Mark emailed me some posts he has up at Outdoors Pro about the secret meetings that led to the issuance of marriage licenses to same-sex couples in Oregon.
This is just hilarious! "not an attempt to circumvent the will of the people"?? Are you kidding me? What do you call it when four out of five county commissioners meet in secret, intentionally excluding the lone opposing commissioner, to come up with a flimsy legal argument for an action that the majority of Oregon citizens oppose? Then carrying out that action with no prior notice or discussion, with the voters or in the courts or legislature?The underlying assumption of modern leftist ideology is that "the people" are sheep to be led by the "enlightened" "elite" -- it's far too dangerous to let them be masters of their own destiny.
The underlying assumption of modern leftist ideology is that "the people" are sheep to be led by the "enlightened" "elite" -- it's far too dangerous to let them be masters of their own destiny.
Yes, but this is also true of the modern rightist ideology. Citizens cannot POSSIBLY decide correctly who to have sex with, what to smoke or not, or what to buy without subsidies or regulations supporting or restricting choices.
Both sides buy into the idea that the power of the government is necessary to ensure the "proper" decision is made. Blegh.
What happened to the land of the free?
Terry: I think you're twisting the issue a great deal. The left works through judges, whereas the right works through the legislatures, democratically-elected bodies. I'm sure you can see the difference.
Plus, "who to have sex with"? No one is trying to force anyone to have sex with anyone else, or even to prevent it. Subsidies (farming, for example) and the war on drugs are just about the most bipartisan issues I can think of.
I think your position is untenable.
Exactly the point. Reasonable people may disagree on the issues, but the Republicans at least have the decency to let us know what they are considering.
In this case, as in recent similar cases, the officials (who are certainly not Republicans or conservatives) didn't think we needed to know anything. In Portland at least, they purposely kept all hint of their actions secret, even from a fellow commissioner.
I'm surprised it's even legal for four commissioners to meet together without the fifth.
The commissioners didn't meet at all - 2 commissioners asked for the legal opinions which they got from the country attorney and a 3rd party firm. Once came back with the decision it was a violation of constitutional rights NOT to issue the licenses, they only had to make sure they had enough votes to implement the change. It's been specifically stated that the '3 or more' commissioners meeting rule that would have triggered a public notice never happened; i.e. no 3 commissioners discussed this at any one time. Once they knew they had 4 votes, they could proceed. No secret meetings, though they did play it 'close to the vest'.
Well, if sodomy was illegal in a state, was it more likely to be a blue state or a red state? If a politician is likely to support de-criminalizing drugs, is it more likely to be a Republican or a Democrat? There are obvious partisan differences on these issues.
You might be right on the subsidies though. There isn't a small government party anymore.
I imagine both parties use the same strategies when they have or don't have control of the Congress/Presidnency, although I've not been around long enough to remember a long Democratically held Congress/President (this happened only two of the 8 years Clinton was President).
"Exactly the point. Reasonable people may disagree on the issues, but the Republicans at least have the decency to let us know what they are considering."
All I can say is that's a bit ironic. I have to look no further than the Washington state Republican controlled Senate that closed 2 hours early rather than let a gay rights bill that would have passed be voted on, making 100 other bills miss a critical 'go forward' milestone. And don't get me started on the dreaded 'WMD'. 'Decency' and 'Republican' are miles away from synonymous.
Its just politics and everyone in it plays the game.
BVB: Right, your description of how the commission handled the situation makes it obvious that there was no deception involved.
Further, you're mistaken if you think it's "just politics" and that both sides play the game the same. I know quite a few people who work as staffers in Washington for both parties, and they all assure me that the Democrats play a lot dirtier.
There's a big difference between refusing to vote on something (like judicial confirmations, *cough*) and actively using the process to sneak things through. Even President Bush's recess appointments only happened after months of blocking by Democrats as a last resort (and a popularly-supported one, at that).
Go ahead and get started on the WMD if you like. All the complaints are hot air, and only make the left sound petulant and absurd.
No, there isn't a big difference. And your sources in Washington are wrong - Republicans are the ones with the byzantine plots, not the Democrats. The Republicans have mastered the art of doublespeak.
The county commissioners did nothing illegal, they achieved their goal, and it was for a good end - giving citizens their constitutional rights. The only ones whining are the people trying to tell other people how they must live their lives and those people can always go take a flying leap.
RVB: Yeah ok, suit yourself.
Such tactics are generally the last resort of those who know they're losing the overall war. Consider all the ideological panic from the left -- they reason they're forced to legislate through judges is because they know they can't actually win the political debate.