Bush trying to fake out conservatives again...

[Devastatin Dave]

Bush is going to go give a speech today about a Gay marraige ban ammendment again. Boy, this guy is so out of touch now. Instead of having a real plan to secure the borders, limit government spending, or trying to give a more concrete explaination about his plan for the war (and no, "staying the course" lost its meaning months ago), or blocking Iran from getting nukes, he's going to give a speech about gay marriage again. Well George it isn't 04 its 06 and we're not going to be fooled. This ammendment would never pass and who cares anyway at this point. There is a lot more to worry about in the world than homosexuals wanting to play family till the gay bath house fashion comes back.

So is this talk about a stupid piece of legislation going to trick true conservatives into voting for Republicans? Its not going to work with me. Not saying I'm going to vote for Democrats, but I'm sure as hell not voting for any incumbants and there are going to be a lot of "Devastatin Dave" written in on my ballot this year.

Here's a good point from Boortz...
"THAT BUSH .. HE'S REALLY IN TOUCH, ISN'T HE?

I had yet another sleepless night last night. It was awful. I woke up at about 1:30 and just couldn't get back to sleep again. You'll hear me yawning uncontrollably today on the show. Not good radio, but whatchagonnado?

And what kept me awake? Well ... I'm sure you're like me. At night, when the mind is otherwise cleared of the flotsam and jetsam of everyday life, those problems that really count, I mean those just awful and terrible problems you have, will come visiting ---- with a vengeance. So last night I'm lying there when suddenly I'm shocked by the realization that somewhere, perhaps even within a ten-mile radius of my home, my sanctuary, there might be two men or two women who truly love each other lying in their own bed as they sleep. Then ... this horrible thought. What if they wanted to get married? Well .. that was it for me. I should have just gone ahead and gotten up to start the day about four hours early. I spent the rest of the night worrying about the devastating impact on my own marriage and on my career that would surely follow if two gays or two lesbians were actually allowed to engage in some ceremony to show their love and lifetime devotion to one another. Why, I'm just not sure I could go on! What would be the purpose in life if two homosexuals were actually allowed to make that kind of commitment to each other?

Fortunately, help is on the way. Today we're going to have a big time presidential speech from the Rose Garden today at 1:00. Frankly, I'm surprised they didn't plant a garden of pansies just for this incredible event. President Bush is going to set all of our minds at ease by coming out strongly for some sort of a Constitutional Amendment to ban gay marriage. We've needed this for such a long time. I think that it is perfectly fitting for us to use the United States Constitution, a document that is dedicated to the preservation of our inalienable rights, to tell a certain specific group of people what they cannot do, rather than tell the government what it cannot do.

We don't need tax reform. We don't need an end to earmark pork spending in Congress. We don't need smaller government and school choice. We don't need real reform that would put medical care back into the competitive marketplace. We need none of those things. All is fine! What we need is a Constitutional Amendment that will keep two people who love each other, but who we don't consider to be normal -- not by our standards anyway -- to marry.

I know I'll sleep better tonight."

:wall:

[Kanamori]

This is just what I was looking for in order for my support of Bush to be solidified.:dizzy2:

When hatred of some people is used to solidify support, I'm of the mind that there is definitely something wrong.

[solypsist]

last time around the religious right made it clear they wouldn't stand to be so grossly manipulated again (and then subsequently forgotten about). i guess we'll see if their memories on that situation remain.

[Major Robert Dump]

I think it just may pass, not all Democrats go to Gay Pride parades, and sometimes even liberal poster boys like clinton surprise us on the issue (what ws his called again?)

But yes, its all a disruptive sideshow, the country has much better things to worry about.

[Lemur]

According to the latest Gallup poll (http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDc2NGU0YmMzZTViZmRkMDJlYmI1NWYxMDdmNWY4YWQ=), many Americans share your sentiments.

(Please note: A consisten 3% of those polled really care about the Federal budget and deficit. Woo-hoo! Three percent, baby! We're a movement now!)

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Didn't you say that last time, Lemur? :embarassed:

[Lemur]

Could be worse. We might have slipped to two percent.

But have a look at the poll -- clearly, the issue of gay people in monogamous relationships is not exactly pressing on the American psyche.

[Alexander the Pretty Good]

Whoa! You read National Review?!

And gay marriage isn't even on the list. :juggle2:

[Papewaio]

So DD do you feel more annoyed by the actions of a Republican President or those of a Democratic leader?

[Devastatin Dave]

The Republican President Pape...

[Papewaio]

And if the Prime Minisiter of Britain, the French President and the North Korean Leader said the same bad thing about USA, whom would you be more annoyed with?

[Devastatin Dave]

And if the Prime Minisiter of Britain, the French President and the North Korean Leader said the same bad thing about USA, whom would you be more annoyed with?
The Republican President Pape...
He's fing up big time especially since he has both the Congress and the Senate. There is no excuse for his lack of action on real issues, not silly placating issues that are just a dry bone with no meat on it thrown to the masses. I'm just fed up with he's wreckless spending, inability to conduct a very important war, and his utter lack of communication skills with his continuous tired old phrases. He's my President and suppose to represent those that got him into office, not coddling the opposition. So Pape, please get to your point instead of trying to paint me into a corner. Tell me what is your point. Thanks

[Lemur]

I'm just fed up with he's wreckless spending
Join the 3% nation! We welcome you with open arms!

[drone]

There was a great editorial in the Wash Post yesterday about this speech:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/05/AR2006060501282.html

Distracter in Chief
Spinning Phony Crises to Avoid Real Ones

By Eugene Robinson
Tuesday, June 6, 2006; Page A15

What uncharted realm lies beyond brazen cynicism? A wasteland of utter shamelessness, perhaps? A vast Sahara of desperation, where principle goes to die? Someday George W. Bush and the Republican right will be able to tell us all about this barren terra incognita, assuming they ever find their way home.

The Decider's decision to whip up a phony crisis over same-sex marriage -- Values under attack! Run for your lives! -- is such a transparent ploy that even conservatives are scratching their heads, wondering if this is the best Karl Rove could come up with. Bush might as well open his next presidential address by giving himself a new title: The Distracter.

Let's check in on what's happening in the real world:

Iraq has become a charnel house for the victims of escalating sectarian slaughter. On Saturday, a car bomb killed 28 people in Shiite-dominated Basra, and hours later gunmen killed nine Sunni worshipers in a mosque. On Sunday, on a road near Baghdad, assassins pulled travelers out of their minivans, sorted them by faith, killed nearly two dozen Shiites and let the Sunnis go. Yesterday, men wearing police uniforms grabbed at least 56 people from bus stations and travel agencies in Baghdad and took them away -- no one knows why, no one knows where.

Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki's new government remains toothless and ineffectual, despite his pledge to end the sectarian violence. On Sunday, he failed yet again to reach agreement on who will run the only two ministries that matter -- the ones in charge of the army and the police. The butcher Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, the most prominent figure in the armed Sunni insurgency and the most hunted man in Iraq, remains at large and periodically manages to issue messages inspiring his followers to continue their jihad. (Just like his hero, Osama bin Laden.) Yet the president spent his weekend radio address pushing "a constitutional amendment that defines marriage in the United States as the union of a man and woman."

Immigration, the last artificial crisis, at least is a genuine issue. But the president and his allies did such a job of rabble-rousing that the best outcome, at this point, is probably for Congress to deadlock and end up doing nothing. The National Guard is headed for the frontier, apparently under orders not to do much of anything. Immigrants are still marching north, employers are still hiring them and self-appointed sentries are still patrolling the border, where something really bad is bound to happen sooner or later.

Yet the issue of "profound importance" the president urgently wants to highlight is "protecting the institution of marriage."

The diplomatic maneuvering over Iran's nuclear program, which looks like the next crisis, is at a critical point. Defiant words from Iranian leaders on Sunday rattled the world's financial markets yesterday and sent oil prices soaring -- threatening even the modest relief most analysts had predicted from $3-a-gallon prices at the gas pump. Just in time for summer vacation.

The president, however, would rather we all reflect on the fact that "marriage is the most enduring and important human institution." Not satisfied that he had gotten his message across in his Saturday radio address, Bush gave another speech in support of a marriage amendment yesterday.

It's almost surreal. For one thing, the president has no role in amending the Constitution. Proposed amendments must be passed in both the House and Senate by two-thirds majorities, and then they must win approval from the legislatures of three-fourths of the states. The president doesn't have to sign it. He doesn't even have to read it.

People who are close to the president are always telling us what an essentially decent man he is, without a bigoted bone in his body. But that doesn't square with all this demagoguery in support of a measure whose only effect would be to write discrimination against gay men and lesbians into the United States Constitution.

Bigotry, pure and simple.

But of course the president knows that there's essentially no chance an amendment to ban gay marriage will make it out of the Senate -- that in fact it might not even get out of the House. All he can possibly accomplish is to energize activists on the religious right, who otherwise might be tempted to sit out the November midterm elections.

It's risky to raise expectations you have no intention of fulfilling, but maybe enough of the Republican base can be fooled by this charade to make a difference in the fall.

Meanwhile it keeps us from talking about things that are real, and that really matter.
Political posturing, plain and simple, with a waste of tax dollars on the side. :wall:

[Lemur]

It's all over but the crying. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5056474.stm)

US Senate blocks gay marriage ban

The US Senate has blocked a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

President George W Bush had backed the ban, saying marriage between a man and a woman was the most fundamental institution of civilisation.

But the motion gained the votes of 49 senators, 11 short of the 60 needed to allow the process to go forward.

Opponents say the president is using the issue to win back disillusioned Republican voters.

Mr Bush has argued marriage needs protection from "activist judges" and an amendment would ensure no court could undermine what he said were the views of the American people.

But Democrats accuse Mr Bush of cynically promoting an issue which appeared to have little chance of Congressional approval to appeal to the Republicans' conservative base ahead of November's mid-term elections.

[Devastatin Dave]

It's all over but the crying. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5056474.stm)

US Senate blocks gay marriage ban

The US Senate has blocked a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

President George W Bush had backed the ban, saying marriage between a man and a woman was the most fundamental institution of civilisation.

But the motion gained the votes of 49 senators, 11 short of the 60 needed to allow the process to go forward.

Opponents say the president is using the issue to win back disillusioned Republican voters.

Mr Bush has argued marriage needs protection from "activist judges" and an amendment would ensure no court could undermine what he said were the views of the American people.

But Democrats accuse Mr Bush of cynically promoting an issue which appeared to have little chance of Congressional approval to appeal to the Republicans' conservative base ahead of November's mid-term elections.
It was a complete non-starter and I have zero idea why el Presidente did this other than he'll fly around the country complaining how he tried to "save" marraige while he was blocked by partisanship. Waste of time and money. There's real problems in the world to work on, [xxx edited by solypsist xxx]getting hitched should be the last issue to work on. :wall:

[Papewaio]

The Republican President Pape...
He's fing up big time especially since he has both the Congress and the Senate. There is no excuse for his lack of action on real issues, not silly placating issues that are just a dry bone with no meat on it thrown to the masses. I'm just fed up with he's wreckless spending, inability to conduct a very important war, and his utter lack of communication skills with his continuous tired old phrases. He's my President and suppose to represent those that got him into office, not coddling the opposition. So Pape, please get to your point instead of trying to paint me into a corner. Tell me what is your point. Thanks

Not painting you in a corner, just using a personal example and scaling it up to a country to country level.

Simple the closer someone is to your political/cultural stance the more annoyed you get with them for going even slightly against what you perceive is the right thing to do. I believe that the reason the US burnt so much faith with allies and the EU is that it is a similar phenomena. Where a lot in the EU wouldn't care about the abuse of human rights by China, North Korea and Burma, they do care about the smallest downturn of human rights in the US because they view the US as far closer to being within their political and cultural sphere... they are in the same boat and don't like the way it is being rocked and spun about.

[Devastatin Dave]

Hmmm, good points Pape. It only took me a couple of months to respond!!!:laugh4:

[yesdachi]

Whenever I think the nation might be ready for samesex marriage I hear Rosie O’Donnell’s voice and decide to table the issue until next election.

[Navaros]

Bush should pass a Constitutional Amendment that makes "homosexuality" outright illegal. That would actually be worthwhile. As it stands DD is somewhat right that this is a useless action, but not for the reason DD stated. Rather, since it doesn't go nearly far enough.

[Ice]

Bush should pass a Constitutional Amendment that makes "homosexuality" outright illegal. That would actually be worthwhile. As it stands DD is somewhat right that this is a useless action, but not for the reason DD stated. Rather, since it doesn't go nearly far enough.

No.

[Fragony]

Something tells me that Navaros doesn't think very highly of homosexuals :laugh4:

[Ice]

Something tells me that Navaros doesn't think very highly of homosexuals :laugh4:

Something tells me he is a homophobic.

[Fragony]

Less talk more hangings!

http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Aug05/Iran-Hanging.jpg

[InsaneApache]

You want to make it against the law for two, or three :inquisitive: consenting adults to participate in sex?

You are a strange person.

[Major Robert Dump]

Presidents dont pass amendments.

And I could give to sheets where people put their private parts, as long as its consenting. Suffice to say, i'm a tad more worried about taxes, illegal immigrants who take up 30% of the medicaid expenditures and dont declare citizenship until they are old enough to get SSI, oh, and a war thats been poorly executed from the beginning, oh, and earmarks on federal budget bills that sap a billion dollars a year, oh, and political family dynasties, oh, and Iran and North Korea playing huggy huggy.

but yeah, homoes ae the real problem. reminds me of my poor, evangilical mom, who leaves everything in jesus' hands. When i ask her why she didnt call a plumber and has been crapping in a hole behind the house because the toilet didnt work, she responded "well i prayed." Please

[Ronin]

Bush should pass a Constitutional Amendment that makes "homosexuality" outright illegal. That would actually be worthwhile. As it stands DD is somewhat right that this is a useless action, but not for the reason DD stated. Rather, since it doesn't go nearly far enough.


you can outlaw consentual sexual practices as much as you can outlaw breathing...get over it.....if they aren´t doing it to you I don´t see what the fuss is about anyway.

[Devastatin Dave]

you can outlaw consentual sexual practices as much as you can outlaw breathing...get over it.....if they aren´t doing it to you I don´t see what the fuss is about anyway.
We should outlaw breathing for all religous zealots of all cloths...

[Spino]

Given that election time is rapidly approaching I understand the motivation behind this speech. Clearly the President's men, or rather his party's campaign men, want to make absolutely sure their fundamentalist Christian base does not take these elections for granted and gets out there to vote in considerable numbers as they did during the last presidential election.

Sometimes even the most loyal of followers need a reminder to continue pledging their support. This is no different than the Democrats periodically raising race issues or decrying the evils of 'tax cuts for the rich' in order to remind their own dependable constituency that the world will come to an end unless they keep up the support by getting out to vote. Everyone here remember 'Vote or Die'? :inquisitive:

Personally I'm against gay marriage but passing an amendment outlawing it and further defiling the Constitution is just idiotic. Leave the issue to the States to decide!

[Pannonian]

Less talk more hangings!

Can we vote: no lynch?

[Major Robert Dump]

Given that election time is rapidly approaching I understand the motivation behind this speech. Clearly the President's men, or rather his party's campaign men, want to make absolutely sure their fundamentalist Christian base does not take these elections for granted and gets out there to vote in considerable numbers as they did during the last presidential election.

Sometimes even the most loyal of followers need a reminder to continue pledging their support. This is no different than the Democrats periodically raising race issues or decrying the evils of 'tax cuts for the rich' in order to remind their own dependable constituency that the world will come to an end unless they keep up the support by getting out to vote. Everyone here remember 'Vote or Die'? :inquisitive:

Personally I'm against gay marriage but passing an amendment outlawing it and further defiling the Constitution is just idiotic. Leave the issue to the States to decide!


you do realize this is a very old thread and a very old speech bush made right lol??? Dave just revived it, i dont know why, but if I had to guess it would be to show that what were the REAL public priorities then are still the REAL public priorities now, and government inaction and deflection has essentially accomplished nothing during the last congress ( i refer you to the post office naming thread). So for every tard tuning in to hear Bush talk about homo marriage there is one of us a tad bit more worried about southeast asia and the pyscho bastard funding the Iraqi insurgency.

But maybe I'm wrong, Dave is crazy, who knows why he bumped the thread. BTW Dave, i talked to an Air Force recruiter yesterday, and asked him if he knew you, he kicked me out of the office :furious3:

[Spino]

you do realize this is a very old thread and a very old speech bush made right lol??? Dave just revived it, i dont know why, but if I had to guess it would be to show that what were the REAL public priorities then are still the REAL public priorities now, and government inaction and deflection has essentially accomplished nothing during the last congress ( i refer you to the post office naming thread). So for every tard tuning in to hear Bush talk about homo marriage there is one of us a tad bit more worried about southeast asia and the pyscho bastard funding the Iraqi insurgency.

But maybe I'm wrong, Dave is crazy, who knows why he bumped the thread. BTW Dave, i talked to an Air Force recruiter yesterday, and asked him if he knew you, he kicked me out of the office :furious3:

Oops. Yes, this thread is old but not that old (wtf, it's from June 06, not June 04) and given that our national priorities really haven't changed in the last 3-4 months my post still stands. I'm not defending the current administration's priorities but please keep in mind we're dealing with politicians. Right or wrong drumming up the homosexual marriage issue roughly 5 months prior to elections in order energize a certain segment of the Republican party is still a sound strategy. Is Bush truly serious about the amendment? I have no idea. Does Bush believe the amendment doesn't stand and chance and is simply providing the necessary lip service to keep the ears of party's Christian fundamentalist constituency perked and alert? I have no idea. What I do know is that we are in an election year and that means every single Presidential appearance and speech (especially one that is given less than 6 months before elections) is done for a reason.

You'll get no argument from me on the validity of the points presented in this thread but you guys need to keep in mind the why, the what for and the how to of the species known as politicus domesticus maximus.

Yes, Dave is an honest and passionate soul but he is also, as the ancients would say, a tad 'touched by the Gods'. :inquisitive:

[Devastatin Dave]

Yes, Dave is an honest and passionate soul but he is also, as the ancients would say, a tad 'touched by the Gods'. :inquisitive:
And it made me feel all dirty, it was a bad touch, not a good touch...:furious3:

:laugh4:


I love diggin up old thread, especially if its me that started it, you know, my pretentiousness knows no bounds!!!

Major, the last thing you want to do when talking to the Air Force is mention my name, you're lucky you left there with your life!!!