Barney Frank blasts Obama’s ‘big mistake’ on DOMA, asks prez to explain himself

[camera obscura]

U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, one of the nation’s leading gay rights champions, blasted President Obama yesterday over a controversial anti-gay marriage court filing and is calling on the commander in chief to explain himself.

“I think the administration made a big mistake. The wording they used was inappropriate,” Frank (D-Newton) said of a brief filed by Obama’s Department of Justice that supported the Defense of Marriage Act.

The DOJ brief, which has touched off a firestorm of anger in the gay community, argued that states should not have to recognize same-sex marriages from other states, just as states don’t have to recognize incestuous marriages or unions involving underage girls.

“I’ve been in touch with the White House and I’m hoping the president will make clear these were not his views,” Frank said.

More: http://bostonherald.com/news/us_politics/view/2009_06_17_Barney_Frank_rips_prez_s_%E2%80%98big_mistake_:_Fuming_over_anti-gay_wed_filing/srvc=home&position=6

Barney Frank told GQ earlier this month that he did not expect Obama to support gay marriage when he ran for office, so it seems his beef is mainly with the wording of the filing.

(This is a quote from a different interview - before the DOMA filing came out.)

I’m curious how you feel about where gay marriage is right now. Is it disappointing that you now have this young Democratic president, this young black Democratic president, who still won’t come out for—
Not really. Because he’s been so good on everything else. And, uh, I understand the political reality. I was not in favor of his coming out for same-sex marriage when he first got elected. But I would hope he would be by the time he runs for reelection.

You would hope he would be, but you weren’t in favor of him doing so in 2008?
I think it would have given the opposition help they didn’t need.

So do you think Obama doesn’t really feel that there should be same-sex marriage? Or was it just a political—
I don’t know what’s in his heart of hearts. I do know that it was…The general view, which I shared, was that no one who wanted to get elected president could have been a supporter of same-sex marriage. On the other hand, things have moved very far since then, and I’m more optimistic about 2012 than I was about same-sex marriage.

From here: http://men.style.com/gq/blogs/gqeditors/2009/06/barney-frank-qa.html

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LostinVA]

25. You forgot the sarcasm icon

[bicentennial_baby]

30. That one is saying that allll over GDP today

:boring:

[LostinVA]

31. Missed that!

[QC]

32. I wish the central committee would send out new talking points.

These are getting awfully stale.

It's enough to make me miss "Your concern is noted" and "ALERT AND IGNORE!1!! ALERT AND IGNORE!!!11"

[bicentennial_baby]

35. LOL

Indeed.

:hi:

[glitch]

81. Uuuuuuuum, that doesn't sound very Pro-Obama. Are you now or have you ever been Pro-Pony? nt

[masuki bance]

82. lmmfao!

[billyoc]

2. Barney Frank under the bus in 3, 2, 1...

[Proud Liberal Dem]

9. criticism="under the bus"

:shrug:

[QC]

20. {BUMP BUMP BUMP BUMP}

[bicentennial_baby]

3. Barney just wants a pony

:P

[redqueen]

4. Q: "Is it disappointing ...

that you now have this young Democratic president, this young black Democratic president, who still won’t come out for—"

A: "Not really. Because he’s been so good on everything else. And, uh, I understand the political reality."



And *rofflemayo*... I love how people are failing to read what he actually said. :rofl:

[camera obscura]

7. No, that is a quote from a different interview. I'll edit the post to clarify.

[redqueen]

10. Doesn't matter where it's from.

But yeah, I can see people seizing on a few words from one article rather than trying to understand his point of view in general.

His problem is with the wording in the brief.

[Bluenorthwest]

34. We voted for Obama understanding the reality just like Barney

That is why we extended the benefit of the doubt to him so many times, and sent money and worked hard to elect him. Obama did promise to lead on DOMA. He did. He has often stated that he wants a full repeal of that law. He pointedly ran saying that Clinton was not as strongly opposed to DOMA as he is. "Vote for me because I am more opposed to DOMA than Hillary is." That was a selling point he worked and worked hard.
I hope that by this afternoon they have come up with something. Even words could help after all his fierce silence.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

5. I like Barney

but does he too NOT understand that that DOMA is a federal law (unfortunately), the DOJ was obligated to defend it in court against a lawsuit challenging it, and that it was a lawyer (a Bush appointee no less) working in the bowels of the DOJ who wrote the actual brief, that President Obama had NOTHING to do with approving of the brief and the arguments therein, and, most importantly, that President Obama personally supports a repeal of DOMA (unless he has said otherwise)?
:shrug:

[vaberella]

12. I don't know why he said what he said. I thought he knew better.

I adore Barney Frank, but this doesn't make sense to me either.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

14. I think that he might still be operating as though Bush/Cheney were still in office

They, of course, used the DOJ to advance their own political and legal interests. I imagine that it is hard for him, as I'm sure it is for many of us, to remember how government institutions like DOJ are SUPPOSED to operate given how Bushco ran roughshod over the Constitution during the past eight years.

[Bluenorthwest]

42. Barney pre dates Bush

And I am sure that he understands how the DoJ is supposed to work. He was first elected to the House in 1980 and sworn in in 1981. He has been in Congress under Reagan, Clinton and two Bushes.

[Hieronymus]

71. Makes sense to me. Obama is ignoring human rights.

[AntiFascist]

83. Perhaps he was challenging the President, making it clear that we need clarification...

this seems to have worked now that Obama has reconfirmed his opposition to DOMA.

[redqueen]

13. Maybe the mistake was staying silent about it this long.

Not that he wrote it, or approved of it... but that he hasn't commented, still.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

16. Would that be appropriate for him to do so?

I agree with what you are saying and he may (probably does) have issues with the brief like we all do but is it appropriate for him to publicly criticize DOJ briefs, particularly while a case is in the process of being litigated, beyond perhaps reaffirming his support for a repeal of DOMA (which I believe he has already done)? Is there any precedent for POTUS to criticize DOJ briefs? I just don't know. :shrug:

[redqueen]

19. That's debatable.

But regardless, it seems necessary. People are freaking the fuck out.

[mvd]

21. Debatable, yes. But I still think that..

Obama will get repeals of DOMA and DADT done. I disagree with the timing (these are human rights, which I push for just as much as a straight person), but as my friend rasputin1952 said, sometimes progress takes a while in politics.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

23. I'm sure that if he can, he will

Although, given the anger and outrage it's provoked towards President Obama, I'm not even exactly sure what he could say that would calm everybody down. The most he can really do is call on Congress to pass a repeal of DOMA (that doesn't currently exist) and re-affirm his support for signing such a repeal if and when it reaches his desk. Until DOMA is repealed, DOJ will just have to keep defending it. I'm curious as to how come Barney hasn't introduced a repeal of DOMA yet?

[mvd]

27. Constitution (equal protection clause - 14th amendment)

could possibly be used in court. That's why it's debatable. Yes, the President should continue to keep calling for a repeal. It's the easiest way to stop DOMA.

[Thrill]

6. I'm sure the President sits down and reads every brief that the DOJ files

:eyes:

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[vaberella]

11. I don't know why Barney Frank is acting like this...he's closer to the President than most. n/t

[bicentennial_baby]

15. Acting like what?

[LostinVA]

26. A pouty homosexual

[vaberella]

40. Don't assume to know what I think. Please. n/t

[LostinVA]

44. The you should have explained yourself

Which you didn't until two people asked you to.

[ronnykmarshall]

50. POWER TO THE PAPS!

"Perpetually Angry People"


I'm a PAP and PROUD!!!

[vaberella]

39. Acting like he doesn't know why the DOJ did what they did.

Further more...like it's in some way Obama's fault.

[mvd]

17. Many had a problem with the wording of the brief

I had a problem with the brief, too (that argument can be found in other threads - I'm not getting into it again.)

I'm thiking it's a positive that someone close to the President said this - maybe it's more likely to get a clarification from Obama.

[Vidar]

18. Good for Barney.

[Political Tiger]

22. I wonder why he hasn't introduced legislation to end DOMA?

Come on Barney! You know better! If you're so upset about DOMA, do something about it! Introduce legislation to end it....send Obama a bill to sign ending DOMA!

[redqueen]

24. Are the votes there?

If he puts the bill up, and it needs Obama to go to bat for it... and he "knows the political reality"... perhaps he considers that putting Obama into a no-win situation?

Just wondering aloud...

[mkultra]

29. wouldnt that be more appropriate than say

Obama pushing for a bill to be introduced. If the bill is authored, it can then be discussed on the national stage more easily.

[redqueen]

36. Sure it would, but re-read this:

"I think it would have given the opposition help they didn’t need."

Perhaps Senator Frank thinks things haven't changed enough to get into all that just yet. Cause after all, he's just another politician, right? And all they think about is politics.

[mkultra]

38. well, that may be very true

If the political environment is not currently present, there isn't much Obama can do to change this aside from calling for all out war on the senate floor. I think Obama gauges the political wind better than many i have seen so far so i would imagine he is very aware that this issue will be divisive. I personally feel that he will begin the push for the repeal of DADT and DOMA but he is using the semi-bipartisan environment that currently exists to pass things that are less divisive. When the spoil is off the election, and things fully return to partisanship, he will start with the tougher fights.

just my opinion though.

[redqueen]

45. Sounds very logical to me. And I imagine that Barney Frank agrees...

else we'd likely have seen that bill to repeal by now.

[mkultra]

51. true, so the real question is, how do we build the support before the fight

You have to assume its coming at some point. Its now an unstoppable force that has yet to see its time.

[redqueen]

54. Key word there... "we".

Same way anything else changes... we have to influence public opinion. It has to happen at the grassroots level.

However, I think a big part of that process, though, is 'disagreeing without being disagreeable'... so... let's just say I'm not so hopeful.

[mkultra]

56. i personally have seen a building awareness

in fact, discussion of the issue IRL has always been more agreeable than discussion here.

[alcibiades_mystery]

47. Holy Christ!

:wow:

"Are the votes there?"

Just fucking wow.

[redqueen]

49. So, you'd expect a bill repealing DOMA to get through congress with ease...

am I reading you right?

[alcibiades_mystery]

52. No, not at all

It wouldn't get through. It would fail miserably.

The votes aren't there, and the support isn't there, and nobody in Congress has the slightest interest in risking their future over a DOMA repeal. Of course, understanding this basic political reality should affect the way people read the administration's culpability, but it apparently doesn't. The law has to be changed in Congress. It is perhaps past time to start pushing on Congress, which can actually change the law.

By the way, it's few and far between that we see criticism where it really belongs: signing DOMA into law was one of the most despicable acts of political cravenness of the last 40 years, and it lands at the feet of Bill Clinton. More acknowledgment of THAT would make the criticisms of Obama seem less opportunistic.

[redqueen]

55. Hah, yes... didn't think so.

I read your post literally... was curious to find out if you disagreed & why.

Totally agree re: understanding basic political reality & how acknowledgment of history would make the ubiquitous howling criticisms seem less opportunistic.

[zulchzulu]

33. Precisely... where's Barney Frank's DOMA repeal legislation? n/t

[vaberella]

41. Add DADT to the list please. But this could be called blaming the victim by some. ~sigh~ n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

48. Of course when running for office

Obama clearly promised to provide that leadership that you are asking that others do. Sigh.

"Unlike Senator Clinton, I support the complete repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) – a position I have held since before arriving in the U.S. Senate. While some say we should repeal only part of the law, I believe we should get rid of that statute altogether. Federal law should not discriminate in any way against gay and lesbian couples, which is precisely what DOMA does.
Americans are yearning for leadership that can empower us to reach for what we know is possible. I believe that we can achieve the goal of full equality for the millions of LGBT people in this country. To do that, we need leadership that can appeal to the best parts of the human spirit. Join with me, and I will provide that leadership."

Leadership is exactly what he promised, yet I see people claiming that Barney should be doing that instead. What has Barney Frank to do with the promises Obama made?

[depakid]

58. " What has Barney Frank to do with the promises Obama made?"

A relevant question that you're unlikely to get anything more than an obtuse response to.

[Political Tiger]

53. True, but there is a bill out there re: DADT

H.R. 1283: Military Readiness Enhancement Act of 2009

To amend title 10, United States Code, to enhance the readiness of the Armed Forces by replacing the current policy concerning homosexuality in the Armed Forces, referred to as "Don't Ask, Don't Tell", with a policy of nondiscrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-1283

------------------

I think this is what Obama is waiting on and I am confident that when (or if) this bill hits Obama's desk he will sign it!

[Beacool]

28. Barney Frank, this is not the man I came to know............

:rofl:

[bertman]

37. Keep pushing, Barney. Keep nudging, prodding, cajoling. Maybe in 2013, when he

doesn't have to worry about re-election, President Obama will do the right thing by our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters.

(Yes, I understand that I am taking for granted his re-election--for rhetorical purposes)

[vaberella]

43. Can you ask Barney Frank to put legislation out there to repeal DOMA & DADT? n/t

[LostinVA]

46. He's already done ENDA why does the only openly gay Senator have to be Mr GLBT Rights?

Maybe someone elose in the whole damned Dem Party leaderhip could give him a hand. Why BLAME IT ON HIM???

[redqueen]

57. I don't think anyone expects him to actually do it.

I think people expect others to note the fact that he hasn't, and reflect on why that might be the case.

[Hard_Work]

62. Maybe because he IS

the only openly gay Senator! Maybe if he gave the whole damned Dem Party something to get behind, the rest of the party WOULD give him a hand! No one is blaming Barney, but as stated previously, no one else in the Senate is willing to risk their careers either. There needs to be legislation launched that causes enough of a groundswell that the rest of congress feels secure enough to back it...without fear of losing their jobs. That is just human nature.

[LostinVA]

65. So, it's Barney's fault

[tishaLA]

76. oops. wrong place

[tishaLA]

72. Unless things have changed, Rep Frank leaves the "T" out of it

Unlike Tammy Balwdin, he has not been going for trans-inclusive ENDA

[bicentennial_baby]

75. Nope, he's introducing inclusive ENDA next week

with Baldwin's language intact. I posted a thread about it in GLBT this morning.

[tishaLA]

77. very good news. thanks!

[bicentennial_baby]

78. Here's the link:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=221x139065

:)

[chicago legal pro]

67. Legislation has already been introduced.

Legislation to end DADT was introduced in March, 2009 and has 112 co-sponsors, including Franks. http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/03/02/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry4839383.shtml?tag=contentMain;

[redqueen]

68. Cool, thanks.

Interesting how such fierce advocates of repealing DOMA had no idea.

[incapsulated]

59. What, exactly, is wrong with Obama distancing himself from this language?

If it was not, as many of you say, his choice or his language, why not apologize for it?

[Beacool]

60. I had forgotten about the Advocate interview.

Comment on another board:

This is one of many reasons why so many gay men voted for Hillary Clinton. Obama's disastrous interview in the Advocate — where he claimed his gay role model (a professor whose name he couldn't remember) was his role model because he didn't "proselytize" — should have sounded the alarm for the gay community before the primaries. But, there you are.

Here's the actual quote:

What event or person has most affected your perceptions of or relationship to the LGBT community?

"Well, it starts with my mom, who just always instilled in me a belief that everybody’s of equal worth and a strong sense of empathy -- that you try to see people through their eyes, stand in their shoes. So I think that applies to how I see all people.

Somebody else who influenced me, I actually had a professor at Occidental -- now, this is embarrassing because I might screw up his last name -- Lawrence Goldyn, I think it was. He was a wonderful guy. He was the first openly gay professor that I had ever come in contact with, or openly gay person of authority that I had come in contact with. And he was just a terrific guy. He wasn’t proselytizing all the time, but just his comfort in his own skin and the friendship we developed helped to educate me on a number of these issues."

http://www.advocate.com/exclusive_detail_id53285.asp

[Political Tiger]

61. Here's the rest of that discussion:

Did you have a chance to ask him about being gay?

I’m sure we did, but as I said, he was really comfortable in his own skin, and the relationship was a strong friendship and I never felt as if I had to get over any mental hurdles to be close to him or to learn from him. He’s probably somebody who had a strong influence.

How old were you then?

Eighteen … 19. It does remind me, though, I remember in my first two years of college that was when I first saw students who were self-identified as gay and lesbian come out and start organizing around gay issues, so that would have been in 1979 and ’80. I think what’s encouraging is just to see how much progress has been made in such a relatively short period of time.

[Beacool]

64. He doesn't strike me as a man with many gay friends.

I'm not gay, but have several gay friends. I support their cause and have attended quite a few rallies and parades over the years (BTW, Gay Pride day is June 28 in NYC). I never thought of any of them as "proselytizing". They are who they are: bright, funny, politically engaged and my protectors when a guy gets out of line. They are also the ones who warn me about the bad apples, far more accurately than my girl friends. I love them.

I think that of the two main candidates we had during the primaries, Hillary is the one more comfortable with gay people. She has friends and staffers who are gay and is known to be quite a matchmaker. Gay or straight, if you're single she'll try to pair you with someone. Corny and old fashioned as it may sound, she wants people to be happy. She also remembers to ask about partners, children, etc. It may be a small thing, but it has endeared her to her gay staffers.

:D

[ieoeja]

66. The primaries are over.

[QC]

63. It's unusual for Barney to criticize anyone with power.

This is like Mr. Greenjeans publicly expressing a disagreement with Captain Kangaroo.

[Forkboy]

69. K&R for Barney

:kick:

[Freddie Stubbs]

70. Barney Frank has a lot of nerve bitching about the Defense of Marriage Act

He is a member of the United States House of Representatives. He hasn't done jack to repeal this law. There is no bill currently introduced in the House to repeal DOMA. WTF is Frank and the other members of the House waiting for?

[redqueen]

73. Probably the votes to get it passed.

If public opinion is overwhelmingly in support of repealing DADT, as reportedly it is, and *that* bill still hasn't got the votes, I fail to see how one repealing DOMA would get anywhere near the President's desk.

But reality be damned, it's outrage time!

[Freddie Stubbs]

74. So, he is waiting for votes to appear for a bill which does not exist?

:shrug:

[redqueen]

79. Maybe he doesn't see the point in writing a bill

that has no chance of passing?

I don't know, just guessing.

[treestar]

87. Amen! I get sick of people just leaning on Obama as though there is

no work to be done convincing Congress, and their fellow **&^^&ing citizens! Like they expect Obama to waive a wand and the law is changed! "I gave him $$ for his campaign and I want it back!" they shriek. Like they gave $$ to the campaign figuring Obama could change centuries of cultural views within months?

So freaking immature!

[Life Long Dem]

80. I don't think it's what's in his heart.

Because he always talks about working for the people and what they want.

[Clio the Leo]

84. Well, I was wondering where Barney was....

.... I thought perhaps he was on vacation or in Iran protesting or something.

I suspect though, it could have something to do with this....

http://www.americablog.com/2009/06/dnc-gay-fundraiser-starting-to-fall.html

[camera obscura]

85. Update: "Congressman Frank Corrects Media Reports on his Response to DOMA Brief"

“When I was called by a newspaper reporter for reaction to the administration’s brief defending the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act, I made the mistake of relying on other people’s oral descriptions to me of what had been in the brief, rather than reading it first. It is a lesson to me that I should not give in to press insistence that I comment before I have had a chance fully to inform myself on the subject at hand.”

“Now that I have read the brief, I believe that the administration made a conscientious and largely successful effort to avoid inappropriate rhetoric. There are some cases where I wish they had been more explicit in disavowing their view that certain arguments were correct, and to make it clear that they were talking not about their own views of these issues, but rather what was appropriate in a constitutional case with a rational basis standard – which is the one that now prevails in the federal courts, although I think it should be upgraded.”

“It was my position in that conversation with the reporter that the administration had no choice but to defend the constitutionality of the law. I think it is unwise for liberals like myself, who were consistently critical of President Bush’s refusal to abide by the law in cases where he disagreed with it to now object when President Obama refuses to follow the Bush example. It is the President’s job to try to change the law, but it is also his obligation to uphold and defend it when it has been enacted by appropriate processes. It would not be wise, in my judgment, for those of us who are gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender, or who sympathize with the fight for our rights, to argue for a precedent that says that executives who disagreed politically with the purpose of the law should have the option of refusing to defend it in a constitutional case.”
“I strongly opposed DOMA when it was adopted and I will continue to fight for changes. I support very strongly the lawsuit brought by the people at Gay & Lesbian Advocates and Defenders (GLAD) that make the cogent argument that DOMA’s provision denying federal recognition of same-sex marriages blatantly violates the equal protection clause. And I will work with the Obama administration as they have promised to do to enact laws protecting LGBT people from hate crimes, from job discrimination, and from discrimination in the military. I will also be critical when I think inappropriate language is used. But after rereading this brief, I do not think that the Obama administration should be subject to harsh criticism in this instance.”

[Bodhi BloodWave]

88. Now THIS is something all those complaining abut Obama in regards to this brief should read

Hopefully most will consider it and not just see it as him having sold out in this instance(It would seem Aravosis has tossed Barney under the buss about this)

[dsc]

89. No he is merely wrong, it happens

That brief is inexcusable period. I don't care who says it isn't. I can read just as well as anyone else, and the standard utilized in that brief would be a total disaster for gay rights. Frank is conflating two issues. One is should a brief defending DOMA have been written. Most people, gay or not, believe it should have been written. The second is, given that it should have been written was it a brief that was written in a way not to attack gays and their rights. It did both and didn't have to.

[treestar]

86. the law is as it is, and until it is changed, DOJ has to follow it

Why people blame the President rather than call their Congress people to get the law changed it a mystery to me. The outrage can only be from people who think the President really is a "Decider."