Trump nominates openly gay conservative to federal appeals court (voted, party)

[Three Wolves In Snow]

Originally Posted by atltechdude

A bit of a whitewash of history here. Republicans absolutely did and many do still care about gays and see being gay as a disqualifier.

We've only have legal nationwide gay marriage for 3 years. Republicans' opposition to gays in America is a long term historical problem that we've only recently started to overcome.

Please provide factual evidence that Marco Rubio withdrew his support for that judge because he was black or gay or both.

I'll wait.

[LS Jaun]

Originally Posted by Retroit

If a straight man accuses him of being grabbed in high school, who will the libs side with?

They already say that anyone can switch between men and women, so why would they side with one or the other. To dems men and women are social constructs and are the same

[EastwardBound]

Originally Posted by shadowne

Of course, Feinstein and Harris are opposing his nomination.

Trump should engage them in language they can understand and ask them why they hate gay people.

[Scooby Snacks]

How pathetic. The president is so homophobic that when he doesn't display it it warrants a thread

[AZLiam]

Originally Posted by Scooby Snacks

How pathetic. The president is so homophobic that when he doesn't display it it warrants a thread

Is that a CNN talking point?

[juneaubound]

Originally Posted by Corrie22

Patrick Bumatay is the second openly gay person to be nominated by Trump to be a federal judge. The first was Mary Rowland, a magistrate judge who Trump nominated to be on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in June; she is waiting to be confirmed by the Senate.

https://www.nbcnews.com/feature/nbc-...m_npd_nn_tw_ma

I'm a big picture kind of woman. You all can wallow in the mud and fight over whether Trump loves or hate or respects or disrespects gays and whether Rubio loves or hates blacks. Bottom line is in the first sentence of the link:

President Donald Trump recently announced another wave of judicial nominees.

Clinton didn't. Sanders didn't. Trump did. Bottom line. And everyone who voted for Trump is reminded yet again why they voted for Trump.

[Scooby Snacks]

Originally Posted by juneaubound

I'm a big picture kind of woman. You all can wallow in the mud and fight over whether Trump loves or hate or respects or disrespects gays and whether Rubio loves or hates blacks. Bottom line is in the first sentence of the link:

President Donald Trump recently announced another wave of judicial nominees.

Clinton didn't. Sanders didn't. Trump did. Bottom line. And everyone who voted for Trump is reminded yet again why they voted for Trump.

I'm not sure what that means. People voted for Trump because they wanted judges?

[earthlyfather]

We can count on them being originalist too, which makes it even better. I can live with an originalist ruling. Whether or not I particularly like the ruling. Chief Justice Roberts’ ruling on the mandate as a tax and not a penalty is an example. No made up modern day living document interpretation, just the constitution, as intended.

Originally Posted by juneaubound

I'm a big picture kind of woman. You all can wallow in the mud and fight over whether Trump loves or hate or respects or disrespects gays and whether Rubio loves or hates blacks. Bottom line is in the first sentence of the link:

President Donald Trump recently announced another wave of judicial nominees.

Clinton didn't. Sanders didn't. Trump did. Bottom line. And everyone who voted for Trump is reminded yet again why they voted for Trump.

[dsjj251]

Originally Posted by Three Wolves In Snow

So let's try a little game. It's called, "What Does All Of This Information Tell You?"

Let's see....

You state that Republicans blocked (make sure that is bolded) 2 different judges who were gay when the clown attempted to nominate them. The implication is that the Republicans blocked (make sure that is bolded) them solely because they were gay.

And yet, here we have the Republican party nominating gays.

What does that tell you?

Hint: We don't play identity politics, we vote on merit, not who they choose to sleep with, what their gender is, what their race is, how old they are, etc.

Thank you for playing.

You didnt block them on merit since they were clearly qualified. they were blocked based on ideology.

[Tom Lennox 70]

This won't matter to the left. They'll simply call this gay person a traitor and not a real gay person. Just like any black who supports Trump will be called an Uncle Tom and any Hispanic who supports Trump and opposes illegal immigration suddenly becomes a "white Hispanic".