He also said that if he were starting from scratch he would advocate a single payer health care plan, but that he believes that nothing would get done if he put that plan forward, and so supporting something, though not tackling that issue in the initial proposal for the plan isn't unusual. As far as I've known he's always been in favor of negotiating, but not doing anything prematurely. Is this another canard like when you tried to claim he was running campaign commercials in Florida? That turned out to be bunk, it was a regional commercial for other states, and part of the region just happened to include a chunk of Florida. Again those two things seem consistent. Especially if upon reviewing the mandatory min. sentences go out the window. Already been addressed. He never did endorse such a plan, but said that he believes the single payer plan is what would be the best ultimately, if he were starting from scratch.
I think it is worth mentioning that not all flip-flopping constitutes political chickanery. The ability to change your mind and be flexible is as important as the ability to stand firm. The key is to know when to change, and when to stick to your guns. It is also important that you be clear as to why you are changing your mind.
Except that in regard to the debate for GLBT equal rights the debate is pretty much all about marriage as even GW Bush has stated he would be OK with states having civil unions or domestic partnerships. He (GW Bush) flip flopped on that in the 2004 election but part of what has made this debate so intractable is that from the GLBT perspective anything short of marriage implies a second class standard. This is one of those situations that I've mentioned previously where Obama's rhetoric might not be the magical elixer that unites people as many seem to expect. It seems logical that domestric partnerships / civil unions are the answer but if that was the case this debate would've been resolved years ago. My own opinion is that Obama's rhetoric of change and [/i]bringing people together[/i] are going to dissapoint some of his supporters when they find out that the change he is talking aobut isn't necessarily what they think it is or that bringing people together means you can't have the change you want.
I disagree. There are plenty of GOP values voters/ conservatives that aren't happy with the idea of legal civil unions. They aren't happy with the states that allow those, and it isn't just a case of if that was all people were asking for, they would have gotten it. I do agree that just civil unions isn't going far enough, but it is a start, and it is a beginning. It is some progress which is better than none. It is not enough, but we should start there.
