Comments on: Gingrich wants House to retaliate against Obama over DOMA

By: Gingrich that stole Xmas

Gingrich that stole Xmas — Wed, 02 Mar 2011 16:01:15 +0000

Well Cheryl, truth be known, and you know it too, this was Bill Clinton’s D.O.M.A. I’ve always wondered how his adulterant ass had the nerve to mention anything related marriage in ear shot of Hillary. I’m as surprised that Newt can even form the word marriage as well. Two cheats at both ends of this debate.

By: Aarrgghh

Aarrgghh — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 23:37:52 +0000

comment was not meant for you, sorry… see below

By: Aarrgghh

Aarrgghh — Mon, 28 Feb 2011 23:36:49 +0000

perhaps you should re-read (maybe a few times so it sinks in) the part where it says that the administration will “enforce the law” just not defend it’s constitutionality.. reading comprehension is your friend.

By: Cheryl Williams

Cheryl Williams — Sun, 27 Feb 2011 11:27:36 +0000

Actually the President is not infringing on the judiciary. DOMA has already been declared unconstitutional in 2 federal courts. Pres. Obama is merely cutting expenses by not wasting money to pay lawyers to defend a law that is destined to lose. Just because Congress passes it does not ever mean that it passes constitutional muster. Congress has had lots of its laws overturned by the court because it tends to overstep its bounds and get WAY too full of itself. Obama is NOT the first President to have refused to defend a law on the belief that it was unconstitutional. Trust me if Gingrich or any other Republican were President then they would be refusing to defend the Affordable Health Care Act as if their life depended on it. It has just been made out to seem new, different, foreign and horrible when it is Pres. Obama objecting to a piece of socially conservative legislation (which is typically unconstitutional because it almost always discriminates against one group of people or another)

By: Steve Lawrence

Steve Lawrence — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 16:42:09 +0000

I prefer to judge people based on their views of the issues rather than their individual private lives. When I am perfect, then I’ll cast the first stone. The issue for me is not the constitutional validity of DOMA. The constitution provides a proper way to deal with that. The issue here is whether the executive branch is usurping the judiciary. I stand in disagreement with Newt when his spokesperson reports that he doesn’t believe the country is currently in a constitutional crisis. If the President’s infringement on the judiciary is not addressed and acted upon by my congressional representatives as improper, to the highest degree, then I will seek new representation through future elections.

By: Rick Rosendall

Rick Rosendall — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 13:27:57 +0000

Peter, the gutter is all Newt knows. But the quick “clarification” is amusing. He is a political arsonist yet he can’t stand his ground for one news cycle. He attacks the President over DOMA yet cannot get his facts right about Obama’s position on it either in 2008 (when he called for full DOMA repeal) or now (which he said he will continue to enforce Section 3, just not defend it). He may think the facts don’t matter, and maybe they wouldn’t if more people were as hysterical on this subject. But Newt has stirred one too many mob. A friend suggested last night that Obama is goading the radical right to lure them way out on a rickety limb, and he may be right.

By: Peter Rosenstein

Peter Rosenstein — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 03:21:18 +0000

Well Newt Gingrich is desparate for an issue to run on. It is sad that this much married adulterer would sink to the gutter to find one.

By: hank kelly

hank kelly — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 02:29:49 +0000

Oh yeah, like Gingrich has any credibility about the sanctitity of marriage. He dumped his first wife while she lay in the hospital suffering from cancer. Another Republican self righteous hypocrite.

By: Heywood Jablowme

Heywood Jablowme — Sat, 26 Feb 2011 02:12:53 +0000

I love when the opponents of Marriage Equality say…”If passed who is going to pay for all the benefits like SSI survivor benefits and the tax breaks?”…answer finally WE ALL WILL! Straight people have been getting a free ride on the backs of gays for years. Generally we make more money and are better educated contributing far more money to all the rights afforded not able to access most of them. For the most part we dont have children but pay for your schools, we do not enjoy SSI survivor benefits but pay into SSI with every paycheck. If our husband or wife is in the Armed Forces and is killed in battle no widow/widower benefits. Not to mention the other plethora of benefits afforded married straight people. If you arent interested in affording homosexuals the same rights…fine…then we should not continue to pay any portions of the unfair advantages that you reap from our contributions. Fighting this is pointless…the cat is out of the bag…this ship has sailed…this bell has been rung…Marriage Equality is GOING to happen…what will be remembered…is who was on the right side of history and who was on the wrong side.