[Question Liberal Authority]

I like a lot of things about Newt, but I don't see how he has any credibility when it comes to defining "marriage". Even months ago, Jay Leno was telling jokes like "Newt believes marriage is a sacred bond between a man, his mistress, and the woman he cheated on his first wife with."

I agree that Mitt won't have any credibility on the issue. "The courts made me do it" is a weak defense, and his defense of RomneyCare is that it's a state issue, not a Federal issue. So wouldn't the same thing apply to marriage?

Ron Paul obviously won't do anything to ban gay marriage, unless the marriage is between two members of the Federal Reserve Board.

If gay marriage is your #1 issue, then Santorum might be your only bet.

[JediJones]

That’s a classic liberal trap, claiming that because someone is immoral that they cannot or should not be a spokesman for morality. Newt’s marital problems don’t have anything to do with his policy on gay marriage. He openly told a voter in Iowa to not vote for him when the guy asked him his policy on gay marriage and didn’t like his answer.

I don’t just have one issue. But I think what’s really interesting all of us is why support among the elites and insiders is so passionate for Romney above all other candidates and why the one candidate perceived as a real threat to him has been so powerfully Romneyboated. I know some of the Romney backers have been bought off, but there’s very little that the strongest Romney supporters are openly saying that passes muster as any kind of plausible explanation at all. There is a palpable sense that Romney and, by extension, some of his supporters are hiding something.