Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

RUSH: Our Morning Update today dealt with an Obama promise that he has broken to the gay community of the United States. And today the New York Times has editorialized on this — as usual, a day after we are on the cutting edge of the story. Here are the details: A filing by the Obama Justice Department last week surprised hardcore supporters. Now, as a candidate Obama had promised the gay community that he would work to overturn the Defense of Marriage Act. His lawyers urged dismissal of the first same-sex marriage case to reach federal courts. Despite his promise, his own lawyers urged dismissal of the first same-sex marriage case to reach federal courts. The plaintiffs… Get these cases here. The plaintiffs are two guys who got married when same-sex marriages were legal in California. They claim the Defense of Marriage Act violates the Constitution’s full faith-and-credit clause, the due process clause, equal protection, their free speech rights, and their right to privacy.

Obama’s legal beavers have attacked out there. They cited Catalano vs. Catalano. These two guys say, ‘Oh, we got married, the Defense of Marriage Act, Obama is breaking a promise.’ Here’s what Obama’s lawyers went in with to dispute this case. The first thing they did was cite a called Catalano vs. Catalano that involves a man who married his niece in Italy, and sought to have the marriage recognized in Connecticut. The courts told him to stuff it. His lawyers then cited a case of an Indiana marriage of an underage woman that New Jersey courts red-lighted. This is a woman married to David Letterman! She’s under age… I’m just kidding. But the New Jersey court said you can’t marry somebody underage. The third case that legal beavers of Obama cited involve the marriage of first cousins in New Mexico. That was blown out by the Arizona courts. So the lesbian, gay bisexers, the transgenders are fuming that Obama isn’t dismantling the Defense of Marriage Act.

They are livid that his beavers would cite cases involving incest and people marrying children. They are also furious at Obama’s limp action on the military’s ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ policy. Now, as you know, we have several members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender community in this audience, and you boys and girls in that community, you have to understand something here, President Obama is getting busy. I mean, he’s got some things that rank ahead of you and your marriage rights. He has to finish off the economy. He’s gotta destroy health care. And those are pretty big deals. In doing so, he’s going to end up controlling a whole lot of money, like four to five trillion dollars currently in the private sector. He’s going to get his hands on it. Your little defense of marriage business doesn’t get him any money. It doesn’t get him in control of anything. So for the moment, you lesbian, gay, bisexers and transgenders are just going to have to do what the rest of us have been doing with this guy and that’s bend over, grab the ankles. But don’t doubt him. Your turn’s coming. So to speak. I mean, he’s one of you guys. He’s on your side. You’re just not a priority right now. Man up and deal with it. Like we’ve all had to man up and deal with this guy, it’s your turn to man up and deal with the guy. Stop whining!


RUSH: Seriously, this New York Times editorial on Obama’s defense of the Defense of Marriage Act, or his support for it is hilarious. ‘A Bad Call on Gay Rights’ is the headline, but then they say, ‘If the administration does feel compelled to defend the [Defense of Marriage] act, it should do so in a less hurtful way.’ What the hell is that, a ‘less hurtful way’? I guess they mean, ‘Well, you could defend it without citing cases on incest, stuff like that.’ You can imagine his supporters in the gay, lesbian and transgender brigades would be upset about this.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This