Bush advisor and outspoken opponent of freedom to marry is granted second divorce

ChicagoPride.com
December 29, 2009
Karl Rove's second divorce is making headlines because he has been an outspoken opponent of the freedom to marry. Rove is considered the architect behind using marriage equality as a wedge issue during the 2004 presidential election, which helped President Bush defeat John Kerry. [Link]

Evan Wolfson: Bill Clinton can be a Very Important Voice in Explaining Why He Changed His Mind

Bay Area Reporter
August 20, 2009
Bill Clinton's remarks on DADT and DOMA in Pittsburgh last week have drawn criticism from several LGBT leaders. Evan Wolfson, however, points out that "We don't need to look backward... it would be better if he talked about why he's moved ahead." [Link]

Gay-Baiting '08

AfterElton
August 5, 2008
Starting in 2000 the invocation of gay rights issues – and the biggest "threat" of all, marriage equality – has been the stuff not just of political humor but of political advertising and cable news punditry as well. Today, nearly every prominent political news analyst, left, right, or center, seems to agree that gay-bashing as an overt political strategy is either dying or already dead. [Link]

California Dreaming: Homophobia Will Not Determine this Election

Huffington Post
July 1, 2008
Joe Solmonese, President of the Human Rights Campaign, explains why the California Supreme Court's decision to uphold the freedom to marry will not affect the 2008 election. (Link)

Republicans, beware of marriage politics

Politico
July 1, 2008
Patrick Sammon, president of Log Cabin Republicans, exposes the lies about marriage as a wedge issue in the 2004 election, and warns in regards to marriage, "Republicans who try exploiting the issue for political gain this November will fail." (Link)

Gay marriage redux

The Hill
June 24, 2008
Mark Mellman shows that not only were theories of anti-marriage amendments affecting the 2004 presidential race baseless and wrong, but also such theories are again wrong about the California anti-marriage initiative this year affecting the 2008 presidential election. (Link)

OPINION: No one's benefit in MI

The Michigan Daily
July 9, 2007
When Michigan voters passed the discriminator ban on gay and lesbian couples' marriages in 2004, they made a mistake. When Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox used his position to further his personal beliefs and ban same-sex benefits as well, he made the voters' mistake much worse. Now, the University is in a tough spot as it must mitigate these realities. Its attempts to deal with the dumb law and Cox's dumber interpretations are flawed. The only solution is that Michigan voters must abolish the nonsensical "gay marriage" ban. [link]

Waves of change swept away bid against gay people's marriages

The Boston Globe
June 17, 2007
Over the years, one legislator after another moved into the pro-marriage equality camp, or at least into the anti-amendment one. Some did so after immense personal struggles over the issue; some after they discovered that switching sides had few electoral costs. In 2004, the year of the most impassioned debate over gay and lesbian marriages, all of the lawmakers who switched their positions to oppose the ban were reelected, even though supporters of the amendment had warned them of bruising battles and certain defeat. [Link]

MI court: No same-sex benefits

San Francisco Gate
February 2, 2007
A three-judge panel said a 2004 discriminatory measure against gay and lesbian couples also applies to same-sex domestic partner benefits. The decision reverses a 2005 ruling from an Ingham County judge who said universities and governments could provide the benefits. [Link]

OPINION: Must gay people wait for our 'comfort'?

OpEd News
December 30, 2006
There is nothing that the GLBT community can do to appease its opponents except, perhaps, disappear. But in one of the exit polls in the 2004 presidential election that got the least attention, 60 percent of voters favor either marriage equality or civil unions. The younger the voters, the more likely they are to favor marriage. To me, that is reason enough to fight for marriage equality instead of civil unions. [link]

Truth in Numbers

Boston Review
February/March 2005
Further analysis definitively refutes right-wing efforts to spin Bush's narrow victory as a repudiation of gay people or our freedom to marry. [link]

Okay, we lost Ohio. The question is why?

Washington Post
December 5, 2004
The GOP put on a strong mobilization effort, but that's not what tipped the Ohio election. They did not turn Gore voters into Bush voters by offering a ride to the polls. Instead, it was skillful exploitation of public concern over terrorism by the Bush team -- coupled with Democrats' inability to draw clear, powerful contrasts on the economy and health care -- that pushed Bush over the finish line. [link]

OPINION: The Anatomy of Myth

Washington Post
December 4, 2004
How did one exit poll answer become the story of how Bush won? The myth of the 'moral values' election has morphed from instant doctrine to gospel truth—pundit prognostications like this must be stopped in their tracks. [Link]

Scrooge's nightmare

Salon.com
November 25, 2004
All the claims about mandates and values notwithstanding, the very fact that one-fifth of voters cited moral values means that four-fifths didn't. In fact, we heard much the same talk about the rise of conservative social values in the Reagan '80s, yet scholars who have studied attitudes in that period have found little evidence to suggest any reversal of the social liberalism that began in the '60s, particularly on issues involving family, women, morality, sexuality and overall tolerance. We must be careful not to confuse election results with cultural trends. [Link]

Liberal Christians challenge 'values vote'

Washington Post
November 10, 2004
Throughout the presidential campaign, opinion polls showed that frequent churchgoers were far more likely to support Bush than his Democratic rival, Sen. John F. Kerry. Exit polls on Election Day found that 22 percent of voters cited "moral values" as the key to their vote, and they tilted 4 to 1 toward Bush. The answer to this "God gap," Perriello said, "is that progressives need to embrace the deep moral critique that people are looking for and make that case on poverty and Iraq, and not just try to talk more about God or outpace the Republicans on gay marriage or abortion." [Link]

Moral Values Malarkey

CBS
November 5, 2004
While the nexus of issues boiled into the words "moral values" certainly were a big factor in this election, it’s being exaggerated partly because of the oddities of the poll itself and partly because the Big Theory conforms with what Republican strategists want you to believe. [Link]

Discriminatory marriage ban passed in North Dakota

USA Today
November 2, 2004
The North Dakota measure limits marriage rights to man-woman couples and restricts civil unions. [link]

Kerry explains support for Massachusetts and Missouri amendments

Washington Blade
September 24, 2004
"I was unbriefed and I thought it was the same amendment we had in Massachusetts... I just thought it was a simple prohibition...I just didn't know it went as far as it did and, obviously, I don't support it." [link]

NBJC condemns discriminatory constitutional vote in Missouri

National Black Justice Coalition
August 4, 2004
"George W. Bush and his radical conservative allies are seeking to divide us on this issue...African Americans oppose discrimination in all its forms." [link]