Kelly Clarkson Endorses Obama, Gay Marriage

By On 10/19/2012 · 147 Comments · In American Idol, Kelly Clarkson

Share on TumblrShare via email

Kelly Clarkson is currently wrapping up the UK leg of her world tour and she tells the Daily Star that she can’t wait to move into her her new home in Nashville, and that she’s eager to vote in the upcoming American presidential election.

After the online controversy over the American Idol winner’s twitter “endorsement” of Republican, Ron Paul during the primaries, it turns out that she’ll be voting for Barack Obama…again. One of the reasons why? She joins Carrie Underwood in declaring her support for gay marriage.

“ I’ve been reading online about the debates and I’m probably going to vote for Obama again, even though I’m a Republican at heart,” she reveals. “I can’t support Romney’s policies as I have a lot of gay friends and I don’t think it’s fair they can’t get married.”

“I’m not a hardcore feminist but we can’t be going back to the 50s.

“Obama is a great guy. I’ve met him and I’m a fan of Michelle too. “She has been busy promoting better education and healthy diets, which is something we could all use a dose of reality on.”

So there you have it.

As a side note–it wasn’t all work and no play in the UK for Kelly. She hired a personal driver to take in the sights.

“I had my sister with me and we went to Derbyshire to see where the version of Pride And Prejudice featuring Kiera Knightley was filmed. Y’all live in such a beautiful place. When I’m here there’s so much to see as I’m a really big history nerd.”

Unfortunately, back in July, Kelly bid on a ring at auction that was once owned by author Jane Austen and she can’t bring it home! The ring, which cost the singer £152,000, must stay in the UK. “We put in an export request but I can’t take it out of the UK as they’ve named it a national treasure,” says Kelly. Maybe she can donate it to a museum and go visit it once in awhile…

Kelly’s Greatest Hits Chapter One is due out on November 19.

Via the Daily Star.

 
← Older Comments
  • MellyPer1692

    Thank you Marmom07. Eloquently said.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_PSHFTD4YV3QOE3INABJUXZSWMU hillstreetblooz

     The Salt Lake Tribune, the largest newspaper in Utah, on Friday endorsed
    President Obama for re-election rather than the first Mormon
    presidential nominee, Mitt Romney. In an editorial entitled “Too Many Mitts,” the paper castigated Romney for his frequent reinventions and changes of position.

    That speaks volumes… start your ‘education’ or reeducation here.

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/10/19/163282550/salt-lake-tribune-endorses-obama-put-off-by-too-many-mitts

  • marmom07

     Bush tax cuts benefited the wealthy far more than anyone else.

    from here: http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=1811

    The Bush tax cuts have contributed to revenues dropping in
    2004 to the lowest level as a share of the economy since 1950, and
    have been a major contributor to the dramatic shift from large
    projected budget surpluses to projected deficits as far as the eye
    can see.The tax cuts have conferred the most benefits, by
    far, on the highest-income households — those least in need of
    additional resources — at a time when income already is
    exceptionally concentrated at the top of the income spectrum.The
    design of these tax cuts was ill-conceived, resulting in
    significantly less economic stimulus than could have been accomplished
    for the same budgetary cost.  In part because the tax cuts were not
    as effective as alternative measures would have been, job creation
    during this recovery has been notably worse than in any other
    recovery since the end of World War II.

    More info here:

    http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3811

    Yes this link is wikipeida but at the bottom of the page are a lot of links for further reading.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_tax_cuts

    more on Romney’s tax plan

    http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/10/16/1020461/reagan-advisor-taxes-job-growth/

  • mileyfan123

    Welcome back :)

    I liked your post, you should stick around.

  • wordnerdarchie

    Thanks for the links. I don’t have much information on thinkprogress.org or whether they are considered unbiased or not, but I’ll read their conclusions and decide, based on other information, whether I agree with their findings.

    As a side note I wasn’t asking about Bush, I was asking about Romney so your information regarding President Bush I’ll disregard at the moment.  I understand why you included it however.

    Information about the two candidates regarding taxes are clearly listed in this document.  They’re probably a lot closer than you think.

    http://tax.cchgroup.com/downloads/files/pdfs/legislation/candidates-taxpolicy.pdf

    Taxes are a very complicated issue, and politicians have been talking for years about tax reform.  However, when talking about current tax “breaks” one must keep in mind there have been years of increases in taxes for the middle to higher income taxpayers, so changes in that area are needed in order to make the tax code fair for all tax payers.

  • elliegrll

     

    Bush tax cuts benefited the wealthy far more than anyone else.

    As the info. that you have in quotes shows, the biggest problem isn’t that they benefited the wealthy, it’s that they are a major reason why the deficit grew.   Another reason is how George Bush decided to pay for two wars, including borrowing money to China, which has resulted in the US losing a lot of jobs to China and importing some goods that don’t meet the US standards.

    The Bush tax cuts are similar to what people have been saying about Romney’s tax plan.  He’s proposing more cuts for the top 1 to 5%
    of earners, but he hasn’t said how he will pay for these cuts.  Every economist has said that these cuts will add as much as $5 trillion to the deficit.  Romney has said that he won’t be raising the taxes on the high earners to pay for these cuts, so the only option is to raise taxes on the middle class.

    To be fair, given the economic situation that we are in, the only option to get on the road to recovery is to raise almost everybody’s taxes.  

  • marmom07

     Yes exactly, 

    While I don’t like everything Obama has done, who will Romney be as a president? Moderate republican like when governor? hard right conservative like he was campaigning for the Rupubilcan nom? Something else? He’s asking me to trust him when he can’t or won’t explain how he will achieve his promises and policy wise he has been all over the map with his answers. I am deeply against his ideology that only hetro, two parent marriages produce successful children. I am deeply against many republican policies so no I’m not willing to take a chance on Romney. I don’t want more radical conservative judges placed on the supreme court (or other courts).

    The US is a great country because we got rid of child labor, require companies to protect workers from work place accidents (no sweat shops), ensure our water is safe to drink, our children can play in dirt not full of toxic waste, we have freedom of speech and due process, separation of church and state, we have fire, rescue and 911 and federal aid to areas devastated by natural disasters….. so yeah I pay taxes for that stuff and more.

    Currently people are dying because of pharmacy compounding medicine with no industry over-sight for me that’s not ok. Is it ok that the banking industry screwed people over and made bad loans and yet walked away without even a slap on the wrist? It’s why we have regulations and laws. Our economic melt down is tied to the de-regulation of banks not too much oversight.

  • http://twitter.com/KariannHart Kariann Hart

    The gop wants a certain type of economic policy: no unions, low wages, no benefits, little job security, low taxes on the wealthy. They need to convince the majority of Americans to follow such a policy, as the policy is blatantly self destructive for a majority of people.

    I can’t help but wonder why anyone would want to give 4 or 8 years to someone that isn’t looking out for their back.  Romney is a major risk.  Of course, we want the recovery to be faster, but I believe President Obama is doing the best he can.  I would like to see the Democrats take over the House and jumpstart Obama’s programs.

    Also, the elderly are not always conservative.  We are looking out for our Medicare and Social Security, and believe in equal rights for all.

    marmon07, thank you for expressing your views so eloquently.  Indeed, Kelly and Carrie rock.  (Oh, and Bruce Springsteen, too.)

  • wordnerdarchie

    Bush tax cuts also benefited people all the way down to those having only $6000 in taxable income, or eligible for earned income credit as well as keeping in effect those credits for children & education.  Let’s be real and not rewrite tax history.

    The economy is like a house of cards where you might take one card out & you’ll be fine, or it could all tumble down.  Projecting what will happen given certain changes in tax policy and how it will affect the economy is, imo, purely guesswork.  If it was easy, we wouldn’t be in this mess right now.

    I wouldn’t want to be the one making those decisions.

  • elliegrll

    The economy is like a house of cards where you might take one card out & you’ll be fine, or it could all tumble down.  Projecting what will happen given certain changes in tax policy and how it will affect the economy is, imo, purely guesswork.

    And this is why people want Romney to be specific.  For example, he has said that he is going to repeal the so called Obamacare, but he’s going to provide everyone with coverage.  So the obvious question is how will he pay for it.  While governor he said that Massachusetts plan wouldn’t work, unless everyone was required to get health insurance.  

    Romney has said that he would cut these taxes:
    Lower tax rates by 20% = $2.5 trillion
    Eliminating the Alternative Minimum Tax = $700 billion
    Repeal of high-income payroll tax = $300 billion
    Repeal the estate tax = $150 billion
    Tax cut for corporations = $1.1 trillion  

    How couldn’t this have an effect on the economy?  Obviously something would have to be done to make up for this lose in revenue.

  • wordnerdarchie

    Wait a minute – repeal high-income payroll tax…. explain that one please, cause I’m not sure what you meant by that one.  Everyone pays FICA/Medi tax limited by a certain wage base.

    I hadn’t heard that either man has addressed payroll taxes at all at least according to the link I posted, unless it has been done lately.  Currently, payroll taxes are set to go back to regular levels of 6.2 % and 1.45% at the end of 2012.  The base wage for 2012 is 110,100. I don’t believe the base wage has been posted for 2013.

    As for reducing corporate tax %, Obama wants to also reduce corporate tax rate as well, so that point is a draw. ;)

    Both men want to lower individual tax rates – another draw. ;)  Romney does however, want to continue the same rates for higher taxpayers that are currently in force for 2012.  Obama wants to raise rates for those making more than $250,000.

    Obama’s stand on the Estate tax doesn’t do enough in situations like family farms estates, Romney’s is too drastic.  (See, I can be open-minded, lol)

    I personally hate AMT tax because it affects too many middle income taxpayers, so I understand Romney’s stand to do away with it.

    No matter who gets elected president, it’s up to Congress to get the work done in pounding out a new tax act, in time to be implemented for 2013 year. It needs to happen so it will happen, but it will probably be passed as a retroactive tax bill.  That means my job in Feb-May of 2013 is going to be a living hell.

  • asifclueless

    pj … You want Romney’s plan?
    You’ll get Romney’s plan!!!  :)  lol

    http://www.romneytaxplan.com/

  • wordnerdarchie

    I’ve seen that – paid for by the Democratic National Committee, which you can believe turns off a few voters.  The way they mock & ridicule the other side is disturbing and it seems to be widespread as seen by my twitter stream.  It’s not a good way to win over the moderates in the Republican Party or the undecided who are taking this election very seriously.  ;)

  • quickjessie

    Oh please.  The advertising by the GOP – with “paid for by the RNC” – FAR outweighs Democratic advertising.

    I live in a swing state – we are being BURIED in GOP ads.  You want disturbing?  How’s about 10 minutes out of every 30 being deluged with lies, easily checked via the Google?  That’s what the GOP is doing here.

    And by the way, the last moderate Republican was kicked out of his Party during the primaries.

  • elliegrll

    Both sides mock and ridicule one another.  I do have an opinion of who is doing more mocking, but I’m biased.  I think the sad thing is that the mocking works.  People will remember memes and zingers more than a long list of specific facts.  Which is why people focus on Big Bird, Binders full of Women,etc. instead of the real issues that those memes represent.

    BTW, people who would get upset about that website aren’t the intended audience.  I think that’s something that the President has had to learn.  Those who don’t notice how idiotic it is to mock his name, that he is a US citizen, or who focus more on whether or not he said that Benghazi was a terrorist attack, more so than the attack itself, are not people who were going to be open to voting for him anyway.

  • MollyAnnMay

    wordnerdarchie: That means my job in Feb-May of 2013 is going to be a living hell.

    Cry me a river. At least you’ll have a job. If Romney is elected he has indicated that he will, in collusion with the anti-science Republican Congress, be delighted to sign a budget that will effectively eliminate my job. 

    He’s also indicated that he would be delighted to collude with Congress to limit women’s access to health care, including safe abortions, and limit the civil rights of gay and lesbian citizens.

    Needless to say, that’s enough for me to vote for the guy who won’t do any of those things.

    But even if one focuses only on money, taxes and the economy, here are two essays on why Romney’s tax plan (or whichever tax plan he happens to be touting at any given moment) doesn’t make mathematical sense and WILL increase both the deficit and the tax burden on everyone except the extremely wealthy. (Who, btw, despite their whining, have done just fine over the last 4 years. Which hasn’t stopped them from greedily grasping for more.)

    From the center-right, Josh Barrow at Bloomberg: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-12/the-final-word-on-mitt-romney-s-tax-plan.html

    From the center left Ezra Klein at the Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/wp/2012/10/16/the-truth-about-romneys-six-studies/

  • wordnerdarchie

    Happy to see that you agree with me on the idiocy of making a joke out of something that isn’t in the least bit…. humorous.

  • wordnerdarchie

    I appreciate the links.  It will take some time to read & work through all of the points.  One comment in the comment section of the Bloomberg article did catch my eye and raised a good question, it asked for an analysis of President’s Obama’s plan.  I wonder how his plan holds up under similar scrutiny.

    We all have our reasons for voting for our candidate of choice. Some issues are more important to each one of us than others.  I’ve lost jobs in the past because of governmental budget cuts and it’s never a fun experience.  My son has not been able to find a job and he’s been looking since May.  The husband’s plant just closed last month and he’s currently unemployed, so I hear you.  I don’t think my little part-time job will put us in any privileged tax group so I just might cry you a river. ;)  All those many years of penny-pinching & saving for a “rainy day” will come in handy now which apparently is what many people have failed to do.  Let’s hope that whoever is elected, that our economy will turn around.  It’s just a matter of which candidate you think will be able to accomplish that task.

    Thankfully, we have the opportunity to vote unlike people in many other countries and to have a civilized discussion on the issues in a public forum.

    But I have to break away from this discussion since there are things to do, it’s been fun, interesting and educational.  Thanks MJ for allowing it to continue. ;)

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=677275924 facebook-677275924

    You want Romney’s plan? You’ll get Romney’s plan!!!  :)  lol
    http://www.romneytaxplan.com/
    ———————————————–

    Oh my God that was hilarious!

  • Pippygirl

    I laughed out loud at that!

  • iluvai

    Is it possible to be a liberal socially, but a conservative fiscally??  I probably shouldn’t be on this thread.  ;) See you all on the DWTS and XF threads.  :)

  • GinaBallerina

    Really wish I hadn’t read this.  What a truly foolish reason to support Obama.  He endorsed gay marriage for political reasons only – why did he run last time as being against it?  It’s pretty obvious that his endorsement of gay marriage was for political gain, to appeal to a certain voting block.  Kelly says she’s voting for him AGAIN, mainly because of this one issue.  Yet last election he was against gay marriage…
    The real issue this election is the economy.  We can’t effect much change if we don’t have jobs that pay a living wage.  I love Kelly but I guess when you have a job that pays millions it makes you a little out of touch with what the real problems are.

← Older Comments