Barack Obama | Gay Marriage | Netroots Nation | News

White House Communications Director Says Obama Didn't Fill Out 1996 Statement Supporting Same-Sex Marriage: VIDEO


At Netroots Nation today, White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer was asked about the 1996 questionnaire published by the Windy City Times and signed by Barack Obama when he was running for State Senate in Illinois.

The questionnaire (seen below) features a range of statements, one of them being "I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages."

Said Pfeiffer at the Netroots panel: "If you actually go back and look, that questionnaire was actually filled out by someone else, not the President."

When pressed on if the questionnaire is faked, Pfeiffer dodges the question and goes on to explain that Obama's position is that he is "evolving" on the issue, adding:

"I can't tell you today when that evolution will continue, but that is where he is, and I will say, people in this room have pushed him on this, and he believes you should continue to push him on it."



Feed This post's comment feed


  1. And this is an excellent example of why I will NEVER EVER AGAIN vote for Barack Obama.

    Posted by: ohplease | Jun 17, 2011 1:44:06 PM

  2. "...he believes you should continue to push him on it."

    Because the alternative is to give up on his sorry ass and sit out 2012, a prospect that's looking more and more appealing.

    Posted by: Keppler | Jun 17, 2011 1:52:04 PM

  3. so, she was either unwilling or unable to get to actually answer the question. Is he claiming this is a "fake" document and Obama didn't fill it out or sign it? Or, is he claiming that a staff member of Obama's filled out the document and Obama just "signed" it without reading it to see if he agreed with the content.

    Posted by: Tim NC | Jun 17, 2011 1:53:16 PM

  4. Folks, please understand that Obama is brilliant at "playing the game." HE IS ON OUR SIDE and has done more for us than any president ever has and probably will continue to do so. He supports same-sex marriage, he just knows that it is not yet politically safe to fully back it as president. He can't do anything to help LGBT rights if he gets voted out of office for being too liberal! Do you people understand that??? It's not rocket science.

    Some of you are terrible, terrible strategists.

    Posted by: MDK | Jun 17, 2011 1:56:59 PM

  5. Good point Keppler, sitting at home sure did a lot of good in 2010. We sure showed those Democrats. Now, because liberals sat at home and didn't vote in 2010, all the disappointments in the Democratic party will have their marriages on the ballot in Minnesota and Indiana, and bills legalizing their marriages didn't pass in Maryland. Oh wait, no, it's our marriages that will be up because idiots stayed home and Democrats lost seats in legislative chambers.

    Well at least we sure showed Barack Obama for not being liberal enough by staying home and allowing Democrats to lose the House of Representatives. I'd sure rather the House keep trying to reinstate Don't Ask Don't Tell and defend DOMA rather than let that evil President think he can get away with only supporting civil unions.

    Posted by: Tyler | Jun 17, 2011 1:57:39 PM

  6. Yes, for sure sitting out the next election will be really, really helpful to our agenda ... and will show that Barack Obama a thing or two [cross arms, stamp feet]

    Posted by: ant | Jun 17, 2011 1:59:37 PM

  7. I will say, I don't care who filled it out, but Mr. President your signature is at the bottom.

    Anyways, keep pushing him. He'll, is it devolve or re-evolve, be back in the marriage equality camp sometime in his 2nd term.

    Posted by: searunner | Jun 17, 2011 2:03:38 PM

  8. I will vote for Obama and pray that his true colors show in his second term. I mean I really don't want a Republican to win; the best alternatives to Obama would be Ron Paul (against all marriage), Chris Chrstie (not a candidate), or Fred Karger (barely recognized as a candidate). I don't even want to know what someone like Michelle Bachman or Rick Santorum would do if they were elected, but have a pretty good guess it would be worse than Obama.

    Posted by: Matthew | Jun 17, 2011 2:14:08 PM

  9. Yes, OHPLEASE is a prime example of the absolutist short sighted gays who think that sitting out of the election or voting for some fringe candidate will be the answer.

    Stop letting the good be the enemy of the perfect.

    Posted by: Brian in Texas | Jun 17, 2011 2:21:45 PM

  10. I'd second Matthew except to say there is no chance in hell any Republican would be anything but awful. Every one of them would go back to defending DOMA; every one of them would veto an ENDA, were it ever to come out of Congress; every one would appoint judges and justices who would be dismissive of gay rights instead of supportive.

    I never understood the vitriol he suffers for this position. It's clearly political, not personal. I don't know why people are taking it personally. Listen, I hate the second-class status issue as much as anyone else, but that shouldn't blind anyone to the realities of the alternatives. By all means, don't be his friend but it's just cutting off your nose to spite your face to oppose someone who's 90% on your side when the alternative is someone who's 100% on your enemies' side.

    Posted by: Tyler | Jun 17, 2011 2:29:19 PM

  11. @Searunner

    Exactly, he signed the damn thing!

    Posted by: Chitown Kev | Jun 17, 2011 2:34:12 PM

  12. Oh, please OHPLEASE stop kidding yourself like you are actually going to vote Republican in 2012

    Posted by: FernLaPlante | Jun 17, 2011 2:42:49 PM

  13. I will vote for Obama again, but won't donate a nickel in time or money to his re-election campaign.
    That is the most reasonable response I think.

    Posted by: SteveC | Jun 17, 2011 2:48:24 PM

  14. Andy, are you really going to let trolls like MDK, Kepler and Tyler overrun this blog?(Brian in Texas seems to have been appointed to this blog full time) You do know its only going to get worse as 2012 approaches, don't you? At some point your regular readers are just going to abandon the site altogether. If you can't see the rote commentary that is obvious from some OFA script talking points, you need to pay closer attention.

    Posted by: gaylib | Jun 17, 2011 2:51:57 PM

  15. Just more of the same run around. At least Obama and his team have stopped lying and saying he opposes marriage equality. It's all political and everyone should realize that, in America in 2011, it's not a very tenable position to openly support and promote marriage equality and be president of the United States. This country simply isn't progressive enough and there are too many social conservatives on both sides of the aisle that have made their homophobic POV's clear and the obvious fact they will attack our community and our supporters at all costs.

    Obama is straddling the fence. It doesn't please me, but we saw what happened when we failed to get out to vote last time when we needed to do so. We need to realize who our enemies are, and act accordingly.

    Posted by: Francis | Jun 17, 2011 2:56:36 PM

  16. "Andy, are you really going to let trolls like MDK, Kepler and Tyler overrun this blog?(Brian in Texas seems to have been appointed to this blog full time)"

    What's the alternative? You? That's like having to choose between Franklin D Roosevelt or Huey P Long. The former has a great mind and vision, the latter is a nut.

    Posted by: Derrick from Philly | Jun 17, 2011 3:03:29 PM

  17. @ MDK : I believe you make a good point.....
    @ Gaylib : what do you want us to do ? Romney or worse ?

    Posted by: JackFknTwist | Jun 17, 2011 3:34:15 PM

  18. Those of you who support Obama, who is clearly against us, are exactly the reason we don't deserve equality.

    Have some dignity and stand up for yourselves and your community.

    Posted by: eric | Jun 17, 2011 3:50:43 PM

  19. Liberals didn't sit at home in 2010. The data show that independents were convinced by smear ads to switch to the Republicans. You all need to realize that the Citizens United decision has forever changed politics.

    Posted by: Ben | Jun 17, 2011 3:51:18 PM

  20. for all those claiming that liberals "sitting out" the 2010 election cost the dems the elections. It may or may not be true.

    But, you are claiming that it is the voters who need to learn a lesson from the 2010 defeat.

    There is also the possibility that the democratic politicians should learn the lesson instead and STOP PISSING OFF LIBERALS. The dems don't need to actually win every fight for the liberal position. But, they need to at least make the fight for liberal positions instead of constantly caving in to republicans before the conversations even begin.

    Dems have a habit of having a starting position that is centrist up against the far-right position. Then when the compromise comes (and with dems it comes almost immediately) we keep getting center-right policy and no dem even fights for liberal policy. If the dems would start with a liberal policy, then when they compromise, we could end up with centrist policies instead of center-right policy. But, if they are unwilling to even propose liberal positions to start a debate, why would they expect to ever excite the liberals to come out to the polls when the results are always center-right policies?

    Posted by: Tim NC | Jun 17, 2011 4:06:27 PM

  21. Fierce advocate.

    (That's change you can believe in.)

    Posted by: Inside | Jun 17, 2011 4:06:37 PM

  22. I'm sorry. It's a letter, he signed it, you can't wiggle out of it. If something goes out under my signature, the buck stops with me and I'm held to what it says. I don't care who authored the letter, he signed it. He's stuck with it.

    Posted by: Bob | Jun 17, 2011 4:29:57 PM

  23. Donald Trump has the real questionnaire.

    Posted by: Anastasia Beaverhausen | Jun 17, 2011 4:30:25 PM

  24. it wasn't a letter it was a candidate's questionnaire that is a run of the mill type thing used with candidates for office all the time;

    and I can verify that I heard him talk about the topic at a meeting when he was running for state office in Illinois; this is just one of the reasons i couldn't vote for him as preznit! he's lied about a number of things, as many people are finding out. yeah, i know - it's called 'political expediency';

    no matter what it's called, i call it lying!!!

    Posted by: mike/ | Jun 17, 2011 5:17:40 PM

  25. [In this scene, Michelle Bachmann is disciplining a "lousy queer" and reminding him that he doesn't have the moral right to cast a vote for one of the candidates from the two major political parties.]

    Michelle: You do nothing to prevent our official traditional-values leader, Mitt Romney, from taking the White House. Is that clear, you pathetic pervert?

    Lousy Queer: Yes, Miss Michelle, whatever you say! Us lousy queers don't have the right to vote. I don't know anything about how to vote, I swear!

    Posted by: Phil | Jun 17, 2011 5:29:02 PM

Post a comment


« «LGBT Stories: Boston College Professor Nearly Outed In Uganda, Then Comes Out in Ghana« «