He also didn’t challenge Islam on their ethnic cleansing or the discrimination against and persecution of Christians and Hindus or Female Genital Mutilation or honor killings or the ‘death to apostate’ meme or a few other things. He did smack them for Holocaust denial – whoop whoop.

Note that he doesn’t even support these things for Americans. Why would he support them in another country? Just more meaningless words from the O.

I think it is a Democrat agenda to push it only when it can be used to beat political opponents over the head with a club.

Not saying the Republicans don’t try. They just have less issues and suck at it more.

I don’t know about that Hongkong Mark. If you’re right, then the left is doing a terrible job pushing for it.

I’m sure we’ll be hearing from the any day now…

Well he didn’t actually get confirmed by the Republican controlled senate. But anyhow he said before his confirmation took place that he was going to use his position as ambassordor to promote gay rights. He didn’t say if he was going to promote gay rights in Belgium, where he was to ambassador, or all over the world nor did he say why he thought it was the position of a US ambassador to promote civil rights for any particular group. If a particular group in the country he ambassador to was being mistreated the US administration could direct that ambassador to register a complaint with that country but if there wasn’t anything out of the ordinary as far as any particular group in that country speaking out would be just using your position as a soap box for your particular interest.

At the time I thought that the Republicans should’ve proposed that they would confirm only if he was to be named ambassador to a Arab country in the Middle East.

But back on subject. Those “gay rights” groups are leftwing, anti-American groups who happen to be gay. And their use of gay rights is a tool they use to bash America or any pro-USA entity. That’s why they bash Republicans over the issue of gay rights and not democrats.

* of course, there are some good reasons to support it to so some people with postive motives do.

Taken for granted, that is.

The respective parties want each respective groups’ votes, organizational skills, volunteering, and most of all money.

But, neither party is going to actually do anything for “their” group. Democrats aren’t really going to do much of anything for gays and the GOP isn’t really going to do much of anything for gunowners.

So, once the election is over the parties want these particular supporters to shut the fuck up and get back in the closet for two to four more years.

Reading through the comments, I realize I should simply have said, so now I expect you to praise Bush for standing up for gay rights since he used similar rhetoric in talking about his hopes for democracy in the Muslim world.

Thanks, readers, esp. ILC, for inspiring that thought.

ILC, thanks. I vaguely recall Bush making such statements, but did not remember the specifics, and like you I didn’t recall anything specific regarding gay persons. And I don’t recall if Bush made any of these statements when he met with King Abdullah or visiting other mideast nations. I’ll wait and see what Obama says, for example, at his first address at the UN, but I’m not holding my breath.

Pat – Bush never marketed himself as a kind of gay messiah. Though he had bad ideas on about gay marriage, he could be surprisingly gay-supportive in other ways, like his tripling AIDS spending.

That’s true. And I figure that Bush is horrified about what is happening to gay persons in the Islamic world, e.g., hanging of teens.

Now Obama comes along. Obama *is* supposed to be the first Gay President, or some such messiah.

I guess many had already anointed Obama as the first “Gay President,” but not me. I’ll consider that when I see action from Obama. Even if he pushes his campaign promises but fails, I’ll give him credit. So far, nothing.

http://www.brookings.edu/interviews/2003/1110globalgovernance_daalder.aspx
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/19/bush.un/index.html
http://oxblog.blogspot.com/2003_11_02_oxblog_archive.html#106816554993268636
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-bush14jan14,1,2406747.story
http://www.presidentialrhetoric.com/speeches/10.06.05.html – Text of Bush speech in 2005 at the National Endowment for Democracy.

Has Bush made a statement regarding the lack of human rights in the Islamic world

From a Bush speech in 2003:

“Sixty years of Western nations excusing and accommodating the lack of freedom in the Middle East did nothing to make us safe, because in the long run stability cannot be purchased at the expense of liberty. As long as the Middle East remains a place where freedom does not flourish, it will remain a place of stagnation, resentment and violence ready for export. And with the spread of weapons that can bring catastrophic harm to our country and to our friends, it would be reckless to accept the status quo.

“Therefore the United States has adopted a new policy, a forward strategy of freedom in the Middle East. This strategy requires the same persistence and energy and idealism we have shown before, and it will yield the same results. As in Europe, as in Asia, as in every region of the world, the advance of freedom leads to peace.”

Also in 2004, 5, 6, 7, 8… Just about every State of the Union or foreign policy or security speech that Bush gave after 9-11. Example from CNN in 2006:

President Bush challenged world leaders to do more to build democracy in the Middle East in an address at the United Nations in New York on Tuesday…
“From Beirut to Baghdad, people are making the choice for freedom,” Bush told the General Assembly.
“And the nations gathered in this chamber must make a choice as well,” he said. “Will we support the moderates and reformers who are working for change across the Middle East, or will we yield the future to the terrorists and extremists?”…
Bush said the “calling of our generation” is the fight between extremism and the “peaceful majority.”
The American president cited electoral advances across the Mideast as proof that democracy is advancing in the region and said the lack of reform seen in the past decades fertilized extremism.
Bush said people who have hope for a future “are less likely to blow themselves up in suicide attacks” and asked Muslim nations to support democratic reforms in the Middle East.
He praised the people of Iraq for voting for a democratic government and vowed to stand behind the elected leaders in securing Iraq’s future from “terrorists and extremists.”
Afghanistan voters also drew his praise for establishing a free government that combats terrorists.

From the LA Times in 2008:

President Bush on Sunday called Iran “the world’s leading state sponsor of terror”…
But even as he criticized Iranian leaders, … Bush appealed to U.S. allies in the region to open up their own political and economic systems to greater democracy.

It was consistent, pervasive, for years, and backed by deeds. Links to follow in a separate comment (because the spamfilter might block them).

Has Bush made a statement regarding the lack of human rights in the Islamic world

Over and over, for about, oh, seven years. Not specifically mentioning gays, I will admit.

Pat – Bush never marketed himself as a kind of gay messiah. Though he had bad ideas on about gay marriage, he could be surprisingly gay-supportive in other ways, like his tripling AIDS spending. In foreign policy he said, paraphrasing, Everybody yearns for freedom – America needs to be on the side of that impulse. True, he didn’t mention gays as such. He and our brave military did, however, carry out the general thought with deeds, liberating 50 million Muslims from two of the world’s worst regimes. Many on the Left have tried to obscure that by calling it something else, but they can’t change facts.

Now Obama comes along. Obama *is* supposed to be the first Gay President, or some such messiah. In foreign policy he has just said, paraphrasing, Everybody yearns for freedom – and I apologize for Bush and our military making it happen. It’s wrong for America to encourage democracy or fight for human freedom. We’ll tell you that we like it but please Mr. Dictator, Mr. Islamist, please pretty please would you like us?

With Bush, what you saw was what you got. Bush was much more honest.