>> schieffer: today on "face the nation," it was the statement that launched a thousand reactions. >> i think same-sex couples should be able to get married alive and many hailed it as historic, but not everyone. republican senator rand paul. >> he said his views were evolving. call me cynical, but i wasn't sure his views on marriage could get any gayer. >> schieffer: so what is the political fallout. mitt romney said flatley this is one place to draw the line. >> marriage is a relationship between one man and one woman. >> schieffer: it is an issue that cuts across party, geographic and ethnic lines, and we'll hear from all sides. ted olson, the former bush administration solicitor general. massachusetts governor "endeavour."

tony perkins of the family research council. former bush political advisory and "newsweek" contributor cd mack. evan wolfson, who heads freedom to mary, and clay aiken, all join us today. on page two, we'll get the latest on the capture of a terrorist bomb by the double agent. and this weekend's drone strikes in yemen from house intelligence committee chairman mike walker. and on this mother's day, we'll round it out with analysis on all of the above from republican strategist, bay buchanan. former obama communications director, anita dunn. melinda henneberger, of the "washington post," and our own norah o'donnell. this is "face the nation." captioning sponsored by cbs from cbs news in washington, "face the nation"

with bob schieffer. >> schieffer: good morning, again, and welcome to "face the nation" on this mother's day. we're going to hear many voices on this issue of gay marriage, same-sex marriage, this morning. but we're going to begin with massachusetts governor deval patrick, in richmond, massachusetts, and former bush administration solicitor general, ted olson, who joins us from ellison bay, wisconsin. gentlemen, a gallup poll out friday shows 60% of americans say the president's support for same-sex marriage will have no impact on whether or not they'll vote for him, versus 26% who say it will make them less likely to vote for him, and 13% who say they are more likely to vote for him because of this announcement. i want to go first to ted olson, the kiest's conservative, the founder of the federalist society, george bush's solicitor general, but you, mr. olson, joined with david boy, to argue in federal court that

california's ban on day marriage should be overturned, a case that may well go now to the supreme court. you've also been very active in republican politics over the years. so i want to ask you to start here. what is your advice now to mitt romney and republicans in general on how to handle the statement that the president made? >> well, i think it's very important for everyone, republicans and democrats alike, liberals and conservatives, to recognize that the right of individuals who love one another to get married and to be respected and treated with equality and dignity is exceedingly important. the more people understand that people have been waiting for years for the opportunity for their relationships to be treated equally and so that they can form a loving household is exceedingly important. and it's an american value, and we should all recognize that alive and do you think it was a smart political move for the president because many people, and most polls show, gay and lesbian voters would have voted

for him anyway. this going to help him politically, or will it hurt him? >> bob, no one asked me for political advice. i would say it's an important statement as an american. as the president of the united states to recognize the equality and dignity of our gay and lesbian brothers and sisters and friends and neighbors. that's what's important, not what was right or wrong or popular or unpopular politically. i don't know about politics. i do know about human rights and constitutional rights, and on that basis, i think the president did the right thing. i'm very glad he did it. >> schieffer: would argue with you on one thing. i think you do know about politics, but we won't go into that right now. governor patrick, many religious voteres, including many black voters are, opposed to same-sex marriage. is this issue going to threaten and hurt the president politically? >> i don't think so, bob. and i want to-- i want to thank ted for his clear and principled

on this issue, and it's consistent with the president's clear and principled position on the issue because it's about convictions. it's not about politics. you know, i dealt with something similar in massachusetts when i was running the first time and dealing with black clerget and point i made to them is the same point the president makes to voters nationally, which is that we don't have to agree on everything before we work together on anything. people get that this is about human dignity. and i applaud the president for standing up for human dignity. that is an american sprawl it's a real indication of this president's leadership. >> schieffer: well, some republicans have said, and we may hear this, i suspect, in just a minute or two from some of the other folks on the panel, that this really is going to galvanize, in some ways, governor romney's support because there are a lot of people on the right side of the republican party that were not quite sure of him on social issues. do you think some social conservatives who might have

been just lukewarm about mitt romney may now come right over and say, "i really like the guy now. >> well, they may. you know, those are voters, i suspect, who were not likely to vote for the president anyway, unless they vote their interest, which are economic interests, and this president is foursquare with them and standing with them in this election and in office. i think what we know is that mitt romney has occupied many positions on many issues, and he has, you know, back in 1994, when he was running for the united states senate he said publicly that he would be better than ted kennedy on gay and lesbian issues. he takes a different position in front of a different audience today. i think conservative voters know that about mitt romney. i think the american people know that about mitt romney. barack obama is running on and leading through a set of convictions. >> schieffer: mr. olson, let me ask you, do you intend to fact support mitt romney this time around? >> i fully expect to, yes. i think that he would make a

great president. and he's very, very strong on so many things that i believe in and so many things that the american people believe in. i think that with respect to this issue, this issue svolving, and the more that the american people understand we're talk pentagoingabout the human hearte dignity of our brothers and sisters, more and more people will come around and decide to allow individuals the right to marry the person that they love. >> schieffer: i want to it thank both of you. i want to broaden out the discussion and bring in some other folks. also joining us, tony perkins of the family research council. clay aiken, who all of you know from his "american idol" appearances and subsequent fame as the singer and songwriter. "newsweek" contributor mark mckinnon, one of george w. bush's campaign advisers and chief central artery gist. evan wolfson who heads up freedom to marry.

tony perkins, let me just go to you first. i know your organization has opposed same-sex marriage from the start. so where do you see this going now? >> well, i clearly when you see where this is going in the states, 32 states have voted to preserve the traditional definition of marriage. the gallup poll, one released the end of last week, shows a six-point shift toward traditional marriage. 50% say it's okay. 48% say no. but it's shifting. i think in part as because, ted olson said, i do think people are beginning to understand more, understand more that this is about more than just marriage. couples today can can live together, they can enter into civil contracts. they can get health benefits from their employer. what same-sex marriage is about is forcing the states to coerce others to accept relationships that run counter to their religious tradition. it's about curriculum in our schools. it's stepping in between the relationship between a parent and a child.

as more americans see that there's a lot more to this than just walking downtown aisle. the opposition is growing. >> schieffer: well, i mean, do you see this as a line being drawn here? i mean, do you think that this will be one of the defining issues this time around? i mean the poll says 60% of the people say it doesn't matter. >> well, it's interesting that we've heard this quite frequently, that the social and moral issues don't matter, but it's what took rick santorum from 1% in the republican primary to almost replacing mitt romney as the nominee. these issues do matter. i don't think the president did a political calculus to do this because if he did, he needs to go back to the calculator because it's a bad-- it's a bad formula because when you look at the states-- north carolina, a key swing state, ohio, they have amendments. 16-- the key swing states, 10 of them have marriage amendments. and these marriage amendments haven't kind of just barely eked across the line. they've passed on average with 67% of the public behind them.

so i think he was making a clear statement. i think mitt romney, at my alma mater yesterday, made a very strong statement, weaving it into the other issues. i thought he hit the right tone yesterday. >> schieffer: let me ask you about something senator rand paul said, we ran it at the top of the broadcast. but i just want to get your thought on this. >> the president recently weighed in on marriage, and you know, he said that his views were evolving on marriage. call me cynical, but i wasn't sure that his views on marriage could get any gayer. ( laughter ). >> schieffer: got a big laugh there. >> i don't think it's a laughing matter. i don't think this is something we should-- we should joke about. we are talking about individuals who feel very strongly one way or the other, and i think we should be civil, respectful, allowing all sides to have the debate. i'm glad that's what you're doing here this morning. but i think this is not

something to laugh about. it's not something to poke fun at other people about. this is a very serious issue. and i think it's very much like the abortion issue. 40 years into "roe v. wade" the issue is not solved and i think when you go back to civil rights. civil rights are rooted in natural law. americans don't see same-sex marriage being equal. >> schieffer: let me go to clay aiken. you are from north carolina. the day before the president spoke, as tony perkins said, your state overwhelmingly voted to defeat an initiative that basically gave domestic partners the same right as people who are married. you are openly gay. but did the president's statement pretty much ensure he will lose your home state of north carolina? >> no, i don't. i don't agree it seals it up for him. while we certain see, as you said, 60% of people say it won't matter, i think the people who say it will matter on either side of the equation, probably were not going to vote for obama or were going to vote for

president obama anyway. i think as people in north carolina start to look at this amendment and realize what it's doing not just for same-sex couples but straight couples as well, they're going to reject it. the polls in north carolina show over 60% of north carolinians actually support some sort recognition for same-sex couples, be is civilians or domestic partnerships. and it was sort of a political calculation on the part of some people in the general assembly to get this on the ballot. and as north carolinians see what it's done, and what it will do, i think that they will support the fact that president obama did speak out on principle. it wasn't a political calculation, you're right. because he spoke out and he said this is what i believe. and i think that we-- we'd like to see politicians speak out to principle a little bit more and not do things politicallyicalalated. >> schieffer: evan wolfson, you head a group that's determined to get same-sex marriage legalized nationwide. some activists are actually talking now about trying to move the convention from north carolina because of that vote that they took. do you support that?

>> no, i do not. i think what we need in north carolina and throughout the country is exactly what the president exemplified, which is talking about the conversations he's had in his life with real gay people, real families. he talked so powerfully about the conversations he and first lady michelle obama have had about it and that they've had with their own daughters and they talk about how their daughters have classmates and they can't understand why their classmate's families wouldn't be treated fairly. these are the kinds of conversations that are changing hearts and minds. we're going to see more of those conversations in north carolina. and the arc will continue. i think what the president did was show real moral leadership, and he also underscored that when we talk about real families, it turns out there is no good reason for denying those families the golden rule of treating them as you would want to be treated, the very values he and michelle are trying to teach their kids. >> schieffer: let me go to mark mckinnon. you are a political strategist and people on both sides say you are very good of what you do.

you were one of the chief architects of president bush's victories. you wrote a piece in the it "daily beast" recently and said republicans basically need to kind of go carefully on this. >> well, i actually said that republicans should recognize what's important is that we have a president who leads and stands for what he believes in. president bush won reelection in 2004, not because people liked him necessarilyo even agreed with his policys. they voted for him because they thought he had core principles that they'd fight for consistently. i give the president great credit for voting his conscience. it is not a political winner. north carolina is very difficult, a key swing state. thing about the nine swing states, years, iowa, colorado, missouri, new hampshire, ohio, virginia. north carolina. you look at those states and think where that will help him, probably just one, colorado, maybe new hampshire. otherwise the rest of the states, arguably, it's a net losers and the polling done show 23% of independents and 10%

democrats say it makes them less likely to vote for the president. i think it represents republican philosophies and i agree completely with ted olson, who has been an icon and a-- a legend in republicans, so for him to take this stand really sends a signal to republicans to do the right thing. at bottom i agree with kinky freeman who said the gay couples should have the right to be just as miserable as straight couples. >> schieffer: i think on that, we'll take a little break for a commercial.

>> schieffer: we're back now with our panel. i want to go back to ted olson. mark mckinnon brought out something. you have talked, mr. olson, there may be kind of a libertarian strain running through part of the republican party that is talking about less government in people's lives and that this might be one place where we might see a change

there. talk about that a little bit. >> well, i think that marriage is a conservative value. equality is a conservative value. i'm not saying that those aren't liberal values, either. but the republican party is the party of abraham lincoln. equality and independence and people that love one another, that wish to form a stable bond, are part of our economy, are part of our community. that should be a conservative value. 45 years ago, the supreme court held unanimously that 14 states that prohibited interracial marriage were violating the constitution. in those states, our president today, his mother and father, could not have been married without committing a felony. today, we can't believe that in america, interracial couples were not permitted to be married just 45 years ago in many states

of the united states. i'm hoping that we're coming to the point where we can give the same respect and decency to individuals who wish to marry someone of the same sex, and as the prime minister of great britain said, "i'm not for gay marriage despite the fact i'm a conservative. i'm for gay marriage because i'm a conservative." alive and well, let me go to tony perkins. how do you respond? do you ever see evangelicals coming around to the point of view of ted olson? >> no, look, when you look at interracial marriage, that was wrong. there was no reason to be opposed to that because you had two people who met the definition of marriage between a man and a woman. and that's consistent with natural law, which our civil rights are based on. when you look at same-sex marriage, that's counter to natural law. and, again, we see what comes along-- and this is not theoretical. we've actually seen it-- where parents lose the right to determine what their children are taught in school. religious organizations forced to recognize or allow their facilities to be used for weddings such as this. so i don't see that happening.

i see this more along the lines of the abortion debate. you can make it legal, but you can't make it right. and i do not think that you're going to see the republican party coming to agreement on this. i do think there's this will beitarian viewpoint, but the key to less government is to ensure that kids have moms and dads, not just two caregivers. because if there were two, three would be better. it's moms and dads. >> schieffer: let me talk to clay about this, bought he had a big decision to make, and after you had your first child, you decided that you needed to come out. and i would just like to ask you, what kind of an impact did that have on your professional career? because i know the base of country music, which is something i know a little bit about, is fairly conservative. >> it wasn't 2003 when i was on requested idol." it hasn't had much of an impact in a negative sense.

it's had more of a positive impact. i think between 2003 and today, we've seen it as we've seen with gay marriage polling. we've seen minds changing. we've seen people becoming more open and understanding of homosexuality. i want to address the fact what you just said a second okay. when i my mother married my stepfather, we shouldn't to a church, a baptist church, and since she had been divorced they wouldn't let her get married there. so churches are able to decides who gets married at a church regardless. obviously, you've got-- you've got people who make the argument that interracial relationships back in the 70s, people made the same arguments against interracial relationships as they're making against same-sex marriages today. so i feel-- i really strongly believe in the next 20 years, we're going to look pack on this, and be sort of ashamed of the fact that we were against this, just as we're ashame today we department let people of different races get married. >> schieffer: where do you see this going, mark? >> the arc of history is bending

forward and it's not going backward. i respect tone's position. i have friends like tony who take literally who take words written in scripture literally. i like ted take the words rin in the declaration of independence that guarantee the pursuit of happiness as well. >> schieffer: are you going to take part in this campaign, tonighty? >> which campaign is that? >> the presidential campaign. >> what i have heard since the president's announcement on wednesday, are from pastors across the nation, african american pastors, white pastors, who were sits on the sidelines pause they are weren't sure about mitt romney. i think that barack obama has helped fit that missing piece of intensity that mitt romney is going to need. i don't endorse candidates. won't be endorsing a candidate, but certainly will be working to advance those issues that families across this country care about. >> schieffer: ted olson, are you going to take part in this campaign? because i know sometimes you're active and sometimes you're not. is anybody from the romney campaign asked you to help out?

>> no, they haven't so far. and, bob, maybe it will be necessary for me to participate in the campaign if we have a real close election like we had in 2000. my skills as a lawyer can be brought to play. ( laughter ) but, otherwise, i'll wait and see if anyone asks. >> schieffer: of course what you're talk about is you argued in "bush v. gore" you argued for the president. and david boyes who argued with you on the ban on gay marriage in california, joined you in that election controversy. of course he was on the opposite side. clay, where do you go from here? are you going to be out campaigning? are you going to vote for president obama this time? >> i vote forward president obama last time. i'm sure-- i think all gays, men and women are, probably more energized to vote for president obama now. and so i'll definitely be helping how i can. >> schieffer: and do you think people on the other side, tony perkins, are also engilessed by this? >> i think it does draw a very

clear line of distinction on a very important issue. again, this is-- the reason i think we see the abortion issue and this issue as strong parallels is because of the fact that runs counter to nature to natural law, which is what our rights are bounded-- found in in the declaration of independence. they're based on that natural law. the reason will get us there. people have a hard time finding a reasonable approach to same-sex marriage. >> schieffer: all right, well, i want to thank all of you for joining us this morning. i'll be back in a minute with some thoughts about moms on mother's day.

siemens. answers. >> schieffer: i remember when my mother died, a friend said it takes a long time before you stop thinking of your mother every day. my mother died decades ago, and

i'm still waiting for that day. somehow, some way, not a day passes that i don't think of her at least once, most days four or five times. she was a child of the depression who was widowed at an early age, but she devoted her life to seeing that her three children got what had been denied her-- a college education. we all graduated. we were arson frayed not to. yes, she loved us, put she was a tough customer, and expected and demanded no less. maybe that's why we made sure that all her grandchildren graduated, too. in the autumn of my life, i still hope she knows somehow, when i do something that makes me proud. the other part is, i still worry that she'll find out about the things i'm not so proud of and come after me. in an election year, we talk about so many things that make a nation what it is and ought to be. but i believe the real core of our strength goes much deeper, and it's simpler. it goes to the mothers who teach us what is right and wrong.

all the rest of it grows out of that. so happy mother's day, moms. yours is still the most important job of all. back in a minute. i'm a coach. but when i was diagnosed with prostate cancer... i needed a coach. our doctor was great, but with so many tough decisions i felt lost. unitedhealthcare offered us a specially trained rn who helped us weigh and understand all our options. for me cancer was as scary as a fastball is to some of these kids. but my coach had hit that pitch before. turning data into useful answers. we're 78,000 people looking out for 70 million americans. that's health in numbers. unitedhealthcare.

>> schieffer: some of you will be leaving us now, but for most of you we'll be back with page two and the latest on the new terror bomb plot with the chairman of the house intelligence committee, plus a discussion of mother's day and women voters and a controversial magazine cover. ,,,,,,,,,,

>> schieffer: we're back now with the chairman of the house intelligence committee, mike rogers. mr. chairman, it's being reported in paper today there were two more u.s. drone strikes in yemen that may have killed 11 suspected al qaeda militants. can you tell us anything about that? >> we can't talk about specific operational details or how it's accomplished, but the good news is we didn't find yemen last week. we have been well on to yemen for some time, building the capacity so that we could take necessary steps when they present themselves through intelligence gathering to bring folks to justice. >> schieffer: so you can at least confirm that the strike took place and that u.s. drones were part of it? >> i can't talk. the type of operation, but there may have been airstrikes that have been successful. >> schieffer: i want to ask you about this whole deal with

bthis double agent that managed to get this sophisticated new underwear bomb and how this plot was foiled and as i understand it, we now have the bomb. we know where it came from and all of that. but there were these has beens and in the beginning, the administration seeped to come on television and basically confirm all of this, and then a report came up that, wait a minute. this was not a u.s. agent involved. it was a british agent. and the administration seemed to pull back. i mean, what-- what's going on here? >> well, i wish that commonsense pullback would have happened much sooner. you know, when this information like this gets leaked, bob, it is incredibly damaging to our intelligence community's ability to take that investigation through all of its natural course. there is somebody getting up in yemen today figuring out what that next generation of bomb looks like that circumvents security and gets on an airplane

to kill and legislaturer innocent people. any information that is leaked out, referenced to the operational details, who we were or were not working with overseas, is dangerous for us to try to catch the next generation of bombers who-- who we know are existing and running around. >> schieffer: do you have any idea who-- what the motivation was for the leak? was it somebody in the u.s. government trying to take credit for this, or they wanted the news-- what do you make of this? well, i think there was a little premature chest-thumbing in this whole thing and i've ordered a preliminary review. and i will tell you, this has been a damaging leak. we shouldn't underestimate what really happened here. when you jeopardize our foreign service liaison partners, any of them that may or may not have been involved, or you jeopardize the conclusion of wrapping up all of the people involved, that's dangerous to our national security. >> schieffer: but let me make sure i understand what you just said here. you're saying that somebody in the u.s. government prematurely leaked this to take credit for it, to brag about it.

>> well, you said "brag about it." i said "chest thumping." but it clearly raises some series questions that we're going to have to ask. we do know that the c.i.a. was trying to stop the story. and we know that there was a scheduled white house-- or at least planned press conference on the particular event, and those two desperate positions leads one to believe that there was-- someone was at odds about how much they should or shouldn't talk about it. and just the very thought that they were going to go through with that and not put full pressure on to not let this story out before all the operation was-- i would argue with-- >> schieffer: what you're saying here, stories come abou about@i've always said news comes out because somebody wants it out. you're saying this is not something the associated press or some august news agency stumbled on. this was something deliberately leaked by somebody in the administration and against the wishes of the c.i.a. >> well, it's clear that the

information was leaked, and that information was presented at some point to the c.i.a. the c.i.a. at that point tried to put that story back in the can for security reasons. we had people's lives at stake during this particular operation. and that's where it gets a little murky which is why i've ordered the rerue. this is not anything that should be used for a headline. our national security should be exempt from any november at any time in any year. that operation shouldn't be dictated its conclusion based on any other agenda other than than when it's fully completed our our national security, and that's where we have to make sure -- >> did the administration play straight with you as the chairman of the intelligence committee? >> well, unfortunately, no. >> schieffer: really? >> the press new-- normally, i'll give you an example. when the u.b.l. operation was well under way, i became chairman three days later, six months perfect the operation-- five months. we were brought in, preved, and we were briefed regularly on the all the operational developments

right up to the phone call saying,"hey, we're going." this was very different. so not only did they not notify congress, which is, by the way, law, under the national security act of 1947. they're obligated to do it. i argue for reasons that we're talk about, there's a reason you do that, so you can have that third-party independent eye on these kinds of operations because they arees see, dangerous, and classified. and it was interesting even though the press went to the agency and talked about this particular event, nobody thought it was white house it was important enough to live up to the constitutional and statutory rule to notify congress. it was very concerning. that's why there's just a lot of questions that have been raised in this. and, again, no national security operation ever should be used for a headline under any circumstances when you jeopardize the lives of-- >> schieffer: so what are you going to do? >> i'm conducting that preliminary review. we will make a determination either a full-blown committee investigation or we'll refer it to criminal charges to the

f.b.i. >> schieffer: congressman, i want to thank you very much for coming to us this morning. >> thanks, bob. alive and we're going to be back in one minute with our mother's day panel.

alive and and back now with our mother's day panel, and i'm happy to a they are all moms. babe buchanan has a new book about her adventures as a single mom with three boys. anita dunn is a top democratic strategist, mother of four. melinda henneberger writes a column called "she, the people" for the "washington post." she has 16-year-old twins. and when our own norah o'donnell isn't chasing news at the white house, she's chasing after three children, all of whom are under the age of five, two of whom are twins. i would like to note that i qualify for this panel as well because i have two daughters, and three granddaughters, two of

whom are identical twins. let's talk about the women's vote and where women are today. both sides are accusing the other in this campaign of waging a war on women, which i expect is a little overdrawn, but this is an election year. so that's the sort of rhetoric we-- we talk about on election days and election campaigns. but is our-- are women being taken for granted this time around, bay buchanan. is there a war being wage bide one side or another, you're, of course, a republican? >> of course, a conservative republican. the idea that there's a war on women coming from our side is completely manufactured. no one in their right mind would go after women. and i found it very, very unfortunately, bob, there was an attack on anne romney because she was an at-home mom. the last thing we need to do is divide moms into categories, at

home, working, single or married. moms have so much in common. and we support one another and can help one another and be there. and it's no place to be dividing any mom. so i thought that was enormally unfortunate. >> schieffer: anita? >> i think the relationship you see such a substantial gender gap in the poll, bob, there are two good reasons-- president obama's explored mitt romney's policies. so i think if you look at the obama record in terms of women, it is really groundbreaking. he took office. he set up a council oil women and children. so that he could look at how the federal government's policies affect women, something that had never been done before. and whether it's the affordable care act, which makes sure that having a baby is no longer a preexisting condition for women. that children get covered, no matter what their preexisting conditions. whether it's been the expansion of the e.i.t.c., which helps workwomen keep more of their money. whether it is policies across the board, that this president's policies for women have been extraordinary. and mitt romney has a

backward-looking attitude, particularly when it comes to women. but i think it will come out. >> schieffer: i guess i better-- >> i would love to respond. you know, i think this is where it's going to happen. if there's been any war, whether it's deliberate or not, on women, it's clearly come from the obama white house. if you look, we all know more jobs have been lost, more homes have been lost during this administration than since the great depression. but maybe many of us don't know, most all of the jobs lost my americans in these last two years have been lost by women. and if women of all people don't care about their kids, that is what drives us. and what do-- 53% of the kids we worked so hard to put through college do not have any jobs whatsoever. women care about this enormously. they need that security to take care of themselveses and their own family, especially single moms, something i was. and when you have an economy that's not providing the jobs, either for themselves or for their kids, that is a voting issue that i promise will hit-- >> schieffer: we'll come back

to this. i want to go to the other side of the table here because i want to-- i want to ask you all as journalists, this issue, this gay marriage thing that-- i mean, the president really-- i think the election moved to another state when he made that announcement. melinda, how important is this going to be? could this be a defining issue or some people say no it's going to be about the economy and that's it? >> i think it will still largely be about the economy. this will lose him some votes maybe in north carolina, which he won in '08. he will have a tougher time given that they just put kind of a triple padlock against same-sex marriage in that state. but i think politically, he'll pick up, too. he'll pick up some enthusiasm from younger voters. but it was really important for him to do that because, in a larger sense, i think it's a win for him. if the democratic party and his campaign is about anything, it's about fairness. so there was that disconnect,

and i think it's also important for his credibility credibility, which is huge in any presidential election. people, i think, didn't believe that he did not support same-sex marriage, much as a lot of people don't believe mitt romney doesn't really support it, given that he used to. i think it was important for the president's credibility for him to make that statement. and it works against mitt romney in that way for him not to say the same. alive and so, norawalk us back on this. how did this come out at this time? >> well, i think the vice president sort of got ahead of himself, in announcing what was an administration policy, administration aides were very open about expressing their frustration with vice president biden for doing that. and then leaked-- which i thought was pretty interesting-- that wide wide biden went into e oval office and apologized. i ask all the time about conversations in the oval office and i'm told, conversations

between the president and vice president are sacrosanct. i think it sends a message about who's in charge at the white house. that's why they wanted to do that. but on the policy issue of same-sex marriage, i don't think in the end it's going to be determinative in this election. the economy and jobs is still important. same-sex marriage and different positions are going to motivate different groups. that's going to happen anyway as we get closer to november. so both sides will raise money. both sides of turn out people. >> schieffer: you don't subscribe it the conspiracy theory that came about shortly after this when people were saying this was all part of the plot that the vice president did this, it was all part of a scripted thing that was going to happen? >> anita is a communications specialist, if the white house were trying to leak something successfully, they would not hand it off to joe biden to do that. ( laughter ) with all due respect to the vice president. so i think this was just a natural-- he was asked a question, and he-- he put forward what was-- and, look, president obama was pretty much the last democrat in this country to not endorse same-sex

marriage. so he had to do this before the debates and the convention,'s, and i think they also kind of looked at the landscape and said let's do this early on so we can focus on the economy. >> schieffer: was he, in fact, planning to do this? >> you know, i'm not going to speak to the president's timing. he spoke that that himself. what is important here, and i think the previous panel talked about it, this is clearly something he believes, and he feels very strongly about. and any elected official is going to do better when they're talking from their heart, and i think it's one of the reasons you had a very strong reaction to this it week. clearly, it's a matter of presence pel for him. is it may help him politically. is it may not help him politically, but it's something he believes in. i want a second to go back to something bay said-- and i want to say happy mothery day to all the women here. the month that the president took office, this economy shed 750,000 jobs, including 266,000 women who lost their jobs in one month. and over the past-- since the

stimulus has had a chance to take effect, 4.2 million private sector jobs have been created in this country, including millions for women. but the reality of this, bob, is that the way that we're anything to create the jobs that bay and i both agree with what women want, what everybody wants in this country, we want our kids to have good jobs. wait we're going to do that is by building an economy that lasts, that has a foundation that lasts, that isn't bubble to bubble. and i think that's really the issue in this presidential election. and we all agree, jobs are a critical thing for moms, particularly because now the majority of moms are working. >> schieffer: okay, let me get back to what we were talking about here, at the beginning, though. is this issue going to hurt barack obama? >> gay marriage? >> schieffer: yes. >> well, first of all, i agree, no question the major issue is going to be the president's record. you just aren't going to get away from that, it's the economy. but this is key at this time because what he has allowed us--

we're pulling together that republican party. has intensified the support. the party is going to be unified going into that convention as never before. and, number two, they have trouble. we now have mitt romney, who has always been opposed to gay marriage, i might add. but that is where america is. you have 32 states out there who have banned it. they have never won on the ballot. and so what happens in north carolina now? this is great in iowa, several states. 32 of of them are with us. i think it's no question if there was good politics for barack obama he would have done it a long time ago. he wouldn't have had to have been dragged kicking and screaming-- alive and i want to ask you all about something and it's what everybody is talking about, and it's the cover of "time" magazine. let's put it up on the screen. >> do you have to? >> schieffer: it turns out i don't have it-- there it is, there it is, right there. you can see it. >> it's child pornography. >> schieffer: what is this all about? >> it's not a mothery day gift to most of us to have another

message that says you're not mom enough if you don't look like this terrific-looking woman. and the story is not even about-- >> schieffer: well, he's not a-- >> and the story's not even about breast feeding. it's about a 72-year-old doctor, and i'm sure they were right that this woman looks far better than me. but the story is about this doctor who has many more views on how to be the right kind of mom versus the wrong kind of mom, and i think the timing of it was odd. >> i think it's a provocative cover meant to sell magazines and generate a discussion. but it also generates a discussion around women and mothers who are the majority of this workforce, and in fact, 70% of women with children under 18 are in the workforce. we are consumers. we're voters. we're journalists. and so we're a powerful force, and i think that's why this really refs up and gets a lot of discussion going, especially on mothery day. >> bay said earlier we shouldn't pit moms against moms, i couldn't agree more.

and any time you get this, it's exactly what seems to be going. what norah said is absolutely right-- 65% of the single moms in this country work. 70% of moms work overall. we need to hang together. everyone's got a job, because let's face it, as a mom, i think we can all agree being the mother is the most challenging job in the world. when you have to add through choice necessity and out of home job as well, it's even more challenging, right. but at the end of the day, something like this is going to sell magazines. but the discussion about moms should never pit moms against another because every mom's got-- >> this-- they went too far on this cover. it is disgusting. and i consider it child pornography to even suggest this child that looks so old, five or six, to be in that kind of a position on a cover. ands, also, what does it suggest? how long should we nurse our babies or should we nurse or

babies or what is best? this is nonce sense. this is for women to decide. we don't need anyone on the outside telling us what's best four family to do. we are all different and so are our children. i think it's an outrage to suggest this cover and the headline to it. >> schieffer: what's the state of women today? you know, when i came to work at cbs news in this bureau, there was one producer that was a woman, one woman that was a correspondent, one am that worked on the desk. and when one of those three left, they replaced her with a woman. now, i would say-- what would you say, norah, more than half the people on this bureau are women, t.c.u. in our journalism school, 70% of the students there going into journalism are women. how would you say women's chances are right now, bay buchanan? is there equality? >> there is. the opportunities are unlimited, both through the universities as well as business and professional. and i think what's key for women-- there's often too much talk about-- look to see how

you're treated and what you can do and you better not do that because so many people will say that's beneath you and they're asking to you get coffee because you're a woman. it's so much nonsense. i think the message to young women-- >> i would strongly disagree with that. i think women have had, for the past 30 years, equal opportunity in college. we have more women who are getting medical degrees, ph.d.s and men. but you had for the first time in the last election the number of women in congress decrease. there is a glass ceiling in politics. we only have 17% of the women in the house and the senate. while women are the driving force in the economy and terms of consumers, they're not represented in the congress or the white house or the halls of congress. >> they can run or not run and we choose not to run because women in politics have an equal opportunity to win. >> that is absolutely true. >> they have an edge to men, often, because they're more trusted. so they choose not to run because of their personal livees, their commitment to family or whatever small business they might have. to it's ridiculous to have say

we have to have equal-equal-- >> schieffer: on that note, i want to say happy mother's day. we'll be back with our "face the nation" flab back. but first a look at some of the big issues of the week. >> you're at the fund fund-raiser at george clooney's house. what's been the hollywood community's reaction to the pretty big announcement? has it been positive? >>s that been positive? president obama is at a giant hollywood party the night after he came out for gay marriage. this is like going to israel after you kill hitler. ( laughter ). >> it turns out mitt romney bullied a classmate back in high school. apparently he pinned the guy down and cut his hair. he said it's a harmless prank. what's the big deal. do we have a picture of the haircut mitt game huff? >> it's getting a lot of attention, "time" magazine for its new cover which shows a woman breast feeding her

three-year-old son. the issue is expected to make millions of dollars, and that's-- that's just for the kid's therapist. ( laughter ) >> as you might imagine, many people were shocked by the fact that that was the cover of a magazine. if you're shocked by that, by the way, you do not want to see what they have planned for father's day. ♪ [ male announcer ] for our families... our neighbors... and our communities... america's beverage companies

have created a wide range of new choices. developing smaller portion sizes and more low- & no-calorie beverages... adding clear calorie labels so you know exactly what you're choosing... and in schools, replacing full-calorie soft drinks with lower-calorie options. with more choices and fewer calories, america's beverage companies are delivering.

>> schieffer: finally on this mother's day, in 1956, there was another president running for reelection, dwight eisenhower was being challenged by democrat adlai stevenson, and it was also a big year for this broadcast which was celebrating its second anniversary and welcoming the first of many women to appear here. that's our "face the nation" flashback. "face the nation." >> i personally feel-- >> schieffer: eleanor roosevelt, f.d.r.'s widow, squared off against maine's republican senator, margaret chase smith over the middle east, and it was quite a set-to. >> mrs. roosevelt. >> i don't see how anyone can have confidence in either president eisenhower or

secretary dellasus' policy. as a man and as a general, i respect him. put the policies that have brought us into a position where we are, as far as the near east goes, standing together with the dictator of egypt, and the communist soviet, it's an odd situation to find the united states in. >> mrs. roosevelt, may i interrupt right there. i wonder why you say we're standing with the kremlin and with egypt. >> because there's no one else in the u.n. with us. >> our policy is against aggression because we're aggression and other nations are aggression it doesn't mean we are standing with those nations. we aren't standing with the creme len, certainly on the aggression in hungary. >> no, but there wouldn't have been aggression in hungry if we

didn't encourage them in the middle east. >> schieffer: and so it went. the argument wasn't settled there and nor was the trouble in the middle east. our "face the nation" flashback. the best part was, they actually answered the questions, an example not always followed by their male or female successors. we'll be right back. ,,,,,,,,

>> schieffer: and thanks for watching "face the nation." see you next week and happy mother's day. captioning sponsored by cbs captioned by media access group at wgbh access.wgbh.org ,,,,,,,,