This is a serious issue, but one that betrays the weakness of anti-gay arguments; they know that even in supposedly conservative states, people are far more likely to let their amendment pass if they have no frigging idea what it means. LGBT organisations on the ground have to be prepared to work against this, by making the real meaning of such measures as clear as possible.

Once the churches realize that Prop 8 is an almost guaranteed loser, are they going to do the right thing and let their members know? If not, what happens after Prop 8 loses by 40-60 (or worse), and then the members find out that the church leadership was privy all along to internal polling that predicted a crushing defeat? Do the members get their money back?

Or do they get stuck paying for ads that were run by a campaign that knew it was going to lose but ran them anyway!

Personally, I’d enjoy watching the news if high government officials were required to engage in useless nominalization at all times.

Or, heck, just useless nomation. No, as a matter of fact, I can’t resist any urge to propagate silly Internet memes. Why do you ask?

Terminology’s an important fight, even though it shouldn’t be; how many people base their votes and opinions entirely off the first line? Perhaps it would be better if D’s and R’s were forced, with every proposal, to compromise on boring but straightforward names (i.e. not “No Child Left Behind”, but not “Let’s Merrily Screw Over Our Kids” either, just something like “Increasing Standardized Testing Emphasis”).