Obama flip flops on gay marriage

For it in the 90s, against it from 04-08, and "evolving" on the issue from 09-12. Pretty obvious he was always for it.

http://gma.yahoo.com/obama-announces-his-support-for-same-sex-marriage.html

He just alienated the senior citizens.

Seriously, he did that and irritated quite a few independents.

Personally, I could care less abut gays and the marriage issue.

It took 60 seconds to say that?
He probably just finished his first campaign speech that he started in 2007

Look at the way lefies like Matthews slobbers over his God's flip flop on this, he needs help. lol

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-XnQxv8TQs&feature=g-all-u

See my comment on that page.

TexasBlue wrote:See my comment on that page.

I'm sure Obama made this comment just to get more support for any campaigning and the election. Such is the nature of being a politician...that's what they all do and it's not a new thing.
However to say that only "liberals' are able to change their mind is absurd. Also, why does it have to be so "insidious"?
Since when are people not allowed to have different feelings on things over time regarding issues?
Maybe Joe Schmo in some small Oklahoma town changed his mind about stuff. Where's his news story? (And Joe is a conservative!!!!)

The thing, Prez, is that the left is saying (as Obama did himself) that he is "evolving" on this issue. If it's a Republican or conservative, they're a flip-flopper.

Mark85la wrote:Look at the way lefies like Matthews slobbers over his God's flip flop on this, he needs help. lol

https://www.youtube.com/watchv=b-XnQxv8TQs&feature=g-all-u

The guy is so blatanty biased, so clearly in the tank for Obama, and such a naked far-left shill, that it's a testament to the MSM's overwhelming bias to the left because he still has his job.

The man is a blithering idiot, and yet he works for the MSM.

How many of you guys would be in favor of a candidate that stuck with their beliefs even if they were not what you believed in?
Would you rather vote for a person that changed their mind to what you liked as opposed to a person that was not on your side but stuck with it...?

I believe you have to have one belief about issues and that it. You can't have one philosophy in Oregon and then change ideas the next day when you land in Alabama. Or change your mind when the time comes for an election.
Those types of systems are a sure sign of somebody you can't trust.

It isn't a matter of whether they "change" their minds or "evolve" on any given issue. You're either for something or not. That's the reason people vote for you. My representative has stances on issues. If I like those issues, I vote for him/her. If he changes his tune halfway thru his term, I'll vote against him/her the next election.

It's that simple.

TexasBlue wrote:It isn't a matter of whether they "change" their minds or "evolve" on any given issue. You're either for something or not. That's the reason people vote for you. My representative has stances on issues. If I like those issues, I vote for him/her. If he changes his tune halfway thru his term, I'll vote against him/her the next election.

It's that simple.

So he can flip more than an Olympic gymnast doing the floor routine as long he winds up on your position at some point...
The other guy sticks with what he believes for the duration and it's not with your ideals so he's out.

TheNextPrez2012 wrote:So he can flip more than an Olympic gymnast doing the floor routine as long he winds up on your position at some point...
The other guy sticks with what he believes for the duration and it's not with your ideals so he's out.

You serious? If a representative campaigns on being for low taxes and then votes to increase them during his term... you think I should vote for him the next round?

I respect any rep or senator who has their beliefs and what they campaign on. Nancy Pelosi represents a very liberal district. She votes for very liberal issues. That's why she keeps getting reelected. That's what her constituents expect from her and she gives it to them. All good.

TheNextPrez2012 wrote:How many of you guys would be in favor of a candidate that stuck with their beliefs even if they were not what you believed in

That is, in fact, precisely what I want with any candidate. I want someone with the courage to communicate honestly their positions on the issues of the day without equivocation or doublespeak.

Unfortunately, this is a rare quality in those running for public office, but we have seen their like - Gov Chris Christie, Presidential candidate Herman Cain, US Rep Ron Paul are among those candidates that possess this quality.

TheNextPrez2012 wrote:Would you rather vote for a person that changed their mind to what you liked as opposed to a person that was not on your side but stuck with it...

As you might have gathered from my statement above, I'd prefer the former every time. I might not vote for them, depending on the issue in question, but I'd respect their integrity.

TheNextPrez2012 wrote:I believe you have to have one belief about issues and that it. You can't have one philosophy in Oregon and then change ideas the next day when you land in Alabama. Or change your mind when the time comes for an election.
Those types of systems are a sure sign of somebody you can't trust.

Precisely. It is that sort of disembling, that bending to the winds of this or that constituency, that is the hallmark of a politician one can not trust.