[q]The mayor of San Francisco is also a citizen as well.[/q]
Not when he’s acting in his capacity as mayor. At that point, he’s the mayor, not some protestor.
So, it is ok to call people “Nazis”? You insult a man because of how his voice sounds and the say he should move back to Austria? What a load of shite! How much more racist of a statement is needed?
Arnold has actually been extremely restrained in this whole affair. He could have flown into SF and squeezed Newsoms scrawny little giiiiirly neck between his maaaaahssive biceps. 
Did anyone catch the openning scene in SNL last night? The guy who was doing Arnold had me in stitches. I haven’t laughed that hard in a long., long time.
That depends on each individual state’s constitution, doesn’t it? That is definitely NOT the case here in Colorado, and judging by t-bonham@scc.net’s exerpt, it appears not to be the case in California, either.
As a matter of fact, just recently the Colorado Attorney General (who is, by the way, an elected official, not appointed) sued the state over the redistricting law. Among other things, the court found that he was entitled to do so.
Austrians are a race? Xenophobic, maybe, but racist? No. Learn what words mean before you use them.
I agree that the Nazi epithet is often used inappropriately in political arguments, but given that Arnold’s father was a Nazi Party member and Arnold has made pro-Nazi statements in unguarded moments, and has defended his friendship with Kurt Waldheim, a Nazi war criminal, it’s not out of place here.
Now that I think about it, this makes a lot of sense. It will surely galvanize all those folks in the middle who are wondering which side in this debate is on the best legal and moral grounds. Once they realize how obvioius it is that Arnold is nothing but a Nazi stooge for the religious right, they will jump on the gay-marriage bandwagon in droves.
WHOA! I didn’t know all that, gobear (though I did not directly call him a nazi - I said his voice was nazi-sounding; splitting hairs, but hey). Can you provide some cites? I’d be interested in reading abou it.
For the record, my family risked their lives in WWII defending the US in the Pacific and in Europe. (Not me, I realize, but still - if there are heritage admissions to colleges, then it’s worth pointing out my own pedigree here.) And my family has been American since at least the 17th Century.
With that said, like it or not, someone born in Austria telling Californians that the “civil order” is at risk by peaceful civil disobedience is vaguely reminiscent of those films in which the Nazis said to Jews and others, “Are your papers in order?” And then there are the German stereotypes about being obsessed with order. You may not like the fact that it echoes these things, but it does.
And this is the Pit, TruthSeeker. Some people need thicker skins.
But, nonetheless, I concede it was totally out of line, so if anyone was truly offended by my out-of-line remarks, Gov. Schwarzenegger, I’m sorry. 
I was momentarily intemperate on an internet message board forum which is dedicated to intemperance, but someone called me on it, and I conceded I was wrong, took personal responsibility for my remarks, and apologized.
Now, I’m moving on. And that’s all I’m going to say about this. Thanks.
[QUOTE=nisosbar]
WHOA! I didn’t know all that, gobear (though I did not directly call him a nazi - I said his voice was nazi-sounding; splitting hairs, but hey). Can you provide some cites? I’d be interested in reading abou it.
The Waldheim Connection
Pro-Hitler comments in 1975, later repudiated when Arnold ran for office.
OTOH, Fox News reported that as a teenager Arnold broke up neo-Nazi rallies.
Notice to immigrants and naturalized citizens in America:
You will never become a full fledged American. If you speak or act in away that offends any group of real Americans no matter how “progressive” or “liberal” that group might be, be prepared to be asked to leave the country.
Yeah, I can just remember the cry from the other kids in school to this young immigrant in the 50s. “Go back to where you came from Dutchie!”
Fuck you nisobar You’ve just become the SDMB #1 asshole as far as I’m concerned.
And gobear, your’re not far behind with your slanderous accusations for which you have no proof. I remember hearing some of this bullshit during the campaign for the governorship, and it was clearly refuted. And Waldheim a war criminal? Yeah, I’ve heard accusations there too, but no conviction. Hey, isn’t that a real American concept “Innocent until proven guilty”
And what relevance is a father’s belief? Man, I would lay odds that your father’s views regarding homosexuality prior to your coming out were severely at odds with your present day views.
Both of you should be spanked.
Denial is not refutation, not that yiou would understand that. You really are a moron.
I take it you didn’t read the cite, nor did you read the cite I provided that said Schwarzenegger was anti-Nazi.
Given that my father died when I was 3, I really have no idea.
Wow! Mendacious and stupid, all in one post!
Mendacious because you intentionally left the critical language off of your quote. Stupid because you thought no one would check. This is the SDMB, after all.
The part you left out from the California constitution reads . . .
Bolding mine.
Let me also direct you to Section 1.
In other words, while both California’s Governor and Attorney General each have their spheres of competence, the buck ultimately stops with the Governor as head of the executive branch.
Charles Atlas for President!
Oh, come on. If someone had made fun of someone’s “wetback accent” and told them to “go back to Mexico,” would you still be so pendatic?
Gobear, normally you’re a pretty fair-minded poster so I’m pretty bummed by your attitude here.
First, so what if his father was a member of the Nazi party? Do you really think it’s fair or reasonable to hold his ancestry against him? Do we really have to have this discussion on this board?
Second, the actual quote seems to be fairly thoughtful. From your own cite.
Well, how about this.
http://www.jdl.org/misc/arnold.shtml
Or this?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/politicselections/2003-08-24-arnold-father_x.htm
For those of you who may not know, the Simon Wiesenthal Center is not in the habit of handing out awards to convinced Nazis.
Apart from all this, can you honestly imagine Maria Shriver marrying a Nazi? If you can, you’ll really love this!
When news of Bustamante’s links to MeChA[sup]1[/sup] – and his unwillingness to repudiate those links – surfaced, lots of people thought it was silly and rolled their eyes. Many of those same people are perfectly happy to insinuate that Arnold is a Nazi sympathizer based on the flimsiest and most distorted of evidence. They ought to be ashamed of themselves. Sadly, they probably aren’t.
[sup]1[/sup] MeChA is a Chicano student organization that still formally advocates joining much of the Southwest United States to Mexico.
WOW! grienspace’s SDMB #1 asshole! I’m honored. Is there a prize? Who did I unseat? That wasn’t hard.
Must be nice never making mistakes, never over-reacting, never getting emotional, never thinking racist or xenophobic thoughts, huh, grienspace? I make all of those mistakes all the time. :eek:
I did apologize, and if you wish to sanctimoniously hold on to a grudge about that, suit yourself. I don’t take it personally. Your anger says more about your nature than mine.
I’ll still let you spank me, though - would be a good one…
Good job also leaving out the part that talks about equal protection under the law, which the anti-gay marriage act violates.
Tars, what has that got to do with anything I said?
Regardless of Arnolds’ stand on gay marriage. The fact that states and the federal government are implemeting constitutional bans on gay marriage essentially violates the Bill of Rights First Ammendment. The First Ammendment states
States are adding constituional ammendments banning gay marriage based on the fact that it destroys the “sanctity of marriage”. Sanctity itself means
Banning gay marriage under this “sanctity” context implies a religeous aspect. But if the states continue to pass constituional band on gay marriage based on protecting the sanctity of marriage, they are supporting laws for a particular religeous view that the First Ammendment prohibits. Therefore a constitutional ban on any level would be in direct conflict with the Bill of Rights. And as far as I know a states’ constitution cannot be in conflict with the federal constitution.
Also, what I find interesting is that if a federal ban on gay marriage is put in place, it would be the first time in the history of this country that a constituonal ammendment would take/withold rights away from citizens
now after i wrote this I realize that this has turned into a hijack of the orginal topic- sorry.
That the governor is ordering the Attorney General to enforce a law that violates the Constitution, which the Attorney General is supposed to uphold, so he can refuse that order.
Except XVIII, XXII, and arguably XVI, that is…
Hearing of non-violent Christian protest, Schwarzenegger states he anticipates riots, clashes, injuries and deaths.
The Mayor of San Francisco sees no threat to public safety in that city, and informs the media that if troubles were to occur, the City would step in using the normal methods of enforcing the law.
Governor Schwarzeneger has issued an order to the State Attorney General Lockyer, who declines to take orders from the Governor and who called it preposterous.
The Governor is comparing marriage licenses to licenses for assault weapons.