Jerry Brown Wants Gay Marriage to Resume

[californio sur]

An interesting article in the New York Times about this very subject:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/08/opinion/08cannon.html

Essentially, the author points out that Prop 8 may be irrelevant in this November's election but could slightly boost or hurt Meg Whitman.

"After disposing of a more conservative rival in the Republican primary, Ms. Whitman has been trying to court independent voters, especially women, in a state where Democrats vastly outnumber Republicans. She has favored a woman’s right to abortion, moderated the anti-immigration views she expressed in the primary race and supported the state’s existing laws providing civil unions and other protections for gays and lesbians".


After a mild response to Judge Walker's ruling, conservatives became angry with Whitman's lukewarm statement so she announced on her website her belief that marriage was only between a man and a woman.


The article points out the polls consistently now favor gay marriage in California so it may have been wise for Jerry Brown to urge the court to allow the resumption of gay marriage and it didn't hurt that Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican joined Brown in petitioning the court. So now Brown looks like a moderate and Whitman seems more conservative.


If Whitman is forced by Republicans to take an anti-gay marriage stance then it could energize Democrats to vote for Brown. Sounds like chess.

[azoria]

Originally Posted by BVitamin

Curm, it could have been read two ways.

One, that he ran off somewhere to become a Buddhist ascetic just right after he became governor.

Two, as you stated, that he ran off to become a Buddhist ascetic after his term in office. Either way the confusion lies in whoever made the original statement.

Another confusion is in the poster's latter statement, it begs the question as to what he/she was referring to. One can assume that the poster referred to his/her former statement. The other assumption is that the poster just made an entirely different statement altogether, clarification is needed. Of course I would think that the former assumption would be the correct assumption.

I should have said something more to the effect of ....remember last time he was governor and running around with Linda Ronstadt.... then after losing the following election he ran off to obscure locations to play at being a Buddhist ascetic.

Then etc, etc, etc, "but um, is this the kind of *leadership* the state of California needs right now? I'm guessing not."

Better?


(BTW, I voted for Jerry Brown then, but certainly would not do so now. California in 1974 was a very different place than the current bankrupt version of California we have today.)

[Wonderful Jellal]

And Meg Whitman wants growth to Resume
(I support the gay marriage, but honestly who cares about that in this moment ? California needs JOBS, and not green jobs only..)

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by RenaudFR

And Meg Whitman wants growth to Resume

They both want that.

(I support the gay marriage, but honestly who cares about that in this moment ? California needs JOBS, and not green jobs only..)

We'll take any job growth we can get.

Furthermore, the need for jobs is a nationwide issue-not just in California.

[Voyageur]

Originally Posted by californio sur

Wow what a thoughtful reply. Thanks but the issue is the political ramifications of gay marriage and how candidates will deal with it. New to California closed down the discussion of gay marriage so this thread is more about how Jerry Brown, Whitman and the senate candidates are dealing with the issue. But thanks again for your response.

I was responding to your first paragraph, and avoided the pros/cons of gay marriage and just looked at the potential judicial endgame and how that might be relevant to Brown's opposing a stay in the decision.

[wehotex]

Originally Posted by californio sur

Acting as attorney general, Jerry Brown urged Judge Walker to permit gay marriages to resume immediately. Also governor Schwarzenegger is expected to request the resumption of gay marriages.

Meanwhile, candidates are split on Judge Walker's ruling yesterday. Predictably Meg Whitman and Carly Fiorina voiced opposition to the federal decision while Senator Boxer praised the action of the judge.

I think this issue is becoming a political "hot potato" with interesting differences among politicians regardless of their party. Do you think the issue of gay marriage will have an effect on November's election?

Atty. Gen. Jerry Brown urges judge to allow same-sex marriages to resume while opponents wait on appeal | L.A. NOW | Los Angeles Times

No, not really. I think that the voters that would be anti-SSM would have voted for Meg anyway. Black voters and Latino voters vote mostly Democratic anyway also. There may be a few bible thumpers that would contradict that, but I feel that the number would be minimal.

[californio sur]

Originally Posted by wehotex

No, not really. I think that the voters that would be anti-SSM would have voted for Meg anyway. Black voters and Latino voters vote mostly Democratic anyway also. There may be a few bible thumpers that would contradict that, but I feel that the number would be minimal.

I think you are correct and what's ironic is that just a few years ago or more this issue would have been a big impact on elections. Now that 5 states and the District of Columbia have gay marriage, it is becoming less an advantage for Republicans to use it as a wedge issue. All those Democrats who voted for Prop 8 two years ago also voted Democratic right down the ticket so there wasn't any effect on candidates. Independent voters that are becoming the largest segment of the population are less reliably pro or con same-sex marriage but in this November's election the issue is the economy.