Rachel Maddow interviewed Tea Party-supported Republican candidate for U.S. Senate Joe Miller for about three minutes as they walked from a roof to his car. Needless to say, Miller isn’t especially gracious, courteous, well-mannered, or welcoming. But he is homophobic, condescending, hypocritical, and lacks a basic understanding of the constitution.
Miller says gay rights are states’ rights issues, but he would definitely sign a federal constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage, and he supports the federal anti-gay marriage amendment, DOMA.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640
Via Huffington Post:
“Miller tried to avoid saying whether he believes homosexuality is a choice, confusingly stating, “I think that’s up to the individual. The individual has to make that decision.”
“About whether or not they’re gay, or about whether or not they believe that?” Maddow asked. Miller followed-up with a long pause, and then responded, “I’m not going to intrude upon an individual’s decision as to what he or she does. The fact of the matter is it’s a state issue. That’s our position in the campaign. That’s our answer to your question. We’re increasingly a diverse country. I want to be straight with you. And as a diverse country, I think it’s important that we recognize that there are different approaches to different values. And I think it’s best for states to be able to make those choices.”
“Just a few moments later, however, Miller made clear that he’s completely fine with the federal government being allowed to “intrude upon an individual’s decision as to what he or she does,” saying he would back a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.”
MADDOW: Is there a federal role in banning gay marriage?
MILLER: Well, I think there’s the Defense of Marriage Act, which I support. But again —
MADDOW: But why should there be a federal role there if it should be a state issue otherwise?
MILLER: Well, my perspective is it is, at the core, a state issue. But there are federal issues obviously intertwined. You’ve got taxation policy and otherwise that depends upon certain status. And as a consequence of the taxation structure of the federal government, there clearly is a role. But I think that ultimately, as the country becomes more diverse, those decisions have got to be decided at the state level. …
MADDOW: But you do want a federal role in restricting the states’ ability to legalize gay marriage? But at the state level —
MILLER: That’s not what I said. I said that there is a federal role, there are obviously federal decisions made based upon the status of marriage.
MADDOW: Do you think there should be a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage?
MILLER: That’s up to the people. If you got a 3/4 vote ratified, I’d vote for it.
MADDOW: You would vote for it?
MILLER: I would, yeah.
Notice the smug smile at times as he dismissively talks to Maddow.
No wonder Miller has had ethics issues.
The New Civil Rights Movement
<!–
google_ad_client = “pub-6759057198693805”;
/* 468×60, created 10/21/10 */
google_ad_slot = “8507588931”;
google_ad_width = 468;
google_ad_height = 60;
//–>