Michele Bachmann: Swiss Citizen Since 1978

The ever insane and modern day Pharisee Michele Bachmann likes to question Barack Obama's citizenship and eligibility to hold the office of president, yet Ms. Bachmann has some citizenship issues of her own.  Such as her own Swiss citizenship that has apparently existed for 34 years.  If she wants to hold herself out as uber-American patriot, perhaps she should relinquish her own foreign citizenship.  That, course, would mean not being a hypocrite, so don't expect to see that happen anytime soon unless Bachmann is pressured by the Kool-Aid drinking GOP base.  Politico looks at Ms. Bachmann's heretofore undisclosed Swiss citizenship.  Here are highlights: 

Rep. Michele Bachmann tried to downplay her dual U.S.-Swiss citizenship Wednesday, releasing a statement that asserts she has actually been a dual citizen since 1978.  “I automatically became a dual citizen of the United States and Switzerland in 1978 when I married my husband, Marcus. Marcus is a dual American and Swiss citizen because he is the son of Swiss immigrants. As a family, we just recently updated our documents,” the Minnesota Republican and former presidential candidate said in a statement. “This is a non-story.”

According to her version of events, Bachmann has known she was a Swiss citizen for approximately 34 years. However, she never disclosed her citizenship while running for Congress and president of the United States.  Her office said that such a disclosure was not necessary.

Her statement that she has been a citizen since 1978 is based off a technicality - at the time of her marriage, automatic citizenship was granted to those who married Swiss citizens. However, Marcus Bachmann, her husband, did not register their marriage with Swiss authorities until this year - meaning that the Swiss government was not aware of it until recently.

Bachmann, who serves on the House Intelligence Committee, is now running for reelection in Minnesota’s 6^th Congressional District.  “This is simply another distraction,” said a spokesperson for Democratic challenger Jim Graves on Wednesday. “The Graves family is not interested in dual citizenship and they are proud to be Americans.”

Republicans and Pundits Seek to Spin Obama's Gay Marriage Stance

Writers at the Richmond Times-Dispatch and other Virginia news outlets are trying to spin yesterday's announcement by Barack Obama in support of marriage equality as somehow putting Obama's chances in Virginia at risk.  Even the usually savvy Larry Sabato makes some ridiculous statements such as saying Obama's move might jeopardize votes from conservatives attending the Kool-Aid drinker convention - I mean commencement at Liberty University. Seriously, does ANYONE seriously believe that people delusional enough to attend or send their children to Liberty would ever vote Democrat anyway?  As for black voters (and black pastors in particular), if they allow Obama's stance on gay marriage to tip their vote, they might just as well sell themselves back into slavery and make their control by the white supremacist crowd at The Family Foundation complete.  Needless to say, Victoria Cobb - head bitch at The Family Foundation who is about as Christian as some of the women of GCB - has her patties in a major wad over Obama's announcement.  Here's some of the BS from the Times-Dispatch:

President Barack Obama's declaration of unequivocal support for same-sex marriage could have political ramifications in battleground Virginia.  Virginia is among a handful of states that could decide this year's presidential election and is one of 31 that have voted to ban same-sex marriage in their constitution.

The issue might also trickle down to Virginia's U.S. Senate race, where Democratic nominee and former Gov. Timothy M. Kaine will face the winner of a GOP primary involving former Gov. George Allen, tea-party activist Jamie Radtke, Chesapeake minister E.W. Jackson and Del. Robert G. Marshall, R-Prince William.

Some pundits believe same-sex marriage could harm the president's chances in swing states such as Virginia and North Carolina, where voters on Tuesday approved by 61 percent to 39 percent their own amendment restricting marriage to a man and woman.  Others argue the president's long-awaited decision on the issue will enliven the Democratic base and help him gain ground with independents likely to determine November's outcome.

"By November 6, the election will still be about the economy … but this could have some political impact," said Larry Sabato, a University of Virginia political scientist.  Sabato said the president's position would energize youth support and help him in college towns and urban areas.  But he added that it would give presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney "a very useful weapon" for some swaths of the Republican electorate, like the ones watching when he offers the commencement address Saturday at Liberty University, an evangelical institution in Lynchburg founded by the Rev. Jerry Falwell.

While most Virginia Republicans remained quiet on the issue Wednesday, Democrats and activists rejoiced.  "From the state whose mistakes led to the landmark case of Loving v. Virginia," the U.S. Supreme Court case that ended raced-based restrictions on legal marriage, "let me be among the first to thank the president for realizing that it needn't take the wrenching apart of couples and a Supreme Court case for us to do what is right," said state Sen. A. Donald McEachin, D-Henrico.

Virginia ACLU director Kent Willis voiced support for the president's decision, and suggested that it was a smart political calculation.  "In the future, when marriage equality is as accepted as racial and religious equality is now, the president's statement may be viewed as a political turning point in the struggle for gay rights," he said.

Victoria Cobb, president of the conservative Family Foundation of Virginia, accused the president of "pandering to his dwindling base in an election year … the sign of a desperate candidate."  She added: "It's bewildering that anyone can say with a straight face that counterfeit marriage has the momentum after the citizens of 31 states, including California, have voted to protect the definition of marriage."

More Wednesday Male Beauty

Wingnuts Go Berserk Over Obama Gay Marriage Position

Needless to say, the spittle must have been flying by barrel full amongst the Christianist and professional Christian crowd upon the news that Obama finally came out in favor of same sex marriage.  And many of the GOP political whore class were quick to jump on board with the hate merchants.  Time will tell as to whether the black preacher crowd will finally will wake up and stop acting as house slaves to the white supremacist loving Christianist groups that treat black pastors as their trained circus dogs.  In addition to Mitt Romney, the (in my view) likely closeted Rick Santorum had a virtual hissy fit over Obama's announcement.  Here is a sampling of Santorum's verbal coniption fit:

  

"The announcement today by President Obama should come as no surprise to the American public. President Obama has consistently fought against protecting the institution of marriage from radical social engineering at both the state and federal level. The President recently opposed the North Carolina constitutional amendment and, of course, he refused to defend President Clinton's Defense of Marriage Act before the U.S. Supreme court. The charade is now over, no doubt an attempt to galvanize his core hard left supporters in advance of the November election. 

Thankfully the American public, when it has had an opportunity to consider the real world consequences of such a fundamental change to our society, has consistently voted for maintaining one man one woman marriage - the basic building block of our society. I will continue to fight to make sure that the cultural elites don't further undermine the institution that gives the best opportunity for healthy, happy children and a just and prosperous society."

As for the other hate merchants, Right Wing Watch has compilation of some of the hate spewing from professional Christians and hate groups.  Here are highlights:

Tony Perkins of Family Research Council said Obama’s position has handed Mitt Romney “the key to social conservative support”:

The President's announcement today that he supports legalizing same-sex marriage finally brings his words in sync with his actions. From opposing state marriage amendments to refusing to defend the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DoMA) to giving taxpayer funded marriage benefits to same-sex couples, the President has undermined the spirit if not the letter of the law.

The President has provided a clear contrast between him and his challenger Mitt Romney. Romney, who has signed a pledge to support a marriage protection amendment to the U.S. Constitution, may have been handed the key to social conservative support by President Obama.

Gary Bauer [who strikes me as GAY!!!] later commented in an email to supporters that Obama “may have just lost the presidency”:

President Obama just told ABC News that he now supports same-sex marriage. Surprised? Didn’t think so. Obama is no doubt hoping to energize his leftwing base. And he is betting this will help him to re-energize the youth vote this November. But in fact he may have just lost the presidency.

Brian Brown of the National Organization for Marriage pledged to defeat Obama and warned, "God is the author of marriage, and we will not let an activist politician like Barack Obama who is beholden to gay marriage activists for campaign financing to turn marriage into something political that can be redefined according to presidential whim.

The Traditional Values Coalition president Andrea Lafferty maintained Obama’s view on marriage equality displays his “radical ideology”:

Matt Smith of the Catholic Advocate said Obama’s support for marriage equality is part of “an anti-Catholic agenda”

Faith and Freedom Coalition chairman Ralph Reed said the announcement shows the President is “tone-deaf and out-of-touch with the time-honored values of millions of Americans”

Bill Donohue of the Catholic League claimed Obama “has fully broken with his Christian moorings” and suggested he also favors polygamy.

 im Campbell of the Alliance Defense Fund said his endorsement “promotes the creation of even more fatherless and motherless homes.”

LGBT Reactions to Obama's Embrace of Gay Marriage

As regular readers of this blog know, I have often been frustrated and/or angry with Barack Obama and his repeated willingness to throw LGBT Americans under the bus when deemed politically expedient.  Yes, at times Obama has exhibited pro-gay actions: passage of DADT repeal (under extreme pressure), cessation of defense of DOMA, and various administrative actions.  Today, much to my surprise, Obama finally got off the fence on same sex marriage.  Am I pleased that he finally did so?  Most definitely, even though it's unclear what Obama's personal support for same sex couples will mean from a practical perspective.   I do hope that Obama's statements will perhaps help LGBT youth to believe that the future can be better.  From surfing the blogosphere, I'm not the only one with mixed emotions and uncertain as to what the consequences will be.   First, these reactions from Andrew Sullivan:

I was uncharacteristically at a loss for words for a while, didn't know what to write, and, like many Dish readers, there are tears in my eyes.

So let me simply say: I think of all the gay kids out there who now know they have their president on their side. I think of Maurice Sendak, who just died, whose decades-long relationship was never given the respect it deserved. I think of the centuries and decades in which gay people found it impossible to believe that marriage and inclusion in their own families was possible for them, so crushed were they by the weight of social and religious pressure. I think of all those in the plague years shut out of hospital rooms, thrown out of apartments, written out of wills, treated like human garbage because they loved another human being. I think of Frank Kameny. I think of the gay parents who now feel their president is behind their sacrifices and their love for their children.

Today Obama did more than make a logical step. He let go of fear. He is clearly prepared to let the political chips fall as they may. That's why we elected him. That's the change we believed in. The contrast with a candidate who wants to abolish all rights for gay couples by amending the federal constitution, and who has donated to organizations that seek to "cure" gays, who bowed to pressure from bigots who demanded the head of a spokesman on foreign policy solely because he was gay: how much starker can it get?

Then there are the thoughts of my blogger friend Pam Spaulding who I first met at the 2008 LGBT Blogger Summit in Washington, D.C., and with whom I often find myself in agreement:

The President’s position to date has been dodge and parry that ultimately made no sense politically. Robin Roberts in her live report moments ago, cited that President Obama’s “evolution” finally occurred because of a conversation with his daughters, who attend school with kids who have same-sex parents, and that it wasn’t a big deal.

Well, I guess that’s as good a cover story for the debutante debut on this matter as any. After all, Mitt Romney has staked out a position in favor of a federal marriage amendment, something that will go nowhere. It all comes down to whether either of them think this is a decision point for voters who are out of work, have lost their home or health insurance.

Even as one part of me celebrates the end of the torture, as I said earlier, it smarts sitting here in NC where his evolution is cold comfort for those of us now living under the thumb of a marriage discrimination amendment.

Being jerked around, constantly seen as an ATM, and the man can’t even state the obvious, and his surrogates continue this tap dance of stupidity over what is or isn’t an affirmation that the President believes in full equality for gay and lesbian couples. His own campaign couldn’t even lift a digital finger to tell people to vote against discrimination here in NC. The President can’t even sign an executive order barring employment discrimination against LGBTs in federal contracts.

Being able to come out of the closet and not be fired is eons more important sitting here in NC than the right to marry, but I’m sure that POV and emotional drain of this won’t carry the day among most of my fellow LGBTs celebrating the President’s statement.

The equality movement will celebrate — as it should — and move on; it will be easy to forget how hard we fought without the President’s help here. The expect the outflow of gay $$$ to his campaign will now accelerate. We’re left to pick up the pieces until the feds/courts help us here in North Carolina.
All this is to say, we’re not just a political football. Families are going to be hurt here.

As in North Carolina, LGBT Virginians can be fired at will and we have ZERO legal protections.  While support of gay marriage is nice, employment non-discrimination protections would be more practical for many of us.  Having been forced from a large law firm after I came out, employment is a huge deal for me.

Dan Savage likewise had mixed emotions:

 Today Barack Obama announced that he supports the freedom to marry. Personally. Because he knows monogamous same-sex couples who are raising children. (Non-monogamous couples aren't allowed to get legally married, of course, unless they're straight.) But the president also supports the "concept" of states "deciding the issue on their own." (States like, say, North Carolina, which yesterday banned any recognition of same-sex relationships in reality, not in concept.) So the president supports same-sex marriage while also supporting the right of states to ban the same-sex marriages that he supports. Which means, of course, that once the dust settles... everyone is going to be upset, supporters of marriage equality and opponents alike.

I wouldn't say that this "completes a turnabout" for the president on the issue of marriage equality. I'd say he's almost there. His support for marriage equality in concept is huge, of course, and it's welcome, and I'm pulling out my gay checkbook. (I'm pulling it out again.) But as delighted as I am by this news—and I'm freakin' delighted—I'm nevertheless disappointed that the president's support for marriage equality doesn't extend to same-sex couples in North Carolina and other states that have already banned same-sex marriage.

And yes, I must confess I contributed to the Obama campaign after hearing the news.  I'm still not thrilled with Obama, but now the contrast between Obama and Romney - as noted by Andrew - makes it a no brainer as to I will support in November.  Despite his waffling, Obama finally seems to recognize my humanity.  Romney does not.  It's that simple.

County Republican Party Newsletter Suggests "Armed Revolution" If Obama Reelected

Just as North Carolina exhibited huge differences in support for Amendment One based on education levels (and I would suggest intelligence levels too), so too is the case in Virginia.  Hence, the Greene County Republican Party newsletter suggesting that an "armed revolution" is called for if Barack Obama is re-elected.  For those unfamiliar with Virginia, Greene County is just north of Charlottesville and Albemarle County but is light years away culturally and socially.  The latter are among the most progressive jurisdictions in Virginia.  In contrast, Greene county is a county predominated by Neanderthal kuckle draggers where not that many years ago when I was at UVA one would see Greene wedding announcements in the Charlottesville newspaper where cousins were marrying cousins.  Not surprisingly, the Republican Party is popular in Greene County.  Think Progress looks at this insane batshitery.  Here are highlights:

The Republican Party of Greene County in Virginia published their monthly newsletter in March and in it, the editor suggested an “armed revolution” will be necessary if President Obama is reelected in November:

We have before us a challenge to remove an ideologue unlike anything world history has ever witnessed or recognized. . . . The ultimate task for the people is to remain vigilant and aware ~ that the government, their government is out of control, and this moment, this opportunity, must not be forsaken, must not escape us, for we shall not have any coarse[sic] but armed revolution should we fail with the power of the vote in November.

The editor of the newsletter, listed as Ponch McPhee, is the latest Virginian to threaten violence towards the president or his administration. Just this week, Christopher Hecker was charged with a felony for threatening to kill the president and other officials, as well as bomb landmarks along the east coast.

The Secret Service, which is tasked with investigating all threats made against the president, wasn’t immediately available for comment on whether they have — or will — conduct a similar investigation into McPhee or the county committee.

Support OBX Pridefest - June 15 to 18, 2012

My first reaction to yesterday's vote on Amendment One - which relegates LGBT North Carolina citizens to the 4th class citizenship status that LGBT Virginians have lived for almost 6 years (I have more legal recognition of my ownership of my Chihuahua than to my relationship with my de facto husband) - was to totally boycott all of North Carolina.   Was I angry and seeking revenge?  Most definitely.

However, conversing with members of the OBX Pridefest committee, I've rethought my first reaction.  At least in certain instances.  Instances like OBX Pridefest next month in Nags Head, North Carolina.  As many of us as possible need to support OBX Pridefest and the businesses that are sponsoring the event.  Non-sponsor, go ahead and boycott them.  But PLEASE SUPPORT the event and the businesses that have rejected the bigotry of the 68% of Currituck County that supported Amendment One (immediately to the south Dare County's vote was very close to break even).

Check out the sponsors on the image above and also go to OBX Pridefest's webpage and make your reservations for rentals, lodging and restaurants accordingly.   The Boyfriend and I attended the first OBX Pridefest last year and had an wonderful time.  PLEASE attend this year's event if possible and support the LGBT supportive sponsors of the event.

Barack Obama Finally Endorses Marriage Equality

The airwaves and blogosphere are a twitter with news of and reactions to Barack Obama's ABC News interview this afternoon during which he finally stated that he personally supports same sex marriage.  I suspect that his words had been carefully planned and the timing was interesting - the day after North Carolina voters told LGBT citizens of that state that they (and their children) were deemed less than human and undeserving of any recognition of their relationships.  Perhaps Obama felt that he had to do something after the harsh criticisms of his failure to strongly denounce Amendment One.  We will likely never really know all of the motivations that led to today's action.  Not surprisingly, Mitt Romney condemned Obama's statement and said he supported only one man one woman marriage - just as he was likely directed to do by his Christofascist/Mormon puppeteers.  The Washington Post reports on the development.  Here are highlights:

President Obama endorsed same-sex marriage Wednesday, capping days of frenzied speculation about his views and intensifying pressure from gay campaign donors that began with surprising comments on the issue over the weekend by Vice President Biden.  The announcement marked an apparent end to Obama’s self-described “evolution” on the issue.

“I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same-sex couples should be able to get married,” Obama told Robin Roberts, in an ABC News interview.  Obama went on to explain that he had “hesitated” on marriage because he thought same-sex unions would be “sufficient” in order to guarantee rights for couples such as hospital visitations. And he said he wanted to be “sensitive” to the fact that for many Americans, the word “marriage” evokes “very powerful positions, religious beliefs and so forth.”

The president’s challenge was evident in Tuesday’s vote in North Carolina, one of the campaign’s targeted states, where voters overwhelmingly backed a constitutional amendment to ban same-sex unions.
Obama’s campaign released a statement describing the North Carolina results as “disappointing.”

At an event at the Oklahoma Republican Party’s headquarters in Oklahoma City, presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney responded to the news of Obama’s same-sex marriage shift by reiterating that he himself continues to believe that marriage is between one man and one woman.
 
On Capitol Hill, Democrats warmly supported the president’s new position.  House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said the president’s statement “marks progress for the civil rights of LGBT Americans and all Americans,” and added later that “Republicans are standing on the wrong side of history.” 

Obama’s shift Wednesday followed days of frantic phone calls and conversations between campaign officials and leading activists and donors in the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community.  .   .   . At least one in six Obama bundlers are gay, according to a Washington Post count, making it hard for the president to ignore the growing frustrations.

“The top 12 gay and lesbian donors in this country have all maxed out to the president, but they have not played in the super PAC world yet,” this adviser said. “And if there is the expectation that they’re going to, then there will have to be some concrete actions in fairly short order to demonstrate this administration’s desire to keep them included in this campaign.”   The dynamic — and Obama’s decision to sit for the interview Wednesday — underscored how much the president can ill afford to alienate any piece of his base in what is expected to be a tight election.

As to the risks to Obama's action will generate, another Washington Post column looks at the issue.  Here are highlights: 

 

Now that the President is on record in support of gay marriage, it’s worth breaking down the political pluses and minuses of that position.  Let’s start with the pluses.

1. Public opinion: The movement in national polling on the issue is something rarely seen; support for gay marriage is rapidly rising even as opposition rapidly erodes.

 

2. Excite the activist base: The LGBT community is not only a major part of the Democratic base but they also comprise some of the most politicalyl active people in the party. While Obama had a case to make — his decision to end “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and the Justice Department’s announcement that they won’t defend the constitutionality of the Defense of Marriage Act — that he had already done a lot for the LGBT community, this is a cherry on top that wins him not only their votes but, as importantly, their volunteer hours.

3. Excite the donor base: One in six Obama’s 2012 campaign bundlers are gay, according to research conducted by the Post’s Dan Eggen and T.W. Farnam. Couple that fact with the news earlier this week that George Soros, one of the most prominent Democratic major donors in the country, was directing his contributions to grassroots groups rather than the super PAC expected to fund TV ads supporting Obama and it’s clear that the president badly needs a heavy investment from Hollywood and Silicon Valley. And those two communities are heavily in favor of gay marriage.

 4. Rally young people: It’s no secret that for President Obama to win, he needs a heavily consolidated vote among 18-29 year olds. And, polling suggests that the age group most supportive of gay marriage is — you guessed it! — 18-29 year olds. In a year’s worth of Post-ABC polling — from March 2011 to March 2012 — fully 65 percent of people aged 18-29 say gay marriage should be legal while 61 percent of those aged 30-39 said the same.

And now, the minuses.

1. Not a slam dunk: As we wrote earlier this week, while a majority of people in the country now favor gay marriage it’s far from the sort of overwhelming majority that would prompt Obama to change his position .   .   .   .     Key subgroups like white voters (53 percent support legalization/43 percent oppose it) and voters aged 40-49 (52 percent support) are only narrowly on board with legalization. And, in an election year, no politician — including Obama — wants to tackle an issue where public opinion is that closely divided.

2. The black community: If the LGBT vote is a pillar of Obama’s base, the African American vote is an even bigger pillar. (In a recent Post poll in Virginia, Obama was beating former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney 97 percent to one percent among black voters.) And, African Americans have consistently been one of the groups most resistant to gay marriage.

3. Virginia/North Carolina: President Obama won both states in 2008 and his campaign is targeting both again in 2012.  .   .   .   .   While both states have changed demographically and politically over the past decade (or so), large portions of both states remain culturally quite conservative and might balk at Obama’s support for same-sex marriage. 

4. Flip flopping: Romney has a reputation for flip flopping that Democrats have made considerable political hay out of over these past few months. Obama’s change on gay marriage allows Republicans a strong counter to the charge that their nominee is the only one in the race who lacks a core. 

The Pitifully Few Gay Friendly North Carolina Counties



Click Image to Enlarge



As the this map from WRAL-TV indicates, yesterday's vote on Amendment One confirmed that most counties in North Carolina are hostile to LGBT rights including neighboring Currituck County where 68% of the vote supported anti-gay bigotry (Currituck County includes part of the Outer Banks and the towns of Duck, Kill Devil Hills, Kitty Hawk, and Nags Head).  I feel sorry for those putting on OBX Pridefest next month who now face an uphill battle convincing would be attendees that the area isn't outright hostile to LGBT individuals.  The boyfriend and I attended last years OBX Pride and had a great time. 

Bob Felton at Civil Commotion shared these caustic but accurate thoughts on yesterday's anti-gay vote:

In the cities, where the universities are, and the best educated work, and the ambiance tends toward cosmopolitan, Amendment One failed decisively. But out in the boonies, where banshees still flit through the trees at night and Holy Men are known to have magical powers, the numbers were almost exactly reversed.

In my own county, just outside Raleigh, Amendment One passed by a wide margin, and the vote tallies reveal that many people went to the polls and voted on only Amendment One. They cast no vote in the gubernatorial primary, that is, or the presidential primary, or their congressional primary; they bestirred themselves to go to the polls and outlaw those scary gays — and that’s it.

I never saw an advertisement advancing a public policy argument in favor of Amendment One. The pro-Amendment campaign relied exclusively on some notion of “God’s intention,” making the vote a religious referendum. This tells us two things: First, the average Tarheel knows next to nothing about his country’s founding ideals and, second, the average Tarheel knows next to nothing about his Bible.

Wednesday Morning Male Beauty