10 Responses to “Hey California, You Jackass”

1. Tyler says:

   November 5, 2008 at 9:36 am

   Arizona faced the same vote in ’06 and made the progressive choice, for lack of a better word.

   On a more uplifting note, AZ’s representatives now consist of 5 D’s and 3 R’s, as opposed to 2 D’s and 6 R’s in ’04.
2. james says:

   November 5, 2008 at 10:21 am

   Prop 102 rolls that back. Don’t we all have bigger things to worry about? And why can we not approach law without pushing personal belief system agendas into it? :-/

   that said, hell yeah on the reps!
3. Tyler says:

   November 5, 2008 at 10:38 am

   Yeah, I know 102 rolls it back. It was a wise move on the religious right’s part to give it another go, as the electorate in the ’06 Midterms consisted almost entirely of Arizona’s angry liberals, myself included.

   If it’s really about protecting the sanctity of marriage, why not ban divorce? Is it really sacred if it fails more than half the time?

   I’m still waiting to find out what happens with AZ prop 101, which is still too close to call. http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2008/10/29/arizonas-proposition-101-would-block-universal-health-coverage/
4. james says:

   November 5, 2008 at 10:50 am

   I hear you but I think it is less about defending marriage, that is just a dog whistle, and more about codifying a personal belief system so that it might be imposed on others that do not share the same system. In my book it is another power grab.

   As for prop 101 why the hell does that need to be a constitutional amendment? As for the commentators, apparently they checked their brains at the top of the thread with the usual arguments of “personal responsibility” yet forgetting that as a nation we are a corporate welfare state. Not to mention that AZ takes more than it gives.
5. Tyler says:

   November 5, 2008 at 11:03 am

   You’re preaching to the choir.

   Eventually you train yourself not to scroll down to the comments section of any AZ news article.
6. james says:

   November 5, 2008 at 11:34 am

   True enough!
7. Quyen says:

   November 5, 2008 at 5:17 pm

   Yes, I was disappointed that Prop 8 passed. I was hoping CA had enough people to vote no, but that’s not the case. We’ll see what happens next. I’m sure there is some sort of appeals process. I’d be curious to see the demographics of the people who voted yes. That was definitely the biggest state proposition.
8. james says:

   November 6, 2008 at 1:31 pm

   What was the marketing efforts in your effort? Was there a big push for either direction?

   In CT there was an effort to call a constitutional convention, which can only happen every 20 years, but the reason was not made explicit. It was marketed as , “Just because.” which in the tiny, completely unscientific sampling I made by listening to people in line with me at the polls was met with utter disdain, “Don’t ask me to vote to change the constitution if you are not going to be honest about it!”
9. Quyen says:

   November 6, 2008 at 7:16 pm

   I don’t know how much TV advertising there was (if any). All I saw were people holding up signs at street corners – both yes and no on Prop 8. I received a call about Yes on 8, and I can’t remember the woman’s message. I can’t shed much light on the marketing angle around here….
10. james says:

    November 6, 2008 at 10:44 pm

    Hey, your busy growing big bunches of basil and massive tomatoes while writing your dissertation only so much time in the day!