer than the first time Obama supported it and I haven't changed (like Obama has).
        BTW, basically what Obama did was say "I am for it, but don't expect me to do anything about it". This is the guy you look up to as a great leader. It is very telling about who you are.

        May 10, 2012 at 11:00 am |
      • Pete

        @john,you must be one of those fence stratlers aren't ya.Go where its more favorable for ya ,ha!! What are ya than,a shallow Democrate scared, too scared or politically intimidated to come out of your closet and say what ya really want to say,is that it ,did I hit it right or what,cat had your tongue!!!Are ya the type that sees what side is winning then jump on their wagon,or is it no spine,you tell me!!!

        May 10, 2012 at 11:31 am |
      • John

        Pete, let me tell you why you do not understand. Libs are confused by people like me who can actually agree or disagree with either party, depending on the issue. I am for cutting entitlements, I am also for gay marriage and choice. It is called being an Independent. If you think me taking a stance of support of gay marriage, or abortion is more favorable for me you are what I said you were in an earlier post – an idiot.
        I am saying what I want to say, you are just a confused liberal idiot.

        May 10, 2012 at 11:42 am |
      • John

        Moderator got my post again. Bottom line of what I said Pete – you are an idiot. My views are consistant with being an Independent. I understand you are a confused liberal idiot, but people can actually take stances on issues for and against Dems and Repubs stances, depending on the issue. I do not follow blindly like Obama supporters.

        May 10, 2012 at 11:44 am |
      • Pete

        @john,an idiot is someone like you,being indepentant whatever,never really siding with any one candidate till ya close the curtain,at the booth voting.Then going about your business saying I voted for him or I voted for that guy,never standing up saying you were wrong .Being independant is just another way a person gets around in life ,never being able to be held accountable for anything ,being he was never really for anything to begin with.That's why I called you spineless,because if your stance goes sour down the road you'll jump to the other,like I said before, to be with the "in"crowd!!!So I'd rather be an idiot Democrate ,like you said,than a flip floppin independant,just like your idol Liberman ,who is constantly getting in hot water,saying he's voting for this,then does an about face and votes for that,promises,promises.Or you call it political posturing ,great name right.I'm a proud Democrate,so is my family and we know what's right and I'll go to my grave with the same philosophy,will you and are you comfortable with yourself?Remember,write this down its the Democrates MO,people over profits,no republican or Independent will change that!!!And one more thing,Independents are usually disgruntled Democrates or Republicans that never really voted or took a side politically,but were always bitching no matter who the president was or his policies at that time,do I have it right!!!

        May 10, 2012 at 12:38 pm |
  14. Kool-Aid Police

    Everybody knew he already supported this, Biden just hurried it up. Obama already had the gay vote so it's unclear how much he will gain from this. The more telling part was his comment about the US military "fighting on his behalf", they take an oath to the constitution, not Obama.

    May 10, 2012 at 7:14 am |
    • jean2009

      Yes, but they are fighting on his, your, and my behalf...but he, as commander-in-chief, is the one who signs the papers that says they go into battle.

      May 11, 2012 at 10:04 pm |
      • jean2009

        http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/.../obama-oks-new-troops-afghanistan/

        May 11, 2012 at 10:07 pm |
  15. Free Man in the Republic of Texas

    Obama’s Homosexual "Marriage" Announcement:

    Why now?

    Can you spell... Ahh.. Oh... Wait a min... R e – E l e c t i o n ???

    FORWARD to depravity !!!

    May 10, 2012 at 7:38 am |
  16. livingston1

    Really? You jump all over him demanding that he state his opinion and then ask why he came out with it now? Duh, because you asked. I think this is a non issue in this election. The people who say that they would change their vote because of this wouldn't have voted for him anyway. I think he came down on the right side of history on this. Remember that when equal rights for blacks and for women to get the vote, none of these thing were the 'popular side to take. But it was the right thing to do. History has shown this.

    May 10, 2012 at 8:49 am |
    • John

      I agree w/you. I do not think anyone will change their vote over this issue. But, people may change their vote because this administration keeps trying to deflect conversations from the poor economy, Obamacare, and the border..

      May 10, 2012 at 11:47 am |
      • jean2009

        OH PLEEZE! What have the GOP been concentrating on other than women's heath issues?

        May 11, 2012 at 10:12 pm |
    • BLKMANnAmerica

      So on point, thanks for posting.

      May 10, 2012 at 12:17 pm |
      • Ivana

        Hillary made have had been better off diirocvng him after winning the senate seat.No. Staying married was her only play. Like it or not, she had to have Bill campaign for her, even if it were to blow it for her.Think of the star athlete who misses the final shot and loses the game. Everyone talks about how he cost them the victory, but they wouldn't have been in that position to even lost it if not for him.Hillary doesn't get a chance if not for Bill.And many people think that one reason Gore lost in 2000 was because he didn't get Bill involved soon enough.

        July 31, 2012 at 2:20 am |
      • Humberto

        Laurence,I'm really alpplaed at your stance on this issue. I'll make this quick and simple when you watch all those angry white people at those town halls across the country screaming we want our country back what do you think they want it back from? The answer is they want it back from the black man who is President. These people who are protesting at these town halls are for the most part from my estimation not angry with any particular Obama policy, rather hey are angry that the President of the United States is black. I even heard one townhall where a white Republican yelled out Get Obama's government hands of my medicare! Are these the people you're defending in your thesis here? I surely hope not. On another note, I know you don't affiliate yourself with a political party but it's quite obvious that your views align more closely with the Republican party than the Democratic party. I hope you know that you're really beginning to lose credibility by doing so. This party has essentially become a marginalized group of know nothing red-neck Americans who don't know anything about any issue but just can't stand the fact that a black man is president. I find it very odd that you jump to defend this group of ignorant morons. And they are clearly just racist idiots you should be dismissed as such, I'm sure if you polled most of them on any issue you would find they don't know anything. Any sort of response would be much appreciated.Mr. Klein

        August 2, 2012 at 12:57 am |
  17. Martin

    For the black folk who value their Christian principles over blind allegiance to Obama . This is it, Obama just lost our support.

    May 10, 2012 at 11:24 am |
    • Pete

      @Martin,does that mean you're throwing the baby out with the bathwater.You won't stand up with your black brothers and sisters who may happen to be "gay".Does that mean Pres.Obama won't win and sucessfully be a 2 term African American,the first "black"president in history.Too bad you're so narrow minded and can't grasp what problems we will have with a corporate goon that's already spouting ideas of deregulation on the presidents regulations that curbed the financial disaster that the previous moron put us in.And only on one item,sounds like you were never with the incumbent in the first place.I,on the other hand, evaluate the total pros and cons on any candidate,before any final decision is made,but stated earlier by an irate Independent that I'm just a liberal idiot,this rebuttal may just be in vain.You have to look at the total package before you vote,not just one thing and Pres.Obama ,no matter what anyone here says,is truely the only intelligent candidate running,he's for the people and this is from a white Democrate that was happy he was elected in the first place,he is truely making history,even with the obstructionistic party of NO against him.I'll always be in his corner,and his stance from the beginning has always Ben people over politics,plain and simple,that's what got him there.Thanks for reading,I'm also non denominational Christian, a Catholic in name only,take care....

      May 10, 2012 at 1:15 pm |
    • Steveo

      Excellent point! This just placed a whole lot of folk in a bind but, on the other side is..its this or a Mormon! Folks needs to be praying!

      May 10, 2012 at 3:05 pm |
  18. B

    Liberty and equality for All take a very long time, but hopefully that will happen, and We, as a country can honesty say to the World that what we have always claimed to be true, will be Liberty and Justice for All and not just white Christians.

    This is supposed to be what freedoms we fight for against -Theocracies like Iran that don’t that we claim to be against!
    This country is supposed to be inclusive of All Religions and No Religion if that is your choice.

    Last time I looked this country was supposed to have separation of Church and State , and not a Christian Theocracy.

    May 10, 2012 at 1:20 pm |
    • C-Lo

      So, B, do you also support polygamy between consenting adults as some "mainstream' religions allow or even call for (isn't this one of the reasons people point fingers at Romney). What about Islam? The support polygamous unions. And we definately have to bow to thier desires these days, lest we be condemned for being "haters." In other words, where do you draw the line??? What about civil unions between brother and sister as consenting adults? After all, all we are talking about is the basic "rights" afforded "committed couples" of inheritance, hospital visitation rights, community property, etc. Right?

      My thought is this...allow marrage/civil unions between any and all consenting adults regardless of gender or number to satisfy all walks of life, but do away with "spousal benefits" of things like SS, Medicare, insurance, etc. Oh, wait, that won't fly because in the end it's all about the money, correct?

      May 10, 2012 at 2:01 pm |
      • John

        ...allow marrage/civil unions – these are not the same.

        May 10, 2012 at 2:04 pm |
      • C-Lo

        John, they are trying to make the essentially the same in CO.

        May 10, 2012 at 2:15 pm |
      • John

        Hmmm, I am not sure what I think about that.

        May 10, 2012 at 3:59 pm |
      • C-Lo

        Well, John, I'll tell you what I think about it. First, I understand some of the arguments for "civil unions." Primarily for the ease of certain contractual/civil matters which could be accomplished through other legal means (living wills, consent forms, normal contract law) but which are "givens" for married individuals. I get that. You notice, however, what they leave off (or minimize) is the fight for other "rights," primarily gov't entitlements (SS survivor benefits being a prime example). If these benefits are not available, then why does it matter? Nothing prevents two (or 3 or 10) people from committing to each other in the presence of whomever, to make their vows. But to what extent it is LEGALLY recognized is the issue. Why not have a simple contract or consent form giving all signors full equal rights to each other's property and visitation. Don't have to call it marriage, civil unity, or anything else but a binding legal contract like what a marriage cert provides in similar circumstances. But when it comes down to it, its all about the money/benefits.

        Last, even though I've wasted as much time as I have about it, bottom line is it's smoke and mirrors at election time to take our eyes off the ball of the economy, wars, civil unrest, etc. If you ask the average joe on the street where this issue ranks overall in their day to day lives, it'd be well below the threshhold of the time spent debating it.

        May 10, 2012 at 4:26 pm |
    • Steveo

      B,

      Stop with the silly comparisions, please! Theocracies like Iran will cut your head off if you follow any religion other than te one that is state sponsored! There a Christian pastor over there right now, in prision and facing execution fo rte sole purpose of him being a christian. According to you, we do that here! Please explain to all of us what rights women have over there? Because according to you we are no different than Iran! Over there te state is actually hunting down and killing those in the g-a-y lifestyle and atheists too! But according to you, we are just like

      B, your argument is old and isn't even in the galaxy as the truth!

      btw, this country isn't a theocracy but AND seperation of church and state is not what you have been taught it is! Simply read Jefferson's letter for the context!

      May 10, 2012 at 3:21 pm |
      • DEcember 2012

        THAT'S BECAUSE WE HAVE SEPARATION OF CHURCH AND STATE HERE, OR AT LEAST WE DO UNLESS IT CONCERNS PRO-LIFE AND GAY PEOPLE. SO YEAH, WE ARE SOMEWHAT BETTER THAN IRAN IN THAT RESPECT. WHATEVER MAKES YOU SLEEP BETTER AT NIGHT.

        POLYGAMY? WHY NOT. I'M SURE MITT ROMNEY WOULDN'T MIND.

        May 10, 2012 at 7:36 pm |
      • jean2009

        Steveo
        Oh so we are going to state it is only the old testament that is out of touch? How about the Bible states the earth is flat, has four corners, and can't be shaken?
        Chronicles 16:30 and Reveltions 7:1
        I'm sure the people in Haiti and Japan are looking forward to your explanation.

        May 10, 2012 at 8:20 pm |
      • Steveo

        DEcember 2012,

        You are starting to make less and less sense. Have you read Jefferson's letter to the pastors at Danbury, Connecticut? Read it and you will discover he was answering a very specific fear these pastor's had. The fear of a state run church just like the Church of England. That was the concern, the state involvement in the church! It was a personal letter and not a federal document!

        As usual and over time it was taken out of context!

        You think we are "somewhat better than Iran'? I betting, somehow, you're not moving, are you?

        May 10, 2012 at 8:31 pm |
      • Steveo

        Jean,

        Once again, The Christian church DID NOT exist under the Old Testament, which means Christians did not exist under the law! The OT is the history of God's called people, the Hebrews (Jews). We are to learn to lessons from it not live it! The Law was NOT given to Gentiles. Gentiles were included in God's family in the New Testament.

        May 12, 2012 at 2:36 pm |
    • Pete

      @john,ya have to look at the overall picture,not just one thing,and ya just don't vote on a president only on one thing,and the economy will mend,it has before.It typically runs on 5 year cycles if you'd ever do any real economical research.Being a business owner as well as working for someone gives me more insight than most maybe even you,sir.I try thinking the glass is half full ,when others think its half empty and try intelligently how to return it to full.I also see this "calculated White House maneuver" you're talking about and see this as a political chess game, with Pres.Obama giving the game to Romney and watching him hang himself politically and if you haven't noticed,its working.I just hope that by November ,you and others will realize who these candidates actually have in their best interests after election time, the incumbent ,who is fighting for your best interests or the venture capitalist who looks at you as a commodity broker looks at hog bellies,only caring what he's going to make on this product in the long run ,being you in the end...So as an "idiot"that possibly has more business experience and is in tuned with what's really going on ,more than"" you"" might think,just go back to the ""GREAT DEPRESSION" and ask yourself ,do I want to see history repeat itself ,because with Romney,you might just see it again because of his capitalist agendas,and deregulation of everything,that's his game plan ,it was made publicly.And you can quote this "idiot" on that also.Take care,no hard feelings,if I got you pissed off I apologize,politially speaking,just kiddin...

      May 10, 2012 at 3:37 pm |
  19. Dean

    'Bend Over Forward'.

    May 10, 2012 at 2:43 pm |
  20. jerrylax

    Good try obama...redirect the attention to this buch of nonsense (most Americans could care less if the gays marry their pets). The real issue is the economy, foreign policy, health care, social security, and immigration... The economy is a mess (new job numbers out today, the supreme court is dismanteling obama care and obama imigration policy, the middle east is a mess with NO end in sight and Israel calling up their reserves, Russia flexing in eastern europe and flipping off our weak president...everywhere you look obama is a mess and he tries despirately to redirect attention to womens issues, gay rights, and all this fluff.... IT WON'T WORK OBAMA.

    May 10, 2012 at 3:14 pm |
    • DEcember 2012

      NORTH CAROLINA CARES. EVERY STATE OUT THERE WITH DOMA TYPE LAWS CARE. OF COURSE, THE FIRST THING LIMBAUGH SAID IN REPLY IS THERE IS A WAR ON MARRIAGE. APPARENTLY, YOU ARE DEAD WRONG.

      May 10, 2012 at 5:50 pm |
    • Pete

      @jerrylax, it has so far , he's gaining in the battle ground states especially with women and minorities.So go back and think of a better propaganda message,it ain't workin here.And it ain't workin Romney,take your ass somewhere else,you're not even wanted in Massachusetts ,ya know that already didn't ya!!!

      May 10, 2012 at 8:19 pm |
  21. Debby

    Why did Obama announce his "evolving" views on gay marriage right before the George Clooney Hollywood fundraiser and his upcoming June appearance at the LBGT Gala? MONEY!! He will sell his soul, compromise his "Christian" principles and do or say anything any one or group wants to hear for contributions! Would this be similar to, lets say, prostitution?

    May 11, 2012 at 11:14 pm |