The Pundits Speak: Keith Olbermann and other traditional journalists on gay issues

[ccharles000]

AfterElton.com: How much have things changed since the 2004 election when the Republicans used anti-gay sentiments to increase turnout for their party?
Keith Olbermann, Host, Countdown with Keith Olbermann: When nobody can afford to go to a gay wedding, a straight wedding or a protest of a gay wedding, is not going to make any difference. This is the danger of values, if you will, and that’s used as a facetious term, values politics – when that’s all you’ve got, when reality intervenes, like nobody can afford to keep their home or put gasoline or home winter heating oil in it this winter, people are going to say, “You’re serious? You want me to vote for you when you’ve ruined the economy, ruined our place in the world, haven’t stopped terrorism, made us kind of the bullies of the world, and I’m supposed to vote for you because you have some phony baloney belief that gay people shouldn’t have the right to be just as miserable as all the straight married people?” Really, I sense in the country a strong sense of incredulity to a lot of this and it’s not just gender or sexual orientation issues, but all these other things are just being trotted out and thrown out and nobody’s responding to them.


Joe Scarborough, Host, Morning Joe: Well, Karl Rove’s job was to get George Bush elected. I’m sure Rove looked at it and people who worked for Bush looked at it as a wedge issue to drive evangelicals out. And if you look at the results of 2004, it was an Evangelical base that ended up making the difference to George Bush in Florida and Ohio and in a lot of other states that really mattered. As far as the strategy they employed, it worked. But the world has changed, I think, at least, when it comes to social issues like gay marriage being used as a wedge issue.

Chris Matthews: Host, Hardball with Chris Matthews: It’s a much different climate. It’s a totally different climate. It’s much more evenly matched, you know what I’m saying? is no longer a slam-dunk like it was as a statute. I think people are thinking about it, evolving on it and I don’t think it has the scare factor, culturally, that it had. I’m just looking at it myself. I’m just studying it, looking at it. I think people have very different reactions to this thing. I think a lot of things have unintended consequences. You know, look at the Larry Craig story – it was so sad, that it made a lot of people say, “Wait a minute. If you don’t respect individuals, they’re not going to respect themselves.” And I think that’s a very good conservative argument for marriage. You know what I mean? That’s what I talk about on the air. I don’t think we’ve had one show on the heat over the issue , and we do tend to be a heat-seeking show. We look wherever the heat is.

Suzanne Malveaux, White House Correspondent, CNN News: The cultural issues that resonated in previous elections aren't necessarily being emphasized this time around. It's more pocketbook issues, it's more gas prices, it's more the homeowners' crisis, the mortgage crisis. It used to be about Iraq, but it's less so about Iraq now. I don't get the sense that people are coming out because of any kind of social issues or social agenda. If anything, I think people look at this as more a historical election, and I think that's what you're seeing them respond to.

http://www.afterelton.com/people/2008/8/pundits