Beware The Folksy Fred Factor

The San Francisco Bay Times ^ | November 1, 2007 | Chris Crain

[Constitutionalist Conservative]

I disagree. To allow states to not recognize marriages performed in other states is contrary to the "full faith and credit" clause, by which states must recognize the legitimate legislative rulings of other states.

I think you're confusing federalism with constitutionalism. Federalism is the dispersing of power from the central government. Exceptions to the full-faith-and-credit clause of the Constitution, duly enacted by amendment and consistent with federalism, are okee-dokee with me.

[Hostage]

This one has so many errors it's difficult to figure out where to start without repeating every sentence.

Here's one:

He’s flat wrong that no legislature has enacted gay marriage legislation, since California has twice. But the measure was vetoed the first time and likely will again by Governor Schwarzenegger.

He's saying California 'enacted' gay marriage legislation. Aren't 'reporters' supposed to have an above average command of the English language?

The word 'enact' means:

en·act
–verb (used with object)
1. to make into an act or statute: Congress has enacted a new tax law.
2. to represent on or as on the stage; act the part of: to enact Hamlet.

A state law is enacted when it is passed by a state legislator, sent to the governor to be signed and is in fact SIGNED by the governor. If the governor refuses to sign and sends it back (veto), then the legislation is not 'enacted' into law.

Fred Thompson stated correctly that no state has signed off on a gay marriage bill. And that is true.

I got a cute little poster on my wall taken from the movie 'The Sixth Sense'. It shows the little boy saying to Bruce Willis "I see dumb people, I see them everywhere". I'm tempted to cross out the word 'people' and write in 'reporters'.

[2ndDivisionVet]

Their daughter is the “spitting image” of Mom, IMO.

[The Pack Knight]

The law isn’t settled as to gay marriage, but there has long been held a “public policy exemption” to the Full Faith and Credit clause, whereby states are not forced to substitute conflicting statutes of other states for their own statutes on point, or honor laws that are repugnant to the public policy of that state.

[tubebender]

Well now that we’ve heard from the Maggot Faggots of San Franfornoica we should all have a drink and send FRed another check.

[driftless2]

This insipid article shows exactly where most lib “journalists” heads are at. Obviously this clown believes there’s only one issue that matters: gay freaking marriage. You have to ask yourself how these idiots get hired by supposedly reputable news sources. The answer is of course they get hired by other people who seriously believe that gay marriage is the issue of our times.

[Tony in Hawaii]

If I didn’t know any better, I’d say this article was written by a conservative pretending to be a liberal, in order to help energize the Republican base for Fred.

I mean, I’ve never read anything written about Fred that did a better job of assuring the base that Fred’s OK than this article. It sure reassures me!

[George W. Bush]

Fred: "I’m not going to pass judgment on several million of my fellow citizens. Anybody that knows me knows how I feel about the importance of a family … of traditional marriage,” he said. “It’s the thing I want for my children. But it goes back to the unity we were talking about. As president of the United States one should not go out of their way to castigate or pass judgment publicly on a large segment of people."

An extremely sound answer. And he can state it briefly and quotably, an excellent quality in a candidate. Better yet, it's not nuanced or rehearsed.

Don't count Folksy Fred out just yet.

[LucyJo]

I think you’re right...she’s a pretty little girl. There are pics where she has a little favor of dad, but she certainly favors mom.

I’d love to see little kids running around in the WH again. Maybe, after 8 yrs. of watching them grow up there, we’d finally get the taint of the Clinton’s out of our minds when we talk about it and see pictures of it.

The Thompson’s are a beautiful family - no matter how hard some want to paint them otherwise.

[daylilly]

That is the first picture where I’ve seen Sammy smile. Every other one he looked very serious. And he has teeth now! Back in June when it was heating up about Fred running he was seven months old and never smiled enough to see the teeth.

Thanks for posting this one. I’d love to see this family in the White House.

[TN4Liberty]

...and with the strongest street-smarts is, sad to say, Giuliani. Just an impression.

Interesting perspective. Rudy comes across to me as a panderer. Is that what street-smarts is?

[Shortstop7]

Even more reasons to love Fred!

[ejonesie22]

This “person” is proof of something I have said all along.

Even though in our hearts we want a Defense of Marriage Act nationally, it will never even get to the states the way Congress has been going and that will not shift anytime soon. We can whine and complain and demand that our candidates support such, but any tactically aware and strategically honest conservative who looks at both houses knows it won’t even make it out of committee.

Now put it to the states, their legislatures, where it is much closer to “The People”, where the lawmakers are in most cases more responsive to their constituents and more susceptible to their influence, then we see movement.

Of course there will be a few “Gay Marriage” states, but with Fred’s approach the damage is contained, they won’t have rights past the state line. You can see the reaction to that in this article.

The really cool part, the strategy part, is that if one looks at the states, while there will be states like California and some eastern states that will pass gay marriage, it won’t be more than 25%. That leaves 3/4 of the legislatures on record as defending marriage, the same legislatures that approve constitutional amendments. With now visible national support, with Gay and Non gay marriage states pictured on a map for all to see, it will be neigh on impossible for congress not to act at some point to put forth that amendment...

[trisham]

I’d love to see this family in the White House

*************

Me too!

[RightWhale]

That is a possible addition to the meaning. Some are very quick and very smart. Successful politicians might do well at that.

[WOSG]

Thompson ignores the evidence on the politics of gay marriage. Pro-marriage legislators in Massachusetts have done much better at the polls than opponents. He’s flat wrong that no legislature has enacted gay marriage legislation, since California has twice. But the measure was vetoed the first time and likely will again by Governor Schwarzenegger. In New York the situation is reversed, as Gov. Elliott Spitzer is pro-marriage and even got the measure through half the legislature in June. In New Jersey, Gov. Jon Corzine said this week marriage is almost inevitable, albeit after the ‘08 elections. In the District of Columbia, the mayor and a majority of the city council are already on record favoring gay marriage, but have been given temporary political cover for dodging the issue by a terrified old-school gay activist group. The point is that gay marriage is inevitable in other states, whether by popular means or by legal challenge, including prominent suits pending in Iowa, Maryland and California. If Fred Thompson can “aww shucks” his way to the White House and gets his constitutionalized DOMA, we’ll be saddled for a generation with a patchwork of states where gays can marry, and then lose all legal protection when they cross the wrong state lines.

Gay Activists think gay marriage is inevitable, even if Fred's Amendment passes.

This is why I support the FMA.

[budwiesest]

The answer is to issue "Pretend Marriage" licenses. That way, when they look in the mirror some morning and realize, "I'm married to a homo!", they'll have ease of access to becoming un-married.

Admiring Fred's frederalism. Very refreshing (bet you thought I was going to write 'refredshing', huh?)

If this guy really wants to use the constitution as the basis for his administration, we might have a winner here. Think of the destruction to democrat programs this might wreak.

[pop-aye]

By your reasoning, every state should recognize every other states concealed carry license? This is not the case.

[Steve_Seattle]

"By your reasoning, every state should recognize every other states concealed carry license? This is not the case."

That's not my reasoning. I'm not a constitutiional lawyer and perhaps can't give an exact statement of the "full faith and credit" doctrine, but it does exist in the Constitution and requires that states generally recognize the legitimacy of - for example - judicial rulings in other states, such as decrees of divorce.