Bush gets lots of flack about his stance on gay marriage from those inclined to give him flack about his stance on gay marriage. Never mind that Kerry claims to be against gay marriage, too (he's sort of for civil unions, but not when the issue comes up in Massachusetts, evidently). Anyway, others have commented on his recent quote in the NY Times:
"The president and I have the same position, fundamentally, on gay marriage. We do. Same position. But they're out there misleading people and exploiting it."
It's the final sentence of this quote that boggles me. What about Bush's position is misleading or exploitative?
- "Exploiting"? Bullcrap. It's a valid subject to bring up (why wouldn't it be?).
- "Misleading"? Bullcrap. Bush has been very clear on the subject (quick, what's Bush's position on gay marriage? For contrast,what's Kerry's??)
It's a common tactic among the left: words and phrases such as "misleading", "exploiting", "divisive", "stifling of dissent", and "Hitler" are bad -> Bush is bad -> therefore let's tar Bush with words and phrases such as "misleading", "exploiting", "divisive", "stifling of dissent", and "Hitler". Never mind what the words and phrases actually mean, nor if they are true or not (nor if they apply perfectly to the speaker); they'll be reported and repeated ad nauseum, and too few people will stop to ask questions (or at least that's their hope.)
Kaus sees through it:
The problem, as with most of Kerry's straddles, is that he doesn't let both sides know both faces of his position. In the above quote, he's trying to con conservatives into thinking--well, that he has the same position as the president.
You mean Kerry's statement might be misleading?