While I appreciate Michelle Bachmann’s charisma and her ability to articulate the unifying message of the Tea Party, I have some concerns about her past statements on state recognition of same-sex relationships. That said, if you’re going to take issue with her arguments, do so in the same manner she offers them.

Why do some gay lefties feel the need to throw stuff on their ideological adversaries:

Why are they so reluctant to engage them?

Via Instapundit.

RELATED: Note the words I wrote in a blog post two years ago that Michelle Malkin chose to feature in a post on civility and tolerance. Why does the woman in the video above prefer political theater to serious argument?

UPDATE: Over at RedState, Caleb Howe comments on this video:

“She can run, but she can’t hide.” Yeah, nothing says “I’m in hiding” like running for President, plainly stating your views repeatedly on national television, and speaking at a major conference. . . .

“The left: we throw stuff and stuff.” Powerful message.

Yeah, well, throwing stuff is a lot easier than acknowledging your adversary’s points and countering them with well-thought out arguments.

UP-UPDATE:  Even Bachmann’s sensible critics castigate the glitterer.  At Dump Bachmann, Eva Young writes:

I personally condemn this move. Here at Dump Bachmann we’ve been exposing Michele Bachmann’s words and record. This glitter bombing of candidates doesn’t accomplish anything.

Perhaps, we might be able to get to the bottom of the Barack Obama’s changing stance on gay marriage if some leading gay rights’ activists were more interested in advocating for gay people than in agitating for Democratic politicians:

WHO ARE YOU GOING TO BELIEVE, ME OR YOUR OWN LYING EYES? Senior White House aide: 1996 Obama gay marriage questionnaire is a fake, even though Obama signed it. Presumably the White House is demanding release of the original long-form questionnaire.

While HRC is silent, gay bloggers and blogreses are asking questions.  At Pam’s House Blend, Autumn Sandeen feels like she’s “watching a denial from the Obama Administration of Barack Obama’s 1996 position on marriage equality in the face of documentation that makes the denial appear to be a lie. It looks to me to be an attempt at a history rewrite“:

I can’t imagine that this isn’t going to cause problems between the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community and the Obama Administration, and it will require someone more senior to White House communications director Dan Pfeiffer in an attempt to straighten this out.

Once again, gay and lesbian bloggers (and blogresses), working on a shoestring, are doing the work the national gay organizations, with multi-million dollar budgets, fancy offices and expense accounts refuse to do.

Does seem Obama arrives at his positions on gay issues, not on their merits, but on their politically expediency.

It seems he supported state recognition of same-sex marriage in his first campaign, yet subsequently never marched in any gay pride parade — or otherwise participated in such celebrations.  You’d think national gay groups would be asking questions, especially given the president’s aggressive solicitation of gay money and votes.

Kudos to the gay leftie bloggers unwilling to serve as lickspittles to a Democratic president with whom they are, by and large, ideologically in sync.  Would it we could say the same thing for the national gay groups.  But, for them it seems, fealty to the Democratic Party — and its standard bearers — remains the highest bond.

Contrasting New Jersey Republican Governor Chris Christie’s success at crafting a budget deal with legislative Democrats in his state, Jennifer Rubin speculates that it might be possible in Washington but for one thing:

The key ingredient missing in D.C., of course, is executive leadership. President Obama has ducked, delegated and demagogued. It is up to Senate and House leaders to forge a deal. And then to complete the task, the voters in 2012 will need to elect a president with the same fortitude and courage as Christie. Maybe Christie himself.

Emphasis addded.  Read the whole thing.