Chris Geidner deconstructs the latest spin from the White House on the issue of marriage. At yesterday's press briefing, Jay Carney told Geidner that when the First Lady talked about "lov[ing] whomever we choose" in campaign speeches, she wasn't talking about marriage. Of course, anyone paying attention to the marriage equality debate might think otherwise. Sure sounds like a coded message.
According to Chris, it's gotten into Alice in Wonderland territory:
When Lewis Carroll wrote Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, he wasn't referring to the White House.We've been saying this for months. The geniuses who are running the President's reelection campaign think they can ride this "evolving" talking point until the election. It's increasingly clear to everyone (except the geniuses) that they can't. As Chris' analysis makes clear, it's become absurd. Read his entire piece. (Be good idea for Team Obama to read it, too.)
But, after Tuesday, he might as well have been.
For example, when Alice was told, ''[Y]ou should say what you mean'' at the tea party, she hastily replied, ''I do. At least — at least I mean what I say — that's the same thing, you know.'' She was, in response, reprimanded by the Hatter, who proclaimed, ''Not the same thing a bit! You might just as well say that 'I see what I eat' is the same thing as 'I eat what I see'!''
With Carney's comments on Tuesday, he said that the first lady's words about ''love'' actually are about the federal benefits that those couples allowed to marry by their state government would be entitled to at the federal level if DOMA's federal definition of marriage didn't prevent same-sex couples from receiving them.
Richard Socarides, the former White House gay liaison and advisor to President Clinton, sounded incredulous.
''Especially in this context, 'love' and 'marriage' would seem to go together,'' he says. ''The meaning seems pretty plain.''
Plain, however, is not a word that comes up often anymore in discussions about President Barack Obama's views on marriage equality.
There is a simple solution: Evolve already. I laid out the political case for supporting marriage in my post, Mr. President, It's Been 500 Days... Evolve Already! And, Dr. Gary Segura recently explained "Why Latinos are Ahead of Barack Obama on Marriage Equality." Gary also included this anecdote:
As Darwin noted, evolution is a painfully slow process. On February 23, Jonathan Capehart (Washington Post) and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) got into a contentious give-and-take on Morning Joe on MSNBC. When confronted with Christie’s (and many Republicans’) favorite dodge, that he and the president agreed on the issue by favoring civil unions but not full equality, Capehart again repeated the “evolving” line. To a person, everyone on the Morning Joe set laughed out loud. Liberal and conservative, it didn’t matter. It was hilarious to everyone.Alice in Wonderland territory.
Geidner also pointed out one of the key exchanges from my interview with the President:
In that 2010 interview with progressive bloggers, Obama said, ''The one thing I will say today is I think it's pretty clear where the trendlines are going.''The trendline is very clear. And, it keeps getting clearer. But, for whatever reason, the President and the First Lady just won't say they support marriage equality. At this point, it's obviously a calculated political decision. But, it's a miscalculation.
AmericaBlog's Sudbay replied, ''The arc of history.''
Obama echoed, ''The arc of history.''
Again, evolve already. It's the right thing to do. It's the smart thing to do.
