Arnold Schwarzenegger...announces rerun!

[archangel]

Good for him..He threw out the "Political Correct" BS and laughs at his low rating... per polls...he has a grasp on reality..."He who laughs first-laughs last!" :funnyface

 

[Big Blue Machin]

He's done a pretty good job as Governor.

 

[insein]

agreed. He can never be president, so running for governor for awhile is good for California. How many terms can you run out there?

 

[ProudDem]

I hope he runs again and then loses. I'm glad he can never run for president.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I hope he runs again and then loses. I'm glad he can never run for president.

Are you trying to troll?

 

[ProudDem]

Are you trying to troll?

Nope. Why would you say that? I am expressing my opinion on the Governator.

 

[kurtsprincess]

I'm glad he decided to run again. He has some unfinished business and keeps the liberals dems of CA on their toes because their panties are always in a bunch..........he's not very PC and I think more of this type of outlook is needed for balance in America today. :rotflmao: :rotflmao:

 

[insein]

He's very good for that state. He does what the PEOPLE want. The people vote in referendum's and he hold's the CA congress to those referendum's instead of trying to create laws that oppose the people's will.

He's a rareity in politics. A man who does what the PEOPLE want.

 

[ProudDem]

He's very good for that state. He does what the PEOPLE want. The people vote in referendum's and he hold's the CA congress to those referendum's instead of trying to create laws that oppose the people's will.

He's a rareity in politics. A man who does what the PEOPLE want.

Did he do what the people wanted by vetoing the "gay marriage" legislation? He had said that the courts could not legislate from the bench and allow gay marriage, that such should be determined by the people. So the politicians (who are elected by the people) then passed legislation to allow gay marriage. Thus, the people essentially determined that it would allow gay marriage. Ahnold wants to veto the legislation? He can't have it both ways.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Did he do what the people wanted by vetoing the "gay marriage" legislation? He had said that the courts could not legislate from the bench and allow gay marriage, that such should be determined by the people. So the politicians (who are elected by the people) then passed legislation to allow gay marriage. Thus, the people essentially determined that it would allow gay marriage. Ahnold wants to veto the legislation? He can't have it both ways.

And the people voted For arnold. SO In a way, it's the people's veto. No?

 

[ProudDem]

And the people voted For arnold. SO In a way, it's the people's veto. No?

You know, I had not thought of it that way. Good point. But I have a hard time thinking that he genuinely thinks that this is what the people want. Come on, he's in a hugely blue state.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

You know, I had not thought of it that way. Good point. But I have a hard time thinking that he genuinely thinks that this is what the people want. Come on, he's in a hugely blue state.

All this gay marriage stuff is just the lefts attempt to slowly separate the notion of family with the notion of procreation. We can get into that some other time. The point here is: Democracy is working.

 

[ProudDem]

All this gay marriage stuff is just the lefts attempt to slowly separate the notion of family with the notion of procreation. We can get into that some other time. The point here is: Democracy is working.

Rightwing avenger, I am married and I don't have children. My husband and I are unsure whether we will have children. Does that mean we should get a divorce if we choose not to procreate? One of the definitions of family is people living under the same household. To me, my husband and I are a family.

Honestly, I think what this whole gay marriage issue is, is the segregation issue being replayed. Human beings are equal no matter their race or sexual orientation. Why wouldn't all human beings be entitled to get married to one other person?

I just don't see how allowing gay people to marry has any effect on anyone else's marriage or family or that it somehow takes away the meaning of marriage. Marriage is about two people wanting a lifetime commitment to each other. Whatever sex or orientation these two people are should not matter.

 

[insein]

Did he do what the people wanted by vetoing the "gay marriage" legislation? He had said that the courts could not legislate from the bench and allow gay marriage, that such should be determined by the people. So the politicians (who are elected by the people) then passed legislation to allow gay marriage. Thus, the people essentially determined that it would allow gay marriage. Ahnold wants to veto the legislation? He can't have it both ways.

As i recall, the people voted in a referendum to define marriage as the joining of a man and woman.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/09/01/AR2005090102086.html

Opponents deemed it an "arrogant" move in defiance of a voter-approved law limiting marriage rights to male-female couples. "Twenty-one Democrats in the Senate took it upon themselves to redefine marriage," said Benjamin Lopez, a lobbyist for the Traditional Values Coalition, "and they're saying that 4.6 million Californians are wrong."

 

[insein]

Rightwing avenger, I am married and I don't have children. My husband and I are unsure whether we will have children. Does that mean we should get a divorce if we choose not to procreate? One of the definitions of family is people living under the same household. To me, my husband and I are a family.

Honestly, I think what this whole gay marriage issue is, is the segregation issue being replayed. Human beings are equal no matter their race or sexual orientation. Why wouldn't all human beings be entitled to get married to one other person?

I just don't see how allowing gay people to marry has any effect on anyone else's marriage or family or that it somehow takes away the meaning of marriage. Marriage is about two people wanting a lifetime commitment to each other. Whatever sex or orientation these two people are should not matter.

Marriage is a religious sacrement. I agree with civil unions and having the rights of gay couples being the same as a married couples but it is not marriage. Marriage is the joining of a "Man and a Woman."

 

[archangel]

Rightwing avenger, I am married and I don't have children. My husband and I are unsure whether we will have children. Does that mean we should get a divorce if we choose not to procreate? One of the definitions of family is people living under the same household. To me, my husband and I are a family.

Honestly, I think what this whole gay marriage issue is, is the segregation issue being replayed. Human beings are equal no matter their race or sexual orientation. Why wouldn't all human beings be entitled to get married to one other person?

I just don't see how allowing gay people to marry has any effect on anyone else's marriage or family or that it somehow takes away the meaning of marriage. Marriage is about two people wanting a lifetime commitment to each other. Whatever sex or orientation these two people are should not matter.

why all liberals focus on sexual issues and perverted issues rather than fiscal and security issues...hummm maybe a little Freudian slip in the tongue with them! :cof:

 

[ProudDem]

why all liberals focus on sexual issues and perverted issues rather than fiscal and security issues...hummm maybe a little Freudian slip in the tongue with them! :cof:

Oh brother. How am I focusing on sexual issues and perverted issues?

Someone mentioned procreating, hence, my discussion of whether my husband and I would have children or not.

The issue was about gay marriage. I guess you consider that "perverted." I consider anyone who labels such behavior as "perverted" to be small-minded.

Are you accusing me of possibly being gay? Okaaaaaaaaaaaay. LOL

 

[archangel]

Oh brother. How am I focusing on sexual issues and perverted issues?

Someone mentioned procreating, hence, my discussion of whether my husband and I would have children or not.

The issue was about gay marriage. I guess you consider that "perverted." I consider anyone who labels such behavior as "perverted" to be small-minded.

Are you accusing me of possibly being gay? Okaaaaaaaaaaaay. LOL

I am not accusing you of being Gay...just that all liberal issues seem to revolve around Gay Marriage and abortion...why is that?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Rightwing avenger, I am married and I don't have children. My husband and I are unsure whether we will have children. Does that mean we should get a divorce if we choose not to procreate? One of the definitions of family is people living under the same household. To me, my husband and I are a family.

But actually, you're a couple.


See, they have succeeded in mindscrubbing you.

 

[ProudDem]

I am not accusing you of being Gay...just that all liberal issues seem to revolve around Gay Marriage and abortion...why is that?

Gotcha. Hmmmm, I think the gay marriage issue is the desegregation issue played out again. Someone has to look out for them. I guess I never gave gay marriage much thought until Massachusetts (where I was born ) ruled on it with California following suit.

As for the abortion issue, I think dems are scared that Roe could get overturned.