Why is it considered "unfocused" to defend against homophobia...

[Ladyhawk]

...and fundamentalism?

I keep reading posts saying, "You're letting THEM set the frame again. We shouldn't be talking about gay marriage and Mel Gibson's crazy fundy movie."

Why shouldn't we take the time to discuss these issues? We can discuss them and still discuss black box voting, the lies that led to the invasion of Iraq, the outing of a CIA agent, Bush's absence from duty in the National Guard...

Is it so impossible for us to multitask? It seems to me that the issues the Republicans brought up--especially the silly amendment that would ban gays from marrying--hurt the GOP. The crazy reich-wingers are showing their true colors. We should be thrilled they are trying to change the subject. All it requires is a day or so of progressives rolling their eyes, saying, "We told you so" and moving back to other issues.

[Redneck Socialist]

1. On DU we can blather about whatever strikes out fancy, but

in terms of a coordinated political campaign when we get off our message (Bush's job performance, the economy, the war etc)we loose focus and dilute what we are trying to get across, mainly that bush has got to go.

The anti love amendment is quite cynically designed to divide us and wrench the debate over onto the conservative side of the field. The more bush can stand up and say he supports "traditional family values" the less he has to answer questions about his lies and failures.

That is the danger of too eagerly taking bushco's bait.

[mmm]

4. Bush and Co are brilliant in using this issue to divide the Dems

The Dems took the bait. Bush will not lose one vote over this.
But it will divide and distract the Dems, setting up the Bush victory.
Now is not the time to fight this battle. It cannot be won until
the Dems control the White House, and we are far from that.

[Redneck Socialist]

6. Ultimately I think it will help us

Even if most folks are against gay marriage I don't think they feel it rises to the level of constitutional crisis.

People are going to see that bush is using this to distract attention from all his other messes. As long as WE (the democrats) keep the focus on the economy, the war, etc and don't let bush change the subject we will be fine.

[Brotherjohn]

2. I agree. I think this is going to backfire on them big time.

Replay the last time the right tried to start a "culture war". They lost the White House. Remember Pat Buchanan's speech to the Republican National Convention in 1992?

Polls may show a majority of people are against same-sex marriage, or even for an amendment. But when push comes to shove (and Bush has now brought it there himself), they will ask "Is this REALLY that important? Does this belong in the Constitution?"

All Kerry has to say (and he already has said it) is:
"This President can’t talk about jobs. He can’t talk about health care. He can’t talk about a foreign policy, which has driven away allies and weakened the United States, so he is looking for a wedge issue to divide the American people."

If they want to make this the debate, let them have at it! It only further reinforces their image as idealogues who do not care for real issues or real people.

[BigDaddyLove]

3. Good points.

.

[Stephanie]

8. I will never forget that speech. I knew then and there that they had lost

I remember telling my Dad that they had just lost the election. That speech was an OUTRAGE, and I knew Americans would never stand for that, would not want anything to do with it.

I wonder if the text of that speech is available anywhere? It was just unbelievable.

[orwell]

5. Party On

Go for it. I have no problem with any discussions. The attention span of the public political mind on individual issues might soon be measured in nanoseconds.

As far as framing, it is the most important tactical issue for Progressives/Liberals to discuss. We are being devastated, with respect to framing, by the Cons.

O

On edit: I am pushing the framing meme in almost all of my posts because it is so critical to understand how a minority can hijack the political mass mind. It's good to see that it is spreading, even if in a negative sense in your post. To negate the frame is to assert the frame.

[PVnRT]

7. They are setting the frame here

Yes, it is important to talk about such things. Gay marriage is an important civil rights issue.

However, the GOP is raising this ruckus right now as election-year politics, trying to divide people and shift the debate away from things like the economy, Iraq, etc. Now, instead of attacking Bush on those things, our candidates will have to answer the same asinine questions over and over again about whether or not they're opposed to the amendment, etc.

I hope the amendment issue goes away, but this does not mean that I want the discussion about rights for gays to suddenly stop. It should be refocused as a positive discussion instead of this negative one we are embroiled in now - focusing on how they deserve equal rights, not focusing on an amendment to take their rights away.