« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »


He was fine with it in '96 -- so why now the 86?

by Jeremy Hooper

Did the mid-90's form of Barack Obama's "yes we can" mantra include full marriage equality? Yes, says the staff of Windy City Times, who have unearthed a 1996 questionnaire from when the president elect was running for IL state senate:

Obama changed views on gay marriage: Windy City Times Exclusive: WCT Examines His Step Back [Windy City Times]

We say: Hey, Doc Martens and "90210" have made a comeback. Why not reasoned, principled marriage stands?

Come on, Barackstar: Raining on one's wedding day was "Ironic" in '96:

Now it's just annoying.

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper

Your thoughts

When asking why Obama didn't support marriage during his campaign, we have to ask if he could have gotten elected if he did. Sickening, I know, but it's another thing we need to change.

Damn Karl Rove.

Posted by: RainbowPhoenix | Jan 13, 2009 6:57:41 PM

"When asking why Obama didn't support marriage during his campaign, we have to ask if he could have gotten elected if he did."

I would argue yes, but obviously none of us will ever know.

Now it's a different story. He's about to take office. Will he "evolve" on the issue in short spell?

Posted by: G-A-Y | Jan 13, 2009 7:01:48 PM

Maybe in his next interview with Rachel Maddow he'll get questioned on this change of position. Not likely but here's to hoping

Posted by: Daimeon | Jan 13, 2009 9:27:54 PM

What's so hard to understand? He read the poll, which is something we might try, before changing our goal to domestic partnership. Or maybe we still believe that politicians take positions based on the Eternal Purity of Our Bright Moral Vision.

Posted by: Wilberforce | Jan 13, 2009 9:40:27 PM

People, we all know Obama is for marriage equality. He had to soften his position to get elected. Duh.

Posted by: Jake | Jan 14, 2009 2:43:03 AM

Wilberforce, Jake: Speaking only for myself, my push for Obama to support marriage equality does not mean I am unaware of the political reality, his pragmatism, or strategic vision. I totally get the game. However, MY game is to encourage the principled stands that our political allies cannot or will not take, but should.

Posted by: G-A-Y | Jan 14, 2009 7:08:23 AM

We're never sure where a politician stands when he is running for office. I think Obama may feel that it's still too soon to take off the kid gloves.

But I think the underlying beliefs haven't changed, and we will see that in what he does (which will speak volumes).

And yeah, I'm overlooking R**k W****n for the time being.

Posted by: Bonnie_Half-Elven | Jan 14, 2009 12:48:12 PM

He did it for the same reason that Lincoln waffled on slavery until the moment when it could do him the least political harm/most political benefit. The Great Emancipator spent most of his political career avoiding taking a controversial stand on slavery.

Politicians waffle to hold on to power. That's what they do. It's the people that are supposed to keep the pressure on until they act. I don't worry so much about the fickle commitments of politicians as I do about the LGBT movement's nearly unbroken record of defeat for at least the past decade.

Posted by: Mike | Jan 14, 2009 4:01:55 PM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy

Related Posts with Thumbnails