The rubes will buy it.
Bush plans to make the case for the marriage amendment during his weekly radio address on Saturday, and then deliver a public statement about the amendment on Monday – on the eve of the Senate s planned vote on an amendment prohibiting states from recognizing gay or lesbian marriages.
This could be a failed venture, however. It takes two-thirds of the Senate and then the House to present a constitutional amendment for approval by the states, and it appears the Senate could be split fairly evenly on this.
Several Senate Republicans oppose the amendment, and only one Democrat, Sen. Ben Nelson of Nebraska, has said he will support it. The Senate s Judiciary Committee approved it last month on a party-line vote.
Yet Bush, who long has supported the amendment but has not frequently campaigned for it, will dedicate both his radio address and his only planned public statement Monday to the issue. Obviously, this is something that is on the legislative calendar, explains spokesman Tony Snow.
I swear, some Dem Senator with cajones should introduce the Protecting Baby Kitties And Puppies Constitutional Amendment in response. “You voted against the puppies? For shame, sir.”
some Dem Senator with cajones should introduce the Protecting Baby Kitties And Puppies Constitutional Amendment in response.
I agree. I mean, it’s not like they have anything more important to do, do they?!
Sheesh…
Every time you think you’ve seen it all along comes the republicans in Congress. This is an election year stunt, that should outrage both conservatives and progressives alike. The fact that any group of politicians are so worried about their jobs that they propose to exclude any group of persons from the same rights as everyone else is a tragedy in itself. With all of the other problems which need to be dealt with, such is further justification for voting against anyone who supports this amendment.
The following statement speaks for itself.
Bush says:
“We got something to run on. We got something other than rhetoric to run on. We’re going to run on principles and a strong record.”
LOL
Bush is now on record on his radio address as saying this is another problem with those damned “activist judges”, that marriage should be decided by the electorate and not the courts.
I know it’s too much to ask of our lap-dog press, but I would really like to see some enterprising and courageous reporter ask the Little Emperor whether he thinks Loving vs. state of Virginia should now be overturned.
Activist judges are only needed when republicans need them to change the outcome of an election that is not in their favor. Or if there is even a possibility that re-counting all of the votes would make a difference.
funny, when I saw this headline I thought it was going to be about Kerry putting up a bill requiring the withdrawal of our troops from iraq…
It will be “interesting” to see if there are enough narrow minded voters who are still stupid enough to fall for this and reelect the current losers back to Congress. Meanwhile, nothing is done about immigration, the raging federal deficit, an energy policy that will actually reduce our dependence on oil from the very people who are trying to destroy us, and on and on. My guess is that a well-deserved ass kicking waiting is in the wings for this bunch.
There’s a lot to exploit here, and the Democrats could use this marriage amendment tactic to make the Republicans look desperate and out of touch. But that would require growing a spine, and I don’t think there’s enough stem-cell research that could ever make that happen with the current bunch representing us, or whoever.