According to a recent poll, a wide majority of Americans
believe that long-time companions President Bush and advisor Karl Rove
should have access to the same rights that married couples enjoy. Under
current law, Mr. Rove would be denied hospital visitation rights should
the President become ill. Nor could the two exercise the right to
refuse to testify against one another should legal troubles befall one
or both of them.
Legal limbo for a couple of more than 30 years
By Deanna Swift
WASHINGTON, DC—A new poll reveals that an overwhelming majority of Americans believe that President Bush and his confidante of more than 30 years should have access to the rights and privileges enjoyed by their married counterparts. Under current state and federal laws, with the exception of the gay state of Massachusetts, Mr. Bush and Mr. Rove are denied more than 1,000 rights afforded to married couples, including the right to visit one another in the hospital in the event of an emergency and the right to refuse to testify against one another should legal troubles befall one or both of them.
 |
Related Stories |
|
• Poll: Karl Rove Leak Story 'Boring,' 'Hard to Follow' |
|
'How can something so right be so wrong?'
According to the poll, 71% of Americans answered 'yes' to the question "Should President Bush and Karl Rove be able to enjoy the same benefits and responsibilities that married couples have?" Twenty-eight percent of Americans answered 'no.'
The poll was conducted by the Swift Report, a popular conservative Weblog that frequently covers gay issues of importance to the GOP. Earlier this year, the Swift Report released the results of another poll in which it ranked the most influential gay Republicans. In that survey, actor Charlton Heston narrowly beat out such party luminaries as Abraham Lincoln and J. Edgar Hoover for the honor of 'top' GOP gay.
America embraces a conservative couple
What accounts for the embrace of the long-time political partners, at a time when much of the GOP remains hostile to gay marriage in particular and to homosexuals in general? Swift Report founding editor Todd Fox, the author of the forthcoming self-help guide "Stumbling Down the Yellow Brick Road: An Ecumenical Ex-Gay Travel Journal," (Regnery) speculates that because the two men live their lives in the public eye, not in the closet, many Americans have come to accept their relationship.
"They're in the news day after day in a way that allows us to really celebrate their partnership, their closeness," says Mr. Fox. "And when we see that these two guys have been able to make it work for more than 30 years, I think that something in our heart-of-hearts says 'let's help them make it permanent. Let's help them go all the way.'"
A warm bath of affection—but trouble ahead?
But while the poll may signal the high regard—and the warm bath of affection—in which most Americans hold the relationship between Mr. Bush and Mr. Rove, the two still face a rocky road together given the current legal climate. For instance, should the two be embroiled in some kind of legal trouble, Mr. Rove could not refuse to testify against Mr. Bush. He would have that right were the two married, or afforded the rights of a married couple.
A love name made public
There may also be limits as to just how much the public wants to know about these long-time companions. Case in point: the recent revelation regarding Mr. Bush's nickname for Mr. Rove, "Turd Blossom," meaning a flower that sprouts upon cattle excrement in Texas or a term of endearment between two men. (Mr. Rove's nickname for Mr. Bush, "Texas Longhorn," a popular term of endowment, has been less well publicized.) When Mr. Bush's name for his companion appeared in newspapers across the country, several editors moved to strike the reference, maintaining that it was unsuitable for family publications.
The Roberts effect
Sources close to the couple also say that good old-fashioned jealousy could be taking a toll on the two. Mr. Rove is reportedly unhappy with President Bush's choice for the Supreme Court, ex-gay conservative John Roberts. Says one insider: "Karl is worried because George had been spending so much time with John, who frankly is younger and better looking than Karl is. Who wouldn't be a bit wary?"
Rove and the sheik must be quite jealous of our coward Bush's homosexual prostitute Gannon/Guckert.
Posted by: doug | August 14, 2005 at 10:44 PM
As Churchill is reported to have said about me, "A riddle inside an enigma wrapped in a Roosevelt Road suit."
Drunk? If only I were. Love goeth out the door and money cometh innuendo.
Posted by: CryptoCat | August 11, 2005 at 09:19 AM
Crypto C., re: your lovely post, a riddle within a riddle, is your comment a part of the satire, or are you drunk?
"Thou shalt not suffer a man with flesh colored hair to live" [II Delusions VI:6]
Quote courtesy of Arne, from his "Deluxe Home Edition" of the "C"oran (odd how the text seems to be in the style of early 17th century English)
Posted by: pedantmann | August 10, 2005 at 12:23 PM
I'm reprinting Arne's post of Aug. 10 because I really like it, and I believe that creative writing deserves to find a wider audience.
I don't know why I like it, or even what it means. Kind of like reading Ezra Pound, if you know what I mean.
"Is it only me and a bunch of catastrophists who see how the US is turning into an integrist state? Is this the full extent of it, or are we going to see our own version of coranic schools and unashamed censorship in the name of someone's god? Please somebody, show me some comparably large tendencies going the other way so I can find some balance (or hope) in these times.
Posted by: Bob Rosenberg | August 10, 2005 at 09:08 AM
Is this site a satire or what?
It makes me angry that you demean a man just because he has flesh-colored hair.
Don't you people have any integrity?
Posted by: CryptoCat | August 10, 2005 at 08:57 AM