Speed Gibson

This is my third post on this week's Almanac couch of the DFL U.S. Senate hopefuls, which I found quite interesting.

Candidate Mike Ciresi spent considerable time trying to paint himself as a public figure fighting the good DFL fights for decades. The truth is, he was largely unknown before the infamous tobacco lawsuit and settlement. Anyway, here is this man of the people speaking directly on the issue of so-called gay marriage:

Host Eric Escola: Sentence or two, yes or no would be great. [Are] you for legalizing gay marriage?

Candidate Mike Ciresi: I'm in favor of no discrimination in this country whatsover. I am not in favor of imposing requirements on religious denominations.

Escola: Are you for legalizing gay marriage?

Ciresi No, what I've said is that I'm for no discrimination whatsoever, but that in terms of marriage, I'm not in favor of imposing that on religious denominations.

Host Cathy Wurzer: I'm a little confused, though.

Candidate Mike Ciresi: What I said is, in terms of civil unions, I am in favor of that. I do not favor any form of discrimination. We have fought against this. Our law firm has taken on many of these issues on a pro bono basis. But I am not in favor of imposing on religious denominations the fact that they have to marry gay people. I just don't this that's right.

This is an edited transcript, mostly to exclude other candidates responses in the interim.

This was a well-rehearsed lawyerly answer so murky that both Eric and Cathy had to ask again, only to get the same answer. I'm not sure I understand what he said exactly, but it looks to me like he could have simply said "I believe that civil unions is the best answer."

I noticed on the earlier topic of alleged predatory lending, he again used legal jargon needlessly. It's apparently his native tongue, not exactly what you'd expect from this self-described man of the people.