Coup in Honduras? Check. Michael Jackson? Check. Health care reform? Check. The D.C. license plate? Wait; this again?

That must have been what White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs was thinking during yesterday’s briefing with the press. As he dealt with the issues of the day, Gibbs was once again forced to field questions, this time from ABC News reporter Yunji de Nies, about why President Obama has so far opted not to place “Taxation Without Representation” tags on the presidential limousine. Gibbs got a little testy when asked about the issue:

“I think rather than change the logo around the license plate, the president is committed instead to changing the status of the District of Columbia,” said Gibbs. “I guess I would ask you to ask people in Washington whether they’d like to have that status changed, or that symbolism screwed onto the back of a limousine?”

A little later in the briefing, the question came up again, with a reporter inquiring as to what “changing the status of the District” meant. “Giving it voting rights, giving it statehood,” responded Gibbs. “I think the legislation is making its way through Congress, with the support of the President.”

Hmmmm. Two points here, Gibbsy. Did you just commit President Obama to supporting D.C. statehood? That’s a gutsy move, especially since Obama was more or less silent on the bill that would have merely granted the District a voting seat in the House. But we’ll take it. Second, unless a super-secret piece of legislation granting us statehood is stealthily working its way through Congress, you must be referring to the measure that only two weeks ago was shelved for the foreseeable future because the Democratic leadership couldn’t find a way to remove an amendment that would have done away with the city’s gun laws. So it’s not exactly still making its way through Congress, regardless of presidential support.

As we’ve mentioned before, the D.C. license plate doesn’t rank real high on our collective lists when it comes to District voting rights hopes. But for an administration that is as big on symbolism as this one — a speech on national security and civil liberties at the National Archives? An organic vegetable garden at the White House? Being the first sitting president to host a Seder? — we’re still perplexed at this insistent refusal to do what would take five minutes and probably not attract much attention, much less opposition. We do take Gibbs’ point, of course. We’d be much happier with action over symbolism. The problem is that we haven’t seen either come from the White House yet.