Kerry & Bush's position on "gay marriage": Nearly IDENTICAL! So why...

[UdoKier]

... were the democrats suddenly the "gay marriage party" last year.?

Most elected democrats, like Kerry and Bush, are in favor of states making provisions for "civil unions". I heard very few of dems standing up for mayor Newsom on the talking head shows last year. And it should be added that the judges in Mass. that ruled in favor of gay marriage there were GOP appointees (as were the judges in the recent pro-gay marriage ruling here in CA)

This is not to say that I am opposed to full equal rights to marriage for same sex couples. I'm for it, but I continue to be puzzled by the public perception that the democratic party stood up for gay marriage last year, when it did nothing of the sort.

Is it kind of like the old saw about how the GOP are supposed to be the party of "fiscal responsibility"?

[Goldmund]

1. Because it no longer has anything to do with positions.

[Behind the Aegis]

2. Balls (or Ovaries)

The Democrats didn't have big enough of either! They let the Repugs set the agenda! The Democrats talked themselves in circles! Funny, that you should point out that the Thugs and Democrats had the same position because as you know, we, gays, lost the election for the Democrats! :eyes:

[UdoKier]

5. Granted, outright discrimination against gays is still 100% okay in GOP

You can be a GOP pol and be in favor of bringing back sodomy laws, imprisonment, whatever, and the party leadership will be cool with it. The democratic party doesn't seem to tolerate such retrograde positions. Maybe that's the difference?

[Behind the Aegis]

10. This is true

But with what I have seen from some Democrats, I wouldn't be surprised if they did support some of the things you mentioned as a way to be more "moderate." A few people seem to be OK with selling-out the rights of gays, women, and few other groups in order to appease the Reich-wing. That is what scares me!

[Orsino]

27. I don't like the "balls" meme.

It doesn't guts of any sort to be a party loyalist who does as Big Money says. Can we dispose of the idea that Republican politicans are somehow more disciplined or brave than others?

When a Democratic or other lefty voice speaks, and that voice strikes us as wishy-washy, well, that's the way it's supposed to be, when the issue at hand isn't life-threatening. The artificial crises touted by corporate media don't make the GOP positions forthright, or even relevant.

Republican politicians say what they have to say in order to keep the money flowing. Democrats, typically, simply haven't as thoroughly subjugated themselves to corporate masters.

The groupthink patsies enlisted by the Powers That Be aren't "winners," nor are they brilliant, gutsy warriors. They're just lazy thinkers who find it easy to do as they're told, and they are tools of a machine that wants them that way. If you look around at your fellow activists and think they look sloppy or namby-pamby, get that thought out of your head. Be proud, instead, that there are as many opinions as people in the room!

Democracy is supposed to be messy. The Gingrich-Delay railroad is the aberration, not the default.

[Behind the Aegis]

28. Never said Rethugs were more disciplined or brave

I don't care about their fortitude, just the fortitude of the Democrats! Instead of setting the pace, they let it be set for them. They could have, against the odds, stood up and SET the agenda, instead they allowed some good ole gay "bashing," and tripped all over themselves when trying to say what their stance was on gay rights. That is where the big cahones come in!

[Stop_the_War]

3. Um, it is my opinion that the Democratic Party should defend gay rights

:eyes:

[Mass]

4. Not at all identical

Bush is not for the states making the decision. He supports the Federal Marriage Amendment.

Kerry supports states making the decision, but in his own state, he supports equal rights for same sex couples, and proposed same sex couples had the same federal benefits than other couples during the campaign. I wished he had gone clearly for gay marriage rather than civil unions with full rights, but he is very far from Bush on the subject).

[mzmolly]

7. Bush said he supports "civil unions" Kerry said the same.

The stated philosophical positions pretty well match sans RW propaganda.

[Mass]

11. Stated is a very good word

Could it be most people knew Bush was lying and that he did not support civil union except for half an hour at the end of the campaign?

[UdoKier]

17. To the contrary, I don't think Bush gives a damn about gays either way.

I think his support of the FMA was feigned and purely something Rove made him do. He has never been crazy about the bible-thumping right, but Rove correctly advised him that he could win them over with the phony FMA act. You need to keep in mind that EVERYTHING this administration ever does is based on pure cynicism and opportunism, not a sincere belief in anything. If they thought endorsing "homo marriage" would win them votes and further their real agenda, which is looting the country, they'd do it in a second. Please don't confuse this administration with the rubes they've got convinced that Bush is a "Christian". He's no more a Christian than I am, and I'm a longtime atheist.

[Inland]

23. That's the way I think about it.

Bush was very good at announcing positions that nobody took seriously. Part of that is because Bush on every occasion assures the religious right that he is one of them; the other part is that the right wing media feels free to edit Bush to the right wing audiences.

I think that a huge part of Bush's appeal is that when he takes a moderate stand, the moderates let hope be their guide, and the conservatives assume that Bush is just saying it to get votes. For most presidents, being a presumed liar would have its drawbacks, but the conservatives know that the only way to get their agenda enacted is to lie about some things and fudge everything else, so they accept it as necessary. They just believe that Bush is lying to someone else and not them; and they have come to believe that lying to get around democratic pressure is necessary to leadership. The next step is getting rid of the pesky democracy that inhibits Bush in the first place, but that's another topic.

[UdoKier]

8. Good point.

To me their positions, both favoring civil unions, sounded identical to me. I forgot to consider the FMA, since I never considered it to be a serious proposal, but just a piece of meat for the Fred Phelpses who make up the backbone of the GOP voting bloc.

[Mass]

13. RW newspapers were careful to point to the differences

between Bush's supposed support of a civil union with limited rights (if even that) and Kerry's support of a civil union with full rights.

They were not going to let the differences go, specially given the fact that they consider the form of civil unions with full benefits as marriage without the name.

[blm]

6. The media had another storyline they were given by Rove. Plus, Bush didn't

tell his audiences at ONE campaign rally that he was FOR civil unions. He put all his emphasis on a gay marriage amendment to the Constitution which he really doesn't even give a shit about, but he knows how to play his fundie audiences for the fools they are.

But, Bush made sure to say he was for civil unions right before the election in a tv interview for more moderate viewers. Did ya hear any of the RW yakkers condemn Bush for being for civil unions the way they condemned Dean then Kerry for being for them?

BushInc is lying scum, and they have a lying scum media to protect them.

[Mass]

9. They know he is not.

He supported the OH referendum aginst gay marriage and civil union.

[Wright Patman]

12. Thousands of Southern Baptist pastors

campaigned as best they could, trying to stay within 501(c)(3) guidelines but failing in many cases, for * last summer and fall.

I personally witnessed one deacon almost collapse in tears as he "blessed" the collection in his prayer. He was absolutely terrified of marauding gays destroying our culture and the "sacred" institution of marriage. (Of course, half the congregation is on their second marriage, at least, but let's not go there.)

Every white Baptist pastor I have ever heard has expressed almost sacrilegious reverence for *, if not for the GOP in general.

It is more a cult of personality directed toward *. I just don't see it. Some of it is that * is not Clinton, who was reviled by the Baptists not only for his sexual peccadilloes, but for the fact he was married to what they consider a modern-day "Jezebel." But we now have had so many years of misrule that you would think they would eventually take their blinders off.

If anything, * seems to be an antichrist figure. He can't be THE Antichrist, because he's proven too incompetent even at perpetrating evil to qualify.

[Vinca]

14. Because Dubya led them to believe he would press for an

amendment to the Constitution to ban gay marriage . . . which, of course, he is not doing because that's even too stupid for him. So, the dumb folks who are now unable to file bankruptcy, who do not have health care, whose jobs have been outsourced, who are paying over $2 a gallon for gas, whose retirement is in jeopardy, have also been back stabbed by their boy George, 'cause there's no amendment and the two gay guys down the street might still be able to throw a big wedding.

[TheFarseer]

15. I don't think that's true

Bush said he wanted to amend the constitution to prevent gay marriage (even if we never saw any real action on that). Kerry never said that. Bush wasn't in favor of civil unions and Kerry was in favor of them or in favor of states deciding for themselves(I can't remember which) I have NEVER seen bush say he was in favor of civil unions although I don't see everything he says. If you wanted to say Kerry and Cheney's positions were the same, that I would buy.

Also, if you wanted to say this issue is about 5,342 on the list of important issues facing our country, I would emphatically agree with you.

[blm]

18. A week before the election Bush said he favors civil unions.

But that was a more moderate audience. The cable news shows avoided talking about it because the Bin Laden tape popped up. (Even though BushInc had the tape since Sept.)

That is just another example of how they control the news, folks.

[Johonny]

24. I agree

Kerry had a position. Bush never had a position on anything. He'll say anything to anyone if he thins they'll vote for them. Bush is on a 60 day tour to sell a privatization plan that he won't tell you what it is.

[UdoKier]

19. Yes I agree that this wedge issue should be way down the priority list...

and so should abortion, but they use it successfully over and over.

I will concede that their positions were not "identical", and have edited my headline a bit to reflect that.

But the fact remains Kerry did not take an absolute pro-gay rights position, and Bush did not embrace the fundie position, which would be to ban civil unions and put gays in prison or worse. If their positions were so close, and the judges who ruled in Mass were GOP, why did we get defined that way?

[Mass]

22. As I said. because it was difficult to equate the two on the subject

If there was something that the RW said again and again, it is that Kerry voted against DOMA (that prevents gay marriage and gay civil unions to be recognized from one state to the other) and was opposed to Dont ask Dont tell and for full integration of gay people in the military.

Here in MA, a lot of newspapers wrote about how his decision not to support gay marriage was opportunistic (I have no idea if it is true). The fact is that Kerry has an history of being a strong supporter of civil rights and that nobody serious would have believed their positions were close, even if he did not endorse gay marriage. The best proof is that Clinton tried to have him support local referendums against gay marriage and civil unions and he refused to do that.

[jpgray]

16. One of the few instances where Kerry rejected bad advice

To my persepective, there was a difference there, and a significant one. It also proves that Kerry wasn't all about winning, because politically this advice was probably pretty good.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=102&topic_id=959585

[UdoKier]

20. It's funny, because despite his record, Clinton will always be remembered

by the nuts on the right as the one who "let the gays into the military" - as though it wasn't full of them already...

[Carolab]

21. Blame the media.

Remember when Charlie Gibson interviewed * and Laura and Bush said he personally was NOT against civil unions? No one in the media said ANYTHING about it! It would have been repeated in an endless loop if Kerry had flip-flopped like that.

[ultraist]

25. EQUAL Rights is a core value of the Dem party

Gay marriage and ProChoice are about equal rights. They BOTH should be a priority for Dems. I can't believe people are saying they are low on the priority list.

I also disagree that Kerry and Bush are no different on Gay marriage. Bush proposed an Constitutional amendment whereas Kerry said, let the states decide, NO amdmt and has a long history of supporting Gay rights, UNLIKE Bush.

That said, Kerry should have come out stronger for Equal rights. Pandering the right, didn't work.

[applegrove]

26. Reframing. They get people who go to church to vote on things

that really do not affect them. That is how they get people to vote against themselves.