This afternoon Bush is preparing to (re)proclaim his "strong" support for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution banning all states from recognizing same-sex marriages. Why? The Senate is scheduled to vote on the issue on tomorrow. The bigger "why?" is that there is an election in 4 months and they want to piss off the right-wing voters so that they remember to vote against the "homo-lover" party.
So, here's the test, does this last minute, last ditch effort really count as "strong" support from Bush among social conservatives? Or will they wise up and see through this ridiculously transparent stunt? (Then again, some of these people actually believe that same-sex marriage is the biggest threat facing America today. Go figure.)
Is it also possible that the corners of Rove's favorite wedge issue aren't as sharp as they used to be. In the absence of any high-profile stories about same-sex marriage will this strategy flop? Will it backfire among people who rank dozens of other issues as having a higher priority than banning complete strangers from marrying via the constitution? (War, terrorism, economy, jobs, health care, bird flu, to name a few.) Massachusetts has not shriveled up and fallen into the ocean, heterosexuals have not divorced in droves citing "gay marriage" as the cause.
I have a theory-- or perhaps it's just wishful thinking-- that it is possible that the issue is losing its power. More importantly, that it doesn't have the neverending, perennial strength of the abortion issue.
It will be interesting to see if the GOP can sucessfully resurrect the gay boogeyman for the 2006 election cycle.