ARNIE URGES END TO GAY-WED BLITZ

New York Post ^ | 2/18/04 | David K. Li

[kattracks]

February 18, 2004 -- California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger last night called for San Francisco to terminate its ongoing gay-marriage marathon.

"Californians spoke on the issue of same-sex marriage when they overwhelmingly approved California's law that defines marriage as being between a man and a woman. I support that law, and I encourage San Francisco officials to obey that law," the former actor said.

[Tamzee]

Oh big time.... it's funny to see each "conservative" screech for the "rule of law" in the first half of his/her sentence and screech for Arnold to go outside of that rule in the second half.

There's no worse type of hypocrite than a right-wing hypocrite.

[BibChr]

You captured my very thought, and put it better.

Dan

[Carry_Okie]

You captured my very thought, and put it better.

However typically and poorly based in legal or political reality. There is a lot that Arnold could have done from within his legal powers.

Arnold is the chief of the militia per Article 5 Section 7 of the California Constitution.

SEC. 7. The Governor is commander in chief of a militia that shall be provided by statute. The Governor may call it forth to execute the law.

Pretty clear, isn't it? Arnold has the power to order the National Guard to effect an arrest.

Here is the distinction between Arnold and Lockyer:

SEC. 13. Subject to the powers and duties of the Governor, the Attorney General shall be the chief law officer of the State. It shall be the duty of the Attorney General to see that the laws of the State are uniformly and adequately enforced.

Arnold can order an arrest of Gavin Newsome on grounds of probable cause that Mr. Newsome has committed felony malfeasance (if not criminal fraud for modifying State documents and representing them as official). Should Arnold choose not to do that, preferring to go through channels, he can file a memo to Lockyer stating that there is obvious probable cause for an indictment of Mr. Newsome and a demand that he take action on an act of felony malfeasance.

He didn't do either. Now, lest you think that taking such precipitous action is foolishly extreme, I remind you that when these marriage licenses are canceled there is a very likely possiblity of a riot. (You do remember "White Night"?) The longer he waits, the worse it will get.

Lest you fail to consider the seriousness of this situation, I remind you that what Gavin Newsome did was an illegal act of pure dictatorship. To allow this to go on is an affront to the law and akin to literal mob rule. It cannot stand and neither can these "marriages."

[BibChr]

I agree with you about Newsome's actions. The word "outrageous" isn't strong enough; I don't even know a strong enough word. It capsizes the whole notion of rule of law, for starters.

What you suggest would have been fine with me.

Since I don't damn and hate Arnold no matter what he does, as you have done, I just don't assume that there is only one way (mine), and damn him for not doing it.

It may be a great long-term win for him to leave it on Lockyer's shoulders to do his job, and leave him standing out there refusing to do it.

Dan

[only1percent]

I seem to remember, a few decades ago, that a certain public school in Montgomery, AL had a situation similar to this.......

If and when a court orders San Francisco to stop issuing the licenses, then the Governor would be well within his rights to order the National Guard in to enforce the court's order if the City defies it. That's what happened in Alabama (except that it was the President who ordered in the Army, to enforce a Federal court order.)

[Carry_Okie]

Since I don't damn and hate Arnold no matter what he does, as you have done,

Where? Show it. Else you have just damned yourself.

I just don't assume that there is only one way (mine), and damn him for not doing it.

No, you just assume that there is nothing Arnold could have legally done, and that therefore the criticism on this thread is illegitimate, thus:

So... how are the people who were jumping all over the Governor for NOT reponding (i.e. doing the AG's job) now going to tell us that this is an evil, terrible response?

Did I damn him? No. Did I call his response evil? No. I called it predictable because of what he owes to his patrons, a principal among whom IS GAY, Michael Huffington. I did infer that you and your ilk willfully mischaracterized him, just as you have done with me, here. Perhaps you should read up on what "false witness" means.

It may be a great long-term win for him to leave it on Lockyer's shoulders to do his job, and leave him standing out there refusing to do it.

You would allow this to stand, when you have the law invontrovertably on your side, in order to gain political advantage? Not only is that a morally reprehensible option, it is political insanity.

Unfortunately, I expected nothing less than an effort to make it "somebody else's problem" (Lockyer's), lest accountability for tough political choices come home to roost. Allowing this precedent to stand is not "faithfully executing the laws" per the governor's oath of office. Meanwhile, there will be "violated" gay couples, daily, screaming in the media, seeking to create the clamor by which to legitmize what Mr. Newsome has done. The louder and longer that noise goes on the harder it will be to quell. There is likely to be massive civil disobedience and damage to the lives and property of innocents. Arnold would get to look pretty harsh calling out the National Guard for that. The sad fact is that those "couples" were unwittingly more violated by the process Mr. Newsome has so venally initiated.

You would allow this, just to put Mr. Lockyer in the hot seat? He doesn't care. He'll make it Arnold's problem, by dragging his feet wailing about the equal protection of the rights of gay couples (as if couples had rights, which are necessarily individual). I expect nothing less than to see Arnold find a way to cave as a way to "restore order." He personally doesn't give a crap about gay marriage and has said so. Nor does he want the heat for making a tough decision.

No, something needs to be done about this, now.

[PJ-Comix]

Can I still marry my pet lamb, Daisy? You may not approve but it is TRUE LOVE. BAAAAAAH!

[Scenic Sounds]

No, something needs to be done about this, now.

Trust in the lawyers.

LOL. I know how that unreassuring that must sound, but really, trust in the lawyers. The lawyers can fix anything. They just need a little time and a little money and they can make everything just fine again.

Please be patient. ;-)

[Tempest]

It's never enough for some people. I'm sure Arnie is having the State DA look into his options on this one. Sadly this is a very political issue and it wouldn't be wise for him to ride in half cocked and throwing arrest warrants around just to have them overturned by some liberal judge.

I'm sure this statement is a clear indication that Arnold and his team are looking for a iron-clad solution to settling this display of civil disobiediance without making it look like a media nightmare.

Which reminds me. Why is it that Justice Roy Moore could get fired for his display of civil disobiediance and this clown Newsmom is most likely going to get a slap on the wrist?!

[dmzTahoe]

I would love to see a mayor in another California city, even a small city, start issuing Concealed Carry Weapons permits to anyone applying... Or how about disobey the no-smoking laws? Then we would see everyone, especially the liberal media, calling for that mayor's arrest.

Where's a ballsy mayor when we need one. The precedent for anarchy has been set by Arnie's refusal to take action..

Let's give them a taste of conservative-bent anarchy!

[dmzTahoe]

I would love to see a mayor in another California city, even a small city, start issuing Concealed Carry Weapons permits to anyone applying... Or how about disobey the no-smoking laws? Then we would see everyone, especially the liberal media, calling for that mayor's arrest.

Where's a ballsy mayor when we need one. The precedent for anarchy has been set by Arnie's refusal to take action..

Let's give them a taste of conservative-bent anarchy!

[Lurking Libertarian]

Which reminds me. Why is it that Justice Roy Moore could get fired for his display of civil disobiediance and this clown Newsmom is most likely going to get a slap on the wrist?!

Moore was fired for disobeying a direct court order. I doubt that Newsom will go that far.

[mpreston]

If Schwarzenegger won't support the law, why should anyone vote for the upcoming bond issue? The best way to get Governments attention is to financially starve it.

[Tempest]

Ahhhh so Moore was fired because he defyed a court order that said.

Hey you can't put this engraved stone in here. And that's a very, very bad thing to do.

But Newsmom isn't such a bad guy because he is knowingly defy a law that was overwhelmingly passed by the voters of California.

So one judges decision holds more weight than the majority of voters in a state. . . cool. ..

[Carry_Okie]

I know how that unreassuring that must sound, but really, trust in the lawyers.

Having seen how far they can go in service to a "compelling State interest," there is not a chance in hell will I ever trust a lawyer with twisted interpretations of the 14th Amendment. Consider the opinions of the ABA on gay rights. I have way too much experience in the travesties lawyers and judges have visited upon landowners to have any faith that they even intend to fix this mess.

[BibChr]

I have a harder question.

Why do I even try to talk with these people, ever — when

1. Every response they give has to be a 500-word retread amounting to nothing more than "I hate him! I hate him," but in greater detail; and
2. The only thing the Governor ("Arnold") could do to please them would be to shoot himself — and even then they'd criticize his choice of gun?

Why do I do it, Tempest? WHY?

Dan

[Scenic Sounds]

These lawyers can handle this kind of problem without even breaking into a sweat. Just marvel as they void and invalidate these "certificates" ab initio and then nunc pro tunc any who thereafter remain standing.

Relax and enjoy the show! ;-)

[Tempest]

I suppose your a good a man and for some reason you still try to look for hope in what sometimes appears to be a hopeless situation.

[Elsie]

Yup....

This is what I would have said, too.

[Tamzee]

Am I seeing things or are "conservatives" actually agitating for the state government to sic the National Guard on local officials before allowing an issue to be resolved in court?

Scary...