Bush said to back limit on gays

[Freddie Stubbs]

Support expected for constitutional marriage measure
By Alan Elsner, Reuters, 2/20/2004

WASHINGTON -- President Bush's political director has told a group of prominent conservatives that the president would soon publicly endorse a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage.

Bay Buchanan, sister of former Republican presidential candidate Pat Buchanan, said she was one of several conservatives who heard the message from political director Karl Rove two weeks ago.

"We were told by Karl Rove that the president would support the constitutional amendment -- not just that he would endorse it but also that he would fight for it," Buchanan said.

Rove told an alliance of conservatives known as the Arlington Group in a telephone conversation that Bush would back the amendment put forward by Representative Marilyn Musgrave, Republican of Colorado, and that his statement would come "sooner rather than later."

more: http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2004/02/20/bush_said_to_back_limit_on_gays/

[Bertha Venation]

1. I'm fed to the teeth with this and about to implode.

So I'm sorry that I'm going to try to remove my voice from this subject today.

It's all just too fucking unbelievable to bear.

[skippysmom]

2. I said it yesterday, and I'll say it again:

Just come out and say it, Georgie! Say you support this amendment and show your true homophobic colors.

Compassionate conservatism my ass!

[Bridget Burke]

3. It's not only that this is Wrong....

The idiotic Constitutional amendment, I mean...

But, yesterday, lots of valuable space in the Houston Chronicle was taken up by two prominent articles expressing the "President's" & his 1st Lady's shock, dismay, etc., on the topic of gay marriage.

Space that would have been better devoted to the non-existent WMD's, the non-existent Bush military records, the stymied 9/11 investigation, the deficit, the ongoing Enron scandals.....

[Freddie Stubbs]

6. You can thank the City of San Fransisco and MA's highest court

for bringing this issue to the forefront. Karl Rove couldn't have planned it better.

[Pale Blue Dot]

7. Yeah. They were so stupid!

...For giving people their basic human rights.

[Freddie Stubbs]

19. Will it be worth a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage

or another four years of Bush is the White House?

[Pale Blue Dot]

21. There will not be another 4 years of Bush.

And there will not be an amendment. Contrary to what the Bush Administration thinks, this is not an issue that will cause people to forget the economy, the war, the lying....

[Freddie Stubbs]

22. The CA law banning same-sex marriages was passed by voters

less than four years ago. California is hardly a conservative state. Imagine how this will play in states that are far less liberal like Pennsylvania, Indiana, and Iowa. It will be very difficult for a Democrat to win without those states.

[thinkingwoman]

26. If a Democrat needs Indiana

to win, he (or someday goddes willing, SHE) is in big trouble.

[SheepyMcSheepster]

4. yeah, i heard a guy from this group on a local A.M. radio show

saying the same thing last week. he said carl rove via speaker phone/conference call told them bush was going to come out in support of making a constitutional admendment.

[Norquist Nemesis]

5. What this really shows

is their desparation. They're gearing up on the wedge issues and attempting to solidify the base. I think they're mis-underestimating (LOL) the American public though. Even those that I know are against gay marriage (or put it as they believe marriage is between a man and a woman) strongly believe that a Constitution amendment is wrong and unnecessary.

[dtseiler]

8. Amendments should grant rights

not remove them. Other than prohibition (which was repealed only a couple of years later), to my knowledge the Constitution and it's Amendments were used to guarantee rights to Americans. Now these pigs want to use it to guarantee a lack of rights based on sexual orientation.

I think this aspect needs to be shouted from the rooftops.

[Norquist Nemesis]

12. Precisely!

That's why the people I know are all against an amendment. This would be historical if they managed to do it...that is pass an amendment denying rights of individuals. Conservatives debating the issue lamely ask "what right is being denied? They have the choice not to get married". (sends me right up the wall and over the edge!)

The problem, (from what little I understand about the complexities) is if it would be passed, it can't be declared UN-constitutional. Only laws can be declared unconstitutional. Another amendment would have to undo it.

[gorgan]

27. I know!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

It's so disheartening that they would think it appropriate to codify in the master defining document of the country the *denial of rights* to a specific minority. It's insane, it's sickening, it's business as usual for Bush & Co.

[BR_Parkway]

24. Dont forget Roe vs Wade coming back up

They are pushing this into the forefront now to give some more red meat to the preachers to stir up the congregations so they can win at the polls.

How does her changing her mind affect another woman's right to decide?

[DuctapeFatwa]

9. Good. Bring it on. Let's clear the air. Bring things to a head

Equal Protection under the law. Or not.

Secular state, or theocracy.

[RT Atlanta]

10. Civil Disobedience

*'s support is total bullshit and complete pandering to his right-wing whacko base.

Here is one point that I really haven't seen discussed, but I want to bring it up: assume the worst happens and there is an amendment that passes, what the hell is the PENALTY going to be for violating it (let's go ahead and throwout the whackos' eternal damnation shit)?!? Nothing, zero, zilch. Moreover, I am bolstered by so many folks getting married in SF that even if marriage were to become illegal, I truly believe there would be widespread civil disobedience (I will do my part in ATL!) that could very well lead to a mini-revolution in this country on social matters.

The repug whackos are totally itching for a fight on this one and I personally believe they are sorely underestimating the kind of fight they will bring upon themselves if this push this discussion further. Repugs are so far out of touch from the true "priorities" that face Americans each day. Marriage and what my gay brothers and sisters want to do with their personal lives does not affect my family and me in the slightest. Where did we once read about "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?"

I will close my mini rant with a quote from Dr. King that I really like and one which I feel is so appopriate for many of the issues regularly discussed on DU:

"Even when pressed by the demands of inner truth, men do not easily assume the task of opposing their government's policy, especially in time of war. Nor does the human spirit move without great difficulty against all the apathy of conformist thought within one's own bosom and in the surrounding world...."

MLK, Jr.

[veganwitch]

11. well i guess its a good thing...

now that it is blantantly obvious that rove is flying the bush plane.

[diamond14]

13. Daley: "They love each other as much as anybody else"

this is a great wedge issue....it will show bush* as the real BIGOT that he and his minions are....

and BIG city Democratic mayors are putting bush* to shame with just a few words, yet the shrub remains 'on message' because shrub's rove is really just a STUPID bully guy....

stay tuned...the Democrats are STANDING UP to bush*-the-bigot, BIG TIME...




http://www.bettybowers.com

[fizzana]

14. Let them do it.

While a majority of Americans might be against the idea of gay marriage I'm also sure the majority of Americans are against the idea of using the Constitution to deny a specific group rights.

As it stands right now, the gay marriage issue is tricky for the Democrats but if the GOP tries to ram a constitutional amendment down our throats it makes it far easier to frame the debate against the GOP.

Once again, the GOP will get it wrong by pushing too hard.

[diamond14]

15. amendment to give women equal rights is still languishing since

the 60's...still not approved...

it's difficult to change the Constitution, with good reason...

this new 'bush bigotry' initiative is just a lot of HOT AIR from the Texas Souffle....it'll keep bush's bigotry up in the news though....which is good...

several BIG city mayors, including Dick Daley, have called bush* on this one....it's exposing 'bigot bush*' as a real 'little' man..."compassionate?????"


big city mayor, Richard Daley yesterday: "They love each other as much as anyone else".....

[fizzana]

16. Without the amendment idea they've got an issue that will

make the Democratic candidate squirm. With the Amendment they've given us a huge opening. It will give the Democrats the chance to claim that the GOP are more interested in restricting the rights of a group of people than in the economy, Iraq, healthcare, jobs etc.

[GinaMaria]

17. IIRC the majority of Americans

do not support a constitutional amendment. No way should these repukes touch the constitution for this. Support gay marriage or not, but this is not a valid reason to alter the constitution.

[David__77]

18. This is a cardinal fight.

The Democratic Party has the power to stop this. It is my hope that by villfying lesbians and gay men, Bush will move his opponents to embrace them. That will surely improve the views of same gender unions by whatever name!

[thebaghwan]

20. You know I hear the repukes say "Let the People vote on this issue"

also "we can't have this issue decided by one vote in the Massachusetts Supreme Court". All I have to say is that there are areas in this country where if we allowed ther popular vote to dictate what rights people have we would still have segregation. The Constitution is the law of the land and I believe that it is there that hope for a just result for gays and the issue of gay marriage lies. I also believe that what has occurred in S.F. should be widely applauded.

[BadGimp]

23. An issue tailor made for the GOP machine

What better a way to distract people from the economy and the quagmire in Iraq/Afghanistan?

It's always better to use FEAR as a wedge right? Think terror alerts. These are Moral Alerts. Same effect.

I must admit that I admire the brilliance of their strategy.

I do not think this will backfire. In fact I think it will be a big win for them. Far bigger than most people would predict.

I am reminded of the OJ trial. All the smart folks in my office all were predicting a Guilty verdict. Yet I noticed all the knucle draggers knew without a doubt it would be Not Guilty. I started asking them what they were basing their assumptions on...not a one could tell me. They just knew. I mean they knew at a deep conviction level. It's like that with stupid people (the majority of the US population). They don't think through these things they simply react to largely if not always emotionally charged messages and issues. Rove gets it.

And the DEMs had beter get it or we will be obliterated at the polls as a result.

I don;t know the most effective response I just know the pre-emptive attack being launched is shaping up to be a windfall for the GOP.

I wanna puke now...

[RetroLounge]

25. I hope major cities all over the country

follow San Franciscao's lead, and start offering marriege licenses to Gays and Lesbians.

We need a epidemic of civil disobedience.

Good for Mayor Daley. Lets hope Chicago follows SF's lead.

RL