Bush to make homophobia a centerpiece of his campaign

The BBQ Pit
41

Okay, so let me say this up front.

My name is Morrigoon and I’m a Republican
(crowd: “Hi Morrigoon”)

I’m in that contingent of rep’s who are disenchanted with our current leader (not that we had THAT much faith in him from the get go), but have even LESS positive feelings about the democratic candidates, and so we keep voting these jokers in. Frankly, neither party has put up a desirable candidate in years. Dean creeps me out.

I’m in no way supporting what Bush is pushing, but let me at least offer up a different view. (never mind that we all know he’s against gay marriage… asshole).
I think the point of stating that at the beginning of promoting his program is not to say that the money will be spent thwarting gay marriage per se, but that the money from the program is intended to help people in straight marriages exclusively. Which sucks ass, but let’s be honest, promoting straight marriage doesn’t necessarily have to hurt gay marriage.

IMHO, since society is proven to be best served when people get married, why don’t we promote gay marriage as a way to bring stability into the lives of homosexual americans? Seems like a better answer to me. Legalize gay marriage, and then promote marital welfare for all.

And you damn demi-crats could ever come up with a decent candidate that didn’t whine like a 5 year old or smack me of being a tree-hugging hippie in pinstripes, I might actually vote for them for a change. In the meantime I’ll take my chances with the idiot in power.

42

Says the dumbass-rightist? If you honestly believe that this is nothing but pandering to the radical right base at the expense of gay people then you’re so fucked in the head that you’re beyond the pale.

I have no need of your translation, thanks, I said exactly what I meant. And the only doublespeak is the claim that the RNC engages in “legitimate criticism.” Anyone who isn’t a mind-numbed addlepate in thrall to the radical right ought to be able to remember enough of recent history to recall the disgusting lies and distortions vomited forth upon the public by the RNC attack squads in every national election for at least the last 30 years. All the while fronting candidates who mealy-mouth empty platitudes about how ugly modern politics has gotten while reaping the benefits of their surrogates’ underhanded and fundamentally dishonest attacks on the opposition.

43

If you honestly believe that this is anything but pandering to the radical right base at the expense of gay people then you’re so fucked in the head that you’re beyond the pale.

44

It’s not the victim at the end of the stream that bothers me, it’s the Republican selling umbrellas for $63,938.23

45

If this insane idea goes through I am thinking of applying to law school and specializing in Divorce.

46

This is a dumb idea. A colossal waste of cash for a silly sop to a group that wasn’t exactly lining up to get into the Dean meetup in the first place.

That said,

If that’s the case, the guy you’ll be looking to flame is named Otto, who had earlier expressed no small amount of outrage that the earlier, even more stupid but less expensive thing the Bush administration did relative to “protecting marriage” did not have as features the very things that are in this thing.

47

On purely hypothetical perfect-case scenario grounds for this plan, I would actually support it. If couples were able to learn vital tools to keep their relationship alive, I would call it a very good thing. Divorces stink. Even if it turns out for the best and everyone saw it coming, the process itself can be very, very painful indeed and anything which can improve a marriage to the point where it becomes unnecessary would be roses and chocolate.

But this ain’t a perfect world, so the whole thing is just whistlin’ “Dixie” while burnin’ dollar bills.

Priam
:mad: :o :wink: :stuck_out_tongue: :eek: :confused:

48

We have a winner: best obscure Animotion reference.

49

Oh, I’ve got some very bad news for you, beagle. We’re old. Really old. All animotion references are obscure. Cousin Brucie’s playing that stuff these days. :wink:

50

I understand the position of those who think that the policy seems, per se to be benign if ineffectual.

Context is everything, though, and the context of this initiative is an election campaign against a presumptive challenger who openly supports gay rights and same-sex civil unions. The subtext of the initiative is that Bush is “pro marriage” while Dean is a libertine with no moral values.

It isn’t what the initiative actually says overtly that’s offensive, it’s what is said covertly. This is an attempt to exploit anti-gay sentiment. It’s a deliberate appeal to bigotry without coming right out and saying it.

I hope nobody believes for a second that Bush actually gives two shits about the relative marital “health” of poor people. It’s simply moral grandstanding.

“I care about marriage and Dean wants to destroy it.”

That’s the message.

51

There’s pretty much only one Animotion reference…

52

Divorces stink, no doubt. Broken marriages hurt children, no doubt.

So does alcoholism. So does heroin addiction. So does urban decay, and rural isolation, and techno-emigration, and rising personal and governmental debt.

So why is marriage going to be one of the central issues that the Bush Administration is going to focus upon at this time?

I’ll fucking tell you why, it’s because it’s the one tail which the Republicans might be able to pin on the Howard Dean-or-hopefully-other donkey. If you can’t see the cynical origins behind this virtually unique Republican attempt at progressive social engineering, then you are totally fucking blind.

And if you aren’t cynical about it, then you will find yourself surprised when you see marriage rallies, and faith-based marriage counseling grants proposed, and Marriage Protection Weeks, but you find that the Bush FY 2005 budget proposal revokes every promised dime for the programs once the bastards are safely ensconsed in their lordly seat of power for another four years. Leave no marriage behind.

Hey, if the shit works as promised I will be simultaneously surprised, amused, and even pleased if they leave out the homophobic rhetoric. But, because I’ve actually observed how these people operate rather than acted as the forlorn hope for their propaganda machine, I know it by the term which used to be bandied about with so much bitterness back when another guy was running the show: triangulation.

We’ll see if Bush even bothers to deliver you anything at all, but I can promise you the buck stops at the border of “compassionate homophobia,” and no further.

53

Republicans are for fewer economic restrictions and more social restrictions.

Libertarians are for less government.

Somebody needs a program, I think.:wink:

54

But Republicans used to be for smaller government. This has changed as the neocons and the Neanderthal Religious Right took over. As I said elsewhere, Barry Goldwater’s ashes are spinning in their urn.

55

I’m almost afraid to check the news tomorrow morning and see what new gov’t program Bush is going to propose. Amnesty for illegal aliens, sending men to Mars, paying people to get married… Is he trying to lose my vote?

But lets not disparage our cousins, the Neanderthals, in the process. As far as we can tell, they had a very small government. :slight_smile:

56

Trying to suggest that this action is homophobic is just idiotic, as has been pointed out.

I know y’all want to paint Bush as a homophobe. For all I know he is. You can’t tell from this. It doesn’t do anything against homosexuals.

Doma. That’s homophobic. “Don’t ask don’t tell.” That’s homophobic. Clinton signed both. For all I know he’s not a homophobe.

But, if we’re talking about actual actions against homosexuals, actual legislation, correct me if I’m wrong, I don’t think Bush has actually done anything.

Bush is clearly trying to cater to his social conservative constituency with this, though. There’s little doubt of that. Clearly the social conservative agenda is actively homophobic, and clearly he can’t afford to piss these people off. He has to do something for them.

As misguided as they are, they at least have a good premise at heart as regards marriage. They seem to be in favor of stable marriages that are good places to raise children.

So, rather than put down homosexuals, Bush has chosen to cater to this group by promoting such marriages.

That said, I tend to agree with the sentiment that marriage counseling isn’t really the purview of the government despite the societal benefits.

But I might be wrong.

Recently my wife had a child. At the hospital we were literally forced to watch this video about shaken baby syndrome. It seems some numb nuts don’t know that violently shaking infants will damage them, and they require education.

It was a pretty horrible and depressing video. I resented being compelled to watch it and sign an affidavit that I did so. I didn’t think it was the government’s purview.

I expressed this sentiment to the nurse. She told me that she could understand that. She also told me that shaken baby syndrome was a real problem. They would see it quite a bit. Apparently shaken baby syndrome is down 75% IIRC in PA since they started compelling people to watch this video. Since these kids often die or are brain damaged for life, I can’t help but wonder if maybe my resentment is misplaced. Maybe I should be pissed that we need to show this video rather than at the people showing it.

By that same token, if this legislation can prevent Britney Spears from saying “oops I did it again,” maybe it’s not all bad. Maybe if they’re telling people “look stupid getting married doesn’t mean you can rape and beat your wife,” and drives the point home, it might not be such a terrible thing. Maybe if it counsels people on basic economics of starting a household and on respect for your partner, it might not be so terrible.

Never underestimate the number of truly incredibly stupid people out there. It is maybe possible that done properly, this might be a good thing. It might avert disasters.

I personally doubt it, though. Sounds like bullshit to me.

But maybe we are so stupid that this is a good idea. After all, we need the government to tell us that shaking infants is bad. You think some idiot that would do that couldn’t use some marriage counseling?

57

Well, Diogenes is losing the last marbles he has, somebody please give him an airtight bag.

The #1 predictor of “failure” in life, e.g. drug use, crime, family violence is not having a dad home, shouldn’t the government promote dads being home?

Let’s say Bush IS promoting heterosexual marriage as the only healthy marriage, so what? he is dong it up front and shows some consistency (even if wrong), unlike Dean who is one flip-flop from becoming a Republican. Is he “ramming his morality down out throats”, yes, as much as any president/congress/supreme court would if they approved gay “marriage”.

If you don’t like him, just don’t vote for him, isn’t that the American way? or are you afraid of democracy?

Why is FAVOURING something equal to hating the opposite?

Coming from a country where many people feel arfraid when they see a police officer, where $10 bribes (sometimes even less) can get you off the hook, where 15% of the population doesn’t eat every day, etc., I find it pathetic when americans complain about how hard their life is.

58

Wouldn’t this be an extremely strong argument in favor of giving homosexual marriages (male ones, anyway) full legal recognition?

59

I didn’t know that. Congratulations. :slight_smile:

60

This is the second one. He’s spreading miniature Scyllas throughout central Pennsylvania in a secret stealth mission to spread conservatism, sheeplove, and fear of Nazi groundhogs.