The headline caught my eye: “Bush defines marriage as man and woman.� That’s amazing. Not that the President would come out (pun intended) against gay marriage, but that he would actually define something. Heck, he has a hard enough time pronouncing words, never mind defining them. Although maybe he uses “the Google� for help. In any regard, Bush traveled to Des Moines today. (I imagine, upon landing, he was surprised to find himself in Iowa instead of France.) He was in corn country to boost the sagging spirits and hopes of some nameless Republican congressional candidate. As such, the Definer decided to offer a kernel or two of opinion on the subject of marriage, to which the AP lent an ear:

President Bush said the “sacred institution� of marriage between a man and a woman must be defended against what he called activist court rulings.

Bush briefly brought up the topic, unprompted, while raising money here for a Republican congressional candidate, a day after the New Jersey Supreme Court decided that same-sex couples must be given the same rights as married people.

The court left it up to the state’s Legislature to decide whether to extend those rights under the structure of marriage, civil unions or something else.

The president said the ruling “raises doubts about the institution of marriage.�

“I believe marriage is a union between a man and a woman,� he said. “I believe its a sacred institution that is critical to the health of our society and the well-being of families, and it must be defended.� [full text]

It must be defended? Them’s fightin’ words. Is the President so rattled by recent scandals and failures that he is planning to shrug off Iran and North Korea—and attack Massachusetts instead? Perhaps that’s the October Surprise the White House has up its sleeve, to shock and awe the Gomorrah of states into submission and make the world safe from sodomy (which, by the way, is a term better used to describe what Bush and his cronies have been doing to the country than what consenting adults might opt to engage in). What’s really scary is that even the Muslim extremists would be on board with such a plan.

I have to say that I don’t much like the threatening posture that Bush is adopting here—and not just because I live in the Bay State. It’s just plain wrong to threaten, denigrate, or marginalize people who want nothing more than to share in the same liberties and opportunities to which their fellow citizens are entitled. If the President is so dang concerned about the sacred institution of marriage, then maybe he should do something about the high rate of divorce in this country. But, of course, he won’t do that. Politically, he’d be shooting himself in Des Loines, since “the areas of the country where divorce rates are highest are also frequently the areas where many conservative Christians live….And the state with the lowest divorce rate [is] Massachusetts, home to John Kerry, the Kennedys and same-sex marriage.â€? Well, fancy that.

I’d be tempted to suggest that Bush define irony or hypocrisy, only I don’t reckon the lame bugger is up to the task. Now, if you’ll excuse me, I have a bunker to dig.