After last week's presidential candidate debate, Bay Buchanan talked to reporters in the spin room as a surrogate and senior adviser to the Romney campaign. It didn't generate much attention at the time, but Buchanan told The Advocate that a Romney administration would treat marriage as "a state issue" and would "not get in the way of what states decide to do on marriage and adoption."
So, was this a new attempt at moderation? Maybe another issue receiving the Etch A Sketch treatment? As it turns out, no -- Buchanan simply came down with a temporary case of Romnesia, and soon after after disavowed her own comments.
...Buchanan issued a clarification to BuzzFeed this afternoon following initial publication of this story, writing, "Governor Romney supports a federal marriage amendment to the Constitution that defines marriage as an institution between a man and a woman. Governor Romney also believes, consistent with the 10th Amendment, that it should be left to states to decide whether to grant same-sex couples certain benefits, such as hospital visitation rights and the ability to adopt children. I referred to the Tenth Amendment only when speaking about these kinds of benefits -- not marriage."
So, according to the campaign, a Romney administration would like to write into constitutional stone a prohibition on marriage equality, which in turn would eliminate existing state laws that allow same-sex couples to get legally married. Romney would also like to see states have the power to stop gay adoption and prohibit hospital visitation rights for gay families.
Also note, by signing the National Organization for Marriage's candidates pledge, Romney has also promised, not only to support an anti-gay constitutional amendment, but also to appoint federal judges who don't see a constitutional right to same-sex marriage and to back the Defense of Marriage Act. Romney's running mate, Paul Ryan, has also endorsed amending the U.S. Constitution to prevent marriage equality.
On this issue, Romney/Ryan is far to the right of Bush/Cheney, even as the nation is becoming more progressive on gay civil rights.
Leave a Comment:
Another reason to realize that, for America, this election is as important as was that in 1933 for Germany.
Yet again, there was no election in Germany in 1933. Hitler became chancellor because the German president, Paul von Hindenburg, appointed him chancellor in a desperate attempt to gain political stability. A good case can be made for comparing today's GOP to fascists of any strip, but leave historical fiction out of it.
When did the huge migration of German immigrants to the U.S. begin? I'd like to say it was the late 20's or early 30's.
Prevent marriage equality!
Wonderful, what other issues are we planning to regress on?
Oh, that's right: Foreign Policy, Social Services, Hunger, Science, Education, Humanities, Honesty, Equal Opportunity, A Middle Class..
Apparently Republicans hate our constitution. So far they've proposed amending (includes repealing amendments already in place) the following:
Repeal the 17th amendment and remove the election of congressional representatives by the voters.
Repeal the 14th amendment and remove birthright citizenship.
Proposed an amendment prohibiting the government from owning stock. (Think bailouts.)
Proposed an amendment for Parental Rights which says the government can’t raise children. (I have no idea. Apparently the government is threatening to take over raising our children?)
Proposed an amendment to impose term limits. (I wholeheartedly support this one.)
Proposed an amendment to criminalize flag desecration. (No more garments or furniture depicting our flag.)
Proposed an amendment making a balanced budget mandatory.
Propose an amendment that life begins at conception.
Propose an amendment that declares marriage as something between a man and a woman. (Or several women in the case of Romney’s grandfather.)
Propose an amendment requiring two-thirds majority vote for a tax increase.
Propose an amendment capping government spending at a set percentage of GDP.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/slideshows/12-ways-republicans-want-to-change-the-constitution
You left out the ones that would formally declare the US a "Cristian Nation"
I know they are fringy but they are out there and if they thought they could get away with it they would
Actually I thought of that under the Parent Rights amendment. I can easily see that becoming the place where all children must be raised as Christians. Yeah, I know it's supposed to keep the government out, but this is the party that screams about small government while steadfastly putting the government in your bedroom...hell, your uterus if you're a woman... and thinks it's okay to curtail voting rights, wants to allow warrantless arrests, torture, holding a person indefinitely, etc. The list is endless.
Hey, let's start a real zinger!
Formally declare the US a "Mormon Nation".
or
All children must be raised as Mormons.
Oh that's right, we don't dabble in teatarded ideas..
You're scaring me, what kind of drinks would they serve you anyway? Sex on the Beach?
"a Romney administration would treat marriage as "a state issue""
Then Bay's brother, Pat Buchanan, added: "Ditto for the 'slavery issue'."
Pat Buchanan's departure from MSNBC did much to improve the air quality in this country. Now if Bay would do us the kind favor of slipping quietly into the night...
^I'll say it; Bay Buchanan, would you do the world a favor and die, please?!
(: - )
Who would he come back as though? Archbishop666?
Romnesia is a special kind of schizophrenia, a mind trip like a ping-pong ball setting off a room filled with mousetraps. If Romney wins they'll have to create a special television network to keep up with his lies.
All these hospitals have family only visitations? Or will you change it to family only? Is that how that works? No friends? Let those demented gays die alone, they deserve it that way? You take their money for your services and deny them a peaceful death because of your beliefs? Gag me with a spoon. You teapubs are the demented ones.
I still cannot believe they continue to get away with these constantly shifting positions. I mean really, it stuns me to the point that I find myself getting more and more angry with every passing day. Back in the summer I had no fear of a Romney candidacy because I was SURE the media would destroy him for having no core principles. I mean, John Kerry got absolutely DESTROYED by the media over a perceived flip-flop on ONE issue.
But sadly, I was way off - the election is 2 weeks away, and Mitt here still changes his mind on EVERY ISSUE, sometimes multiple times in the course of a single day, but somehow nothing ever sticks to the Amazing Teflon Man.
And the ridiculous false equivalencies - "oh both sides lie". NO. You are wrong. There are levels. I have in the course of my life told a lie or two. That does NOT make me equal to a person who is a diagnosed pathological liar. Likewise, the fact that the President may have stretched the truth a bit here and there does NOT make him equal to a man whose entire campaign has been one lie after another.
And yet here we are, 15 days from the election, and it looks increasingly likely that the media is going to just let Mitt LIE his way straight to the oval office. I simply cannot handle it....
Sorry, had to rant a little.....
They are only shifting if you don't hear the dog whistles and believe me rural conservatives have incredibly sharp ears.
No SouthPaw , do not apologize , you just nailed it with the Kerry comparison , the media is completely silent on the 1000 romney campaigns flip flops, and out right dishonest answers , I get frustrated with the dems messaging , but when they go up against a moutain range avalanche of misinformation , and covering romneys back by avoiding OBVIOUS FLAWS , there is NO messaging that will over come it , it is buried
The hyperventilating by the msm about libya sealed the deal for me on the subject also , "obamas massive cover up" , where nothing was covered up (?)......
3 weeks engulfed on a story with zero substance , the public needs to take the elections away from our dysfunctional corporate media , but it may already be to late for that
SUCH liars...you should see the ads/lies that are swirling in Washington State these days brought to you by the RNC. States indeed. We're gonna CRUSH them with equality!
Typical Repub (R&R) approach - claim the most moderate position to the largest audience, then backtrack to those only paying attention to the rightwing broadcasts.
Is it just me or are these two concepts totally contradictory? I know she distinguishing between marriage itself and benefits of marriage, but just how, exactly, do you support state rights while invoking a federal amendment to the Constitution?
You can have whatever color you want so long as its black...
Contradictory, or just covering all the bases. If "states' rights" gets the job done, fine, or if that fails to set inequality into stone then they'll go the federal route. It's a matter of expedient, not principles.
Up to now, the states have been very reliable tools to hinder equality. But this year it's possible that we may see equality advance for the first time at the state level. Possibly the opposition will start focusing on the federal level if that happens and just say to hell with the states.
Stone the fact checkers.
The Buchanans are hilarious. Can you imagine the mental midgets that gave birth to that crew?
Calling these events 'romnesia' is giving them the benefit of the doubt.
The Romney surrogates tend to give moderate positions when they are sitting in front of a TV camera, and then give their actual positions to the smaller, usually print, media. How many in the TV audience have actually read the clarifications?
These people have not forgotten Romney's true position. They are outright lying to the larger audience.
Can someone tell me when did the bible sanction lying? For a group of people that claim a "G-d lock" it's pretty disturbing how quickly they lie. It's also pretty infuriating that the "librul" media doesn't call them out on this! Have WE as a nation gotten so "politically correct" that WE cannot call out liars? Dayum shame!
This seems to me to part of an even larger problem about Romney. Their continued retractions and clarifications are a careful effort to confuse voters. The original spot receives a great deal of air and print time. It gets set in stone for many voters. Then the retractions and clarifications emerge -- sometimes multiple ones for the original statement -- and those are buried as simple clean-up, not worthy of attention: "pay no attention, nothing to see here, move along." The confusion sowed is intentional and malevolent. I wish it were the incompetency it is designed to emulate. But I fear it is more.
The GOP SOP is to take a stand in front of a large audience on every side of every issue and then deny later to a smaller audience in the hope that voters hear what they want to hear and stop listening. Further, should the Bookends win, how can anyone hold them accountable for campaign promises? They will merely claim they did what they said they would and whip out the confirming clip.
I am mostly disgusted with the voters who pay absolutely no attention to anything and now 15 days before an election they just happen to hear an ad on TV or radio or pass by a billboard on the highway and the one piece of "non-info" seals the deal for them.
Keep in mind that if the GOP lies convince folks to vote for them, it means that those voters believe what's being said - or what they heard being said at that exact moment they heard it!
I once had a woman ask me to settle an argument she was having with another woman. I was living in Florida at the time and the 2 women were FL born, raised and educated. They said they both agreed that I, a Damn Yankee on any other day, would know the answer to settle the argument. The question was "Which state was the 51st state to join the USA; Alaska or Hawaii?" Seriously. I asked if it was a joke? She said, No, they knew that I would know the answer. So I told them we don't have a 51st state. All of a sudden, the Damn Yankee didn't know what she was talking about any more.
Do you think we have an education problem in this country?
I'm beginning to see the advantage of living deep in the wilderness and growing my own food! Anyone know of a good commune in the deep wilderness? As long as I have the InterWebs!!!
You all are WAY too funny. As a gay man (married in MA), I find the Obama Flip flop in gay marriage, his "evolving" stance, a slap in the face.......He was against it before he was for it. Let us all face the facts....if Romney(yes, I KNOW he won't) says he believes in gay mariiage, he would be called a flip flopper. How come the same is not said about our flip flopping President? LEAVE ME ALONE, I have what I want, i do NOT need anyone to validate my or my partners existence. We all know that Obama flopped on gay marriage because he needs the gay vote. When are we going to call it for what it is? He could have dealt with this in the house and senate when he had them, be he hadn't "evolved" yet. And why did he not put it before the house and senate now? Because he is AFRAID that some of the Dems would vote against it because they do not want to go on the record on this issue. Check out some of the Dems stancers on gay marriage. It is NOT overwhelming..... Fact Check- Obama is a flip flop on this issue........
I agree, Obama simply said what was "palatable" to get into the running. Had he said anything but he would have been disavowed by Democrats.. I've been legally "gay-married" in a State (CA) where it is illegal for gays to get married but "we" got "grandfathered in". Iowa is more progressive than even President Obama. I'm so tired of it even being an issue that it makes me want to psycho kill at the very mention of it. I've been "gay married" to the same individual twice now, our "new" anniversary is October 31 as we wanted to avoid the mob-rule of Prop 8. I don't need any-body's @!$%#ing blessing for my relationship with my spouse, whenever the issue comes up I get so mad that I just want to tell people to go @!$%# themselves, any way they see fit. It's like we live in the 4th god-damned century..
Who cares whether Obama flipped or flopped, as long as he does so in the right direction?
Frankly, I have trouble taking this pascoguy65 seriously. The eccentric capitalization and punctuation, the poor grammar. And then there is the sentence reading "We all know that Obama flopped on gay marriage because he needs the gay vote." That is a right-wing talking point! And then there is the weird part about "Dems stancers". If he has any point to make there, it's blown up by the failure to substantiate whatever the hell it is he's talking about. Taking it all together, this guy looks like a right-wing concern tr0ll.
So you'd rather vote for Rmoney, whose church, LDS worked very hard to get Prop 8 passed to REVERSE marriage equality in CA, than vote for a President that ended DADT and does not believe DOMA is constitutional came out in favor of marriage equality? Really?
Why is this even at the federal level. Our forefathers, set it up that the federal government should not decided issues like marriage. It should be decided by the states! Then each state can not discriminate against a state that allows marriage and one that doesn't! I think that all of the politician's should take Political Science classes prior to running for office. What a bunch of morons!
The only reason that marriage is an issue at law is because of the legal rights and privileges that come with the certificate. The issue for the GOP, as always, is about money. Those "corporations that are people" will have to pay medical and pension benefits to spouses they presently don't pay for. States will have to let a spouse simply inherit property as tenants by the entireties - without being taxed. Those come immediately to mind and I'm sure there are many other advantages.
The actual marriage between two consenting adults can be accomplished without anyone else's consent - but the attendant rights and privileges need government approval.
Years ago, marriage between a black and a white of any gender was a NO NO!! Now it's not because it was discrimination. IMO, it's still discrimination to limit anyone's right to "pursue happiness" as they like - unless it involves minor children!
As to states deciding individually rather than a Federal law - since when is it OK for We, the People, to allow some states to discriminate but not others?
Furthermore, the GOP because they are too cowardly to admit it's a money issue, couch their objection to gay marriage in terms of religion and no one's religion belongs in MY Government! This country was founded on the principle of freedom from religious persecution - that means that Each American Citizen is free FROM Every other American Citizen's religion.
So Romney is free to believe that god was born on the planet Kobol; Jews are free to believe that the Messiah is still coming; Christians are free to believe that the Messiah already came in the person of Jesus, etc. and each one who belongs to any of those relegions is free to believe that marriage is whatever that religion dictates they believe - BUT the government is NOT free to create laws based on any religion!
Pure and simple it is discrimination. If you let them get away with it on this issue, they are coming for your issue next!
Who cares what States think, the important thing is what do the people think? States do not think people do. People should make up their own mind about such personal issues. There they go again! Trying to take a peak into our bedrooms, trying to get their hands on our silky draws. Disgusting.
So maybe someone can get them to answer this question: what are the legal definitions of "man" and "woman?" Are we talking about:
This is a problem that calls for the Todd Akin's deep and profound understanding of sexual physiology. In the meantime, by all means give it a try.
[1] of the kind that can be rearranged by surgery?
[2] Look up "androgen insensitivity syndrome." Or Caster Semenya.
[3] Hysterectomy (or orchiectomy) and boom! Instant annulment.
MeddlingMonk,
It is extremely important whether he flip flopped or not. As a gay man I am offended that he would try and use us this way. Unless you are gay,leave us alone. Attack attack attack. Please defend instead of attacking. You can say what you will about spelling, grammar, etc...but I get to go in a cast a ballot on election day. Nothing you say or do will negate my vote. Thank you trollop, Your words ring true. We are in the same situation. Every time they go to the gay marriage issue I want to throw up. Just leave us the hell alone.
If you think you are being attacked, then you definitely are a right-wing tr0ll, and not worth my time.