taken from the transcript of 5/6/12 meet the press []May 6: Joe Biden, Kelly Ayotte, Diane Swonk, Tom Brokaw, Chuck Todd - Meet the Press - Transcripts - msnbc.com

[from the roundtable discussion]
DAVID GREGORY:
All right, point taken. Final one on our hot topics this week: the vice president on this program talking about same-sex marriage. He made news on this, Chuck.

CHUCK TODD:
He did. He went far, he's gone farther. I mean basically, he came out and supported gay marriage. And that was clear in your interview. What's interesting there is the vice President's office reached out to me to say, "Yes, we know that the vice president was speaking about himself. He's not speaking for the administration." And they pointed out, like the president, he's evolving on this issue."

will the old 'flip-flop' become the new 'evolving'?

P-L-E-A-S-E "Say it ain't so Joe"

What I like about Biden is he sometimes slips out of political mode and speaks what HE THINKS about a subject!!!! How refreshing and very, VERY RARE.

Just see the WH scurrying around today to do damage and save a vote control.

Good old Joe helping Obama again...

btk

Originally Posted by njbchbum

taken from the transcript of 5/6/12 meet the press []May 6: Joe Biden, Kelly Ayotte, Diane Swonk, Tom Brokaw, Chuck Todd - Meet the Press - Transcripts - msnbc.com

[from the roundtable discussion]
DAVID GREGORY:
All right, point taken. Final one on our hot topics this week: the vice president on this program talking about same-sex marriage. He made news on this, Chuck.

CHUCK TODD:
He did. He went far, he's gone farther. I mean basically, he came out and supported gay marriage. And that was clear in your interview. What's interesting there is the vice President's office reached out to me to say, "Yes, we know that the vice president was speaking about himself. He's not speaking for the administration." And they pointed out, like the president, he's evolving on this issue."

will the old 'flip-flop' become the new 'evolving'?

Same sex marriage is a very tough issue for politicians. You lose a voting block no matter what position you take up when taking a side on this issue.

Having worked along various gays/lesbians while living in Minneapolis and before that near San Francisco, being able to marry and get the rights set up for married couples, seems like a human right that should be available to anyone. On the other hand, though, I do see a freedom of religion argument here that certain churches which are against gay/lesbian marriages should not have to allow such unions within their church.

good post, tal...but do you think that politicians of any flavor will begin to use the word 'evolving' instead of 'flip-flop' when thay get caught up in an issue where they have reversed/modified their stance on any given issue?

the concept of 'evolving' seems, to me, to be much more acceptable than 'flip-flopping'. flip-flop has had a long history of being used - and it seems to have developed a very negative connotation.

personally, as a woman, i could never understand why changing one's mind is so difficult for some to accept! i always thought that it was one's prerogative

Evolving is definitely a better word than flip-flopping. With flip-flopping, it means you can go one way to another way and back and forth several times. Evolving, I think, means you have changed your mind on the issue after studying it and moving forward with it.

Very rarely do things evolve backwards. There are a couple of examples in the animal kingdom. The Galopago igauna is evolving backward to become a sea creature once again after millions of years on land. The blind cave fish has evolved backward without eyes or pigmentation because of living in complete darkness.

Forward evolution goes on, too. Rabbits around California have begun to develop natural protection from the hemotoxin of the Western Pacific rattlesnake and now the snakes in a certain region of California have actually begun to evolve their venom to be both hemotoxic and neurotoxic.

Originally Posted by njbchbum

good post, tal...but do you think that politicians of any flavor will begin to use the word 'evolving' instead of 'flip-flop' when thay get caught up in an issue where they have reversed/modified their stance on any given issue?

the concept of 'evolving' seems, to me, to be much more acceptable than 'flip-flopping'. flip-flop has had a long history of being used - and it seems to have developed a very negative connotation.

personally, as a woman, i could never understand why changing one's mind is so difficult for some to accept! i always thought that it was one's prerogative

Well, here is agreement.

I find it just fine to "evolve". In our personal lives we do it all the time. As we get older, more experiences and supposedly wiser we see some things differently and in politics where everything seems to be defined as black or white, I think evolving is not a bad thing.

I didn't agree on all the tags placed on Kerry in this regard, as I could see on specific issues how minds can be changed (evolved)

Gov Romney has "evolved" from being the first governor in the country to sign a law allowing same sex marriage to being vehemently opposed to same sex marriage. Stay classy Mitt.

If there is to be open, honest, adult conversation on this forum, lets at least get the facts straight....

......Gov Romney never signed such a law as you have said. It was decided by the Massachusetts court system, as opposed to any move by the legislature or then-governor Romney in the statehouse.

.....He is still opposed but while Governor Romney advocated for benefits for same-sex couples, such as health insurance and family leave time.

This seems like a fair and reasonable approach to a touchy subject on which he opposes the marriage !

BUT lets at least discuss FACTS

Actually, being firmly against gay marriage is good for Romney.

Seems even Dem Ed Rendell is telling him to "man up"...his words....

Ed Rendell: Obama Should Man Up & Say Position on Gay Marriage - Political News Video

Those years in Illinois voting "present" instead of taking a stand got him spoiled !!! Actually Secy Clinton was the one who said ""In the Illinois State Senate, Senator Obama voted 130 times 'present,'" Clinton said. "That's not 'yes.' That's not 'no.' That's 'maybe.'"

janmcn, not to hijack my own thread [but i guess i can]...do you not think that it is possible for ANY politician [or anyone else for that matter] to hold a personal belief while at the same time believe that they must act in the best interest of their constituents? can a politician NOT support legislation that is seen as good for their town, county, state, country while holding personal beliefs that are different?

to me, a politician that can separate their job responsibilities from their personal [and perhaps interferring] beliefs in order to act in the best interest of their constituents is more honest than one who claims not to have an opinion or to have an opinion that is "evolving". not being able to have an opinion is like not beaing able to make a commitment.

As usual, Mitt Romney has been all over the place on this issue. In an Oct 1994 letter he said "If we are to achieve the goals we share, we must make equality for gays and lesbians our mainstream concern".

In his 2002 campaign for governor, Romney declined to back a proposed state constitutional amendment to prohibit same sex marriage. Read all about it:


Mitt Romney's Massachusetts history with same-sex marriage - Los Angeles Times

Originally Posted by njbchbum

janmcn, not to hijack my own thread [but i guess i can]...do you not think that it is possible for ANY politician [or anyone else for that matter] to hold a personal belief while at the same time believe that they must act in the best interest of their constituents? can a politician NOT support legislation that is seen as good for their town, county, state, country while holding personal beliefs that are different?

to me, a politician that can separate their job responsibilities from their personal [and perhaps interferring] beliefs in order to act in the best interest of their constituents is more honest than one who claims not to have an opinion or to have an opinion that is "evolving". not being able to have an opinion is like not beaing able to make a commitment.

Yes, I believe they can and that is exactly what President Obama is doing on this matter.

Originally Posted by janmcn

As usual, Mitt Romney has been all over the place on this issue. In an Oct 1994 letter he said "If we are to achieve the goals we share, we must make equality for gays and lesbians our mainstream concern".

In his 2002 campaign for governor, Romney declined to back a proposed state constitutional amendment to prohibit same sex marriage. Read all about it:


Mitt Romney's Massachusetts history with same-sex marriage - Los Angeles Times

All true !!! He was/is against same sex marriage. He does want to protect their rights. He opposed the constitutional amendment..thus the courts made it law. He then right before leaving said ok to the amendment, but he never changed his mind on where he stood versus same sex marriage...always against.

All his actions were to protect the citizens even though he opposed what the court had done !

The issue being discussed here has implications that will change life as we know it now. So I want to know before I place my trust with someone just how they feel about that issue.