Married to the Economy?

Somehow, Obama’s re-entry into campaign politics has changed the political air. The usually relatively moderate and independent are leaning to their familiar sides. High minded debates about the long term future of the nation are taking shape in the nation’s major newspapers. The gay marriage debate, sparked by Biden and then Obama, is far removed from those debates about the structural nature of our country, but speaks to a cultural divide that is noteworthy.

The GOP’s favorite media enforcer of the moment, Florida senator Marco Rubio, has accused Obama of distracting the national discourse from the real issues. Rubio is entirely right that Obama has and will continue to distract from the most substantive and important issues facing the country right now. Student loans was not one of them, that arose organically. I’m also not sure that his recent statement supporting gay marriage was a calculated attempt to distract either. Obama has a case to make as a Democrat and as the personification of modernity.

As Daily Beast columnist David Frum notes, the brand ID of the democrats continues to be one of cultural modernity. Treating homosexuality as taboo is no longer accepted in modern culture. People from every generation have begun to change their attitude of aversion towards homosexuality. For those under 30 the taboo against homosexuality has largely been reversed, with 64 percent supporting gay marriage.

 

So, in many ways, this issue has increasingly become a matter of accepting modernity rather than a genuine policy disagreement. Young Republicans and independents alike share this perspective and will probably respect Obama for coming out in support of gay marriage. While his new position is likely to do very little with regards to concrete policy changes, it is not, as senator Rubio claimed, some politically motivated attempt to divide America. That rebuttal is one of no substance (in this case, as gay marriage is a legitimate social issue to raise) and reserved for those who find themselves on an increasingly difficult side of an issue.

UPDATE:

In this post I said,

“Jobs” based rhetoric is almost always empty. It can tacked on to virtually any piece of spending as an ancillary benefit. Its usage is essentially synonymous with “I think this is a good idea,” which we knew already. I’m perpetually disappointed by virtually everyone’s willingness to let claims about jobs fly. Unfortunately, it is a claim easily backed up with casual logic and debunked by only relatively complex economic logic foreign to nearly everyone.

With “jobs and “the economy” being nearly synonymous in the mainstream media, it should be no surprise that articles are popping up drawing a line between gay marriage and the economy. Absurd? Yes.

Comments

  1. Mark says:

    I think it’s important also to note the implication that Obama would have been better off staying silent. Silence does not galvanize civil rights movements, and I agree, Obama’s tacit support of gay marriage has been spun into a divisive political maneuver. I applaud the president for speaking out and question the motives of people who attempt to paint this as a distraction.

  2. jay says:

    Thanks for the comment Mark.

    I think the main motivation behind the “distraction” talking point is that it fits the GOP narrative that Obama is trying to divide the nation. They’ve used the “dividing americans” talking point on the Buffett rule, students loans and now this. Unfortunately, it is a way to include an attack against the president without addressing the issue at hand.

  3. matt says:

    So anything that plays into Republican talking points is off-limits for Democrats.

    I wonder if you’re smart enough to take this to its logical conclusion.

  4. JimC146 says:

    >So anything that plays into Republican talking points is
    >off-limits for Democrats.

    No! In fact, I sincerely hope President Obama continues to stand on his principles and come out on more of his true beliefs so clearly for the American people to see…

  5. Thomas says:

    Obama’s same-sex marriage gambit was a smart and bold move and clearly dared the GOP leadership to reply by openly rejecting same-sex marriage. On one hand, one can’t really blame the GOP too much for dodging with the “you’re being divisive” rebuttal; it’s definitely less risky, and it is an alternative to the political suicide of allowing the opponent to set the terms of debate. On the other hand, it just seems that a rather whinging complaint does next to nothing to advance one’s position. It doesn’t make much sense until you realize that the real work of “you’re being divisive” is ad hominem, a contribution to the cult of personal hatred and revulsion conservatives feel toward Obama as a person.

    It’s interesting to consider the two “I”s and two “me”s in Obama’s statement “I’ve just concluded that for me personally it is important for me to go ahead and affirm that I think same sex couples should be able to get married.” as a sort of bait for the conservative response, guiding it away from policy discussion and toward an outburst of huffing know-your-place indignation and racist cartoons. It’s been a really good strategy so far and Republicans seem almost in love with falling for it.