Bush daughter Barbara supports gay marriage

  • metta

    Posts: 39099

    Feb 01, 2011 3:58 AM GMT
    Bush daughter Barbara supports gay marriage




    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/48560.html


    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Barbara-Bush/8924924996?v=wall
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 4:50 AM GMT
    Actually his WIFE Laura does too! (twas a huge bone of contention in the Bush household)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 5:54 AM GMT
    TropicalMark saidtwas a huge bone of contention in the Bush household)

    Tee Hee....



    You said "contention".
  • LuckyGuyKC

    Posts: 2080

    Feb 01, 2011 6:11 AM GMT
    Barbara is the Bush twin that also supported the Health care bill.

    Apparently brains do skip generations. She definitely got the ones her Father missed.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 6:23 AM GMT
    oh.







    wait. why does she matter?
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    Feb 01, 2011 6:24 AM GMT
    Good for her, and she's beautiful too!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 7:24 AM GMT
    Maybe she's adopted?


    MeOhMy> why does she matter?

    Because this is proof that Republicans, unlike them HoMoSexSHuals, can be trusted to raise children?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 9:02 AM GMT
    MeOhMy saidoh.

    wait. why does she matter?


    Because her endorsement (OMG! President's Bush daughter!) is good publicity, and good publicity is a big component of today's politics.

    You know, I believe most educated people in power (who also are not fundamentalists) either do support marriage equality o don't mind... people like Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, heck! Even John McCain (maybe)!

    They don't just come out in support because we're not yet at the point when such a bold position's plusses would clearly outweigh its minuses in terms of votes and donations: simple as that.

    Why does Bill Clinton now supports marriage equality? Because he will never face the voters again and now can speak his mind in most issues. Do you think that Hillary Clinton doesn't already think marriage equality is a no brainer? Of course she does, but she cannot get ahead of her boss (bad form) and she might still face the voters one more time.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 9:25 AM GMT
    well, I consider all the above mentioned people to be horrific individuals, war criminals and morally vacant. It's like having the devil say you're a really great guy.

    I don't see how an "endorsement" from spawn of war criminals like Bush, or from current war criminals like Hillary and Obama, or former war criminals like Clinton does any good. Is this a good thing? Are these still considered "respected" people?

    Or is it that if they speak out for "gay rights", suddenly everything they have done for their entire careers - their economic and foreign policies, their wars, their murders - these things don't matter? I will never understand identity politics, it's totally illogical. It's looking through tunnel vision. And scum bags like those mentioned above will continue to play to a "base" and support whatever the fuck is politically appealing to support because they know that for all the horrible, horrific and murderous things they do, they can rely upon you for your vote... because they said "it's a-okay to be gay."

    Maybe it's just me, but I find it hard to believe that any of these people are still considered by some to be "respected". A bit of rhetoric about "gay rights" doesn't really redeem war crimes, crimes against humanity, terror, murder, corruption, etc., but then... maybe that's just me.
  • trl_

    Posts: 994

    Feb 01, 2011 9:44 AM GMT
    dude i totally imagine her having like at least 5 fierce southern gay bffs, this is probably where this comes from
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 10:08 AM GMT
    With their track record, I'd prefer that the Bush spawn steer clear, thank you.
    With firends like that, who needs enemies?

    The big question: how does Barbara Bush remove those stubborn blood stains from her father's hands?
  • LuckyGuyKC

    Posts: 2080

    Feb 01, 2011 1:05 PM GMT
    MeOhMy saidI don't see how an "endorsement" from spawn of war criminals like Bush, or from current war criminals like Hillary and Obama, or former war criminals like Clinton does any good. Is this a good thing?

    Spawn of War Criminals? You may want to narrow the scope of your shotgun. Not very many children of murderers murder. So let Barbara Bush support good issues and celebrate it. She represents a new generation of conservative voters that by all appearance are loosening on social and civil rights issues.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 2:05 PM GMT
    MeOhMy saidwell, I consider all the above mentioned people to be horrific individuals, war criminals and morally vacant. It's like having the devil say you're a really great guy.

    I don't see how an "endorsement" from spawn of war criminals like Bush, or from current war criminals like Hillary and Obama, or former war criminals like Clinton does any good. Is this a good thing? Are these still considered "respected" people?

    Or is it that if they speak out for "gay rights", suddenly everything they have done for their entire careers - their economic and foreign policies, their wars, their murders - these things don't matter? I will never understand identity politics, it's totally illogical. It's looking through tunnel vision. And scum bags like those mentioned above will continue to play to a "base" and support whatever the fuck is politically appealing to support because they know that for all the horrible, horrific and murderous things they do, they can rely upon you for your vote... because they said "it's a-okay to be gay."

    Maybe it's just me, but I find it hard to believe that any of these people are still considered by some to be "respected". A bit of rhetoric about "gay rights" doesn't really redeem war crimes, crimes against humanity, terror, murder, corruption, etc., but then... maybe that's just me.
    Why dont you try and judge an individual by their actions and not of their parents actions or lack thereof.
    Are you going to call me a "war criminal" too?
    Be VERY careful padawan...
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 2:36 PM GMT
    How wonderful! Gorgeous and in support of equal rights for EVERYONE!

    The president's family is often much more likable than the president himself. I didn't care for Bush but I loved, and still do, his wife, their daughters, and his dog Barney; and although I don't really care for Obama, I love his wife, their daughters, and dog.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 2:46 PM GMT
    MeOhMy saidwell, I consider all the above mentioned people to be horrific individuals, war criminals and morally vacant. It's like having the devil say you're a really great guy.

    I don't see how an "endorsement" from spawn of war criminals like Bush, or from current war criminals like Hillary and Obama, or former war criminals like Clinton does any good. Is this a good thing? Are these still considered "respected" people?

    Or is it that if they speak out for "gay rights", suddenly everything they have done for their entire careers - their economic and foreign policies, their wars, their murders - these things don't matter? I will never understand identity politics, it's totally illogical. It's looking through tunnel vision. And scum bags like those mentioned above will continue to play to a "base" and support whatever the fuck is politically appealing to support because they know that for all the horrible, horrific and murderous things they do, they can rely upon you for your vote... because they said "it's a-okay to be gay."

    Maybe it's just me, but I find it hard to believe that any of these people are still considered by some to be "respected". A bit of rhetoric about "gay rights" doesn't really redeem war crimes, crimes against humanity, terror, murder, corruption, etc., but then... maybe that's just me.


    This guy reminds me of Jared Lee Loughner and the columbine shooters type kids.

    hide-yo-kids-hide-yo-wife-cause-cor-rapi
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    Feb 01, 2011 3:55 PM GMT
    MeOhMy saidwell, I consider all the above mentioned people to be horrific individuals, war criminals



    Really?!?! Did I miss something. I don't recall any of the above mentioned being convicted of ANYTHING war-related. That would, after all, define a "war criminal" --- someone convicted of war crimes. Otherwise this is just you bathering on with your opinions --- opinions that many people don't happen to share.

    As for Barbara Bush, by most any account she has grown up to be a wonderful young woman, as has her twin sister, Jenna. That in itself says a great deal about the parents that raised them.
  • vintovka

    Posts: 588

    Feb 01, 2011 4:28 PM GMT
    This is cool, but be aware that the Bush family is one of the biggest political dynasties in the US (more people attached to the Bushes have been elected than the Kennedys). They accomplished this by shifting their ideological and geographic positions to track public opinion. The next generation of Bushes will have to take positions supportive of gay rights if they want to get elected in many parts of the US, so let's not get all misty eyed here.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 4:29 PM GMT
    LanceKC said
    MeOhMy saidI don't see how an "endorsement" from spawn of war criminals like Bush, or from current war criminals like Hillary and Obama, or former war criminals like Clinton does any good. Is this a good thing?

    Spawn of War Criminals? You may want to narrow the scope of your shotgun. Not very many children of murderers murder. So let Barbara Bush support good issues and celebrate it. She represents a new generation of conservative voters that by all appearance are loosening on social and civil rights issues.


    Fair point. However, I have no hope for any spawn in that family. They have a long history of being horrible people. George W.'s great grandfather was a war profiteer from the first world war; then his grandfather, Prescott Bush, was a banker and Senator who helped finance Hitler and also profited off of slave labour at Auschwitz concentration camp; then his 'daddy' was the chief architect behind Iran-Contra, not to mention the war of aggression against Iraq, and then Bush, well... etc. Families that function like political dynasties typically do not produce decent human beings. It happens, of course, but it's the exception, not the rule.

    As for the individual questioning the claim of war crime. By your logic, because Hitler was never "convicted" of war crimes, he is, according to you, NOT a war criminal. Yet, if you use something called "common sense" and look at the law, as set up during the Nuremberg trials, there are very specific criteria for being deemed a war criminal, or for defining war crimes themselves. Among them are committing "Wars of aggression" against a country or people who did not provoke you. Bush obviously did this against Iraq, also Somalia. Clinton did it against Yugoslavia, his sanctions imposed on Iraq (economic warfare) killed over 1 million innocents, 500,000 of which were under the age of 12; Bush sr. did this against Iraq and Panama, and on and on... oh and Obama has done this against Pakistan, Yemen, etc. The problem with war crimes is that in our sad world, only the losers of war get tried... yet it is the victors who often commit the greatest crimes, which is precisely why they 'win'. Those who run the American empire never get convicted of war crimes (except for Henry Kissinger, but he's still roaming free advising presidents), but that doesn't mean there aren't war criminals among them.

    If someone commits murder in front of you, do you declare that they are "not a murderer" simply because they haven't been convicted of murder? Or, do you use common sense?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 4:30 PM GMT
    vintovka saidThis is cool, but be aware that the Bush family is one of the biggest political dynasties in the US (more people attached to the Bushes have been elected than the Kennedys). They accomplished this by shifting their ideological and geographic positions to track public opinion. The next generation of Bushes will have to take positions supportive of gay rights if they want to get elected in many parts of the US, so let's not get all misty eyed here.


    Thank you! They're simply effective political movers, and at this point, if anyone believes anything they say, they're a lost cause. They probably still think that Bush was trying to spread "democracy" and "freedom" to the world.
  • CuriousJockAZ

    Posts: 19119

    Feb 01, 2011 6:22 PM GMT
    MeOhMy said
    As for the individual questioning the claim of war crime. By your logic, because Hitler was never "convicted" of war crimes, he is, according to you, NOT a war criminal. Yet, if you use something called "common sense" and look at the law, as set up during the Nuremberg trials, there are very specific criteria for being deemed a war criminal, or for defining war crimes themselves.



    Your whole point crosses over into La-La land as soon as you mention BUSH & HITLER in the same paragraph. Sorry, the haters can play judge & jury and convict the former President of being the devil incarnate in their minds until the end of time for all I care, but it's not going to make any difference in the grand scheme of things. Barbara Bush, like Meghan McCain, has broken from her father in terms of "The Gay Marriage" issue -- and THIS is a good thing on all kinds of levels. It has significance if for no other reason than Barbara Bush is not just any citizen, but the daughter of a former President (not to mention also the grand-daughter of another former President), and when these people speak out in favor of gay rights, it reflects positively and makes a difference.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 6:25 PM GMT
    vintovka saidThis is cool, but be aware that the Bush family is one of the biggest political dynasties in the US (more people attached to the Bushes have been elected than the Kennedys). They accomplished this by shifting their ideological and geographic positions to track public opinion. The next generation of Bushes will have to take positions supportive of gay rights if they want to get elected in many parts of the US, so let's not get all misty eyed here.


    But isn't this the the goal of ALL political dynasties??? You can hardly single out one family.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 6:27 PM GMT
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 7:03 PM GMT
    Good for her!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Feb 01, 2011 7:20 PM GMT
    The trying to compare Bush with Hitler is silly, there is no comparison and anyone who isn't illiterate in history (real history) would see that. The only president that can be close to Hitler-like is Woodrow Wilson.. Read about the things he did, and believed and you'll see it. Not only that but he is also mentioned favorably by Joseph Goebbels. You may hate Bush, and may disagree with the war but that does not equate with war crimes, or him being like Hitler.

    As for the Bush daughter.. Not a surprise. Many new and younger Republicans support gay marriage and all. The ones who are religious even do though they feel man and woman are ideal in creating and raising life, they feel it is wrong to deny two consenting adults who love each other the happiness of a union, thats a true Christian.

    The thing that shocked the loony left, was when Bill O'Reilly mentioned how he supports gay marriage, and adoption... So does Glenn Beck, because he feels if its not hurting the country or him, then why should he care?

  • tongun18

    Posts: 593

    Feb 01, 2011 7:32 PM GMT
    IHG84 said. The only president that can be close to Hitler-like is Woodrow Wilson.



    Actually Andrew Jackson as well, he ethnically cleansed a few Native American tribes. But your point is taken, you may not like him but Bush ≠ Hitler.