Javert Rovinski, on Feb 24 2004, 03:28 PM, said:
Please. Even assuming Bush could get every republican congressman behind the effort-- which he can't, in part due to the log cabin republicans-- it wouldn't be enough. It would die there.
I think you are failing to see that Bush just rolled a nuclear grenade into the middle of the Democrats. Donít underestimate what a vicious kick this will be in terms of splitting the Democrats among themselves. The Democrats are in trouble either way they go voting for or against and this one is going to split that party down the center if anything more so than the Republicans.
Rov: Even if he could, there simply aren't that many state legislatures with the political motivation to get it through.
I beg to differ. Over thirty-eight of them have passed laws outlawing gay marriage. That alone says something. In addition this issue is going to be pressed right on because now it has become something much more than an issue of gay marriage. It has gotten right into the clash between judicial activism, federalism, and local authority. You have the three biggest long trends in American Constitutionalism at work here and that is going to drive many.
Rov: Heck, the relatively non-controversial, "Men and women are equal" couldn't get passed; this is far more contentious.
Contention and controversy isnít always something that stops something sometimes it shoves it right down the center. Those types of backlashes over controversial issues occur quite often.
"History has proven too often and too recently that the nation which relaxes its defenses invites attack."
-Fleet Admiral Nimitz
"Their sailors say they should have flight pay and sub pay both -- they're in the air half the time, under the water the other half""
- Ernie Pyle: Aboard a DE