Connect with us

Jeb Bush: Florists Must Sell Flowers To Gay Couples, Unless They’re Wedding Flowers

Published

on

Jeb Bush is wading into the wedding flowers and cakes wars, trying to appease all, and failing.

Back in April, during the middle of Indiana Governor Mike Pence’s self-created implosion over a discriminatory “religious freedom” law designed to marginalize LGBT people, Jeb Bush headed to California to try to woo high-value Silicon Valley donors. It didn’t end well, after Bush offered support for Pence’s anti-gay discrimination.

Salon’s Joan Walsh had written it was “all such bad timing – as he headed to Silicon Valley to raise megabucks for his Right to Rise PAC. Bay Area businesses like Twitter, Yelp and Salesforce, plus valley titan Apple, had all blasted the law.”

Campaigning in San Francisco on Thursday, Jeb Bush’s timing also could not have been worse.

The Republican presidential candidate, second now to Donald Trump, made a big media deal of stepping into an Uber car Thursday morning, which turned out to be the same day a judge ruled Uber should be forced to pay the State of California $7.3 million for its failure to follow state regulations.

Riding “shotgun,” Bush pulled up to a San Francisco startup, Thumbtack, where he shared his views on the third rail of politics – not “entitlements,” although he spoke to those too – but whether or not a Christian florist should have to sell flowers to a same-sex couple for their wedding, along with other wage discrimination and LGBT civil rights issues.

TIME reports that a Thumbtack employee “who identified himself to Bush as being gay asked about Bush’s position on legislation to ban discrimination of LGBT Americans. ‘I don’t think you should be discriminated because of your sexual orientation. Period. Over and out,’ he replied.”

“The fact that there wasn’t a law doesn’t necessarily mean you would have been discriminated against,” Bush told the gay employee. Small comfort to the millions of LGBT Americans who have been discriminated against, no doubt, and ignoring the fact that in more than half the states across the nation, LGBT employees have had access to no legal protections and have been fired just for being LGBT.

Bush “added that in the wake of the Supreme Court decision to legalize same-sex marriage nationwide, the country must work to carefully balance the rights of those seeking to marry and the religious beliefs of those who oppose those unions.”

Citing the frequently-used example by religious freedom advocates, Bush said that in the case of a florist approached by a gay couple, “you should be obligated to sell them flowers, doing otherwise would be discriminatory.” But he said that the objecting florist should not be required to participate in the wedding, a fine line that he hopes will appeal to all sides of the debate.

In other words, a florist, Bush believes, cannot discriminate against gay people for being gay, but they can if the very same gay people are getting married. 

CBS News quoted Bush’s comment a bit more fully:

“If you’re a florist and you have that deeply felt belief, you should if a gay couple comes in and says I want to buy flowers you should be obligated to sell them flowers. Doing otherwise would be discrimination. But if that couple asks you to participate in the wedding, and you said, based on my conscience I shouldn’t or I won’t, you should not be fined, you should not have to close your business down.”

The religious right over the past year or more has been using the phrase “participate in” to include even the act of, say, merely arranging flowers or baking a cake for the wedding of a same-sex couple.

And Bush’s words are wholly consistent with what he told Pat Robertson’s CBN News in May, telling reporter David Brody that he supports the concept that wedding-related vendors – bakers, florists, photographers – should be given the legal right to discriminate against same-sex couples getting married, based on their professed religious or moral beliefs.

Brody asked the former Florida governor if he is “OK” if wedding vendors don’t provide their services to same-sex couples.

“Yes, absolutely if it’s based on a religious belief,” Bush had responded.

TIME goes on to note that when the gay employee “followed up to ask specifically whether he would support anti-discrimination laws for LGBT Americans for their housing and employment—the next target for gay rights marriage advocates—Bush said he would at the state level.”

“I think this should be done state-by-state, I totally agree with that,” Bush said.

Again, timing is everything.

Later in the day yesterday, the EEOC released an historic and groundbreaking ruling, stating that gay, lesbian, and bisexual employees are covered by and included in the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when it comes to employment discrimination. In other words, at the federal level, nationally, not “state-by-state,” as Bush prefers.

Bush also agreed that wages should be equal between men and women, but insisted “there are laws to make it so, and they should be enforced,” not added to.

As for “entitlements,” what many Americans call government programs like Social Security and Medicare, CNN’s Ashley Killough tweeted what Bush had to say:

So how did Bush fare at the six-year old San Francisco startup?

International Business Times reports that the “gay employee” who asked Bush about discrimination is Jake Poses, Thumbtack’s vice president of product. 

“I appreciate him saying I shouldn’t be discriminated against, but I do believe that if he had more conviction about it, he should [handle it at the federal level],” Poses told IBTimes.

“I give him credit for understanding that startups in San Francisco are having a real and measurable impact on the lives of many Americans,” Poses said. “I probably will not vote for him, but that is because I put a premium on views on social issues. I think that actually is the pervailing view of most people in the Silicon Valley community. That’s part of the ethos of what’s out here.” 

Not the first time Bush has failed when visiting Silicon Valley. 

All in all, not a great day, some might think.

 

Front page image by  via Twitter
Top image by  via Twitter

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Related Topics:
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

These 19 Democrats May Already Be Jockeying for a Presidential Run: Report

Published

13 hours ago

on

January 21, 2026

By

The November midterms are more than nine months away, but already there are well over a dozen Democrats who could be showing signs of interest in running for the White House in 2028.

That’s according to Zenith Research pollster Adam Carlson, who identified nineteen Democrats with varying degrees of proximity to a presidential race.

The list includes current and former U.S. Senators, Congress members, governors, and mayors. One former cabinet secretary, one former ambassador, and one former astronaut. But overall, the list is heavy with executive experience — not just Washington politicians. That could be a feather in the cap for Democrats, as the GOP’s current bench appears to be drawn largely from inside the Trump administration — and voters may not want four, if not eight, more years of the same.

Nearly all have accumulated years — and in some cases, decades — of experience in government, spanning local, state, and national offices, yet none is older than in their mid-60s. The youngest is currently just one year beyond the Constitution’s 35-year age threshold. And today, after nearly a decade of some of the oldest U.S. presidents in history, that age range could bring a sigh of relief for many voters.

Many also hail from across the country, rather than being concentrated among so-called coastal elites — a longstanding critique often leveled at Democrats.

READ MORE: ‘Damage Control’: Trump Mocked for New Weekly Barnstorming Blitz Months Ahead of Midterms

Carlson divided the list into categories. Five are “clearly running,” six seem likely, four fall into a “wouldn’t be surprised” section, and just one is seen as “unlikely.” The future of two could depend on the 2026 race, and one is a “wildcard.”

Here are Carlson’s predictions:

Those clearly signaling a run include Kentucky Governor Andy Beshear; former U.S. Transportation Secretary and former South Bend mayor Pete Buttigieg; former Chicago mayor and U.S. ambassador Rahm Emanuel — who also served in the Obama White House; California Governor Gavin Newsom; and Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro.

The “seems likely” group ranges from former Newark mayor and current U.S. Senator Cory Booker, to former Vice President Kamala Harris, along with U.S. Senator and former NASA astronaut Mark Kelly, U.S. Rep. Ro Khanna, U.S. Senator Chris Murphy, and Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker.

Under “wouldn’t be surprised,” are U.S. Senator Ruben Gallego, Maryland Governor Wes Moore, U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, (AOC), and U.S. Senator Chris Van Hollen.

The “unlikely” candidate, according to Carlson, is Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer.

The two “depends on 2026” candidates are both U.S. Senators, and both from Georgia: Senator Jon Ossoff and Senator Raphael Warnock.

Lastly, the “wildcard”: political commentator and television host Jon Stewart.

READ MORE: ‘Can Barely Keep His Eyes Open’: Trump Mocked Over ‘Ramblefest’ Davos Speech

 

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

‘Damage Control’: Trump Mocked for New Weekly Barnstorming Blitz Months Ahead of Midterms

Published

19 hours ago

on

January 21, 2026

By

As his poll numbers continue to drop, the White House is announcing that President Donald Trump will begin a weekly barnstorming blitz of the country to rally supporters with stump speeches designed to change voters’ perceptions that high prices are Trump’s fault.

“Trump’s first stop will be on Tuesday in Iowa, where he will deliver a speech on the economy and energy, chief of staff Susie Wiles told reporters on the way to Davos, Switzerland,” Politico reported. “The travel blitz beginning in January is much earlier than during his first term, when he began traveling aggressively to support candidates just after Labor Day.”

“Trump has struggled to articulate an affordability message that moves the needle with voters, and a purposeful tack back to domestic matters could help that perception,” Politico noted, adding that “polling has regularly shown Trump’s popularity slipping and voters beginning to blame his policies for the high cost of living.”

According to Zeteo News’ Prem Thakker, Trump is running negative — and in some cases double-digit negative — in a dozen states that will hold elections for the U.S. Senate this November. Thakker cited data from The Economist, which also shows that the president’s net approval rating is now -19 percent, down two points from last week and “the lowest it has been this term.”

READ MORE: DOJ Delay Continues as Judge Denies Epstein Files Special Master

Some of those state ratings, Thakker noted, include:
Georgia: -18.6%
Maine: -18.4%
Texas: -17.2%
Michigan: -15.8%
N Carolina: -13.6%

Meanwhile, some appeared optimistic.

“As President Trump barnstorms the country to advance his America First agenda, Republicans are poised to defy history in the midterms,” Republican National Committee spokesperson Kiersten Pels told Politico.

Others took a different view.

The Bulwark’s Sarah Longwell rejected former Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) spokesperson Katie Miller’s suggestion that Trump’s travel to Iowa means that he’s “running.”

“This is a hilarious tweet,” Longwell wrote. “Trump isn’t going to Iowa because he is running. He’s going for damage control because his tariffs have made the state a pickup for Democrats.”

The Lincoln Project added, “Trump’s ‘Affordability Hoax’ heads to Iowa to tell Iowans that everything’s fine, despite their worst-in-the-country economy.”

On Tuesday, CNN’s John King reported that while Democrats understand that Iowa will be an uphill battle, they see opportunity.

“Democrats have a huge opportunity and Republicans acknowledge it,” King also told Anderson Cooper. “If the election were tomorrow, the Democrats would take back the House without question. The only part is the margin.”

READ MORE: ‘Can Barely Keep His Eyes Open’: Trump Mocked Over ‘Ramblefest’ Davos Speech

 

Image via Reuters 

Continue Reading

News

DOJ Delay Continues as Judge Denies Epstein Files Special Master

Published

21 hours ago

on

January 21, 2026

By

Thirty-three days after the Trump Department of Justice was required by law to release the Epstein Files — but failed to produce even one percent of them — a federal judge has rejected a bipartisan effort to appoint a special master to oversee production of the documents.

U.S. Reps. Ro Khanna (D-CA) and Thomas Massie (R-KY), authors of the Epstein Files Transparency Act (EFTA), went to court to make their request. On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer declined that request, stating that he does not have the authority to appoint a special master.

“Their request is ‘important’ and ‘timely,’ but the appropriate vehicle may be a lawsuit or Congress, the judge says,” according to All Rise News editor-in-chief Adam Klasfeld.

“This criminal case does not give the Court any charter to supervise DOJ’s compliance with the EFTA,” Judge Engelmayer wrote, as New York Daily News reporter Molly Crane-Newman reported. “And the motion exceeds the bounds of permissible amici participation. This decision is without prejudice to the Representatives’ right to initiate a separate lawsuit. The Representatives are also, of course, at liberty to pursue oversight of DOJ via the tools available to Congress.”

READ MORE: ‘Can Barely Keep His Eyes Open’: Trump Mocked Over ‘Ramblefest’ Davos Speech

On Tuesday, Crane-Newman reported that attorneys for the two congressmen had renewed “their push to seek a special master to oversee the Epstein files release, saying the government ‘cannot be relied upon to act with disinterest and objectively to do what is best for the survivors. It has its own conflicting interests.'”

Former Palm Beach County State Attorney Dave Aronberg, earlier on Wednesday, told MSNOW, “I don’t think we’ll see the entire file until Trump is out of office.”

“I think part of the problem here for Congressmen Khanna and Massie is that the law that they wrote is riddled with loopholes. It does not have an enforcement mechanism. So they’re trying to figure out how to get the DOJ to turn over all the documents, but there’s nothing in the law that forces them to do so under penalty of whatever,” he explained.

Aronberg called it “a real big question whether or not they, as members of Congress, have the standing to get this judge in a closed case to force the DOJ to turn over the documents.”

READ MORE: Canadian Prime Minister Warns World Order Has Ruptured

 

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.