More notes on the Gay Marriage pandering

First, let me say how pleased I am that almost every report on this gay-baiting disgrace is making note of the fact that it is merely a political ploy and has no chance of passing. The recognition that this is just political posturing for votes is such an improvement on the unskeptical 2004 coverage. Also, a lot of the articles contain quotes from "the base" agreeing that the Republicans are blowing election year smoke. Notes:

Tony Snow is just awful. He called "marriage protection" a civil rights issue, (perhaps he meant reversing civil rights?) and then he couldn't define civil rights among many other errors. Holden does a more complete takedown of that error today and several more.

Aravosis at Americablog makes the interesting point that all the "name" protestant leaders(Dobson, Perkins, etc.) were seated in the back and kept off camera.

Also, why the small crowd jammed into the small room? (which created a weird space) "The White House told activists that Monday's speech would be in the Rose Garden, but after criticism that he was using such a symbolic site, the White House moved it to an office building next door." (CNN reports that it was done "without explanation.")

Watching these guys, I think we can agree there's more story there than a White House concern over the use of a "symbolic site."

Fear of protest? "Homoterrorists"? Maybe because they couldn't hide Dobson and Perkins outside? I don't know, but I hope somebody can dig out the reason for the sudden change. I'll bet it would gut the whole effort.