Look Who's Linking to PoliBlog:
Absinthe and Cookies
Accidental Verbosity
Admiral Quixote's Roundtable
All Day Permanent Red
All Things Jennifer
Ann Althouse
The American Mind
Arguing with signposts
The Astute Blogger
Asymmeterical Information
B-Town Blog Boys
Backcountry Conservative
Balloon Juice
Bananas and Such Begging to Differ
The Bemusement Park
Bewtween the Coasts
Betsy's Page
The Big Picture
Blogs for Bush
Boots and Sabers
The Bully Pulpit
Caffeinated Musing
California Yankee
Captain's Quarters
Chicago Report
Chicagoland of Confusion
Citizen Smash
Collected Thoughts
The Command Post
Common Sense and Wonder
Confessions Of A Political Junkie
The Conservative Philosopher
Conservative Revolution
Conservative and Right
Cranial Cavity
The Daily Lemon
Daly Thoughts
DANEgerus Weblog
Dart Frog on a Cactus
Dean's World Dear Free World
Brad DeLong
Democracy Project
The Disagreeable Conservative Curmudgeon
Down to the Piraeus
Drink this...
Earl's log
Earthly Passions
The Education Wonks
the evangelical outpost
Eye of the Storm
The Flying Space Monkey Chronicles
The Friendly Ghost
Functional, if not decorative
The Galvin Opinion
The Glittering Eye
Haight Speech
The Hedgehog Report
Heh. Indeed.
Hennessy's View
High Desert Skeptic
History and Perceptions
Robert Holcomb
I love Jet Noise
Idlewild South
Independent Thinker
Insults Unpunished
Internet Ronin
Ipse Dixit
It Can't Rain All The Time...
The Jay Blog
Jen Speaks
Joefish's Freshwater Blog
John Lemon blog
Judicious Asininity
Just On The Other Side
The Kudzu Files
Let's Try Freedom
Liberty Father
Life and Law
David Limbaugh
Locke, or Demosthenes?
Mad Minerva
Gary Manca
Mark the Pundit
Mediocre but Unexciting
Mental Hiccups
Miller's Time
Mind of Mog
Minorities For Bush
Mr. Hawaii
The Moderate Voice
The Modulator
Much Ado
Mungowitz End
My opinion counts
my thoughts, without the penny charge
My Word
Neophyte Pundit
Neutiquam erro
New England Republican
NewsHawk Daily
neWs Round-Up
No Pundit Intended
Nobody asked me, but...
Obsidian Wings
Occam's Toothbrush
On the Fritz
On the Third Hand
One Fine Jay
Out of Context
Outside the Beltway
Suman Palit
Passionate America
Brian Patton
Peppermint Patty
John Pierce
The Politicker
The Politburo Diktat
Political Annotation
Political Blog For The Politically Incorrect
Power Politics
Practical Penumbra
Priorities & Frivolities
Prof. Blogger's Pontifications
Pundit Heads
The Queen of All Evil
Quotes, Thoughts, and other Ramblings
Ramblings' Journal
Random Acts of Kindness
Random Nuclear Strikes
Ranting Rationalist
Read My Lips
Reagan Country
A Republican's Blog
The Review
Right Side of the Rainbow
Right Wingin-It
Right Wing News
Right Voices
Rightward Reasonings
riting on the wall
Rooftop Report
The Sake of Argument
Secular Sermons
Sha Ka Ree
Shaking Spears
She Who Will Be Obeyed!
The Skeptician
The Skewed
Slobokan's Site O' Schtuff
small dead animals
Sneakeasy's Joint
SoCal Law Blog
A Solo Dialogue
Some Great Reward
Southern Musings
Speed of Thought...
Spin Killer
Matthew J. Stinson
A Stitch in Haste
The Strange Political Road Trip of Jane Q. Public
Stuff about
Suman Palit
Target Centermass
Templar Pundit
The Temporal Globe
Tex the Pontificator
Texas Native
think about it...
Tobacco Road Fogey
Toner Mishap
Tony Talks Tech
The Trimblog
Truth. Quante-fied.
Use The Forks!!
Vista On Current Events
Vox Baby
Jeff Vreeland's Blog
Wall of Sleep
Weapons of Mass Discussion
Who Knew?
The Window Manager
Winning Again!
WizBang Tech
The World Around You
The Yin Blog
You Big Mouth, You!
Non-Blogs Linking to PoliBlog: - Alabama Weblogs

AJC's 2004 Election Politics Sites and Blogs Campaign Finance
Welcome to World O' Blogs
Yahoo! Directory Political Weblogs
Young Elephant

Who Links Here

Monday, November 8, 2004
On the Gay Marriage Amendment

By Steven Taylor @ 8:02 pm

Several readers have responded to my statement this morning that pursuing a federal marriage amendment would be politically foolish by stating that it would 1) reward evangelical voters and 2) it would keep the issue alive politically for the next election.

First off, both of those assumptions seem based on the idea that it was in fact gay marriage that delivered the presidency for Bush. As numerous posts have demonstrated here and elsewhere over the past several days, an examination of the data does not support that proposition. Further, if the issue one of reward, what kind of reward is a failed vote?

Indeed, that leads me to the bottom line: it would be utterly foolish for Bush to pursue the gay marriage amendment for the simple reason that it would lose (there can be no doubt about that fact). Why spend time, effort and energy on a loser (and one likely to garner bad press)? If the issue is one of “rewards” one guesses that the evangelicals would prefer conservative judges on the bench—a fight that might could actually be won-over a faux fight that wastes political capital for a foregone conclusion that will be utter failure. If the Presidnet pursues the gay marriage amendment, loses, and is furher painted as a right-wing extremist on social issues that will simply demand his ability to appoint conservative, constructionist judges. Is a losing fight really worth creating that type of scenario?

Further, not only is engaging in an activity that will certainly fail a bad idea in terms of waste, it is not politically smart to work hard just to label oneself a loser. Such things do matter, in the grand scheme of things. Don Quixote is all fine and good, but tilting at windmills isn’t always good politics—and in this case it would be very bad politics.

If the president has any illusions about serious tax reform, social security reform, and winning the coming fights on the court nominations, then there is no point engaging in a doomed fight when there are plenty of difficult fights to be had.

Don’t forget: it takes 2/3rds of both chambers of Congress to propose an amendment. If Bush couldn’t get 60 Senators for his judicial nominees in the 108th Congress, by what magic will he get 67 for a gay marriage ban in the 109th? And that is moot, because he couldn’t get the need votes in the House, either (it’s not like it was close in the recent vote).

Further, since it would appear for the moment that DOMA is working, and the states are deciding, there is even more reason not to engage in a fight. And if DOMA is challenged, where will it end up? The Supreme Court—which brings us back to what the important fights may well be (not to mention more winnable ones).

It is really all a matter of practical politics.

Filed under: US Politics

Click here to go to the main page.


The URI to TrackBack this entry is:

  1. The Republican Party does not owe the evangelicals anything. They chose to sit out the 2000 election because Bush was a sinner. I have my doubts that they participated much in this election. They are single-issue voters who end up doing more harm than good. They are as bad as any of the fringe groups on the left.

    The evangelicals need to grow up and realize we are in the world, not some fantasy paradise.

    The impression I get from the evangelical side is that they are more interested in imposing their views on those they don’t like, than they are in being part of a free society.

    Comment by Remy Logan — Tuesday, November 9, 2004 @ 12:40 am

  2. Actually, I think that it ends up that the proportion of evangelicals who voted in 2004 was the same as in 2000 (i.e., percentage, not raw numbers).

    And to be fair: I think you overstate your criticisms quite a bit.

    Comment by Steven Taylor — Tuesday, November 9, 2004 @ 9:15 am

  3. I do agree that I my criticisms are harsh. On the other hand, the comment posted is the toned down version of my feelings.

    I don’t think that the evangelical’s search for political power is healthy for the Republican Party. Reagan kept them at arm’s length, as has Bush. The antics of Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell refelcted negatively on Reagan. Robertson still hasn’t learned the lesson that preaching and politicking need to be kept seperate. What this all comes down to is that I agree with what you are saying:

    Further, not only is engaging in an activity that will certainly fail a bad idea in terms of waste, it is not politically smart to work hard just to label oneself a loser. Such things do matter, in the grand scheme of things. Don Quixote is all fine and good, but tilting at windmills isn’t always good politics—and in this case it would be very bad politics.

    I’m just not being classy about it.

    Comment by Remy Logan — Tuesday, November 9, 2004 @ 11:02 am

RSS feed for these comments.

Leave a comment

Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title="" rel=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>



Take a Look At This!
  • Tabloid News
  • Word of The Day
  • Chronograph Watches
  • Office Shredders
  • Cash Registers
  • Ricoh Fax Machines
  • IBM Typewriters
  • Copy Machines
  • UNIX Consulting
  • Web Design

Visitors Since 2/15/03

Powered by WordPress