Comments on: Day of Decision: What to Expect from the California Supremes http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/ Politics for liberal newsgeeks Sat, 18 Feb 2012 05:37:02 -0600 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 By: JoeBuck http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26581 JoeBuck Tue, 26 May 2009 16:41:23 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26581 <p>20 minutes to go; I think they are going to “split the baby”.</p> 20 minutes to go; I think they are going to “split the baby”.

]]> By: Twain http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26580 Twain Tue, 26 May 2009 16:39:43 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26580 <p>Justice in our uneven court system is a bug, not a fixture.</p> Justice in our uneven court system is a bug, not a fixture.

]]> By: oldtree http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26579 oldtree Tue, 26 May 2009 16:31:46 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26579 <p>Why would a court not invalidate something clearly defined in the constitution about equal protection? Fair is fair, law is law and people don’t get to vote to condemn their neighbor. If the court does not rule on the side of the constitution, our laws, which are severely tested now, will be proven to be meaningless.</p> Why would a court not invalidate something clearly defined in the constitution about equal protection? Fair is fair, law is law and people don’t get to vote to condemn their neighbor. If the court does not rule on the side of the constitution, our laws, which are severely tested now, will be proven to be meaningless.

]]> By: BargainCountertenor http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26578 BargainCountertenor Tue, 26 May 2009 16:26:37 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26578 <p>No s***, Sherlock.</p> <p>When I was in the 8th grade in California, I had to pass a State-mandated exam on the California Constitution. Given that I had started school in California from Hawaii in November of that year, I had nightmares about that test. In teaching us about the Glorious California Constitution, we were told what a marvelously Progressive document it is.</p> <p>We were taught that the Initiative and Recall provisions are central to its marvelosity [sic]. Looking back, I can see that they are bugs rather than features. It’s way too easy to get an initiative on the ballot and way too easy to pass an initiative once it’s on the ballot.</p> <p>If I were revising the California Constitution there are two things I’d be sure to do. First, I’d raise the valid signature requirement to a level that made it infeasible to use paid signature gatherers to qualify either an initiative or a recall. Second, I’d require a significant supermajority to pass an initiative, perhaps 3/5 of those voting. Alternatively, I’d require a majority of registered voters rather than a majority of those who showed up. That is, failure to show at the polls counts as a “Nay” vote on all propositions.</p> <p>There are a bunch of other f***ups in the California Constitution that need fixing too, and most of them are the result of initiatives and interactions between initiatives.</p> No s***, Sherlock.

When I was in the 8th grade in California, I had to pass a State-mandated exam on the California Constitution. Given that I had started school in California from Hawaii in November of that year, I had nightmares about that test. In teaching us about the Glorious California Constitution, we were told what a marvelously Progressive document it is.

We were taught that the Initiative and Recall provisions are central to its marvelosity [sic]. Looking back, I can see that they are bugs rather than features. It’s way too easy to get an initiative on the ballot and way too easy to pass an initiative once it’s on the ballot.

If I were revising the California Constitution there are two things I’d be sure to do. First, I’d raise the valid signature requirement to a level that made it infeasible to use paid signature gatherers to qualify either an initiative or a recall. Second, I’d require a significant supermajority to pass an initiative, perhaps 3/5 of those voting. Alternatively, I’d require a majority of registered voters rather than a majority of those who showed up. That is, failure to show at the polls counts as a “Nay” vote on all propositions.

There are a bunch of other f***ups in the California Constitution that need fixing too, and most of them are the result of initiatives and interactions between initiatives.

]]> By: Twain http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26577 Twain Tue, 26 May 2009 16:24:19 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26577 <p>LOL and never marry TWICE !</p> LOL and never marry TWICE !

]]> By: Elliott http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26576 Elliott Tue, 26 May 2009 16:21:25 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26576 <p><a href="http://christyhardinsmith.firedoglake.com/2009/05/26/scotus-get-yer-rnc-talking-points-here/" rel="nofollow">Christy has more on Sotomayor</a><br /> Messaging FAIL: RNC Accidentally Releases Secret Sotomayor Talking Points</p> Christy has more on Sotomayor
Messaging FAIL: RNC Accidentally Releases Secret Sotomayor Talking Points

]]> By: jayt http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26575 jayt Tue, 26 May 2009 16:18:53 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26575 <p><i>“Cause the lawyers make lots of money from divorce.</i></p> <p>heh. Don’t forget the corollary:</p> <p>Q - “Why are divorces so expensive?”</p> <p>A - “Because they’re worth it!”</p> “Cause the lawyers make lots of money from divorce.

heh. Don’t forget the corollary:

Q – “Why are divorces so expensive?”

A – “Because they’re worth it!”

]]> By: timr http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26574 timr Tue, 26 May 2009 16:17:47 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26574 <p>The US is a very skitzo country. On the one hand we are religious prudes, against sex in general, always attempting to regain something that never was. At the same time, advertisers use SEX to sell everything. Hotels carry porno channels, cable and sat. providers carry porno channels. The biggest markets on the internet are sex related. Yet we continue to make laws against sex of all kinds. We rate movies PG-13 when extreme violence is the theme of the movie, yet rate a movie AO if there is even any nudity. Above the table we are extreme prudes, while under the table we are extreme liberines. Honesty about sex is verbotten, while violence is fine-except in video gmes where a young person might be warped. The young today are confused because on the one hand we refuse to teach sex ed-embarrassment about sex and nudity is the biggest reason-yet children have easy access to porno movies and children as young as middle school are engaging in sex. The biggest rethug pol-palin-and advocate of not teaching sex ed, has a daughter get preggers. This is no surprise. I see the same thing here in Tx. Religious parents all say how “good” their kids are, they teach that abstinence is the only way. They have public promises with their kids-only girls,I guess that it is fine for boys to have lots of sex, but never ever girls-and the girls wear rings and promise to remain virgins until marriage. How victorian. Except of course it doesn’t work. Girls have as much desire to fool around as boys do-I say this as the father of 3 girls, one of whom had a child at the age of 15, ran away from home with the childs father, but who now, 15 years later, is a business owner and married to a very nice person who is not the childs father(who is dumb as a post)-Kids will get drugs and booze and have sex if they want too enough. Parents can not lock their children up, the only thing you can do is instill values while they are young ennough to listen. My point is that despite our extreme religious views in public, the world will do what the people want and the young people-outside of the extreme religious-don’t really mind if 2men or 2 women get married. Its not a big deal. The older generation will die out as will their views-archie bunker types-and the US will finally(maybe) find that it can catch up with the rest of the world.In Europe we have a world in which drugs are available without fear of arrest, sex and nudity are presented without shame and violence is the thing that is denied, not sex. But prudes that we are, I don’t see it happening until my generation dies out.</p> The US is a very skitzo country. On the one hand we are religious prudes, against sex in general, always attempting to regain something that never was. At the same time, advertisers use SEX to sell everything. Hotels carry porno channels, cable and sat. providers carry porno channels. The biggest markets on the internet are sex related. Yet we continue to make laws against sex of all kinds. We rate movies PG-13 when extreme violence is the theme of the movie, yet rate a movie AO if there is even any nudity. Above the table we are extreme prudes, while under the table we are extreme liberines. Honesty about sex is verbotten, while violence is fine-except in video gmes where a young person might be warped. The young today are confused because on the one hand we refuse to teach sex ed-embarrassment about sex and nudity is the biggest reason-yet children have easy access to porno movies and children as young as middle school are engaging in sex. The biggest rethug pol-palin-and advocate of not teaching sex ed, has a daughter get preggers. This is no surprise. I see the same thing here in Tx. Religious parents all say how “good” their kids are, they teach that abstinence is the only way. They have public promises with their kids-only girls,I guess that it is fine for boys to have lots of sex, but never ever girls-and the girls wear rings and promise to remain virgins until marriage. How victorian. Except of course it doesn’t work. Girls have as much desire to fool around as boys do-I say this as the father of 3 girls, one of whom had a child at the age of 15, ran away from home with the childs father, but who now, 15 years later, is a business owner and married to a very nice person who is not the childs father(who is dumb as a post)-Kids will get drugs and booze and have sex if they want too enough. Parents can not lock their children up, the only thing you can do is instill values while they are young ennough to listen. My point is that despite our extreme religious views in public, the world will do what the people want and the young people-outside of the extreme religious-don’t really mind if 2men or 2 women get married. Its not a big deal. The older generation will die out as will their views-archie bunker types-and the US will finally(maybe) find that it can catch up with the rest of the world.In Europe we have a world in which drugs are available without fear of arrest, sex and nudity are presented without shame and violence is the thing that is denied, not sex. But prudes that we are, I don’t see it happening until my generation dies out.

]]> By: BargainCountertenor http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26573 BargainCountertenor Tue, 26 May 2009 16:16:42 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26573 <p>Well, remember that by and large, these are the same forces that are pushing the idea of <em>covenant marriage</em>. That is, a return to the old days when divorce could be had only for cause. Cause is generally limited to spousal abuse, infidelity, and nonsupport.</p> Well, remember that by and large, these are the same forces that are pushing the idea of covenant marriage. That is, a return to the old days when divorce could be had only for cause. Cause is generally limited to spousal abuse, infidelity, and nonsupport.

]]> By: Badwater http://fdlaction.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26572 Badwater Tue, 26 May 2009 16:15:07 +0000 http://campaignsilo.firedoglake.com/2009/05/25/day-of-decision-what-to-expect-from-the-california-supremes/#comment-26572 <p>Either way, this will generate more propositions for years to come. In CA, it’s way too easy to qualify these things for the ballot.</p> Either way, this will generate more propositions for years to come. In CA, it’s way too easy to qualify these things for the ballot.

]]>