Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register

The Newfound Love Affair With Ted Olson

Not so recently, Ted Olson was the man you wanted to meet the front end of a sledgehammer. He was, after all, the fella who secured President George W. Bush a first term in office, thanks to his U.S. Supreme Court razzle dazzle. But now it’s like, we want to sit in this man’s lap. And have him tell us it’s all going to be okay.

Olson is making a surprisingly vast media tour pushing his Perry stance — all the more impressive when you consider defendant ProtectMarriage.com and attorney Charles Cooper has been seen far fewer places in the run-up to the trial — and his “Conservative Case for Gay Marriage” piece hits Newsweek as this NBC video segment also drops. We’re big fans of eloquent individuals who can so concisely boil down the gay marriage argument into an elevator speech — something he did in today’s opening statement (see next page), which closed with, “It is unconstitutional.”

But NBC didn’t stop there. It also produced this segments with plaintiff couples Jeff Zarrillo and Paul Katami.

ON THE NEXT PAGE: Ted Olson’s full opening statement.

    • CHIP1218

      I really think losing his wife on 9/11 led to him becoming pro-marriage equality. A loss like that makes you evaluate how you look at things, especially issues such as love and life long companionship. Whatever the reason for his coming to the conclusion of a “conservative case for gay marriage,” I thank him for his support and leadership.

      Jan 11, 2010 at 11:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • MitchNYC

      I’m pleased to see a conservative individual making a conservative argument for marriage equality. Well someone other than Andrew Sullivan.

      Jan 11, 2010 at 11:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Lukas P.

      Yeah Olson! Never thought I would write that but his piece in Newsweek (linked above) is most definitely worth a read. He draws out in clear logical and historical terms why gay marriage should be favored by conservatives. I’m sending copies to some of the fence-sitters I know and hope others will do so, too.

      In other related news, 3 more people who were planned to testify on behalf of Prop 8 have reportedly dropped out. Hmmm.

      Queerty, nicely done on Olson.

      We had our doubts about him….I’m glad to have been, so far, proven wrong.

      Jan 11, 2010 at 11:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Kevin

      Olson’s Supreme Court argument was for Bush in 2000, not 2004 and was therefore instrumental in securing his *first* term in office, *not* his second.

      Jan 12, 2010 at 12:00 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • CHIP1218

      I try not to pay attention to the grammar, spelling, fact checking, etc. that gets messed up on this site…if you forget about it too Kevin, it will prevent the migraines one can get from reading them!

      Jan 12, 2010 at 12:06 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Attmay

      @1 CHIP1218:

      Maybe because the same people who murdered his wife are the spiritual brethren of the opponents of gay equality.

      Jan 12, 2010 at 12:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Forrest

      Am I correct that even if we win this round the ban stays in place all the way to the final showdown in scotus?

      Jan 12, 2010 at 9:26 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Sam

      Olson’s going to have to step it up a bit to get my love. Walker asked him a softball question about domestic partnerships in California and he got the facts wrong. There was some good stuff in his opening, but it doesn’t seem like he’s bringing his A-game yet. I hope it comes soon.

      Jan 12, 2010 at 10:02 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • FakeName

      Forrest sez: Am I correct that even if we win this round the ban stays in place all the way to the final showdown in scotus?

      It depends on the judge. In all likelihood if Walker strikes down Prop 8 he will issue a stay of his own ruling pending appeal, either on his own motion or a motion from the intervening party. That’s standard in controversial cases where appeals are certain. If he strikes the ban, doesn’t issue the stay and is then reversed on appeal, couples who marry in the interval could find themselves in a legally untenable position.

      Jan 12, 2010 at 10:27 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Brian NJ

      There is only one accurate opinion about the constitutionality of unequal laws respecting marriage, and Ted Olson knows what it is. So he has come not only to our assistance, but to the assistance of the Nation, because this issue goes to the core of who we are as a people; what distinguishes this country and constitution from others.

      He is not just helping us. He is a real patriot, who understands what the country is all about: life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, and is willing to fight for it.

      Jan 12, 2010 at 1:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Dasher

      The Right Wingers will throw verbal excrement on Ted Olson and they will never, ever forgive him for this. But he is a man of principle, and he is doing what is right for the country. He sure isn’t doing it to win popularity contests. He deserves our respect. We need to put an end to these mostly losing state-by-state battles for the simple reason that Olson puts forth, that they are unconstitutional because you can’t use the ballot box to take away a minority group’s constitutional rights. It just might be because of Ted Olson that we finally win our constitutional rights in this country, and achieve full citizenship as a result!

      Jan 13, 2010 at 1:02 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.

  • Copyright 2016 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.