Posts tagged ‘california’
Proposition 8 passed in California.
Proposition 8 adds a provision to the California Constitution that says: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
As my friends said regarding election night, “At least we got one thing.”
It came as no shock or surprise that immediately upon having the vote called in favor of the Amendment opposing gay marriage that there were multiple lawsuits being filed to “invalidate” the vote.
I wrote about the Prop 8, Yes on 8, measure a while back and what floors me about the issue in the first place is that this is the SECOND time that California citizens have made their decision about this. The first time it passed with a 61% majority. Well it passed again!
I have a real issue with the fact that the voice of the people is being suppressed here. How do you get to “invalidate” my vote because you don’t like it? If we are going to play that game there are some other things that have been voted on that I would like to have invalidated too. Once you start taking away the right of the citizens to have a say in how things work then we lose our rights as a democracy. That is a very bad thing.
I hear the phrase, the majority cannot decide what is right for the minority. Does anyone think there is something funny there? So the minority gets to decide what is right for the majority? I don’t know of any place where that kind of logic works. The rationale used there confuses me.
The Mormon church is also under attack for their financial support of the Proposition. Really? The money was mostly given by individual members of their churches. Which is the individual citizens business. Not a church and state issue. And even if it was from the church group as a whole the percentage of money given is a fraction of the denominational funds. This was not a church and state issue. If it was then no church would have taken a stance on the issue. Churches cannot promote specific candidates or parties but they can take a stance on issues. If that is a problem what about the churches that spoke out against Prop 8. Surely the percentage of cash given from those smaller organizations would surpass the percentage from the Mormon church. You can’t have this type of argument one way.
I heard a great guest on FOX this past weekend. (still trying to find the clip) But in it they alluded to this fact, and as much as I wish it were not true it is: If the people fighting so hard to pass same-sex marriage left it alone and fought hard for equal civil rights for the next ten years or so, by then the population of voters will be replaced by people who would support their agenda. It would pass easily.
That makes some sense. Why fight the man? Bide your time and you will ultimately get your way. If you seek to invalidate my vote now I am only going to be angered and feel that my vote has no meaning.
And why riot and picket? Is that serving your purpose? By rioting you are not coming across well and lose any credibility you might have. It comes off like sore losers.
Here are some articles that Protect Marriage sent out this evening. Some good reading.
John went on to emphasize that civil unions grant same-sex couples the same rights afforded to married heterosexual couples. He stated, “I don’t want to be married. I’m very happy with a civil partnership. If gay people want to get married, or get together, they should have a civil partnership…the word marriage, I think, puts a lot of people off. You get the same equal rights that we do when we have a civil partnership. Heterosexual people get married. We can have civil partnerships.”
The editorial summarizes the opposition’s actions, citing that, “Angry opponents of Proposition 8 are targeting businesses and individuals who contributed money to the “yes” campaign. Vandals have hit churches that supported the initiative. Sparked by the speed and reach of the Internet, supporters of gay and lesbian rights are organizing protests from California to Salt Lake City, the home of the Mormon Church.”
And while the editorial takes a sympathetic approach to the opposition’s protests, saying their “charged reaction is understandable,” it does not justify that by “venting their anger and in exercising their right to challenge Proposition 8, some opponents risk crossing the line that separates civil protest from harassment. And by crossing that line, they undermine the message that some gay and lesbian leaders are trying to impart: that everyone’s rights should be respected.”
The editorial went on to acknowledge that the No on 8 campaign has not adequately addressed the acts of violence and harassment undertaken by their supporters, saying that “a lone statement” on their Web site asking supporters to not isolate those who oppose their views is simply not enough.
This is just amazing. It is very disheartening to see the disabled being taken advantage of by caregivers “helping” them vote. While it may be the right of every citizen of age to cast a vote, it should also be true that they should be competent to make that choice for themselves. The point of individual voting is not to make it a tool to be manipulated. If a person is not of mental capacity to even register, comprehend, etc then it should be up to their parents or loved ones to deal with their right to vote, NOT to the caregiver at whatever facility they are residing at. The family may have a different view of what is best for their loved one AND the family should be the final say so in this instance.
Here are cases of such situations – that could bordering on being voter fraud:
My son was politicized!! I live in Iowa. I have a disabled 26 yr old son. I have never registered him to vote because 1. He is not mentally capable and 2. He couldn’t read a ballot. He lives in a group home with others like him. They the homes staff registered my son to vote. When I found out I told them that he is NOT allowed to vote. I find out today they took him to vote and a home staff member told him who to vote for (Obama) and was actually the person who helped him vote. I am livid. They tell me it is his right and the law. They knew I would probably ‘get him’ on election day so they took him to vote early. I am shaking so bad right now. The staff used my son and others for political gains.
Michelle Malkin reports of more instances in Georgia, California, and Iowa.
Here is one of the California stories:
The California Republican Party is asking the secretary of state to investigate an organized voting campaign involving developmentally disabled adults in Tuolumne County.
As many as ten clients of the Thumbs Up! adult care center have already cast absentee ballots under the supervision of center director David Simerley, and nearly all of them were for Barack Obama.
“We all registered to vote and we all sat together as a group and went over our ballots and voted,” Simerley told News10.
Among those voting was Michael Rascon, 56, whose father described him as having the mental capacity of a 5-year-old.
“What kind of people would do this to somebody like that,” asked Sam Rascon, who discovered his son had registered and voted only after seeing him with an Obama button last Thursday. “He wouldn’t know one candidate from another.”
News10 spoke to Michael Rascon at the Thumbs Up! center about the election. When asked which candidate he’d voted for, Rascon answered “the black man.” He was unable to remember Obama’s name.
Simerley said the absentee voting followed field trips to both local Republican and Democratic party headquarters.
“When we register people to vote, we try to be totally non-partisan,” Simerley said. He insists he exerted no influence over his clients despite the fact nearly all of them voted Democratic in an otherwise Republican county.
“I think maybe Obama would appeal to people with disabilities,” he explained.
Sad. This would be wrong no matter which party the votes were for. People being taken advantage of is just wrong.
Not to mention the curiosity of inmates voting. The curious part being exactly how it is done. Absentee with ballots sent to their place of residence outside of the prison, sent to the prison directly, polling done in the prison in person, etc. There is a lot of room for gray in this. How hard would it be to imagine – a ballot being sent to the home where the inmate lives and it magically getting filled out for them without the inmate ever actually seeing it? Vermont and Maine are the only two states where convicted inmates can actually vote, with the only exception being if they are in for murder. In the other states it varies, but seems that if they are in prison awaiting trial then they are eligible.
So today the email response (again, I know it is a stock letter) came from Barbara Boxer. I post this just to be in contrast to the Eshoo letter. While I may not agree with Barbara Boxer on many views, I respect and appreciate her response.
Unlike the Eshoo email, Boxer does not show partisanship in her response. She is respectful and appears to have crafted her response for all constituents. So kudos out to Barbara Boxer. Even though I still am not happy with the bill, I appreciate your respect and consideration.
Dear Mr. and Mrs. xxxxx:
Thank you for contacting me regarding the financial rescue legislation (H.R.1424). I appreciate hearing from you on this critical issue.
The fundamentals of our economy have been shaken, and Americans are deeply concerned. When Secretary Paulson and Chairman Bernanke placed an urgent phone call a few weeks ago to Congress to say we needed emergency action to prevent a major financial meltdown, I expected they would come forward with a plan that was targeted and reasonable, with appropriate oversight and taxpayer protections.
Unfortunately, what they brought us was a $700 billion blank check, which they asked us to sign with no questions asked. This plan contained no oversight, no taxpayer equity, and no control over CEO pay. I strongly opposed this proposal – and thanks to your phone calls, e-mails, and letters, Congress stopped it in its tracks.
The Senate made major improvements designed to strengthen our economy and protect our taxpayers. Instead of a blank check, the Senate plan included significant Congressional oversight, equity for taxpayers, curbs on executive compensation, an increase in FDIC insurance protection for bank depositors, middle-class tax relief, and job-creating tax incentives for renewable energy. The bill passed the Senate by an overwhelmingly bipartisan vote of 74-25 and the House by a vote of 263-171.
These were very important changes. But let me be honest: There were still aspects of this package that I didn’t like. I preferred the government acquiring more equity instead of toxic assets. I wanted the package to be put forward in smaller installments and to include more checks and balances to make sure it would work.
For me, the deciding factor in my Yes vote was information I received from the State of California. I was told by the Treasurer’s office that without access to credit, which is the goal of this legislation, California wouldn’t be able to sell voter-approved highway, school, and water bonds that are desperately needed for our economy and the creation of good-paying new jobs. In addition, I was told by the Governor’s office, that without action, our state might be forced to withhold funds for law enforcement, schools, and other needed services. This would bring our state to its knees and many middle-class families would be in deep trouble. Small businesses are beginning to tell me they cannot get lines of credit to meet payroll, as well.
Rest assured, I will continue to speak out forcefully about the failures that led us to this place and keep working with my colleagues to strengthen confidence in our markets, protect the American taxpayers, and enact regulatory reform to ensure that we don’t end up in this mess again.
Again, thank you for writing to me about this very important matter. Even though you may feel frustrated with the outcome of the legislation that passed, your voice absolutely resulted in the enactment of a better bill. Feel free to contact me again about any issue of importance to you.
United States Senator
I have to keep reminding myself to keep my headphones on and not eavesdrop at what the people around me are saying. It creates too many temptations to try and argue with them. And based on the things they are saying there is not a chance that they would think I am right. They are being pretty nasty.
I am the minority. I wish my McCain/Palin shirt was clean today. I would have totally worn it.
I decided to search and see what percentage of the state of California is Republican. It was not a pretty sight. I found this article California Republicans: An endangered species? it did not do anything to make me feel better. Here are a few key excerpts in case you don’t want to click through.
- Registered Republicans now constitute barely a third of the electorate in the biggest state — 34 percent — a decline from 39 percent just two decades ago.
- Even in Orange County, regularly described as “the most Republican county in the U.S.,” Republican registration has fallen below 50 percent.
- The Republicans haven’t controlled the state Senate since 1970. They have controlled the state Assembly for only one year — 1996 — since 1970.
- In the past three general elections, Republicans have lost 20 of the 24 statewide constitutional offices up for election. In both 1998 and 2006, the GOP lost six of eight statewide offices.
- In 2002, Republicans were shut out of all statewide offices for the first time since 1882 — despite a Democratic ticket led by an incumbent governor up for reelection with job approval ratings in the 30s.
- Other than Arnold Schwarzenegger in the 2003 gubernatorial recall election, the only non-incumbent Republican to win any statewide office whatsoever since 1994 was a multimillionaire high-tech maven who in 2006 was elected insurance commissioner.
- Republicans have lost — count ’em — seven straight U.S. Senate races in California dating back to 1992, the last four by double-digit blowouts.
- In the two most recent races in 2004 and 2006, the sad sack GOP nominees didn’t even have the money to air a single spot on broadcast television — a first in the modern era for either major party.
- The Republican nominee against Sen. Dianne Feinstein in ’06 ran his own campaign out of his house.
- Of the 53 members of Congress from California, only 19 are Republican, the party having lost four GOP-held seats in 2000, a newly created district in 2002 and another, supposedly rock-solid, Republican seat in 2006.
- Republicans have lost the past four presidential elections in California, all of them by double-digit, landslide margins.
- And George W. Bush’s job approval ratings in California are below even his historic-low national standings — and only a couple of points above former Gov. Gray Davis’ numbers on the day he was recalled in 2003.
Wow, it is much sadder than I thought. Here is a link to another document with California vote profiles. Maybe we moved to the wrong part of the state 🙂
Coming from what is arguably one of the most conservative, Republican counties in the country to this one has been a major eye opener. I have never been in the minority for anything in my life. I am used to my friends and people around me having very similar beliefs. Here it seems like a free for all and you cannot be sure of what anyone believes. There are so many more shades of gray in this state.
So please, if you are a Republican in California let me know I am not alone. I am a proud registered Republican in the great state of California and I am not ashamed.