She seems to believe it was okay for Romney to be pro-gay in 1994 because "gay marriage ‚Äî what we are talking about today ‚Äî wasn’t really on the table in 1994." Actually, the first state court recognized the right to marry in Hawaii in 1993. in 1994, it was quite the hot topic. Kathryn-Jean Lopez was around twelve then so she can be forgiven for forgetting. DOMA was in 1996. During the height of the first Christianist hysteria about gay marriage, Romney clearly took a proudly pro-gay stand. I think that’s telling. He’s now against even civil unions. What gives?
K-Lo then suggests that Romney’s new position is the real one, and that the last few years have led him to this position. So that means that a Republican candidate who supported ENDA (the federal Employment Non-Discrimination Act for gays) in 1994 is going to be less likely to do so in 2006? Run that logic by me one more time, will you? As for me and LCR never entertaining Romney as a candidate, I reserve judgment. If Romney proposes healthcare reform on the basis of the Massachusetts experiment, if he backs gay civil unions and ENDA, if he reaches out to LCR, if he leaves marriage to the states to decide, and if he has a sane and serious strategy for fighting Islamist terror, I’d be perfectly open to backing him. If he is serious about cutting spending, I could even get enthusiastic. He seems more of a conservative than a fundamentalist to me. He’s just posing as a fundie for the primaries. Alas, he won’t be able to pose for much longer. He’ll have to deliver. And then, as K-Lo says, "we’ll see…"
The Dish 