At least she's consistent. Not to turn this into the Robin Toner Watch, and it's not an A1 piece today—but when she pops up twice in two days on the marriage amendment issue, and after yesterday's post, it'd be churlish of me not to take notice, don't you think?

This is ostensibly reporting, not analysis, but it covers the same political-theater territory as her article yesterday, this time from the Democratic angle ("Democrats Join Fray on Marriage"). The headline echoes the odd conceit of the article's lead, that Bush's reluctant, much-belated announcement yesterday of support for a marriage amendment somehow started a debate to which the Democrats are only now adding their voices:

Democrats on Wednesday plunged into the volatile new debate over a constitutional amendment that would ban gay marriage, saying they were confident that voters would see President Bush's endorsement of the measure as an expression of political opportunism, not shared values.

But that's Toner's thesis in this piece, and no inconvenient reality is going to get in her way. Toner has decided that Bush's announcement yesterday seized the political initiative, and forced the Dems behind another excellent Rovian eight-ball:

In declaring his support on Tuesday for a constitutional amendment that would bar same-sex marriage, Mr. Bush called the union of a man and a woman the "most fundamental institution of civilization." He left Democratic candidates trying to walk a careful line, mindful that polls show that most Americans oppose gay marriage but are more closely divided on amending the Constitution to prohibit it.

See? Bush, for Robin Toner ever the Steely-Eyed Rocket Man of Principle, is talking about values, about civilization—and the Dems are just carping about process and looking for a "middle ground" where they can find room to maneuver. They just seem, well, small, don't they? [Does the fact that Congressional Republicans aren't looking all that quick to take the amendment bait themselves, as Toner's colleague Carl Hulse reports on the same page today, cast any shadow in her world? Not a bit of it—for Toner, only Democrats are creatures of ambivalence.]

As was true yesterday, and even though this article is ostensibly about the Democratic position, Toner remains faithful to her pattern: Democratic voices criticize, and are subject to Republican rebuttal—never the other way around. More remarkable, Toner's Democrats today have to concede the main points before they're even allowed to criticize—sometimes after, too, even if Toner has to push them a bit. While Bush's coming out (pardon the pun) for the amendment

may energize his base, [some] Democrats said, it will cost him support among the electorate at large.

"If we do our job right, it can be perceived as an attempt to divert attention away from the economy and the war and the lack of direction in the country," said Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster. [Seems like more of that Democratic unwillingness to talk about values, doesn't it? -ed.]

Still, Ms. Lake acknowledged that the gay marriage issue could trouble older, blue-collar voters as well as some Catholics otherwise attracted by the Democratic Party's economic message.

Who other than Robin was there to extract that final concession from Ms. Lake? That's Toner, always looking out for her GOoPer pals.

Toner even manages an opportunity to get straight-up RNC spin into the mix. She quotes Andrew Kohut of the Pew Center saying that Kerry and Edwards, both of whom "draw the line" at gay marriage, are claiming a position that draws that line "in a more reasonable, moderate way than amending the Constitution." And then, not bothering with Edwards, she trains her sights on Kerry:

But Republicans said Mr. Kerry was simply trying to have it both ways. Ed Gillespie, the Republican national chairman, told reporters that "Senator Kerry has had a number of different positions on this." Mr. Gillespie noted that despite his stated opposition to same-sex marriage, Mr. Kerry was one of only 14 senators who voted against the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996, which prohibits federal recognition of such marriages. Spokesmen for Mr. Kerry's campaign said he had voted against the legislation because he believed it had become a Congressional exercise in gay-bashing.

Which is, of course, the preferred Republican line of attack on Kerry—he wants it both ways! Says one thing, votes (years before, in a different context entirely, but this is Nit Picklering, remember) the opposite! Can't trust the man. (Even when Toner stoops to print the Kerry camp's demurrer, she makes sure it fits the pattern in which Democrats speak only to process. That there might be intellectual substance, even principle, in a position that resists amending the Constitution except as an extraordinary last resort, is an idea apparently too complex for Toner to get her head around.)

Much as I'd love to see her drop the pretense and just work directly for the RNC, Toner is obviously much more useful to them where she is. How many gold stars do you think are next to her name in Ed Gillespie's Rolodex?

posted by michael  5:38:05 PM  
tell me about it []