# The Younger Gens Bush: Thank God for Family Values **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 28, 2005, 5:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813 "2005-09-28T05:50:41Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![ShibbOleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@ShibbOleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShibbOleth)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/101 "2005-09-29T12:38:17Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > If Bush is really back off the wagon, it’ll show directly soon enough. If he had a momentary relapse, so what? Yeah, wasn’t Nixon drunk quite a bit? I recall a while back where he got a call from Kissinger in the late at night and he was too incoherent to take the call. And I wouldn’t be surprised if some of Clinton’s “excesses” were alcohol related (although no data to support this assertion). Grant was allegedly drunk throughout his administration and he did just fine. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/102 "2005-09-29T12:53:41Z")
I am going to do something strange here. I am going to defend Bush :eek: When it comes to George W Bush and whether his kids or relatives are drinking, it is not something he can really control as a parent. My parents couldn’t stop me from the occasional binge either. Every kid, when they hit a certain age, is going to do dumb things from time to time. It’s part of growing up and testing parental limits. Just because Bush is president, that doesn’t give him some sort of magical uber daddy powers to control the kids. All he can do is lecture, yell, scold and all the other things people do when kiddo come home smashed. The kids are still gonna do what they are gonna do. Eventually they outgrow it (usually). It’s normal. ---
**Author:** ![plnnr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/7ea924/32.png) [@plnnr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/plnnr)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/103 "2005-09-29T12:55:12Z")
> [@ShibbOleth](#): > > Grant was allegedly drunk throughout his administration and he did just fine. The Grant Administration is generally regarded as one of, if not the most, corrupt in US history. There is agreement that Grant personally didn’t enrich himself, but his Cabinet and administrative officers were as crooked as the day is long. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 12:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/104 "2005-09-29T12:55:31Z")
> [@eleanorigby](#): > > And yes, for every Bush relation, there is probably a Democratic counterpart–that is NOT the point. The point is that the Dems don’t go all righteous and morally rigid and pretend to be above the pale. Sure it’s the point. I can think of a Democratic politician who committed to running “the most ethical Administration in history”, and who is - by the standards of this thread - a cocaine-abusing rapist and murderer. His co-President - again, by the standards of the OP - is a corrupt lesbian, liar, and paranoid schizophrenic. And Kerry ran and hid in Viet Nam, and what’s-his-name didn’t get his legs and arm blown off by the Viet Cong but by being stupid, and so on, and so on. if you are gonna say “accusations are enough”, then by golly accusations are gonna be enough when it’s your boy/girl/whatever on the chopping block. And if it is bad when I do it or the Swift Boat Veterans do it or [MoveOn.org](http://MoveOn.org) does it, then by God it is just as bad when you do it. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![ShibbOleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@ShibbOleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShibbOleth)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/105 "2005-09-29T13:25:00Z")
> [@plnnr](#): > > The Grant Administration is generally regarded as one of, if not the most, corrupt in US history. There is agreement that Grant personally didn’t enrich himself, but his Cabinet and administrative officers were as crooked as the day is long. Sorry, left off the “sarcasm” smiley there. ---
**Author:** ![eleanorigby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ee7513/32.png) [@eleanorigby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eleanorigby)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/106 "2005-09-29T13:45:39Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Sure it’s the point. > > Regards, > Shodan Words fail me. I don’t know what exactly you are blathering on about, but this thread is about the supposedly apparent poor parenting skills and noted hypocrisy of the leader of the party that claims the moral high ground in regards to family. Perhaps you have something to contribute to that. **Pinkmarabou** --I love your new “sig”. Now, let’s decide on the appropriate ritual to worship One so worthy. I’m thinking belly shots… ---
**Author:** ![UncleBeer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/977dab/32.png) [@UncleBeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBeer)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 1:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/107 "2005-09-29T13:55:07Z")
> [@ShibbOleth](#): > > Yeah, wasn’t Nixon drunk quite a bit? Yeah. Nixon liked to have a few drinks. Also, by several accounts he couldn’t hold his liquor. It took only a couple small drinks to affect him greatly. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/108 "2005-09-29T14:11:39Z")
crap. There are, indeed, some bad parents out there. And yes, many folks in prison had bad parents. And I have also seen many examples of “bad parenting causing children’s problems with the law” (as in the woman who’s family put her on the street as a hooker when she was 14, to bring in $$ for the family, ended up on drugs, no surprise etc for example). but. Substance abuse is a medical condition, not the result of bad parenting. Noelle is (apparently) some one w/a serious substance abuse problem. Jury is still out on the rest of the clan, but if underage drinking (and getting caught at it) is seriously being bandied about here as evidence of bad parenting - my corner in the “liberal but not a fucking lunatic” section is going to be really really lonely. I’ll admit to chuckling when the BUsh twins got busted. Much in the same way I chuckled when I drove by and saw my best friend get a speeding ticket on Woodward Ave. (folks from around that area will recognize what long odds that would be) but to bust their chops over “family values” vs. young adults getting busted for common young adult-like behavior or a medical condition? fuck that. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/109 "2005-09-29T14:15:04Z")
> [@Shodan](#): > > Sure it’s the point. No, I don’t think comparisons to Democrats are relevant for their point, as I understand their point to be. As I understand it, their argument is: [ol] [li]Republicans advertise themselves as the party that is focused on “family values;”[/li][li]They claim that these family values are essential to raising traditionally valued and successful children, or, at least, the _absence_ of these family values results in grave risk that children will be raised lacking some critical values, skills, abilities, or morals;[/li][li]The leader of the Republican party, and his brother, both have families with children that have flouted the law to greater or lesser degree;[/li][li]Therefore, the leader of the Republican party and his brother are hypocrites because they either did not practice the “family values” which guarantee parenting success -OR- the “family values” they preach have nothing to do with parental success and they know it.[/li][/ol] If I’ve captured the argument correctly, it’s irrelevant what the Democrats may be accused of; they are not the ones advancing a “family values” platform in the first place. Am I close to the mark, or have I built a strawman, guys? ---
**Author:** ![UncleBeer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/977dab/32.png) [@UncleBeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UncleBeer)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/110 "2005-09-29T14:25:24Z")
That may very well be, Bricker. But since item number one in your list is false, the entire argument falls apart. The Democrats have blathered on as much about family values during election cycles as have the Republicans. ---
**Author:** ![ShibbOleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@ShibbOleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShibbOleth)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/111 "2005-09-29T14:26:33Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > -OR- the “family values” they preach have nothing to do with parental success and they know it. > If I’ve captured the argument correctly, it’s irrelevant what the Democrats may be accused of; they are not the ones advancing a “family values” platform in the first place. > > Am I close to the mark, or have I built a strawman, guys? I think you’re close here. It’s that the current GOP crop seem to laud their moral superiority – how they’re going to return America to a better time, when family values were important, but perhaps they’re so busy with other issues that the kids are out getting in trouble. For me, it’s the simplicity of “God, Family, Country” is often not that simple. While their may be some Schadenfreude here, I try to stay away from gloating over other people’s problems, whether they be children or adults. ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/112 "2005-09-29T14:33:58Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No, I don’t think comparisons to Democrats are relevant for their point, as I understand their point to be. > > As I understand it, their argument is: > > [ol] > [li]Republicans advertise themselves as the party that is focused on “family values;”[/li][li]They claim that these family values are essential to raising traditionally valued and successful children, or, at least, the _absence_ of these family values results in grave risk that children will be raised lacking some critical values, skills, abilities, or morals;[/li][li]The leader of the Republican party, and his brother, both have families with children that have flouted the law to greater or lesser degree;[/li][li]Therefore, the leader of the Republican party and his brother are hypocrites because they either did not practice the “family values” which guarantee parenting success -OR- the “family values” they preach have nothing to do with parental success and they know it.[/li][/ol] > > If I’ve captured the argument correctly, it’s irrelevant what the Democrats may be accused of; they are not the ones advancing a “family values” platform in the first place. > > Am I close to the mark, or have I built a strawman, guys? Bricker I think you summed it up brilliantly, and I note you do not say you support it. You are just doing us the favor of clarifying. Thank You. BTW, what is your opinion on this? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 2:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/113 "2005-09-29T14:41:10Z")
The more irksome thing to me than the substance abuse problems (which are largely hereditary) is the pattern of complete unaccountability in the Bush family. Even before the twins and the Jeb spawn, Dubya and his brothers were already having strings pulled for them and never having to face any consequences for reckless or crimonal actions. Shrub was an AWOL drunk and probably a cokehead who was above all the rules and does anyone remember his sleazy brother Neil in the Savings and Loan scandal? The biggest act of larceny in US history and Neily never did a day in jail. Jeb had a loan fraud problem as well and the taxpayers had to pay for it. The latest generation is following right in their fathers’ footsteps. Jeb’s asshole son who broke into his girlfriends house and attacked her father is a perfect example. No, the parents are not responsible for the behavior of their grown children, but they _can_ be ripped for never holding the little shits accountable when they fuck up. The Bush’s are a family which honestly believes that the rules don’t apply to them. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 2:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/114 "2005-09-29T14:43:43Z")
I’ll grant you the one about the break in, but the rest of the stories, the kids did indeed get busted and got the typical treatment for that offense. I didn’t see anything unusual w/Bush twins sentences or Noelle’s. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 2:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/115 "2005-09-29T14:52:32Z")
> [@UncleBeer](#): > > That may very well be, Bricker. But since item number one in your list is false, the entire argument falls apart. The Democrats have blathered on as much about family values during election cycles as have the Republicans. Well, no party or politician will come out _against_ family values; you might as well admit you hate Mom and apple pie while you’re at it. Buit I think their point #1 is an arguably fair one, because there is a difference between the commonly-understand themes offered by the Democrats and by the Republicans on what precisely constitutes “family values” and what sorts of behavior flout those expectations. As a very broad-brush sort of example, consider a monogamous same-sex marriage or civil union couple raising a child. That generally falls under the sort of umbrella that Democrats would consider as exemplifying family values, but which the Republicans would probaby reject as inimical to family values. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 3:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/116 "2005-09-29T15:38:20Z")
No “probably” about it. The term “family values” as used by the modern GOP is code for the Christian Right agenda, including anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-stem-cell-research, anti-evolution, anti-non-missionary-position-sex policies. ---
**Author:** ![ShibbOleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/848f3c/32.png) [@ShibbOleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ShibbOleth)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/117 "2005-09-29T15:40:18Z")
> [@wring](#): > > I’ll grant you the one about the break in, but the rest of the stories, the kids did indeed get busted and got the typical treatment for that offense. I didn’t see anything unusual w/Bush twins sentences or Noelle’s. I doubt that the Bush twins was far from the norm for that, but is community service, or whatever Noelle got for forging prescriptions, with a prior record, a normal sentence for her offence? (I really don’t know and am just asking, but it does seem lenient compared to what someone might get for a small pot or coke bust around here) ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/118 "2005-09-29T15:46:50Z")
> [@jrfranchi](#): > > Bricker I think you summed it up brilliantly, and I note you do not say you support it. You are just doing us the favor of clarifying. Thank You. > > BTW, what is your opinion on this? My opinion is that there are some flaws in the argument, both factual and logical. The factual flaws first: With respect to Barbara and Jenna Bush, I don’t regard their “crimes” as particularly serious. While the acts are nothing admirable, the fact of the matter is that many, many college students drink while underage, and use someone else’s ID to get into coveted clubs or bars. The twins, through no fault of their own, are much more highly visible than would average girls of their age. It was certainly foolish and an exercise of poor judgement to do what they did, but it’s not an sort of evidence of poor parenting. Nor does any reasonable proponent of “family values” suggest that adhering to the principles of “family values” – whatever their specifics might be – will inoculate the family against an incident like this. In short: I don’t agree that Barbara and Jenna’s “crimes” are any sort of evidence of hypocrisy or poor parenting. As was discussed above, the inclusion of Laura’s teenage auto accident in this list goes beyond the pale. All indications are that it was simply an accident - one that arose from no criminal intent whatsoever. I agree that Noelle Bush is fairly characterized as a criminal. While her criminal acts arise from addiction, the fact of the matter is that in this society, although we recognize that addiction is a special problem, we do not permit it to excuse criminal acts. And while a “lewd act” in a parked car between a sixteen year old boy and a seventeen year old girl is not something I regard as a serious crime, drunk in public and resisting arrest crosses the line. The problem with this analysis is that these charges (assuming the truth of our theory) can be levelled at Jeb Bush, but not at the President. It’s absurd to contend that an uncle is somehow responsible for how his nieces and nephews are raised. So on a fair application of the theory to the facts, the criticism is valid only against Jeb Bush. Now turning to the logic flaw: I think we may all agree that the GOP’s “Family Values” platform is not what we might call rigorously defined. That is, “Family Values,” is a sort of nebulous catch-all phrase, the use of which presumably evokes certain commonly-understood themes among those that hear it. There are bumper stickers that read, “Hate is NOT a family value.” This is presumably intended to characterize the GOP’s version of “family values” as against homosexuals, and further to argue that this misplaced. This is a fair criticism – I think it’s very well understood that someone advancing the GOP’s version of “family values” is implicitly inveighing against homosexual conduct. Yet you would be hard-pressed to point to the definitive list of “family values” to discover the specific rules condeming gays. The argument advanced above takes advantage of that lack of specificity. It’s both a strawman argument and an irrelevant conclusion. In my summary, it relates to point #2. Even if we assume that, in fact, the GOP claims that “family values” are important in avoiding such outcomes, they certainly don’t claim that they are _guaranteed_ to produce that result. As an analogy, consider a prominent safety expert who crusades for mandatory seatbelt laws. One of his children is killed in a car accident despite wearing a seatbelt. We may not conclude that his seatbelt argument is flawed simply because it failed to protect his child. Similarly, we cannot conclude that the GOP’s push for “family values” is flawed merely because a visible proponent of that push has children that are criminal. Let’s take it a step further. Suppose the seatbelt expert’s child was killed in an accident while NOT wearing his seatbelt. Can we then conclude that the seatbelt expert’s push to wear seatbelts is wrong? Again, no. The truth or falsity of his claims have nothing to do with that result. Now let’s take it even further. Suppose, after the accident, it became clear that the seatbelt expert, despite his public crusade, never encouraged his own children to wear seatbelts. Does THIS invalidate the truth of his claims regarding seatbelt safety? Of course not. It does, however, fairly invite criticism of him as a hypocrite. But even that is questionable in our real-life example. What tenet. precisely, of “family values” is Jeb Bush violating with his children? What is he urging others to do that he himself is not doing? So that’s the logical flaw in the argument. Hope that helps. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 3:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/119 "2005-09-29T15:54:35Z")
> [@ShibbOleth](#): > > I doubt that the Bush twins was far from the norm for that, but is community service, or whatever Noelle got for forging prescriptions, with a prior record, a normal sentence for her offence? (I really don’t know and am just asking, but it does seem lenient compared to what someone might get for a small pot or coke bust around here) IIRC, part of Noelle’s sentence was going to a treatment facility, and FME (not necessarily Florida), that’s pretty common. And it appeared at the time that it was certainly permissable under FL law. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 29, 2005, 3:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813/120 "2005-09-29T15:58:12Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > No “probably” about it. The term “family values” as used by the modern GOP is code for the Christian Right agenda, including anti-gay, anti-abortion, anti-stem-cell-research, anti-evolution, anti-non-missionary-position-sex policies. > [@Bricker](#): > > I think we may all agree that the GOP’s “Family Values” platform is not what we might call rigorously defined. That is, “Family Values,” is a sort of nebulous catch-all phrase, the use of which presumably evokes certain commonly-understood themes among those that hear it. There are bumper stickers that read, “Hate is NOT a family value.” This is presumably intended to characterize the GOP’s version of “family values” as against homosexuals, and further to argue that this misplaced. This is a fair criticism – I think it’s very well understood that someone advancing the GOP’s version of “family values” is implicitly inveighing against homosexual conduct. Yet you would be hard-pressed to point to the definitive list of “family values” to discover the specific rules condeming gays. **ElvisL1ves** takes advantage of the lack of specifics I mention above to advance an argument that I think is a strawman in some respects. In other respects, he’s right, and in still others, I think the issue’s in the air. We are hampered, as I say, by the lack of any specific definition for “family values.” Were there an official list, we could easily resolve these charges. BRICKER: Point out the objection to stem cell research! It’s not on the family values list. ELVISL1VES: Right there. Number 13 on the list. See it? BRICKER: Ah, yes. My mistake. Or… BRICKER: OK, then point out the objection to evolution on the family values list. ELVISL1VES: My mistake. It’s not there after all. BRICKER: No problem. Of course, that exchange will never happen, and it’s not simply because **ElvisL1ves** is loathe to admit error under any circumstances whatsoever. It’s an impossible exchange because “family values” is simply not rigourously defined. However, my personal opinion is that the following charges are characterized as follows: [ul] [li]anti-gay – YES[/li][li]anti-abortion – MAYBE; certainly the GOP is anti-abortion but the association between this issue and “family values” is weak[/li][li]anti-stem-cell-research – NO; no unanimity within the GOP and no close association between stem cell research and “family values”[/li][li]anti-evolution – NO; no unanimity within the GOP and no close association between creationism and “family values”[/li][li]anti-non-missionary-position-sex – NO, and no real debunking necessary [/li][/ul] [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-younger-gens-bush-thank-god-for-family-values/323813.md?page=7)