Jan 6 Sacramento
blog
“The contents of this blog are not necessarily the thoughts or opinions of The Sacramento Union.”
Tuesday, May 24, 2005
NAACP Trades Marriage for Memberships


California NAACP President, Alice Huffman

I came across this Democratic discussion board and found it sad that California NAACP President Alice Huffman would speak to the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender Caucus and sell out the Black community.

Alice Huffman, president of the CA NAACP, spoke to the LGBT Caucus and stood with our community in strong support of marriage equality. Her stirring words in support of LGBT rights and solidarity amongst all civil rights communities moved each of us.

And I have it from several sources that the NAACP has suffered significant membership losses in California and Nationally. Clearly Huffman implied as much in her remarks to the LGBT Caucus.

The recent endorsement and support of gay and lesbian marriage by CA NAACP has not been without costs. Some members have left the CA NAACP in protest.

That word “some” is an understatement for “Many”. And as Blacks leave the NAACP, Huffman has had to go trolling in the LGBT community for members.

In her presentation to the LGBT Caucus, Alice Huffman asked that her brothers and sisters in the LGBT community join the CA NAACP to show how strongly our communities support one another and our issues.

We would strongly encourage members of Alice to take this message of support and coalition building to heart and join the CA NAACP this week.

The NAACP National Convention is coming up in July. It will be interesting to see if Julian Bond (a supporter of same sex marriage) will let the CA NAACP resolution see the light of day.

We’ll be watching!

Craig DeLuz

(Comments)

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com
Published: May 24, 2005, 5:55 am | Permalink | Printable Version
Monday, May 23, 2005
Fund-Rais-inator

During the 2004 election Governor Schwartzenkennedy explained that his refusal to campaign for President Bush was due to his presence being required in Sacramento to deal with the state’s problems. When it was pointed out that he rarely visits Sacramento, much less hunkers down here he managed to add a quick appearance at a Bush event into an unrelated business trip to Ohio. He never did explain why that trip was not taking him away from state business.

He explained being AWOL, beyond token appearances, from a variety of close state races with basically the same lame excuse…state business.

Well, things must be looking up for sunny California because Governor Wanderlust is on the road to stuff his pockets on a nation-wide fund-raiser.

Who’s watching the store?

Cruz Bustamante.

Oh well. Governor Schwarzenkennedy / Governor Bustamante... see much difference on most issues?

Me either.

---------------------------

Mark Williams is a member of the Society of Professional Journalists, and Investigative Reporters and Editors Inc. His work appears in this publication, on Fox News Channel and nightly on Sacramento’s 1530 AM KFBK radio. For more on Mark and his background visit his web site.


Published: May 23, 2005, 4:47 pm | Permalink | Printable Version
According to Lockyer Same Sex Relationships = Marriage

This Wednesday, the California Supreme Court will hear oral arguments on a case involving child support obligations in same sex relationships.

This is a memo issued to the press by the office of California Attorney General, Bill Lockyer.

**Notice how they equate “Same Sex Relationships” to “Marriage” **

To: Interested reporters

Subject:CA Supreme Court to Decide On Children's Rights in Same-Sex Marriages

On Tuesday, May 24th the California Channel will televise oral arguments in a landmark California Supreme Court case that will determine the rights of children in same-sex marriages.

At issue is whether children of same-sex couples can be denied the opportunity to receive child support from two parents, and whether a person can be allowed to avoid child-support responsibility merely because his or her former partner is the same sex.

Lockyer's office will argue that same-sex couples have the same legal duty to financially support the children they bring into this world as those of opposite-sex couples, because when only one of two people is required to provide support, it's the children who unfairly bear the burden.

On behalf of the public, California Bill Lockyer has invoked his authority to challenge a Court of Appeals ruling, Elisa Maria B., v. Superior Court of El Dorado County. The appeals court ruled that one of the parents in a separated same-sex couple does not have child-support obligations.

Oral arguments in this and two other same-sex parent cases will be televised live on the California Channel from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon on Tuesday, May 24th. To determine local channel listings, or to view the proceedings via webcast, visit http://www.calchannel.com.

Background: Two women, Elisa and Emily, were in a long-term relationship and each assisted the other in bearing children by using the same anonymous sperm donor. Both held themselves as the children's parents, and Elisa agreed to financially support the entire family. The two eventually split up. The Court of Appeal held that Elisa had no responsibility to provide child support for the children borne by Emily, even though such responsibility would have been imposed if Elisa were a man.


Am I the only one who finds it sad that someone who equates uncommitted relationships (same sex in this case) to marriage is tasked with defending Proposition 22, which defines marriage in California as being between one man and one woman?

Craig DeLuz

(Comments)

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com
Published: May 23, 2005, 8:42 am | Permalink | Printable Version
Lowering The Bar Doesn’t Help

Example

The San Francisco Chronicle is reporting on attempts by Democrats to impede the implementation of the California High School Exit Exam.

"We're looking like we're being tough on education, but we're not being smart," said state Sen. Gloria Romero, D-Los Angeles, whose SB517 would allow students at schools named in the landmark Williams legal settlement on school funding inequity to be exempted from its make-or-break outcome.

Why are Democrats blaming the test, instead of asking how these students got to the 12th grade when they can’t read or write at 10th grade level; or do math at an 8th grade level?

"The problem is that we have never held anybody accountable for the fact that the kids can't pass the exit exams," Riordan said. If children in any school are exempted from the consequences of failing the test, he said, "then nobody's going to be mad at the teachers and the others who have failed the children."

That’s right! If we stop graduating young people who can’t read or do basic math, parents are going to start asking who is responsible. They are going to ask why the best paid teachers in the country (Average Salary of $56,283) aren’t preparing our children for the future.

There is a lot of blame to go around. Politicians, teacher’s unions, education bureaucrats, unengaged parents and many others are all partly to blame in the mess. Setting a standard for academic achievement and sticking to it is the first step toward bringing accountability to the education system.

Wherever there is accountability, shortcomings are revealed. And the purpose of exposing them is not to place blame, but to fix them.

"Putting the pressure and the accountability on the kids is the type of thing that will turn the system around," he [Riordan] added.


Craig DeLuz

PS. It took me less than 3 minutes to answer all of these questions. How about you?

(Comments)

Visit The Home of Uncommon Sense…
www.craigdeluz.com
Published: May 23, 2005, 5:32 am | Permalink | Printable Version
Friday, May 20, 2005
Review: Star Wars: Episode III Revenge of the Sith

As the final screen wipe came up last night and the now familiar words "written and directed by George Lucas" appeared, I found myself extremely disappointed. I was not disappointed because the movie was bad, in fact it was fantastic. I was and still am disappointed because for all intents and purposes, that was the last time I will ever see a new Star Wars movie.

It was a bittersweet ending. The film ends on a tragically hopeful note, with a poignancy that exists very rarely in the other Star Wars movies. And as pathetic as it sounds, I was really sad to see the franchise that changed so many things draw to a close.

As I mentioned, the movie is wonderful. Recently, I re-watched Episode II to refresh my memory on why the Clone War was going on. Maybe it was the anticipation for the latest film, but I found myself not hating Episode II anymore. In fact, I rather enjoyed it. And it also became clear last night that the previous two episodes, despite their many flaws, were neccessary set pieces that lead up to the spectacle that is Episode III.

The movie is admittedly one long, astonishing special effect. Every scene has such life and movement. The only thing lacking life was some of the actors and their dialogue, but it was not nearly as bad as I anticipated. It was certainly no worse than any scene involving Mark Hamill. And in some instances the acting was actually quite good. Hayden Christiansen has either matured significantly as an actor or George Lucas got some help with the writing (which has been rumored).

I did feel that Anakin's transition to the dark side was abrreviated, but that can be forgiven considering the pace of the movie. And with each movie, as she moved farther away from the role as queen, Natalie Portman has become much more believable. Ewan McGregor and Yoda give the best performances, followed closely by Ian Mcdirmid as the emperor. McGregor's Obi Wan Kenobi is almost spot on to the perfomance orginally done by Alec Guiness. After Darth Vader, I think Obi Wan's story is the most compelling. He really does seem to suffer at his apparent failing with Anakin.

The scene after the climactic battle between Anakin and Obi Wan is genuinely moving. As Anakin lays mutilated at the hands of his former master, Obi Wan's pain is wrentching. "You were supposed to be the chosen one!" Obi Wans cries. "You were supposed to bring balance to the Force, not leave it in darkness." I felt that was the best scene Lucas has ever written.

While the audience knows that Obi Wan's training is succesful in the end, he himself dies before Anakin does bring balance back to the Force in Return of the Jedi. Equally as moving were the scenes of Darth Vader's birth and Padme's death that were brilliantly intercut with one another. Finally, as Yoda and Obi Wan are forced into hiding, a sense of loneliness and sadness are pervasive. Even knowing the overall outcome doesn't change the fact that our heros have, from their persepctive, failed to save the day.

The movie closes with Uncle Owen and Aunt Beru holding baby Luke and staring somberly at the dual sunset on Tatooine, a reworking of the same classic scene when Luke must decide his future. At once sweet, sad, tragic and hopeful, the ending - and the entire film - more than makes up for Lucas' stumbling up to this point. It is rare for a franchise to end on such a note of despair, but Revenge of the Sith pulls it off in glorious fashion.

The Wrong Blog
Published: May 20, 2005, 8:16 am | Permalink | Printable Version
Page 3 of 7 pages.

« First  <  1 2 3 4 5 >  Last »