keep the appropriate amount of distance. it wasn t difficult with barack obama. he s a lot of things and among them he s a good lawyer who understands the value of having an independent justice department. there were things that i would want to share with him because i knew he was going to be reading about them in the newspapers the next day, monday or something like that. the doma decision, the decision not to defend doma i made. i thought this was one he can t read about in the newspapers. so on the sunday of the super bowl party i told him this is the decision i made. he said to me, i m glad pip didn t know how to approach you. this is where i wanted my justice department to be. but i m glad you made that decision. you presented it to him as a fait accompli and he said i wanted to suggest it to you but i didn t think that s appropriate. exactly. that s the relationship that
be reading about them in the newspapers the next day, monday or something like that. the doma decision, for instance, the decision not to defend doma i made. i thought this is one he can t read about in the newspapers. so i on a sunday at a super bowl party i told him this is where we were going to go. this is a decision i had made. and he said to me, i m really glad i didn t know how to approach you because this is where i wanted my justice department to be. i didn t think it was appropriate to share that with you, but i m glad you made that decision. so you present td to him as a fait accompli and he said i m glad, i wanted to suggest to you to do this but didn t feel it was appropriate. exactly. that is an example of the kind of relationship that should exist between an attorney general and a president. there are a whole range of law enforcement issues that i never shared with him where an indictment was going to be brought and he would simply and people in the white house w
one thing we always did was present both sides of an issue every single topic. two arizona ago when the doma decision came down it was incredibly difficult to find anyone who would speak on the opposition of gay marriage on television because people had said to us we understand we have lost this argument. no matter what happens, we won t stand by it. that s one reason the media coverage is bias. it s more difficult to present that side because people aren t willing to stand up and say it. when you try to find statements there s a handful here and there. protesters outside of the court but it s a difficult thing. even leaders in congress say i don t agree with it. it should be state s rights but they won t make this their issue. rerun the footage of obama telling rick warren that marriage is between a man and a woman. do we have a white
one thing we always did was present both sides of an issue every single topic. two arizona ago when the doma decision came down it was incredibly difficult to find anyone who would speak on the opposition of gay marriage on television because people had said to us we understand we have lost this argument. no matter what happens, we won t stand by it. that s one reason the media coverage is bias. it s more difficult to present that side because people aren t willing to stand up and say it. when you try to find statements there s a handful here and there. protesters outside of the court but it s a difficult thing. even leaders in congress say i don t agree with it. it should be state s rights but they won t make this their issue. rerun the footage of obama telling rick warren that marriage is between a man and a woman. do we have a white
it, knew that phil robertson held extremely conservative views. what i thought was interesting in revealing about this exchange, his comments about gay marriage got a lot of press and rightly so. but what he said about jim crow, the fact that blacks were, quote, unquote, happy and singing during segregation, got almost no coverage. i thought that was reflective of the debate we re having. remember, the supreme court s decision to overturn section 4 of the voting rights act happened a day before they then overturned doma. and the doma decision, which was a great victory for equality, really overshadowed the voting rights act decision. the supreme court, i think, the concerns in the supreme court, have this twilsed notion that there are there is a need for expanded rights for some people, at least anthony kennedy had this definition, but not for other people. so basically say, okay, well, gay rights is a thing of the future, to be progressive on, that but rights for blacks and hispanic