Discussion for article #231657
Brilliant! “it’s been overturned by the courts, I guess.”…WAY TO LEAD! Did you think of that all by yerself? Just wait until he has to do the GOTP primary dance on immigration…
13 Likes
In fairness to Jeb Bush, there really isn’t much difference between those two statements, and the statements are not necessarily inconsistent. The first statement sets forth his view that the matter should be left up to the individual states to resolve, and in the second statement he simply expresses his belief that we should respect the decision of the court, a decision with which he obviously does not agree. There will, I suspect, be lots of things in the coming months about which to criticize Jeb Bush, but these two statements aren’t it.
2 Likes
Feh. He’s figured out that the issue is nothing HE’s going to stick is face in, for sure.
I think he’s underestimating the level of crazy in his party’s base, though. Gay marriage isn’t an issue for those of us here in the real world, but he has to run the cray cray gamut first, and for a lot of them, gay equality is even worse than accepting Hispanics as equals.
10 Likes
Jeb Bush Wobbles
Does that make him a Weeble ?
6 Likes
How long before we realize that GWB is the smarter one? And GWB is god-awfully stupid.
8 Likes
As the first Gov to sign a Stand your Ground Law, he may not even win Florida
1 Like
He’s a little rusty on this whole politics thing. Been busy cashing in for the past decade.
8 Likes
or is wobbles the new flip-flops? (although I agree with Informed that he didn’t exactly contradict himself in this instance)
Its almost as if he read my comment on the other thread…
No, there is a nice chunk of daylight between the two. Meaning, those pesky Federal Judges just spat in the face of voters (who, by the way probably would allow marriage now…) but he’s all law and order-y.
3 Likes
Weasel wobbles, but he don’t fall down… yet.
5 Likes
respect for the good people…making lifetime commitments
But nothing for the gays that fornicate like national Republican Christian politicians…
2 Likes
He’s beginning to sound a lot like Senator Rancid Paul, even the backtracking part…
Probably thinks private businesses should have the right to discriminate too…Lunch counters, Jeb? Can we get a statement from you on that while we’re at it?
I didn’t know his name really isn’t Jeb…sheesh. Can’t believe I just learned that.
3 Likes
On today’s episode of “Why You Never Knowingly Take the Wrong Position Just to Pander to Idiots and Fools”…
3 Likes
"Bush said he hoped that “we can show respect for the good people
on all sides of the gay and lesbian marriage issue…”
Man-- that would be great Jeb!
Could you have a word with the thousands of ® politicians and other assorted RWNJ bigots who refuse?
jw1
.
4 Likes
The wimp factor is back. Talk about leading from behind!
2 Likes
…including couples making lifetime commitments to each other
who are seeking greater legal protections
and those of us who believe marriage is a sacrament
and want to safeguard religious liberty.
Man-- that would be great Jeb!
If you had just left out the emboldened dog-whistle.
jw1
.
2 Likes
Actually, it’s more like the two side of the same coin. Inextricably combined, but unable to see both at the same time (unless you use a mirror).
Marriage regulation is a power left to the states since the Constitution gives Congress no authority to define or regulate marriage. States can legalize same-sex marriage or not, but once they prohibit it, they flip to the other side of the coin. Once same-sex marriage is seen as an Equal Protection of the Laws issue rather than one of morality or of religious freedom to persecute gays, then the courts will step in because the state is violating the 14th Amendment. The courts have regularly held that the right to marry is a basic right (presumably one of the “unenumerated rights” protected by the 9th Amendment). As such the states are not permitted to deny that right to a minority, even by majority vote. As Justice Robert H. Jackson once wrote:
The very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy, to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials and to establish them as legal principles to be applied by the courts. One’s right to life, liberty, and property, to free speech, a free press, freedom of worship and assembly, and other fundamental rights may not be submitted to vote; they depend on the outcome of no elections.
West Virginia Bd. of Ed. v. Barnette, 319 U.S. 624, 638 (1943)
So same-sex marriage is a matter left to the states by the Constitution. But the way the constitutional deck is stacked, the state can allow it, but they can’t prohibit it without running afoul of the Constitution. Once they try to prohibit it, it becomes a constitutional issue and there is only one way any court is going to rule on it.
2 Likes
In a salute to word play I’m submitting Jebbles. Gay marriage right now, and support for immigration down the road a little. But I think he’s safe with having supported Stand Your Ground.