Patterico's Pontifications


Arnold Will Veto Same-Sex Marriage Bill

Filed under: Civil Liberties — Patterico @ 7:55 pm

Via Xrlq (in the comments) comes word that Arnold Schwarzenegger will veto the same-sex marriage bill.

I am sympathetic to the concept of same-sex marriage, but I think Schwarzenegger has it just right. This bill clearly conflicts with Proposition 22 (which I voted against), and cannot legally become law without submission to the voters — something the bill does not contemplate. For more, see Dafydd ab Hugh’s earlier post.

UPDATE: The story also says: “The Republican governor had indicated previously that he would veto the bill, saying the debate over same-sex marriage should be decided by voters or the courts.” I don’t support that. Voters, yes. Courts, no.

If Arnold wants the courts to resolve the issue, he has it wrong. If Arnold wants Proposition 22 (meaning the voters) to resolve it, he has it just right.

Pejman on Privilege

Filed under: General,Judiciary,Law — Patterico @ 6:55 pm

Pejman Yousefzadeh has a column up at Tech Central Station regarding claims of government lawyer privilege. It’s a topic that Pejman says will likely become even more important with the nomination of John Roberts to be Chief Justice of the United States.

In support of his argument, Pejman cites legal luminaries such as Eugene Volokh and William Dyer (aka Beldar). He also cites a non-luminary by the name of Patterico. This seeming error in judgment does not detract from Pejman’s argument, since the opinions of this Patterico fellow seem to line up quite nicely with those of Volokh and Dyer. (Lucky thing, that.)

Anyway, read Pejman’s column. It’s quite good.

It Depends On What the Meaning of “Never” Is

Filed under: Dog Trainer,Sheehan — Patterico @ 6:57 am

Regular readers will remember that I recently noted that the L.A. Times edited wire copy in a way that distorted the truth about Cindy Sheehan. The Times version of an AP story asserted that Bush “never” met with Sheehan:

Sheehan had vowed to stay in Crawford until Bush’s monthlong vacation ended or until she could question him about the war that claimed the life of her son Casey and nearly 1,900 other U.S. soldiers. She missed a week of the protest because her mother suffered a stroke.

Although two top administration officials talked to Sheehan the first day, the president never did — though he said that he sympathizes with her. He ended his vacation Wednesday to monitor federal aid to hurricane victims on the Gulf Coast.

It was inaccurate to say that Bush “never” met with Sheehan, because the president met with her in June 2004. As I noted in my previous post, the original version of the AP story had included a clarifying phrase (“during her Crawford stay”) that Times editors removed:

While two top Bush administration officials talked to Sheehan the first day, the president never did during her Crawford stay — although he said that he sympathizes with her.

That four-word phrase removed by Times editors appeared in every other version of the story I could find, in newspapers across the country.

I wrote Readers’ Representative Jamie Gold about this. After all, saying the president “never” met with Sheehan, when he actually did, sounded an awful lot like a factual misstatement to me. In my e-mail to Ms. Gold, I said: “I think a correction is warranted — unless you have a different definition of ‘never’ than I do.”

Gold never responded to my e-mail.

But make sure to click on “more” to read the rest of the story!


Dafydd: State Senate to People: Drop Dead!

Filed under: Court Decisions,Law,Political Correctness — Dafydd @ 6:11 am

This post is by Dafydd, not Patterico; I have no idea where Patterico stands on Proposition 22. [Patterico says: read the UPDATE below and find out!]

[And yet another update below, as of 7 September 2005]

This vote is simply breathtaking in its arrogance.

California Senate approves bill allowing gay marriage
By Steve Lawrence, Associated Press Writer
Thursday, September 1, 2005

Handing gay rights advocates a major victory, the California Senate approved legislation Thursday that would legalize same-sex marriages in the nation’s most populous state.

The 21-15 vote made the Senate the first legislative chamber in the country to approve a gay marriage bill. It sets the stage for a showdown in the state Assembly, which narrowly rejected a gay marriage bill in June.

What truly separates this apart from other issues is that in 2000, the people of the state of California voted overwhelmingly for Proposition 22, the California Defense of Marriage Act, which flatly and unequivocally bans same-sex marriage: “Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California.” You will not see a single word about this in the SFGate story linked above… it was all a dream; it never happened.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0685 secs.