This body of 30 individuals has decided that they are going to substitute their judgment for 600,000 voters—Harold Ickes, Sen. Hillary Clinton StrategistLiberals are celebrating in the Judgedom of California, the newly formed independent nation state, in which last week 4 black robed anarchist decided that they would substitute their judgment for the 4,618,673 votes that were cast in favor of proposition 22 the proposition that was voted on and passed in 2000 by a People driven ballot initiative that defined marriage for the people of California.
In 2000, 61% of California voters approved a ballot measure, Proposition 22, that said "only marriage between a man and a woman is valid and recognized in California."Where was Harold Ickes when the California Supreme Court hijacked voter rights in the former state of California? Mr. Ickes waxed so eloquently before the DNC committee on Saturday in his defense of the People’s right to vote his contingent was that no oligarchic group has the right to take the vote away from the People. (story)
Proposition 22 was ratified by an overwhelming majority of California voters, prevailing by a 23-point margin. Statewide, 4,618,673 votes were cast in favor of the proposition, comprising 61.4% of the total vote.
Final vote counts revealed that Proposition 22 won in 52 of California's 58 counties, including all of the major metropolitan areas except for San Francisco. The six counties which did not approve Prop. 22 were all in the immediate San Francisco Bay area, including: Alameda county, Marin county, San Francisco county, Santa Cruz county, Sonoma county, and Yolo county.
Listen to Harold Ickes rebuke the 30 individuals on the DNC Rules and Bylaws Committee for their decision to enforce their rules against two states, 600,000 voters that violated the DNC’s primary scheduling. The same argument is valid and should be applied to the California Supreme Court decision to substitute their 4 individual judgments over the 4.6 million votes of the people of California (see video)
Based on Mr. Ickes arguments Liberals and Democrats can not argue that the DNC stole delegates from Sen. Hillary Clinton or stole voting rights from the People of Florida and Michigan by enforcing DNC rules and bylaws and at the same time ignore what the California Supreme Court did when it stole the voting rights of over 4.6 million people by their May 2008 ruling which struck down the People duly approved and voted on initiative.
The 4 Justices lied there was no basis in California Constitutional Law to overturn 4.6 million votes. What Justices Ronald M. George, Carlos R. Moreno, Kathryn Mickle Werdegar and Joyce Kennard did is an offence to every American it is an offense that must be immediately address in the most direct and forceful way possible.
And for the record the California Court did not overturn a Gay Marriage ban as the Orwellian headline suggests what the Courts did was overturn over 4 million votes and depraved multimillions of Californians of their right to vote and have their vote counted.(article)
"I am stunned that we have the gall and chutzpah to substitute our judgment for 600,000" people who voted in Michigan, he said. "Mrs. Clinton has instructed me to reserve her rights to take this to the credentials committee."—Harold Ickes
Thomas Jefferson wrote on behalf of religious freedom for the state of Virginia he said in essence that Judges should not take it upon themselves to decide certain matters that are in the realm of social opinion. In spite of the fact that the homosexual lobby has taken great pains to dress up their cause as a legal concern it was first presented as a privacy issue where homosexuals demanded that the government stay out of their bedrooms.
[T]he opinions of men are not the object of civil government, nor under its jurisdiction; that to suffer the civil magistrate to intrude his powers into the field of opinion and to restrain the profession or propagation of principles on supposition of their ill tendency is a dangerous fallacy, which at once destroys all religious liberty, because he being of course judge of that tendency will make his opinions the rule of judgment, and approve or condemn the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own; that it is time enough for the rightful purposes of civil government for its officers to interfere when principles break out into overt acts against peace and good order; and finally, that truth is great and will prevail if left to herself; that she is the proper and sufficient antagonist to error, and has nothing to fear from the conflict unless by human interposition disarmed of her natural weapons, free argument and debate; errors ceasing to be dangerous when it is permitted freely to contradict them. —Thomas Jefferson, Bill Establishing Religious Freedom in the State of Virginia, 1786Like religion is a private matter so too was homosexuality they argued. What two consenting adults do behind closed doors was their private business.
Now in a reversal of radical ideology and thru the recent California ruling that substituted 4 individuals judgment for 4.6 million voters homosexuals used the California Court to drag the homosexual bed right into the middle of our society for all to see the lewd and lascivious acts commented upon it.
Homosexuality won its first cases under the right to privacy, if they not don’t wish to have privacy what rights do they claim?
It is now the Homosexual’s opinion that all that has be learned in the course in human history about human relationships should be overturned, changed and redefined. That is their opinion but according to Jefferson when a judge intervenes in such matters he approves or condemns the sentiments of others only as they shall square with or differ from his own.
That is what 4 individuals did on the California Supreme Court and that is why 4.6 million Californians must not let this ruling stand and that is why 3.3 billion people of the United States of America must not let an Oligarchy of 4 judges lay claim to rule over them as this California group of 4 black robed anarchist has done with this ruling. A ruling that attacks the most sacred right of any democracy and any free American.
That right is to have your vote count and to have the results of that legally tended vote be as the people willed it. That is what Harold Ickes claimed to be fighting for on the behalf of Sen. Clinton against the DNC’s ruling, the question is who will fight for that principle on the behalf of the people of former state of California?