PDA

View Full Version : "Has Jeb Bush Privately 'Evolved' on Gay Marriage?"



TrueBlue
02-27-2015, 01:48 PM
Has Jeb Bush Privately 'Evolved' on Gay Marriage?

http://www.towleroad.com/2015/02/has-jeb-bush-privately-evolved-on-gay-marriage.html


"Donors, however, seem increasingly convinced that Bush (again like Obama circa 2008) is even more evolved on the issue of LGBT rights privately than he is publicly."

=========================================
It sure appears that Jeb may be placing himself in serious "Jebberdy" with some of his more right-wing constituents if he comes out fully supporting Gay Marriage.

Cigar
02-27-2015, 01:50 PM
The GOP has no choice than to Run another Nut and Lose :laugh: ... to a Woman.

Bob
02-27-2015, 01:51 PM
One more homosexual talk by True Blue.

Say I have a suggestion. Talk about great places to take a vacation.

Cigar
02-27-2015, 01:53 PM
One more homosexual talk by True Blue.

Say I have a suggestion. Talk about great places to take a vacation.


Gaylord Michigan :laugh:

Mister D
02-27-2015, 01:55 PM
Obama didn't evolve and Jeb Bush didn't either. We have an unprincipled political class whose priority is to get elected.

Cigar
02-27-2015, 01:57 PM
Obama didn't evolve and Jeb Bush didn't either. We have an unprincipled political class whose priority is to get elected.

Or Obama isn't in denial of Americac's Demographics :wink:

Reason10
02-27-2015, 01:58 PM
Has Jeb Bush Privately 'Evolved' on Gay Marriage?

http://www.towleroad.com/2015/02/has-jeb-bush-privately-evolved-on-gay-marriage.html



=========================================
It sure appears that Jeb may be placing himself in serious "Jebberdy" with some of his more right-wing constituents if he comes out fully supporting Gay Marriage.

It's not going to matter. He's not going to get nominated to run on the Republican ticket anyway. Hell, he can be for humans marrying animals for all the good it'll do his political career.

Reason10
02-27-2015, 01:59 PM
Or Obama isn't in denial of Americac's Demographics :wink:

You liberals are the ones in denial. Most of America is AGAINST same sex marriage. That's why unelected judges are overturning the will of the people in so many states.

Mister D
02-27-2015, 01:59 PM
Or Obama isn't in denial of Americac's Demographics :wink:

Gays are tiny fraction of the US population, Leroy.

Reason10
02-27-2015, 02:00 PM
The GOP has no choice than to Run another Nut and Lose :laugh: ... to a Woman.

That would only happen if Sarah Palin ran as a Democrats.

Today, the Democrat party does not have a breathing human being who can defeat either Dr. Carson or Governor Walker. One of those two will be the next president, unless Barak Ebola orders them killed.

Peter1469
02-27-2015, 02:01 PM
Only the left evolves on issues. The right flip flops.

Cigar
02-27-2015, 02:01 PM
You liberals are the ones in denial. Most of America is AGAINST same sex marriage. That's why unelected judges are overturning the will of the people in so many states.

You mean BOTH Judges :laugh:

http://i.imgur.com/2mDTFyy.gif?1?8836

Mister D
02-27-2015, 02:02 PM
Only the left evolves on issues. The right flip flops.

These people are the all the same.

Cigar
02-27-2015, 02:03 PM
Gays are tiny fraction of the US population, Leroy.

Keep thinking that ... :laugh:

http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=HN.608031730226759251&w=300&h=300&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0

Mister D
02-27-2015, 02:03 PM
Keep thinking that ... :laugh:

http://ts1.mm.bing.net/th?&id=HN.608031730226759251&w=300&h=300&c=0&pid=1.9&rs=0&p=0

Um...you do know gays are a tiny fraction of the US population, right? Serious question.

Cigar
02-27-2015, 02:05 PM
Um...you do know gays are a tiny fraction of the US population, right? Serious question.

Every little bit helps when you Winning by margins of 9.5 and 5 Million :laugh:

Mister D
02-27-2015, 02:06 PM
Every little bit helps when you Winning by margins of 9.5 and 5 Million :laugh:

Don't look now but the Democrats just got their asses handed to them. Anyway, chasing the gay vote would be like chasing the dwarf vote.

Cigar
02-27-2015, 02:12 PM
Don't look now but the Democrats just got their asses handed to them. Anyway, chasing the gay vote would be like chasing the dwarf vote.

... and in the last Two Months ... what have they done?

Other that get their Ass handed to them by The Skinny Dude from Chicago :grin:

Hows that Big Win working out for you?

Mister D
02-27-2015, 02:44 PM
... and in the last Two Months ... what have they done?

Other that get their Ass handed to them by The Skinny Dude from Chicago :grin:

Hows that Big Win working out for you?

It's not my win. I don't live vicariously through political parties that don't give a fuck about me or the country. That's for saps like you. In any case, the Democrats got their asses kicked. Hard. Ouch. lol

Cigar
02-27-2015, 02:47 PM
It's not my win. I don't live vicariously through political parties that don't give a $#@! about me or the country. That's for saps like you. In any case, the Democrats got their asses kicked. Hard. Ouch. lol

I guess that explans all the laughing :laugh:

Common Sense
02-27-2015, 02:48 PM
That would only happen if Sarah Palin ran as a Democrats.

Today, the Democrat party does not have a breathing human being who can defeat either Dr. Carson or Governor Walker. One of those two will be the next president, unless Barak Ebola orders them killed.

LOL...that's hi-larious. Neither of them stand a chance.

TrueBlue
02-27-2015, 03:18 PM
One more homosexual talk by True Blue.

Say I have a suggestion. Talk about great places to take a vacation.
Believe me, there will be plenty of places to talk about for the GOP to take a vacation after the 2016 elections with Hillary at the White House. :)

Bob
02-27-2015, 03:26 PM
Believe me, there will be plenty of places to talk about for the GOP to take a vacation after the 2016 elections with Hillary at the White House. :)

This country has been stupid over the two past presidential elections. Please for the nations sake, public at large, I implore you, get back to your senses.

Obama has made a mess of things.

Common
02-27-2015, 04:15 PM
This country has been stupid over the two past presidential elections. Please for the nations sake, public at large, I implore you, get back to your senses.

Obama has made a mess of things.

Its the stupid voters who voted a GOP majority in the house twice.
The GOP house has made a mess of things.

Bob
02-27-2015, 04:39 PM
Its the stupid voters who voted a GOP majority in the house twice.
The GOP house has made a mess of things.

The public got sick of the stupid DNC that at first had it all. The voters took it back.

Common
02-27-2015, 04:43 PM
The public got sick of the stupid DNC that at first had it all. The voters took it back.

The gop wont have it long bob, even the dumbest GOP voter whos broke and doesnt have a pot to piss in will finally wake up and realize the rebublicans exist only for the richest americans.

Only the most stupid ass cant see that just by LOOKING AT THEIR VOTING RECORD

Peter1469
02-27-2015, 04:53 PM
There are a lot of people who want more government.

There are a lot of people who want less government.

Reconcile that.

Max Rockatansky
02-27-2015, 04:56 PM
Has Jeb Bush Privately 'Evolved' on Gay Marriage?
Could be. Isn't that what Barack Obama claims he did?

http://time.com/3704760/barack-obama-gay-marriage-david-axelrod/
President Barack Obamamaintained in a new interview (http://www.buzzfeed.com/bensmith/buzzfeed-news-interview-president-obama#.kwrmO53v8D)that he “evolved” on gay marriage, despite a top aide’s assertion in a new book that he was “bullshitting” in 2008 (http://time.com/3702584/gay-marriage-axelrod-obama/)when he opposed the unions.

Obama told BuzzFeed that longtime political guru David Axelrod didn’t accurately characterize his position when Axelrod wrote in his new book that Obama shifted on the issue for political gains. But the President proved unable to explain why he moved away from supporting the unions despite supporting them as a state Senate candidate in 1996.

“I think David is mixing up my personal feelings with my position on the issue,” Obama said. “I always felt that same-sex couples should be able to enjoy the same rights, legally, as anybody else and so it was frustrating to me not to, I think, be able to square that with what were a whole bunch of religious sensitivities out there.”

Bob
02-27-2015, 05:09 PM
The gop wont have it long bob, even the dumbest GOP voter whos broke and doesnt have a pot to piss in will finally wake up and realize the rebublicans exist only for the richest americans.

Only the most stupid ass cant see that just by LOOKING AT THEIR VOTING RECORD

I spent a good many years as one of you. I no longer believe a thing the Democrats tell me.

PolWatch
02-27-2015, 05:17 PM
The big Repub win in November made the gop chances of a win in 2016 go down. People can say that the dems are blocking everything (and they will) but the voter will only remember that nothing was accomplished under the great repub majority. They will be on the defensive, instead of being able to point at the lack of accomplishment by the dems. People will only remember the promises of 2014 and the results (or not) in 2016.

Bob
02-27-2015, 05:21 PM
The big Repub win in November made the gop chances of a win in 2016 go down. People can say that the dems are blocking everything (and they will) but the voter will only remember that nothing was accomplished under the great repub majority. They will be on the defensive, instead of being able to point at the lack of accomplishment by the dems. People will only remember the promises of 2014 and the results (or not) in 2016.

I can't rule that out. The public that put Obama into power has been just that stupid in the past.

Face it, the reason Obama wants to help the illegals is to get them to vote. We all know it.

What proof will there be a voter is not legal?

Come on. We know they are filling the till with voters.

And the sad thing, it just can work.

Peter1469
02-27-2015, 05:36 PM
The modern pattern is establish of one party to the establishment of the other. Repeat.

And nothing changes.

Howey
02-27-2015, 05:36 PM
One more homosexual talk by True Blue.

Say I have a suggestion. Talk about great places to take a vacation.

Why do you have to read every post with the word gay in it? Curious?

Max Rockatansky
02-27-2015, 05:49 PM
The bottom line is that people don't have to like or agree with each other but what we should agree upon is the Constitution of the United States. In this case, the 14th Amendment Equal Protection clause.

People are free to define marriage however their religion or personal beliefs dictate, but our laws should apply to all equally.

Mac-7
02-27-2015, 05:53 PM
The bottom line is that people don't have to like or agree with each other but what we should agree upon is the Constitution of the United States. In this case, the 14th Amendment Equal Protection clause.

People are free to define marriage however their religion or personal beliefs dictate, but our laws should apply to all equally.

So a man can marry his horse?

Or three women at the same time?

Bob
02-27-2015, 05:57 PM
So a man can marry his horse?

Or three women at the same time?

Doesn't this topic belong on the homosexual topics that is set aside for such discussions?

Howey
02-27-2015, 06:03 PM
So a man can marry his horse?

Or three women at the same time?


Wouldn't you prefer if a man could marry a line of children waiting at the school bus stop?

Howey
02-27-2015, 06:03 PM
Doesn't this topic belong on the homosexual topics that is set aside for such discussions?

No.

http://i.imgur.com/PtKve3Q.gif

Bob
02-27-2015, 06:07 PM
The bottom line is that people don't have to like or agree with each other but what we should agree upon is the Constitution of the United States. In this case, the 14th Amendment Equal Protection clause.

People are free to define marriage however their religion or personal beliefs dictate, but our laws should apply to all equally.

I get what you are saying Max.

I try hard to be perfectly fair to every poster. I don't care if they are so young (William) so snotty as a nemixis is, or what, but Marriage has thousands of years of tradition.

And the marriage laws are defined per each state.

The founding fathers were wise in they never put the Feds in charge of marriage.

I never believed marriage to be some religious rite.

While religions do include the ceremony for people, the fact it is licensed by the state means it is government.

For it to be religious, it would then mean Government is in the religious business. It is not approved by law over religion.



When tax benefits are doled out due to children, you know it is not religious. This is not religious teaching. When a worker has a personal deduction, why don't democrats scream that is just a payment to the person? That is how they treat oil company deductions.

Max Rockatansky
02-27-2015, 06:31 PM
I get what you are saying Max.

I try hard to be perfectly fair to every poster. I don't care if they are so young (William) so snotty as a nemixis is, or what, but Marriage has thousands of years of tradition.

And the marriage laws are defined per each state.

The founding fathers were wise in they never put the Feds in charge of marriage.

I never believed marriage to be some religious rite.

While religions do include the ceremony for people, the fact it is licensed by the state means it is government.

For it to be religious, it would then mean Government is in the religious business. It is not approved by law over religion.



When tax benefits are doled out due to children, you know it is not religious. This is not religious teaching. When a worker has a personal deduction, why don't democrats scream that is just a payment to the person? That is how they treat oil company deductions.

If I understand you correctly, then we are agreed on both the separation of Church and State and also the rights of States. One question for clarification; do States have to abide by the Constitution?

Can California pass a law that says all Hispanics and Blacks pay no tax, Women get 25% of their salary returned out of State tax collections and ll White Men must pay 75% tax on their salaries to make up the difference? Should that be legal, purely a State issue, or does it have to pass a Constitutional test? If the former, then what good are the Bill of Rights in each State? Can California, Illinois and New York ban guns, free speech and religion or not?

Bob
02-27-2015, 06:36 PM
If I understand you correctly, then we are agreed on both the separation of Church and State and also the rights of States. One question for clarification; do States have to abide by the Constitution?

Can California pass a law that says all Hispanics and Blacks pay no tax, Women get 25% of their salary returned out of State tax collections and ll White Men must pay 75% tax on their salaries to make up the difference? Should that be legal, purely a State issue, or does it have to pass a Constitutional test? If the former, then what good are the Bill of Rights in each State? Can California, Illinois and New York ban guns, free speech and religion or not?

Yes, states do.

If you mean can Government demand that kind of thing happen, no. And you did say CA would pass a law.

I believe the US Constitution has to be applied.

No, they may not ban what is in the national constitution.

Max Rockatansky
02-27-2015, 06:39 PM
Yes, states do.

If you mean can Government demand that kind of thing happen, no. And you did say CA would pass a law.

I believe the US Constitution has to be applied.

No, they may not ban what is in the national constitution.

Agreed. So now we come to the point of 1138 Federal rights and benefits granted married couples not to mention the numerous ones granted by individual states. It's only a matter of time, IMO, before this 14th Amendment conflict is resolved in SCOTUS.

For those who are absolutely die-hard in denying these rights to gays, then the solution is obvious; eliminate all special rights and privileges granted married couples. Put everyone on the same playing field and we'd have no Constitutional conflict.

Bob
02-27-2015, 06:42 PM
Agreed. So now we come to the point of 1138 Federal rights and benefits granted married couples not to mention the numerous ones granted by individual states. It's only a matter of time, IMO, before this 14th Amendment conflict is resolved in SCOTUS.

For those who are absolutely die-hard in denying these rights to gays, then the solution is obvious; eliminate all special rights and privileges granted married couples. Put everyone on the same playing field and we'd have no Constitutional conflict.

Revoke those 1138 alleged rights due to marriage. That is the problem. Today we are not all treated as equals.

domer76
02-27-2015, 06:43 PM
You liberals are the ones in denial. Most of America is AGAINST same sex marriage. That's why unelected judges are overturning the will of the people in so many states.

How can one be so consistently wrong on so many topics?

http://www.gallup.com/poll/169640/sex-marriage-support-reaches-new-high.aspx

domer76
02-27-2015, 06:45 PM
That would only happen if Sarah Palin ran as a Democrats.

Today, the Democrat party does not have a breathing human being who can defeat either Dr. Carson or Governor Walker. One of those two will be the next president, unless Barak Ebola orders them killed.

Delusional

Max Rockatansky
02-27-2015, 06:54 PM
Revoke those 1138 alleged rights due to marriage. That is the problem. Today we are not all treated as equals.

I agree we're not all treated as equals. Why do you say alleged?
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04353r.pdf

Regardless if it is only 1 right or benefit, it's a Constitutional violation which anyone who has sworn to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, should seek to be correctly resolved.

Max Rockatansky
02-27-2015, 06:56 PM
So a man can marry his horse?

Or three women at the same time?

So, according to you, Religion trumps the Constitution and you'd rather use our Constitution as toilet paper than see two gays marry. Correct?

Mac-7
02-27-2015, 06:57 PM
Agreed. So now we come to the point of 1138 Federal rights and benefits granted married couples not to mention the numerous ones granted by individual states. It's only a matter of time, IMO, before this 14th Amendment conflict is resolved in SCOTUS.

For those who are absolutely die-hard in denying these rights to gays, then the solution is obvious; eliminate all special rights and privileges granted married couples. Put everyone on the same playing field and we'd have no Constitutional conflict.

If you open the door to gays all the other freaks are going to come through also.

Conservatives did not invent the institution of one man and one woman marriage just to be mean to gays.

In fact we didn't invent the institution of marriage at all.

Not last month, last year or 1000 years ago.

It has been one man and one woman for thousands of years.

Max Rockatansky
02-27-2015, 06:59 PM
If you open the door to gays all the other freaks are going to come through also.
Against all enemies, foreign and domestic. I'll just as happily shoot a domestic terrorist as a foreign one. :D

Mac-7
02-27-2015, 08:27 PM
So, according to you, Religion trumps the Constitution and you'd rather use our Constitution as toilet paper than see two gays marry. Correct?

If religion, namely Christians, are a dirty word to you that's too bad.

But the fact is that even in the godless uber lib Soviet Union marriage was a union between one man and one woman.

Bob
02-27-2015, 08:43 PM
I agree we're not all treated as equals. Why do you say alleged?
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04353r.pdf

Regardless if it is only 1 right or benefit, it's a Constitutional violation which anyone who has sworn to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic, should seek to be correctly resolved.

Alleged as to number. Was not sure how many there are.

Quite the report. Though I did not study the rights named.

As to your conclusion. Well said.

Max Rockatansky
02-27-2015, 08:45 PM
If religion, namely Christians, are a dirty word to you that's too bad.

But the fact is that even in the godless uber lib Soviet Union marriage was a union between one man and one woman.I support the First Amendment just as much as the Fourteenth and all the others. If you can't, that's your problem.

Bob
02-27-2015, 08:50 PM
This has to be a general comment, but I am informed, mainly by the media and some posters, that blacks do not accept homosexuals. That they believe one man to one woman is marriage. Who can blame them.

Max Rockatansky
02-27-2015, 08:53 PM
This has to be a general comment, but I am informed, mainly by the media and some posters, that blacks do not accept homosexuals. That they believe one man to one woman is marriage. Who can blame them.
Their choice to hate others, but not their choice to deprive someone of their Constitutional rights.

Bob
02-27-2015, 08:54 PM
Their choice to hate others, but not their choice to deprive someone of their Constitutional rights.

Forgive me while I look in the constitution for the word marriage.

Mac-7
02-27-2015, 08:55 PM
I support the First Amendment just as much as the Fourteenth and all the others. If you can't, that's your problem.

I don't know what that is supposed to mean.

you were the one who brought religion into the debate by attacking my (suspected by you) religious beliefs.

As for the 14th amendment homosexual men have the same right that I do to marry any woman who will have them.

Max Rockatansky
02-27-2015, 09:05 PM
Forgive me while I look in the constitution for the word marriage.
You won't find it. What you will find is this:

No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

Blackrook
02-27-2015, 09:32 PM
Well, the Muslims say a man can have up to four wives, so we've been oppressing them too. When will that issue be addressed?

Max Rockatansky
02-27-2015, 09:35 PM
Well, the Muslims say a man can have up to four wives, so we've been oppressing them too. When will that issue be addressed?
I think having multiple wives is a reasonable idea.....just don't tell my wife. :D

TrueBlue
02-27-2015, 11:34 PM
I think having multiple wives is a reasonable idea.....just don't tell my wife. :D
Well it would just mean more footprints on the ceiling to have to scrub off. ;)

Mac-7
02-28-2015, 03:21 AM
I think having multiple wives is a reasonable idea.....just don't tell my wife. :D

Translation:

Max doesn't have an answer for that question so he tries to laugh it off.

Max Rockatansky
02-28-2015, 08:14 AM
Well it would just mean more footprints on the ceiling to have to scrub off. ;)
...but I'd have enough wives to do it. ;)

Max Rockatansky
02-28-2015, 08:16 AM
Translation:

Max doesn't have an answer for that question so he tries to laugh it off.

You're just jealous because if I was allowed to have four wives, you'd still be unable to marry your cat.

Mac-7
02-28-2015, 08:39 AM
You're just jealous because if I was allowed to have four wives, you'd still be unable to marry your cat.

Your attempted insults don't even make any sense.

I'm the one warning you that gay marriage opens to door for all the other sexual perversions to become legal too.

Max Rockatansky
02-28-2015, 08:44 AM
Your attempted insults don't even make any sense.

I'm the one warning you that gay marriage opens to door for all the other sexual perversions to become legal too.

You're supposed to pronounce it "prevurshuns" as in "If'n ya let them gay boys marry, then we'll have all kinds of prevurshuns in 'Merica. Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!" then jump up and down and wet yourself.

Common
02-28-2015, 08:52 AM
The far right teaparty and the koch bros machine is in an all out push for Scott Walker. They are denigrating Bush for anything they can find. The far right wants nothing less than Scott Walker Potus at ALL COSTS money is not a problem.

I hope walker wins the primary. He will never win the whitehouse, unless the democrats nomimate cigar :)

Peter1469
02-28-2015, 08:59 AM
Walker might be the only potential GOP candidate that I would vote for.

Max Rockatansky
02-28-2015, 09:04 AM
Walker might be the only potential GOP candidate that I would vote for.
Agreed. The may be others in the wings, but of the current batch, he's the only one I would consider electable and worthy of my vote.

PolWatch
02-28-2015, 09:08 AM
He must be viewed as the biggest threat to the dems. The number of anti-Walker items almost equals the anti-Hillary items.

Mac-7
02-28-2015, 09:40 AM
You're supposed to pronounce it "prevurshuns" as in "If'n ya let them gay boys marry, then we'll have all kinds of prevurshuns in 'Merica. Human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria!" then jump up and down and wet yourself.

Sure Max, whatever you say.

But you can only mock the truth for so long.

Mac-7
02-28-2015, 09:42 AM
Agreed. The may be others in the wings, but of the current batch, he's the only one I would consider electable and worthy of my vote.

If three refugees from lib la la land like Walker then good things may be on the horizon after all.

Max Rockatansky
02-28-2015, 01:06 PM
Sure Max, whatever you say.

But you can only mock the truth for so long.I can mock idiots all day long, so you need to either get used to it or put me on ignore. You're highly illogical which makes you mock-worthy.

http://media.carddit.com/a/t8lrRGxv3.jpg