Gay Marriage | Larry King | Laura Bush | News

Watch: Laura Bush on Marriage —
Gay Couples 'Should Have the Same Rights' as Everyone Else

Laurabush

Former First Lady Laura Bush discussed her views on same-sex marriage and abortion on Larry King last night. She said committed gay couples should have the same rights as everyone else and believes acceptance of it is a "generational thing." She also discussed her views on abortion, that she believes it should remain legal.

In late April I posted an excerpt from her new book, which said, "In 2004 the social question that animated the campaign was gay marriage. Before the election season had unfolded, I had talked to George about not making gay marriage a significant issue. We have, I reminded him, a number of close friends who are gay or whose children are gay. But at that moment I could never have imagined what path this issue would take and where it would lead.”

Watch, AFTER THE JUMP...

(Clip via Good As You)

Feed This post's comment feed

Comments

  1. what a fucking hypocrite! opens her mouth years after it could have done some good.

    Posted by: rick | May 12, 2010 9:29:18 AM


  2. Another Republican Wife pretends to be less bigoted than her husband and the party she has represented for much of her life.

    Don't be fooled by the lying cunt. This is all a dodge to make the GOP appear to be more diverse than it is.

    Posted by: Roscoe | May 12, 2010 9:37:05 AM


  3. Just like Cheney, it's too bad this didn't come out when it could have done some good.

    Posted by: Garet | May 12, 2010 9:39:54 AM


  4. That's just the worst kind of selfishness.

    Posted by: Garet | May 12, 2010 9:40:25 AM


  5. F*ck you, lady.

    Posted by: ichabod | May 12, 2010 9:41:07 AM


  6. She may seem a hypocrite, but she's so well-respected amongst conservatives as a sort of matriarchal figure that this might actually still have some significant effect.

    Posted by: Patrick | May 12, 2010 9:43:01 AM


  7. I am deeply sad she did not publicly express these views while her husband was President, but I understand why she did not. She was married to the President. Perhaps she said more to him about it privately, maybe even George was willing to accept gay relationships as equivalent to straight relationships, but the public veneer on this will not likely ever be peeled back to reveal George's true feelings on this issue. Politics trumped everything back then, and Karl Rove called the shots. Please don't knock me, but I am hopeful perhaps Laura's words will be heard by some calmer voices in the Republican Party and stem some of the vitriol coming from them these days.

    Posted by: Hawthorne | May 12, 2010 9:44:03 AM


  8. Stop looking this gift horse in the mouth. It is politically unthinkable for a First Lady to oppose her husband in public, and rightly so. She is not the one who holds the job. And what possible benefit could be achieved from a "pretense" of this sort?

    This will make a difference to some conservatives, particularly women, and we ought to acknowledge her support rather than use vulgar epithets against her. Sheesh.

    Posted by: Rascal | May 12, 2010 9:44:40 AM


  9. I am pleased to see from these initial comments that people are not now fawning over her.

    The most infuriating disclosures about her book and Rove's book are the revelations about their comments about Senator Kerry's completely appropriate reference to Mary Cheney's lesbianism in the 2004 debates. Senator Kerry, one of only 13 U.S. Senators to have been brave enough to vote against DOMA, requires no lectures on respect for gay and lesbian people from people who have stood by silently while their loved ones have used homophobia to advance their political careers. These book passages are nearly as nauseating as the contrived debate-night reaction to those same comments by Senator Kerry from the vile Lynne Cheney.

    Posted by: Patric | May 12, 2010 9:47:17 AM


  10. Well put, rascal.

    Posted by: Eric | May 12, 2010 9:48:38 AM


  11. As to those who are contending that a First Lady cannot take a position on a controversial social issue different than that of her husband, Laura Bush's own mother-in-law was openly pro choice during her husband's time in office.

    Posted by: Patric | May 12, 2010 9:51:38 AM


  12. Acknowledge her support?

    Her useless support, NOW, after the fact, when it doesn't matter, doesn't cost her anything, has no real impact and after she stood by as her husband and his cronies vilified us, used us to terrify others, and made us out to be the bane of humanity?

    Give me a fucking BREAK. She deserves every bit of invective thrown her way and then some. Maybe after a few years repenting, volunteering to help our community in a tangible way.. maybe then.

    Now? With just a few queefs of hot air from her empty, stepford head? Not bloody likely.

    Posted by: Gridlock | May 12, 2010 10:00:04 AM


  13. Considering the family she married into, it's a blessing she can feel free to speak out on anything at all. Imagine being married to that idiot and having a c--t like Barbara for a mother-in-law.

    Posted by: Jack M | May 12, 2010 10:00:29 AM


  14. I understand the anger at her for not saying something sooner but it's such a difficult issue and I, for one, commend her for even daring to say she supports same-sex marriage. Don't forget her modest, but still unexpected words in 2006 about the Federal Marriage Amendment. She could've easily said that her religion prohibited her from supporting it (like Obama) instead she said that, "I don't think it should be used as a campaign tool, obviously. It requires a lot of sensitivity to just talk about the issue... a lot of sensitivity."

    Posted by: Maxcor | May 12, 2010 10:06:23 AM


  15. The reaction to her support is disgusting. She SUPPORTS marriage equality. That's what she just said. Why is a supporter of marriage equality a "cunt" for supporting marriage equality? Ugh ...

    Posted by: DavyG | May 12, 2010 10:27:10 AM


  16. DAYYG, try reading the other comments. It helps.

    Posted by: Gridlock | May 12, 2010 10:29:28 AM


  17. Patric, thank you for injecting this discussion with some common sense.

    Rascal, that this might make a difference among women and conservatives now isn't what has people riled up. The fact is, she made a choice to stay silent while her husband rallied conservatives against gay marriage for eight years, all the while painting himself as a "compassionate conservative." It was a political ploy, and it worked. She should be ashamed of herself not to have said something when it mattered, and to add this now, after the fact, "By the way, I think you gays are lovely," is a slap in the face and a calculated move to sell more copies of her book to liberals.

    No one forced her to marry George W. Bush, or to stay married to him, or to become First Lady. If you were in her position, and your husband were railing against interracial marriage as a political platform, God help you if you tacitly supported it with your silence and then discussed all your nice black and white couple friends after the fact, as if that somehow excused it. It doesn't. Laura Bush's choices are her own, and she's accountable for them.

    Posted by: Dan | May 12, 2010 10:33:17 AM


  18. Maybe she should be invited to speak at LGBT events and see if she accepts. For free. For recompense. For her conscience. If she accepts, and speaks, it could be transformative. Imagine news coverage of that event.

    Posted by: shane | May 12, 2010 10:39:29 AM


  19. I should add that I would be singing an entirely different tune if she said now, "I made a mistake by staying silent, and I regret it. Mea culpa."

    Posted by: Dan | May 12, 2010 10:42:09 AM


  20. this is probably very hard for her to do.it puts a much different face on support for gay marriage. laura bush is not some radical left fanatic. it is a face many conservatives can identify with and actually will listen to. also with her book tour a lot of people who would never hear positives about gay marriage are hearing. does anyone hear really thing george bush would have listened to her. he may have big ears but doesn't use them for listening just to hold up his glasses. and those big ears are attached to a small brain. thank the former first lady for her support and use it to move foward. she has said more than obama has and we haven't burned him at the stake

    Posted by: walter | May 12, 2010 10:42:14 AM


  21. Well, I can perhaps go to the heart of this from a different POV.

    I think that Hillary Clinton was pretty much to the left of Bill as far as NAFTA was concerned but Hillary Clinton wasn't talking about that until she had a stable political career of her own.

    I kind of feel the same way here. Now Laura could have stemmed the tide of the social stigmatizing of gay people through all those marriage amendments...I do fault her for that, but I can't imagine a sitting FL coming out against her husband.

    Posted by: Chitown Kev | May 12, 2010 10:42:25 AM


  22. If we had to have a Republican and Bush in the White House, I wish it had been her instead of her husband!

    Posted by: Jim | May 12, 2010 11:02:48 AM


  23. Too late, you selfish gold-digger. You Bushies are the LIMIT.

    Posted by: veg | May 12, 2010 11:06:06 AM


  24. Are First Lady's brainless robots who must follow the political tracts of their President husbands? If true, it sounds as if while the rest of the country has come into the 21st century, the white house is stuck in the 50's.

    She could have certainly said something during Bush's terms in office.

    Posted by: Leonard | May 12, 2010 11:10:25 AM


  25. I can't deny it's always helpful to hear this from a Republican. However, she has no character considering she kept her mouth shut all through those eight years of hell.

    Posted by: Matthew Rettenmund | May 12, 2010 11:19:12 AM


  26. 1 2 3 »

Post a comment







Trending


« «Mistrial Declared in Brooklyn Hate Crime Trial of Keith Phoenix« «