Comments

  1. Clayton says

    He keeps coming back to 2008 when the Democratic Party was not for gay marriage.

    True. But the Democrats weren’t pushing a constitutional amendment to define marriage as one man and one woman–something that Republican candidates have been pushing since 2004.

    And besides, 2008 was five years ago. Can we please talk about Republicans in 2013?

  2. Richard says

    The Democratic platform included a pro marriage equality stance. The Republican platform affirmed support for a constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman. Nothing could be more diametrically opposite…

  3. says

    Yes, the Republican party had a platform which was built of bigotry bricks; they wanted to deny us equal rights as straights.
    They push an amendment to deprive of permanently from that equality.

    So yes, gay rights is a political issue…..it is supported my Democrats and actively denied by republicans.
    Now under that tit Paul Ryan they will try to deny women of their rights by pushing a Personhood Amendment.

    Hillery in 2016 is an essential candidate.

  4. Tim says

    This has everything to do with a party issue: Republicans are WAY TOO Right sided — and their history of their “passion” is catching up with them. I cannot wait until these nut jobs see how irrational they’ve been thinking.

  5. Steve says

    For a lot of Democrats it wasn’t so much principled opposition, but political convenience. Until recently it simply didn’t pay off to be publicly pro-gay. 15-20 years ago it was usually damaging to one’s career.

  6. says

    there’s a difference between having “not been a vocal supporter of gay marriage” and being someone who has consistently played anti-gay rhetoric to your plebeian base.

    before her Marriage Equality statement, remember Mrs. Clinton’s speaking out for LGBT Equality at the UN? She’s made some pretty bold speeches, while Mittens was all “well, you see, I just believe in the JESUS form of marriage” or some nonsense like that.

    so no, it aint the same. and clinton isn’t actually “following Rob Portman” – Portman only cares because his own son is gay. Hillary cares despite not having a gay child of her own. And Hillary is taking a strong position – Portman? he claimed to support it then ran to hide.

    so there.

  7. Graphicjack says

    Hilary was also not able to make ANY political stances or opinions while she was Secretary of State, so it’s disingenuous to say she waited so much longer to speak in favour of gay marriage when for four years she simply couldn’t. Her speech that gay rights are human rights was enough of an indication where her heart lay. And as others have said, silence from the Democrats was still better than open discrimination that still exists within the Republican Party, and will continue to do so as long as the Teabaggers and evangelical/Mormon/religious extremists have a stranglehold on the party. Good luck to you, bitches.

  8. Peter says

    Let’s note the distinction between politicians who haven’t yet voiced their support for marriage equality and those who enthusiastically oppose it. In other words, there’s a difference between Democrats who haven’t explicitly supported marriage and Republicans who wear their bigotry as a badge.

  9. TonyJazz says

    Romney was an easy opponent for Obama in the election.

    A man of no morals, nor principles—-trying to be a conservative star…. I guess the Republicans gave up on the election before it started…..

  10. woodroad34 says

    That is the biggest box of whine I’ve ever seen. I think Kathy Griffin’s Mom is jealous;-) . And to think that republican males think of themselves as (sing with me) “macho, macho men”. Biggest babies around.

  11. Chitown Kev says

    Graphicjack, Hillary Clinton was also a candidate for the Democratic party’s nomination for President of the United States and at no time during the Democratic primaries did she endorse marriage equality.

    You historical whitewashing queens are tripping.

    Al Sharpton, Carol Mosely Braun, and Dennis Kucinch were all candidates that endorsed marriage equality while the ran for Presidnet of the United States

    Technically, President Obama fits that category, too. (Obama was a sitting president who declared his support prior to the 2012 election)

  12. Javier says

    Let’s be clear here:

    1) Hillary Clinton’s endorsement of gay marriage came at her speech in from of the UN. She reiterated a position that everyone in Washington was already familiar with since her speech at the UN. FAIL #1 for Romney advisor.

    2) Your focus on the 2008 Democratic platform is disingenuous at best. This argument does not hold because it fails to take into account the evolution that occurred on the 2012 election. You might want to focus on this past election. Democratic platform for Obama was pro-gay marriage and for Romney was anti gay marriage. You make your bed… now sleep in it! FAIL # 2 – For Romney advisor.

    3) Dividing this between political lines is the wrong way to go… Are you kidding me? Who made this decision? Need I remind you at the RNC debates the military soldier who asked if he would have the right to marry his partner under a Republican administration. Was teir one candidate that night who stood up and said yes? Did Romney mention that he was going to repeal DADT? FAIL # 3 – Romney (bold face liar) advisor.

  13. JT says

    I am so sick of “this discussion.” There is hardly any “debate” going on. Gays deserve to be equal under the law and stop being treated as second class citizens. I keep hearing from the media that the equal marriage discussion is “new” as it has been only since 2000 whereby any country has had gay marriage. Well, damn it, I’ve been “discussing” it since I was 18. So that makes it 35 years for me. Let’s get on with it already. It should be a non-issue. Why should it take decades to make change? Right is right. Stuart Stevens and his like are an icon of bad political strategists.

Leave A Reply