Ah, the tolerance! The always inane Joan Walsh weighed in, of course.

According to Ms. Walsh, Bush and Cheney (also highlighted in the ad in support of same-sex marriage) aren’t brave, you see. Unlike President Obama and his oh-so-courageous ever-evolving stance, timed to coincide with campaign fundraising. Now that is a gutsy call!

CNN jumps in, too.

Evil Laura Bush pulled out of an ad in support of gay marriage. Oh, the horror! Except that, you know, she was never asked for permission to be included in the ad.



Funny how that works, huh?

More from ABC News:

The ad, created by a group called Respect for Marriage Coalition, includes a statement Bush made during an interview with CNN’s “Larry King Live” in 2010 in which she talked about her memoir, “Spoken from the Heart.”

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 told King three years ago.

The former first lady’s office told the Dallas Morning News that Bush had not given her consent to be part of the ad, and had asked that she be removed from it.

Further, perhaps she doesn’t want to be associated with a group with whom she may not agree?

But, truth and reality doesn’t stop hate-filled liberals. Another day, another excuse to show their true and misogynist colors.








Civility! Nasty liberals need to take a look in their hate-filled mirrors.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Stephanie-Warren/100001648091118 Stephanie Warren

    Shame on them!

    • AaronHarrisinAlaska

      Now imagine saying that about a mixed race couple. Sounds kind of…racist then, right? Discriminatory?

      • TeaPartyGeezer

        Saying what? Did you read the article? She was not asked if they could use her in the ad. That’s a no-no.

  • http://twitter.com/die_mich_zwei Spatial Awareness

    Because NOTHING says EQUALITY like the word “CUNT”.

    • shimauma

      typical intolerant response of the sexual deviants who want to be justified in their perversity. I don’t blame Ms. Bush from wanting to get away from that crowd.

    • http://profiles.google.com/kithogan Kit Hogan

      Nothing says lib Dem like potty mouth

      • shimauma

        seeing as how they are complete butt lickers, it kind of goes without saying

        • Marie

          Really? What science? Quack science?

      • NCRelite

        but cursing is SO liberating! /sarcasm

    • $24698634

      Curious how you knew the author of the tweet with the C word was a liberal? Some kind of clairvoyance? Or maybe omniscience…

      • Catchance

        No, just common sense. Something you seem to be lacking. Conservatives wouldn’t call her that because A) We don’t use words like that, B) We quite like Laura Bush, and C) We agree that it wasn’t up to them to post a video from 2010 without permission.

        • $24698634

          Well, I do declare.  You speak for all conservatives, do you?

          By the way, I like Laura too.  I didn’t even hold it against her that she accidentally killed her HS boyfriend when she ran a stop sign and slammed into him.

          • Secede

            At least she didn’t run off of a bridge and leave the passenger in the car to drown and tried to cover it up like your Saint Teddy did !

      • wwbdinct

        Only foul-mouthed lefties use that word. It’s crass, insulting and degrading to women. You libtards really do need to look in the mirror.

        • $24698634

          You might want to tell John McCain that.  Oh, I guess it’s ok if it’s your wife.

          • seek456

            remember you tried that – didn’t fly. Perhaps you shouldn’t get your “knowledge” from the internet.

          • $24698634

            Then why do you keep sending me to google?  Make up your mind.

      • Penmar

        Big Clue here, try to pay attention, I know reading is hard, but DemoCat is a dead giveaway.
        Luigi Proud DemoCat!
        So, @laurawbush, the bigoted cunt who murdered her boyfriend wants 2 b removed from an equality ad? No surprise there @politicsnation @msnbc

  • The Monster

    Remember it’s the >>Republicans<< engaging in a WAR ON WOMYN.

    • Marie

      Two dudes or two women cannot marry one another. The government has no business redefining a religious institution to make a bunch of whiny gays feel better about themselves.

      The left has taken everything else from us. We are not letting you subhuman scum have marriage.

      • seek456

        You’re not a republican. You’re a foul, ugly inhumane creep.
        Just shut it with the stupid comments.

    • Marie

      Why so hateful to those working minimum wage? I thought you disgusting liberals were for the working man?

      Evidently, your fruity ass is the dreaded, evil 1%. Scratch a liberal, find a hypocrite.

    • Marie

      Gay people are the real vermin of the world. You disgusting subhuman scumbags are truly good for nothing.

    • Marie

      Where in the Constitution is marriage or gays even mentioned?

      Oh, that’s right…nowhere. Furthermore, the Founding Fathers had some strong opinions in gays. You might want to know what the hell you’re talking about before you come here to defend your Best Gay Friend.

  • NachoCheese (D)

    Thanks to President Obamao for his call to civility, certainly is refreshing to see that we can disagree and not resort to rage filled temper tantrums.

    Oh wait, never mind, “civility” only applies to those evil “racists” that don’t like totalitarian statism.

  • Karla M

    There is no such thing as marriage equality. What they are trying to do is redefine marriage

    • http://twitter.com/__abstraction__ An Abstraction

      “Traditional” institutions always incorporate societal changes overtime (want some very recent, clear examples?)…. the problem is Patriotic Conservative Christians see any change, whatsoever, as trying to undermine their beliefs. Talk about perpetual victims! I’ve never seen a group of people whine and complain as much as Patriotic Conservative Christians. I say let everyone experience the miserable institution of marriage (hey – how’s that national divorce rate workin’ out for ya?).

      • tk10

        the ‘problem’ is social engineers redefining words to fit their ever changing definition…there fixed it for ya! marriage = 1 man and 1 woman, gay=fun, silly…for hundreds of years thats what those words meant, til the likes of ppl like you who think they decide for all…NOT

        • Marie

          …Says the fruitcake who can’t even use punctuation properly.

      • EastValleyConservative

        Do you include blacks and hispanics in your “patriotic conservative Christians” group? Just wondering. Some of us are not particulary religious nor do we spend a lot of time worrying about who marries who….
        If you have never seen a group of people whine and complain as much…you are blind and deaf.

      • Marie

        Perpetual victims? That is a perfect description for all the gays whining about “equality” and what not.

        Oh, and not only are liberals the ones who divorce at higher rates, they’re the ones who largely pushed for no fault divorce laws.

      • DrSamHerman

        Look who is talking–another of the chronic outrage/habitual offense (COHO) brigade! Is it not leftists of your ilk that tell every minority that we are “victimized”? I am a Latino and I have never felt victimized except for the young black male who told me I had no right taking “his” spot in medical school. Of course, it turned out he didn’t even apply.

        If you find the institution of marriage to be so miserable, why do you stay in it? Your side promoted no-fault divorces and then the rate skyrocketed.

    • AaronHarrisinAlaska

      Kind of like how Civil Liberties were redefined in the 60s and 70s so that way no one can be discriminated against based on gender or color. Redefining. You’re saying it as though its a bad thing to cease discrimination based on sexual orientation.

      • walterc

        Unless you’re a white male, then you go to the back of the line because of something perpetrated by the Democratic party. I.E. Affirmative Action.

      • http://twitter.com/TruPundit BristolGOP Backup

        Skin color is inherent. Having sex with someone is a choice. Being recognized by the government for a legal contract is a privledge.

        • AaronHarrisinAlaska

          By that logic it’s completely fine and dandy to discriminate against mixed race marriages. We’re not talking about sex, and even if we were the factors that deside sexual orientation are still not yet nailed down so even then it’s ignorant to call it a choice. I degrees. We’re talking about marriage, civil unions, what ever they want to call it. Telling some one no based on sexual preference is nothing short of bigotry, discrimination, and is counter intuitive to the persuits of life and liberty.

          • EastValleyConservative

            I think you missed the point entirely. Read again. Having sex with someone is a choice—for EVERYONE. I personally don’t care about the science of it, I accept it as just what it is, doesn’t bother me one way or the other. But you really need to go and look at the history of politicians and government involved in this. If you feel that passionately about this, you’ll surely want to look at what the government has been doing. Every politician that claims to be for gay marriage, (listen to their words, sometimes they say equality and they do not mean marriage) look at their history and what they have done to advance the cause. Did they drop it? If they did so over political heat, then they are not worthy of the cause. Politics are not what feeds my family or pay my bills. Politicians trying to get re-elected on hot button issues rarely stick with their stated causes.

          • http://twitter.com/TruPundit BristolGOP Backup

            No, as I said, race is inherent.

            Honestly I don’t care what 1.5% of the population does as long as I don’t have to kneel at their altar.

          • Jason

            Buddy, you are looking at inherent in some way other than the law does.

            Antimiscengenation laws don’t change your status based on race, they change your status based on the CHOICE to marry someone of a different race. And we collectively decided that to prevent someone from marrying someone because of their race is a pretty bad reason, because its immutable. Gay people can already get married to someone of the opposite gender. Now the question is do we prevent someone from marrying someone because they have the same gender, which is equally immutable.

            Frankly, bringing sexual orientation into the debate just detracts from the argument. We don’t prohibit loveless marriages by law. Whether two men, or two women, should be able to get married should have nothing to do with their sexual orientation. It is simply a choice they make about who to enter in the contract of marriage with, with all its attendant rights and responsibilities.

            So, so what if I want to marry my bro, and have a wingman for life, and someone to help me raise the kid the surrogate pops out. Hopefully, he’ll be a dude too and we’ll never have to worry about putting down the toilet seat in our house. Booyah!

          • http://twitter.com/TruPundit BristolGOP Backup

            Actually, I thought your team believes sex is mutable. TVTS, right?

        • $24698634

          You are implying same sex attraction is a choice. Science says otherwise. Otherwise I agree.

          • http://twitter.com/TruPundit BristolGOP Backup

            I’m attracted to a lot of people who aren’t my wife. I don’t have sex with them.

          • $24698634

            You have a wife.  Gays want one too.

          • Judy B

            Wrong, Science does not support that at all. Every so called “study” proclaiming that has been found to be bogus.

          • $24698634

            Some evidence please.

          • DrSamHerman

            The studies are equivocal Kelly, meaning that they reached no conclusion. The study purporting to find a ‘gay gene’ was done in less than 100 people and it has not been replicated to the point where it would reach medical or scientific relevance. It’s the same as those other idiotic studies which found finger length, nose length, blah blah blah to be indicators of who is gay or not.

            The only conclusion that we have come to in psychiatry is that sexual attraction and sexuality are so enormously complex and varied that we just say we don’t know.

        • PatThePatriot


      • EastValleyConservative

        Marriage is not a civil right. Never has been. What gays want are the same benefits that married couples get in terms of tax breaks, insurance, other things–which can be accomplished without redefining marriage. Politicians could have solved this a long time ago, but if they solve it, they are left without a voting bloc that needs them to “save” them.

    • Dara

      It’s the Alynski way… change the meaning of the words – change the culture. I ain’t buyin’ it. You gays want to get hitched? It’s none of my business. You libs are great at making stuff up – MAKE UP ANOTHER WORD FOR ‘YOUR UNION’… See there? Problem solved : )

      • J. Cox

        But…that would not undermine traditional values and keep hammering away at Christians.I can almost bet that within 10 years,Churches will be getting sued for not allowing same sex unions.

      • EastValleyConservative

        But @facebook-100003328396959:disqus the left can’t divide and conquer with a simple SOLUTION!! They have to continue to keep their voting bloc roped in. If they ever managed to “solve” all the ills of society they claim they stood for, everyone would be fine and well, you can’t rally a group of people against another set of people if things are FINE.

  • geronl

    “Respect for Marriage Coalition” are those trying to destroy marriage, okay

    • AaronHarrisinAlaska

      If your faith in a marital foundation is so shaken by the idea of two dudes or two dudettes getting hitched than perhaps your foundation was made of mud instead of stone.

    • Marie

      I actually do like to read, asshole.

      Furthermore, we are all well aware that she came out in support of the idiotic farce that is “gay marriage” but even so, publicly supporting it does NOT give any organization the right to use her likeness in such a manner that it implies an endorsement of that organization.

      She might have felt differently if they had reached out to her first. Unfortunately, the gay activists are entitled drama queens with no common sense or decency.

    • Marie

      But here you are, bragging about your imaginary rich life when you are likely holed up in a hospice somewhere, dying of AIDS.

    • Marie

      They’re probably getting deleted because your supercilious insults aren’t adding to the conversation.

      Consider it a favor…vermin.

  • Danny Wheeler

    Yeah, liberals think they can say anything they want to those who don’t agree with them.

    • AaronHarrisinAlaska


  • RightThinking1

    How much of this stuff does one have to read before understanding that the pro-homosexual folk are vile? All of the feel-good arguments that they make are nothing but a thin veneer of cover for evil people.

    • http://www.facebook.com/luke.givens.963 Luke Givens

      Of course one never reads an allegedly conservative person making foul, angry comments on twitter, or on twitchy et al to offend your delicate girlish constitution. Everything is just roses and civility.

      • RightThinking1

        I’m not sure why ‘conservative’ is injected into the issue, since my comment only extended to the vitriolic pro-homosexual community. Putting that aside, I condemn all coarse, vulgar expression, whatever the source. Perhaps you approve of all of those expressions…? At least you’ve posted no condemnation of it here, which suggests tacit approval.

    • AaronHarrisinAlaska

      Pretty disgusting that you would judge the legitimacy of some ones love based upon your preconceived notion of their unrelated personal beliefs.

      • 364NKL

        So we have to believe in gay marriage because you do? Give me a flippin break. I don’t care what you do with your gay lover but don’t try to tell me I have to approve of it.

        • $24698634

          You don’t have to approve, just get out of the way. Gays have the same rights you do. The Constitution says so.

          • Catchance

            That’s not really the issue here. It isn’t whether it’s covered under the Constitution; it isn’t whether marriage is a right or a privilege; It isn’t even whether or not homosexuals have a right to “marry”. No, the issue is this: *what* is this right or privilege?

            You’re not trying to redefine marriage… you’re trying to *undefine* it. You’re implying that the definition that has been accepted by Western civilization for millennia (between one man and one woman) is wrong.

            If you think that marriage is only a legally sanctioned union and everyone has a *right* to it, then how can we deny it to polygamists?How can we deny it to someone who loves his horse?

          • $24698634

            Simple, keep it between two individuals only.

            I don’t hear about a lot of people trying to marry their horse.  Polygamy has already been dealt with.

      • RightThinking1

        There is nothing ‘preconceived’ about my interpretation of the outpouring of venom above. Do you believe that values are just turned on or off depending on the issue at hand? I notice that, just as Luke, you seem to be defensive of it.

  • Love of Country

    Tracy [email protected]

    Laura Bush asks to be removed from pro-gay marriage ad http://share.d-news.co/2Taq0NB – GOOD! DUMB BITCH STOOD BY WHILE HER HUSBAND TORTURED PEOPLE.


    Hey Tracy …. the Bush Administration water-boarded three terrorists, mkay? That’s how the SEALs got OBL, mkay? Dinglebarry has killed over 200 children w/ drones …. how you can possibly lament those three water-boarded terrorists without calling out Dinglebarry for callously murdering 200 small children is quite a feat. Sigmund Freud would be impressed, I’m sure!


    • AaronHarrisinAlaska

      They also aren’t the ones claiming to be the party of civility and tolerance.

    • Marie

      Oh look, the rump ranger lied. Thought you were done, donut puncher?

      Big talk coming from the fruit who takes it up the ass every night.

      • seek456

        what kind of an ugly human are you? Your comments are beyond reprehensible. Perhaps you should quit posting before you completely poison your poor computer.

  • http://profiles.google.com/kithogan Kit Hogan

    Libs are so jealous of anyone with loving husband and money

    • AaronHarrisinAlaska

      Dosnt mean they have the right to use her face and voice with out permission to push a personal point.

    • Marie

      You used dildo

  • doug sams

    Don’t blame her. You mental cases will want to marry your dogs soon. I have a couple horses for sale!

    • 364NKL

      And they will want the dogs listed as a parent in an adoption. Sick individuals.

    • Marie

      Unfortunately for you, Princess Fruitcake, I have.

      This isn’t Twitter, moron. Hash tags don’t work here, and your asinine usage if them us not impressing anyone.

    • Hiraghm

      Actually, that’s the argument I use against them. Since they want to redefine marriage as including marrying members of the same sex, why *can’t* others redefine it to include marriage to animals, vegetables and inanimate objects?

      The counter argument I usually get is because the dog (car/banana) can’t give consent. Therefore I’m denied my ‘right’ to marry whom *I* choose to. Such thinking is only possible to idiots who believe in group rights (oh wait… that’d include Laura Bush… “When *couples* are committed to each other and love each other, then *they* ought to have the same sort of rights that everyone has”).

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Marcy-Cook/1001619613 Marcy Cook

    These people are so disgustingly hateful and foul mouthed it is shocking that anyone would want to be in their ad.

  • seek456

    I think the hypocrisy of the left is enough to make one vomit. This outfit used Laura’s face and comment without her permission and she’s been called every foul name and then some. Meanwhile, the republican re-election committee was absolutely crucified for using a song in an ad. The left went bat-shit about it.

    What the hell is wrong with the left? Are they all nuts?


    btw toads – perfectly legal – but it hasn’t stopped the creepy left.


    • $24698634

      You want hypocrisy and double standard, I don’t remember Laura Bush being attacked while First Lady.

      • http://twitter.com/TheAngieNC2 Angie (D)

        Then you weren’t paying attention — I hate to break it to you, but history doesn’t stop happening just because you were living under a rock.

        • $24698634

          What was the attack, exactly?

          • seek456

            again, google is your friend. It wasn’t one attack – you will find many in the 8 years.

          • $24698634

            Name one.

          • http://twitter.com/TheAngieNC2 Angie (D)

            Seriously, you are willfully ignorant, spew your ignorance around as if it is fact and then expect others to do your research for you. Go educate yourself.

          • DrSamHerman

            Are you serious? Or do you have a rare case of true amnesia? Anybody who was not anesthetized in the last decade saw what happened to both George and Barbara Bush.

      • seek456

        of course you don’t remember – cause you agreed with it!

        • $24698634

          What were the attacks?  That she may have been drinking and smoking in the WH?  That was fine with me.

      • wwbdinct

        Childish libtard.

        • $24698634

          You have to be kidding.  No actual comment?

      • Hiraghm

        I remember.

        If we had a First Lady today, she’d probably be attacked, as well. Instead, we only have the WH occupier’s bedmate to attack. And she gives us SO much ammunition…

  • http://twitter.com/jimni27 Jimni27

    Do these people even know what tolerance means?

    • http://twitter.com/TruPundit BristolGOP Backup

      Tolerance means you have the right to agree with them in every possible way, duh

  • kateorjane

    Funny how quick the Left is cry about how insensitive & evil the Right is when they think someone has said something unkind or offensive about their buzz groups but they have absolutely no problem being generally disgusting slime bags when they disagree with a Conservative.
    Why would Bush want to help people who are so quick to call her vile words?

  • Steve_J

    Are all those people OWS and Code Pink members?

    • http://twitter.com/1RandiStarr Randi Starr

      Incomplete abortions.

      • Hiraghm

        maybe not so incomplete… they certainly seem brain dead.

  • http://www.facebook.com/sherri.seiber Sherri Seiber

    What part of she never gave her permission don’t these idiots get. If they hate her so much, why would they want her in the ad anyway.

  • lillymckim

    They did not ask or get Laura Bush’s approval to use her. Laura Bush is using her “Pro Choice Voice” and does not wish to be in the ad yes, thats “her” choice.

    • $24698634

      I think they had the legal right to use her statement. As a courtesy, though, they could have asked her.

      • http://twitter.com/TheAngieNC2 Angie (D)

        You can *think* what you like — but you would be 100% wrong — even public figures have complete control over their image UNLESS it is for news (i.e., if NBC news ran the clip as part of a NEWS STORY that would be OK). However, this organization which clearly has an AGENDA and is not REPORTING NEWS does not have any right, whatsoever, to use anyone in their AD (right there, proving it isn’t used for “news”) without EXPRESS PERMISSION.

        • $24698634

          I’m not doubting you, but could you provide some proof of that?

          Remember, trust but verify.

          • seek456
          • $24698634

            Still not sure it’s so clear cut.  I found this under exceptions:

            “a fundraising letter discussing public policy questions in
            the field of education and relating a local political figure’s praise of the organization sending the letter;”  (my italics).

            Maybe a legal argument could be made.  I don’t remember, did LB threaten to sue?

  • rivers

    Sorry, I could get past moron Tracey Frank’s comment. Like she gives a rat’s butt that someone was tortured, she certainly doesn’t care about the beheaded homosexuals who hail from the same countries as those who were waterboarded; doesn’t have a beef with the 1400 killed by Obama’s drone strikes. Yet we’re supposed to beleive that she’s so angry at Laura because she herself is such a loving and compassionate person?

    The hypocrisy and hatefulness of these people is astounding.

    • Hiraghm

      At least Bush “tortured” foreign terrorists, as opposed to the torture Obama has inflicted on the American public for four+ years.

  • NCRelite

    I just got married to my lovely wife recently. We get what, like a few hundred dollars in a tax break? To me that is totally inconsequential, what matters most is the commitment we made to eachother and to God — none of which has anything to do with the United States Federal Government

    • AaronHarrisinAlaska

      Which makes me ask why two dudes or two dudettes can’t make the same commitment, with or without god.

      • NCRelite

        Exactly! Why do they need the Government to validate their love, and more importantly, why do they need taxpayer sponsorship?

        • Hiraghm

          What they want is the establishment that their “relationship” is as valid, real, natural and healthy as the mating of males and females. Both to further the delusion that they’re not sick, and, more importantly, to tear down yet another of the vital and fundamental institutions of the nation.

  • 364NKL

    I’d say Bill and Hillary’s crimes would top that of Laura Bush.

  • Joe W.

    From the LIBERAL, Snopes:


    Lying maggot…

  • grais

    These cretins would throw those names out at their own grandmothers. And probably have. They deserve to be ignored.

  • Garth Haycock

    As if Joan Walsh is the epitome of political courage.

  • Gallatin

    Robert Crawford
    @TheBrandonShire Laura Bush is a Xanax-addled, pie-eyed douchebag. Who gives a fuck what she says or wants? #RWNJs #p2 #p21

    @TheBrandonShire Michelle Obama is a Xanax-addled, dough-butt douchebag. Who gives a fuck what she says or wants? #RWNJs #p2 #p21

    Fixed it for you.

  • detroit19

    I love/support Laura Bush as First Lady and as a decent, caring human being (and GW as President. as well). We haven’t this much class in the White House since Ronald & Nancy Reagan. God bless them both!

    • Hiraghm

      “We haven’t any class in the White House since Ronald & Nancy Reagan.”


  • EastValleyConservative

    Odd, anything the left disagrees with is called “lack of political courage” as if we are too afraid to voice our opinions lest someone on the right disagree with it. Wrong. Standing up for what your beliefs are and sticking to them is the very definition of political courage.

  • $27789750

    Usual gay over the top reponse to anything they disagree with.

  • DefCon99

    So much for tolerance.

    • http://twitter.com/1RandiStarr Randi Starr

      The left is like a toddler, they tolerate only when they get their way.

  • http://twitter.com/1RandiStarr Randi Starr

    Nothing says ugly like progressive………………….

  • bkeyser

    Butt hurt gay mafia. Whooda seen that comin’?

  • orringtonmom (D)

    i’m sorry, laura bush wants out of an ad… i don’t have time for your benghazi nonsense…

    • seek456

      laura bush never wanted into the ad. Get it?

  • Judy B

    Wow, what vitriol, now I don’t feel so bad saying Mochelle looks like a scab on a chickens ass.

    • Hiraghm

      Wow… you managed to insult both scabs AND chickens in one comment. I salute you! :)

  • Jazzee

    Mrs Bush can have her OWN opinion without being called disgusting names by these idiots………..if she supports gay marriage or not
    totally out of control…owe her an apology

  • kim

    isn’t it nice to see how open, loving, civil, and tolerant the left really is?

  • $41378716

    Laura Bush is no longer in the public eye and wants to live in peace as a private citizen. I am not understanding why anyone would persecute her for wanting to be left out of the current “conversation”. Can’t they find someone else to ‘use’ as their token Republican, female poster child?
    Good God! Leave the woman alone already!

    • http://twitter.com/1RandiStarr Randi Starr

      This is a totally strange concept to a group of people who do nothing but scream ME,ME,ME.

    • http://twitter.com/1RandiStarr Randi Starr

      This is a totally strange concept to a group of people who do nothing but scream ME,ME,ME.

  • Paul Citro

    If you don’t agree with the left hold on to your ass as the mask flies off.

    • http://twitter.com/1RandiStarr Randi Starr

      They not only lie to you they lie to them-self which is the real sad reality.

    • http://twitter.com/1RandiStarr Randi Starr

      They not only lie to you they lie to them-self which is the real sad reality.

  • CynicOwl

    #WarOnWomen ????

  • wyatt81

    The foul mouthed, self centered, hypocritical brownshirts on the left once again prove that this is the dumbest generation in history-not to mention the nastiest. These are supposed to be human beings?

  • wyatt81

    The foul mouthed, self centered, hypocritical brownshirts on the left once again prove that this is the dumbest generation in history-not to mention the nastiest. These are supposed to be human beings?

  • rant stocks

    I guess when you stand by your own convictions you get filthy comments and hateful words your way. disgusting liberals never fail….oops take that back…THEY ALL FAIL AS DECENT HUMAN BEINGS PERIOD.

  • Phil McMorrow

    What a bunch of fowl mouthed losers. Typical left wing ad hominum attacks that make no attempt at digging into exactly why Laura Bush wanted her comments removed from the ad. In fact, it really doesn’t matter why. She owns the comments and can do what she wants with them. I am fairly certain this whole episode is an effort to embarass her. In any event, all of those incredibly stupid individuals can go to a very, very warm place to be roasted, as far as I am concerned.

  • Chris D. Clay

    what a bunch of assholes. if they didnt get the womans permission to put her in the ad, then she has the right to ask to be removed. so sick of this bullshit. shes not a cunt, or evil or a coward for not wanting to used by some company for their purposes with out permission. so wonder if someone made an anti gay ad, and used the images of some of the people that are bashing the former first lady…. i bet those clowns would be lining up to lawyer up to sue the ad maker. people, just stop it. its unamerican, and stupid.

  • Hiraghm

    Now maybe y’all understand why your forebears persecuted homosexuals. Their mental/emotional illness doesn’t end with their misbegotten sexual appetites…

  • Guest

    Who could be surprised at filthy insults, spewed from the Comrades,
    as they circle the toilet bowl of their lives.