Conservative Ted Olson teaches Chris Wallace of Fox News a lesson on U.S. Constitution

Ted Olson, who served as solicitor general under President George W. Bush (and represented Bush in the Supreme Court case that determined the final result of the disputed 2000 presidential election), appeared this morning on “Fox News Sunday” to discuss the California gay marriage case.

Host Chris Wallace threw a lot of familiar Republican talking points at Olson, who deftly parried them all.




  1. Mr. Funfsinn

    I’m not sure why they call these fakes “conservative”. They’re libertarian today. A “conservative” might have been conservative in 1964, before the late 60s happen, but would clearly look like a libertarian today. The supposed “neocons,” which is a fabricated term without any real meaning, are actually just the defenders of traditionalism. Many of them used to be Democrats.

  2. ilivehere2

    Prop 8 wrote discrimination into the California constitution which goes directly against the US Constitution. I think Mr. Olson explains all of this very clearly for anyone that is willing to actually listen to what he is saying. And to think this is coming from someone from the Solicitor Generals office under Bush. Is this why the Bush administration, while making a big brouhaha about the sanctity of marriage between a man and a women in the 2006 election cycle, didn’t push this as a cause?

    Again Pat, thank you for posting this. 2 for 2 today.

  3. Mr. Funfsinn

    Defining marriage is not discrimination. Many, many states will simply no longer issue marriage licenses. The U.S. Congress should hand over to the states a Constitutional amendment. The number of states that have defined marriage stands at 44. When the Supreme Court decided Lawrence v. Texas, it was noted that the states were trending in one direction, which the court concluded to be relevant. Here, there has been a trend in the opposite direction. Even voters in the state of Maine overturned their own legislature. This is a lot more like Roe v. Wade than any other unanimous decision. Brown v. Bd. of Edu. was not a plurality. Pluralities that divide the court divide the country much more,

  4. who he hurts? Who does gay marriage hurt? Dave please share with the class how you been hurt by gay marriage.

    I’m sorry but trying to stop any adult from getting married to another adult is stupid. Nothing but one group of people trying to act supior to another group of people.

  5. miltonwaddams

    Many, many states will simply no longer issue marriage licenses.

    Good. The State needs to get out of the marriage business.

  6. Neftali

    milton – I think you would appreciate this column from Reason.com

    An excerpt:

    “we have two activist groups trying to
    force their own ethical construction of marriage on the rest of us.
    And to enforce it, they have been using the power of the state—one
    via majority rule and the other using the judiciary”


    So while I like the column, unfortunately, this issue has to be settled in the courts, and it looks like it eventually will be. I’m also very proud to have Ted Olson part of the Republican party. Not only did he rightly put Bush in the White House, but he is also on the correct side of the Same sex marriage debate. Mr. Funfsinn and bigdave54 could learn a lot from this man.

  7. Milton Waddams

    I posted that article on my Facebook page a few days ago. Good call.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *