Discussion for article #240029
Stopped clock, etc…
Given that Graham was a JA and prosecutor in the Air Force, he’s well acquainted with the concept of obeying the law regardless of personal beliefs.
He’s been acting a little more rational in the last few months. I think he realizes the batshit crazy route the GOP has taken is going to crash and burn sooner than later.
I think that gives him too much credit. It won’t last…
Senator Grahams is, of course, correct. But it is not even a close call. The fact that there is even a debate, with people taking the clerk’s side, tells us how messed up we are as a nation.
It’s possible. It’s just that it seems he’s making sense more than anyone else in the GOP, especially for a 2016 Presidential candidate.
Hewitt then asked Graham if there is a middle ground between complying with the Supreme Court ruling and refusing to issue licenses.
I suppose the middle ground might be she issues licenses to hetero couples but not to LGBT couples. That's a middle ground conservatives would agree to. Hey, they're willing to compromise, right?
"“The rule of law is the rule of law,” Graham said. “We are a rule of law
nation. And I appreciate her conviction, and I support traditional
marriage, but she’s accepted a job where she has to apply the law to
everyone and that’s her choice.”
Trump has brought some sense to a few I see.
Lindsey is right and I admire his courage for saying so.
If he believes we are a nation of laws, where was he during the Bush admin??
Time will tell how this plays in the rest of Wingnuttia. That’s the most sensible remarks uttered by a Republican in many years.
Tomorrow’s court hearing should be fun!
You might be assuming they know what the laws are.
Never have I heard so much misinterpretation, throughout this campaign season, of what the law actually is.
The “law” is whatever is in their fevered dreams at the moment.
A case of see which way the wind blows then go with the wind to get more votes .
Well, that and he knows he has zero chance of getting the nomination or even a juicy appointment. So there’s no longer any need to cater to the crazy. I think Graham has demonstrated before that he is secretly a sane, sound policymaker, his pro-militarism hawkishness aside (I think that stuff is partly just boosting fed spending in SC)
Given that the guiding ideology of his tribe is “You are with us or against us”, I wonder how many people look at this completely rational statement of his and conclude Mr. Graham is a liberal-leaning establishment traitor to the party who needs to be tossed?
I wish proceedings in federal court were televised. Tomorrow would be must-see TV.
What option does the court or state have if she refuses to resign? Jail? None of her staff will do the job, since the staff all appear to be her family. Can the court appoint someone to fill the position while she is jailed, since it is an elected position?
Sometimes issues are really that simple. They can be summed up in one sentence. And even a Republican presidential candidate can utter the sentence in a direct, straightforward and unambiguous manner. Well done.