I’ve been married 19 years to a pretty wonderful woman. But if we don’t stop this movement toward same-sex marriages, I may be forced to leave her. That’s right. In a story about the burgeoning movement, the president of the Family Research Council said, “We cannot permit a few states and cities to force same-sex marriages on the rest of America.”

I love you, babe. It’s been great, but these judges and cities and states are making me do it. We could probably use a toaster for a wedding present, and I don’t have any high heeled shoes.

Any of a number of recent books tell the story of right wing intimidation of the media. It’s been a coordinated campaign since Spiro Agnew complained about the nattering “nabobs of negatively.” Since Goldwater’s defeat, the right wing has systematically intimated the media, accusing it being liberal and biased against conservatives. Even if you think there was some truth to it 40 years ago, the right wing’s campaign has turned it around 180 degrees – and then some. Today, the media is intimidated, bending over backwards to prove they aren’t liberal.

The result has been a free ride for much of the right wing agenda the last couple of decades. The media was merciless towards Clinton, but rarely challenged Bush until the Democratic presidential campaign heated up.

An argument made by The Washington Post’s Dana Milbank on MSNBC points out that part of the reason is that Democrats had lost their voice for so long. Now, with the wimps getting a backbone thanks to Howard Dean, the press has begun to ask Bush tougher questions.

So expect more columns like Charles Krauthammer’s in today’s Post. He chides Democrats for being negative. This from a Republican, the party of Lee Atwater, one of the first mudslingers the GOP has employed over the years. It’s been Bush and company who have suggested opponents to the Iraqi war are treasonous. Krauthammer accuses the Democrats of playing to the camera. Bush rarely faces a tough crowd, favoring delivering his lies to any camera he wants. No president has held so few press conferences in the post World War II era.

Another example of intimidation is today’s Wall Street Journal column that claims a double standard at work within the fourth estate. Many journalists have been either unusually silent or outright hostile to Robert Novak’s claim that he is protecting his sources by not revealing who told him that Joe Wilson’s wife, Valerie Plume, was a CIA operative. For no apparent journalistic reason, Novak included in his column criticizing Wilson, who publicly questioned the Bush administration’s claim that Iraq was buying uranium to build the big one, outed Plume. Whoever told Novak may have committed a national security crime.

So the Journal’s op-ed page, influential but very conservative, thinks there is a double standard because not every journalist is coming to Novak’s defense. If a law was broken and the value of the fact was superfluous to the column, some think Novak should come clean. It’s fair to wonder if journalists are inconsistent. But one thing I can assure you: If it were a Clinton White House staffer who revealed a CIA agent’s identity, the Journal and every other right wing pundit and politician would be calling the journalist who reported the identity a traitor and demanding that he or she patriotically fess up. That’s the double standard here.

The Krauthammer and WSJ columns will be just two of many accusing the media of an anti-Bush or liberal bias. And I fear, as in the past, it just might work because if there’s ever a thin-skinned group, it’s journalists.

On Commonwealth Common Sense, you’ll find a lot about Virginia politics. My state, as are many others, is wrestling with the tax issue. Being a conservative state, what happens here is closely watched. Gov. Warner proposed a modest tax reform/hike plan. The GOP majority leader in the Senate has submitted a much more aggressive plan to pay for schools, health care and transportation. The conservative House of Delegates, after months of decrying any attempt to raise taxes, introduced a very modest plan last week that eliminates sales tax breaks for businesses. Key votes will be made in the coming weeks as the House and Senate plans are sent to the opposing body for consideration.

Yesterday, the Senate passed the majority leader’s plan. Sen. John Chichester (R-Stafford) saw opposition from some in his own party, including two moderates who backed an amendment to eliminate the increase in the income tax rate for people making over $100,000 a year. Sen. Jeannemarie Devolites (R-Fairfax) spoke on behalf of the amendment by Sen. Bill Mims (R-Loudoun). They both represent wealthy areas. The amendment lost, however. Mims then went on to vote for the Chichester plan (SB 635) today. Devolites cast her vote with the right wingers such as Sens. Ken Cuccinelli (R-Fairfax), Mark Obenshain (R-Harrionsburg) and Jay O’Brien (R-Fairfax).

Robert Holsworth, a political science professor at Virginia Commonwealth University and The Washington Post’s favorite usual suspect when searching for punditry, was quoted, “The whole thing has gotten so weird.”

Weird maybe. But it makes for intriguing politics. The GOP is slowly stealing Warner’s thunder as the two camps argue about the need for revenue versus spending cuts. Chichester is being portrayed as a man of strong character, taking on the party’s hierarchy that has railed against tax hikes. With the House beginning to soften against the onslaught of business leaders and high profile Republicans (U.S. Senator John Warner, no relation to the governor, and former GOP Sen. Paul Tribble among them) supporting tax increases, it remains to be seen who comes off as the hero or the goat in 2005 when the House is up for election, or when Sen. Warner or the other GOP U.S. Sen. George Allen come up for re-election. Gov. Mark Warner is expected to challenge one or the other. Sen. Allen is up for reelection in 2006. Sen. Warner, 77, may retire after his term expires in 2008. Will Warner be able to leverage his image as being fiscally responsible for recommending tax hikes (and some cuts) for higher office?

Watch here for the blow by blow over the coming weeks.

In a story today in The Washington Post about the planned Bush campaign of ads trashing John Kerry, we learn that two of the entities preparing the mud fest will be a company that brought us the Taco Bell talking dog and the writer of Kentucky Fried Chicken ads.

One thrust will be that Kerry is beholden to special interests. The campaign leaders see no hypocrisy. From The Post:

Acknowledging that Bush has received major financial support from corporations, McKinnon said: “The issue is hypocrisy in saying you’re going to take on the special interests, not who took the most special interest money. You don’t hear the president in the Oval Office railing against the special interests. You do hear John Kerry railing against the special interests.” The campaign has previewed this theme in an online video calling Kerry “unprincipled” and “brought to you by the special interests.”

So being beholden to special interests is OK; saying you’re not when you are is. Fair enough. Wonder if Bush will run on a campaign supporting feeding at the special interests trough?

We’re beyond Plan B. The Bush administration is scrapping its latest plan for a transition government in Iraq. I’m not sure how many different schemes for peace have been tried there, but it’s clear the administration didn’t think very hard about what they could achieve before starting a war. Can Democrats develop cogent messages that this administration, whether in foreign policy or in domestic affairs, has a string of defeats, strategy changes and dubious predictions? It seems that since Bush infamously proclaimed, “Bring it on” we’ve lost hundreds of soldiers with many more maimed, and the Iraqis dissidents and outside terrorists have been more than up to his challenge. On the domestic side, remember that promise of creating 2.6 million new jobs. Well, never mind.

With withering criticism from states left with the task of implementing the No Child Left Behind Act but insufficient funds, the administration announced easing of standards yesterday. With 28 percent of schools failing the act’s targets, Education Secretary Rod Paige said requirements will be relaxed for students who speak English as a second language (ESL students, in the educational vernacular). The Washington Post also reports that Paige will announce a “more flexible interpretation” of what defines a “fully qualified teacher.”

The issue of underperforming schools is addressed in a book I’m now reading: The 2% Solution. (See my reading list left column.) Liberals will like Matthew Miller saying that a lot more money is needed for teacher salaries. Conservatives will like Miller’s voucher ideas and his call for doing away with teacher tenure.

Former Enron Chairman and Dubya good friend Ken Lay is now the only top executive of the company not charged with something nefarious. Yesterday, former CEO Jeff Skilling had the honor of having his hand-cuffs photographed as he surrendered in the face of about three dozen conspiracy, fraud and insider trading charges. He was released on $5 million bond. Wonder how much of that money was rightfully former employees and investors who were duped by Kenny Boy’s top execs?

Want to know how unsubstantiate rumors find their way to The Washington Post? Listen to The Post’s Dana Milbank give the excuse, for an excuse is all it is. Incredibly, he suggests that Matt Drudge, the British tabloids, the U.S. tabloids and I guess you and me, make The Post do it. He suggests that media writer (sometimes called a Political Writer by The Post) Howard Kurtz, whose wife, by the way, is reportedly a Republican consultant, will write about these rumors, even if they’re unsubstantiated, because Drudge, the tabloids and blah, blah, blah are doing it. Here’s the transcript:

Terry Gross of “Fresh Air” on NPR: So, when there’s an allegation about an affair or a personal thing like that, the Washington Post decides to investigate a little and see if there’s anything there before deciding whether it’s worthy of coverage or not?”

Milbank’s Response: “Yes, of course. The typical way these rumors wind up in the mainstream is they wind up on the Internet, then they wind up in the British publications, which seem to have a lower standard of accuracy. Then they make it into the American tabloids market, like the New York Post, and eventually it filters into the mainstream. If there’s accuracy to the rumor then of course we’re going to be covering it. If there’s no accuracy to the rumor, most likely we’ll do it as we did this week, and that is have our media writer write about everybody else writing about it.”

No basketball fans, crossover here is not a change of dribble from one hand to the other. Crossover is the mid-way point in the Virginia General Assembly, where bills from one house cross over to the other for consideration. Now we’ll see what kind of tax reform/hike/cut we’ll get. Catch up with it here and here

Bush’s duplicitous No Child Left Behind Act is getting a lousy reception in many states stuck with the bill to pay for what is essentially testing and reporting requirements that seem to be just a front for dismantling the pubic school system in this country. See The Washington Post story today.