Centerfield

Game On

Last Sunday on This Week, Senator McCain stated his position on gay marriage. IMO it is the same position he took in 2000 and the same position he has taken since, which is that he personally opposes gay marriage but believes the issue should be left up to the states. He also stated his support for Civil Unions and has in the past opposed the Federal Marriage Amendment. All in all this seems to be the mainstream position of the day, and the one that is taken by most elected officials who are closest to the middle.

McCain's recent statements have earned him some early campaign shots from Governor Mitt Romney who opposes gay marriage and supports an amendment to the Constitution that would ban it, or at least he does now that he is running for President.

Romney recently stated:

"Look, if somebody says they're in favor of gay marriage, I respect that view. If someone says -- like I do -- that I oppose same-sex marriage, I respect that view.... But those who try and pretend to have it both ways, I find it to be disingenuous."

This is one big reason I will not mark my ballot for Mitt under any circumstance in the primary or general election, the other is that he is the most greasy of the Republican contenders. Mitt is the George W. Bush of the 2008 elections in that he is attempting to take a complex issue and explain it to the American people like we are a bunch of idiots, and we have had enough.

McCain's position isn't disingenuous, and it isn't having it both ways. In fact, it is in line with current policy under the Defense of Marriage Act that leaves the issue up to the states. The same Defense of Marriage Act that was passed by a conservative Republican Congress.

What gets to me the most is that Romney's obvious pander is just the first of many rhetorical shots that we will see from the right in an attempt to label McCain what he is not, a liberal. When you think about it, McCain's position is historically consistent with Conservative Republican principles that value state right's, while Mitt and social conservatives are proposing government over the individual.

Let me make this logic clear. They see a problem and are proposing a government solution to the problem by pushing for the biggest regulations of them all, an amendment to the Constitution. Why are they doing this? To stop activist Judges from redifining marriage, so they say, yet that has only happened in states where voters immediately turned around and voted to ban gay marriage. In fact, I don't remember a state where the issue has come up that has voted in favor of legalizing marriage for gay couples. Seems sort of knee-jerk to me, and we are supposed to believe that John McCain is the liberal.

For the record, I agree with the Senator that the issue should be left up to the states, but support gay marriage where he opposes it. However, I can tell the difference between a politician that takes an ideologically consistent stand on an issue and one that is taking a stand solely for political gain.