Schwarzenegger Seeks Meeting With Gays Over Marriage Veto

[ruggerson]

I guess Ahhnold is feeling the heat and beginning to realize that vetoing this means he is a one term governor.


http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/09/091405arnold.htm

<snip>

San Francisco, California) Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger asked Wednesday for a meeting with leaders of California's gay community, angry over his threatened veto of legislation to allow same-sex marriage.

The meeting will take place in the governor's Sacramento office next Wednesday. It will include Equality California executive director Geoff Kors and two other members of the EQCA board. Also taking part will be senior staffers for the governor. The meeting will be chaired by the governor's chief of staff, but Schwarzenegger has not committed to be there himself.

Nevertheless, EQCA Wednesday night called the invitation a major step forward.

On the table will be a number of concerns for the LGBT community in the state, but chief among them is the marriage bill.

<snip>

[okieinpain]

1. i smell a blanco coming on.

[GRLMGC]

2. I hope he backpedals

but he probably won't. He's probably trying to appeal to the bigots since nobody else likes him

[moobu2]

3. Holy moley

The thing about Schwarzenstupidass is he has no depth of concern or understanding of anything. He just likes playing Governor. Guess Californians were blinded by the starlight.

[Toucano]

4. He's a one-term governor has-been-actor no matter what. n/t

[Oerdin]

12. Think so?

He's only behind in the polls by 3% of Angelides and the smear campaign hasn't even started yet. All the Governor needs to do is find a good culture war issue to get the red neck vote out in mass and he wins as long as they do a good job of smearing Angelides.

[olddad56]

21. One term governor? As if elections were still honest and fair.

[Imagevision]

22. Arnuld is history-his numbers are lower then Bush's and this jerkoff

wanted to be prez?!!! too many steroids arnie...!

[Laelth]

5. I'm no fan of the gropenfuhrer, but ...

... at least he's willing to meet with them.

Does the name Cindy Sheehan come to mind?

-Laelth

[FredScuttle]

6. er....WHA???

Did you catch this tidbit?

"The meeting will take place in the governor's Sacramento office next Wednesday. It will include Equality California executive director Geoff Kors and two other members of the EQCA board. Also taking part will be senior staffers for the governor. The meeting will be chaired by the governor's chief of staff, but Schwarzenegger has not committed to be there himself."

Maybe he thinks they'll try to sneak a lesbian nurse in there. He seems to be quite the fraidy-cat when it comes to caregivers.

Fuck Arnold...his bad dream of a governatorship can't be over soon enough.

[Laelth]

14. Schwarzenegger has not committed to be there himself

No, I missed that. Shame on me for scanning headlines.

So he reserves the right to pull a shrub, does he? What a girlie man!

:spank:

-Laelth


Edit:Laelth--must remember to read more closely.

[FredScuttle]

24. The fault lies in the headline

It should read "Schwarzenegger Seeks Meeting For His Staff With Gays Over Marriage Veto....He Himself Plans To Be In A Private 'Pumping' Session With Joe Weider"

[merwin]

7. Exactly what I was thinking. He's got more balls than the whole admin

combined.

Well, maybe not Condi... hers are pretty big.

[Laughing Mirror]

13. I must have a meeting with you fags & dykes, but I won't be coming

I'm sending my chief of staff to slap you and pull your hair. I'm the governor of California, presidential material, the Terminator. I'm too chicken to meet you face to face. I'm too scared to be there.

[mitchum]

8. That vain idiot thinks he can appease them by wearing his posing trunks

[IndyJones]

9. CA was up in arms when a judge in San Fran decided to grant

marriage certs to gay couples. Arnold would be pissing off his base if he didn't veto it.

And it's not a partisan issue in CA. The majority of voters in CA are democrats, who also voted down gay marriage in 2000.

If they think the voters' minds have changed over the last five years, maybe they need to put it back on the CA ballot.

[FredScuttle]

10. Technical correction

The proposition passed in 2000 was confusingly worded...basically, it prohibits California from recognizing same-sex marriages performed in other states, but made no determination of the validity of same-sex marriages performed in California.

[ruggerson]

16. In 2000

The voters approved a statutory referendum designed to make sure California did not recognize same sex marriages performed in other states. Read the rationale behind Prop 22, that is what the backers were trying to accomplish, as same sex marriage was ALREADY illegal under the family code.

What this legislation does is to change the family code. So, there is a very compelling argument to make that it is not legally at odds with Prop 22.

But, fundamentally, marriage rights and privileges should not be decided by majority rule. Even though all polling shows that the numbers who back gay marriage are much higher than they were five years ago, that doesn't matter. What's right is right. About 80% of the country opposed interracial marriage when the Supreme Court struck down miscenegation laws in Loving Vs. Virginia. Civil privileges such as these should not be subject to majority whim. That's why we are a republic, not an unfettered democracy.

Btw, what's your opinion on this. You show up on a lot of threads about this and offer up republican talking points in the abstract. What do YOU think?

[BR_Parkway]

20. Maybe they've realized that Mass didn't fall off the map, or get

swallowed by a horde of locust AND their divorce rate is one of the lowest in the country. And England, Canada and Spain have moved well away from that position in the past five years.

All we hear about is activist judges overriding the will of the legislature, unless of course the legislature actually decides to give equal status to gay folks, then of course, it should either go back to the right activist judge to shoot down, or to the general population so the churches can threaten everyone that they'll burn in hell if they don't vote it down. Fuck that. The people elected representatives to go to the capitol and make the laws. They did, so Arnie needs to just sign the damn thing and be done with it.

Under your system of thinking, I'd still have to keep a wife for appearance sakes, while I got one of my slaves to drive me in secret to meet my boyfriend. It's not about the will of the majority to strip or restrict the rights of the minority. It's about that one little phrase "all men are created equal...."

[Technowitch]

29. That wasn't a judge, it was Mayor Gavin Newsom

And the reason Prop22 passed is because the RW politicos framed it as a religious issue (marriage is a 'sacred institution').

Also, it wasn't just 'gay' couples to whom the City of San Francisco issued licenses, lesbian couples such as myself and my wife (together for eight years now) were also eligible.

Alas, we have to continue to make do with a domestic partnership. At least we have that much, unless the American Taliban has its way. If that happens, we're heading north.

[TaleWgnDg]

11. Telephone Arnold's office, tell Arnold not to veto Senate Bill 849 . . .

.
California Gov. Schwarzenegger's office is accepting calls from anywhere regarding California's marriage equality bill. It passed both houses of the state legislature, but needs the Governor's approval. It's all automated, so you don't have to talk to anyone.

Follow these directions:

1. Call the Governor: 916-445-2841 (This number is listed at www.governor.ca.gov )
2. Push: 2 (voice your opinion on legislation)
3. Push: 1 (gender-neutral marriage bill - Senate Bill 849)
4. And push: 1 to support marriage equality

Pass it on.

.

[Orsino]

15. How the hell do you ask for a meeting...

...without committing to be there?

He's trying to have it both ways, appeasing gay leaders while still able to deny every having met with them. Punk.

[gratuitous]

18. Yeah, so glad he's not a politician

Remember how he ran as a regular guy (who just happens to star in blockbuster Hollywood movies), and wasn't a politician? He was going to fight for the little guy and not beholden to special interests and big corporate money?

Seems like with his call for a meeting without committing to attend personally, Ah-nuld has learned a few political tricks. Maybe he'll have a fundraiser to attend with political donors that will conflict?

EQCA has nothing to lose by attending the meeting. If Arnold pulls some kind of political shenanigans, they can come out of the meeting and call him on it. They responded to his invitation in good faith; Arnold has everything to lose if he decides to snub the meeting.

[xchrom]

17. why? on both counts.

why does he want to meet with them?{yes i know he gave himself a headache clause.}

and why -- for god's sake why -- would gay and lesbian groups agree to meet with him?
is there some reason they would give to promote his candidacy even if he supported equal marriage?

i wish my people would learn that sometimes it's really better to knock the dust off their shoes and move the fuck on.

knock him on his ass ass, move on, walk away a clear winner.

[StuckinKS]

19. The leaders need to meet with him

and point out two things to him.

1. If he vetoes the bill, he pisses off the gay community and their supporters and he will not win reelection.

2. If he doesn't veto the bill, he pisses of the reich wing and their supporters and he doesn't win reelection.

Hence, he could make sure that his one (partial) term administration ends up with at least one moment that history can look back upon favorably. He can be the man who helped advance equal rights in California.

...but it won't happen this way.

[dickthegrouch]

27. He needs to meet with the people he's discriminating against

Better late than never.

Let him show he has some guts and veto the thing in front of the people who will be most hurt by that veto.

I am driving from Mountain View, CA to Sacramento next wed.
Anyone want to share gas money?

[closeupready]

23. There's nothing to discuss with him. End of story.

gays and lesbians are NOT going to accept ANY excuses. Veto it, and take some personal responsibility for having done so. Don't, and we'll reserve judgment.

[ronnykmarshall]

25. Maria must have cut him off again.

[yellowcanine]

26. Takes some chutzpah to call a meeting and then not show up.

Then agai no one ever accused Aahnold of being chutzpah challenged.

[rocktivity]

28. If he signs it, the GOP will veto his political future.

But if he vetoes it, the voters will veto his re-election--he's alienated too many of the other voting blocs to rely on religious wingnuts alone. Decisions, decisions...

:dilemma:
rocknation

[Barkley]

30. Don't Blame Me, I Voted for Gary Coleman - nt