Rich Lowry, editor of the conservative National Review, has a
Washington Post op-ed titled "The
President Keeps His Distance," complaining that George W. is
missing in action on the culture war front -- especially in not
being more vigilant in opposing gay marriage. As I've written
before, liberal Bush haters just don't see the pressure that Bush
is facing, and often resisting, from his none-too-happy social
conservative base. As Lowry writes:
when Bush was asked about gay marriage, you got the feeling he would have preferred not to be asked at all. His statement against it was an assertion and expression of personal preference, that "somebody like me" believes "a marriage is between a man and a woman." Well, okay. But why? Explaining that requires argument, requires making moral distinctions among sex acts, in ways that are likely to make some people very angry. Requires, in short, everything Bush would rather not do -- because it probably feels too "judgmental" to him, because he (like most conservatives of his generation or younger) has openly gay friends, and because it will inflame voters both pro and con.
This is a loss for those of us who are conservatives. It means that, on important issues, a crucial player isn't fully engaged.
Lowry and his conservative kind wish Bush would be more like
anti-gay big-mouth Sen. Rick Santorum. The gay left refuses to see
any distinction between the two. Maybe they should start reading
the rightwing press.