Pelosi: Prop 8 supporters might have been too dumb to grasp what they were doing
posted at 8:53 pm on November 8, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Evidently, it’s now somehow illegitimate to vote on the substance of an issue without being fully informed of the legal posture first. Sure, a majority opposes gay marriage — but did they know that four justices of the California Supreme Court disagree with them (whereas three don’t)?
Speaking as someone who would have voted no on Prop 8: Who cares?
“Unfortunately, I think people thought they were making a statement about what their view of same-sex marriage was,” the San Francisco Democrat said. “I don’t know if it was clear that this meant that we are amending the Constitution to diminish freedom in our state.”
Treacher snarkily retrofits her “logic” to fit the election results:
“Unfortunately, I think people thought they were making a statement about what their views of race relations and male beauty were,” the San Francisco Democrat said. “I don’t know if it was clear that this meant that we are picking the next President of the United States.”
Everyone see what she’s up to? I once served on a jury during a criminal trial and whenever a cop would testify, the judge would go out of his way to say that we shouldn’t let our respect for the law color our assessment of the credibility of his testimony. Simply judge him on the merits, we were told, just as we would anyone else. Pelosi’s saying the opposite. Never mind the merits; don’t you know that gay marriage is in the Constitution — as of, er, six months ago, per the decision of a narrowly divided court? Exit question for Madam Speaker: If Scalia and Thomas bring back freedom of contract, you’ll be super keen to block any amendments that would diminish freedom in our country by overturning the decision, right?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »
Man that face will make a freight train take a dirt road
driver on November 8, 2008 at 8:55 PM
How would you like to wake up to that every morning?
dangitt on November 8, 2008 at 8:56 PM
Popeye Pelosi once again reveals her disdain for the voters.
Dee2008 on November 8, 2008 at 8:57 PM
How much do you think she would charge to haunt a house?
driver on November 8, 2008 at 8:58 PM
Allah, I would have voted Yes on Prop 8 if I lived in California but it’s nice to see that not everyone on the other side rejects the rule of law. People of good will can disagree on this but as usual Pelosi and her ilk seek to paint us as dumb and/or evil.
D0WNT0WN on November 8, 2008 at 9:00 PM
Gonna be a long four years.
terryannonline on November 8, 2008 at 9:00 PM
How about doing more to inform the public then insulting them. Of course the idea they just didn’t get it could be applied to California’s presidential race, but thats too complicated for our speaker. By the way, I was looking at the vote tallies by county, 25% of san francisco alone voted for prop 8. That would be the speakers Home turf and home to some of the best organized progressive groups in the country, so lets just say I am highly skeptical that people didn’t know what they were doing.
rob verdi on November 8, 2008 at 9:00 PM
This woman has an approval rating in the single digits; why anyone covers her or why she thinks anyone gives a crap what she says is a mystery to me
redfoxbluestate on November 8, 2008 at 9:01 PM
If I had to wake up to that every morning, she wouldn’t be in congress. The question is…would I make that sacrifice for my country?
csdeven on November 8, 2008 at 9:01 PM
Isn’t she getting paid to haunt the house now?
BallisticBob on November 8, 2008 at 9:01 PM
Better than you.
maynila on November 8, 2008 at 9:02 PM
Actually, the voters voted twice to make gay marriage illegal in California, Pelosi and Gavin Nosense are the ones that are mentally challenged.
Pelosi’s constituents, however, may be dumber than most as evidence of her position in government.
RedbonePro on November 8, 2008 at 9:03 PM
Auuh yea your wright
driver on November 8, 2008 at 9:03 PM
However voting for Barry was genius. Go give your face a rest Nancy.
RobCon on November 8, 2008 at 9:04 PM
Rimshot!
baldilocks on November 8, 2008 at 9:05 PM
Pelosi is embarassed, the enlightened California populace and what not..she is narcissistic, whatever Californians do is a reflection on her. I think she is Co Dependent, this is what Co Dependents do, they interpet what other people are thinking and feeling (motives) Of course She will use the ter – intuitive. Nancy Pelosi “Mommy Dearest” I feel sorry for Californians, no I am not “Feeling for Californians”
Dr Evil on November 8, 2008 at 9:05 PM
I wonder if she has thought of the implications of calling the majority of California’s blacks and Hispanics stupid?
Nahanni on November 8, 2008 at 9:05 PM
And yet woeful ignorance about the person you are voting for to become POTUS is preferred.
Elizabetty on November 8, 2008 at 9:06 PM
Prop 8 supporters were exactly dumb enough to know what they were doing.
RightOFLeft on November 8, 2008 at 9:07 PM
The standard Left response to disagreement: “You must be too dumb to understand.”
njcommuter on November 8, 2008 at 9:07 PM
She’s a lezzie. Can’t you see it. Now she’s peeved that she won’t be able to (eventually under a democratic regime) set the tone for the nation so she can get married to her ‘life partner’ on the steps of the Lincoln Memorial (since he was a great Republican, she wants to rub it in his face, just as Hussein when he insulted the memory of President Reagan).
madmonkphotog on November 8, 2008 at 9:07 PM
It’s the new Democratic tactic, insult the voters.
Murtha = Racists and rednecks.
Pelosi = Stupid.
Like either one of those have room to talk on either subject…
Hog Wild on November 8, 2008 at 9:08 PM
Sounds like she was describing Democrat voters in general there.
Dreadnought223 on November 8, 2008 at 9:09 PM
America would be a better country if the stupid voter that do not agree with her would not vote, or something.
custer on November 8, 2008 at 9:10 PM
People who voted for Pelosi were too dumb to grasp what they were doing.
VanPalin on November 8, 2008 at 9:10 PM
I remember watching the debate on the senate floor during the bailout bill and barbara boxer, also of Ca., said much the same thing. I can not quote her exact words but it boiled down to; I have received thousands of emails, letters and calls asking me not to vote for this bill, but I know better than they do what is good for them, so I am voting for this bill.
brianpierre on November 8, 2008 at 9:14 PM
Yet the stupid people keep voting those who slam them into office.
Pennsylvania just amazes me. How they could vote in Obama and Murtha is a mystery.
Don’t whine when the people you voted in mess up your world.
carbon_footprint on November 8, 2008 at 9:14 PM
any outcome that democrats disagree with is illegitimate.
Don’t we know this already?
lorien1973 on November 8, 2008 at 9:14 PM
Don’t whine when the people you voted in mess up your
worldcountry.carbon_footprint on November 8, 2008 at 9:14 PM
Get ready – California is once again turning from blue to purple, and in 2010 watch us knock Boxer to the curb.
savvydude on November 8, 2008 at 9:15 PM
It’s gonna take a lot of whiskey to get the image of that face out of my head before bed time
driver on November 8, 2008 at 9:16 PM
At least she has a grasp on why she has been elected…Dumb people……..
rich801 on November 8, 2008 at 9:16 PM
I wonder if she has thought of the implications of calling the majority of California’s blacks and Hispanics stupid?
Nahanni on November 8, 2008
There are no implications.
Democrat=immunity.
artist on November 8, 2008 at 9:17 PM
These are the same voters who voted for Obama, so by the transitive property, we can say that they were too dumb to know what they were doing?
lorien1973 on November 8, 2008 at 9:18 PM
test
artist on November 8, 2008 at 9:19 PM
Legislators termed out by Proposition 140 made similar arguments while suing for life employment. The irony of all these “voters were too dumb to know what they were voting on” arguments is that for every proposition, there’s a good 20-25% who have no clue what they are voting on, and express such ignorance not by reasonably abstaining but by petulantly voting “no.” Even Proposition 48, a purely non-substantive constitutional revision in 2002 that merely cleaned up the Constitution by removing reference to municipal courts that no longer existed, passed by roughly a 73%-27% margin rather than a more rational 100%-0% one. This is why the Legislature twice passed two blatantly unconstitutional bills aimed at circumventing Prop 22 rather than one constitutional bill to repeal it outright: the latter option would have required them to put gay marriage to a popular vote, where supporters of gay marriage would have had to vote “yes” rather than “no.”
Xrlq on November 8, 2008 at 9:19 PM
And I wish the Obama Administration the same success that Pelosi and Reid have had.
Mark Levin set me straight. Unity is not an option when the Obama Administration has far left, radical ideas that do not jive with our own conservative principles. Fight them every inch of the way.
National Unity My A.s.s.
carbon_footprint on November 8, 2008 at 9:19 PM
National Unity My A.s.s.
NUMA NUMA!
carbon_footprint on November 8, 2008 at 9:21 PM
savvydude:
Hope springs eternal, but I wouldn’t use Prop 8 as an example of that. Prop 8 passed by only a 5% margin this time around, while the identically-worded Proposition 22 passed better than 60-40 in 2000.
Xrlq on November 8, 2008 at 9:23 PM
FYI, you can leave a message on her web site at speaker.gov.
Most probably, though, whoever her gate keeper is she’ll never see it.
However, if enough send a harsh message regarding the obvious contempt she has for the voters it might get through.
pocomoco on November 8, 2008 at 9:25 PM
Here in South Central, I saw the Obama-Biden signs right next to the Yes on 8 signs. Liberalism has its limits, apparently.
baldilocks on November 8, 2008 at 9:32 PM
Then there is hope.
carbon_footprint on November 8, 2008 at 9:33 PM
This is a lesson in judicial activism. The state Supreme court turned over a ballot initiative that banned gay marriage in the state. The ballot initiative had overwhelming support the first time. So since the Activist Judges so to it to overrule the people the people saw to it to overrule the courts. Since the first time it was determined that the law was against the state constitution now it is part of the state constitution.
Democracy worked the way it was intended and the will of the people in the State of California has been heard.
theguardianii on November 8, 2008 at 9:33 PM
I wasn’t in CA in 2000, but I doubt the wording was identical. This time around Prop 8 was worded as a removal of rights. Since those “rights” were only put in place earlier this year, I doubt Prop 22 was worded that way.
On the official voter guide, this is how Prop 8 was described:
and I think the sample ballot read this way:
From what I could find at FindLaw, Prop 22 read like this:
I think most people are quicker to define something than to eliminate a right. I bet some of the apparent loss of support for Prop 8 is more a function of voter psychology than voter intent.
Y-not on November 8, 2008 at 9:33 PM
Yeah, I left her messages during the drilling protest when, as I recall, she also insulted the voters. Jerk-face.
Y-not on November 8, 2008 at 9:34 PM
Pelosi has got to be the dumbest, corrupt, power hungry and disingenuous woman I have every seen in action in my life (so far 51 years on planet Earth). There is nothing like watching the pot calling the kettle black when it comes to stupid and ineffective leadership. She is so smart along with her buddy Dirty Harry Reid they have led Congress to rightly earn the lowest approval rating in history. Yep! We are all dumb because we believe in traditional family values, the rule of law, and public decency unlike the morally corrupt liberals.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒE (mo-lone lah-veh) Translation: Come and take them!
Retired USAF on November 8, 2008 at 9:34 PM
My guess is she never see’s e-mail that isn’t a glowing confirmation of her history-making service to the country.
All the e-mails critical of her or her policies never get to her desk.
Tim Zank on November 8, 2008 at 9:35 PM
Maybe most people in California are the unbridled libertines that the media, and certain parts of the state, make them out to be.
I’m wondering how Ellen Degeneres is going to take the news.
manwithblackhat on November 8, 2008 at 9:36 PM
Maybe that face is why so many men in San Fran are gay.
dedalus on November 8, 2008 at 9:38 PM
There’s something very “freeing” about not having voted for these num-nuts. Hard to believe these fools will now run this country. We’ll survive them though, and then vote them the hell out in 2012.
Brooke on November 8, 2008 at 9:38 PM
She calls them dumb, it doesn’t matter, they really are. Dems depend on the uneducated and the dependent. Give them money, they give you votes. The cycle can only be broken with education but they have the NEA and the total education system in their pocket. The leaders of the idiots who are gaining more strength through Obamaorgs like Acorn. How the hell do we stop this cycle of ignorance???? HEEEEEELP!!!!!
PaCadle on November 8, 2008 at 9:38 PM
+1. Line of the day!
Dubn8tr on November 8, 2008 at 9:40 PM
Same here in San Gabriel Valley, which is predominately White/Hispanic and chock full of Catholic churches.
Apparently, gay marriage is wrong, but we’re cool with abortion on demand and infanticide. Heh.
Trace on November 8, 2008 at 9:41 PM
About $212,100 a year.
Dawnsblood on November 8, 2008 at 9:42 PM
Good News: Now that the democrats are in power we can look forward to a nation that is similar to those democratic-run bastions like Detroit, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Philadelphia, Oakland and Baltimore.
carbon_footprint on November 8, 2008 at 9:42 PM
WOW!..personality, looks, liberal intelligence,..that’s coyote love!
Definition of coyote love,.when you would rather chew your arm off in the morning then wake her up!
just sayin.
christene on November 8, 2008 at 9:42 PM
I don’t think the Pennsylvania voters necessarily did take insults and still vote for the guy. I don’t trust the elections anymore.
Alana on November 8, 2008 at 9:43 PM
The same way all lib celebutards do: tears, recriminations and tantrums designed to remind us what bad people we are for having differing points of view.
Melissa Etheridge claims she’s going to stop paying her taxes in protest. I’d like to jump on that bandwagon, too.
NO JUSTICE! NO FEES!
Trace on November 8, 2008 at 9:45 PM
Fixed it for you. (And I’m stuck with them. Sigh.)
irishspy on November 8, 2008 at 9:46 PM
Prop 8 was very badly presented by the ‘elites’ like Jerry Brown, who fraudulently worded the description of the proposition on the ballot, to the Pelosi’s that tried to claim that some sort of ‘human right’ was involved.
Prop 8 simply says that the WORD marriage only applies to a man and a woman signing up for it.
Prop 8 does NOT take away ANYONES RIGHTS!
In California, at the behest of both athiests and gays, the rights of people engaged in civil unions have IDENTICAL rights as people engaged in marriage.
Many ideologues, like Pelosi, simply choose to IGNORE the TRUTH in order to provoke what they percieve to be a political advantage.
Clearly, Pelosi is not happy that the majority of the people of California saw through this, for the SECOND time in 8 years!
The last time we passed a use of the word Marriage proposition the ‘expert’ pollsters pretended it was going to lose 2 to 1. After it passed with 60% of the vote, the ‘experts’ also claimed that the people were just too ’stupid’ to understand it.
Freddy on November 8, 2008 at 9:46 PM
Actually Christene, I believe Nancy Pelosi may have been attractive in her 20’s. Would love to see a daguerreotype of her wedding.
carbon_footprint on November 8, 2008 at 9:47 PM
TERM LIMITS….The only answer left.
Tim Zank on November 8, 2008 at 9:47 PM
One of the biggest complaints here in CA was that Jerry Brown (Moonbeam) was the one who wrote the wording on the ballot for Prop 8. When Prop 22 was written it said, “Marriage shall be between a man and a woman.” That’s it. This time around it said, “eliminates the right of same-sex couples to marry.” So this CRAP that Pelosi is feeding us is really stupid…it was made clear to everyone that voted that someone’s rights were being eliminated.
jawbone on November 8, 2008 at 9:47 PM
I would have voted a resounding NO on this. Not just because same-sex marriage is an affront to God’s word (which it is) but because giving gays the right to “marry” was an act by a few liberal jurists who were actually playing God and deciding that they have the right to speak for all Californians. Last Tuesday, Californians spoke for themselves.
It was a bad ruling as evidenced by the fact that the reversal of one court ruling has had such an impact. If Pelosi and all those gays in California want legal standing let them do it the right way by changing the law- not by packing the court with activist jurists!
highhopes on November 8, 2008 at 9:47 PM
On Thursday one of our seniors sent a passionate e-mail to the whole staff begging us to go to some website or another and sign a petition to overrule the will of the voters of CA because it’s unjust, blah, blah, blah. Cry me a river, kid.
He got called to the carpet for using the school e-mail setup for non-school use, though.
Bob's Kid on November 8, 2008 at 9:48 PM
Irony, thy name is Pelosi
Iblis on November 8, 2008 at 9:48 PM
She has a twitter page. When I first looked at it, she had about 500 followers but she was following no one. (For you folks who don’t know what that means, it means that 500 cared what she was saying or doing but she didn’t want to know what anyone else was saying or doing.)
Now she’s following 22 persons–all congresscritters.
baldilocks on November 8, 2008 at 9:53 PM
It really doesn’t matter what Pelosi thinks or what the social cons think. We just five years until enough opponents of gay marriage die and we’ll win majority support for gay marriage in California.
thuja on November 8, 2008 at 9:54 PM
I take issue with the “eliminates rights” wording. A referendum on raising the age for getting full driving privileges wouldn’t refer to eliminating the rights of 16-year-olds to drive without restrictions. A referendum on smoking pot for medicinal purposes wouldn’t refer to the right to smoke a federally banned substance. Fact of the matter there was no fundamental “right” under the law for California’s gays to get married so nothing was actually eliminated.
highhopes on November 8, 2008 at 9:55 PM
Proposition 8 (2008) will ammend the California state Constitution to restrict marriage between a man and a woman. QUESTION: IF YOU ARE A CONSERVATIVE WHY WOULD YOU VOTE NO?
apacalyps on November 8, 2008 at 9:57 PM
It is quite interesting to see identity groups go after each other in the Dhimicrat party. First we had the feminists ticked off with Obama, and now we have gay people ticked at black people.
And yet, the Dhimicrats won this round and will likely not learn any lessons about the problem with playing identity politics.
BryanS on November 8, 2008 at 9:58 PM
Oh Nice! Banking on old people to die so that you can force through legislation that undermines the fabric of American society! People like you prove that California is a hell hole with no redeeming value. The United States shouldn’t invest one more dollar in a state that embraces the most radical social initiatives, protects illegals, and has absolutely no relevance to the rest of the country. Here’s hoping that in the next five years there will be enough wildfires, mudslides, tsunamis, and economic downturns that people like you will lose your smug ideas about the rest of us.
highhopes on November 8, 2008 at 10:00 PM
What a waste of a position. First woman to be speaker of the house and she blows it with her stupidity, inability to be professional, mismanagment of bills, and power-hungry attitude.
Please tell me that picture was pre-botox.
sherry on November 8, 2008 at 10:01 PM
I wouldn’t worry. It won’t be long before we’re just worried about getting through the two years until mid-term elections. By March, the skeletons will start falling out of the closet. They can’t remain hidden for too much longer with or without the MSM in the tank.
slug on November 8, 2008 at 10:01 PM
I agree with the gist of your comment. Don’t know the time frame, but there continues to be a generational change in the attitude toward gay people. At some point this won’t be a good issue for the GOP.
dedalus on November 8, 2008 at 10:02 PM
Y-not:
Doubt no more. According to the California Secretary of State, Proposition 22 in March, 2000 added the following language to the California Family Code:
In sharp contrast, last week Proposition 8 added this language, which reads nothing like Prop 22, to the California Constitution:
Nope, no similarities there.
Xrlq on November 8, 2008 at 10:02 PM
One final note before I abandon this thread to intolerant trolls like thuja- This was the same tactic used in Michigan after “Prop 2″ overwhelmingly passed. Michiganders were essentially called to dumb to understand what they were voting for and the effects of doing so. It wasn’t true then and it isn’t true in 2008. America does not want to legalize and legitimize same-sex marriage. Banking on old people to die off in sufficient numbers isn’t going to change that fact.
highhopes on November 8, 2008 at 10:05 PM
Is it any wonder with a face like that why so many men in Frisco are gay
Irvin88 on November 8, 2008 at 10:13 PM
I voted for Prop 8, and to a small degree because I believe that marriage really is between a man and a woman.
It also seems that the past 6000 years of history agrees with me; no major culture (or even any minor ones) permitted, with public knowledge and approval, men to marry men or women to marry women. Even Classical Greece (~850BC to ~330BC), where homosexual conduct seems to have been publicly socially acceptable, did not.
I heard a commercial where Sen. Diane Feinstein asserted that gay marriage was a basic human right, and well, no, basic human rights are determined by the people. The Constitution and Bill of Rights were ratified by the states (by the people’s representatives), not by judicial whim.
This was another reason for me to vote for Prop 8; she doesn’t decide what is or is not a right, and history says she’s wrong. Then there’s her voting record; among other things, she seems to have little difficulty allowing government contract to go to her husband’s company / companies.
.
But the main reason I voted for Prop 8 was the reason it was created: a judge simply decided, and against the publicly declared will of the people of California, to make gay marriage a right and therefore legal.
Setting the precedent, that a judge can decide what is a right, seems a bad plan. The next move would be to decide what isn’t a right, and then maybe who gets rights (and which ones) and who doesn’t.
There are places on the planet where such is the law. This isn’t one of them.
I have a better idea (apparently the same idea that the majority of voters had): vote for Prop 8 and remove the option (and precedent) for judges to invent (or invalidate) rights.
If, at some future date, the People of California choose to change their cultural norms, and permit gay marriage, so be it.
I also like the idea or of removing the various judges involved from the California bench; overstepping their authority, obstructing / subverting / simply interfering with my vote seems sufficient cause, but I’ll settle for incompetence.
Arbalest on November 8, 2008 at 10:15 PM
As someone who also would have voted no on the prop, given the backlash by gay progressives on its’ defeat, I would have regretted it. Anyone find it ironic that they are now calling for attacks and boycotts on Utah, the Sundance Film Festival and by extension, the Mormon church? I find that absolutely rich. Never mind that the Sundance festival isn’t exactly a bastion of employment for Mormon churchgoers. Nor is the state capital, Salt Lake City renowned for its ultra liberal, pro-gay rights mayor Rocky Anderson and ranking as highly concentrated with LBGT people, a good area to try and inflict economic revenge. I would compare this with the LA riots after the Rodney King verdict…doing nothing more than destroying their own community.
Nevermind that blacks effectively voted 70% for the measure and Mormons make up less than 5% of the CA population. The argument of course is that Mormons contributed over half of the money and a good portion of canvassing toward the campaign for Prop 8, and therefore should be singled out. That doesn’t sound like a civil rights strategy to me, but very shortsighted.
hot-heir on November 8, 2008 at 10:17 PM
I believe you mean you would have voted a resounding Yes on prop 8. Yes meaning voting for an amendment to the CA constitution defining marriage between heterosexual couples.
hot-heir on November 8, 2008 at 10:20 PM
You had to be not just stupid to vote for this measure- stupid enough to think learning gay marriage in schools would turn kids gay- but also heartless to discriminate against thousands of gay couples. But hey, now that gay marriage won’t be taught in schools now your kids will never know that there are big scary TEH GAYS out there, right? Now if you REALLY wanted to protect your children, you’d get them away from those predatory Catholic priests of yours…..
Noneya on November 8, 2008 at 10:20 PM
Proposition 8 (2008) will ammend the California state Constitution to restrict marriage between a man and a woman. QUESTION: IF YOU ARE A CONSERVATIVE WHY WOULD YOU VOTE NO?
apacalyps on November 8, 2008 at 9:57 PM
when the 2000 one was up. I voted against gay marriage. I was a DemocRAT then. (Don’t throw rocks) I woke up, re registered as Republican. Voted YES again. That just isn’t morally right. They have same rights as married couples have.
sheebe on November 8, 2008 at 10:22 PM
How many needy families in this lousy economy could have been fed with the millions the Mormon Church and the Vatican contributed to passing this measure? Talk about straying from the spirit and message of Jesus Christ himself……
Noneya on November 8, 2008 at 10:23 PM
hot-heir on November 8, 2008 at 10:27 PM
It would be nice if someone would report on the religious bigotry and racial hate the the left is displaying at these rallies.
But I guess Mormons and Blacks don’t matter in the GOP.
Dr B on November 8, 2008 at 10:27 PM
Say what you will .But 52% of the american people voted for the likes of her and Obama .Kind of dumb if you ask me.
thmcbb on November 8, 2008 at 10:36 PM
What’s so unfortunate about that? Nancy Pelosi, meet Free Speech.
For the huge majority of Californians who don’t want to marry someone of the same sex, freedom was not diminished–they didn’t think they had that freedom in the first place.
Steve Z on November 8, 2008 at 10:42 PM
I’ve heard that one, too.
tuffy on November 8, 2008 at 10:42 PM
Pelosi is a racist. I can’t understand how anyone could in good conscience vote for her. According to Pelosi’s standards, her voters must be dumb’uns.
tuffy on November 8, 2008 at 10:43 PM
Judges are supposed to make decisions based on the Constitution, which probably didn’t say anything about gay marriage.
If the people of California don’t like the judges’ decision, and decide to change the Constitution, to limit the judges’ power, so be it. Constitutions are supposed to be at the service of the people, not judges.
Steve Z on November 8, 2008 at 10:47 PM
I posted the following on the story in the Headlines section, but I cannot not re-post it here, too:
.
=======
.
Oh horsecrap! I voted Yes on Proposition 8 for one reason and one reason only – because I view marriage in one way and one way only. Marriage is a union of 1 man and 1 woman. Calling black white does not make black white and all the money and passion and advertising in the world will not make it so. In the same vein, calling my thought process “hateful and bigoted” does not make it so, either. The amendment became necessary because a “want” somehow morphed into a “right” and the “progressives” were persuaded that, if homosexuals couldn’t be married, the very foundations of the State of California and the United States of America.
In their never-ending quest to be termed “normal”, the LGBT folks set their eyes on the term “marriage” — apparently thinking that if they can do something that everybody else can do, they’d be seen as more like everybody else.
One huge flaw in that thought process . . . Marriage has always been defined as a union between 1 man and 1 woman. Even in societies in which homosexual behavior was not only accepted, but almost expected, marriage was defined as a union between one man and one woman.
Heck, even the “No On 8″ folks used the imagery of a traditional marriage -ie: one man one woman – in one of their commercials. Why’d they do that? Because marriage has always been regarded as a union of one man and one woman.
least1 on November 8, 2008 at 10:47 PM
If that’s what she thinks can we say all her people are doing is playing follow the leader. HAHAHA
Now she wants to bail out the auto industry does that mean I get a free car. Hey I want my free house and car. When are the dems going to pony up and give it to me.
Brat4life on November 8, 2008 at 10:49 PM
They are attacking blacks also.
baldilocks on November 8, 2008 at 10:50 PM
Sorry. I don’t know if that site is NSFW or not so be careful.
baldilocks on November 8, 2008 at 10:53 PM
I think there must be a lot of schizos out there in many parts of the country, California in particular.
California goes for Obama. Yet votes down the gay marriage thing and also votes against Prop 7 and Prop 10 – both government ‘green’ initiatives.
The people of California vote against intrusive government and against massive regulation and tax increses which the ‘green’ stuff would have caused, yet vote in the largest tax and spend liberal democrat in the history of the US.
W.
T.
F.
catmman on November 8, 2008 at 10:57 PM
I agree with you sheebe. And I’m glad you left the dark side. Male-male anal sodomy isn’t morally right. Why? Because it’s an unnatural act God never intended you to engage in. That’s why. Not only that, but it’s a health hazard. Y’know, these folks who somehow believe they are helping homosexuals by voting NO on Prop 8 aren’t helping them — they are HURTING them. Homosexuality was primarily responsible for the spread of aids in the 80’s and 90’s. It’s a destructive lifestyle. It destroys peoples lives. Not only that, but these diseases spread to the hetero community as well. So voting no on Prop 8 is really a dangerous thing to do. Not only because it violates God’s law, but because it endangers our communities too.
apacalyps on November 8, 2008 at 10:57 PM
And another thing…
Murtha calls his own constituents ignorant racist rednecks -and they still re-elect the tool.
Bearing out that Murtha may be a bloviating a–hat, but he’s right…
His constituents are, indeed, ignorant.
catmman on November 8, 2008 at 11:00 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »