NOM BLOG

Category Archives: President Obama

Top of Drudge: Claim: Obama Co-Chair Attacked Romney With Leaked IRS Docs

Our press release yesterday is now top news on Drudge Report this morning:

Screen shot 2013-05-15 at 9.18.55 AM

That headline links to this story on Brietbart.com:

One of President Barack Obama's re-election campaign co-chairmen used a leaked document from the IRS to attack GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney during the 2012 election, according to the National Organization for Marriage (NOM).

NOM, a pro-traditional marriage organization, claims the IRS leaked their 2008 confidential financial documents to the rival Human Rights Campaign. Those NOM documents were published on the Huffington Post on March 30, 2012. At that time, Joe Solmonese, a left-wing activist and Huffington Post contributor, was the president of the Human Rights Campaign (HRC). Solmonese was also a 2012 Obama campaign co-chairman.

... “Not only has Romney signed NOM’s radical marriage pledge, now we know he’s one of the donors that NOM has been so desperate to keep secret all these years,” Solmonese added.

Solmonese resigned his position at HRC the next day and took up a position as an Obama campaign co-chair.

Politico: NOM Calls for Hearing After IRS Flap

Our press release today on the growing IRS scandal and its connection to what happened to our private tax return is gaining attention -- including on capitol hill and Politico:

The National Organization for Marriage hopes revelations about the IRS unfairly targeting conservative groups can revitalize an investigation into who leaked its donor information last year.

“This is what happens in the Soviet Union,” NOM President Brian Brown told POLITICO on Monday. “This is not what happens in the United States of America.”

In April 2012, the Huffington Post and the Human Rights Campaign posted documents showing GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney donated $10,000 to NOM in 2008. The anti-gay marriage group immediately cried foul and called for the Treasury Inspector General for Tax Administration — the same investigators who are set to release a report on the IRS targeting later this week — to investigate, accusing IRS employees of leaking the documents.

... Brown said the group wants a congressional hearing to look into the document release, since the group’s attempts to use the Freedom of Information Act to stay updated on the case have been unsuccessful.

“Without a congressional hearing and Congress’ subpoena power, where are we?” Brown asked. “All we’re getting is what [the IRS] wants to say.”

NOM's Peters: "We Expect the Supreme Court to Exonerate the Votes of Over 7 million Californians to Protect Marriage."

Our Communications Director Thomas Peters released a brief statement to the media as the news broke yesterday that President Obama has reversed himself once again on marriage by urging the Supreme Court to strike down Proposition 8:

"We expect the Supreme Court to exonerate the votes of over 7 million Californians to protect marriage. The President is clearly fulfilling a campaign promise to wealthy gay marriage donors. There is no right to redefine marriage in our Constitution.”

His statement was picked up by the Associated Press, the Drudge Report, Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe, ABC News, Foxnews.com, NPR, and dozens of other media outlets.

Peters will be on CNN tomorrow morning at 8:15AM to add more comments.

We continue to urge all supporters of marriage at this critical time to make plans now to come to Washington, D.C. for the March for Marriage on March 26, the day the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the Proposition 8 case.

House GOP to SCOTUS: Obama Administration Has No Right to Attack DOMA

Lyle Denniston of the SCOTUS blog on the the House GOP pointing out to SCOTUS that the Obama administration is trying to strike down DOMA after refusing to defend it:

The Republican leaders of the House of Representatives urged the Supreme Court on Friday to cast aside the Obama administration’s appeal on the constitutionality of the federal Defense of Marriage Act, though that already has been granted review, and to then take on the dispute in the GOP chiefs’ own case in defense of the law.

In a brief answering jurisdictional questions raised by the Court when it took on the DOMA dispute, the House’s Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group (BLAG) argued that it has a right under the Constitution’s Article III to be in court in DOMA cases.  It noted that the administration has stopped defending the law and instead is attacking it.

The new filing also contended that the New York woman who was at the center of the case the Court is reviewing does not have a right to appeal.  Both the administration and Ms. Windsor won in lower courts, getting everything that they wanted out of the controversy, and thus have given up their right to pursue the case in the Supreme Court.

“Without the House’s participation,” the document said, “it is hard to see how there is any case or controversy here at all.  Both Ms. Windsor and the executive agree that DOMA is unconstitutional and that Ms. Windsor was entitled to a refund [for an estate tax she paid].  And the lower courts granted them all the relief they requested.  Only the House’s intervention provides the adverseness that Article III demands.”

Politico: W.H. Urges Supreme Court to Strike Down DOMA

It remains to be seen if the White House will also call on the Supreme Court to strike down Proposition 8:

The Obama administration on Friday urged the Supreme Court to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act.

By forcing a federal definition of “spouse” and “marriage,” the administration argued in a brief, DOMA “violates the fundamental constitutional guarantee of equal protection. The law denies to tens of thousands of same-sex couples who are legally married under state law an array of important federal benefits that are available to legally married opposite-sex couples.”

The Obama administration has been urging courts to strike down DOMA for two years. Friday was the deadline to file briefs in the challenge to the 1996 law, scheduled to be heard March 27. (Politico)

FOIA Request Reveals Cozy Relationship Between DoJ and SPLC

LifeSiteNews:

Documents uncovered from a Freedom of Information Act request show the Obama administration's Department of Justice enjoys a close relationship with the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC), an organization that brands principled opposition to homosexuality “hate.”

The SPLC has built an elaborate fundraising empire by branding mainstream Christian ministries – including the American Family Association, the Family Research Council, and Concerned Women for America – as “hate groups” for opposing homosexuality.

The legal watchdog Judicial Watch filed the request to see what effect SPLC's designation of “hate groups” had on the government. The two-dozen pages of e-mails it received reveal views of DOJ employees that border on adulation.

The department invited co-founder Morris Dees to appear as the featured speaker at a July 31, 2012, “Diversity Training Event.” The Assistant Attorney General's office “wants to take Morris out to lunch” before his simulcast remarks, entitled “With Justice for All,” one e-mail stated.

A “training blurb” stated that the event “qualifies for mandatory annual diversity training.”

“I will pick you [Morris Dees] up at the airport July 30,” DOJ employee Barry Kowalski wrote Dees in an e-mail. “Would you go out to dinner with my wife and me and our two teenage daughters that first night? The girls need some inspiration from a master of inspiration,” he gushed.

National Organization for Marriage Reacts to President Obama’s Immigration Proposal

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: January 31, 2013

Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Jen Campbell (703-683-5004)


National Organization for Marriage

Washington, D.C. — Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), released the following statement in regards to President Obama’s immigration proposal:

"This is yet another example of the President playing politics rather than enforcing our nation’s laws and offering a true, workable solution. First, his Administration threw in the towel and refused to defend the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA). Then, he came out of the closet on gay marriage. Now, he is apparently proposing a direct violation of DOMA, currying added favor with gay activists, many of whom have lavished contributions on his reelection campaign. Our nation has a lot of serious issues to resolve concerning immigration policy, but providing a safe haven for gays and lesbians from foreign countries in violation of American law is not one of them. Responsible immigration reform includes protecting America’s borders, providing access to needed workers, keeping terrorists out of our country and determining what to do with the millions of people already here illegally. This proposal from President Obama concerning homosexual immigration is not serious immigration reform."

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray (x130), eray@crcpublicrelations.com, or Jen Campbell (x145), jcampbell@crcpublicrelations.com, at 703-683-5004.

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).

Brian Brown on Obama, Divider-in-Chief on Marriage

Brian Brown's op-ed on the President's choice to use his inaugural address to push for a redefinition of marriage has been published in CNS News:

"... Marriage as it has been defined throughout history - as the union of one man and one woman - is a great cause of unity for any culture, including our own. We know all too well what happens to society when marriage breaks down and government interferes with the rights of men and women to come together and form healthy, lifelong marriages.  The President's obsession with redefining marriage has prevented him in his first term from doing anything of substance to support and advance the institution of marriage for the vast majority of Americans. That is where his emphasis should be. 

Americans remain united in support of the commonsense definition of marriage. A poll taken after the most recent elections showed that 60% of Americans agree that marriage is between one man and one woman. Twenty percent of Americans in that same poll said marriage was one of their top three issues. The vast majority of states define marriage as the union of husband and wife and the vast majority of Americans who have been given a chance to vote on the question have supported that definition as well.

... We eagerly await the Supreme Court's decision on the question of whether Americans have a right to protect marriage in law.

In the meantime, Americans should unite in support of the commonsense definition of marriage. The longer our leaders insist on throwing their words and weight behind the movement to redefine marriage the more they will continue to divide our beloved nation."

NOM Chairman John Eastman on Obama's Gay Couples Immigration Destraction

Our Chairman Prof. John Eastman was interviewed briefly by NBC Latino yesterday:

"...DOMA proponents see the president’s decision to roll in a provision for bi-national same-sex couples as misguided.

“If the president is putting immigration as his highest priority, why would he muddy the waters with a proposal that violates current federal law?” says John Eastman, president of the National Organization for Marriage. “I guarantee there’ll be a fight if he’s trying to repeal the Defense of Marriage Act. I think it demonstrates he’s not serious about immigration reform.”

Am immigration reform blueprint released by the “Gang of Eight,” as the group of Republican and Democratic senators have come to be known, detailed major shifts on immigration but did not refer to measures for same-sex couples."

Tax Expert Says U.S. Tax Code Sending a Message: Don't Be Married

The fiscal cliff deal signed by President Obama earlier this month comes down especially hard on married individuals, many of whom were already penalized by the Affordable Care Act:

It pays to be single -- that is, when it comes to high earners' tax bills.

U.S. taxpayers with income of more than $200,000 a year will see federal tax rates rise this year on wages and investments. Tax increases will pinch married couples faster than individuals, especially if both spouses work and have capital gains and dividend income, said Joseph Perry, partner- in-charge of tax and business services at the accounting firm Marcum LLP.

In the law passed by Congress Jan. 1, multiple thresholds for higher rates kick in for married couples only $50,000 above where they hit for singles. Married taxpayers with income of at least $300,000 also face limits on the value of deductions and personal exemptions that were reinstated for 2013.

"If they're sending a message, it's not to be married," Perry said of U.S. tax policy. "People who are married, working, earning two good salaries, are being penalized."

The budget deal struck by Congress and new taxes stemming from the 2010 health-care law are exacerbating the long- established marriage penalty for high earners. The added bite will affect taxes they pay for 2013, and not the current filing season that starts this month. (Bloomberg)

Abp. Cordileone to Obama: Protecting Marriage is Not Discrimination

In response to the President's claim in his inaugural address that gay people are not equally protected under the law, Archbishop Cordileone, chairman of the Subcommittee for the Promotion and Defense of Marriage, said:

I honor the President’s concern for the equal dignity of every human being, including those that experience same-sex attraction, who like everyone else, must be protected against any and all violence and hatred.

But the marriage debate is not about equality under the law, but rather the very meaning of marriage. Marriage is the only institution that unites children with their mothers and fathers.

Protecting this understanding of marriage is not discrimination nor is it some kind of pronouncement on how adults live out their intimate relationships; it is standing for the common good.

... the equal right of all children to grow up knowing and being loved by their mother and father. I pray for the president and for all our nation’s leaders that they will grow to understand and support this enduring truth. (Marriage Unique for a Reason blog)

Anderson: President Got Marriage and the Declaration Wrong

Ryan Anderson, co-author of What is Marriage? explains what President Obama got wrong about marriage and the Declaration of Independence's pledge in his inaugural speech:

"...Being created equal doesn’t entail or require redefining marriage. Every marriage policy draws lines, leaving out some types of relationships. But equality forbids arbitrary line-drawing. Determining which lines are arbitrary requires us to answer two questions:
1)      What is marriage?

2)      Why does it matter for policy?

Reflecting on these questions reveals why there’s nothing “equal” about redefining marriage to eliminate the norm of sexual complementarity. Indeed, there are many good reasons why citizens in 41 states have said over and over that marriage is between a man and a woman. Marriage exists to bring a man and a woman together as husband and wife to be father and mother to any children their union produces. And as ample social science has shown, children tend to do best when reared by their mother and father." (Heritage)

Video: Obama Supporters at Inauguration Say They Personally Oppose Gay Marriage

The Daily Caller:

Following the inauguration of President Barack Obama, The Daily Caller asked attendees of the ceremony if they were surprised that the president mentioned gay rights in his address.

Even individuals who told TheDC that they oppose gay marriage said they still support President Obama, who “evolved” on the issue and announced his support of the practice last year.

Brian Brown: Obama Forgot the Right of Children to a Mom and Dad

Our president Brian Brown responds to President Obama's misunderstanding of civil rights:

Brian Brown, president of the National Organization for Marriage, which has spearheaded votes banning gay marriage in many states, took exception to Obama linking the 1969 Stonewall riots in New York City -- which launched the gay rights movement -- to the Selma voting rights march in the Civil Rights era.

“Same-sex marriage is not a civil right,” he told NBC News, noting that millions of Americans had voted to ban it. “To try and compare in any way the attempt to redefine marriage with the Civil Rights movement is simply false. I think that the president’s forgetting about the most important group affected by this and their civil rights, and that’s children having the civil right to have both a mom and a dad.” (NBC News)

National Organization for Marriage Criticizes President's Decision to Divide Nation Over Marriage on Inauguration Day

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: January 21, 2013
Contact: Elizabeth Ray or Jen Campbell (703-683-5004)


National Organization for Marriage Criticizes President's Decision to Divide Nation Over Marriage on Inauguration Day

“Gay and lesbian people already enjoy full equal rights under the law."

– Brian Brown, NOM president –

National Organization for Marriage

Washington, D.C. — Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), criticized President Obama’s decision to use his Inauguration Day address to further divide the nation on the question of what is marriage. The President chose to make a veiled reference to redefine marriage when he said "our journey is not complete until our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law."

"Gay and lesbian people are already treated equally under the law," Brian Brown responded. "They have the same civil rights as anyone else; they have the right to live as they wish and love whom they choose. What they don’t have is the right to redefine marriage for all of society. In fact, six federal courts have rejected the idea that there is a constitutional right to same-sex marriage, including the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit and the U.S. Supreme Court in a summary decision in 1972. Furthermore, the vast majority of states have codified the commonsense view held for thousands of years that marriage is the union of a man and a woman. The President is profoundly wrong to imply that those who have acted to protect marriage have denied anyone's rights by doing so."

Brown continued: "A presidential inauguration should be a time for the nation to come together; instead President Obama chose to voice his support for a radical agenda advanced by some of his biggest campaign contributors to redefine marriage for everyone. Marriage brings our nation together. The concept of gay ‘marriage’ would have been totally alien to our founding fathers, and the protection and advancement of marriage between one man and one woman will immeasurably serve the common good of this country and further strengthen our Union. Today the President should have thrown his support behind this beautiful vision of men and women coming together in love to raise the next generation. Nonetheless, we pro-marriage Americans pledge to defend the institution which the President has chosen to undermine once again."

###

To schedule an interview with Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage, please contact Elizabeth Ray (x130), eray@crcpublicrelations.com, or Jen Campbell (x145), jcampbell@crcpublicrelations.com, at 703-683-5004.

Paid for by The National Organization for Marriage, Brian Brown, president. 2029 K Street NW, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20006, not authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. New § 68A.405(1)(f) & (h).