Monthly Archives: February 2011

Roundup: Presidential Hopefuls on Obama's DOMA Dereliction

We're reviewing the potential Presidential candidates in 2012 to see how they reacted to last week's DOMA development. If we missed anyone, please let us know in the comments!

Rick Santorum:

"President Obama's refusal to defend a law that was overwhelmingly supported on both sides of the aisle and signed into law by a president of his own party is an affront to the will of the people. This is yet another example of our president's effort to erode the very traditions that have made our country the greatest nation on earth."

Michelle Bachmann:

“I will continue to do everything in my power to fight back against Barack Obama’s attacks on marriage.” (source: The Washington Independent)

Newt Gingrich:

Gingrich slammed Obama for his decision, telling Newsmax that he is not a “one-person Supreme Court” and his decision sets a “very dangerous precedent” that must not be allowed to stand. [video here]

“First of all, he campaigned in favor of [the law]. He is breaking his word to the American people,” Gingrich says. Second, he swore an oath on the Bible to become president that he would uphold the Constitution and enforce the laws of the United States. He is not a one-person Supreme Court. The idea that we now have the rule of Obama instead of the rule of law should frighten everybody."

“The fact that the left likes the policy is allowing them to ignore the fact that this is a very unconstitutional act,” Gingrich said. (source)

Mike Huckabee:

[The President] said because some lower court decided that a part of DOMA was unconstitutional that he would not enforce it. OK. By that logic, he should not try to implement Obamacare, because some lower courts have already decided that it's unconstitutional.

That's hypocritical. It's hypocritical and it's dishonest, because when he ran for president, Chris, he said he supported traditional marriage. He's on the record. Now, the question is was he dishonest then? Is he dishonest now? Or did he change his view, and if he did when and why? (source: Fox News Sunday)

Mitt Romney:

Romney called the decision "an unfortunate mistake," saying Obama "has an obligation as chief executive to enforce and defend the laws of the nation. He should not abdicate that responsibility based on his own interpretations and personal views."

Tim Pawlenty:

“I firmly believe that marriage is between a man and a woman, as President Obama told us he believed in 2008. But now President Obama and his Justice Department would have us believe that traditional marriage laws are unconstitutional.

“I oppose the Justice Department’s political decision to reverse its policy defending the Defense of Marriage Act, a federal statute passed overwhelmingly by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton. The job of the Justice Department is to enforce and defend laws passed by Congress and signed by the President.”

I am disappointed that the President and his Justice Department have abdicated this responsibility, all for the sake of partisan political gain.” (source: The Washington Independent)

Ron Paul:

“Today’s announcement that the Obama Administration will abandon its obligation to enforce DOMA is truly disappointing and shows a profound lack of respect for the Constitution and the Rule of Law.

... “The Administration’s dereliction throws the door wide open for special interests to abuse Federal power and attempt to force Iowa to recognize non-traditional marriage. Upcoming battles are looming just over the horizon." (source)

Hermain Cain:

I think it is a breach of presidential duty bordering on treason. The oath of office by the president says that he will protect, observe, and defend the Constitution of the United States of America, which means all of its subsequent laws. The fact that he says that he has asked the Department of Justice not to enforce it, to me, is a breach duty as President of the United States. (source)

Mitch Daniels

Asked if Mitch Daniels, the Republican governor of Indiana and a possible presidential candidate, had commented on the marriage decision, a spokeswoman said that he “hasn’t, and with other things we have going on here right now, he has no plans.” (source: NYT)

Sarah Palin [update - Sarah Palin released this exclusive statement to us on her position]

"I have always believed that marriage is between one man and one woman. Like the majority of Americans, I support the Defense of Marriage Act and find it appalling that the Obama administration decided not to defend this federal law which was enacted with broad bipartisan support and signed into law by a Democrat president. It's appalling, but not surprising that the President has flip-flopped on yet another issue from his stated position as a candidate to a seemingly opposite position once he was elected."

Article source: The Hill, "Santorum, Bachmann lead way in criticizing Obama on DOMA decision." (

BREAKING: Speaker Boehner Says House Likely to Defend DOMA!

Your calls and letters are working!  Speaker Boehner just told The Hill that the House is likely to do something on DOMA soon.

To tell your Congressman to defend DOMA, click here. (since it only takes a few moments, ask a few of your friends to do the same!)

URGENT: Court Sets Deadline in DOMA Case – Contact Congress Today!

Dear Friend of Marriage,

Our task just became even more urgent.

On Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit gave us just three weeks to ensure that Congress steps up to defend DOMA. By March 18th, the Obama administration and the State of Massachusetts must agree on a new plan for how the pending DOMA litigation will proceed.

That’s right, when President Obama declared the Defense of Marriage Act unconstitutional last week, the Court ordered the administration to get together with the plaintiffs to develop a plan for the litigation – Eric Holder sitting down with Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley to plan the future of DOMA!

If Congress doesn’t step up quickly to defend DOMA, the Defense of Marriage Act may soon be history – the victim of an administration that is deliberately undercutting the very laws it is duty-bound to defend.

Gay marriage advocates are ramping up pressure on Congress with a new “Don’t Defend DOMA” campaign. Activists in Congress are proposing legislation to repeal DOMA.

It’s time to step it up! Take action today!

Thousands of you have already petitioned your Congressman to intervene on behalf of DOMA in the challenge filed by the State of Massachusetts. But if you haven’t yet done so, please use this link to send your email right now. Your calls and emails could make the difference – not just for DOMA, but for the future of marriage in our nation.

Over the next three weeks, Congress needs to hear from tens of thousands of Americans demanding that their elected representatives stand up for marriage and the rule of law. No president has the authority to unilaterally declare laws unconstitutional – that’s why we have courts, and our adversarial legal system.

Please forward this email to at least five friends today. Use the buttons at the top of this message to spread the word on Facebook and Twitter. Or just pick up the phone and call a friend. Whatever the means, I urge you to help get the word out. The future of marriage depends on it.

For two years, we’ve watched the fox guarding the DOMA hen house. Now the mask is off and the Obama administration has revealed its true colors. But if Congress doesn’t act soon, it will be too late.

We have 18 days. The clock is ticking. We need your action today.

Brian Brown

Brian S. Brown,
National Organization for Marriage

Imperial County Ends the Standing Question?

Bob Unruh reports:

A newly elected county clerk in California says he has the answer to the question of "standing" being considered right now by the state Supreme Court in response to a query from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which is considering Proposition 8 – the constitutional amendment that defines marriage as between one man and one woman only.

"I took an oath of office to uphold the California Constitution, and Prop 8 is part of the Constitution," said Chuck Storey, the new county clerk for the County of Imperial. (source)

Maryland Prepares for Referendum Fight (if it comes to that)

Maggie Clark:

One day after the Maryland Senate voted to approve same-sex marriage, representatives from national organizations, including the Family Research Council and the National Organization for Marriage, were in Annapolis lending their support to the fight against same-sex marriage in the state.

Opponents on Friday were well organized and said Thursday's vote in the Senate does not represent the opinion of the majority of Marylanders.

"There's no question that the numbers are there to overturn this...we believe that there are a lot of people who are sitting timid and quiet and not speaking out on this issue. We're not going to fail," said Rev. Pierre Bynum, chaplain for the Family Research Council and a Maryland resident.

Family Research Council leaders are expecting Maryland's churches "will be animated and mobilized," and will be the source of most of the 53,650 signatures needed to get same-sex marriage on the 2012 ballot.

"There are churches in our coalition that have 20,000 people in their church, so it's a question of just circulating it (a petition) among a few churches," Bynum said. (source)

Andrew Sullivan on Maggie Gallagher's "Lies and Propaganda"

Andrew does his typical thing, responding to Maggie Gallagher's Fox News interview by accusing her of bad faith: "lies and propaganda."

Is SSM a Done Deal in Maryland?

The gay press is reporting that thanks to a "ferocious campaign" by "anti-gay Christianists" a House vote in Maryland that was thought to be an easy win is now in jeopardy:

The coming marriage equality vote in the Maryland House of Delegates is now thought to be in jeopardy due to a ferocious campaign by anti-gay Christianists. Only a couple of days ago the vote was considered to be an easy win. Lou Chibarro reports at Washington Blade:
Backers said that as of this week, the number of delegates who have publicly declared their support for the bill was just short of the 71 votes needed in the 141-member House. "There's an effort to derail this bill like none I've seen before," said gay State Sen. Richard Madaleno (D-Montgomery County), the author and one of the lead sponsors of the marriage equality bill in the Senate. (source)

Obama's DOMA Decree: Responses & Reactions

There's been an avalanche of news relating to the President's decision to stop defending DOMA. NOM has been on the front ranks responding and taking the next steps to defend marriage at this critical time. Here's a summary of our activities so far:

Numerous organizations have issued statements condemning the decision:

Here are some commentaries by top pundits:

Please continue to check back here in the coming days as we continue to keep you up to speed on our efforts (and yours!) to defend DOMA!

Want to sell Lady Gaga CDs? Sign up for her LGBT lecture first

Star Tribune: "In order to carry an exclusive version of the new Lady Gaga album, Target executives listened to a lecture from the diva."

Gays Who Don't Want Gay Marriage

Natalie Neutsch in the Daily Beast:

For all the effort we've put into fighting for the right to do it, the dirty little secret is that many gays are simply not sure about same-sex marriage.

... there's a subtler, even more insidious anxiety lurking beneath the surface of our gay-marriage win. It's the unsettling possibility that we've spent the past couple of decades fighting to fit into an institution that doesn't necessarily fit us. (source)

What reporters took away from Maggie's MD testimony

Last Friday Maggie testified at the SSM hearing in Maryland. We'll have audio of her testimony up here soon so you can judge for yourself.

From the Baltimore Sun "Maryland Politics" blog:

Pastors, lawyers and the chairwoman of the National Organization for Marriage were among the opponents to testify this afternoon. "Most of my adult relationships are untouched by the law," said Maggie Gallagher, chairwoman of the National Organization for Marriage. Of heterosexual marriage, she said, "these are the only unions that create new life." (

From the Washington Blade:

Several witnesses testifying before the House panel, such as Maggie Gallagher, president of the National Organization of Marriage, also testified at the Senate hearing.

“None of us have the right to redefine marriage,” Gallagher testified on Friday. “You need to bring together male and female to keep the human race going.” (

And this, from an interview Maggie gave to the Southern Maryland online:

"We expect to take a major role if the House votes wrong and the governor signs it," said Maggie Gallagher, chairman of the board of the National Organization for Marriage.

"I think this is going to end up with the people of Maryland if the House passes it. There were polls in California that showed that Prop 8 would fail by 10 points. But we're really confident that we can get this issue to the public and that the people of Maryland will do what people in every other state have done," Gallagher said. (

Video: Jon Stewart Goes After MSNBC, OBAMA

He's a funny guy, even when he's picking on us. Funnier when he's picking on MSNBC:

Sunday Funnies: Obama's Priorities


House leader surprised by Obama not defending DOMA

The House Republican Whip speaks:

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor says he was "taken aback" by President Barack Obama ordering his administration to stop defending the constitutionality of a federal law that bans recognition of gay marriage.

The Virginia Republican said Thursday that he'd never been around when a president decided not to defend a law on the books. He says the U.S. Congress is mulling its options on the 15-year-old Defense of Marriage Act. [source]

Breaking News: Imperial County Re-Enters Prop 8 Fight

The newly elected county clerk of Imperial County has asked the 9th Circuit for the right to intervene.

This is very big. The reason Imperial County was held to lack standing is that it was only the assistant clerk and not the elected county clerk who asked to intervene in the first place.