Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

Elector Woman and Dyna Girl

Virginia has an election today, so after work we need to head over to the *mumble* school and cast our ballots for Tweedledum or Tweedledee. A more generic bunch of yes-men and yes-women I've never seen on a ballot ... even our requisites from the Silly Party aren't really that silly. (There is a small but persistent segment of rail-happy folks constantly trying to make every issue from budget to crime enforcement be about why we need more trains.) The main thing of interest is that I get to vote against the bozo who championed the "in-state abuser fees" for speeding tickets, which a) is really a road tax in disguise, and b) only applies to Virginia driver licenses anyway.

Unfortunately, I haven't been able to find a record of who on my ballot voted for or against the Virginia Hates Homosexuals 'cause They're Icky "Marriage Affirmation Act". Janet Howell railed against it in the assembly, likening the climate to post-Weimar Germany, which earns her points but she's unopposed anyway. Chap Petersen, the democrat in Vienna, supported it, but I can't vote against him 'cause I live in Herndon. :P (His opponent voted for it anyway -- Virginia sucks in that regard. Although it's come back to bite her in the butt, which gives me a little hope for the future.) I was particularly hoping to find an opinion on this one way or the other from the candidates for Commonwealth Attorney, as they appear to be completely identical in every way from everything I can find, and I was hoping to use it as a decider.

-The Gneech


( 12 comments — Leave a comment )
Nov. 6th, 2007 08:26 pm (UTC)
These candidates look like clones. Wait a minute. They are clones! - Philip J Fry, Futurama, A Head in the Polls
Nov. 7th, 2007 05:41 am (UTC)
"Don't let their identical DNA fool you, they differ on several key issues."
"I say your 1% titanium tax goes too far."
"I say my 1% titanium tax doesn't go too far enough."
Leela, Jack Johnson and John Jackson.
Nov. 6th, 2007 08:27 pm (UTC)
i haven't looked it up myself, but moominmolly said she did a while ago and found it was a strict party-line vote. (since one of my uva friends is now a virginia state legislator, and a republican, i'd been avoiding knowing too much about that.)
Nov. 6th, 2007 08:29 pm (UTC)
As I recall, it wasn't exactly a party-line vote. More like "not all democrats voted against it, but all the people who voted against it were democrats."

I'm not positive of that, that's just the way I remember it.

-The Gneech
Nov. 6th, 2007 09:04 pm (UTC)
Nov. 6th, 2007 09:08 pm (UTC)
Thanks! :)

Nov. 6th, 2007 10:10 pm (UTC)
"...and that such an arrangement entered into in another state or jurisdiction is void in Virginia and any contractual rights created thereby are void and unenforceable."

Er, weren't the original Thirteen States (of which Virginia was one, as I recall) originally confederated into a single entity in order to prevent such denials of status and/or contract between jurisdictions? That is, didn't they originally come together as a single nation - instead of as an alliance of nations - to prevent any single one of them from saying to any of the others "we don't recognize your contract/commerce/arrangements/etc"?

Seems to me that Virginia has already once been a part of something that got stomped for asserting its independence from the whole. (Although admittedly, that leaves them 1 and 1.)
Nov. 6th, 2007 10:25 pm (UTC)
Yes, well, there's a reason I'm so against that law and anybody who had a part in it.

I'm pretty much the same way about the Patriot Act on a Federal level.

-The Gneech
Nov. 7th, 2007 03:22 am (UTC)
Yeah, but then they screwed it up.

Article 4, section 1 of the owner's manual:

Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.

The second sentence is crucial. You may recall hearing about a federal law laughingly called the "Defense of Marriage Act". It uses the second sentence to helpfully negate the first for states that prefer to make their laws according to their deluded interpretation of the Christian Bible.
Nov. 6th, 2007 10:42 pm (UTC)
Well, at least our state senator voted against it. She's running unopposed this time, but it's still good to express support rather than just voting against the worse one.
Nov. 6th, 2007 10:21 pm (UTC)
got spared this year....
but I figure that I'll have a say in the future of the Whiners in 2008.

I love Santa Clara...

Nov. 7th, 2007 05:59 am (UTC)
Aside from BoE and Mayor of Charlotte (and I don't live in Charlotte) the big one today here was over the repeal of the transit tax for the (controversial) light rail line. I look upon this one as a damned if you do, damned if you don't sort of deal. You keep it, they keep the transit (sales) tax, light rail continues and (probably) becomes a boondoggle and traffic gets worse, you repeal it, CharMeck raises property taxes, light rail continues and (probably) becomes a boondoggle and traffic gets worse. We've got a history of that with the 2001 non-binding arena bond deal, gets voted down and boom they go and do it anyway. :P And they keep reelecting these goobers.
( 12 comments — Leave a comment )

Latest Month

August 2019


Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Tiffany Chow