| |
SaveCalifornia.com Blog//
Posts Tagged ‘Randy Thomasson’
Friday, September 9, 2011, 12:33 pm |
Today (Friday, Sept. 9) is the last day of the California Legislature’s regular session.
Because Democrats control both houses and the Governor’s office, I’ve expected and then seen, to my horror, dozens of anti-family, tyrannical bills pass this year due to the foolish imaginations of the dominating Democrat legislators.
This is why, in the last several years, only the governor could stop bad bills. “Republican” Arnold Schwarzenegger, frequently lobbied by conservative Californians, vetoed most of the anti-family bills his first term. But upon his reelection in 2006, he revealed his immoral heart and started signing bad bills, even bills that he vetoed his first term.
Now, with Democrat Jerry Brown back in the governor’s office, he’s already signed SB 48, mandating blatant homosexual-bisexual-transsexual indoctrination of children without parental consent. Yet Brown’s vetoed other bills that would have imposed new state mandates, coerced more people into costly unions, and limited the power of voter initiatives.
So, it’s worth “testing” Jerry Brown on the worst bills on his desk. With your calls, emails, and faxes, will he veto them?
SaveCalifornia.com has identified the four worst bills — all authored by Democrats — and urges you to take action:
AB 499 allows school staff, nurses, and others to push the risky HPV vaccine upon girls as young as 12 years old, without parental consent
1. The Gardasil or Cervarix vaccine can harm or kill. The CDC reports there have already been 18,727 reports of adverse events, including 68 deaths.
2. Giving to pre-teen girls is equivalent to telling them to have teenage sex, resulting in disease, pregnancy, abortion, emotional damage, moral ruin, etc.
3. Tramples parental rights because no parental consent is required.
4. Paves way for more anti-parent laws.
5. These injections of minor girls will eventually be paid for by the state (the taxpayers), even though there is no money in the state budget.
CDC: 68 deaths | CalCatholic.com article | AB 499 text
SB 651 would eliminate requirement that homosexual “domestic partners” live together (opens door to fraud); allows minors to become “domestic partners” (roping kids into homosexual lifestyles)
The purpose of SB 651 is to erase any and all legal distinctions between man-woman marriage and homosexual partners. According to the author, San Francisco Democrat Mark Leno, “This bill will remedy those final inequities, including the denial of long-term care insurance to domestic partners who are state employees and requirements related to age and whether couples live at the same residence. As we inch ever closer to equality, the only way to ensure fair treatment is to allow all loving couples the right to marry. Separate is seldom, if ever, equal,” he said.”
“San Diego Gay & Lesbian News” | SB 651 text
AB 101 unionizes in-home childcare, forcing it in many cases
According to the Sacramento Bee, “The measure would allow small-business owners who provide child care in their own homes or the child’s home and – this is key – who care for children who receive state child care subsidies to unionize. The child-care providers targeted for unionization, many of them unlicensed grandmothers and other relatives or neighbors, would not be forced to join a union. However, if the child they care for receives state subsidies, they would have to pay union dues whether they joined the union or not…If the bill is approved, like IHSS it will inevitably increase state costs at a time California is broke. Citing costs, former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger vetoed several previous baby sitter unionization bills. Given California’s precarious financial situation, increased costs alone should be enough to sideline AB 101 this year.”
Sacramento Bee: Democrats make last-minute push to unionize California child-care workers
Editorial: Baby sitter bill deserves some adult supervision
SB 397 permits online voter registration
There is already voter fraud happening by all the vote-by-mail shenanigans (dead people voting, illegal aliens voting). Can you imagine the fraud if Jerry Brown signs online voter registration? Can you imagine entering in your existing address under another name and thus vote twice or more? There is no reliable way for election officials to ferret out fraud, especially registrations that are close to an election.
SB 397 text | Senate floor analysis | Criticism of similar Michigan proposal
Contact Brown by phone, fax, email
Phone (916) 445-2841
Fax (916) 558-3160
Brown’s contact form
When the godly are in authority, the people rejoice.
But when the wicked are in power, they groan.
Proverbs 29:2 NLT
Tags: Randy Thomasson, SaveCalifornia.com
Posted in California Legislature | Comments Off on ALERT: The 4 worst bills on Jerry Brown’s desk
Tuesday, September 6, 2011, 2:58 pm |
I’m encouraged that several reporters believe the California Supreme Court will, within 90 days, recommend to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that man-woman marriage supporters should have the right to defend Proposition 8 when former state attorney general and current governor Jerry Brown (Democrat) and current attorney general Kamala Harris (Democrat) and former governor Arnold Schwarzenegger (liberal Republican) all shirked their constitutional duty to defend the law.
Here’s what I told a TV news reporter today after the hearing:
“This is about the right to defend the will of the voters — and most of the justices on the state high court seemed to understand that. It’s sad that Jerry Brown shirked his duty to defend Prop. 8, which the majority of Californians supported, because they know deep in their hearts that marriage is naturally and exclusively between a man and a woman, a male and a female.”
So be hopeful. All the media accounts I’m reading suggest this positive outcome based on questions and statements from most of the seven justices on the state high court – even liberal, pro-homosexual “marriage” justices, who are used to seeing both sides represented in every hearing.
See this account from long-time court watcher Howard Mintz, reporter with the San Jose Mercury News:
“So,” Justice Ming Chin asked Olson at one point, “you want the federal courts to answer this question with only one side represented?”
At another juncture, Chief Justice Tani Cantil-Sakauye interjected, “What happens to the state’s interest (if state officials refuse to defend an initiative)? Does it evaporate?”
Justice Joyce Kennard, as usual the most active of questioners, was skeptical of Olson’s position as well. “If we agree with your position, it would appear to me that we would nullify the great power the people have reserved for themselves (to enact ballot initiatives),” she said.
Justice Goodwin Liu, hearing his first case less than a week after being sworn in, was also very active in his debut.
“It seems to me the 9th Circuit has set up a hoop initiative proponents have to jump through,” Liu told Olson. “Given how protective we have been (about the initiative process), why shouldn’t we read the California constitution to offer initiative proponents whatever they need to jump through that hoop?”
Now, if the California Supreme Court rules in favor of Prop. 8 proponents, the three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will receive and consider their advisory vote. While I am very confident that the federal appeals court bench will agree and let the case go forward, I remain highly concerned that the 9th Circuit will ultimately rule against Prop. 8 (see my earlier blog explaining why). If that happens, this incredibly moral case will go to the United States Supreme Court, where Californian Anthony Kennedy, the court’s swing vote, will decide everything.
Marriage is honorable among all, and the bed undefiled;
but fornicators and adulterers God will judge.
Hebrews 13:4 NKJV
Tags: Randy Thomasson, SaveCalifornia.com
Posted in California Constitution, California Supreme Court, Marriage | Comments Off on Looks like Prop. 8 is still alive
Thursday, July 28, 2011, 2:05 pm |
Many of you have heard of Goodwin Liu, former clerk for Ruth Ginsburg, the most liberal judge on the U.S. Supreme Court.
In May, Lui was prevented from joining the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals by heavily-lobbied U.S. Senate Republicans . Yet now, California Democrat Governor Jerry Brown has nominated liberal Liu to replace retired California Supreme Court Associate Justice Carlos Moreno.
Of all the bad judges there, Moreno had the most enmity against the written California Constitution and its original intent (he was the only judge to vote to strike down Prop. 8 on marriage after it had passed). And Liu is even to the left of Moreno!
I’m speaking out against Liu to educate voters on the difference between a good judge and a bad judge. Here’s an excerpt from Wednesday’s Metropolitan News in Los Angeles:
Randy Thomasson, head of the socially conservative SaveCalifornia.com, insisted Liu is poised to “become the new Rose Bird of the California Supreme Court,” referencing the state’s first female chief justice, a Brown appointee, who was unseated by voters—along with Justices Cruz Reynoso and Joseph Grodin—over their anti-death penalty stances in 1986.
Thomasson further called Liu a “radical, liberal, political activist who would impose his own values on everyone else by legislating from the bench, a clear violation of his oath of office and of the specific words of our constitution.” Read the rest of this July 27 article in the Metropolitan News
See the full quote and link that I sent the reporter, which explains things more:
“Sadly, there is a growing group of unpatriotic liars who raise their right hands and swear to support and defend the specific, written constitutions of California and of the United States, but they intend nothing of the sort. Goodwin Liu is one of these un-American deceivers because he refuses to abide by the plain reading and original construction of both the state and federal constitutions we’ve all agreed to live under. No, Goodwin Liu is a radical, liberal, political activist who would impose his own values on everyone else by legislating from the bench, a clear violation of his oath of office and of the specific words of our constitution. Even to the left of Carlos Moreno, Liu, if confirmed, would become the new Rose Bird of the California Supreme Court.”
Please see this signed memo with documentation of Liu’s judicial activism and links demonstrating why he is unfit to be a judge: http://www.cwfa.org/content.asp?id=19977
Yet, in perspective, if Liu is confirmed on August 31, the make-up of the California Supreme Court will not change much. As I told the Christian Post, “The retired Carlos Moreno … was pro-homosexual ‘marriage’ all the way. So the numbers [on the state high court] would stay the same.”
To attend and testify at Liu’s Aug. 31 confirmation hearing in San Francisco, you must follow these guidelines as explained by the Metropolitan News:
The Aug. 31 confirmation hearing provides an opportunity for members of the public to weigh in on Liu’s nomination. The deadline for written comment, or to notify the commission that one wishes to speak at the hearing, is 5:00 p.m. on Aug. 24.
Requests to speak must include a summary of the facts on which any testimony or opinion will be based, under the commission’s guidelines.
The commission requested that communications be addressed to the chief justice at 350 McAllister Street, San Francisco, CA 94102, Attention: Ms. AhMoi Kim, Secretary to the Commission.
* * * * *
“I believe there are more instances
of the abridgment of the freedom of the people
by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power
than by violent and sudden usurpations.”
James Madison, U.S. founding father and 4th President
Tags: Randy Thomasson, SaveCalifornia.com
Posted in California Supreme Court, Judges | Comments Off on Goodwin Liu is a bad loss for families
|
|
| |
RSS 2.0 Feed