THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2013
[quote]The former first lady appears in the ad along with other high profile political figures including President Obama and Dick Cheney. But Bush says she was included without permission and wants to be removed from the ad.
Laura Bush isn't happy she's being used in a new pro-gay marriage ad.
The former first lady is one of several public figures - including President Obama and Dick Cheney - who make cameos in a new ad campaign by the Respect for Marriage Coalition. Bush's appearance in the ad comes from an appearance she made on CNN in 2010. "When couples are committed to each other and love each other then they ought to have the same sort of rights that everyone has," she said at the time.
But Bush is asking that she be removed from the ad, according to The Dallas Morning Newslaura. Bush "did not approve of her inclusion in this advertisement nor is she associated with the group that made the ad in any way," spokeswoman Anne MacDonald said.
"When she became aware of the advertisement last night, we requested that the group remove her from it," MacDonald said.
The ad, backed by a $1-million campaign on TV, in print and online, argues that "a growing majority of Americans believe it's time to allow marriage for gay and lesbian couples."
She's a public figure. She made this statement publicly. Before the ad was released, one could see her make this statement online at anytime. Her permission is not required.
typical Republican, "THE PARTY COMES FIRST" mental illness
Reminds me of the Cheney's not attending his lesbian daughter's wedding because it would attract media attention.
If this were Michelle Obama, I'm sure the log cabinettes would be shrieking like the cunts they are, but then, hypocrisy has always been their strong suit.
Republicanism is just an Organized Crime family. They don't stand for anything in particular.
An important question I would like answered would be:
During what appearance on CNN in 2010 did she make the statement?
Does anyone know?
Lash me with a wet noodle if it's in the NYDailyNews piece.
Newsflash: Republicans are selfish assholes. Unless it personally affects them, they don't give a shit. And even when it personally affects them, they still don't think anyone else should benefit or they think when they do it or need it, it's different.
The only reason Nancy Reagan supports stem cell research is because of what Ronnie went through. She wouldn't give a shit if she didn't witness the hell of Alzheimer's.
I'm thinking it doesn't matter. I'm more bothered with inclusion of Dick Cheney and anyone else who served in the Bush administration -- especially given they used the LGBT as a campaign piece for the 2004 Bush/Cheney re-election campaign. So, Laura Bush or no Laura Bush ... I don't give a shit. The increasing acceptance of marriage equality is happening without them.
nasty woman. nasty decision.
Speaking of people who should get the chair, the statute of limitations on murder is...well, there isn't one. She could get the chair for killing her ex-boyfriend.
She's a fucking cunt, a drunk, and a murderer.
Never forget that Laura Bush killed a guy, all without consequence due to her family's money.
Bravo, Pickles. You're finally learning!
R12, that stayed in the back of mind after first learning of it.
It escapes me how as Laura Welch she wasn't even given a traffic citation for speeding and failing to stop for a stop sign that resulted in the accident that killed her ex-boyfriend.
Sure stinks, doesn't it?
That wasn't the only the only cover-up that occurred in Texas in November 1963.
Sorry i garbled that last post.
Texas is also the only state in the USA i know of where a man convicted of first-degree murder received a suspended sentence in the 20th century!
I guess like the old Florida tourism slogan, the rules are different in Texas.
She wants to take back what she said about gay marriage, yet continues to stand by the lies her husband told about Iraq's WMD?
Fuck her. Fuck her with something hard and sandpappery.
I always wonder how these things get this far before someone decides to protest. Really? Nobody thoght to ask her permission? No Lawyers around? Hmmm..
Perhaps Pickles just had second thoughts, sobered up and just said 'no'.
BFM = BUSH FAMILY MAFIA
I don't think she's taking back what she said about gay marriage. I think she's just pissed that a group she doesn't know or have any affiliations with is using her image & interview without her permission.
[quote]Reminds me of the Cheney's not attending his lesbian daughter's wedding because it would attract media attention.
Which daughter was that, Uday or Qusay?
[quote]Nobody thoght(sic) to ask her permission?
Her permission is not needed.
I knew I didn't trust her when she claimed to support gay marriage, especially considering since she wasn't for it while her husband was in office. Looks like she changed her mind AGAIN.
Don't trust Republicans.
r24, oBAMA changed his mind too
r23 but "Fair Use Law" can go either way in a court of law as shown in that article.
Her attorney could argue that her image and interview was appropriated & it's likely she would win.
Further, she's no longer a public person, she's stepped back into private citizenry but that could be iffy.
So she's for gay marriage when it's abstract and a long ways off. So when it's imminent her true feelings emerge. She's dead to me.
[quote]She's dead to me.
So she used to be alive to you?
[R24], oBAMA changed his mind too
Yeah, while he was IN office, which took guts. Laura didn't say a damn word the whole time her husband was in office, so who cares what she says now?
[quote]Her attorney could argue that her image and interview was appropriated & it's likely she would win.
But she doesn't hold the copyright on the interview, so she has no standing.
[quote]Further, she's no longer a public person, she's stepped back into private citizenry but that could be iffy.
If she is a not a public person, she would not make public statements. She made the statement on the Larry King Show. Second, all the ad is doing is reporting word for word what she said. If they changed what she said that would be a different matter. You cant go on television, make a statement, then cry foul when someone quotes what you said.
Obama changed his mind for our votes. As for his mind changing, with politicians we never know especially when they don't have to worry about another election.
She's a HE, right? I mean, I always assumed, but....
I have a VPN amd can post whenever I want.
The permanent block of PT you have imposed on several European countries is a failure, and only prevents countless other people from posting.
Your quest to rid the site of trolls has backfired, and you have ruined Datalounge.
Oh, and smooches!
remind me what PPSM stands for again?
Suck it Cabbies, your party is morally corrupt.
"I don't think she's taking back what she said about gay marriage. I think she's just pissed that a group she doesn't know or have any affiliations with is using her image & interview without her permission."
I agree with that.
I would also say that as a public figure who went on television and made these views publicly known, she has no grounds for objecting to a group she doesn't know or affiliate with using her image and statements without her business.
That is part of being in politics. And she knows it.
What good does it do to have the quote if that's not how she really feels about it?
Don't we want supporters that truly believe in our rights? Not somebody that paid lip service for whatever reason at one time.
If that's not how she views gay marriage then screw her. There are other more evolved people (even Republicans) that do believe in our cause.
Those are the people I want featured.
The risk you run when you presumptuously use someone's name and imagine for your cause or campaign.
The risk you run when you go on national television and say something that is recorded for prosperity.
[quote]The risk you run when you go on national television and say something that is recorded for prosperity.
Oh, dear me.
So Republicans who tried to claim credit for her (and other individual Republicans') alleged "support" for gay marriage, while at the same time backing a party that rabidly opposes gay marriage for political traction among paleo-conservatives: what's your new talking point? That even now she "really" supports gay marriage, she's just a little miffed at the unauthorized use of her image? But any day now, she will permit the authorized use of her image to promote marriage equality--right? And, uh, yeah, uh, OBAMA!
You are pathetic.
Can we use her image on drinking and driving?
Actually Obama never changed his mind. He has been for gay marriage since he said so as a Senator. Basically he played a political game: See L Lincoln and slavery, see FDR and American involvement in the 2nd WW before Pearl Harbor.
[quote]I would also say that as a public figure who went on television and made these views publicly known, she has no grounds for objecting to a group she doesn't know or affiliate with using her image and statements without her business.
Exactly. Think of all those Republican attack ads that used clips of Obama. You can imagine the reaction if Obama called Rove and said, "Hey buddy, you will have to remove that ad because I didn't give you permission"
Laura Bush is a douchebag and hypocrite--like all the Bushes. Her nephew (Jeb's son, George) is running for political office in Texas. So Auntie Laura is taking political cover to help the nephew with the homophobic bigot vote in Texas.
Laura said what she said. Was she lying then or now?