Maybe the bigots will finally shoot themselves in the foot by trying to make it an election topic — most of “the” American public couldn’t care less right now about making equal rights for us a priority. They can’t pay for food and housing and want to see the culprits of this shi%§y situation being brought to justice.
Although, I probably give “them” too much credit… and “they” tend to have the shortest memory amongst all nations.
My gaydar is going wild with this one. I’ve seen videos of him before too, srs.
Most the House Council can do is file Amicus briefs, only the Justice Department can actually defend federal law in court, and Justice is part of the Executive branch.
Boner is as boner named, a nob head of the first degree. Mr Sobby, weeping and blubbering at the drop of a hanky. He’s more nelly than a nelly on nelly street handing out nelly balloons. Republican’s are utter effin morons and hypocrites to a last one of em’.
I must admit when I see republicans it does make me reappraise my dislike of my dislike of the conservative party
Where are all the Log Cabin members to pressure Boner to stop this nonsense????
“The constitutionality of this law should be determined by the courts — not by the president unilaterally”
Yes, because what kind of world would we live in, if the democratically elected determine what happens as opposed to the courts?
It’s off topic I know, but can someone explain the logic to that quote? I hear it a lot from American politicians, how it should be left to the courts to decide, and it just strikes me as odd.
The directly or indirectly elected executive branch doesn’t usually determine which laws are constitutional. Like, anywhere.
Lucius, well said and succintly. The legislature enacts laws; the executive should implement them. But where a nation has a formal constitution, legislation must accord with that constitution. If it appears it doesn’t, the executive may propose to the legislature what to do either to bring the legislation into accord with the constitution or to repeal the legislation. The Obama regime believes DOMA unconstitutional and is not therefore seeking to defend its constitutionality in the courts, but I understand it will continue to act to execute the legislation as required until it is amended to bring it back into constitutionality or until it is, as the Obama presidency wants, repealed. I think I have it right. And what Boner is saying is that the Presidency should stay out of ruling whether DOMA is constitutional or not. Indeed it should – that’s the court’s function. But the executive should not spend money defending the constitutionality of a piece of law it thinks unconstitutional.
The economy, jobs and housing are the most important things that should be priorities for everyone going on in the Congress – not defending old and outdated unconitutional laws from the 1990s!!!!!!
He appears to have had his eyes done, (bags removed) and he’s wearing fouindation and mascara (lol)
What with that supercilious old lady smile I think the lady doth protest too much.
Oh come on!! He’s gay.
Look at him.
This guy certainly looks suspect to me, is he just another Old Closet Queen bashing Gays to hide his own insecurities about HIS own sexuality? Mmmm.
A bit rich coming from a bigot who has committed adultery with two female lobbyists while defending the Defence of Marriage Act and the sanctity of marriage. Yet another typical republican hypocrite.That’s what their party is all about, hypocrisy and the double-standard of the worst kind. Conservatives take note! We’re watching you very closely when it comes to marriage equality.
So Obama, who thinks we should be able to get married as long as we don’t call it marriage, should focus on fixing the economy by wasting taxpayer money defending a doomed law. The incoherence on both sides gives me a headache.
Jeez. I’ve seen 60+ drag queens with less slap on than him.
In just one State in the USA the following DEMOCRATIC Senators voted against a bill to legalise gay marriage:
Sens. Ruben Diaz Sr. of the Bronx; Joseph Addabbo, Shirley Huntley, Hiram Monserrate and George Onorato of Queens; Carl Kruger of Brooklyn; Darrel Aubertine of the North Country; and William Stachowski of Buffalo…
Which State was it? Oh, New York, of course.
You’ll find the same Democratic pattern of voting in many other States.
Just a scant forty-eight months ago the State of Virginia’s Democratic Party’s governing body, at a weekend session in Charlottesville, unanimously passed a resolution opposing the proposed gay marriage amendment to Virginia’s constitution.
The so-called ‘New Liberal’ wing of the Democratic Party (you can follow them on Twitter) is staunchly and vocally against gay marriage, gays in the military and what they term the ‘gay agenda’.
So don’t give me the tommy rot about left is good and right is wrong.
And, by-the-by, if the voting in the Ward 5 Democratic organisation is anything to go by then Democrats in Washington D.C. are split roughly two thirds to one third AGAINST gay marriage.
Those who actively dislike us come in all political colours but it’s been my personal experience in the UK that the worst haters of LGBT people support the left wing parties rather than the Conservatives. Many others will no doubt agree with me but that still won’t be the whole truth about hatred of LGBTs, will it? That hatred of us is spread pretty evenly across the whole political spectrum would be much nearer the truth even though I have only ever experienced hatred from socialists.
JohnMJ…and what about the republicans when it came to marriage equality. Just how many of them voted against it? Those blue democrats in New York state are nothing more than closet republicans, fearful of doing the decent thing but instead kowtowing to religious bigots and using religion as a shield to discriminate.
Out of the ten countries that have enacted marriage equality, name one conservative government under which it was passed?
The only reason David Cameron is coming around to supporting marriage equality is because of Nick Clegg, a Liberal Democrat and Ed Miliband, the new leader of the Labour Party both supporting it , likewise the Green Party.
Look at the makeup of the people who put referenda on state ballots in the United Sates to overturn marriage equality. Almost all conservatives, the same people who want The Defence of Marriage Act (DOMA) to remain unchanged. While I”m at it, which party voted overwhelmingly to overturn Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell (DADT)?
I don’ think Boehner is so much against it, as he is using these words as an election ploy. The GOP desperately wants the White House in 2012 and they will do all they can to get it. So, what we are is a pawn. The same applies to other “hot button” issues in America.
There are many in the GOP who firmly believe that gays are evil and against God, but Boehner tends to avoid that entire part of the GOP. Personally, people like Boehner are far easier to deal with than people like Santorum and Bachmann. And for the UK readers, those are 2 names, among many, that you better hope you never see coming close to the White House.
Oh, and you have to get a more recent picture of Boehner. The chain smoking man has aged a great deal in the last few years.
John Boehner is NOT gay (a charge at which I take umbrage, because “we gays” don’t want anything to do with him).
He is, however, famously emotionally unstable and weepy, which many attribute to his alcohol consumption. He’s known to close up shop on the dot and retire to a local watering-hole almost invariably.
And the flattering picture accompanying this article fails to capture his ruddy hue, which has gained him the nickname “the Tan Man” (and given us “Boehner Orange” as a color reference.
I, personally, think of him as a “crying drunk” whose color stems from liver damage.
Got it! Thanks a lot again for helnipg me out!