stats for wordpress
 







Are you on Facebook?

Would you please click "like" in the box to your right, or

Visit us on Facebook!


Why Are Palin And Huckabee Lying About Candidate Obama’s DOMA Position?

by David Badash on March 3, 2011

in Bigotry Watch,Civil Rights,DOMA,Gay Agenda,Marriage,News

Post image for Why Are Palin And Huckabee Lying About Candidate Obama’s DOMA Position?

Why are Sarah Palin (with Maggie Gallagher echoing her words,) and Mike Huckabee lying about Barack Obama’s position as a presidential candidate on DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act?

You’d think there were a secret Republican playbook that tells everyone in the GOP what to say, because all of a sudden, conservatives are lying (well, that part isn’t all of a sudden,) by saying that Obama has changed his position on DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act. Some are suggesting he did it to get elected, some are even suggesting impeachment.

The record is very, very clear. Obama has always said, (always, after the letter he wrote supporting same-sex marriage in 1996, that is,) that he opposes DOMA and supports civil unions.

This is not news. This is fact.

But it’s not fact to those who make up their own, like Maggie Gallagher, Sarah Palin, Mike Huckabee, and Pat Vaughn, general counsel of the certified hate group the American Family Association, all of whom are echoing the false concept that Obama has changed his position on DOMA.

Sarah Palin told NOM’s Maggie Gallagher, “It’s appalling, but not surprising that the President has flip-flopped on yet another issue from his stated position as a candidate to a seemingly opposite position once he was elected.”

Um, nope, no flip-flop, no change.

Mike Huckabee last month said Obama “himself didn’t take this position [against DOMA] when he ran for president. I think if he had, he wouldn’t be president,” adding, “I think he owes the people of America an explanation – was he being disingenuous and dishonest then, is he being dishonest now, or did he change his view and if he did, when and why?”

Sorry, Mike, you’re lying. Just like you lied about Obama being raised in Kenya.

And CBS News agrees, writing, “the former Arkansas governor is incorrect in suggesting that Mr. Obama did not oppose DOMA as a candidate. In August 2007, campaign spokesman Ben LaBolt said, “He supports the complete repeal of DOMA which is the same position he has held since early 2004.”

Pat Vaughn, too, of the AFA — who just recently said he believes DOMA is unconstitutional — said “Obama, when he ran for office, told people that he supported the Defense of Marriage Act, so he’s flip-flopped on that, so he lied to people when he ran.”

Sorry, Pat, you’re the one who’s lying, along with Palin and Huckabee.

Here’s even more proof:

On August 9, 2007, presidential candidate Barack Obama at the HRC/Logo presidential debate, said, “That’s why I opposed DOMA in 2006 when I ran for the Senate. That’s why I am a strong supporter not of a weak version of civil unions, but of a strong version, in which the rights that are conferred at the federal level to persons who are part of the same sex union are compatible.

“When it comes to federal rights, the over 1,100 rights that right now are not being given to same sex couples, I think that’s unacceptable, and as president of the United States, I am going to fight hard to make sure that those rights are available.”

Need I say more?

Stop the lies.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Friends:

We invite you to sign up for our new mailing list, and subscribe to The New Civil Rights Movement via email or RSS.

Also, please like us on Facebook, and follow us on Twitter!

{ 5 comments }

Heywood Jablowme March 3, 2011 at 5:21 pm

the right wing bible packers arent going to like this article one bit! LMFAO

Clearbrook March 3, 2011 at 5:58 pm

It is semantics. If you go back through Obama's Campaign Speeches, he does, in fact, say he *does* support marriages as being strictly between a man and a woman on more than one occasion. Yes, this was semantics. The argument from the Right is that these representations were deliberately meant to mislead, *OR* he changed his position from what he represented to some people. This article, in order to avoid having this pointed out, correctly states that he "supports civil unions" which is the exact catch phrase and rhetoric he used to attempt to placate both sides. He was ambivalent, at best, about his stance on DOMA. His rhetoric in Liberal Camps was certainly what any self respecting Left Leaning Robot would expect of him. However, in more Moderate parts of the country, he knew that would not fly, and his tone was more conciliatory, and in some cases, even suggesting that he felt an obligation to defend the DOMA. That tone, that representation, is what the argument that he "changed his position" is based upon.

David Badash March 3, 2011 at 6:12 pm

No. No no no no no.

Obama clearly said he did not support DOMA, BEFORE he was elected. That's why his spokesperson CLEARLY said, "He supports the complete repeal of DOMA which is the same position he has held since early 2004.”
How is that semantics? It's not. It is simple words. Period.
These liars do NOT get to re-write the words of their president and call him a liar. THEY are the liars. Period.

CLearbrook March 3, 2011 at 6:00 pm

You can't know his mind. I can't know his mind. He may not even know his mind, although having the ability to start a Nuclear War at his command, I would hope he is more stable than that! For that reason, the argument can *only* be about the way he was presented and came across. If the Mainstream American Media misrepresented him on that, he should have called them to task when it happened. He did not. Since mainstream media reported him to have that position, (of supporting DOMA) and he did not object, I have to think he approved of that representation, and that is the best we are ever going to get to knowing his mind!

David Badash March 3, 2011 at 6:14 pm

When did the mainstream media portray Obama as SUPPORTING DOMA before he was elected? Proof please.
Oh, and you're wrong. He cannot be responsible IF the MSM misrepresented his words. Though, I am doubtful they did.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: