Bill Clinton Praises The Demise Of DOMA, Without Mentioning That He Signed It Into Law

[rhett o rick]

Former President Bill Clinton and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton released a joint statement hailing the Supreme Court's decision to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act.

It took us 17 years to undo DOMA. Thanks a lot Bill.

http://www.businessinsider.com/bill-hillary-clinton-statement-doma-supreme-court-decision-gay-marriage-2013-6

[dsc]

1. and of course Congess had nothing whatsoever to do with it

only Bill Clinton passed this law.

[Nye Bevan]

3. He made a campaign commercial directed at Christian groups in which he bragged about DOMA.

Yes, he threw gays under the bus in order to get homophobes to vote for him.

[The Link]

6. Many Presidents, including the current one, exploited homophobic feelings to get votes.

[Nye Bevan]

8. Yep. Reminds me of the "sausage factory" saying. (nt)

[Maximumnegro]

32. that makes no sense considering

Obama's many DOCUMENTED speeches about his views and the fact that during his administration is when the most gains have been made and...

Seriously? You dislike him that much you actually believe he has not played a significant part? Do you believe that all the progress that has been made would have happened anyway under McCain and Romney?

Is the hate that strong?

[The Link]

33. what the hell are you talking about? he changed his mind on marriage last fucking year.

[DURHAM D]

41. Yes. Just two days after NC passed an amendment to their constitution

and one day after Biden walked him into a corner.

[Maximumnegro]

48. Okay so Biden MADE Obama change

his mind now. I see. He is so inept that he got bullied by Biden. Got it.

[Romulus Quirinus]

53. Are you implying that Biden has some sort of problem

such that only the inept could be out-manoeuvred by him?

[Maximumnegro]

47. Doesn't answer my questions

1) that is specifically, SPECIFICALLY regarding gay marriage.
2)There is a difference between HIS OWN views on gay marriage, and what he has SUPPORTED.

So again, can you answer the questions. Are you saying he has played no significant role in the gains made. Are you saying the gains made (GAINS, not just GAY MARRIAGE specifically) for the LGBT community would have been the same under McCain and Romney?

Mind you the post above is regarding EXPLOITING HOMOPHOBIC FEELINGS. THAT is what you are agreeing to. That Obama has explited homophobia. Please defend that. I would love to hear it.

[The Link]

75. I am saying that when it was politically safe for him to do so, he came on board.

Where the rest of us have been for a long, long time.

[AtomicKitten]

95. Safe? It was before the 2012 election.

That's before, not after, and certainly not 17 years removed from the scene of the crime.

[The Link]

76. Donnie McClurkin as a campaign surrogate absolutely exploited homophobia.

[Ms. Toad]

73. Obama's position on same gender marriage until very recently

was lip service, when necessary, coupled (at least during the primaries leading up to the 2008 election and the early years of his first term) with a core discomfort with LGBT issues. He did us no favors - and in many ways betrayed us. That is why during the 2008 primaries I supported other candidates, rather than him. Until Edwards - who had that same core discomfort - dropped out of the primaries I supported him because he was at least honest about his personal struggles with LGBT issues. I knew where he stood. I wouldn't always like where he stood, but I wouldn't be expecting different from what might be delivered.

That changed for President Obama - particularly his core connection with LGBT issues. I don't know exactly when - but by the time he made his public announcement supporting same gender marriage the change was palpable. It was just as clear to me that it was not just lip service or politics - as it had previously clear that it was. I think it was his connection with the parents of some of his children's friends, and some people I know personally who have regular contact with him, that was the catalyst for change.

I won't dismiss the role of politics, and the changing tide of public opinion, as factors in the timing of the public announcement.

But however, and whenever, he got here he is NOW he is a strong advocate for LGBT rights, and has played a very positive role in grabbing the momentum and turning that momentum into concrete gains. And that thrills me.

But that thrill is tempered by the visceral memory of bus wheels running across my torso for the first 3 years of his administration. That memory will fade - but it will also take time.

[Freddie]

105. I think Obama's issue was the African American community

Which, deserved or not, had a reputation for being opposed to gay rights, and the President was hesitant to anger his strongest supporters. In the end he did the right thing.

[Ms. Toad]

106. No. It was strong personal discomfort.

I've spent most of my life interacting with people who can mouth what they know the right thing to be with respect to LGBT issues - with varying degrees of gut knowledge that it really is the right thing. (As well as people who are just blatant bigots and don't care what the right thing is.) In more than three decades you get a pretty good sense of when what is going on in the gut doesn't match the public presentation.

As I noted - the same thing was going on with Edwards, except that he was very honest about it (which didn't win him many friends in the LGBT community).

But there truly has been a palpable change. I stopped listening for a while because it just made me angry. So sometime in the last couple of years, before his announced support of same gender marriage, something really changed at a gut level for him.

He is also a political creature, so the timing of the public announcement of that gut level change may well have been influenced by political considerations. But the kind of advocacy we now see isn't something which is purely political, nor is it something which can be sustained without the kind of gut level change I had sensed (any more than the damaging action and inaction of most of his first term could have been sustained had the change preceded his first term in office).

[loyalsister]

116. It was political because, like it or not he's a politician

He identified the 2004 controversy as a distraction and at first argued that in the absence of meaningful consensus, civil unions could be a compromise.

He wrote about a conversation he had with a supporter who was a lesbian...
"I was reminded that it is my obligation as an elected official in a pluralistic society and as a christian, to remain open to the possibility that my unwillingness to support gay marriage is misguided

I think the fact that he values the fact that we live in a pluralistic society drives his inclination to compromise. He lacks the hubris to claim "my way or the highway." Oddly that was one of my and many other's chief complaints about W.

[Ms. Toad]

118. We'll have to disagree.

I was addressing what I was picking up from how he talked about people he knew or encountered who were gay - and, frankly, the comment you quoted is a perfect example. Intellectualizing, emotionally distancing, and mouthing the right words. The position is political - the way he talks about it, the tone, the word choices, the affect all of those things signal what is going on at a gut level.

Contrast that statement with the much warmer, more personal statement of support, "Obama said his daughters, Malia and Sasha, have friends whose parents are same-sex couples. "It wouldn't dawn on them that somehow their friends' parents would be treated differently. It doesn't make sense to them and frankly, that's the kind of thing that prompts a change in perspective."

That doesn't mean the change (or that his earlier position) wasn't also political.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

64. Difference he, the current president was not vicious about it. He did not run on the issue and brag

about it.

[The Link]

74. Having a surrogate like McClurkin wasn't vicious?

Ok.

[Ikonoklast]

94. "Surrogate"? Really?

You are vastly over-stating his importance to the electorate.

I seem to not remember McClurkin on the campaign trail stumping for Mr. Obama, going state to state in order to incite the homophobe vote; please correct me if I am amiss in my memory.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

109. Exactly!!!

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

108. No. Elton John performed for Rush Limbaugh. Does that make him vicious?

ETA: Barack Obama did not run on a DOMA-like platform. He has his won personal views, but he didn't go around on the campaign trail bragging about his disdain for gay marriage. He just didn't.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

110. This doesn't sound like someone who's vicious...

DAKAR, Senegal (AP) — President Barack Obama on Thursday praised the Supreme Court's ruling on same-sex marriage as a "victory for American democracy" but clashed with his African host over gay rights in a sign of how far the movement has to go internationally.

Obama said recognition of gay unions in the United States should cross state lines and that equal rights should be recognized universally. It was his first chance to expand on his thoughts about the ruling, which was issued Wednesday as he flew to Senegal, one of many African countries that outlaw homosexuality.

Senegalese President Macky Sall rebuffed Obama's call for Africans to give gays equal rights under the law.

"We are still not ready to decriminalize homosexuality," Sall said, while insisting that the country is "very tolerant" and needs more time to digest the issue without pressure. "This does not mean we are homophobic."

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-clashes-african-host-over-gay-rights-134627018.html

----

Obama goes to other countries to push for marriage equality, even ones that tend to be more homophobic and sexist. Yeah, that's a VICIOUS man, he is!!

[HooptieWagon]

112. Vey true.

However, their actions (although callous and political at the time) are partially mitigated by later regret...especially when they act to correct themselves afterwards, such as Obama ending DADT. There is a lot I'm critical of Obama for, but IMO he took a good leadership role in gay rights. I wish he took as strong a leadership role in other issues.

[bike man]

10. Only Bill Clinton signed it into law. He was for it before he was against it I guess. nt

[boston bean]

19. I'm not saying he doesn't deserve scorn, but a veto would have been over ridden

I think that would have been preferable.. Because as it stands he appears to have signd it for political reasons, even though he didn't want to. The election was coming up.. Sad state of affairs all the way around.

[HooptieWagon]

59. To be honest, he did later express regret at signing it.

It appears he signed the bill as a political calculation. Obviously, he should have stuck to his guns and vetoed it if he thought it was wrong. Even Obama seemed to have come around, reportedly due to pressure from his girls.
Perhaps we should commend those polititians that have changed their minds, rather than condemn them. After all, many of the Dem leadership 50 years ago were once segregationists, later supported racial equality.

[OnyxCollie]

79. Lt. Gen DeWitt is said to have expressed regret for his actions, too.

Sorry!

[HooptieWagon]

98. No he didn't.

. He hid documents from the Courts, and ignored Court orders to stop. There is no evidence he regretted or apologized for his actions, nor did he do any actions in behalf of J-A's afterward.

[OnyxCollie]

111. That's why I wrote

"is said."

I have no doubt that Lt. Gen. DeWitt had no regrets for what he had done. Others have attributed moral failing to the internment, however, in an attempt to hide the real cause (economic.)

[HiPointDem]

83. pressure from his *girls*? pressure from his donors more likely.

[HooptieWagon]

96. I recall an article that quotes Obama saying ...

...that Sasha and Malia changed his mind.

[HiPointDem]

107. yeah, politicians always make major political decisions based on what their 12-year-olds tell them.

whatever.

[HooptieWagon]

113. Guess what, you're wrong again. Link...

http://m.cbsnews.com/storysynopsis.rbml?pageType=eveningNews&catid=57431342&feed_id=29

[HiPointDem]

114. guess what, nice story, & i don't believe it. politicians don't make major political decisions

because of what their kids think.

[HooptieWagon]

115. Obama admitted he was wrong.

A lesson some DUers haven't learned.

[HiPointDem]

120. guess what. nothing to do with obama being right or wrong. political decisions aren't made

because of politicians' moral visions.

[bike man]

101. And a veto would have put him on record as 'this is a bad bill, won't be approved by me because

it is a bad bill'

If it was then overridden, the scorn would have been on congress, not the president.

Imagine! A president standing on principle.

[boston bean]

104. That was my point.

[rhett o rick]

11. How very absurd! Of course Congress shares responsibility. But Pres. Clinton and Ms. Clinton

are now jumping on the band wagon 17 years later. I wonder if DOMA would have gotten overturned if Ms. Clinton was president.

[dsc]

16. I would imagine so since her court appointments would like have been as liberal as Obama's

and Bill Clinton's appointees provided as many votes as Obama's in any case. (2 each)

[kestrel91316]

78. Nobody forced him to sign it. He bears considerable responsibility.

That said, in today's climate I think he would take note of how the majority favors gay rights. He was always good at testing which way the wind was blowing.

[dsc]

84. He tried to permit gays to openly serve

when at most 40% agreed with him.

[Coccydynia]

86. Ever heard of a god damned veto?

How many years will we have to wait to close down Gitmo after Obama tied his OWN hands by signing the bill that prevented him from closing Gitmo.

[dsc]

87. every heard of veto proof margins

you might, just might, want to crack open these things called history books once in awhile. Both houses passed with veto proof margins.

[Coccydynia]

88. Ever heard of standing on principle?

Even Obama's hero, Reagan, vetoed on principle and was overridden.

[dsc]

89. I am not saying he shouldn't have or couldn't have vetoed

but the fact is the law would still been there.

[Coccydynia]

97. Probably. However, after making a stand

Perhaps some Democrats would have reconsidered. On the other hand, Clinton was a Blue Dog, which in my book is Republican Lightz

[PoliticAverse]

2. Yeah that was pretty hypocritical there... As Colbert put it...

"it was passed ... for the sacred purpose of getting Bill Clinton re-elected"

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/06/27/colbert-tells-straight-people-how-to-protect-their-marriages-from-gay-threats/

[Nye Bevan]

5. I like Bill, but he certainly knew how to play politics to his advantage.

Like when he went back to Arkansas during the campaign for the execution of the mentally retarded guy.

[dsc]

7. that is a total lie

it was a GOP Congress that passed it, yes with heavy Democratic support, but it was a GOP Congress which I am going to go out on a limb here and say didn't want Clinton reelected.

[Myrina]

13. ... and he couldn't have vetoed it?

Really?

[dsc]

15. He could have but it would have been overridden

but you wrote, and I quote, it was passed for the sacred purpose of getting Clinton reelected. That was a lie, plain and simple.

[WinkyDink]

38. You DO know who Stephen Colbert is, right?

[AtheistCrusader]

67. So what if it was overriden?

It's not like they impeach you when they override a veto.

He pandered. He tried to get more votes. This issue would get more centrist votes.
It was an unprincipled self-serving political gamble, and it worked for him. Don't know why this would be controversial or hard for you to see.

[dsc]

85. the law would still exist

Hence to blame him and not even mention the Congress is pretty dishonest.

[AtheistCrusader]

99. Was the 1996 congress up in front of a microphone somewhere talking about how great it was this was

overturned?

I missed that.

Everyone knows the president doesn't pass legislation, he or she only signs it once the Congress passes it.
He had an opportunity to stand against it. He didn't. He went along to get along in an election year. This is not news. The fact they would have overridden his veto doesn't change the moral implications of signing it.

[dsc]

100. well actually Pat Leahy who voted for it

issued a statement. Tom Harkin who voted for it, issued a statement. I could go on but won't.

[AtheistCrusader]

102. Oh, I'm sure they did.

And there are several threads and online callouts going around for people who voted for that law. It's not like this one article here on Bill is the only one anywhere calling out hypocrisy.

[graham4anything]

4. Thank you Hillary Clinton.Look at what Rand Paul said against it(bring a barf bag Rand is fuming mad

[rhett o rick]

12. What thanks does Ms. Clinton deserve? nm

[graham4anything]

17. Elton John has said she is a major supporter & Elton is the #1 fundraiser for AIDS in the world

so I trust his opinion on the matter
In fact, Elton was very upset when Hillary lost in 2008, for just this reason.
Now I did not support Hillary in 2008, however

What would Bob Dole and Jeb Bush and W and 41 and Rand and Ron Paul have done? NOTHING at all.

Why the hatred for Hillary?

Hillary and Bill are not the same person.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

22. Elton John supports NAFTA?

[graham4anything]

23. One thing is sure, after both court rulings, LBJ has moved to #1 as the greatest president of all.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

24. Elton John support LBJ?

[bullwinkle428]

36. Well, not sure about his support for LBJ, but we know he supports Limbaugh!

[Phlem]

93. Yep.

Also Hillary Clinton has no skeletons in her closet!

-p

[WinkyDink]

39. Hardly. See: "Conflict, VietNam."

[whatchamacallit]

9. Politicians...

[unblock]

14. he did acknowledge this fact, maybe a few months ago, and that he had since had a change of heart.

or perhaps simply that he had sensed a shift in the political winds.


to me, this is the most amazing thing about the timeline. 17 years ago bill clinton, as potus, felt the politics of gay rights were such that he needed to throw a mostly democratic constituency under the bus for his own political power.

and this year, the potus, vpotus, bill clinton, and many other democrats are actually falling over themselves to position themselves in support of gay rights.

i know 17 years sounds like a long time, and of course it's a disgrace that we have even had to fight this battle at all. but in comparison to the timeline of progress on other forms of bigotry, the last 17 years have actually been remarkable.

[graham4anything]

21. +1. FORWARD, not harping on the past and going backward.

I have no idea, but is this anti-Clinton happening today, an attempt to divide the party going into 2016?

And, it shows FORWARD is the optimum word, instead of people wanting to go BACKWARD.

[Maximumnegro]

37. Clinton is an azzhat. How is this a surprise.

The Clintons are inherently divisive because they have a lifetime of wanting it both ways. By Clintons I really mean Bill, because as awesome as Hillary may be Bill always wants the spotlight and always ends up putting his foot in his mouth.

The biggest obstacle for a Hillary presidency is her damn husband.

[graham4anything]

43. Hillary is her OWN person. She is not owned by anyone.

[Skittles]

49. CORRECT

VERY much her own person

[Whisp]

65. i'm sure he has sleepless nights about this now, along with Rwanda and all the other crap

he is responsible, or partly responsible for.

That's a Clinton for ya. Pretend apologies go a long way to a rapt and eager audience.

[unblock]

90. i tend to think most politicians make most big decisions based on politics rather than conviction

i have no doubt that both his decision to sign doma then and his decision to apologize for it now are cynical appeals to the prevailing political winds. cynical politics are so common that even when a president is being genuine it's hard to be sure there's not a political motive in there somewhere.

[duffyduff]

119. If he becomes contrite over his signing the Glass-Steagall repeal

despite the fact Congress would have overridden any veto, then I will believe him.

Bill Clinton needs to retire from public life.

[William769]

18. He has made amends.

I met him and Hilary in 1993 followed his presidency closely (the good and the bad). I do not regret voting for him either time (given what was before him the previous 12 years).

He's all right in my book And will be remembered as one the the great Presidents of our time.

[truebluegreen]

61. "...of our time" is a pretty low bar. imho.

[William769]

62. Ok, my time.

Better?

[truebluegreen]

63. Whatever you like.

[Orsino]

117. No, he hasn't.

He might have reformed, but he has not refunded the happiness and monetary benefits he helped steal from US citizens.

IMO, "making amends" really isn't possible. He's had all the marriage and money he needs for a long time. Changing his mind isn't amends.

But it isn't nothing. In today's American politicscape, he and Hillary look progressive, and do deserve some credit. Along with a mountain of debits.

[Arugula Latte]

20. Slick Willy.

[Bandit]

25. In Clinton's first few months in Office he spent much of his political capital trying to allow gays

in the military. He caught holy hell about it and had to settle for DADT which was a whole fucking bunch better than what had been. People went to jail for being gay in the military and Clinton changed that. Now the Military could no longer go after gays unless the gays brought the matter up themselves and then the most the military could do was a discharge.. No longer could they just send them to jail. so bad mouth Clinton all you want on the gay issue but he did an awful lot to make life better for all.

[William769]

26. ...

[DURHAM D]

35. Thank you.

[PennsylvaniaMatt]

40. Took the words out of my mouth....

I was going to post about how President Clinton pushed hard to end the ban on gays in the military as one of his first acts in office.

This country has evolved DRASTICALLY on the issue of gay rights, just in the past 8 years, let alone 17 since DOMA was passed.

[AtheistCrusader]

68. Mixed bag.

Thanks though, I had forgotten that he did stand up for that. I remember it now.

[AndyA]

27. Yeah, thanks a lot Bill.

Special thanks to everyone still in Congress who voted for that piece of crap that discriminated against people all these years. If it's unconstitutional now, it was unconstitutional then and it shouldn't have ever been passed.

Some of us won't forget that as you gloat over this victory.

[hrmjustin]

28. I am glad Bill Clinton has seen the error of his ways.

[Recursion]

29. He said, when signing it, he didn't like the law

But that it wasn't a fight he could win at that moment.

[Octafish]

30. What are you trying to do, wreck a photo op?

C'mon. What is this place turning into? Business Insider. Really?



Wonder what the former president would say should Congreff ever repeal the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act that repealed the Glass-Steagall Act?

[DURHAM D]

31. As a long time LGBT activist I find this sort of OP title very sad

because it reflects such a profound level of ignorance regarding our history. Perhaps you have failed to notice that we do not have a federal amendment to the constitution prohibiting same-sex marriage. You can thank President Clinton for that as he took the advice of progressive and LGBT leaders and signed the damn thing.

[graham4anything]

45. that would spoil the rant.

[Arugula Latte]

46. Passing a Constitutional amendment is no easy feat. It takes years

and the cooperation of 2/3s of the House and Senate and 3/4s of the states' legislatures. It's not like someone could have snapped their fingers and put an amendment into the Constitution.

[DURHAM D]

50. Yes. And at the time it was not just possible it was probable.

Also, the Democrats were working hard to stem the tide of take-overs of state legislatures and governor's offices by the Republicans and the amendment was a slam dunk issue for them. DOMA was designed to side-track the tsunami.

[AtheistCrusader]

70. I disagree.

We have not come SO FAR in 15 years that it is impossible now, and not impossible then.

[rhett o rick]

69. Let me see if I get your point. We should thank Pres Clinton for 17 years of DOMA

because it could have been worse? Plez. The last 17 years have been hell for some. I doubt they would agree with you.

[dsc]

103. If we had had the constitutional amendment

then it seems to me that instead of 17 we would have had about 100. I am not saying I know for sure we would have had one, but it was certainly a possibility and had it happened then it would have been all but impossible to overturn.

[malaise]

34. Didn't he use DOMA for his re-election?

I am always amazed that he gets a free pass for a lot of things. Clinton is no liberal.

[closeupready]

44. Spot on, malaise.

Completely agree.

[Apophis]

51. Neither Clinton is a liberal.

[DURHAM D]

52. Neither is the current President.

[Major Hogwash]

72. Yes.

He bragged about it on tv in a long speech he gave about saving marriage.
Then he bit his lower lip and held up his right thumb.

Clinton had become a caricature by 1996.

[closeupready]

42. He did indeed sign it, I remember - it was like nothing to him,

a joke or something. I don't remember him struggling too long before doing so.

Anyway, I'm glad he and Hillary have finally 'evolved' - nonetheless, as the saying goes, "a friend in need is a friend indeed" and I do not count Bill as a friend to the GLBT community; when he could have used his power to be a friend, he chose to empower bigots.

JMHO.

[BlueStreak]

54. If he wants to be helpful, he should renounce NAFTA and the Pacific deal

rather than waiting for another another 10 years of pain and suffering by average Americans.

It isn't particularly helpful to throw the LGBT community under the bus, then 20 years later saying "I'm so happy being under the bus for 20 years didn't kill you."

[rhett o rick]

56. More importantly how does Ms. Clinton stand on NAFTA and the Pacific deal? nm

[BlueStreak]

58. As far as we know, she is also a "New Democrat"

Which is to say a person who embraces nearly all of the horrible policies that Republics push, while still trying to convince us that he or she is a real populist.

At least Republicans are honest about it.

[DonCoquixote]

55. That's ok

People are ready to elect his wife into office in 2016, who will be a "fighter" for progressive ideals, forgetting she fought to kill them.

[William769]

66. Whats that say about President Obama?

They are on the same page. IMHO, thats a good thing.

[bigwillq]

57. Hey, Bill: Take your wife and go on a long vacation

Like never come back.

Enjoy.

[AtomicKitten]

60. +1

[Major Hogwash]

71. No shit.

He's like a black hole, he sucks everything in to which no light can escape.

[The empressof all]

77. Yep...what you said....

Didn't care for him then...Hate what he did to my party during his terms...He still leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Honestly...he's one of the major factors I can't wrap my head around Hillary....

[4Q2u2]

80. 1%er

Maybe he can go to one of the Whitest and Richest places in America, oh that's right he already lives there.

[Whisp]

91. ++++++++++++

[silvershadow]

81. He was a moderate Republican back then...or so it would seem, anyway? I have no explanation for his

actions, though I am sure he does. Now, NAFTA, that's a core Democratic...no, wait...nevermind.

[Nye Bevan]

82. I wonder whether he would praise the exoneration of Ricky Ray Rector,

without mentioning that he approved his execution?

[Phlem]

92. And we're still dealing with his

NAFTA and it's evil off springs.

"Big D#*!"

-p