Just put that crystal ball away

I get weary of political reporters pontificating on What It All Means. There's lots of talk about the 2010 elections (10 months away) and the 2012 election and what this or that little detail implies for Congress, Obama, and the nation. It's not just election politics that gets the pundits gazing at crystal balls. Since the Calif. gay marriage ban before a district court in San Francisco will likely end up before the federal Supremes, there is lots of speculation of what those Supremes will do with the case (all wrapped, of course, in cries of "this case is too soon!"). Alas, this case is more personal than most. Since the Supremes weighed in on whether the district court should be allowed to televise, we have a perhaps cloudy view of what the high court is thinking about the case. This view is based on three insights that were gained from what the Supremes said.

* They are watching the case closely, and even intervening ahead of time (rather than on appeal).

* The conservatives on the high court don't trust the judge handling the case. They say his reasons for wanting the cameras kept changing.

* The court's conservatives are distinctly sympathetic to the anti-gay side, buying their claims of threats of harassment without substantial proof.

So the image in the crystal ball is: it doesn't look good for gays. And yet… Justice Kennedy is the deciding vote and has rejected discrimination against gays in the past.