Our sublime First Lady of love and respect.

Here's the portion of the Time Magazine interview with Laura Bush that deals with gay rights. Note that the Time interviewer, Matthew Cooper, introduces the topic with an invitation to speak from the point of view of someone who disapproves of gay people:

TIME

I was curious if there are ways that people can help those who have gay people in their own lives and be supportive of them, even if they maybe disapprove—



BUSH

Well, I think everyone should be treated with dignity. And I know the President thinks that too. That's something he says all the time.



And we're all different. And I particularly think that from having been a teacher, [one learns] to treat every child in their classroom with dignity and with respect.

Laura Bush neatly and astutely interrupts as soon as Cooper says the word "disapprove." She instantly recrafts the discussion in terms of "dignity," defends the President from what was at most a completely vague indirect criticism, and portrays herself, as always, as a benevolent teacher.



Next Cooper introduces the gay marriage topic:

TIME

And did you have a take on this gay-marriage question?



BUSH

Well, I think it's a debate. People want to be able to debate the issue, and that's exactly what the call for a constitutional amendment does. It opens the debate up. The people of the United States didn't really want the Massachusetts Supreme Court or the San Francisco mayor to make the choice for them. And we're seeing a debate on it. And I think that's good.



TIME

Did you have a take on the amendment yourself?



BUSH

I also think there should be a debate on the issue. People want to be able to talk about it—and come to terms with it, if that's what people decide.

Again, instead of responding to the question in its own terms and taking a position on the specific issue, Laura Bush reframes the subject in terms of something good, this time: "debate." And I see a hint of what her real position is: she supports gay marriage! Where do I see that? I see that in the phrase "come to terms with it." Even though the amendment seems hostile to gay people, it will create a debate on the subject and people will talk and think. The amendment process--which will, of course, ultimately fail--will turn America into the schoolroom of the benevolent teacher. Her vision is this: through the process of debate, with respect for difference, and dignity for all, Americans will "come to terms" with gay marriage. She softens that prediction with "if that's what the people decide," lest anyone who is opposed to gay marriage feel left out and dispirited by a forgone conclusion.



The interviewer persists:

TIME

Right, but are you of an open mind about the amendment?



BUSH

Sure.

A one-word answer, but one that does not match what the President has said in public. The interviewer shifts to a clever question:

TIME

Have you ever had a gay couple stay with you in the White House or in Texas?



BUSH

I'm sure we have.

"Stay with you" strongly implies staying overnight and presumably sharing a bedroom, so if Laura Bush is "sure" that has happened, that's saying quite a lot. Cooper seems surprised by the answer and doesn't blurt out a gay-sex-in-the-Lincoln-Bedroom question. Look at his next question:

TIME

You wouldn't have any objection?

Why "wouldn't"? Why not "didn't"? Didn't you hear that she just said it's already happened? I think Laura Bush was a couple steps ahead of Cooper all along. He seems to have wanted to find a way to invite her to express disapproval of gay persons. Surely, she'd draw a line at allowing a gay couple to sleep together in her own home! But she says:

BUSH

No, of course not.

Yeah, Time. How could you even imagine that Laura Bush would feel anything but love and respect for the dignity of all people?