Monday, June 12, 2006

Give 'em the ol' Razzle Dazzle

"long as you keep 'em way off balance
how can they spot you got no talents..."

Oh, it's a moot point by now of course; still, I thought this particular tap-dance should be preserved for posterity. He's not very good at this, is he? Still, the overhanging brow adds a certain gravitas, it must be said.


"Snow Compares Gay Marriage Ban With 'Civil Rights Legislation'"

Q You mentioned civil rights. Are you comparing this to various civil
rights measures which have come to the Congress over the years?

MR. SNOW: Not -- well, these -- it --

Q Is this a civil right?

MR. SNOW: Marriage? It actually -- what we're really talking about here is
an attempt to try to maintain the traditional meaning of an institution
that has maintained one meeting for -- meaning for a period of centuries.
And furthermore --

Q And you would equate that with civil rights?

MR. SNOW: No, I'm just saying that I think -- well, I don't know. How do
you define civil rights?

Q It's not up to me. Up to you.

MR. SNOW: Okay. Well, no, it's your question. So I -- if I --

Q (Chuckles.)

MR. SNOW: I need to get a more precise definition.

Q Can you stand there and say with a straight face that there is not a
political dimension to this?

MR. SNOW: Of course there's a political dimension to it. There's going to
be a Senate vote on it, for heaven sakes. You have -- there's naturally --
there are political dimensions on both sides.

It's -- this is an issue -- and we talked about this this morning -- that
I think is of keen interest to a lot of people. And one of the interesting
aspects is that there -- it's still -- the amendment still permits states
to consider arrangements and institutions for same-sex couples that would
not be called marriage. But the president feels strongly that marriage as
an institution has a fixed means that ought to be honored in American law.

...Q What has changed about the potential legal challenge since January of
last year that makes this riper?

MR. SNOW: Again, there -- you're going to have to ask --

Q (Off mike.)

MR. SNOW: You're going to have to ask the people who brought it up for a
vote in the Senate.

Q The Republican leadership works in concert with the White House, as you
know.

MR. SNOW: Yeah, but I'm not aware that the White House had any particular
hand in scheduling this. But you know what? I'll check it out, because I
don't have the answer to --

...Q More than 8,000 same-sex couples have been married in Massachusetts.
What threat do they pose? And what's the president's --

MR. SNOW: They don't -- this is not in response to a threat. This is
merely a matter of trying to clarify what marriage ought to mean under the
law. As you know, the people of Massachusetts, also by referendum, defined
marriage as being between a man and a woman, and the Supreme Judicial
Court decided to throw it out. And it remains a matter of contention.

I don't think people look at this as a threat. It is trying to clarify
what is an important and contentious cultural and legal issue.

Q With this -- and let me just follow up.

MR. SNOW: Yeah.

Q With this to become a constitutional amendment, what legally then
happens to those 8,000-plus same-sex couples? Are their marriages
annulled?

MR. SNOW: That would have to require keener legal expertise than mine. I
don't want to try to --

Q The president doesn't know what would happen?

MR. SNOW: No, the press secretary doesn't know. (Laughter.)

Q You mentioned the president was actually concerned about other issues
besides this one.

...

Q Tony, I just wanted -- on gay marriage again. You are almost portraying
the president as being a passive participant in this; that the Senate is
acting, so he's speaking out.

MR. SNOW: Right.

Q In the gaggle, you suggested the media is over-hyping this issue.

MR. SNOW: Yeah.

Q Conservatives, like Tony Perkins, are saying it was the president who
brought this up a lot during the 2004 campaign. Wasn't he hyping it then?
Why is the president being so passive?

MR. SNOW: I'm not going to characterize -- I don't think it's passive.
Again, the president has made clear what his views are. But, you know,
this is one where I -- I'm trying to figure out exactly how one decides
when one is active and one is passive.


Confidential to Mr. Snow: you look at which pocket the President's keys and/or hanky is in; and then you look at the Senate's pockets.

7 comments:

antiprincess said...

black hanky republicans?
HA!

Jean said...

A keen legal expertise? Fucking hell. For what? Verily, one should be wearing the keen legal armor 'ere they dare onto the field.

EL said...

Wow, ummmm hello there?

This guy was hired to articulate positions. Scary.

belledame222 said...

yes, but chock full o' schadenfreudic goodness.

I mean, look, there was no way they were ver gonna get anyone better or even as good as Ari, and *he* left when he couldn't stand it anymore. Scotty must've aged about twenty years in that gig.

It only goes downhill from here, kids.

(pulling up lawnchair, cracking open a cold one)

jackadandy said...

LMAO!!!

!!

*speechless*

Jean said...

"This guy was hired to articulate positions."

That was the point. Take it as you will. ;)

Helpful Links For Growth said...

"This guy was hired to articulate positions. Scary. " exactly..what is this administration doing but stuttering, stammering and (in G.Bush's case) making up words that arent in the english language, while just running our country into the ground..