Schwarzenegger's Veto

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 13, 2007 5:58 PM GMT
    I imagine it's no surprise that Schwarzenegger vetoed another gay marriage bill in California.

    Here in Massachusetts opponents complained that the Supreme Judicial Court was legislating back in Nov 2003 when decided the constitutionality of a law. According to the AP, the governor thinks:

    voters and the state Supreme Court, not lawmakers, should decide the issue

    So now I suppose legislatures aren't supposed to legislate.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 13, 2007 11:31 PM GMT
    Its ok though as going by the current political standards three months time the headlines will read:

    Schwarzenegger found tied up in a hoist wearing a gimp mask and covered in cum!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 14, 2007 1:45 AM GMT
    Ok, did he veto a bill for or against Gay marriage?

    There are two ways this can go:

    If it was for Gay marriage, then fuck him. He is an ignorant pig.

    If it was against gay marriage, then auwww, how sweet. Good for him. He’s a good man.

    icon_wink.gif

    All I can say is that when I find the man that is my other half, we are getting married. Even if we have to fly to another state or country even. We'll just already be in our honeymoon place. Even if it means some witchy lesbian has to wave a stick over our heads. (Name that show!)
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 15, 2007 4:15 PM GMT
    The Governator is just afraid to sign this legislation because he may have plans to run for a higher office in the future. What a chickenshit. All the GOPers keep saying that legislatures should decide and not courts, finally a legislature decides and the GOP chickenshit says oh it should be a courts decision. Blah vote democrat.
  • art_smass

    Posts: 960

    Oct 15, 2007 4:18 PM GMT
    I'm Canadian, so I need to ask this question: What higher office can he run for? Aren't there limitations on how far foreign-born people can get in government? I think I learned that in school.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 15, 2007 4:34 PM GMT
    He is the Governator, no rules apply to him, he'll make it all the way up to persidency by the time im 30
  • Salubrious

    Posts: 420

    Oct 15, 2007 4:46 PM GMT
    To be fair, the legislature isn't allowed to override voter initiatives, which is what bans gay marriage in California, so it's kinda a non-issue.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 15, 2007 5:32 PM GMT
    art_smass, Ahnald can never be president of the US, unless the constitution is amended. It requires that the prez be a US citizen by birth, so no naturalized citizen can be elected by the electoral college. Don't get me started on the electoral college. It's the reason Bush is president now - Gore won the popular vote in 2000.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Oct 15, 2007 7:31 PM GMT
    Arnold was a mindless idiot in most of his movies. He married into a political dynasty, but was already a member of the Republican dark side. I found it made sense that the folks in California would elect him Gov. since everyone loves Hollywood and celebrities. You would think that folks would remember the last actor turned politician who had power, Ronald Reagan. The country is still in recovery from the shambles he created. I fear the State of California will suffer the same. As for the denial of marriage equality, I am with the earlier respondent. When I find the one, I will travel to a really enlightened country and get legally married and wait until the "land of the free" again tries to live up to its name.
  • Salubrious

    Posts: 420

    Oct 15, 2007 11:14 PM GMT
    He's not that bad of a governor, actually.