But for many of us who’ve been politically aware before 2008, judges overruling the will of the people is nothing new, in fact it’s a tried-and-true, expected liberal reaction to anything they don’t like, so let’s go a few years back and you’ll see the pattern.

1994: Proposition 187

There actually came a time in the great state of California where the residents had enough of the Mexican illegal immigration-invasion, specifically the fiscal, social costs and crime ramifications taxpayers are forced to endure, and the topic was put to statewide referendum.

California Proposition 187 (also known as the Save Our State (SOS) initiative) was a 1994 ballot initiative to establish a state-run citizenship screening system and prohibit illegal aliens from using non-emergency health care, public education, and other services in the State of California. Voters passed the proposed law at a referendum in November 1994.
— Wikipedia

Using the most direct optics as a gauge, one would think the proposition lacked support, as one mostly saw anti-187 bumper stickers everywhere. However that may have been because the few cars that did display “Yes on 187” stickers were vandalized to varying degrees. That looming threat to personal property had a visually chilling effect but it appears to also have galvanized and certified the resolve of those who were tired of living in the illegal Mexican culture.

This is NOT anecdotal. I lived in the San Fernando Valley during the 90s and witnessed this first hand.

Proposition 187 passed. The “will of the people” was heard, liberals didn’t like the result, so guess what happened? They found a judge to proudly nullify near nine million voices.

The constitutionality of Proposition 187 was challenged by several lawsuits. On November 11, 1994, three days after the bill’s passage, Federal Judge W. Matthew Byrne issued a temporary restraining order against institution of the measure, which was filed by State Attorney General Dan Lungren. After Judge Mariana Pfaelzer issued a permanent injunction of Proposition 187 in December 1994, blocking all provisions except those dealing with higher education and false documents, multiple cases were consolidated and brought before the federal court. In November 1997, Pfaelzer found the law to be unconstitutional on the basis that it infringed on the federal government’s exclusive jurisdiction over matters relating to immigration.

Ironic considering how liberal judges in Washington state today are infringing on the federal government’s exclusive jurisdiction over matters relating to immigration.

2008: Proposition 8

Prior to events in Massachusetts, EVERY state that held a referendum on gay marriage voted against it and by healthy margins. The left, however, believed the popular vote was NOT a good barometer of public sentiment that should be respected and when such a referendum was offered in California, it was time to pounce again.

Prop 8, officially titled Proposition 8 – Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry, was a statewide ballot proposition in California. On November 4, 2008, voters approved the measure and made same-sex marriage illegal in California.
— Ballotpedia

There were protests, many aimed at religious institutions that campaigned for the initiative, and this could also have been the birth of public shaming now widely used by what we now call the “gaystapo”, as those who donated to groups who campaigned for the initiative were outed, and many lost jobs and businesses as a result.

Of course, all it took was a friendly liberal judge and court to overturn the will of over seven million voters.

The proposition was almost immediately challenged and ultimately overruled by the Ninth Circuit and the opinion written by a proven liberal judge who just happened to be married to the Executive Director of the ACLU of Southern California. But we all know that had absolutely NO influence on his independence as a federal judge because liberals and their integrity are beyond reproach….

On February 7, 2012, a three-judge panel on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a 2–1 majority opinion affirming the judgment in Perry v. Schwarzenegger, which declared Proposition 8 unconstitutional, saying it violated the Equal Protection Clause. The opinion, written by Judge Stephen Reinhardt and joined by Judge Michael Hawkins, states that Proposition 8 did nothing more than lessen the status and dignity of gays and lesbians, and classify their relationships and families as inferior to those of opposite-sex couples. The court found that the people of California, by using their initiative power to target a minority group and withdraw the right to marry they once possessed under the California State Constitution, violated the federal Constitution.
— Wikipedia

By the way, blacks overwhelming voted against Prop 8 and as a result, gay racism became justified thus publicly acceptable.

In two very notable initiatives, the same liberals who decry the election of Donald J. Trump because they claim the popular vote was ignored in favor of an antiquated Electoral College, have used the courts to blow off the popular vote on numerous occasions when it didn’t go their way. Sometimes they observe the jurisdiction of the federal government and sometimes they don’t.

With that, it’s no wonder they’re freaking out. The world they’ve mandated us to live under is being torn apart, they’re technically powerless to stop it, so let’s not act like what’s going on now with the judicial obstruction to President Trump’s “extreme vetting” of refugees attempting entry into the United States is unprecedented.

The only obstruction club they have left are the judges, for now….

Brendan Eich is gone. The creator of JavaScript and co-founder of mozilla.org has quit as Mozilla’s CEO, forced out by the uproar over a donation he made six years ago to a ballot measure against gay marriage. There’s no record of Eich discriminating against gay employees—”I never saw any kind of behavior or attitude from him that was not in line with Mozilla’s values of inclusiveness”, says the company’s chairwoman, Mitchell Baker.

It’s beyond old being lectured on the virtues of “tolerance and inclusion” by the very people who routinely exhibit the most intolerant of traits.

It was like being at a klan rally except the klansmen were wearing Abercrombie polos and Birkenstocks. YOU NIGGER, one man shouted at men. If your people want to call me a FAGGOT, I will call you a nigger. Someone else said same thing to me on the next block near the temple…me and my friend were walking, he is also gay but Korean, and a young WeHo clone said after last night the niggers better not come to West Hollywood if they knew what was BEST for them.
— Geoffrey, a black, gay, UCLA student, 2008

Many of us have said we’d like to have witnessed that WeHo showdown.

For all the talk of inclusion, there’s nothing that makes me believe the gay left is any less inherently racist than progressive Democrats, and those on the ground in 2008 kind of backed that up.

There’s nothing a white gay person can tell me when it comes to how I as a black lesbian should talk to my community about this issue. If and when I choose to, I know how to say what needs to be said. Many black gays just haven’t been convinced that this movement for marriage is about anything more than the white gays who fund it (and who, we often find, are just as racist and clueless when it comes to blacks as they claim blacks are homophobic).

“Purging” society of those who disagree is the kind of obsession that can only be fueled by hate and only a crazy person believes their hate is nobler than someone elses’ or an even crazier person who doesn’t believe their hate is hate at all.

Let’s hope the LGBT activists are happy Mr. Eich resigned. They seem even more happy witnessing the pain of others even after achieving their victory.

Just what does that really say about them and their “movement”?

Flashback 1994: Prop. 187 Approved in California
Flashback 1999: CA’s Anti-Immigrant Proposition 187 is Voided
Flashback 2008: California Votes for Prop 8
Flashback 2012: Prop. 8: Gay-marriage ban unconstitutional, court rules…

When the left wins, it’s called the “Will of the People”. When they lose, it was because The People were either uninformed (too stupid) or too narrow-minded (bigoted) to know how they should have voted, thus the results must be challenged and the “Will of the People” be overturned.

See how this works and why we are where we’re at today?

In a cover story for the Advocate magazine titled “Gay is the New Black,” Michael Joseph Gross wrote,

“These past few years we’ve made so much progress that we’d begun to think everybody saw us as we see ourselves. Suddenly we were faced with the reality that a majority of voters don’t like us, don’t think we’re normal, don’t believe our lives and loves count as much or are worth as much as theirs.”

“… we’d begun to think everybody saw us as we see ourselves.”

Been to a gay pride parade lately?

Yet even some gay leaders are reluctant to directly tie their fight to the African-American legacy. They acknowledge significant differences in the experiences of gays and blacks, ranging from slavery to the relative affluence of white gay men to the choice made by some gays to conceal their sexual orientation, which is not an option for those with darker skin.

“I believe we are very much in a modern-day civil rights struggle,” said Joe Solmonese, president of the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest gay rights organization.

Here’s yet another unfortunate result of the Democrat Party’s ongoing whitewash of history, both politically and academically. Some gay people are totally clueless, thus foolish in making the comparison between the American black versus gay experience.

Gays were not legally enslaved for centuries. Gays were never segregated in education, in the military, or socially overall up until the last 50 years. Again, the comparison is ludicrous.

I would never want gay people to have to walk in my shoes, but until they have, they have no right to demand a share of our legacy. They demean the black American experience and now that some feel empowered to say “Goes to show that Negroes truly are the most underdeveloped race when 70% are homophobic. Kind of funny because that’s also their IQ”, it shows some were never our friends and don’t deserve whatever support they had.

Let me provide a couple of prominent examples of the left using black people for politically-correct posturing.

A few years ago, there was a movie produced by the Farrelly Brothers called “Shallow Hal” which was protested by obesity advocacy groups who, rightly or wrongly, felt discriminated in employment and in public perception. In order to prove their point, they used black people….

The organization asserts that movies like Shallow Hal, American Sweetheart and The Klumps not only reinforce stereotypes and myths about fat people, but underscore the prejudice against fat people in this country.

‘Putting thin performers in fat suits is no different than putting white performers in blackface’, says Maryanne Bodolay, executive administrator of the National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance.

Considering the “thin epidemic” plaguing Hollywood for years, thin actors are placed in fat suits because of a lack of larger actors; not because fat actors are barred from employment opportunities as was the case with blacks decades ago.

There was the now-infamous PeTA exhibit…

Continuing along the Animal Liberation Project, an exhibition recently launched by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), there are pictures of black men and women being branded, bloodied and burned, contrasting with shots of various domesticated animals in similar positions.

One of the most provocative images, however, is that of an African-American’s chained foot opposite the equally shackled limb of a circus elephant.

While animal rights activists today argue that animals were the “first slaves”, one could argue that even then, they were treated more humanely than blacks and the ongoing comparison between blacks and animals is what got the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals in trouble in the first place.

Then again, as we ARE talking about liberals who are the last to admit they’re ever wrong, using blacks is always their prime go-to…

During the whole Proposition 8 debate, a fascinating amount of gay racism was exposed.

It was like being at a klan rally except the klansmen were wearing Abercrombie polos and Birkenstocks. YOU NIGGER, one man shouted at men. If your people want to call me a FAGGOT, I will call you a nigger. Someone else said same thing to me on the next block near the temple…me and my friend were walking, he is also gay but Korean, and a young WeHo clone said after last night the niggers better not come to West Hollywood if they knew what was BEST for them.
— Geoffrey, a student at UCLA who joined the massive protest outside the Temple of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Westwood, and was called the n-word at least twice

“How to deal with the black community”….

Scapegoating blacks for the passage of Proposition 8 may be convenient, but is fact-challenged.

While blacks make up only around 10% of California’s population and the 2008 turnout high, not all turned out. The 70% that voted against gay marriage can’t be singled out with any sense of fairness, and slurring all black people is the very thing gays complain is done to them.

Other demographics voted against the proposition, so they are all homophobic haters (which is what the activists would prefer to believe). But to use racial epithets against one isn’t exactly the tactic we’ve all been instructed by the left to tolerate.

And using the safety of Internet forums to declare that hate is cowardice at the very least. Staging huge protests in front of the Church of Latter Day Saints is safe. Taking those protests to South Central and Compton while using racial epithets there would take courage.

Unlike the civil rights protests where people risked, in some cases, life and limb to participate, gays are not putting all on the line with theirs. The tactics used thus far shows just how courageous these pro-gay marriage activists have chosen to be and who the real haters are.