![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Bush Loves You
Oct. 27th, 2004 08:05 amI've shied away from the political talk lately, because I like many of you have had my fill of this campaign and am really glad that round one will be over next week (the counting stage is round two)
Still, I couldn't let a comment by the president pass. This past weekend, and broadcast on Monday's Good Morning America, George W. Bush spoke with Charlie Gibson about many subjects, giving mostly the standard answers, but he seemed to deviate from the norm on one, stating that he disagreed with the Republican Party platform opposing civil unions for same sex couples.
Boy that's news to me. Not only has he and other members of his party gone out of their way to not mention civil unions, but heck, except when forced to acknowledge Mary Cheney, they can't even get out the word homosexual, sometimes, preferring to say they are preserving some mysterious state created sanctity of marriage.
Bush himself, as Governor of Texas in the late 1990's helped pass the Texas Defense of Marriage Act, brought on by the challenges to Hawaii's marriage rules, that state that Texas cannot marry same-se couples, or create Vermont-style civil unions, going further than most states. This is the same legislation that Louisiana tried to pass a a state constitutional amendment, but forgot that you cannot use and amendment to ban two different things at once.
So now, against the platform of his party, Bush is saying that he's OK with civil unions? Just now? Should we say that he's (dare I say it?) flip-flopped?
You could say that his quotes that people should be allowed to make relationships they choose to make could be expanded to include this, but this certainly can't play well with his base, that doesn't want to see any same sex relationships validated. at this late date in the campaign, did he thing their votes were in the bag, so he could say something like this, or did he get away from his handlers?
Was his truly a moment of honesty, or just a calculated moment to try to fish for some last minute votes. Was he trying to find some people who had been on the fence because of bush's hard line stance? it seems a softening wouldn't change the fact that many battleground states have constitutional amendments on the ballots and fundamentalist christians (little "c") foaming at the mouth to pass them.
Try as I could, I couldn't find a Christian right site that mentioned the president's comments this morning, but i only had a few minutes as I was eating my breakfast. I think they know the battle has been won this year, but they know to have true satisfaction that they must constantly have satan to battle...for 2004 we've been it. Who knows if that will continue.
Here's a link to president Bush's comment's in the New York Times from Monday.(Registration Required)
Still, I couldn't let a comment by the president pass. This past weekend, and broadcast on Monday's Good Morning America, George W. Bush spoke with Charlie Gibson about many subjects, giving mostly the standard answers, but he seemed to deviate from the norm on one, stating that he disagreed with the Republican Party platform opposing civil unions for same sex couples.
Boy that's news to me. Not only has he and other members of his party gone out of their way to not mention civil unions, but heck, except when forced to acknowledge Mary Cheney, they can't even get out the word homosexual, sometimes, preferring to say they are preserving some mysterious state created sanctity of marriage.
Bush himself, as Governor of Texas in the late 1990's helped pass the Texas Defense of Marriage Act, brought on by the challenges to Hawaii's marriage rules, that state that Texas cannot marry same-se couples, or create Vermont-style civil unions, going further than most states. This is the same legislation that Louisiana tried to pass a a state constitutional amendment, but forgot that you cannot use and amendment to ban two different things at once.
So now, against the platform of his party, Bush is saying that he's OK with civil unions? Just now? Should we say that he's (dare I say it?) flip-flopped?
You could say that his quotes that people should be allowed to make relationships they choose to make could be expanded to include this, but this certainly can't play well with his base, that doesn't want to see any same sex relationships validated. at this late date in the campaign, did he thing their votes were in the bag, so he could say something like this, or did he get away from his handlers?
Was his truly a moment of honesty, or just a calculated moment to try to fish for some last minute votes. Was he trying to find some people who had been on the fence because of bush's hard line stance? it seems a softening wouldn't change the fact that many battleground states have constitutional amendments on the ballots and fundamentalist christians (little "c") foaming at the mouth to pass them.
Try as I could, I couldn't find a Christian right site that mentioned the president's comments this morning, but i only had a few minutes as I was eating my breakfast. I think they know the battle has been won this year, but they know to have true satisfaction that they must constantly have satan to battle...for 2004 we've been it. Who knows if that will continue.
Here's a link to president Bush's comment's in the New York Times from Monday.(Registration Required)
