The Bash Mary Cheney Amendment
What I've been reading about today was the "movement" for the national constitutional amendment to ban marriage equality for gay people. It's all very odd and mixed-messag-y. I mean, we homos were the wedge issue in 2004, but now illegal aliens and big fences with sharp points are suddenly du jour, while "values voters" (pace George Will) wring their hands because their anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-sex agenda isn't getting the attention it deserves.
So here's Mary Cheney publishing a book whose title suggests that she's hitting back hard (I keep seeing coiffed interviewers quoted, saying "hard words" as coming out of her mouth, whatever that means), but in retaliation for what is far from clear. Apparently she is, as she has been for years, an out lesbian — but you'd better not mention unless you're conservative or … kerplow! We were very impressed when she revealed that she almost left her Daddy's campaign in 2004 because of the party's attitude about, you know, the "L" thing.
Then along comes Laura Bush telling her husband's would-be successors not to make marriage equality an issue in the campaigns. No one's quite sure why she would say that.
Then today we had the long-heralded committee vote on the Constitutional Amendment in the Senate Juciary Committee. It's passed on to general consideration — all those principled senators voting for it now because they think it "should be debated on the floor", but convinced it will be defeated again. They might even make a principled vote against it if need be. That's how stroking the base works, right?
So it seems that the committee hearing was a bit odd, too, not to mention a bit contentious. (See, e.g., Pam on the subject.) For one oddity, the committee action was moved to a tiny little room in the Capitol (the "Capitol President's Room" — ever heard of it?) where, as it was reported, there was barely even room for the honorable senators. Why the low profile? Does the committee realize that, at this point, even though Frist promised a vote on the amendment it's not going to make anyone happy?
So here we have this ultra-low-profile committee markup thing going on, and it seems that it got a bit heated for some reason and Russ Feingold had words with Arlen Specter — evidently neither of them likes to be "lectured to" — so Feingold departed with some drama and Specter said "good riddance" to the liberal buttocks as they left the venue. Gosh but those straight boys sure can get emotional.
John Aravosis wrote some interesting analysis, saying that Mary Cheney has now embarrassed Republicans enough that the Senate Judiciary committee was afraid to hold their mark-up meeting "in the light of day" — the anti-gay forces are heading back into the closet, symbolized by the committee's meeting in this tiny, inaccessible room. That conclusion seems a bit premature to me, but I do like the conceit.
In that same piece, Aravosis refers to the "Bash Mary Amendment". I like that! I'm thinking we should market it as the "Bash Mary Cheney Amendment", and hope that it personalizes the issue enough for someone so that the "values voters" lose a bit of traction on the issue.
One Response
Subscribe to comments via RSS
Subscribe to comments via RSS
Leave a Reply
To thwart spam, comments by new people are held for moderation; give me a bit of time and your comment will show up.
I welcome comments -- even dissent -- but I will delete without notice irrelevant, rude, psychotic, or incomprehensible comments, particularly those that I deem homophobic, unless they are amusing. The same goes for commercial comments and trackbacks. Sorry, but it's my blog and my decisions are final.
on Sunday, 21 May 2006 at 02.49
Permalink
I'd be surprised if Mary Cheney and her book had anything to do with the Senators' actions or decisions, although I suppose anything is possible.
As for her hard words, I suspect that's when she does things like gratuitously call John Kerry a "son of a bitch" for having made mention of her sexual orientation during an '04 presidential debate.
That brought to mind the old saw about the acorn not falling far from the tree, since her father at times exhibits the social graces of a stepped-on scorpion.