Bush Solicitor General Ted Olson Hails Obama Gay Marriage Shift

The Daily Beast ^ | May 9 2012 | John Avlon

[G Larry]

Was Barbara just his beard?

[B Knotts]

I’m smelling ozone.

[B Knotts]

Actually, looks like he’s already gone.

[Admin Moderator]

Nice name...

[Servant of the Cross]

just as it was gettin’ interesting .....

[Zeppo]

Sometimes I enjoy playing with my food before I eat it.

[Servant of the Cross]

LOL.

But I kind of wanted to play a little first ...

[woofie]

This is a typical reaction on FR .
Olsen is a conservative ...he disagrees with you on this issue ....he agrees with Dick Cheney.....There is enough room for more than one opinion on this and other things

[Sudetenland]

It has become abundantly clear that Barbara was both the driving force of conservatism and the brains in that couple.

Since her murder by muslim terrorists, Ted has wandered progressively further astray.

One must also wonder if perhaps he has fallen victim of the "silly old man syndrome" and hooked up with a younger, more liberal woman.

[aMorePerfectUnion]

You signed up TODAY, to post this?

[Jane Austen]

She was great, but I never liked him. Just something about him . . .

[RMDupree]

This is one of those moments when I wish FR had a “Like” button! LOL!

[pogo101]

Olsen is a conservative ...he disagrees with you on this issue ....he agrees with Dick Cheney.....

Simply incorrect. Olsen argues that the Constitution, as of 1871, already required recognition of gay marriage, and therefore that state voters do not even get to weigh in on the matter.

Cheney believes that it IS up to a state-level vote (and has said he would vote in favor of it).

There is a huge difference between saying, "I favor it, but it doesn't matter because it's already in the Constitution" (Olsen and other whatever-I-want-is-constitutionally-required liberals) and saying "It's up to state voters, and I personally would vote yes" (Cheney).

There is nothing conservative about arguing that gay marriage was "already in the Constitution" as of 1871.

[woofie]

are you a lawyer?
Olsen is a lawyer and as I understand it one of the best.

Lawyers also disagree.
That does not make him a liberal.

My only ponit is on this board any non conformity is frowned on ,,,

Freedom means just that ...People are free to disagree,

Its healthier

[pogo101]

Well, “they agree” (Olsen and Cheney) on the POLICY issue, being pro-gay-marriage. That much is true. Most here on FR probably disagree. I don’t care very much so long as religions aren’t forced to accommodate it.

The two men DO NOT agree on the legal issue. Olsen’s prominence on this issue derives from his LEGAL (as opposed to POLICY) expertise. That is what I was rising to say earlier.

That being said, I agree with you that FR got a little flamey when Mitt was being imposed upon us, and it bothered me too. I was afraid I was going to be denounced!

[tumblindice]

http://images.allmoviephoto.com/2004_You_Got_Served/2004_you_got_served_wallpaper_002.jpg

So long, chummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmP!
Back to the DUmp with you, hie and be gone.

[SoldierDad]

Satire, right???

[SoldierDad]

Too late - he’s/she’s been zotted.

[dfwgator]

Good, their story was growing tiresome.

[cherry]

it should be a states right...be prepared to have laws enacted making it legal for a daddy and dtr to marry, or two brothers, or a mother and her son, or a brother and his sister...

because if two homosexuals can "marry" than why not mommy and sonny?

all I really want is for the homosexuals to pay the marriage penalty tax....and have divorces proceedings, and custody battles....

I feel that most homosexuals will not want to actually "marry"....they just want us to know that its okay to do so....marriage would put a damper on their roaming the gay bars and public restrooms...