Oh, this is hilarious- so much for any sort of honesty or transparency, let alone full disclosure!
Portland Press Herald's Bill Nemitz has an incredible column today. Check out some excerpts (emphasis mine):
Now, as the campaign to repeal Maine's same-sex marriage law shifts into high gear, fear is once again in the air. Only this time it's not the homosexual community that's quaking.It's their opponents.
"I know what you're saying - there is some irony there," agreed Marc Mutty, now on leave from his job as public affairs director for the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland to run Stand for Marriage Maine.
Still, Mutty said, "We feel like the minority that's being discriminated against. We are being treated like pariahs everywhere we go."
A recent e-mail to the staff at the Portland diocese, forwarded to me this week by someone using the pseudonym "M. Luther," offers this advice to the diocesan staff:
"For security reasons, please do not give the physical location of the SFMM (Stand for Marriage Maine) office to anyone. It's imperative that no one else know the location."
Have a steaming cup of paranoia, folks?
Doesn't a 501c3 like SFMM have to disclose information to the public, like their physical location and such?
The e-mail also instructed staff members, should they receive any "marriage" calls, to "direct the angry mobs to the toll-free number or invite them to visit the SFMM website."
Sitting Monday afternoon inside Stand for Marriage Maine's headquarters, an unmarked office in Yarmouth, Mutty said he authorized the e-mail. The "angry mobs" reference, he said, was tongue-in-cheek and not meant for public consumption.
Asked why repea l proponents are so worried about their safety, Mutty cited "what happened in California."
More recently, Mutty said, consultants from California who were hired to help with the Maine repeal effort have warned repeatedly that this is dangerous business and security should be of paramount concern.
To be clear, Mutty said, it's not the "organized opposition" here in Maine that has Stand for Marriage Maine on alert. Rather, he said, it's the "fringe groups" from away.
"Maine is now ground zero in the (same-sex marriage) debate," Mutty said. "And the activists on both sides know that."
No kidding. Tell me about the folks from away.
Tell mell me even more about them, Mutty.
More below.
So how about the Maine Freedom To Marry camp? What say they?
Stand for Marriage Maine's secretive ways contrast sharply with the see-through strategy of the Maine Freedom to Marry coalition.
Jesse Connolly, campaign manager for Maine Freedom to Marry, said his group plans a grand opening of its headquarters on outer Forest Avenue in Portland in the next week or two - and the public is invited.
"Our whole effort is volunteer-driven," Connolly said. "And our volunteers need to know where we are - so we'll be publicizing that throughout the state."
Beyond the logistical advantages to having an actual address, Connolly said his organization is "totally transparent" and looks forward to operating a "very welcoming and open office."
"Maine is a much different place from California," Connolly said, adding, "I'm not sure where (the opposition's) fears are coming from."
I'm guessing Brian Brown and Maggie Gallagher are getting a tad antsy about Maine... and that's exact;y where the paranoia "fear" is coming from.
You know how I'm going to end this one and I thank everyone in advance:
Applicants for Justice Department internships and honors programs may have been rejected based on their membership in LGBT groups during the Bush administration, the Blade has learned.Also on the sh*t list were any people affiliated with immigration issues -- that means two-for-two for Immigration Equality!Numerous applicants were denied entry to the department's Honors Program and the summer intern program starting in 2006 because of their previous work in what were deemed to be liberal organizations, according to an internal Justice Department report issu ed last year. The practice occurred while Attorney General Alberto Gonzales led the department.
..."The findings of this Department of Justice investigation are disturbing," said Sean Cahill, a Gay Men's Health Crisis director. "If anything, the opportunities for interns to work on immigration law at Gay Men's Health Crisis, and provide legal services to immigrants living with HIV, makes one more qualified, not less, to serve in the Department of Justice."
"While few gay rights groups are included on the DOJ's blacklist, immigrant advocacy groups make up 25 percent of the list," she said. "The rights of non-citizens are the canary in our constitutional coal mine, and LGBT people, both immigrants and non-immigrants, know that immigrant rights must be zealously defended for everyone's sake."Not surprisingly, 82% of folks with ties to liberal orgs had their resumes hit the circular file while only 13% of people with conservative backgrounds were crossed off the list....Rachel Tiel Tiven, Immigration Equality's executive director, said in a statement that her organization was "proud to be the only national LGBT organization included in the Bush Justice Department's list of dangerous organizations" and that "opponents of equality and justice are right to fear us."
| NOTE FROM PAM: This article shows you how contentious the move to attach hate crimes legislation to the defense bill is. I'm not sure it will die, or that Obama will refuse to sign it, but Keori outlines the issues at hand. One day after Arizona Sen. John McCain forged an unusual bipartisan alliance with the White House on cutting $1.75 billion in increased spending for the controversial F-22 jet fighter, congressional Democratic leaders pressured lawmakers to drop the matter to clear the way for a controversial hate crimes provision in the defense spending measure. |
Blenders, something slightly unnerving came into my brain this evening, and I'd like to air some of it out and get a second opinion. It's about the proposed moratorium on DADT, and the Matthews Shepard Act. After months of inaction, waffling, and general evasion from the Obama Administration and Democratic members of Congress on issues affecting LGBT lives, we have two interesting developments this week.
Freshman Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand proposed an amendment to the Defense Authorization Bill this week which would put an 18-month moratorium on inquiries, investigations, or discharges of trooptroops under Don't Ask Don't Tell. It does make me wonder. Why is a freshman Senator introducing a “controversial” piece of legislation in her first term? The magic word is “primary challenge.”
It’s not the first time Gillibrand has moved to the left since she joined the Senate, but it is perhaps the most drastic movement yet. And it comes as liberal darling Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-N.Y.) is on the verge of announcing her primary challenge against the appointed Gillibrand.
For those interested in looking at the playing field, check out Rep. Carolyn Maloney’s record on LGBT issues. Notably, she sponsored legislation in both the 110th and 11th Congress for an inclusive FMLA. (New Yorkers, care to comment?) Sen. Gillibrand, appointed to serve the remainder of former Sen. Hillary Clinton’s term after appointment to Secretary of State, is pondering re-election. She has been criticized for her social conservatism, and is most likely trying to shore up the Democratic base. What better way to start than with a voting bloc so recently disenfranchised that it staged a money mutiny? Imagine! A fresh Democratic face in the Senate, who is truly willing to work for the rights of LGBT people! Wow! Can’t you feel those dollars slipping through your fingers and into her campaign coffers?
In related news, Sen. Harry Reid has announced that the Matthew Shepard Act, having passed in the House, is being introduced this week in the Senate as an amendment to the Defense Authorization Bill. Considering that it was originally made a rider on a tourism bill, then rumored to have been pushed off until after August recess, this is an interesting development.
Whoa there, Harry. We’ve danced to this tune before. During the 110th Congress the Matthew Shepard Act passed on May 3, 2007, with a vote of 237–180. The bill was introduced by Senator Ted Kennedy on April 12, 2007. After failing to advance as a standalone bill in the Senate Judiciary Committee, Sen. Kennedy introduced it as an amendment to the Senate Defense Reauthorization bill (H.R. 1585). After Republicans staged a filibuster on a troop-withdrawal amendment to the defense bill, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid delayed the votes on the hate crime amendment and the defense bill until September. Finally, the bill passed the Senate on September 27, 2007, as an amendment to the Defense Reauthorization bill, with a cloture vote of 60–39 in favor. Bush indicated he would veto the Defense Authorization bill if it reached his desk with the hate crimes legislation attached.tached. In the end, the Matthew Shepard Act was dropped from the Defense Authorization Bill.
So now we have two of the LGBT community's biggest legislative issues – Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell and the Matthew Shepard Act - being addressed this week. As riders on the Defense Authorization Bill. Which Obama has vowed to veto over F-22 funding.
Wait, what?
Yes, sorry, it’s true. Details below the fold.
Obama has threatened to veto the Defense Authorization bill if it contains funding for an expanded F-22 fighter program. The Air Force has said they don’t want more funding for the F-22, that they’re happy with the ones that have already been paid for. The Pentagon doesn’t want more F-22s; they’d rather spend the money on better armor for troops on the ground. Obama has said he doesn’t want the F-22s, senior Dems have said they don’t want the F-22s, but are fighting with Democrats whose states have employment interests in the companies that manufacture parts for and assemble the F-22.
Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.), who represents the state where Pratt & Whitney builds the F-22 engine, told The Hill he was working with his Democratic colleagues to convince them to support the purchase of more jets despite the president’s opposition. Dodd also faces a tough reelection campaign next year.Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.), the vice chairman of the Senate Democratic Conference, will be a key vote to watch. The watchdog group Project on Government Oversight, which supports removing the F-22 funds, lists Schumer as poised to vote against stripping the money.
Schumer declined to say how he was voting, telling The Hill he is still studying the issue, and advised: “Watch the vote.”
Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, is co-sponsoring an amendment with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), the panel’s ranking member, to remove the funds.
The vote on that amendment was originally scheduled for Tuesday afternoon but was moved to Wednesday morning.
I see. So we have a possible 18-month moratorium on investigations and discharges of suspected gay troops and the Matthew Shepard Act poised to be killed over F-22 fighters (just like it was killed in 2007 using troop withdrawal as a weak excuse to strip it from the bill). Aside from the fact that the moratorium basically amounts to a gay troop entrapment, since we know repeal won’t be done by the time 18 months is up, does anyone else see the problem with this?
Call me crazy or extremely cynical, but I see this effort by Kirsten Gillibrand and Harry Reid as a way to appear to address LGBT issues, knowing in advance that both bills will die as part of a Presidential veto of the Defense Authorization Bill over F-22s. It’s an ugly thing to consider, but given the back-stabbing behavior of the Obama White House and the professional cowards in Congress. (otherwise known as Democrats), I think it would be both irresponsible and foolish to not consider that we’re being played yet again. Imagine for a moment that the F-22 funding stays in the bill, both the moratorium and hate crimes remain in the bill, it passes in the Senate, and is then vetoed by the President. It goes back to the Senate. I foresee a replay of 2007 in which both amendments are stripped from the Bill when it goes back up the second time to avoid “controversy.” Harry Reid, Kirsten Gillibrand, and other Congressional Dems get to attempt to take credit for having acted on LGBT issues, without actually having done anything. But it will still make everything all better, right? RIGHT? There’s no more gay mutiny, rtiny, right? The gAyTM turns back on, right?
Someone, please talk me down from this. Am I crazy and paranoid, or do I just know the drill in Congress far too well by now? I'd like to think that Congressional hearts are actually in the right place rather than in their bank accounts. Unfortunately, the scramble over the Great Gay Money Mutiny of 2009 showed us exactly what the priorities really are on both Capitol Hill and 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Can't blame me for being overly suspicious of these miraculously-timed developments.
I’ve also got to ask exactly what is up with Harry Reid. Is he Majority Leader or not? Is he even aware of what his own caucus is doing on LGBT issues? From CQ Politics’s transcript of the press conference this afternoon:
REID: What is her -- what’s she doing?QUESTION: She’s considering an amendment to the defense bill that would put an 18-month moratorium on Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell (OFF- MIKE) for 18 months?
REID: Well, I feel, on this issue, that we’re -- we’re having a trouble -- we’re having trouble getting people into the military. And I think that we shouldn’t turn down anybody that’s willing to fight for our country, certainly based on sexual orientation. I feel strongly that -- I support the president; I support the members of the Joint Chiefs who have not spoken out publicly. But I think we’re going to -- if -- if Kirsten offers this amendment, I will support, at least as far as I understand what you just told me, that it would basically change the present policy for 18 months. Is that right?
So, Harry Reid didn’t even know what a member of his own caucus was proposing for the Defense Authorization Bill? WTF?
I have a suggestion for Congressional Democrats: Want to lead on LGBT issues (since Obama refuses to)? Stop the spineless candyassery, pay attention to little details like veto threats before attaching legislation about our lives to bills, present a united front, and sponsor standalone bills that will actually mean something. Don’t keep dragging us around the dance floor like this.
When: Sunday August 16, 2009
12:30pm to 3:30pm
 Waterways Cruises and Events
2501 N. Northlake Way
Seattle, WA 98103
Price ***Free to Attend
For more Details visit www.SameLoveSameRights.com
Join us Sunday August 16, 2009 from 12:30pm to 3:30pm for an afternoon of elegance, fun, music & more at the Waterways Cruises and Events. The Same Love, Same Rights Wedding & Family Expo will spotlight over 40 gay-friendly businesses, including wedding businesses, travel services, gifts and more.
No comments:
Post a Comment