PDA

View Full Version : A new Press Secretary indeed



Cardiffgal
06-06-2006, 10:02 AM
War Room
Gay marriage, civil rights and the Rose Garden event that wasn't
Is George W. Bush feeling a little sheepish about all this gay marriage business?

As we noted earlier today, the president was to hold an event in the White House Rose Garden today to promote a constitutional amendment outlawing gay marriage. At least, that's where leaders of the religious right were told that the event would be held. But at some point in the last few days, the event found itself busted back to a meeting inside the White House Roosevelt Room and a short presidential speech inside the Eisenhower Executive Office Building.

As Cox Newspapers' Ken Herman reports, Tony Snow was asked today why the event had been moved. "It wasn't moved is the answer," he said. Snow said that the invitations -- the ones inviting folks to an event in the White House Rose Garden -- had gone out "preliminarily before the president had an opportunity to examine the schedule and before people had signed off on it." So the meeting location was changed after the invitations went out? "It was not changed," Snow said. "But some people were misled."

OK, then, but why relegate the presidential speech to Room 450 in the EEOB? "I think Room 450 is an appropriate venue for the event," Snow said.

It seems that Snow was just getting warmed up. We just received our copy of the transcript from today's White House press briefing, and we see that the new press secretary has just managed to equate the Federal Marriage Amendment with "civil rights" legislation from the past. The exchange:

Question: There is some criticism that the president's remarks today are merely intended to energize conservative supporters since there is little likelihood this is going to pass in the Senate. What's your response to that?

Snow: Well, the response is ... this is driven in many ways by the legislative calendar. The president is making his views known. Whether it passes or not, as you know, Terry, there have been a number of cases where civil rights matters have arisen on a number of occasions and they've been brought up for repeated consideration by the United States Senate and other legislative bodies.

Somebody followed up a bit later by asking Snow if he really meant to compare the Federal Marriage Amendment to "various civil rights measures" that have come before Congress. "Is this a civil right?" the reporter asked.

Snow: Marriage? It actually -- what we're really talking about here is an attempt to try to maintain the traditional meaning of an institution that has maintained one meaning for a period of centuries, and for...

Question: Do you equate that with civil rights?

Snow: No, I'm just saying, I think -- well, I don't know. How do you define civil rights?

Question: It's not up to me; up to you.

Snow: Well, no, it's your question. So I need to get a more precise definition.

DaveM
06-06-2006, 02:47 PM
From the United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

Article 1
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

Article 2
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.

Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.

Article 7
All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.

Article 16
Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.

Article 30
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

Nice to know that the United States, allegedly a member in good standing of the UN, is committed to practicing what it preaches.

Of course, the people behind the FMA presumably believe that the UN is a communist plot aimed at flouridating our drinking water and contaminating our precious bodily fluids.

And all this from a President who thus far not succeeded in his stated goal of getting steroids out of baseball (note: that involves contamination of bodily fluids....).

Eva
06-06-2006, 04:13 PM
Of course, the people behind the FMA presumably believe that the UN is a communist plot aimed at flouridating our drinking water and contaminating our precious bodily fluids.

Aha! So that was the reason why Bush headed into a war without even talking about it with the UN...

But that's another chapter...

Eva