Watch how Whitman dude Mitch Zak, a Republican operative, interrupted a perfectly nice ladychat between ladyblog WowOwow's Randi Bernfeld and Whitman ladyfundraiser Jillian Manus to explain Whitman's stance on Proposition 8, California's gay marriage ban which voters passed last November:

Randi: I'm a little confused about one issue: Regarding Whitman's stance on Proposition 8 and gay marriage. She is against gay marriage but supports civil unions. Can you speak on that?


Mitch: I can help you on that one. Yes, she voted for Proposition 8, and to her that was a matter of her faith and her personal convictions. She does believe the term "marriage" should belong to the union of a man and a woman. But that said, she is absolutely a strong supporter of civil unions and it's evident by her leadership at eBay. It was tremendously inclusive in that regard. The one other distinction that she made is that the folks who were legally married when the law was in California, those folks should stay married.

Randi: I see.

Mitch: So it's not their fault that the law was what it was.

Many of eBay's numerous gay and lesbian employees are still steaming over Whitman's newfound opposition to same-sex marriage, which they believe has more to do with political opportunism than Whitman's religious faith, something she never mentioned even to close workplace confidants in her years at eBay. And it's hardly a popular cause among the demographic Manus, chair of Whitman's Women's Coalition, will target: White women opposed Proposition 8, 53 percent to 47 percent. That's probably Whitman's best defense for continuing to claim that her opposition to gay marriage is a matter of personal faith, not political expediency: It doesn't seem like a sure-fire vote-getter.

The map application has become an icon for the extremes to which political transparency can be taken — but whoever made it prefers to remain completely anonymous. The application is registered anonymously through GoDaddy and offers no contact information.

The site, eightmaps.com, has become "controversial," the New York Times reports:

Visitors can see markers indicating a contributor's name, approximate location, amount donated and, if the donor listed it, employer. That is often enough information for interested parties to find the rest - like an e-mail or home address...

Some donors to groups supporting the measure have received death threats and envelopes containing a powdery white substance, and their businesses have been boycotted.

It's entirely possible to defend the map as an example of how public disclosure laws are supposed to work. Campaign finance laws were consciously designed so that people's neighbors and political opponents know how they donate money.

But when the people behind a public shaming tool insist on lurking in the shadows, they cover their particular tactical effort in a veneer of slime. And they risk embarrassing a political campaign that has had enough PR failures already.

Whitman, as we've noted, is an oddity among Silicon Valley Republicans, who tend to worry more about lower taxes than hot-button social issues like abortion and gay marriage. In the Republican presidential primaries, she supported Mitt Romney, a Mormon with conservative social views. But it wasn't until recently that Whitman started talking about her own support for Proposition 8, California's recently passed ban on same-sex marriages.

Henry Gomez, the former eBay superflack who's serving as an advisor to Whitman, told me this week that Whitman's stand was "a personal issue." Many gay eBay employees agree. They see Whitman's stance as a deeply personal betrayal. As the CEO of a company in a liberal industry in a liberal region, Whitman never gave a hint that she didn't value gay and lesbian employees' relationships. It turns out she was just being politic.

Whitman's longtime executive assistant, Anita Gaeta, is a lesbian, who owns a house with her partner in San Jose. I tried to contact Gaeta to get her views on the matter, but she did not respond. Gomez tells me Gaeta continues to work for Whitman.

But leave personal feelings aside. As a practical matter, Whitman's support of Proposition 8 may backfire in fundraising and in the general election. Several current and former eBay executives, including founder Pierre Omidyar, lent their name to a newspaper advertisement opposing Proposition 8. Will they support Whitman's campaign now? Unlikely.

Her stance could also hurt her former employer's business. Already, eBay sellers are organizing a boycott because of Whitman's stance. And no company likes to be drawn into controversial causes. One might think that her handpicked successor, John Donahoe, might prevail on Whitman to moderate her stance for that reason alone.

California prefers its Republicans to be centrists — Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, another Proposition 8 opponent, is the best example of this trend. Whitman's top two contenders, former Representative Tom Campbell and Steve Poizner, the state's insurance commissioner, also opposed the proposition.

It all seems ill thought out — rather like Whitman's quixotic legal campaign to reclaim a set of domain names she failed to register before talk of her gubernatorial prospects became public. The sight of a tech billionaire harassing the small businessman who registered them are provoking giggles among California's Republicans.

Which is probably the right reaction to Whitman's stance on Proposition 8: not anger, but pity. Insulated by sycophantic advisors and accustomed to fawning coverage from a supine tech press corps, Whitman must not even realize what a joke her would-be political career is.

Sorry, but Prop 8 isn't something worth protesting. A state constitutional amendment can't be overturned by a state court. The only legal action left is claiming that it's an equal protection violation, but the Supreme Court would probably say that it isn't because equal protection applies to people, not rights; the state is providing the right to marry to almost everyone, even gays, provided they marry someone of the opposite sex. No one said there has to be love, and there are plenty of loveless marriages out there.

Did protesting 209 do anything? Tell them to be useful and start a petition to repeal the amendment.

The Supreme Court would probably uphold Prop 8, saying that the state is treating everyone equally unfair. A great example of what equal protection stops is the 2000 Florida recount (Bush v. Gore). The Court (7 justices) said that since different standards were being used in the recount, it was unconstitutional. With Prop 8, the standards, so far, have been applied fairly. What the equality camp doesn't mention is that gays can get married.

"...nor shall any State...deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

If it said "couple," Prop 8 would be unconstitutional because it treats couples differently, but it says person.

Now that I think about it, is a way that could lead to overturning Prop 8 through equal protection because it denies marriage to legal persons and the intersexed.

Right: Because it's an awesome branding opportunity. The draft is a self-parody of corner office drama, full of Honorary Co-Chairs, Leaders, and Former CEOs. But the real story is: Who's missing? Sergey Brin and Eric Schmidt are here, but not Larry Page. Twitter's Ev Williams is here, but not Digg's Kevin Rose. Federated Media: Present. TechCrunch: Absent. Mark Zuckerberg is not here, but Sheryl Sandberg pulled a John Hancock: She's right up top, where Owen can't miss her. Oh, look, she's trying to make nice! She's going to be sorry.