Video: Why aren’t Republicans making a bigger deal of the Prop 8 ruling?

posted at 6:06 pm on August 6, 2010 by Allahpundit

Good question. Unless I missed it, both Palin and Romney have been silent on the subject and even Huckabee’s statement was notably terse. Two words, my friends: Message discipline.

Republicans said that dwelling on the issue could become a distraction in the effort to win back the House or Senate from Democrats this fall. At a meeting of the Republican National Committee in Kansas City, Mo., several party leaders and strategists said it would be a mistake for the midterm election campaign to suddenly become focused on gay marriage, immigration or other hot-button issues. The only path to winning control of Congress, they said, rested on making an economic argument.

“This election needs to revolve around five issues: taxes, spending, the economy, jobs and debt,” said Ron Nehring, chairman of the California Republican Party. “That doesn’t mean that other issues aren’t important — they are important — but the first issue on the minds of people is the economy.”

Why gamble on an issue on which the electorate’s already fairly closely split when you’ve got the heavy artillery of 9.5 percent unemployment and staggering national debt to run on? Especially when seniors, a reliably anti-gay-marriage group, are already sure to come out to the polls en masse for the GOP to protest ObamaCare and young adults, a reliably pro-gay-marriage group, will probably stay home due to disinterest? Let sleeping dogs lie. Besides, even tea partiers are likely to split over gay marriage; the last thing the GOP leadership wants to do is antagonize the libertarians in its own base. Maddow counters in the clip below that the libertarian element is overblown per the fact that tea-party candidates like Rand Paul and Sharron Angle are actually pretty socially conservative, but each of those two is a special case. Paul’s great worry in the primary was that his last name would make him too kooky to be nominated; since his libertarian pedigree is sterling, his adoption of social con policies, I’ve always assumed, was simply a way to be seen as more mainstream. (Although it should be noted that his pop has always been pro-life too.) As for Angle, yeah, she’s a true believer, but just because she’s not a true blue libertarian doesn’t mean an awful lot of voters who are wouldn’t be alienated by a strong Republican anti-gay-marriage push. Angle is bulletproof among Nevada conservatives because they hate Reid with a fiery passion; she could betray libertarianism on every front and they’ll still vote for her to knock him out. That’s not the case nationally and the GOP, to its credit, seems to recognize it.

All of which is to say that Republican voters aren’t quite as opposed to gay rights as they used to be, which we already knew from CPAC and various polls taken earlier this year. When Rush Limbaugh is a supporter of civil unions and Ann Coulter (“the right-wing Judy Garland”) is headlining GOProud’s first annual conference, it’s safe to say that the old days are over.

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Republicans aren’t making a big deal about this because they don’t need to make a big deal about this. The Dims have been on a suicide mission for over a year. As boring as it may seem, sitting back and watching Dims implode has been an effective strategy for the GOP. No need to cause any ripples by going Prop 8 on everyone…

joejm65 on August 6, 2010 at 6:10 PM

“This election needs to revolve around…: taxes, spending, the economy, jobs and debt”

Can’t really argue with that. Play our strongest suit.

petefrt on August 6, 2010 at 6:11 PM

Screw social issues.

It’s the economy….hammer away at it.

rickyricardo on August 6, 2010 at 6:12 PM

Awww, poor liberals. Can’t play the race card anymore (because now it just makes people laugh), and can’t call conservatives “homophobes.” What else have they got left?

Rational Thought on August 6, 2010 at 6:14 PM

Priorities.

OhioCoastie on August 6, 2010 at 6:14 PM

Democrats are cold to of the people, by the people and for the people and many Republican establishment types aren’t all that many degrees warmer to it.

Tav on August 6, 2010 at 6:14 PM

…it’s safe to say that the old days are over.

Safer to say, but not safe. Just read over the many comments opposing gay marriage right here at HA. If it’s representative of what voters will be, gay marriage is still in trouble.

JetBoy on August 6, 2010 at 6:14 PM

Safer to say, but not safe. Just read over the many comments opposing gay marriage right here at HA. If it’s representative of what voters will be, gay marriage is still in trouble.

JetBoy on August 6, 2010 at 6:14 PM

You’re taking comments on HotAir as representative of voters?

Dude, I think you might have eaten a bad hat.

MadisonConservative on August 6, 2010 at 6:17 PM

Awww, poor liberals. Can’t play the race card anymore (because now it just makes people laugh), and can’t call conservatives “homophobes.” What else have they got left?

Rational Thought on August 6, 2010 at 6:14 PM

What I hear from the libs is that somehow the GOP is “planning something” for November over Prop 8. A lot of ‘em say that, whatever it’s supposed to mean. I think the GOP is smart not to fall into that trap and be labeled homophobic.

JetBoy on August 6, 2010 at 6:18 PM

I think many are watching to see where this heads.

It wasn’t like the People of California, who voted on this, aren’t upset since the Law took it out of their little voting hands.

I think the Law is wrong concerning this. The people’s voices were heard…. and then got strangled.

upinak on August 6, 2010 at 6:18 PM

The only path to winning control of Congress, they said, rested on making an economic argument.

Ridiculous. Haven’t these losers ever heard of Combined Arms?

Tav on August 6, 2010 at 6:18 PM

Safer to say, but not safe. Just read over the many comments opposing gay marriage right here at HA. If it’s representative of what voters will be, gay marriage is still in trouble.

Eh. A comments section on a partisan blog is one of the worst places to find a representative sample of anything. Almost by definition, you’re going to have the most committed activists dominating the discussion, since they’re the most motivated to speak out.

Allahpundit on August 6, 2010 at 6:19 PM

Seriously, what’s the point? Voters have always voted against gay marriage, and politically appointed judges have told them to pound sand. The outcome of this matter appears to lie in the uncertain hands of a single person – Judge Kennedy of the Supreme Court. All the votes of all the voters in America are essentially irrelevant.

It’s a hell of a note that our country has come to this, but it has. Our only hope is to win elections so that our politically appointed rulers will be appointed by the right politicos.

materialist on August 6, 2010 at 6:19 PM

Actually the republicans are being smart in this regard, the left are the ones that want to push the hot buttons to deflect from the economy. The gay marriage issue is being used to bait the conservatives much the way the race card is used to bait conservatives.

fourdeucer on August 6, 2010 at 6:21 PM

I’m against gay marriage but not civil unions. They carry all the same benefits as conventional marriage. I’m a Catholic and Marriage is one of the seven Sacraments. Many,if not most Religions consider it “holy.” That’s what puzzles me the most about gay marriage advocates. Why, if all things Religious are abhorred by you, would you want to have it bestowed on your relationship?

sandee on August 6, 2010 at 6:21 PM

Allahpundit on August 6, 2010 at 6:19 PM

Socrates, you have risen back from the dead!

upinak on August 6, 2010 at 6:21 PM

WHY?
Because they already know where they stand on the issue. And they are well aware that it won’t be ‘settled’ until it reaches the Supreme Court.

GarandFan on August 6, 2010 at 6:21 PM

‘Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.’
- Napolean

rayra on August 6, 2010 at 6:22 PM

Who cares about social issues when we are basically collapsing? If a foreign power takes us over due to our reckless fiscal and foreign policy, all bets are off on social issues.
We’ll either be Red China’s bitches or Dhimmis, all going to slaughter for being infidels.

Deal with social issues AFTER we’ve secured our country financially, militarily, CONSTITUTIONALLY!

NTWR on August 6, 2010 at 6:22 PM

Because we’re not gays or leftards who have a history of rioting every time they don’t get their way.

Blake on August 6, 2010 at 6:22 PM

The last thing any Republican wants to deal with right now is an angry Dick Cheney out for LGBT justice.

joe_doufu on August 6, 2010 at 6:23 PM

Smart play by the GOP!?!?! Wow! I’m a bit shocked!

well played.

Ampersand on August 6, 2010 at 6:23 PM

Disenfranchised voters know how they feel and will vote accordingly. Stick with the fiscal problems.

Cindy Munford on August 6, 2010 at 6:24 PM

This is the kind of message that will get you votes in the Northeast.

Plenty of liberals hate taxes too….and just like RINOs they don’t really care that much about social issues like gay marriage and abortion. Those are back-burner issues for about 90% of Americans.

Stay
On
Message

Mord on August 6, 2010 at 6:24 PM

By passing Prop 8, were the people of California labeled as homophobic?

d1carter on August 6, 2010 at 6:24 PM

A less provocative way to say it is: bigger fish to fry, my friends, bigger fish to fry.

NTWR on August 6, 2010 at 6:25 PM

It’s a hell of a note that our country has come to this, but it has. Our only hope is to win elections so that our politically appointed rulers will be appointed by the right politicos.

materialist on August 6, 2010 at 6:19 PM

There’s always the Founders’ intent, expressed via the 2nd Amendment and the Declaration of Independence -

When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. …

rayra on August 6, 2010 at 6:26 PM

Robert errrr Rachel Maddow has more testosterone than Obly.

barrythrowslikeagirl on August 6, 2010 at 6:26 PM

Could it simply be that most fiscal conservatives actually hold the same views on same sex marriage and civil unions that the president does?

canditaylor68 on August 6, 2010 at 6:27 PM

Eh. A comments section on a partisan blog is one of the worst places to find a representative sample of anything. Almost by definition, you’re going to have the most committed activists dominating the discussion, since they’re the most motivated to speak out.

Allahpundit on August 6, 2010 at 6:19 PM

But judging from the fact that whenever it is put to a vote it loses, that prop 8 was worded in such a way that people who are against gay marriage might have voted against prop 8, and that most people are afraid to voice their opinion against it because as we saw post prop 8 people were forced to quit their jobs and physically assaulted or intimidated. It is especially bad if you are an old lady. Pro gay married supporters love to go after old ladies.

Blake on August 6, 2010 at 6:27 PM

Whether you agree with the ruling or not.. it is a case of judicial activism.. which if both sides were honest, nobody would care for that either. But I’m sure the discussion about the ghey marriage would dominate, so I guess it’s fine enough to stay away from it for now..

Zippy_Slug on August 6, 2010 at 6:27 PM

Almost by definition, you’re going to have the most committed activists dominating the discussion, since they’re the most motivated to speak out.

Absolutely. It’s the same with the gay activists on the other side…they too dominate the discussion while not being a true representation of the group.

And yes…to MadCon as well…I did say “if”, but I get the feeling that it’s voters with their sentiment that will come out to the polls in greater numbers.

JetBoy on August 6, 2010 at 6:27 PM

by definition, you’re going to have the most committed activists dominating the discussion, since they’re the most motivated to speak out.

You have to do analysis by juxtaposing troll comments against
partisan hoo-ha and the opinion stated in blogger’s post.

Apply Fermat’s Last Theorem and, voila’! An accurate representation
of probable outcome.
That is all.

Beto Ochoa on August 6, 2010 at 6:27 PM

By the way I agree whole heartily with this strategy. The Country is pretty evenly split on this issue. It will surely be decided in the Supreme Court. In the famous words of William Jefferson Clinton,”it’s the economy stupid.” Actually I think it was Carville who said it, but you get my drift.

sandee on August 6, 2010 at 6:28 PM

‘Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.’
- Napolean

rayra on August 6, 2010 at 6:22 PM

‘Never let an opportunity to capitalize on your enemies mistakes go by.’
- The Duke of Wellington
-

Tav on August 6, 2010 at 6:29 PM

When Carville who said ”it’s the economy stupid.”
He was directing the comment at Al Gore.

Beto Ochoa on August 6, 2010 at 6:30 PM

if they even go after the issue the gop needs to make it about the will of the people being attacked again NOT about gay marriage.

lavell12 on August 6, 2010 at 6:30 PM

Judicial fiat, with dangerous repercussions.

We’re too confident the Supreme Court will overturn the ruling. It hangs by a 1 vote margin. If Kennedy wakes up on the wrong side of the bed one morning it could be all over.

scotash on August 6, 2010 at 6:31 PM

I don’t feel that many people are ready to man the barricades with pitchforks over this issue anymore. I know I’m not. Maybe Pat Buchanan still is.

Hummer53 on August 6, 2010 at 6:33 PM

Could it be, they (msm) want us to be making a big deal? We r’s think it should be the states decision, not some judge.
L

letget on August 6, 2010 at 6:34 PM

Because no one under 30 gives a damn about such a non consequential issue, and the 2010 and 2012 will hinge on economic issues not stupid culture wars.

therightwinger on August 6, 2010 at 6:35 PM

The Economic Party silent on freeddom, mandates, corruption of the constitution, murder of the innocent, pro-gay and all other sexual deviation for our school children to learn, environmental worship, defense of what, political judges, UN gun control, open borders, all aren’t really important compared to money -yeah the party of money -what a dying nation this is!

Don L on August 6, 2010 at 6:35 PM

Three months to D-Day in Novevember!

Don’t need the distraction,or the Left ammunition,
politically that is!!

canopfor on August 6, 2010 at 6:36 PM

By passing Prop 8, were the people of California labeled as homophobic?

d1carter on August 6, 2010 at 6:24 PM

The Mormons in California were labeled homophobic.

The people in California were just confused (probably by the Mormon’s awesome mind control powers).

JadeNYU on August 6, 2010 at 6:38 PM

I once heard a comedian say that cocaine is God’s way of letting you know you’re making too much money. I’d say that the GOP making a big deal out of Social issues is their way of saying they’re comfortable with their majority. Since they currently have no majority, no SoCon issues at the forefront. Big wins in 2010 and 2012 will change that.

Kafir on August 6, 2010 at 6:38 PM

Eh. A comments section on a partisan blog is one of the worst places to find a representative sample of anything. Almost by definition, you’re going to have the most committed activists dominating the discussion, since they’re the most motivated to speak out.

Allahpundit on August 6, 2010 at 6:19 PM

Every single initiative on a ballot in any state has resulted in a decisive decision against gay marriage. You have a strange notion of an “evenly split” political issue. The California ruling will bring even more anti-liberal voters to the polls. But, the out of control government is a bigger winner in this cycle and message focus makes sense in this regard. However, I doubt very much trying to rally support against this ruling will hurt any conservatives.

NotCoach on August 6, 2010 at 6:39 PM

I think the Law is wrong concerning this. The people’s voices were heard…. and then got strangled.

upinak on August 6, 2010 at 6:18 PM

Twice. CA Judge overturned the first ban in 2005, citing specious CA Constition grounds. So the second effort (Prop8) was a direct ballot initiative to amend the state constitution. So the LLLib millionaires got it put before a gay Federal judge to trump.

Three times, if you count the judicial overturn of Prop 187, passed in 1994, denying state funds to illegals.

Quite a few Californians are pretty damned upset about it all. But we’re outnumbered by socialists / progressive scum and it isn’t yet time for stronger measures.

But that will come soon enough, with our tragic gubernatorial matchup. That tired hippie retread Brown vs the dilletante RINO billionairess. Either path, we’ll get more ruination. A few more years and there will be nothing left to lose. Then we will all be ‘free’.

/Joplin

rayra on August 6, 2010 at 6:43 PM

THANK you! Keep using our KO punch to the face in fiscal conservatism. Everything else can be focused on later

conservador on August 6, 2010 at 6:43 PM

Fire and Brimstone
-MSNBC

canopfor on August 6, 2010 at 6:43 PM

‘Never interrupt your enemy when he is making a mistake.’
- Napolean

rayra on August 6, 2010 at 6:22 PM

‘Never let an opportunity to capitalize on your enemies mistakes go by.’
- The Duke of Wellington
-

Tav on August 6, 2010 at 6:29 PM

“Rommel, you magnificent bastard, I read your BOOK!”
- Patton

rayra on August 6, 2010 at 6:46 PM

“This election needs to revolve around five issues: taxes, spending, the economy, jobs and debt,” said Ron Nehring, chairman of the California Republican Party.

The broader theme ought to be the open hostility of the federal government to its citizens.

thirteen28 on August 6, 2010 at 6:46 PM

Three parts to being a conservative leader. Fiscal Conservative, National Security, and Social conservative. No winning without commitment to traditional marriage.

PrezHussein on August 6, 2010 at 6:46 PM

The Economic Party silent on freeddom, mandates, corruption of the constitution, murder of the innocent, pro-gay and all other sexual deviation for our school children to learn, environmental worship, defense of what, political judges, UN gun control, open borders, all aren’t really important compared to money -yeah the party of money -what a dying nation this is!

Don L on August 6, 2010 at 6:35 PM

Not sure they even get the fiscal title either. They spend money like its going out of style, just not as badly as the Democrats. Maybe The Wastrel Party vs The Drunken Sailor Party?

sharrukin on August 6, 2010 at 6:47 PM

Every single initiative on a ballot in any state has resulted in a decisive decision against gay marriage. You have a strange notion of an “evenly split” political issue.
NotCoach on August 6, 2010 at 6:39 PM

The CA vote was about 5% difference between yes and no. Among the independent votes up for grabs in November the support for gay marriage polls about even and civil unions have a substantial majority.

Turnout will already be high, and pro-GOP, for those opposed to gay marriage.

dedalus on August 6, 2010 at 6:48 PM

JadeNYU on August 6, 2010 at 6:38 PM

Mormon’s know the Vulcan mind meld!11!!eleventy!!

upinak on August 6, 2010 at 6:48 PM

The gay judge ruled Prop 8 was based on “unfounded prejudices”. Too absurd to comment on.

Paul-Cincy on August 6, 2010 at 6:48 PM

Every single initiative on a ballot in any state has resulted in a decisive decision against gay marriage.

And that’s the problem…Constitutional issues over equal rights don’t, and absolutely shouldn’t, get decided by popular vote. The vote on Prop 8 should never have happened.

JetBoy on August 6, 2010 at 6:48 PM

Judicial fiat, with dangerous repercussions.

We’re too confident the Supreme Court will overturn the ruling. It hangs by a 1 vote margin. If Kennedy wakes up on the wrong side of the bed one morning it could be all over.

scotash on August 6, 2010 at 6:31 PM

It’s already over. Kennedy has already demonstrated his affinity for gay causes. He’ll vote to uphold the judicial repeal of Prop8.

/unless of course the appt of a non-judge neophyte marxist who’s only been a lawyer for three years to the Court offends him enough to drive him to the Right.

rayra on August 6, 2010 at 6:48 PM

So,MadCow,and side-kick,are beside themselves,and
are perplexed at the All’s quiet on the Social Issues
Republican Western Front!!

Good,but,they will be on the lookout,maybe even try
to manufacture some soundbites from the Rightsphere
to fire up their bases!!

And,thats the last thing,Republicans need at this
point!!!

canopfor on August 6, 2010 at 6:50 PM

Three parts to being a conservative leader. Fiscal Conservative, National Security, and Social conservative. No winning without commitment to traditional marriage.

Why does “commitment to traditonal marriage even mean? Gay being allowed to enter into legal marriage doesn’t effect you or anyone else in the slightest.

therightwinger on August 6, 2010 at 6:52 PM

Eh. A comments section on a partisan blog is one of the worst places to find a representative sample of anything. Almost by definition, you’re going to have the most committed activists dominating the discussion, since they’re the most motivated to speak out.

Allahpundit on August 6, 2010 at 6:19 PM

Did you just…defend us?

Apologetic California on August 6, 2010 at 6:53 PM

And that’s the problem…Constitutional issues over equal rights don’t, and absolutely shouldn’t, get decided by popular vote. The vote on Prop 8 should never have happened.

You sir, are correct. Blacks would have been repressed in the South for God knows how long if it were put up to a vote.

You can’t put someone’s rights to a vote. Just ridiculous.

therightwinger on August 6, 2010 at 6:54 PM

The Economic Party silent on freeddom, mandates, corruption of the constitution, murder of the innocent, pro-gay and all other sexual deviation for our school children to learn, environmental worship, defense of what, political judges, UN gun control, open borders, all aren’t really important compared to money -yeah the party of money -what a dying nation this is!

Don L on August 6, 2010 at 6:35 PM

Hear hear. Standing for nothing, they stand for anything.
And the people who happen to hold to the Constitution and think those Old Dead White Guys really knew what the hell they were doing – and who have all the guns – grow more and more fed up with the liberal-socialist direction of things and getting the bill for it all. Of our grandkids getting the bill for it all. Our futures are being stolen, mortgaged, for the “privilege” of having everything we hold dear destroyed or torn down, right in front of us.
How long do the marxists and selfish self-centered liberals think we’ll take it?
Do they really think they can abuse our own military, treat them with disdain, then snap their fingers and have that military protect them when the time comes? They’re insane, suicidal.

rayra on August 6, 2010 at 6:55 PM

And that’s the problem…Constitutional issues over equal rights don’t, and absolutely shouldn’t, get decided by popular vote. The vote on Prop 8 should never have happened.

JetBoy on August 6, 2010 at 6:48 PM

ahh shut yer holster.

rayra on August 6, 2010 at 6:59 PM

Just heard on the news that the two attorneys are to turn in information concerning Prop 8. I think it was to the federal judge.

upinak on August 6, 2010 at 7:01 PM

Eh. A comments section on a partisan blog is one of the worst places to find a representative sample of anything. Almost by definition, you’re going to have the most committed activists dominating the discussion, since they’re the most motivated to speak out.

Allahpundit on August 6, 2010 at 6:19 PM

Just great. Now I don’t want to post anything.

You’ve ruined all my fun, Allah!

listens2glenn on August 6, 2010 at 7:03 PM

It’s the economy….hammer away at it.

rickyricardo on August 6, 2010 at 6:12 PM

yes!

cmsinaz on August 6, 2010 at 7:05 PM

Why aren’t Republicans making a bigger deal of the Prop 8 ruling?

Because we’d rather work and spend time with our families than take to the streets in protest every time something doesn’t go our way.

The Ugly American on August 6, 2010 at 7:15 PM

dedalus on August 6, 2010 at 6:48 PM

Except that I think you and AP fail to understand that this now a nationwide issue since a federal appellate court has ruled gay marriage to be somehow a constitutional right. A good argument can be made that it is important who sits in the Senate if Obama gets another opportunity to appoint another justice to SCOTUS. It is not an unreasonable assumption that Scalia might be the next one to step down. And there is the real possibility of a federal constitutional amendment to take the issue of gay marriage out of the judicial branches hands if the SCOTUS ends up agreeing with this ridiculous lower court ruling. Again, in that scenario, who is in congress matters.

NotCoach on August 6, 2010 at 7:15 PM

And that’s the problem…Constitutional issues over equal rights don’t, and absolutely shouldn’t, get decided by popular vote. The vote on Prop 8 should never have happened.

JetBoy on August 6, 2010 at 6:48 PM

Gay marriage has nothing to do with equal rights. Laws that prohibit gay marriage treats every person under the law equally.

NotCoach on August 6, 2010 at 7:16 PM

Simple, the big government religious right is on standby because small government is taking over. One can not force the government out of ones wallet yet make sure it is in everyones bedroom. They are not compatible and having the government out of the wallet is more important than using that wallet to invade everyones bedroom as what would happen with a big government religious right

tjexcite on August 6, 2010 at 7:21 PM

Constitutional issues over equal rights don’t, and absolutely shouldn’t, get decided by popular vote. The vote on Prop 8 should never have happened.

JetBoy on August 6, 2010 at 6:48 PM

Then there is this.

You sir, are correct. Blacks would have been repressed in the South for God knows how long if it were put up to a vote.

You can’t put someone’s rights to a vote. Just ridiculous.

therightwinger on August 6, 2010 at 6:54 PM

Instead, we should decide what rights the various groups have by turning the decision over to a literal handful of people in black robes. People who have historically made such great decisions.

Decisions like the Civil Rights question concerning the ownership of your home. Under Kelo, your home can be taken by the Government in order to give it to a campaign contributor providing that there is a reasonable expectation of increased tax revenues as a result. Thankfully, that wasn’t left to be decided by the public, and we allowed those sainted Supreme’s to make that decision for us. Under your theory, it was a great example of not bowing to popular pressure.

Should I continue to list the awful decisions of the court? How about where they found Separate but Equal just fine and dandy which sanctified the very rights abuses that you claim would still be going on without Court activity.

Now, the Constitution is written in such a way as to be a limit upon reasonable people. Congress shall pass no law as an example. The Supreme Court took the authority upon themselves, and decided that they would be the last stop for all things Constitutional, that was never their assigned task under the Constitution.

They have created many rights, out of thin air. The right to an Abortion is one perfect example. No where is it permitted, or prohibited in the Constitution. Yet, it is now a matter of Constitutional Law, because some dolts in black robes have decreed it.

The Courts continue to uphold the decisions of the Congress, which violate our rights. The right to an attorney for example, is trumped by a National Security Letter authorized by Congress, and never overturned by your sainted court. Why hasn’t this been put to the voters?

Right to be safe in your person and papers, without due process of law and a warrant, again trumped by the National Security Letter. Refusal to co-operate means you are arrested, and by the way, held incommunicado without charges until such time as they feel like letting you talk to someone.

Of course, Your COURT can do the same thing. Find someone in contempt, and hold them indefinitely without other charges, nor trial by a jury of their peers. The court has become the Kings we once rebelled against. They can at a whim order you thrown in jail, with no other review needed.

If you give me a choice between that, and direct democracy, deciding what rights we the people have amongst ourselves, then I’ll vote for a lot more Direct Democracy.

Snake307 on August 6, 2010 at 7:21 PM

because it is the NObama Jobless Greater Depression economy, stupid

mathewsjw on August 6, 2010 at 7:24 PM

DocZero’s nailed it -

http://hotair.com/greenroom/archives/2010/08/06/requiem-for-an-ideal/

rayra on August 6, 2010 at 7:25 PM

Simple, the big government religious right is on standby because small government is taking over. One can not force the government out of ones wallet yet make sure it is in everyones bedroom. They are not compatible and having the government out of the wallet is more important than using that wallet to invade everyones bedroom as what would happen with a big government religious right

tjexcite on August 6, 2010 at 7:21 PM

I have no interest in the federal government being involved in this issue. Each state can democratically decide the matter for themselves. Ultimately the best solution may be getting the government out of the marriage business altogether. But again, something for each state to decide for themselves.

NotCoach on August 6, 2010 at 7:26 PM

By the way I agree whole heartily with this strategy. The Country is pretty evenly split on this issue. It will surely be decided in the Supreme Court. In the famous words of William Jefferson Clinton,”it’s the economy stupid.” Actually I think it was Carville who said it, but you get my drift.

sandee on August 6, 2010 at 6:28 PM

It’s not evenly split. What a load of crap!

Blake on August 6, 2010 at 7:29 PM

Simple, the big government religious right is on standby because small government is taking over. One can not force the government out of ones wallet yet make sure it is in everyones bedroom. They are not compatible and having the government out of the wallet is more important than using that wallet to invade everyones bedroom as what would happen with a big government religious right

tjexcite on August 6, 2010 at 7:21 PM

You have everything all mixed up: first of all, the “religious right” has never been for Big Government.
Secondly, no one wants government in anyone’s wallet or bedroom and that’s not what this is about.
Thirdly, if a federal judge overriding a state referendum of 7 million people isn’t an instance of Big (unelected) Government telling us all what to do, I don’t know what is.

This is about the unelected judiciary run amok.
If it’s not a campaign issue quite yet, that’s because it’s barely been 48 hours since the decision was handed down.
The American people now have 4 instances in 4 states where the will of the people is clashing against that of the Federal Government: AZ with illegals, LA with a drilling moratorium, MO/VA with ObamaCare and now CA with same sex “marriage.”
This clash is so blatant and troubling that GOP candidates are in a position that they almost don’t have to mention the CA case; all they have to do is talk about the tyranny of Big Government coming from Washington and the voters know exactly what they mean.

Jenfidel on August 6, 2010 at 7:30 PM

Simple, the big government religious right is on standby because small government is taking over.

tjexcite on August 6, 2010 at 7:21 PM

Small government is taking over? In what universe?

sharrukin on August 6, 2010 at 7:32 PM

If windsock Peggy Noonan says it, you know the meme is solidifying -

WSJ – ‘America Is At Risk of Boiling Over

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703748904575411713335505250.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

rayra on August 6, 2010 at 7:32 PM

I guess true Republicans are only offended by naked acts of judicial activism in brazen defiance of the express will of the populace through a fair election when they disagree with such acts of judicial activism. NICE.

tommylotto on August 6, 2010 at 7:38 PM

You have everything all mixed up: first of all, the “religious right” has never been for Big Government.

Really?
Then why did the Religious Right vote Democrat for so long? Why were they so in favor of FDR and the New Deal? That was big government

I know a lot of social conservatives think they invented the Republican Party, but the reality is that Social Conservatives were a bloc of the Democratic Party for much longer than they have been voting Republican

firepilot on August 6, 2010 at 7:39 PM

I guess true Republicans are only offended by naked acts of judicial activism in brazen defiance of the express will of the populace through a fair election when they disagree with such acts of judicial activism. NICE.

tommylotto on August 6, 2010 at 7:38 PM

Could you give us an instance of the opposite, please, or is this just your straw man argument?

Jenfidel on August 6, 2010 at 7:40 PM

It’s a Constitution issue, not a homosexuality issue. I couldn’t possibly care less if gays/lesbians want to marry. But I do care if a judge overrules a decision by the people if that decision was Constitutional.

Felonious Monk on August 6, 2010 at 7:41 PM

Really?
Then why did the Religious Right vote Democrat for so long?
I know a lot of social conservatives think they invented the Republican Party, but the reality is that Social Conservatives were a bloc of the Democratic Party for much longer than they have been voting Republican

firepilot on August 6, 2010 at 7:39 PM

That was the old Democrat party, back when they weren’t bothered to be either conservative and/or Christian and hadn’t been hijacked by the Far Left.
That Democrat party basically died with Truman.
See Zell Miller of GA for further reference.
My parents, however, were such Democrats.
(God rest them both!)

Jenfidel on August 6, 2010 at 7:44 PM

I guess true Republicans are only offended by naked acts of judicial activism in brazen defiance of the express will of the populace through a fair election when they disagree with such acts of judicial activism. NICE.

tommylotto on August 6, 2010 at 7:38 PM

Is a right to gay marriage in the constitution? No? Well OK then.

When specific rights as actually outlined in the constitution are violated, IE the right to bear arms, then activism is expected if not required. When the plain language is ignored or rights are invented then we have problems.

NotCoach on August 6, 2010 at 7:49 PM

Stay on target —- stay on target.

29Victor on August 6, 2010 at 7:54 PM

Unless I missed it, both Palin and Romney have been silent on the subject

Palinistas hardest hit.

All of which is to say that Republican voters aren’t quite as opposed to gay rights as they used to be,

Well, those Republicans certainly don’t post in the Hotair comments.

Vyce on August 6, 2010 at 7:59 PM

I guess true Republicans are only offended by naked acts of judicial activism in brazen defiance of the express will of the populace through a fair election when they disagree with such acts of judicial activism. NICE.

tommylotto on August 6, 2010 at 7:38 PM

Horsecrap. Go ahead and name some ‘judicial activism’ that favored Republicans. Your choices should be hilariously edifying about your own politics.

rayra on August 6, 2010 at 8:02 PM

about your own politics.

rayra on August 6, 2010 at 8:02 PM

This should be enlightening.

CWforFreedom on August 6, 2010 at 8:05 PM

That was the old Democrat party, back when they weren’t bothered to be either conservative and/or Christian and hadn’t been hijacked by the Far Left.
That Democrat party basically died with Truman.
See Zell Miller of GA for further reference.
My parents, however, were such Democrats.
(God rest them both!)

Jenfidel

Well if that kind of Democratic Party died out, well Social Conservatives did not leave the Democratic Party until much later, after all Social Conservatives voted overwhelmingly for Jimmy Carter, and Lyndon Johnson.

There have been plenty of instances of Social Conservatives being for big government and nanny statism when it suited them.

You can find inane laws regarding individual rights in both social liberal and social conservative areas.

firepilot on August 6, 2010 at 8:06 PM

Really?
Then why did the Religious Right vote Democrat for so long? Why were they so in favor of FDR and the New Deal? That was big government

I know a lot of social conservatives think they invented the Republican Party, but the reality is that Social Conservatives were a bloc of the Democratic Party for much longer than they have been voting Republican

firepilot on August 6, 2010 at 7:39 PM

And here’s a fool who conflates the subversion of the Democrat Party by marxists in the 60s with a specious claim re the rectitude of conservative democrats. You know, those kindly folk that were seceding over slavery and pretending it was a states rights issue, burning crosses, denying the 2nd amendment to blacks with ‘Jim Crow’ gun laws, and in their majority voting AGAINST the first and second Civil Rights Acts.
The Party of Robert Byrd was nothing to be proud about.

And you might want to study up on the circumstances of the foundation of the Grand Old Party, too.

The South has turned from BLue to Red over the last 20+ yrs as the Byrd generation of racists has died off. Scarcely anything else has changed. And the ideologically re-enslaved black populations now turn the rotten centers of rotten cities a nice deep blue. Chicago. Philly. St Louis. Detroit. All the end points of the ‘underground railroad’ have now been turned into ideological marxist gulags, where black kapos / city officials keep their people ignorant, poor, aborted and disarmed. And stuffed with an engrained rabid racism that would have made their old plantation owners proud. Slaves of the Democrat party once again and always.

rayra on August 6, 2010 at 8:13 PM

I’m glad to see they don’t want social issues to be the focus of the part. Republicans have so much more to offer with the economy and foreign relations, which is what people want to hear. We don’t want to hear about Sen. Graham’s advise from Jesus or care about who gets married.

Let’s fix the damn economy!

Luckedout on August 6, 2010 at 8:13 PM

The elites in both parties support the homosexual agenda. The activist homosexual “judge” who made this decision was a Repubican appointee.

Connect the dots. It’s obvious that Repubicans will roll over for judicial activism as long as it is from a powerful interest group that has a foothold within the Repubican party and among beltway “conservatives”.

vilebody on August 6, 2010 at 8:38 PM

What happened to that gal? Does someone at Stanford get the “credit”?

Akzed on August 6, 2010 at 8:39 PM

Because it is not wise to let the Leftists define the narrative and thrust of this election.

Rachel Maddow and her ilk may think that the world revolves around her personal agenda and that her personal agenda serves as a whipping boy against Republicans or conservatives, but she/they are not all that.

The economy is foremost on the minds of voters.

onlineanalyst on August 6, 2010 at 8:47 PM

There have been plenty of instances of Social Conservatives being for big government and nanny statism when it suited them.

firepilot on August 6, 2010 at 8:06 PM

Conservatives, from the Founders to today, have NEVER been for Big Government and nanny statism–not if they’re truly conservative.

Nice try at disinformation/lying/propaganda, though.

Jenfidel on August 6, 2010 at 8:50 PM

The elites in both parties support the homosexual agenda.

Not in my world they don’t.

The activist homosexual “judge” who made this decision was a Repubican appointee.

Another bad judicial pick by Bush 41–one of the many reasons he didn’t enjoy a 2nd term.

It’s obvious that Repubicans will roll over for judicial activism
vilebody on August 6, 2010 at 8:38 PM

It’s not obvious to me and there are millions of us who will not roll over for judicial activism, particularly when it goes against the will of the people.

Jenfidel on August 6, 2010 at 8:53 PM

Andrea Mitchell & Rachel Maddow, two leftists, are beside themselves because the Republicans haven’t said anything about this same sex marriage ruling. If any Republican said anything against the ruling the leftist media would be talking about it 24/7 to take away the attention from the failed policies of Obama and the democrat party. We have learned that Obama and the democrat party and now the Federal Judiciary that the will of the people mean nothing. As Rachel Maddow said- 31 States have voted in the majority that marriage is between a man and women. Doesn’t mean a thing to the Judiciary and in this case- with this Judge hearing this case is like David Duke sitting in Judgement of a Klansman.
I am more concerned about high taxes and an economy that continues to slide down and down than I am about two men or two women getting married. The GOP has to keep focused on the economy and the high taxes and the wrong direction that Obama is taking the Country. If I wanted to live under a communist type of government I would have moved to the eastern bloc.

flintstone on August 6, 2010 at 8:56 PM

Comment pages: 1 2