Oh, and interracial marriage should be left to the states…
This guy is probably in some serious trouble, at least I hope so.Oh, and interracial marriage should be left to the states…
Racists gonna rascist. That’s what they are and what they do. Sadly, they are now practicing in broad delight, including in public office.Oh, and interracial marriage should be left to the states…
He's going to win unfortunately.This guy is probably in some serious trouble, at least I hope so.
He was an election denier in 2020, as a US Senator from Indiana.
His gubernatorial candidacy is being challenged by a former Republican woman who 8 years ago won the state of Indiana's head of Public Education's office position, and she is now challenging him on the Democratic ticket for the governor's position, and seems to have won some serious momentum to challenge him. Time will tell, I assume.
Braun is not the brightest bulb in the box, but he might be able to fool the Indiana electorate, because they are not the brightest bulb in the box either.
Braun is not the brightest bulb in the box, but he might be able to fool the Indiana electorate, because they are not the brightest bulb in the box either.
While we’re at it, let’s leave it to the states to decide where black people can eat or take a piss while out in public.Oh, and interracial marriage should be left to the states…
I think the truth is Republicans who actually believe this shit now feel emboldened to say it publicly because they know their electorate real well.big oof. It's not like this was some gotcha question. They asked him twice and spelled it out.
Prime Minister Trudeau is interviewing Kamala?On Tuesday evening, Braun sent out a statement saying he had “misunderstood a line of questioning that ended up being about interracial marriage” and condemned “racism in any form” saying there was “no question the Constitution prohibits discrimination of any kind based on race.”
And don't look now but your candidate is about to do an interview with a B list celeb who put on blackface and called a bunch of people ni**ers.
Earning your salary again today I see!The reporter asked again, reiterating the question and asking if Braun would be okay with Supreme Court leaving interracial marriage to the states.
Braun doubled down, saying “Yes, I think that is something that if you’re not wanting the Supreme Court to weigh in on issues like that, you’re not going to be able to have your cake and eat it too, it’s hypocritical.”
Anyone claiming Braun was confused or didn’t understand the question is one, some, or all of the following:
1. A liar
2. A mental midget
3. A piece of shit
The radical right hates mixed marriages. Because racism.It’s nuts that we are even having a discussion about the legality of interracial marriage here in the year 2024. God damn who cares?
Guess you didn’t see Vance’s response to Republican voters that have an issue with him married to a Hindu and fathering mixed race children.It’s nuts that we are even having a discussion about the legality of interracial marriage here in the year 2024. God damn who cares?
The radical right hates mixed marriages. Because racism.
Guess you didn’t see Vance’s response to Republican voters that have an issue with him married to a Hindu and fathering mixed race children.
He essentially apologized and told them but she’s such a good mom and lawyer. Instead of telling them to GFT.
Basically it was about as limp wrist of an answer you can give. Vance knows he needs their votes and was trying as hard as he could not to offend them.No. I didn’t see this. Just… wow. I’ve really got nothing else to say at this point.
Exactly.I think the truth is Republicans who actually believe this shit now feel emboldened to say it publicly because they know their electorate real well.
With a quote from the article?Exactly.
And look at dolts like Whiskey who fall over themselves to excuse it all. Can you blame them?
Trudeau with head pubes.Prime Minister Trudeau is interviewing Kamala?
You’re too dumb to see he is having his cake and eating it too.With a quote from the article?
Ok.....
Charliefromalwayssunny.gifYou’re too dumb to see he is having his cake and eating it too.
Made the racists happy with the initial quote - as he wanted.
Now pretending he didn’t say the words that came out of his own mouth because he knows there are so many numpties like you willing to carry his racist water.
BAU and despicable.
Dems aren't satisfied to simply control things inside their state of residence,.. they feel the need to control everyone, everywhere.
4. All of the above and goes by WhiskeydeltadeltatangoThe reporter asked again, reiterating the question and asking if Braun would be okay with Supreme Court leaving interracial marriage to the states.
Braun doubled down, saying “Yes, I think that is something that if you’re not wanting the Supreme Court to weigh in on issues like that, you’re not going to be able to have your cake and eat it too, it’s hypocritical.”
Anyone claiming Braun was confused or didn’t understand the question is one, some, or all of the following:
1. A liar
2. A mental midget
3. A piece of shit
Rifler would have been on the side of the Confederacy in the Civil War.So you are saying you believe that interracial marriage should be left up to the states?
The fact many on this board don't understand this extremely fundamental civics lesson is terrifying and apalling.1964 California Prop 14 allowed property sellers, landlords and their agents to openly discriminate on ethnic grounds.
This was later found to be unconstitutional.
Point is, states shouldn't have the right to discriminate. It's not a, "right."
Yes. Yes he is.So you are saying you believe that interracial marriage should be left up to the states?
Tell us how you feel about the Texas abortion law.Dems aren't satisfied to simply control things inside their state of residence,.. they feel the need to control everyone, everywhere.
Because it's overturning the accepted federal norm, which is what the majority already agree with.Why is it that every time someone suggests it's up to the state to decide something, it's assumed that person favors the unpopular position?
IMO it's off the table because it should be covered under the Constitution, and a state can't trump that. However...
Why is it that every time someone suggests it's up to the state to decide something, it's assumed that person favors the unpopular position?
States do govern marriage, and probably should govern all marriage regardless of race, religion, gender, etc. Officials say "by the power vested in me by the state of..." So it's not automatically racist to say states should govern marriage...