Day: May 15, 2008

State Supreme Court Overturns California Gay Marriage Ban – But Marriage Rights Face Ballot Initiative in November

Jon Ponder

California took a giant step toward becoming the second state to legalize gay marriage — the other is Massachusetts — in light of a ruling by the state supreme court today:
“The California Constitution properly must be interpreted to guarantee this basic civil right to all Californians, whether gay or heterosexual, and to same-sex couples as well as to opposite-sex couples.”
— Ruling

Gays and lesbians have a constitutional right to marry in California, the state Supreme Court said today in a historic ruling that could be repudiated by the voters in November.

In a 4-3 decision, the justices said the state’s ban on same-sex marriage violates the “fundamental constitutional right to form a family relationship.” The ruling is likely to flood county courthouses with applications from couples newly eligible to marry when the decision takes effect in 30 days.

“The California Constitution properly must be interpreted to guarantee this basic civil right to all Californians, whether gay or heterosexual, and to same-sex couples as well as to opposite-sex couples,” Chief Justice Ronald George wrote in the majority opinion.

Allowing gay and lesbian couples to marry “will not deprive opposite-sex couples of any rights and will not alter the legal framework of the institution of marriage,” George said.

In addition, he said, the current state law discriminates against same-sex couples on the basis of their sexual orientation – discrimination that the court, for the first time, put in the same legal category as racial or gender bias.

Hoping to drum up support for John McCain in the presidential election this November, conservatives are attempting to place an initiative on the ballot that would ban gay marriage by amending the state constitution. “Protect Marriage,” the group organized to promote the initiative, paid $1.5 million to petition-gatherers who claimed to have collected 1.1 million signatures — far in excess of the 694,000 signatures they needed. The signatures are currently being validated by county election offices.

While it is likely there will be enough valid signatures to qualify the initiative, civil rights experts point out that the petitioning was a mercenary operation — workers were paid for each signature they collected — rather than a volunteer, grass-roots effort. This could signal weak support among California voters in the fall.

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has vetoed two bill that passed the legislature that would have legalized gay marriage, says he will oppose the ballot measure.

In Address to Knesset, Bush Mischaracterizes Obama’s Position on Mideast Negotiations

Jon Ponder

George Bush took the occasion of his speech before Israel’s Knesset today to end the longstanding tradition of U.S. presidents leaving domestic politics behind “at the water’s edge” when they travel. Addressing lawmakers as part of the observance of Israel’s 60th anniversary, Bush deliberately misstated Barack Obama’s position on negotiating with U.S. adversaries, without naming him directly, of course:
“It is sad that President Bush would use a speech to the Knesset on the 60th anniversary of Israel’s independence to launch a false political attack.”
–Obama campaign

“Some seem to believe we should negotiate with terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along,” Bush said…

“We have heard this foolish delusion before … As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: ‘Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.’ We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.”

Predictably, the White House then lied about lying — purporting that Bush was also referring to recent discussions held by former Pres. Jimmy Carter with leaders of Hammas:

…White House press secretary Dana Perino flatly rejected the idea that the Knesset remark was aimed in any way at Obama, and [White House spokesman Gordon] Johndroe said Bush was referring to “a wide range of people who have talked to or suggested we talk to Hamas, Hezbollah or their state sponsors.”

The Obama campaign responded in a statement:

“It is sad that President Bush would use a speech to the Knesset on the 60th anniversary of Israel’s independence to launch a false political attack,” Obama said in a statement released to CNN by his campaign. “It is time to turn the page on eight years of policies that have strengthened Iran and failed to secure America or our ally Israel….”

“George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the president’s extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel,” Obama’s statement said.

Obama favors “tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions,” according to his Web site, “and is willing to meet with the leaders of all nations, friend and foe.” He does not favor talks with Hamas, which he has called a terrorist organization.

Bush’s motivation in lying about Obama’s position is to assist John McCain in trying to put a wedge between Obama and Jewish voters. Last week, McCain falsely claimed that Obama was the favored candidate of Hamas, the Palestinian political organization with ties to terrorism.

Ask Dr. Democrat: Who Decides What Happens with the Michigan and Florida Delegates?

Dr. Democrat

Dear Dr. Democrat:

I’m confused by all the talk about the Florida and Michigan delegations to the Democratic Convention. Who decides whether the delegates get seated at the convention and how many of them go? Is it Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean?

Disturbed Over Delegates

Dear Disturbed:

I have to reiterate that it won’t be up to Dr. X (ed. note: Dr. Democrat’s playful nickname for Dr. Howard Dean) who gets seated at the convention. It will be up to Barack Obama, and as soon as Obama has enough delegates to win without Florida and Michigan, which I believe will happen after West Virginia and Kentucky, he will seat the delegations as they are configured now.
doctordemocrat.jpg
This whole thing has been a charade from the get-go, and Dr. X’s threat not to seat the delegations has been 100 percent horse hockey. Iowa and New Hampshire have extraordinary sway over the pols in both parties, and Dr. X had to do their bidding, but it was never up to him who would be seated at the convention, not for a second.

Obama will have to smooth the waters among the pols in Iowa and New Hampshire, but if they are at their least pliable a year before the primary/caucus, they are at their most pliable two months before the convention. This will cease to be a controversy in this cycle, but GOP pols have been watching and have learned how to make mischief.

The only chance Dr. X might have had to decide anything about who gets seated would have been if the contest hadn’t been settled before the convention. But even then, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (currently the most senior elected Democrat) chairs the convention rules committee and outranks him. In the unlikely event that the race is still undecided in late August, Clinton and Obama will negotiate, and if they can’t reach a compromise, it will go to the rules committee.

Dr. X’s job from the moment Clinton drops out of the race and leaves the field to Obama is to be the nominee’s number-one cheerleader and to make sure the convention’s trains run on time and to the liking of the nominee (who speaks when, etc.). Despite having been elected DNC chair, Dr. X now serves at the pleasure of Obama. It is not done for the nominee to replace the DNC chair before the general election but, come January, if Obama wins and he wants a new chair, he’ll have one. In the meantime, if he is unhappy with Dr. X, he’ll put someone in as assistant chair or special counsel or some such, who will really run things while Doc X twiddles his thumbs.

Conversely, quite often party chairs who do a good job are rewarded with the post of secretary of commerce in the new administration.

Dr. D