California Rally This Tuesday!


Rally in Sacramento!  Protect the Vote!

The Digital Network Army, United Families International and Capital Resource Institute are joining forces this Tuesday to rally for families at the Capitol Building in Sacramento.  Both state houses are drafting official resolutions condemning the passage of Proposition 8 and urging the Supreme Court to overturn the will of the people AGAIN.

Two statewide elections with the majority voices of millions were not loud enough to turn the heads of our representatives in Sacramento, so we’re bringing the voice of the people to Sacramento.  Come Rally with us for Marriage and Families!  Help remind the Senators and Assemblymen that we are watching…because there’s nothing more important to our nation than its families.

Protect Marriage!  Protect Families!  Protect Democracy!

If our representatives are going to turn their backs on the people who voted for them, let them do it to our faces in the light of the cameras, not in a silent corner.

—Beetle Blogger

Here is the latest update from the DNA:


Ok, so the most recent word is that the opposition is going to be busing people in from San Francisco for the hearings so seating at the actual hearing may be limited, come early. If you have kids, bring water bottles and a few snacks, comfortable shoes. Security is tight there, so remember, no pocket knives etc.

If we have more people come to the hearing than we can fit in the room, we’ll hold a concurrent rally outside the capitol building with a petition signing.  No body will be wasted!  Kids and families are welcome!  Come and be heard!  Wear your yellow shirt if you like!  If it rains, bring an umbrella, we’ll rally in the hallways!

Proposition 8 Hearings will be held in these rooms:

HR 5
Tuesday, February 17
State Capitol
Room 4202

SR 7
Tuesday, February 17
State Capitol
Room 4203

More Information Here



  1. February 16, 2009 at 1:37 am

    […] Read more over at Beetle Blogger here and here […]

  2. February 16, 2009 at 2:41 pm

    Whether you voted for Prop 8 or not, you should attend the rally, when the government goes against the will of the people, that’s Tyranny, not Democracy.

  3. Euripides said,

    February 17, 2009 at 1:24 am

    This is a shameful action by the state’s legislature. What a bunch of gutless wonders. The Republic is coughing up blood and ready to kick it any time now…

  4. Delirious said,

    February 17, 2009 at 10:32 pm

    Bah…I went to the Capitol, but because of a few wrong turns I was delayed and didn’t make it in to the hearing. I did get to see Capt. “Sully” honored for his heroism. I wanted to stay and speak to other Prop. 8 supporters, but my parking limit was up. Maybe it’s a good thing I didn’t get in, their decision would have been to much to take in person. :(

  5. Delirious said,

    February 17, 2009 at 10:33 pm

    Oh, and I wore yellow, but didn’t see anyone else wearing yellow. But I did get some strong glances from all of the security. lol

  6. CatzPajamas said,

    February 18, 2009 at 1:17 am

    so i went to this hearing. it passed, 7 to 3. i’d planned to go to both, but they cancelled the 2nd one for unknown reasons. probably so they could reschedule it at another obscure time when no one knows about it.

    First off, one thing that really got on my nerves was that the groups of HR5 supporters that were there in the hearing were constantly heckling, rudely commenting and talking during ‘our’ presentations. the guy in charge had to keep interrupting (thus taking away from our presentation time) to tell them to pipe down. i didn’t hear a peep during theirs, our side was respectful, as usual. from the not just disrespectful but angry, obstinate, bitter, vengeful, bigotous muttering comments, expressions and actions of the gay community at this event and in the past, it is extremely obvious to me who ‘owns the hate’. opponents of the measure were, although definitely caught off guard and not nearly as prepared, were composed, matter-of-fact, and respectful of the other side.

    basically the people (majority) of california who voted to pass prop. 8 were painted as a group of ignorant hate-filled lying bigots and that ‘we, the representatives of this state’ have officially decided to step in and take the ‘mere majority vote’ and throw it out the window, because the people of california shouldn’t be able to vote and pass laws. there was a constant theme throughout the comments made by supporters of this measure. I heard ‘simple majority vote, mere majority vote, bare majority vote, ‘silly popularity contest’ and, my favorite, ‘this isn’t american idol’. They trampled the fact that millions of dollars, thousands of hours, and hundreds of thousands of votes, were spent on this campaign, twice, as if it didn’t matter, because ‘in their personal opinion prop 8 should not have passed’. since when do a few corrupt men blatantly override hundreds of thousands of people in a democracy and get away with it? where is the justice in this? are we so far gone in our system of government that our votes are now just a scam? just a ruse to make us feel like we have a say, unless of course some pawn in the governor’s mansion doesn’t like it??

    after this one of the reps went on to say: “we are not required to represent WHO is in our district, we are voted in by our district to vote OUR OWN IDEAS…” he actually said that. i couldn’t believe it. so, you lie and cheat your way into the position, and instead of doing the job you were hired to do which is REPRESENT the people your district, you bend to special interest, radical groups and undermine the very people who put you in office?

    This hearing was a scam and a laugh. they snuck it into the middle of a 3 day rally with thousands of gays and their supporters hounding the capital all weekend long, and kept this hearing a secret until just a few days ago, so the few people who were able to make it to try & argue *again* the issue of gay marriage, were barely able to get organized at all. basically the opponents of HR5 all said the same thing: the government is ignoring the majority of california, we voted TWO TIMES on this thing, please respect the people’s vote. we did it legally, and correctly.

    unhappy that the gays didn’t get their way in the election, they are still trying to undermine the people of this state by throwing their tantrums out in the halls and sneaking their way into getting what they want, and this panel of representatives was eating it up.

    this hearing made it very clear to me how bent our representatives are on catering to the special interest groups, the contempt they have for anyone in any religion, how easily they ignore their duties and responsibilities, and how easily their eyes glaze over with disinterest at the judicial system set in place to keep groups like this in check. I’m thoroughly disgusted with this whole thing. anyone here read ‘animal farm’? these guys are the pigs.

  7. CatzPajamas said,

    February 18, 2009 at 1:17 am

    by the way, i wore yellow Delirious, but i had my coat on, it was raining.

  8. February 18, 2009 at 3:49 am

    I don’t remember anyone mentioning to wear yellow. Don’t know how I missed that. My wife and I were there with our three young children, and we were wearing t-shirts that we made, with this on the front, and this on the back.

    Ditto on your comments, CatzPajamas. I was the next in line to go in and speak when they ran out of time. What irritated my wife and I most was the fact that, since the opposition knew about this ahead of time, they were extremely prepared (talking points and all), and they had their “hired guns,” like Gloria “Satan Incarnate” Allred. I was a little annoyed that our side kept harping on the “majority vote” angle, when there are so many other, more effective and legitimate arguments, and the other side continued to vomit up the tired old falsehoods they used during the campaign which should have been addressed. Since the Senate hearing was postponed, we need to find out about it as early as possible, and, if you will send me a personal email, Beetle, I will be glad to help put together a sheet with our own “talking points” so that we can make sure that everything that needs to be said, gets said. You are also welcome to do this on your own, if you want :)

    Speaking of how “organized” the other side was, it should be noted that they were ALL from one group, complete with matching t-shirts and buttons, bused out there together, and they all represented ONE point of view from ONE group of people. Well, you want DIVERSITY? The rest of us drove out there in our own cars, from our own different walks of life (race, religion, non-religion, financial situation, etc), to share multiple points of view on a subject that brings us all together. Because this is wrong on so many levels, it would be a shame for us to let it get framed as a “tyranny of the majority,” when that has nothing to do with it.

    And, yes. These people are the pigs.

  9. FullWithFaith said,

    February 18, 2009 at 6:32 pm

    I, too was there — my office is near the capitol so I walked over in the rain. I’m a bit confused though. I’ve been aware of these hearings for more than a few days. If my memory serves me well, HR5 and SR7 were both introduced back in December 2008. They were discussed with my family and other families in we know from Church over the holidays. I will have to look into this, though….

    On another note that relates to how well prepared we are to deal with the NoOn8 side’s talking points etc….WE, as a grass roots organization in conjunction with our leaders (attorneys, spokesmen, etc) need to do a better job at working harder to be prepared. This comes after reading transcripts of the hearing before Judge Englund on disclosure of donor info. When the judge asked our side in court to cite the last time that they knew of any harassment occurring, our side, our attorneys remained silent. With all of the evidence out there, they clammed up and didn’t say a word. We can do better than this. Our families deserve better than this. The DNA as a grassroots model is a great way to organize….we just have to move beyond organization and into action.

  10. Chairm said,

    February 20, 2009 at 2:21 pm

    CatzPajamas said: “one of the reps went on to say: “we are not required to represent WHO is in our district, we are voted in by our district to vote OUR OWN IDEAS…” he actually said that.”

    Folks, I want to tell you, as an old war horse, that your sense of outrage is very welcomed.

    We need to get the message out that the use of direct votes in elections is embedded in the state constitution. It is there for a reason.

    When we elected representatives, we don’t usually form a plurality based on a single issue. We usually formulate a trade-off so that the net result is the election of legislators who, in the aggregate, represent the people of the state of California. Each voter has to decide for whom to cast a vote, even if that means choosing someone with whom the voter disagrees on some issues. No single candidate is perfectly representative of all the voters in his district.

    That’s obvious. But we don’t elect little dictators, either. The job of representating means consultation and weighing the balance on an issue-by-issue basis. The representative is tasked with the hard work of becoming educated on these issues and making informed judgements — on our behalf. They are not automatons who do whatever the polls tell them to do.

    However, when a single issue rises to the fore, like marriage, it merits a single issue campaign. This seperates the election of representatives from the decision on that particular issue. It allows for a direct expression of the will of the governed precisely because the People chose to put the issue on the table for a decision that is not subject to the horse-trading that happens when special interest groups exert a disproportionate influence. The elected representatives are delegates of us, not of factions. Each representatives serves all of the people in his district, not just those who lobby 24×7.

    We have a system based on seperation of powers. The legislature writes the laws; the executive administrates these laws; and the judiciary interprets the laws in light of the constitution.

    The seperation of powers is not setup so that the three co-equal branches do Government at the People or to the People, but for the People and by the People.

    When one or more of the branches of OUR government fails us, for whatever reason that WE deem fit, the People are entitled — not merely privileged — to exercise our authority AS THE GOVERNED to govern ourselves.

    Factionalism is something that logjams the democratic process. When an issue, like marriage, is transmorgified into a partisan issue — as per this committee’s vote — then we have confirmation of the Government failing the People.

    This is made doubly obvious when the People’s vote was 52% in favor but the committee’s vote was 70% against the marriage amendment and the Democratic vote on the commitee was 100% against the marriage amendment.

    Even the vote on the Supreme Court of 57% against Proposition 22 was closer to the People’s vote on Proposition 8.

    The Executive failed us, as well, in 4 ways. First, the Governor declared that the courts would decide the matter for the state (although he at least vetoed the legislature’s attempt to over-ride Proposition 22). Second, the Attorney General’s defense of marriage in the court was lousy — he deliberately dropped the most effective argument which had won in other states. Third, the Attorney General, having lost the case, subsequently did an anti-8 rewrite of the marriage amendment’s title and description. And fourth, the Governor came out against Proposition 8 at the start of the campaign and subsequent to the People’s approval of the amendment.

    That failure was matched by the other branches.

    In the immediate aftermath of the victory of the pro-marriage iniativie, Proposition 22, which reaffirmed the man-woman basis of marriage, the Legislature enacted a modest version of civil union named, domestic partnership. But then the Legislature rapidly expanded it to become a localized merger of SSM and Marriage. The Governor did not veto this even though the merger contradicted the premise of Proposition 22 — which had been approved by 61-plus% of the direct vote of The People. That wasn’t enough for the Legislature which then twice attempted to over-ride the People’s statutory defense of marriage. As I said earlier, at least the Governor vetoed these unconstitutional attempts to quash the will of the governed. And now we see the Legislature t-ing up to poke us in the eyes again.

    And the judiciary got into the mess, too. It promoted factionalism when it created a new suspect classification for gayness. The so-called reasoning disregarded all of the above and claimed that gayness signified a minority that was without political power. The judiciary legislated the abolishment of the man-woman basis of marriage law in direct affront to the passage of Proposition 22. And then it rushed to order licenses for the SSM-merger — rather than staying its order pending the outcome of the marriage amendment vote. That was political mischief-making by the judiciary. And now the judiciary is enterataining arguments to over-ride the consent of the governed — AGAIN.

    This is the sort of trajectory toward empowerment of special interests — this is the sort of thing that the state constitution’s amending process is meant to empower The People to correct.

    Remember Tom Hanks remarks about a self-correcting constitution? The amending process is the mechanism for us to correct the mis-representation that occurs when factionalists overtake the levers of our Government.

    SSMers will tell this story, too, but somehow for them this corruption of the means is justified by the ends. They claim that all this should add-up to the defeat of the People who, afterall, are merely a tyrannical majority. They have no clue as to the significance of the amending process. For them it is something to deride — even as they are in the streets, in the media, and in the committee rooms of the Legislature voicing the inflammatory rhetoric of factionalist mobs.

    I always come back to the principle that The People have a government, not the other way around.

    If the Legislature passes a resolution against the marriage amendment, even though Proposition 8 had easily passed through the various pre-vote procedural hurdles, then, they will have declared that the Government owns The People.

    And in so doing the Legislative branch will confirm that the People were correct to have taken the marriage issue out of the hands of the factionalists.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: