Posted on 09/22/2005 4:31:20 PM PDT by Crackingham
The aftermath of Katrina obscured many stories from public view. One of them concerned same-sex marriage. It deserves much more attention, particularly from national politicians. On September 1, the California state Senate, by a vote of 21 to 15, approved same-sex marriage for the Golden State. On Tuesday, September 6, the state Assembly approved the same bill by a margin of 41 to 35. No Republican voted for the measure, and four Assembly Democrats voted against it. The bill proposed changing the legal definition of marriage from "a civil contract between a man and a woman" to a "civil contract between two persons." Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed the bill, citing the overwhelming victory of Proposition 22, an initiative banning same-sex marriage, which had passed with 61 percent of the vote in 2000.
National news media accounts of the votes and the vetoes quoted the backers of the proposal as well as the governor's spokespeople, and advocates and opponents on both sides of the debate. But in no story that I can find did a reporter think to ask a national Democratic leader for their opinion on the vote by their California colleagues. Google News cannot even find San Francisco Democrat and House minority leader Nancy Pelosi's name in the same story as same-sex marriage. Neither can the San Francisco Chronicle over the past 30 days.
Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer made high-profile appearances on national television during the period of the California debate. Of course the big issues they discussed were Katrina relief and the Roberts nomination, but their omission of the California same-sex marriage issue is notable for a couple of reasons.
First, the national players on the left aren't volunteering any opinions on the subject, and not because this is a "state" issue. Rather, it is a nightmare scenario for Democrats who know that their allies on the left are strongly in favor of same-sex marriage.
Second, the media knows this is an issue of intense interest across the political spectrum. The mainstream media also knows that every single time the question of same-sex marriage has been submitted directly to the voters, it has been overwhelming rejected. It is thus a losing issue for Democrats outside of California's hermetically-sealed-off-from-competition legislative districts. Because the gerrymandering in California is so precise, Democrats there have nothing to fear from getting separated from their constituencies. Not so the national Democrats. Recall that John Kerry repeatedly stated his opposition to same-sex marriage throughout campaign 2004, and even went so far as to state that he'd have voted for a state proposition banning the idea.
How to explain the media's collective pass issued to big-name Dems?
Simple enough: They are sparing them a series of questions that would embarrass them.
IIRC rejected by 11 states in the 2004 election, and a few were even states won by Kerry.
We need to hold big media's feet to the fire. Don't just dismiss them as a lost cause. Russert et al: Ask national Democrats where they stand on the California Democratic legislature's attempted end-run around the voters. Was the Governor correct to veto it?.
When he actually vetos it, maybe we can get SOME news coverage and Dems reaction?
****The bill proposed changing the legal definition of marriage from "a civil contract between a man and a woman" to a "civil contract between two persons." ******
I guess that means you could marry your mother or your sister. Or your father if he was queer. Be pretty nice to have the Fathers pension passed on to his daughter.
its because the homosexual activist community behaves like a bunch of inmature teenagers.
thats why voters across the board red state and blue state reject it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.