a) it's misleading for the Times and that chap from the pro gay-rights group to characterize his action as bowing to political pressure, when he's been gunning to do this since his campaign.
b) it's obscene for Bush to position this himself as "speaking for the people," when recent polling by Gallup shows a nearly-even split betweent hose who support the amendment and those who oppose it:
This is direct from Gallup.com: "A constitutional amendment that would define marriage as only between a man and a woman has the support of 51% of Americans, with 45% opposed, based on an analysis of Gallup Polls conducted over the last eight months."
c) my word would be a little longer than "idiot," and it begins with "a," and ends with "ole"
My thoughts are these:
a) it's misleading for the Times and that chap from the pro gay-rights group to characterize his action as bowing to political pressure, when he's been gunning to do this since his campaign.
b) it's obscene for Bush to position this himself as "speaking for the people," when recent polling by Gallup shows a nearly-even split betweent hose who support the amendment and those who oppose it:
This is direct from Gallup.com: "A constitutional amendment that would define marriage as only between a man and a woman has the support of 51% of Americans, with 45% opposed, based on an analysis of Gallup Polls conducted over the last eight months."
c) my word would be a little longer than "idiot," and it begins with "a," and ends with "ole"
Posted by: Valencia | February 25, 2004 10:23 AM