We are all familiar with then-Senator Obama defending traditional marriage in 2008. Mr. Obama used Christianity and God to justify his position.

We learned later from Mr. Axelrod that the whole thing may have been just a little "lie" to appeal to black Americans. In other words, he was always for same-sex marriage but did not have the courage to share that with voters in 2008.

The latest discovery is Hillary Clinton in 2004, or back in the days when she was a hawk on Iraq and defending traditional marriage.
This is what Mrs Clinton said in 2004:

…the fundamental bedrock principle that exists between a man and a woman, going back into the mists of history as one of the founding, foundational institutions of history and humanity and civilization, and that its primary, principal role during those millennia has been the raising and socializing of children for the society into which they are to become adults.

My guess is that many in the left will conveniently file this under "evolution" or people discovering that they are on the wrong side of history.

Yes, people change and that's OK. We remember that President Nixon went to China after being anti-communist # 1 for years. President Bush changed on taxes and accepted increases as part of a 1990 deal with Congress.  

However, is Mrs Clinton's change an honest reappraisal or just cynical pandering to the left? We do remember how she "positioned" herself and opposed the 2007 for purely political reasons.    

I think that she is pandering on the issue of marriage. She just does not have the courage to keep her former position on marriage.

Profile in courage? More like profiles in poll reading.

Question:  What other issues will we learn that she has evolved on?   

P.S. You can hear my show (CantoTalk) or follow me on Twitter.