There’s a war in Iraq, a war on terror, a social security crisis (according to the President), a major budget deficit …
And this is the best that our senior senator from Colorado can come up with as a “top legislative priority” for the US Senate?
The fight over same-sex marriage is about to vault to the top of the congressional agenda today, when U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard plans to reintroduce a measure that would define marriage nationally as being between one man and one woman.
Last year’s version of the proposed constitutional amendment was shelved after a hard-fought procedural vote, when it gained only 48 of the 60 votes needed to bring it up for final approval. Since then, 11 states passed their own versions of a same-sex marriage ban. Meanwhile, the November elections swept out several senators who voted to block Allard’s bill – most notably Senate Democratic Leader Tom Daschle of South Dakota.
“We think we have more support this time than we had last time around,” said Allard, R-Loveland.
Cripes.
Remember…
We’re fighting oppression and tyranny in other nations.
Yes. This is his top priority. What more needs to be said about Wayne Allard?
If I’m not satisfied with the service, am I allowed to get my money back? I don’t want my tax dollars paying for this guy’s crap, even if he’s likely not subsisting off his government paycheque.
Well, he’s gotta come up for reelection sooner or later …
Unfortunately he and Marilyn Musgrave have a solid lock in our little red state. I doubt either one will be ousted out side of term limits, and since those are a myth…..Musgrave is particularly heinous in my personal opinion. However, both of them make me ashamed to be a Coloradoan at times.
True. Musgrave makes Allard look good, I think …
It is unfortunate that so many fail to understand what it means to provide equal protection under the law. It’s bad enough that Musgrave and Allard don’t understand it, but it’s very bad that so few voters understand it.
My bus is filling up really fast. I might need to get another.
This might be why…
Via the NY Times
January 25, 2005
Backers of Gay Marriage Ban Use Social Security as Cudgel
By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK and SHERYL GAY STOLBERG
WASHINGTON, Jan. 24 – A coalition of major conservative Christian groups is threatening to withhold support for President Bush’s plans to remake Social Security unless Mr. Bush vigorously champions a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.
The move came as Senate Republicans vowed on Monday to reintroduce the proposed amendment, which failed in the Senate last year by a substantial margin. Party leaders, who left it off their list of priorities for the legislative year, said they had no immediate plans to bring it to the floor because they still lacked the votes for passage.
But the coalition that wrote the letter, known as the Arlington Group, is increasingly impatient.
In a confidential letter to Karl Rove, Mr. Bush’s top political adviser, the group said it was disappointed with the White House’s decision to put Social Security and other economic issues ahead of its paramount interest: opposition to same-sex marriage.
The letter, dated Jan. 18, pointed out that many social conservatives who voted for Mr. Bush because of his stance on social issues lack equivalent enthusiasm for changing the retirement system or other tax issues. And to pass to pass any sweeping changes, members of the group argue, Mr. Bush will need the support of every element of his coalition.
“We couldn’t help but notice the contrast between how the president is approaching the difficult issue of Social Security privatization where the public is deeply divided and the marriage issue where public opinion is overwhelmingly on his side,” the letter said. “Is he prepared to spend significant political capital on privatization but reluctant to devote the same energy to preserving traditional marriage? If so it would create outrage with countless voters who stood with him just a few weeks ago, including an unprecedented number of African-Americans, Latinos and Catholics who broke with tradition and supported the president solely because of this issue.”
The letter continued, “When the administration adopts a defeatist attitude on an issue that is at the top of our agenda, it becomes impossible for us to unite our movement on an issue such as Social Security privatization where there are already deep misgivings.”
The letter also expressed alarm at recent comments President Bush made to The Washington Post, including his statement that “nothing will happen” on the marriage amendment for now because many senators did not see the need for it.
“We trust that you can imagine our deep disappointment at the defeatist position President Bush demonstrated” in the interview, the group wrote. “He even declined to answer a simple question about whether he would use his bully pulpit to overcome this Senate foot-dragging.”
The letter also noted that in an interview before the election Mr. Bush “appeared to endorse civil unions” for same-sex couples.
The group asked Mr. Rove to designate “a top level” official to coordinate opposition to same-sex marriage, as a show of commitment.
Trent Duffy, a spokesman for the White House, said on Monday that “the president was simply talking about a situation that exists in the Senate, not about his personal commitment or his willingness to continue to push this issue.” Mr. Duffy said the “president remains very committed to a marriage amendment” and added, “We always welcome suggestions from our friends.”
Some Senate Republican leaders were not optimistic on Monday about the amendment’s prospects this year.
“I think if we had the vote right now we’d come up short,” said Senator Rick Santorum, the Pennsylvania Republican who is a member of the leadership and one of the amendment’s most vocal backers in Congress. “We’d like to bring it up when we have the best possible chance of getting it passed.”
The members of the coalition that wrote the letter are some of Mr. Bush’s most influential conservative Christian supporters, and include Dr. James C. Dobson of Focus on the Family, the Family Research Council, the Southern Baptist Convention, the American Family Association, Jerry Falwell and Paul Weyrich.
Several members of the group said that not long ago, many of their supporters were working or middle class, members of families that felt more allegiance to the Democratic Party because of programs like Social Security before gravitating to the Republican Party as it took up more cultural conservative issues over the last 20 years.
Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, declined to talk about the letter, but said, “The enthusiasm to get behind his proposals is going to require that he get behind the issues that really motivated social conservative voters.”
Asked to estimate the level of discontent with the White House among the group on a scale from one to 10, Mr. Perkins put it at 8.
Well, heck, if he’s got the FRC discontent with him at an 8 out the a scale of 10, I actually feel a bit better toward the guy. 🙂