More Proposition 8 lies from the "Yes on 8" campaign

by Chino Blanco, Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 02:04:42 PM EST

The Yes on 8 side of California's Prop. 8 battle is indignant.

Yet another judge has let them down, this time by refusing to change the Prop. 8 title to suit their campaign.

In response, the Yes on 8 campaign is now distributing this press release that includes this claim:

In a review of the past 50 years of ballot measures, this is the only initiative among 250 initiatives that an Attorney General has assigned a negative verb for its Title & Summary.

Really?  

I mean, it sounds like it might be true, so let's go back 52 years:

1956 Prop 5:  ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE ESTABLISHMENTS

Eliminates present provision ...

1956 Prop 16:  CIVIL AND CRIMINAL APPEALS

Deletes present time limits ...

And I'm sure there's more.  Just run a search at the California Ballot Measures Database.

That said, I suspect that even the "50 years" claim is bogus.  For example:

1994 Prop 191:  Effective January 1, 1995, eliminates justice courts ...

1996 Prop 199:  Phases out local rent control laws ... eliminates controls on rent for space ...

And there's more, but you get the idea.

How stupid do these people think we are?




Tags: Jennifer Kerns, Proposition 8 (all tags)

Display:
Permalink :: 8 Comments :: Post a Comment


Suggestion (2.00 / 2)

please give us all a little run down as to what Prop 8 is all about and what this decision is all about.

I rec'd you for bringing this forward and outing the righties lies, but please add a little more.


Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 04:35:06 PM EST

Re: Suggestion (2.00 / 1)

Here, Kevin, this might help:

Backers of a November ballot measure banning gay and lesbian marriages in California rushed to an appellate court Friday after a Sacramento judge rejected their challenge to the state's formal description of their initiative - that it "eliminates (the) right of same-sex couples to marry."

(From the first link posted in the diary)


"Who are you for? That is the wrong question. It should be who is for you?" HRC
by skohayes on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 06:38:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I saw the link (none / 0)

but it always helps to put some of the info in the diary.


Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 10:56:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I apologize profusely for the quick diary ... (none / 0)

I've written ad nauseam about Prop 8.  The present diary was meant to be a quick response to yesterday's press releases from the Yes on 8 campaign.  Nothing more.

If you're just now becoming aware of Prop 8 or for whatever reason are keen to put my diaries into some kind of context for a general readership, please check out:

http://chinoblanco.blogspot.com/

Otherwise, please cut me some slack here.  The links I provided in the original diary were more than sufficient to bring an interested reader up-to-speed on what the diary was about.


by Chino Blanco on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 02:36:34 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Here is what I think (2.00 / 1)

When you write about something that is primarily in one state, why not give a little info as to what it is.

We do not all get on the blogs all day, everyday, so we may miss your other diaries about this subject.

My main point was that you could have included the Prop title, the core of what the Prop is about, etc.

Your diary was basically a follow up to your other diaries on this subject, correct? I understand that. I just feel that when a diary is written, we should assume that there are people who are brand new to the blog, are not on the blog daily and throughout the day or just don't know about the local subject you are speaking about.

This does not mean we need to do a total run down of the subject each time, but it could mean a simple explanation of the subject.

To someone new or just not in the know, Prop 8 means nothing to them but by including a something like this ("ballot measure banning gay and lesbian marriages in California"), you have now brought them partially up to speed and hopefully hooked their interest.

I did not post my first comment or the following comments (including this one) to beat up on you. Sorry if it feels that way.


Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 03:44:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Here is what I think (none / 0)

I think someone from the Edwards Evening News Roundup blog is feeling a little grumpy.  I'd be cranky, too, if I was an Edwards supporter.


by Chino Blanco on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 11:14:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: More Proposition 8 lies (2.00 / 3)

It deserves a negative verb for it's title and summary.  Kinda sucks when your bigotry and hatred is exposed.

Way to go Jerry!


by alamedadem on Sat Aug 09, 2008 at 04:55:11 PM EST

Re: (none / 0)

They are trying to stop the steps of progress, the steps of the Gay Nation.


Killing me softly with his song
by Miles Outlandish on Sun Aug 10, 2008 at 06:56:55 AM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.

Login
Username:

Password: