Discussion for article #229039
Of course he would defend a ban on interracial marriage so long as no one comes after him for being married to a non-White woman. He believes strongly in âI have mine- screw you.â
5 Likes
Heâs a scumbag and he knows his base constituency is Fed-fearing Bible-thumping racist assholes. And sadly (Iâm in Texas) heâs going to win.
3 Likes
ârefused to say whether he would defend a ban.â
Refused to say whether he would fight a ban.
FIFY
âAbbott, whose wife is Hispanicâ
AwkwardâŚ
2 Likes
Followup question: Are you sidestepping the question because you are a racist, or because you depend on the votes of racists?
6 Likes
However, in a private GOP fundraiser after the event, Abbott stated âjust because a court has said something is unconstitutional doesnât make it so. Especially when it comes to freedom of association, a state just has to put its foot down and say âyour overreach stops here.ââ
1 Like
Was that an actual quote, or just snark?
1 Like
Loony times for loony guys.
1 Like
Letâs face it, this was a âgotchaâ question, trying to trap the candidate. I am for his opponent, but donât think he needed to respond at all here. He has enough baggage as it is, so letâs concentrate on what he has actually said and done.
âInterracial Marriage Banâ in Texas?
Hell, most Texans are interracial, even the âpureâ ones.
You donât think Santa Anna and his people just up and left, do you?
1 Like
Up until Republicans started going after contraception, I would have said yes, it is a gotcha question.
However, since the advent of Tea Party, a lot of issues I considered settled, have somehow become unsettled. Such as the legality of contraceptives.
So now I am not so sure.
1 Like
Oh, the latterâsame as McConnell.
How on earth does he have a nearly 14% lead over Davis ?
a stateâs A.G., not unlike the Federal A.G. isnât ârequiredâ to defend all the laws passed by the state legislature.
for example, many state A.G.'s have refused to defend their stateâs laws or constitutional amendments, banning same-sex marriage. they contend that the statutes are illegal on their face, and thus will not withstand judicial scrutiny. it also has the salutary affect of reducing budget expenditures.
I really do not like Abbott and hope he loses to Wendy Davis.
Still, the question is unfair. Consider the position of defense attorneys in criminal cases, especially bad crimes like DUI with injuries or even murder. The defendant in our system deserves a good defense. This as much to make sure our justice system operates properly as to protect the defendant. If defendants are abandoned then prosecutors and the cops get an easy ride and can convict anyone.
Similarly, state AGs need to act to keep the system in balance. Not many decades earlier the Supreme court would have ruled against interracial marriage (see Plessy). A decade ago it would have ruled against same-gender marriage. There is always the question of state-rights vs federal authority that needs to be determined by the judiciary.
Yes, I feel Abbott and Gov. Perry have fought the state rights issue many times when they were wrong, and proven so by losing, when they should have saved the tax payer dollars.
He could have answered the question. There are three responses he can provide, although whichever response he chooses surely provides insight into his personal views. Donât ever think this guy has a respectable bone in his body.
Rick Perry has set the table for this guy. Their policies are awful and the state is struggling in many ways. The water wars may turn out to be the main issue in the not to distant future and that affects everyone. The Repubs are selling off the rights and giving the buyers all the legal ground that they need to do it. Which majority votes for that?
Texas is a bubble economy within the greater economy and they are voting for a crash, that is insane.
Yes, it was. If he hasnât, he will sooner or later. âDog whistlingâ is a little too subtle for the average Texas Teahadi.