As E.D. notes, Ted Olson will probably be called a RINO after this appearance on Fox News Sunday. Here’s what it takes: believing in the Bill of Rights, the 14th amendment, and an independent judiciary. It’s worth watching just to see him demolish Chris Wallace’s “but you’re a conservative!” questions, including one about how he could possibly agree with Hollywood Liberal Rob Reiner.
Words of a RINO
by @heymistermix.com| 30 Comments
This post is in: Activist Judges!, Gay Rights are Human Rights
aimai
I watched a big chunk of this somewhere on the intertoobz and I practically died laughing. Chris Wallace is so phenomenally stupid, and so totally surprised by what he’s hearing. And even more surprised that his canned talking points are brushed aside as so much absurdity. That guy has been living in a box. Unfortunately, its not under a highway. But its a think of beauty, right up with David Boies’ destruction of Tony Perkins.
aimai
Napoleon
Seriously, he asked that? So if Rob Reiner says breathing is good all conservatives will disagree? The very fact Wallace would say that out loud gives you a great window into what motivates the conservative mind.
birthmarker
I thought this GOS diary from a time back made some great points.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/4/15/857544/-We-Always-Win-(A-Cure-For-Liberal-Panic)
Mustang Bobby
I love the sound of Chris Wallace spluttering in the morning.
birthmarker
Did the link trash? I will try again.
dailykos.com/storyonly/2010/4/15/857544/-We-Always-Win-(A-Cure-For-Liberal-Panic)
birthmarker
Sorry. Search DKos diaries for “We Always Win.”
TR
Fantastic stuff.
debit
I loved it when Olson said something to the effect of, “People call it judicial activism when they don’t like the results” and Wallace said, “Exactly!” Olson’s reaction was, “Buh?”
Gen. Jrod and his Howling Army
If Ted Olson can get same-sex marriage legalized, he’ll have paid about 1% of the penance he owes for helping Bush steal the Presidency.
I agree with Wallace on one thing. It’s very hard to imagine Olson losing a Supreme Court case. He made a rhetorical crater of Fock Snooze.
roshan
The video above wasn’t working for me. The link below has the video and some more context.
wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/08/08/wallace-olson/
Morbo
@Napoleon: He did; I had watched it with a straight face up until that point, but I broke out laughing when he asked that.
r€nato
Chris Wallace admits that ‘judicial activism’ is just whining by losers. Awesome.
SiubhanDuinne
Nah. Ted Olson is actually a RINO In Name Only.
Hal
The shorter version of this video is Chris Wallace saying; “But Ted, you’re a conservative!” over and over, and repeating the phrase “judicial activism” every two minutes.
Agoraphobic Kleptomaniac
Comments from local conservatives on facebook when they saw that video:
“Just because this guy served in the bush administration doesn’t make him a conservative”
“Conservatism is about what is doing what is moral, and only the Father can decide what true morality is.”
“Listening to the words of men will only blow you around like a leaf in the wind.”
“Even if the supreme court agrees with this decision, it will still be wrong.”
And then they brought up how William Blackstone wouldn’t have supported gay marriage.
I’m not joking at all.
Comrade Dread
Yeah. I’m not in favor of SSM, but I found myself having a difficult time finding a worthwhile secular argument that would resolve itself to my libertarian principles. I couldn’t really come up with one. So I couldn’t really get all that worked up about the ruling. Frankly, at this point, I expect it.
That’s what the judiciary is for. Sometimes I like the outcome, sometimes I don’t, but ultimately if a judge found a law (even one passed via direct democracy) unconstitutional, then there’s nothing activist about that.
Frankly, I wish more judges weren’t afraid of being more ‘activist’ in the sense of throwing out laws that don’t pass constitutional muster.
matt
The six million or so Californians who did not vote yes on Prop 8 should be given some lip service too. Wallace acts like everybody wanted it.
Corner Stone
Dick Cheney had reasonable views on gay issues IIRC. Doesn’t make him not an asshole either.
Kurzleg
I love how Wallace keeps saying 7 million Californians supported the ban, as if this is some sort of trump card. First, a quick and dirty estimate says there’s something like $27 million voting-age residents in CA. This means that only about 25% of voting-age residents supported the ban. The other thing is that, what, 6.5 million voted against the ban, nearly the same as voted for it. In fact, nearly as many people didn’t vote on the ban at all as for voted on it – for and against. Does that sound like some huge travesty against democracy?
enplaned
Fundamental division in this country is no longer left vs right or liberal vs conservative. It’s rational vs irrational — and Ted is on the side of those who have two neurons to rub together.
Beej
You’ll notice that Olson refused to get drawn into the “7 million voted for, but 6.5 million voted against” sort of argument. That one is a loser because the clinching argument is simply that in our society, majority rules. What Olson refused to let go of is the fact that majority rules unless what the majority wants violates the Constitution. A good lawyer, and Olson is a great one, will not let herself/himself get drawn into a losing argument.
Kurzleg
Beej @ 21:
True enough, strictly speaking. I was pointing out the misleading nature of the “7 million” comment. It’s meant to imply that it’s a majority of Californians and “the will of the people”, but when you dig into it it turns out that nearly 3/4 of voting-age Californians either opposed the ban or couldn’t be bothered to vote on it.
jesdynf
You know, thinking about it, I might’ve been too hard on Olson. I’m mad about That One Case, sure, but why am I mad at *him*? It was his job to make the case, after all. I’m really pissed at the Supreme Court for their reprehensible no-precedent ruling. For all I know he’s as appalled about that as I was.
What struck me about that interview was that Wallace was actually doing a really good job. He had an opinion and he definitely tried to stick it to Olson, but look at how long Olson was allowed to speak without interruption. Olson definitely said what he intended to.
If Olson’s view hadn’t been internally consistent, he probably would’ve run into more trouble from Wallace. I’d like to see more of that sort of thing. (Of course, if you assume that Olson’s /really good/, it might just be that he handled Wallace better than somebody else could’ve. Hard to say.)
Bill Murray
@jesdynf: I guess it depends on what you think about the Arkansas Project. Olson was involved in that too.
zoe kentucky
Yeah. I’m not in favor of SSM, but I found myself having a difficult time finding a worthwhile secular argument that would resolve itself to my libertarian principles. I couldn’t really come up with one. So I couldn’t really get all that worked up about the ruling. Frankly, at this point, I expect it.
Why are you opposed to same-sex marriage?
If your reasons are religious then what do you say to all of the religious organizations that are more than happy to marry same-sex couples? Why do your religious beliefs trump theirs?
MoeLarryAndJesus
I would really enjoy kicking Chris Wallace in the balls.
There’s just something about him that pisses me off.
Lizzy L
zoe kentucky, do you really want to start a fight with Comrade Dread when he’s conceded the argument? He’s said that while he personally “doesn’t like” same-sex marriage, he understands that his lack of enthusiasm should not be enshrined in law. That’s a pretty reasonable stance, don’t you think?
EJ
Sad that it’s so rare to find a conservative these days who claims to support the principles of the Constitution… and actually means it.
Catsy
@zoe kentucky:
Does it matter? He just got done saying that he can’t construct a secular argument against it that comports with his principles, and so can’t get worked up over the Prop 8 ruling.
Marriage equality supporters could really stand to do far less grilling of people who are actually capable of drawing a line between their personal preferences and secular law. You can’t make someone like something that they don’t; all you can really ask is that they refrain from trying to enforce their viewpoint on everyone else.
zoe kentucky in pittsburgh
I wasn’t trying to pick a fight or even “grilling” him, I was just asking where he was coming from. In my personal life it’s rare for me to encounter anyone who openly says they’re opposed to SSM, so I wanted to know why.