Yet the main problem is...he has never come out in favor of supporting same sex marriages (versus civil unions), and has never made same sex marriages a cornerstone policy or even made a large speech about it.  He has never taken a PRO position on it, only to now take a laze faire position on it in order to get elected.

He's said marriage should be left up to the state, but the federal government and all states must recognize civil unions affording identical rights and benefits to same-sex couples. Name one of the viable presidential candidates from the primaries who took a more progressive stance. I mean, he's even more progressive than Clinton because he wants a full repeal of DOMA.

He said it's a bad bill, but better than what was available before.  --That means it's still a bad bill!

He called the original bill bad. He's called the current version an imperfect but acceptable compromise. You can't possibly claim to not understand that difference.

He said it's not the way he would have written the legislation.  --If I recall he's still a member of the United States Senate, why not write his own ammendment or even his own version of the bill!!!???

Nothing is preventing him from writing it, but he won't get enough votes to pass it. Between the blue dogs and Republicans it would be a hard sell under any circumstances, but it's basically impossible during an election year. So, you'd rather he burn his time and political capital on a lost cause?

Anyway, what's your actual problem here? You haven't presented one legitimate criticism. You just seem to be lobbing clumsy attacks for the sake of fighting.