As it stands, he's reverted to a 9/10 mindset...as is his right, but....yeah...

I mean, if I thought the President were sincere, it would be one thing. He's just found a way to go through the motions of "opposing" gay marriage without risking doing anything that might have a negative impact on 'em.

During the 2000 campaign, Bush made it clear that he felt that such issues were the purview of the states themselves. Now, Bush has "flip flopped".

As to Kerry being indecisive----I don't see it. The core of Kerry's critique of the Iraq war is that we cannot do it alone---and Bush has so alienated the rest of the world that we will not get the help we need from the rest of the world.

And Kerry is right---Bush's credibility is shot, and the international community does not trust his motives. Bush has engendered so much hostility toward the US in the Arab/Muslim world that few nations want to be openly associated with the US effort in Iraq anymore. America's geographic isolation make it far less vulnerable to infiltration by terrorists than most of the nations of the world---nations which too closely associate themselves with Bush are far more likely to be the target of terrorist attacks than the US itself is.

And unless there is a change in administrations, no one is going to take the risk of helping the USA at this point.

Bush had dug America into a very deep hole. And when you find yourself in a hole, the first thing you need to do is stop digging.

I've long suspected that, after 9/11, Sulivan and others like him reacted to Bush's early leadership by making him their new hero, and as part of that, tried to project their own ideals and agendas onto him. In Sulivan's case, he invented a fantasy that Bush would somehow do what Sulivan wanted about gay marriage. Now he's been disabused of that fantasy, and is reacting in the typical fashion.

And the sad thing is that he'll probably never seriously consider the idea that the judicial activism he so loves might be what drove Bush to feel he had to publicly endorse the new amendment (just like he said it would at the SotU address).

At very best, it's a cynical political ploy on Pres. Bush's part, endorsing something he doesn't think will pass. At worst, he really believes it is necessary to pass an amendment removing any chance ever of gays being permitted to marry. It is a profoundly statist position for him to take.

It's a disturbing indication of how the president (and/or his advisors) think.

No, I won't vote for Kerry. But I also find myself increasingly disturbed by the idea of voting for Bush.

I for one accept and approve of Bush's explanation for said "flip-flop." Sullivan, and Paul here, seem to expect those of us preferring the traditional definition of marriage to play the game according to rules that their own side doesn't have to follow.

---