Bush's Hateful, Hypocritical Radio Address

[Bob Geiger]

In preparation for "wedge-issue June," which starts in the Senate on Monday with consideration of a Constitutional ban on gay marriage, President Bush used his Saturday radio address as a bully pulpit to tout his support of that bigoted legislation.

"As this debate goes forward, we must remember that every American deserves to be treated with tolerance, respect, and dignity," said Bush, in hawking S.J.RES.1, which would specifically deny tolerance, respect, and dignity to a segment of our population. "All of us have a duty to conduct this discussion with civility and decency toward one another, and all people deserve to have their voices heard."

Can you believe that last sentence coming out of the mouth of a man who only speaks before carefully-screened audiences and who has people who crash the gate with dissenting opinions arrested?

Bush goes on to talk about the protective nature of Senator Wayne Allard's (R-CO) Marriage Protection Amendment, saying that "Marriage cannot be cut off from its cultural, religious, and natural roots without weakening this good influence on society. Government, by recognizing and protecting marriage, serves the interests of all."

This from a guy who doesn't give a damn about the stressful impact on marriage of 46 million Americans with no health care, tax cuts that only hit the pockets of the wealthiest families and a minimum wage that, as far as his party is concerned, can stay at the same low rate it's been for a decade.

"The Defense of Marriage Act declares that no state is required to accept another state's definition of marriage," Bush continues. "If that act is overturned by activist courts, then marriages recognized in one city or state might have to be recognized as marriages everywhere else. That would mean that every state would have to recognize marriages redefined by judges in Massachusetts or local officials in San Francisco, no matter what their own laws or state constitutions say."

I guess when you're as big a hypocrite as Bush, this doesn't apply to the pro-gun legislation being pushed by the GOP, that would force states with restrictive gun laws to accept the lax, concealed-weapons permits of other states. If we should throw up the state borders so stridently for something like same-sex marriage, shouldn't that also apply to something serious like someone's ability to walk down the street packing heat?

"On Monday, I will meet with a coalition of community leaders, constitutional scholars, family and civic organizations, and religious leaders," said Bush. "They're Republicans, Democrats, and independents who've come together to support this amendment."

We'll see on Monday. I'm very interested to see what Democrats Bush has found who embrace the GOP's bigotry.

You can reach Bob Geiger at [e-mail] and read more from him at Democrats.com.

[msongs]

1. pretty sure that many democrats support this amendment

thought they might be a tad reluctant to say so in public.

Msongs
www.msongs.com
batik & digital art
shirts and mugs

[ComerPerro]

2. Reminds me of the 2004 RNC hate rally in NYC

you listen to those assholes talk then, about freedom for all and equality and freedom of religion and prosperity for all and affordable health care, you would think they were progressive.

Until you realize that its a load of shit, and they don't mean a damn word of it.

[primative1]

3. Curious ...

Would any Du'ers mind having their marriages reclassified as a civil union? I wouldn't care and neither would my wife.
I would guess most people wouldn't care and the only people that it would leave who are "married" would be the religious zealots.

[Stinky The Clown]

6. I'd welcome being reclassified as a civil union

I'm perfectly fine with being reclassified if it means fully equality for everyone.

Long time ago, when this shit first failed to fully flush, I suggested we push our version, whereby everyone and anyone gets to be civilly joined and leave 'marriage' up to the churches.

It would be no different whatsoever from what it is now, except there would be the equalizing phrase of civil union overlayed on all joinings, with marriage reserved for those who chose a religious (or otherwise) service.

[primative1]

8. Might be an end run around the problem ...

If they want to fight about defining a word, they can have their word and leave us alone with having defended the concept behind the word. Some fights arent worth fighting and with the religious right its often best to just put them on ignore.

[regnaD kciN]

9. Well, this Christian thinks...

...that the only thing the state should offer are civil unions, whether the couple is gay or straight.

For that is what civil "marriage" is -- a legal arrangement to provide for care of children and equitable handling of property. Nothing more. It doesn't codify the beliefs about marriage held by any given faith or denomination, nor should it.

I say, let the state join people in a civil union, and then let them, if they wish, proceed to get "married" in a house of worship of their own personal faith, or, if not religious, have their own "committment" ceremony according to their own lights. In lots of parts of the world, the civil and religious parts of marriage/union are separated. They should be here, as well.

[genieroze]

4. I'm very interested to see what Democrats Bush has found who embrace the

GOP's bigotry. I bet Lieberman is one of them.

[Nite Owl]

11. Got this link from an email someone sent me

It stands little chance of passing the 100-member Senate, where proponents are struggling to get even 50 votes. Several Republicans oppose the measure, and so far only one Democrat — Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska — has said he will vote for it.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2006-06-03-gay-marriage_x.htm?csp=24


So is this why Nebraska is getting the homeland security money instead of NY and DC?

[Fridays Child]

5. Well said!

:toast:

And welcome to DU. :hi:

Edit: Recommended, by the way.

[stevedeshazer]

7. Be happy. This marks his political death.

He's beaten that dead horse one too many times.

It's remeniscent of his sixty cities in sixty days to reform social security.

That went well, didn't it?

http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm

[Nite Owl]

10. What about the rights of

people in states where it is a right according to their state constitutions? The way he puts this it should cut both ways, don't those people have rights too? Do the 'blue' states not count for anything anymore?

[liberal N proud]

12. Millions of Americans don't have health insurance

Millions don't have jobs
Homelessness is at an all time high
New Orleans has not recovered from the 2005 disaster
The nation is facing an energy crisis


What is Congress going to waste time talking about? How to stop those gay people from invading the sanctity of marriage.
These little homophobic slugs are going to push through some bull shit amendment to satisfy their neo-conservative base.


I hope they pay dearly for this in November, wasting time on an insignificant issue.

[Totally Committed]

13. What a disgraceful speech this was...

He's not some nutjob head of Gayhaters United... he's (unfortunately) supposed to be the President of ALL the people. He sounded like some RW whacko bigot. It's absolutely shameful.

TC

[Eurobabe]

14. I had on AM radio for weather at 10 and heard: NOW the Pretzeldent

of the United States, George W. -- cursed and turned it off. Refuse to listen to Weaselass.

[Imagevision]

15. Bush don't have anyhting else to spew, elections require him to

have something he believes will rally the GOP'ers presntly distancing themselves from this loser prez...!
November and there's going to be many job replavements being made and Bush himself will then have the task of thrawting the investigations that will very likely get him impeached.

Dems take over after mid-term elections? -- Cheney will be the first to announce his reignation due to health reasons. That, you can take to the bank!

[libnnc]

16. Interesting that Chimpy isn't that concerned about his own marriage

Rumor is he's having an affair with Condi.

[tsuki]

17. This is so wrong, on so many levels.

First, state issue licenses. It is a state's right. I am not for a federal marriage license.

Second, churches "marry" people, and he is attempting to insert the state into church doctrine. Yes, I know that they did it concerning polygamy, but I question the federal right to insert itself into church doctrine.

And "activist judges," that is the third of the constitutional separation of powers.

Gawd, I hate Bush and the GOP.