Bush Upsets Some Supporters....

[dr. what]

President Is Urged to Press Ban on Same-Sex Marriage

By Jim VandeHei and Michael A. Fletcher
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, January 19, 2005; Page A11

President Bush came under fire from some social conservatives yesterday for saying he will not aggressively lobby the Senate to pass a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage during his second term.

Prominent leaders such as Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, and many rank-and-file Bush supporters inundated the White House with phone calls to protest Bush's comments in an interview published Sunday in The Washington Post. "Clearly there is concern" among conservatives, Perkins said. "I believe there is no more important issue for the president's second term than the preservation of marriage."

Tom Minnery of Focus on the Family said, "I am sure [White House] phone lines are lighting up all over."

In the Post interview, Bush, for the first time, said senators have made it clear to him the amendment has no chance of passing unless courts strike down the federal Defense of Marriage Act, which protects states from recognizing same-sex marriages conducted elsewhere. Challenges to the act are pending in state courts from California to Florida.

"It was not articulated that way in the campaign," Perkins complained.

Social conservatives who helped stoke record turnout for Bush in the 2004 election expressed concern that he is dropping the issue he passionately touted during the campaign now that he has been reelected. "The president is willing to spend his political capital on Social Security reform, but the nation is greatly conflicted on that issue," said Minnery, vice president of public policy for Focus on the Family. "The nation is united on marriage. The president's leadership is desperately needed." Minnery and Perkins called the White House to complain about Bush's position.
--------------------------------------------------

>Does Nelson laugh<

Ha-Ha!

[BoredShirtless]

"I believe there is no more important issue for the president's second term than the preservation of marriage."

What a fucking idiot.

[Beowulf]

I guess this shows exactly how political his support of the act was, as opposed to actual values he feels like pushing.

[Howedar]

I'm not sure if I find that comforting or disconcerting. It's great that he's not going to push for the ban, but it's disgusting that he'd willingly legislate away someone else's rights to get his own ass reelected.

[Lord Poe]

And you all label Bush as an idiot. He rode the religious-right commuter train right over Kerry and right into the White House. Now he could give less of a shit about them.

[BoredShirtless]

And you all label Bush as an idiot. He rode the religious-right commuter train right over Kerry and right into the White House. Now he could give less of a shit about them.

He's still an idiot, this proves he's an even more dishonest idiot. Anyway, this doesn't mean he doesn't give a shit about them. It's more likely Cheney talked him out of it.

[Kamakazie Sith]

And you all label Bush as an idiot. He rode the religious-right commuter train right over Kerry and right into the White House. Now he could give less of a shit about them.

He's still an idiot, this proves he's an even more dishonest idiot. Anyway, this doesn't mean he doesn't give a shit about them. It's more likely Cheney talked him out of it.

Isn't it interesting that when you consider what it would have took for Kerry to have won he would have had to be dishonest as well?

[BoredShirtless]

Isn't it interesting that when you consider what it would have took for Kerry to have won he would have had to be dishonest as well?

I guess the words "even more" flew over your head, huh.

[RedImperator]

Interesting interview on NPR today with some people who've talked to Bush administration insiders. Bush is definitely a fundie personally, but it's NEVER been a big part of his political agenda. Before 9/11, he was concerned with taxes and education. Afterwards, add neoconservatism. But social issues, he apparently has his opinion, but they're not important enough for him to spend political capital on them.

Another interesting tidbit: Laura Bush apparently has a big role in moderating him socially. Lately, so have the twins. You notice the Marriage Amendment is being left to quietly fade into the background right when Bush is at the height of his power and influence--the longer he waits, the more of a lame duck he becomes. Similarly, no noise about Roe v. Wade, even though now would be the time to make a move against it if he wanted to. Sure, he could try to appoint justices to SCOTUS to overturn it, but without preparing the public for it, he's looking at a huge backlash against his own party--60% of the country wants abortion to be legal, after all. Bush is, by all appearances, telling the fundies what they want to hear in public and then following the advice of his family, all more moderate than him, in deciding on what his legislative agenda should be.

No real argument here, just a fact I thought was interesting.

[Boyish-Tigerlilly]

It seems to me that, in a way, Bush was smart. He fooled all the R-righters and did what he wanted in the end anyway.

Not that that's moral.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Isn't it interesting that when you consider what it would have took for Kerry to have won he would have had to be dishonest as well?

I guess the words "even more" flew over your head, huh.

Even more? LOL either you're dishonest or you're not. There's no 1-10 scale, dumbass.

[Kamakazie Sith]

Isn't it interesting that when you consider what it would have took for Kerry to have won he would have had to be dishonest as well?

I guess the words "even more" flew over your head, huh.

Besides, that wasn't what I was trying to say.

Basically in order to be successful in politics you pretty much have to lie your ass off at some time or another.

[frigidmagi]

Why the surprise? This is politics and Bush wheter you like him or hate him, is a politician with a decent (yes I know that using that word is somewhat ironic) skill level in his chosen profession.

[BoredShirtless]

Isn't it interesting that when you consider what it would have took for Kerry to have won he would have had to be dishonest as well?

I guess the words "even more" flew over your head, huh.

Even more? LOL either you're dishonest or you're not.

No shit, dumbo.

There's no 1-10 scale, dumbass.

Yes there is, dumbo. In general, nuns are less dishonest then politicians.

[BoredShirtless]

Basically in order to be successful in politics you pretty much have to lie your ass off at some time or another.

Thanks for the heads up. Clearly, the phrase "Bush is even more dishonest" didn't register with you properly. The point is he is an even bigger shitbag for lying about this; proving he's even more dishonest then before. It's got nothing to do with your Kerry red herring or the yes/no property of the question "is he dishonest?"

[Howedar]

Even more? LOL either you're dishonest or you're not. There's no 1-10 scale, dumbass.

What a curious perspective. Perhaps you could justify it.

[Alex Moon]

I'm not sure if I find that comforting or disconcerting. It's great that he's not going to push for the ban, but it's disgusting that he'd willingly legislate away someone else's rights to get his own ass reelected.

The FMA had a snowballs chace in hell of passing, and Bush knew it. By pushing for the FMA before the elections, Bush actually managed to defuse the issue. If it had been postponed until after the elections, then the senate would have deliberated this with the knowlege that similar amendments were voted into law in 11 states. That's a lot of popular support, and many senators would have felt pressure to support the FMA to protect their own jobs. Now Bush can tell the religious right that he already tried and failed, and that they should focus on winning state by state.

[Stormbringer]

President Bush came under fire from some social conservatives yesterday for saying he will not aggressively lobby the Senate to pass a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage during his second term.

So it was all a political ploy? Say it ain't so. Say it ain't so.


I can't say as that suprises me. It's was a useful thing to push for to help mobilize a faction of his supporters and no more. Even with the GOP victory in the Senate he doesn't have a chance of passing it and they're not likely to waste public face or capital trying to. If nothing else it'll give the Democrats a heck of leap if they (and a good number of sane.... I mean moderate Republicans) defeat it again.

[Illuminatus Primus]

Well whatever Bush is, he's a consumate politician. The religious Right at worst is not going to come out to the polls as much, but they are never going to go vote for the Democrats, so why beat your head against the wall for them?

[Kamakazie Sith]

Yes there is, dumbo. In general, nuns are less dishonest then politicians.

Yeah, your right.

However, what I was initially trying to say is in order for Kerry to win he would have had to be more dishonest than he was. I'm not sure what you thought I was saying.

[Howedar]

Perhaps you could explain what "either you're dishonest or you're not. There's no 1-10 scale, dumbass" in light of your apparent belief regarding Kerry.

[BoredShirtless]

However, what I was initially trying to say is in order for Kerry to win he would have had to be more dishonest than he was. I'm not sure what you thought I was saying.

Why do you say that? I think if he'd had defended himself sooner against the Shit Boats, and layed out his policies, he'd have won...

[Stormbringer]

Well whatever Bush is, he's a consumate politician. The religious Right at worst is not going to come out to the polls as much, but they are never going to go vote for the Democrats, so why beat your head against the wall for them?

Bush is good, or at least has good advice that's for sure. And you're right the Religious Right is not going to be changing parties any time soon. Not to mention Bush is on term dos now and is out in four years. So it's not like it matters too much.

[Stormbringer]

However, what I was initially trying to say is in order for Kerry to win he would have had to be more dishonest than he was. I'm not sure what you thought I was saying.

Why do you say that? I think if he'd had defended himself sooner against the Shit Boats, and layed out his policies, he'd have won...

I think honest or not he wouldn't have won. But him either lying more or simply avoiding the sort of "technical truths" might have helped.

The simple fact though was he ran an inept campaign. He didn't convey his message, he turned off a lot of potential converts with his attitude and BS, and he generally didn't respond to Bush well. Not just on the attacks on the personal nature but overall. Kerry just blundered into Bush's predefined avenues and got clobbered. Rather than playing to his strengths, admittedly small, he tried to challenge Bush's.

[Chmee]

I've discovered the source of all this .....

Bush daughter's Satanist agenda revealed!