Governor Bush exposed his homophobic colors today while disingenuously declining to endorse an anti-gay marriage amendment.
'…not necessary yet?" What the fuck is that supposed to mean? I’ll tell you what it means. He’s saying that as long as staes don’t legalize same-sex marriage then we don’t need an amendment. If states do legalize gay marriage, then it’s time to get out the crayons and mark up the Constitution.
As to the remark that marriage is “between a man and a woman,” I notice he gives no rationale or explanation of this remark, no doubt because it is derived solely from his mush-brained, shallow, fundie views and not from any serious legal thought or theory.
Anyway, I’m sending a hearty “Fuck you” out to Shrub and his mealy-mouthed, back-handed “compassionate conservatism.”
I hope his daughters turn out to be lesbian, Wiccan vegans.
I dunno. Maybe because I’m an old, old woman, but this made me think how far we’ve come, that the government could even possibly be discussing gay marriage, rather than just laughing out loud at it. I’m pessimistic, I just don’t think it will happen, not in my lifetime. But I remember the '60s, pre-Stonewall, when Nice People didn’t even discuss such things, and I find it heartening that Nice People do indeed discuss this.
I think Clinton was wrong, and that he was pandering somewhat to fundies, but there is a qualitative diffence between saying that a state doesn’t have to recognize gay marriage and saying that it’s not allowed to recognize gay marriage.
Sure, but you’re working from the mistaken assumption that Clinton was a far-left liberal to begin with – a notion that falls apart when you remember he gave us the cockamamie “Don’t ask, don’t tell” nonsense.
Umm…where am I making that assumption rjung? I don’t consider Clinton (when considered in total) to be a classic liberal. He was in the DLC, for starters. He got to be president by appealing to the moderate voters of both major parties.
I do note that DtC does not consider Clinton “mush brained” and “shallow” with fundie views…even though he apparently took pretty near the same stance on the issue in 1996.
What a shock! President Bush disapproves of gay marriage! I can’t fucking believe it!!! What is the world coming to when a mainstream Republican espouses such sentiments!?
Did you read my response, beagle? They are fundamentally different issues.
FWIW, there were many things I disagreed with Clinton about. I’m not a Democrat, I’m an independent leftie. I never liked “Don’t ask, don’t tell.” I disagreed with him on the death penalty, and I really didn’t like it that he sicced the feds on California after it passed its medical marijuana law.
BC is a Southern Baptist but I think his public views on gay marriage were based more on cynical political pragmatism than any religious beliefs. Clinton was far too intelligent to be a sincere fundamentalist. GWB, by contrast, is completely unhampered by intellect and swallows that stuff whole.
That’s not to say that Clinton deserves a pass for trying to obstruct gay rights, just that his motives were different. I’ll send a 'fuick you" out to him too, if that makes you happy.
No president in his (political) right mind would sign anything so controversial without needing to. As long as there are no states that legalize gay marriages then a constitutional amendment isn’t necessary. By signing it, he alienates the entire GLBT community of the United States, but appeases the radical right (which is much bigger than the GLBT community, of course, but it’s not time to write off the queers just yet, if he doesn’t have to); by not signing it - with the above qualification, of course, including the statement that he would, you know, if it were actually necessary - he manages to appease both the GLBT folks and the right.
Sadly, it’s hardly the right thing to do, but it is - most assuredly - the most politically expedient and smart thing to do.
It’s not just that he opposes gay marriage but that he apparently would support a Constitutional amendment against it if it ever becomes “necessary.”
There’s a difference between him just saying he doesn’t like it (that’s just ordinary, fundie stupidity) and saying that it may become necessary to change the fucking US Constitution to prevent any state from ever legalizing it.
I’ve never been a big fan of Clinton and I to used to criticize him heavily for his lame gays in the military solution. That is until I realized the opposition he was facing. He was the first democratic president since the 70’s and had a lot of plans. Ramming homosexuals down the throats of the military might have cost him other programs he was concerned with. Sure, it was an unsatisfactory solution, but it was better then nothing.
To the best of my knowledge G.W. Bush has not been a governor for quite some time and is in fact the President of the United States. Calling him Governor Bush makes you appear to be just as much a jackass as all those people who type Algore, Klinton, or Shrub.
“Governor” is the only political office that GWB has ever been elected to. Even though he’s no longer the governor of Texas, it’s still a courtesy to refer to him by his old title.
