This recall is an insult to California Voters, with the very wealthy slapping us in the face, trying to buy our government from under us. Anyone with a lot of money can come in and pretend to be a politician for a year. It's starting to get pathetic. Isis is like the third guy to come in out of the blue and try to pull something in the pass few years. Now there’s the Terminator pretending too. Note to the very rich newbies: Either be a real politician or just Fuck Off!
This recall has already made California look stupid, and it’s going to be more ridiculous if it passes. I predict that the results of this recall of the governor here in California is going to make Florida (with its hanging chads and false removal of eligible voters) look like a smooth and competent operation. There’s going to be lawsuit after lawsuit disputing the results for a year! Especially if the recall is approved and some marginal and/or nonpartisan player gets the highest number of votes (go Gary Coleman! LOL). That said, the Lt. Governor is supposed to take over if the office of Governor is vacated for any reason according to the CA constitution. Oh well.
Since the law now allows both a no vote on the recall, and a vote for replacement if the recall passes, I am using my back up for Bustamante. I’ve respected him for some time. He is a good man and a respected politician. Of course, it would be great to have Bustamante reporting to Gov. Gary Colemen. :) hmmm…
Saturday, August 09, 2003
Friday, August 08, 2003
Thursday, August 07, 2003
Blog update
I haven't written a blog status update in aeons, mostly cuz well...why? LOL Well, this is pretty cool. I added the picosearch thang to the right side bar menu, and I reconfigured my archives to be weekly instead of monthly, making just a tiny bit easier to find the interesting blog entry once you are on the page where the search as brought you. Anyways, that's that. :)
California Governor Candidates! Search words: 'california governor canidates'
I'm considering casting my vote for Gary Coleman or Larry Flint. They aren't taking this whole mess seriously, thank god! Actually, there may not be any candidates on the ballot when it's time for a vote. The California constitution is clear that the Lt. Governor is to be made Governor is the current Governor is removed for any reason. This means another portion of the Recall law is unconstitutional. Here's the article:
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 5 EXECUTIVE
SEC. 10. The Lieutenant Governor shall become Governor when a vacancy occurs in the office of Governor.
The Lieutenant Governor shall act as Governor during the impeachment, absence from the State, or other temporary disability of the Governor or of a Governor-elect who fails to take office.
The Legislature shall provide an order of precedence after the Lieutenant Governor for succession to the office of Governor and for the temporary exercise of the Governor's functions.
The Supreme Court has exclusive jurisdiction to determine all questions arising under this section.
Standing to raise questions of vacancy or temporary disability is vested exclusively in a body provided by statute.
So that's that, right? LOL No...I'm sure this whole recall thang is going to make Florida's hanging chads look like Saints. BTW, I don't understand the last sentence of the article either.
Have fun, y'all.
CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
ARTICLE 5 EXECUTIVE
SEC. 10. The Lieutenant Governor shall become Governor when a vacancy occurs in the office of Governor.
The Lieutenant Governor shall act as Governor during the impeachment, absence from the State, or other temporary disability of the Governor or of a Governor-elect who fails to take office.
The Legislature shall provide an order of precedence after the Lieutenant Governor for succession to the office of Governor and for the temporary exercise of the Governor's functions.
The Supreme Court has exclusive jurisdiction to determine all questions arising under this section.
Standing to raise questions of vacancy or temporary disability is vested exclusively in a body provided by statute.
So that's that, right? LOL No...I'm sure this whole recall thang is going to make Florida's hanging chads look like Saints. BTW, I don't understand the last sentence of the article either.
Have fun, y'all.
Wednesday, August 06, 2003
Trouble with Gay Priests? Jesus people!
Back when I was a devout Christian, seeing other churches with gay priests would have been confirmation of my own religion's legitimacy over those other churches. After all, how could a church claiming to be worshippers of God accept homosexuals into their ranks. Nowadays, I'm a bit more reasonable. I shed the nonsense of dearly holding onto modern perceptions of ancient, prejudice and convoluted texts like the bible.
The whole renewed push by "conservative" religious people against homosexuals is frustrating. It is sad to see fellow Americans openly treating other Americans as inferiors, using their interpretation of ancients texts to justify their prejudice, in the same way they were used to justify prejudice against blacks and other nonwhite races in the past.
I believe that a religion has the right to choose its leadership for itself. That's part of freedom of religion. Maybe it would seem like a contraction against the bible to have a gay priest or bishop in many faiths. To reconcile, maybe it's time for religious people to accept the message of their bible while leaving behind its prejudice, as we evolve into a more mature and reasonable society.
Final note, this is America, land of the free. How can anyone be free when we choose to oppress one segment of our population? Let's live and let live.
P.S., BTW, The bible never once forbids homosexuality between women. It doesn't even hint at it. It only specifically condemns sexual relations between men. So, it could be argued that only sex between men is forbidden in the bible, and not homosexuality itself. This would mean that it is ok to have a gay priest.
The whole renewed push by "conservative" religious people against homosexuals is frustrating. It is sad to see fellow Americans openly treating other Americans as inferiors, using their interpretation of ancients texts to justify their prejudice, in the same way they were used to justify prejudice against blacks and other nonwhite races in the past.
I believe that a religion has the right to choose its leadership for itself. That's part of freedom of religion. Maybe it would seem like a contraction against the bible to have a gay priest or bishop in many faiths. To reconcile, maybe it's time for religious people to accept the message of their bible while leaving behind its prejudice, as we evolve into a more mature and reasonable society.
Final note, this is America, land of the free. How can anyone be free when we choose to oppress one segment of our population? Let's live and let live.
P.S., BTW, The bible never once forbids homosexuality between women. It doesn't even hint at it. It only specifically condemns sexual relations between men. So, it could be argued that only sex between men is forbidden in the bible, and not homosexuality itself. This would mean that it is ok to have a gay priest.
Tuesday, August 05, 2003
Damn, been hella busy
I've been hella busy. Been going from one thang to another for days now, almost not stop sep for what sleep I'm getting. It's not stopping now either. going to need a break...anyways, I got a couple of rants brewing, so there'll be more posts coming soon!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)