They like Bush, and they are not stupid

The Age newspaper, Australia ^ | January 21, 2004 | Caroline Overington

[LandofLincoln]

GREAT GREAT GREAT ARTICLE

[Liberty Valance]

Woohoo, somebody gets it...wish the US still had a pro American press. Thanks Byron.

G'Day!

[Pippin]

Thanks for the ping! :O)

Now I can tell those libs I live and work with that I'm not stupid for liking President Bush! :O)

[SunStar]

Define "pushing." I would catagorize it as a "mealy mouthed attempt at getting the issue out of the front page."

Firstly, I don't like the tone of any of your comments of late. It's obvious to me that you just don't like President Bush.

Secondly, the President has been very vocal in support of the sanctity of marriage. He hasn't directly endorsed a constitutional amendment, simply because he believes in states rights. However, if you listened to the State of the Union speech last night, you may have noticed these comments:

-----------

"A strong America must also value the institution of marriage. I believe we should respect individuals as we take a principled stand for one of the most fundamental, enduring institutions of our civilization. Congress has already taken a stand on this issue by passing the Defense of Marriage Act, signed in 1996 by President Clinton. That statute protects marriage under federal law as a union of a man and a woman, and declares that one state may not redefine marriage for other states."

"Activist judges, however, have begun redefining marriage by court order, without regard for the will of the people and their elected representatives. On an issue of such great consequence, the people's voice must be heard. If judges insist on forcing their arbitrary will upon the people, the only alternative left to the people would be the constitutional process. Our nation must defend the sanctity of marriage."

[KantianBurke]

"Firstly, I don't like the tone of any of your comments of late."

Tough.

"Secondly, the President has been very vocal in support of the sanctity of marriage. He hasn't directly endorsed a constitutional amendment, simply because he believes in states rights."

Funny how he discovers that segment of our Republic when it suits him but doesn't give a rat's tuckass when it comes to almost every other issue like education policy, farm bills....

[SunStar]

I suppose since you ignored his comments from last night, that you concede the argument? Or, do you ignore information that doesn't stroke your anti-Bush attitude?

[KantianBurke]

Let me answer your inane question by giving you a simple one:

Is Bush's education bill supportive of state's rights or not? Simple yes or no answer please.

[Sabertooth]

I think you're mistaken on the President's opposition to homosexual marriage.

He's a little too "tolerant" of open homosexuals, from my perspective, and was a little slow to get behind the Constitutional Amendment to protect the definition of marriage, but the President got it just right last night in the SOTU speech. The unexpected high point, as far as I'm concerned.

[KantianBurke]

Talk is cheap. When and if Dubya gets serious about stopping gay marriage I'll judge him by his actions rather than his speechwriters.

[Sabertooth]

Well, while talk is sometimes cheap, it isn't aways so.

Whether you're persuaded or not is your prerogative.

However, don't you at least agree with what the President said last night about same sex marriage and activist judges, even if you're skeptical that he'll follow through?

[KantianBurke]

Sure it was nice to hear but the phrase "mealy mouthed platitudes" struck a chord. Ur a smart fella Saber and have good judgement so I'll rest a little easier knowing your take on it. :> But once again, it left a bad taste in my mouth.

[Sabertooth]

Fair enough.

All I'm suggesting is that you put Bush's position on CMA in the open-minded pile.

He's said the right words, let's see if he follows through

[rmlew]

bttfl