When you talk about the politics of hatred, you're talking about the anti-gay marriage amendments, right?

Yes, as a matter of fact. It is extremely disappoint that the gay marriage bans passed, and by large margins, in every state that they were on the ballot. And I hope that those of you, who like me, fear the influence of the religious right on this administration, noticed that W quietly let on that he favors allowing civil unions.

My personal position is that government shouldn't be in the marriage business, period, but since it is so ingrained in our culture (and system of law), it should be available to everyone.

My hope is that now W doesn't have to cowtow to religious extremists to win election - he won't. Obviously, he is a religious man, but I believe him when he says he doesn't have the right to impose that religion on anyone else. I sense decency in W and a desire for inclusiveness.

Example - there was no funding for fetal stem cell research before him - he walked a fine line between his personal moral beliefs and science and hope for the sick to say it will only be funded for the existing lines. Not everything that the scientists wanted, not everything that the religious right wanted. A compromise. Something we need more of. Baby steps, crawling, walking, running.

Believe me when I say that I will not spend the next 4 years cheerleading for Bush or anyone else. The politics of divisiveness is not practiced by only one party. I think Bush stayed above it for the most part, except for the politically expedient endorsement of the FMA. He needs to distance himself from it.

The far left needs to distance itself from this idea that everyone to the right of Nader hates poor people, minorities, gays, etc. There are lunatics in both parties, but there is an intelligent center that is much larger and knows better than to wallow in the mud with these people.