via Ezra at Pandagon
Bush Refines His Position on a Measure Banning Gay Marriage
By RICHARD W. STEVENSON
…By hedging his position, if only a bit, Mr. Bush may have insulated himself somewhat from the sting of the defeat the proposed amendment suffered in the Senate on Wednesday. But the way in which the proposal went down with a whimper - short of a simple majority, much less the two-thirds of the Senate needed for approval - raised questions about whether the White House had fundamentally misjudged the nation's attitude on the issue. And the vote left even some of Mr. Bush's own advisers wondering if his backing of the amendment did not hurt him politically more than it helped by further stoking opposition to him from the left.
"It's a net loss for Republicans politically," said one prominent Republican in Washington who works closely with the White House. "It does nothing for our base, because they're grumpy about not having it, and it energized a significant portion of their base. I guarantee you that the gay community will give twice as much money and work harder for Kerry now, not so much because they care about marriage per se, but because this effort plays to their fears that we're homophobic."
While polling has generally found that most Americans are opposed to gay marriage, it has also shown that few people see the issue, or the proposal for a constitutional amendment that would define marriage as being only between a man and a woman, as being a priority for the country. Polls and focus groups have repeatedly found that the subject barely registers with voters, if it registers at all, at a time when most people are primarily concerned with Iraq, terrorism and jobs.
But wading into the issue was in keeping with the White House's overriding political priority, keeping Mr. Bush's base happy and energized, even at the risk of alienating moderate and swing voters who might see it as anti-gay.
Posted by P6 at July 16, 2004 10:34 PM
Trackback URL: http://www.niggerati.net/mt/mt-tb.cgi/5530
Comments
It really seems this legislation was a revival of plessy v. ferguson's seperate but equal status in ites language. They've just changed changed some of the names.
Civil unions have the same status, but are seperate from traditional marriages.
And this warped take is somehow merged with strongly worded unequalled sums totals in the very next breath.
King did not speak out in over-the-top vocal fashion about gay rights. But a lot of the men walking around him were willing take a bullet or a beatdown intended for him out of the realization that helping others attain due process and rightful merit is to help your cause.
King made vocal issue on behalf of othewr minorities as well, take in point his discourse of antizionism as a code for jewish discrimination.
So he was obviously aware of the contributions of other minorites to the cause, some of those he spoke on behalf of.
That he worked closely enough with many diverse people and even saw division within the minority ranks and addressed it shows how strong the movement really was. It was the high water mark of unity for a better world. We may never reach those times again if the media had its way...
Let all learn from this heritage, there are so many lessons being overlooked still from the side most often associated with this cause.
Posted by Mr.Murder at July 17, 2004 03:48 AMin its* language
any good spellchecks to load on dial-up mozilla windows NT prom?
Back to topic- this in terms of exchange really reminds me of the plessy v. ferguson. Please other's input would help.
Posted by Mr. Murder at July 17, 2004 03:50 AM2: The seperate but equal comparison is on point, and also all over the net.
1: I'm considering a spell checker for the Next Big Thing around here.