Chicago’s Windy City Times—one of the city’s two gay newspapers—announced that it will publish a story in tomorrow’s edition of the weekly detailing Barack Obama’s once-professed support for same-sex marriage. From the press release:
During his run for Illinois state Senate in 1996, Barack Obama stated his unequivocal support for gay marriage, according to an exclusive story in the Jan. 14, 2009 Windy City Times newspaper.
President-elect Obama’s answer to a 1996 Outlines newspaper question on marriage was: “I favor legalizing same-sex marriages, and would fight efforts to prohibit such marriages.” There was no use of the phrase “civil unions.”
This answer is among those included in this week’s Windy City Times feature on Obama’s evolving position on gay marriage. Windy City Times also includes his answers to the candidate questionnaire of IMPACT, at one time a gay political action committee in Illinois. In that survey he also stated his support of same-sex marriage.
The story isn’t posted yet on WCT’s website—but you can read it now by downloading this PDF.
“Before Marriage Equality Before He Was Against It”
Are you even TRYING anymore?
“Before Marriage Equality Before He Was Against It”
Are you even TRYING anymore?
And we’re supposed to be shocked by this? I thought this was a known fact that he really supports gay marriage but takes the semantic two-step route of supporting “civil unions” in order to have a chance in hell of getting elected.
Real life quote from Obama “I’m a Democrat, I’ll say anything as long as you vote for me”
I’m sorry I screwed up the Internet, Non—wait a second. YOU DOUBLE POSTED?!?! ARE YOU EVEN TRYING ANYMORE? CHRIST!
Oh no! A politician politicking!
Sorry Dan, it seems that when I’m actively capturing streaming DVD porn movies to save locally I double post. Will never happen again again again again!
Sorry Dan, it seems that when I’m actively capturing streaming DVD porn movies to save locally I double post. Will never happen again again again again!
Non has been double-posting for days. Personal issue, I suppose.
Not surprised about Obama’s reverse course. He’s done the same even on his pre-nomination promises to post-nomination. He’s from the “windy city”, which I think I read means more than just the weather-related wind.
Why do the men I love and trust turn into fucking liars? First my (ex) boyfriend now Barack Obama. I hate you assholes.
Your stupidity really knows no bounds, Savage. You should really consider going to college and actually STUDYING politics before you talk about it. Linking to other people’s ideas and news articles does not make you smart. It just makes you another clueless liberal misrepresenting the real progressives.
Who’dathunkit?!
Damn it, why didn’t I vote for that one politician who had never changed positions on an issue? That politician was so awesome. Who was that again?
Mao
@11
welcome to the internet, this is called a “blog.”
Are Gay Americans thinking someone else, A Black man, a White woman, a Someone else is going to do the fighting for Civil Rights and Equality for them? Get a clue you dizzy Queens and Bull Dykes, the fight for Civil Rights is YOUR fight NOT theirs. Invite others to join; you bet, but don’t expect them to carry the banner, they won’t.
Sargon, Dan has no idea what that means.
He’s been getting rich off of providing a target market (us gays) to advertisers for years with no “advancement” to show for it. When it comes to rights, he stopped lobbying with the last peanut butter and jelly sandwich.
More interesting than this rather pedestrian positional tap dance is the exposure of Obama’s prehistory only after his election to the Presidency.
It’s rare that any such fragment escapes notice in a two-year presidential campaign. Here’s another one, also uncovered today.
I’m so very relieved that this did not come out before the election.
Dan,
This isn’t too surprising. Jesse Jackson was known as pro-life/anti-choice before switiching to pro-choice later in the 70’s. Politicians switch positions, even hotly-debated positions from time to time.
ACTIONS speak louder than words.
That said, I expect him to cancel the stupid Don’t Ask Don’t Tell But Out All The Lesbians Who Can Pilot Planes Better Than You rule.
He’ll just order them to do it and give them a deadline.
It’s that simple.
Tough shit, Dan. Dennis Kucinich was the only 2008 presidential candidate to fully support gay marriage, yet you and Eli Sanders relentlessly mocked the man.
@3 But now his IS elected, so why isn’t he changing his tune? The argument from a lot of people during the election was that he was just taking certain positions to get into office. But now he’s gotten elected and it seems, if anything, he’s actually shifted to the right considering most of his cabinet appointments.
@16 Right on!
@22 – Yeah, but Dan and Eli were never going to support Dennis “not a chance in hell of winning” Kucinich, because that would mean President McCain, and for all the weeping and gnashing of teeth about Rick Warren etc., the fact is that we’d all rather have President Obama than President McCain, and candidates for national election can’t win if they explicitly support “same-sex marriage.” Is that wrong, morally reprehensible and antithetical to the idea of a free society? YES. But it is also the current reality of this country.
@23,
Maybe because he’d rather fight for change that’s possible. The Congress and Senate can’t do shit about marriage rights except overturn DOMA. Until the Supreme Court decides that marriage rights are protected by the 14th Amendment (as they did in Loving v. Virginia) the states get to decide whether gays and lesbians can marry. Why should Obama take a controversial position that isn’t going to do shit except reinvigorate and reunify social conservatives?
@24 –
I think you’re giving the Stranger’s influence over national politics a little too much credit. Wouldn’t it be nice if our local alternative newspaper would, you know, be a little bit alternative?
Support a Dennis Kucinich? Why the fuck not, Stranger? Take the moral high ground for a change.
22. It is well-documented that gays and lesbians want civil rights, but we will not vote for civil rights.
We want civil rights, but we will not vote for the civil rights candidates. And we will not vote for the political parties that would give us those civil rights.
We vote the way most every other American votes: like we’re rooting for a sports team. We want to win by any means necessary, and if that means voting for someone who’s stated over and over and over again that he’s is not on our side, we’ll do it.
Either that, or the political parties and candidates that would give us our civil rights have been so repugnant to us that we’re willing to settle for second class citizenship rather than vote for them. I’ve not figured it out yet.
Despite what was said and done in the past, versus now, Obama will be a better president when it comes to gay rights than just about anyone else who actually had a chance at winning the office. One can generally support a candidate, or president, and not agree 100 percent with everything that person says or does.
Why are SeaGays waiting for someone to say its ok for them to do something.
Go out and do it–get arrested, sit in on the lunch counter, mob the marriage license bureau and stage sit downs until dogs and fire hoses blast you out.
Doesn’t anyone know how to protest any more?
I was for Dan Savage before I was against him. Or something.
I guess that was before he got bitten by his political Jesus bug. “God is in the mix”, as if civil marriage were some sort of superstitious cocktail or something.
Uggh! How is this just NOW coming out?
Wait, isn’t Michelle a tranny?
The last supposedly pro-gay Democratic president gave us DOMA and Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell. Until you see a poll that shows the majority of Americans are for gay rights, I wouldn’t hold my breath for much on that front from this one.
22, Dennis Kucinich is free to be as liberal as he is precisely because he’s not a real contender for winning. Its laughable to think if Kucinich had been the democratic nominee you think he would have still fully supported gay marriage.
I love how Dan posts something with little commentary, and then a ton of people make comments about it as if Dan made a very specific point with the post, Dan is either stupid b/c duh the imagined point goes without saying, or Dan is a pathetic faggot can’t he just get over it, etc., etc. Hey did anyone stop to think that maybe he just found the item interesting, and wanted to share it with everyone to let them do with it what they will? No one else has ever done that, emailed a friend a news article they thought was interesting?