I've made it to the initial round for favorite progressive blogger in the Air America Cruise Contest. I have to stay in the Top 5 before the second voting round begins, so your vote is appreciated! First voting round:
The Christian Civic League of Maine's Mike Hein calls Pam's House Blend: "a leading source of radical homosexual propaganda, anti-Christian bigotry, and radical transgender advocacy."
He is "praying that Pam Spaulding will "turn away from her wicked and sinful promotion of homosexual behavior."
(CCLM's web site, 10/15/07)
Ex-gay "Christian" activist James Hartline on Pam:
"I have been mocked over and over again by ungodly and unprincipled anti-christian lesbians."
(from "Six Years In Sodom: From The Journal Of James Hartline," 9/4/2006, written from the "homosexual stronghold" of Hillcrest in San Diego).
"Pam is a 'twisted lesbian sister' and an 'embittered lesbian' of the 'self-imposed gutteral experiences of the gay ghetto.'" -- 9/5/2008
Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth Against Homosexuality heartily endorses the Blend, calling Pam:
A "vicious anti-Christian lesbian activist." (Concerned Women for America's radio show [9:15], 1/25/07)
"A nutty lesbian blogger." (MassResistance radio show [16:25], 2/3/07)
Pam's House Blend always seems to find these sick f*cks. The area of the country she is in? The home state of her wife? I know, they are everywhere. Pam just does such a great job of bringing them out into the light.
--Impeach Bush
who monitors yours Bevis ?? Just thought I would drop you a line,so the rest of your life is not wasted.
Yes Campaign Ad Promoting Domestic Partnerships a Sham
Biggest Funders, Managers Opposed DP
Portland, Maine (October 30, 2009)---
The NO on 1 campaign charged that the biggest backers and manager of the Yes campaign have opposed domestic partnerships for same-sex couples for years, even though their latest political ad promotes Maine's domestic partner registry.
After weeks of a paid advertising campaign that attacked Maine schools --attacks that were rejected by Maine newspapers, the Commissioner of Education, the Attorney General and others -- the Yes campaign released a new ad this week applauding the state's DP registry as sufficient to protect same-sex couples and their families.
But in fact, campaign manager Mark Mutty, as director of public affairs for the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland, opposed the DP registry bill both in 2003 and again in 2004 when it passed in the Maine Legislature.
In addition, Mutty and others associated with the Yes campaign were silent on the alternative bill to the marriage equality legislation this spring which would have expanded the DP registry.
"This is the height of hypocrisy and double-talk," said Jesse Connolly, NO on 1 campaign manager.
"Their new ad actually invokes domestic partnership as a solution, yet they're on record either directly or by their silence as opposing even this measure of protection."
In testimony submitted for the 2003 DP bill entitled "An Act to Promote the Financial Security of Maine's Families and Children," Mutty wrote and signed on behalf of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland:
"Our opposition to LD 1579 is foremost rooted in moral and ethical principles that are not only applicable to Catholics, but serve society well as a whole. However there are more practical considerations...
Several attorneys who have reviewed this bill have indicated their strong conviction that such a drastic change in the code would lead to mass confusion in the courts and tie up probate claims for months without clear resolution. These are but a few of the perhaps unintended consequences that such a measure would bring to Maine."
"When I wrote Maine's domestic partner registry law, no group fought against it harder than the Roman Catholic Diocese," said former State Representative Benjamin Dudley, sponsor of the bill creating Maine's domestic partner registry.
"Now the Diocese, through its campaign against marriage equality, says they 'want to be tolerant of gays' and stands behind the registry law they fought so hard to defeat. I'd call that the height of irony."
In addition, Maggie Gallagher, the president of the National Organization for Marriage, which has contributed at least $1.6 million to the Yes campaign, has long opposed both domestic partnerships and civil unions. In fact, Gallagher, in 2002 argued against DP benefits because they "erode the status" of marriage.
Finally, the principals of the Yes campaign were notably silent on a 2009 bill entitled, "An Act to Expand Rights for Maine Families," which would have expanded Maine's DP registry, and was proposed as an alternative to the marriage equality law.
"The Yes campaign in the final hours of this election can't simply reinvent itself and try to claim some sort of new platform," added Connelly.
"The record shows that time and time again, they either opposed domestic partnerships or were silent on them, even when they were offered as an alternative to full marriage equality. This is nothing more than a Trojan horse and voters should not be fooled."
"The DP registry, in fact, has a few but not the hundreds of protections spouses receive under marriage," added Mary Bonauto, the civil rights director at GLAD and a member of NO on 1's executive committee.
"Separate systems are not equal and never have been. Domestic partner laws simply don't apply to the things that allow you to take care of your partner or your children, and it is still impossible for many people to get a family policy of health insurance without getting married.
"Marriage offers protection in times of greatest need and crisis," added Bonauto. "Equality, family, protection and respect only come in one package, and that's marriage."
On Tuesday night, the final mass will be celebrated at the church overlooking Kennedy Park. Bishop Richard Malone plans to officiate. Monsignor Charles Murphy, a former parish priest, will give the homily.
The building will be closed the next day. By Christmas, Maine's Roman Catholic Church is expected to finalize its decision to sell the brick complex that includes the grand nave, a chapel, church hall, rectory and twin steeples.
"It's very painful for everybody," said Monsignor Marc Caron, who leads the parish. For months, he sought advice from churchgoers around Lewiston but finally made the decision in August to recommend closure for St. Joseph's and St. Patrick's churches. St. Joseph's, the city's oldest Catholic church, closed Oct. 13.
At St. Patrick's, activities included a concert Friday night on the Hook and Hastings organ, a homecoming Mass on Sunday and the reburial of the church's founder, the Monsignor Thomas Wallace. His body had been kept in a crypt in the church basement beside the hall.
About 100 people attended Wallace's reburial on Oct. 17 at Mount Hope Cemetery.
Wallace had initiated the construction of the church in 1886, when St. Joseph's church, the only English-speaking Catholic church in the city, had become too popular. It would become a home for Catholics of many different nationalities, drawing Greek, Polish and Lithuanian parishioners.
Apparently Frank Schubert and Brian Brown are tiring of their ineffective -meat puppet/ messenger, Roman CAtholic Diocese of Portland loaner Marc Mutty and using Oregon native/FRC Tony Perkins' buddy, Rev. Bob Emrich instead.
And as has become the norm in Maine, Yes on 1 has continued its horrendous and disgusting tactic, begun in its Calvary Chapel Christian Academy staff ads, of creating a dangerous position for LGBTQ students within schools (imo a CLEAR violation of the 2005 "Maine Won't Discriminate" Law!) by now focusing even CLOSER on the schools.
More specifically, previously proposed education within the schools for the safety of LGBTQ students.
There is an irony, as the Matthew Shepard Bill is now heading for the White House for passage into law, that Yes on 1 and their supporters are trying to not just deny over 1100 rights to Mainers, but to put children in our schools at risk for becoming victims of hate crimes.
What are they afraid of?
Why are they trying to hurt kids in Maine's public schools?
Are they trying to eliminate the good that has come from GLSEN and the many GSAs around the state, the various Civil Rights Teams that have served to help students understand their fellow classmates' lives and create an ambassadorship within the classes of understanding, compassion, fairness and respect?
I do not understand this at all and as a parent, it scares the hell out of me...
Dear Question 1 Supporters,
One local television channel last night reported on an issue we have brought to your attention, but too many Mainers likely know nothing about. It focuses on one of the most damaging consequences of the failure of Question 1, namely that homosexual marriage will become part of the teachings in Maine public schools.
WGME-13 informed its viewers about the state-sanctioned Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Questioning Youth Commission's recommendations to push the gay agenda to children in kindergarten through 12th grade, as well as introducing LGBT-focused books to infants through five-year-olds enrolled in Head Start programs.
Some of the recommendations by the LGBTQ Youth Commission include:
Identifying an "LGBTQ Youth Advocate" in every school building (Pre-K-12,),
Providing support for LGBT educators, school staff, volunteers and parents to be "out" in order to serve as role models for the youth they serve,
Creation of a Rainbow (the visual anthem of homosexuality) Star System, through which schools can attain Rainbow Stars by moving steadily from legal compliance to exemplary practice, and
Hiring a Gay Straight Alliance advocate in every secondary school, presumably at taxpayer expense
Yes on Question 1 campaign chairman, Marc Mutty, exposed the fact that – surprise, surprise – people on the LGBTQ Youth Commission are some of the very people behind the No on Question 1 campaign! Our opponent’s pushback was weak and predictable and, frankly, unpersuasive to the damage the Youth Commission report does to their cause.
Last night’s broadcast pulled the curtain back on the undeniable connection between the gay activists who want young children, including toddlers, to be exposed to homosexual relationships and understand them to be the social norm to those pushing for the next incremental step of teaching that "marriage" between two men is the same as marriage between a man and a woman and appropriate for teachers to instruct.
As we enter the final stages of the campaign to restore traditional marriage in Maine, your donation to keep our messages on the air are more critical than ever. We are battling hard, 24/7, and we are on a winning path. But we remain huge financial underdogs compared to the No on 1 campaign, who are raising millions from gay marriage activists in every corner of the nation.Every dollar we raise is being poured into our media and grassroots activities.Please consider a contribution today. It is urgently needed. Sincerely,
"Yesterday we received a letter from a staff lawyer with NPR asserting that an advertisement by the Yes on 1 campaign violated NPR's copyright and demanded that we cease airing the ad. This is a ridiculous and frivolous complaint," wrote Marc Mutty, chairman of Stand for Marriage Maine, in a statement.
"There has been no copyright violation against NPR or anyone else. As is made clear in the attached letter from our legal counsel, Stand For Marriage Maine has the absolute right to use news clips aired on NPR in our advertisement. This is a protected exercise of the First Amendment of the US Constitution and is expressly contemplated as "fair use" in our nation's copyright laws."
Barry Bostram, from an office in Terre Haute IN, handling SFMM's lil problem. Hmm... sounds familiar...
A spokesperson for NPR said they had sent a cease-and-desist notice to Stand for Marriage Maine saying it did not give the group permission to use part of its program in the ad.
Dana Davis Rehm, senior vice president of marketing, communications and external relations for NPR said, "NPR very carefully analyzed the use that Stand for Marriage Maine and their public relations firm Schubert Flint has made of NPR's 2004 news story. We determined that it does not meet fair use standards, and that it constitutes copyright infringement.
They have exceeded fair use standards by co-opting NPR's content for virtually the entire length of their political ad. What we are seeking to do here is to protect NPR's valuable reputation as a trusted and unbiased source of news. We don't allow use of our content for advocacy or political purposes by any group or person."
So much for earlier claims of compassion, dignity and respect; Mutty has now completely given up and has let Schubert-Flint/NOM/ the Mormon Church define Yes On 1's framing as they will... Mutty tries to preserve the earlier claim of respect in one throwaway and utterly dismissive line.
I love how they continue to beg for money; their released numbers show them to be almost HALF A MILLION IN DEBT and that most of the money they have squandered has gone to OUT-OF-STATE companiesand interests... oh, and Marc Mutty's new status in the '6 Figures Club'!
With less than two weeks before Mainers go to the polls to decide the fate of the institution of traditional marriage, the battle for the hearts and minds of Mainers from every social, economic and religious background continues to be a hard-fought one between people with totally different views of marriage and its value.
Our opponents view marriage as a legal contract that only affects and is therefore the "right" of the two people involved. Our side is made up of people like us who - while we support our gay family members, friends, co-workers and neighbors - know that marriage between a man and a woman has been for centuries and since Maine became a state the optimal situation for children and society as a whole.
We also believe - based on substantial evidence of what has occurred elsewhere - that there will be profound consequences to society, families, people of faith and, especially, children if we strip our historic understanding of marriage from the law and replace it with "any two will do" marriage which exists solely for the benefits of consenting adults.
As you probably know, our opponents have amassed a war chest from the homosexual political elite from nearly every corner of the country to impose their will on Mainers like us. It exceeds our resources by a large margin. They are poised to spend outrageous amounts of money in these final two weeks to do whatever it takes to eliminate traditional marriage completely.
We simply cannot afford to fall further behind in fundraising and let this issue be decided because the other side is able to buy themselves an election. Please donate whatever you can TODAY to bridge the gap between our two campaigns and fight to preserve marriage between a man and a woman.
Despite their financial advantages, this race is very much winnable for our side. Our polling is encouraging, but we can't risk slipping in these final two weeks.
We simply can't continue to air our powerful ads that make it crystal clear that homosexual marriage WILL be taught in public schools as it is in other states that legalized same-sex marriage; that those with a conscientious objection to homosexual marriage CAN be punished by the government whenever acting on their beliefs comes in conflict with the demands of same-sex "married" couples; and that religious organizations RISK their tax-exempt status if they refuse to accept same-sex marriage as part of their ministry.
We are asking for your help in these final days to help guard against marriage becoming a genderless contract that exists solely to meet the desires of adults, a future of "any two will do," and a radical social experiment that will ultimately jeopardize the well being of our most precious Maine resource: our children.
Please give whatever you can right now to push Question 1 over the top on November 3rd. . There is no doubt that as voters hear our messages, they move to our side. But the messages can be delivered only so long as supporters like you make financial sacrifices to preserve marriage. Please, even if you have already given, do so again today. Our campaign - and God's very design for marriage - is counting on your support.
Several times over the next two weeks GLAD Civil Rights Project Director Mary Bonauto will debate Stand for Marriage Maine's Marc Mutty on the question of preserving Maine's marriage equality law.
The following debates leading up to the November 3 vote will be available to view or listen to online:
Thursday, October 22nd, 1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.
Live debate on MPBN radio
Moderated by Susan Sharon, Assistant News Director at MPBN
Listen at www.mpbn.org
Monday, October 26th, 7:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.
Live debate on "207" on WCSH-TV and WLBZ-TV (NBC affiliate, Channel 6 in Portland, Channel 2 in Bangor)
Moderated by "207" hosts Rob Caldwell and Kathleen Shannon
Watch at www.wcsh6.com or www.wlbz2.com
Wednesday, October 28th, 5:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Live debate on WMTW-TV (ABC affiliate, Channel 8 in Portland)
Cosponsored by Maine Today Publications (Portland Press Herald, Maine Sunday Telegram, Kennebec Journal and Central Maine Morning Sentinel)
Moderated by WMTW-TV news anchor Tory Ryden
Watch at www.wmtw.com
Thursday, October 29th, 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m.
Live debate on WGAN-AM radio in Portland
Moderated by WGAN Morning News co-hosts Mike Violette and Ken Altshuler
www.wgan.com
Thursday, October 29th, 5:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Live debate on WGME-TV (CBS affiliate, Channel 13 in Portland)
Moderated by WGME-TV news anchor Greg Lagerquist
Watch at www.wgme.com
For more information on the No On 1 Campaign, visit www.ProtectMaineEquality.org
From Stand For Marriage Maine's Facebook comes the following press release:
AG Mills Unable to Deny Same-Sex Marriage Can Be Taught in Maine Schools
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE October 16, 2009 For More Information: Contact: Scott K Fish, Communications Director 207-458-7185
AG Mills Unable to Deny Same-Sex Marriage Can Be Taught in Maine Schools
It is irrefutable that there is nothing in LD 1020 that prevents our children from being taught about same-sex marriage
The following statement can be attributed to Marc Mutty, chairman of Stand for Marriage Maine, the official campaign of Yes on Question 1:
“It was a foregone conclusion that the Attorney General, an ardent supporter of same-sex marriage, has taken the position that there will be no change in public school curricula if Question 1 fails and LD 1020 takes effect.
“Ms. Mills has long supported LD 1020, the gay marriage legislation. Nearly a week before she released her opinion, she told a local television reporter that she was “appalled” by our ads, which do nothing more than point out the real consequences to school children and parents if a new legal definition of “any two will do” marriage replaces the union between a man and a woman.
Today's Lewiston Sun Journal has a front page story regarding the public debate held at the Lewiston Public Library yesterday:
More than 60 people turned out for a debate on Question 1, the referendum to reject Maine's law allowing same-sex marriage, during a Great Falls Forum lecture at the Lewiston Public Library on Thursday.
Marc Mutty, who is on leave from his job with the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland and is chairman of the Stand for Marriage Maine group, faced off against Shenna Bellows, the executive director of the Maine Civil Liberties Union and a leader in the No on 1/Protect Marriage Equality campaign.
Each was given 15 minutes to present their side's views, follows by an open Q&A session. They then both gave short conclusions.
Excerpts from Marc Mutty's speech:
"We see this as a radical cultural change and one that is extremely significant that has far-reaching consequences over the long run for our society," he said.
The new marriage statute eliminates language praising family and the potential for bringing new life into society. It instead proposes that love is the core of a relationship, that "love binds people," Mutty said.
"That's radically different than what we've seen traditionally," he said. "Traditionally, marriage has been, of course, wrapped in the concept of love, but it was the framework for creating family, the framework for controlling male urges to spread the seed across the land and to bring the species together."
Shenna Bellows:
"A wonderful thing about the U.S. Constitution and the Maine Constitution is that they guarantee both equal protection under the law, prohibition against discrimination against anyone, and (they) provide for religious liberty," she said.
Bellows said the law drafted by the Legislature allows for both same-sex marriage and religious freedom protections.
"First, it defines legal marriage as the legal union of two persons; second, it honors marriages in other states; and third, and really, really, truly important, it affirms religious freedom by specifically stating explicitly in the law that no religious institution, indeed no individual, no notary of the public or attorney, no person authorized to marry two people would have to participate in same-sex marriage, honor, solemnize or recognize same-sex marriage," she said.
Bellows responded to Mutty's assertion that same-sex couples receive equal rights through a means other than marriage, such as a stronger domestic partnership law, by saying separate rights are not equal rights.
"This is the civil rights moment of our day," she said. "We cannot construct a separate institution that would solve these problems and also treat all families equally. So think of our friends, think of our neighbors, think of folks right here in Lewiston who just want to be treated equally and fairly under the law."
I said it last night and sure enough, here is the panicked screeches of National Organization for Marriage!
Check out this latest email Brian's sending out; he followed this with the entire Marc Mutty wailings I reported last night...
EMERGENCY ALERT: Marriage Under Assault in Maine!
October 14, 2009
Friends,
Let me be direct: Unless we act now, marriage will be redefined in Maine. Never before have voters had the chance to directly overturn the legislative enactment of same-sex marriage in any state in the country. If we lose marriage in Maine, we risk losing marriage everywhere.
I’m not asking you today for contributions for the National Organization for Marriage. NOM is dedicated to winning the marriage fight. Period. We don’t have a bloated staff or overhead. We were the largest contributor both to the Proposition 8 effort in California and to Stand for Marriage Maine. We put our money where our mouth is. But we have stretched ourselves as far as we can go.
It is now up to you to make the difference. We want your money to go where it is most useful in the fight. And right now, Yes on 1/Stand for Marriage Maine needs your support in a way that no state marriage group has needed it before.
I’m also asking you to forward this e-mail to everyone you know that supports protecting marriage across the country. Send it to your friends on Facebook, post it on your blog, send it to your e-mail contacts. Do anything you can to get the message out: If we don’t act now we risk losing the most important state battle for marriage since California. It’s that simple. And it’s up to you.
Yours for marriage, Brian S. Brown Executive Director National Organization for Marriage
In spite of the fact that National Organization for Marriage kicked in another $340,000; in spite of the fact that the Portland RC Diocese ponied up another $300,000 SFMM has $66,000 SFMM owes out more than $419,000.
Reviewing the filing, a great deal of money seems to have gone to a company that doesn't exist.
The amount of money that they spent on "production" is obscene considering the terrible quality of their advertisements and the number of commercials that they seem to have produced.
I suspect that donors are not getting a fair shake for their money.
The cold, hard truth is that Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland loaner and head of Stand for Marriage Maine's Marc Mutty does NOT want any Mainers to know:
1. How bad a job he/SFMM has done in managing the huge amounts of money they reported in July.
2. That despite the Diocese's repeated demands of money from Maine's 200,000 plus Catholic faithful, SFMM raked in a very small pile indeed.
3. That SFMM is $400,000 in debt- yet large chunks of money went to Schubert-Flint and the Michigan signature gatherers (because unlike 'No On 1', SFMM was unable to enlist anywhere NEAR enough Maine people to do the job!).
4. That the 'Yes On 1' ads were NOT that expensive to make- because they were simple "cut and paste" of last year's California Prop 8 already produced and paid for ads!
Not a single SFMM ad was original and stand alone, shot with 100% NEW AND SOLELY FOR THE MAINE CAMPAIGN FOOTAGE.
So the question then comes to mind: Don't YOU think the people in Maine need and deserve to know all of this and more?
I do.
So here's what I propose: writing 'Letters To The Editor' detailing all of these facts for the Maine voters to read.
Something along the lines of:
Calling All Mainers:
1. Would you give a nickel to your next-door neighbor who had a $400,000 overdraft at the bank and was hitting you up for a donation to pay his bills?
2. Would you send out an email to everyone you knew, begging for the cash, calling yourself "financially prudent and efficient"?
Marc Mutty did exactly this to all of SFMM's supporters- HOURS BEFORE THE OFFICIAL STATE REQUIRED FINANCIAL CAMPAIGN DISCLOSURE NUMBERS WERE RELEASED.
It's a classic "Bait and Switch", Maine- Stand For Marriage Maine wants YOU to pay for their fiscal irresponsibilities, including:
1. (insert here)
2. "
3. "
Yadayadayada; you see where I'm going here. We need to keep the letters polite, civil, 100% factual and accurate. Mainers will listen to reason, but they demand truthfulness.
Ask any native; they will tell you the very worst thing of all in this earth (hyperbole intended!) is to be called a liar.
It is the most damning label one can wear and it never comes off. It is never forgiven, even if it eventually is no longer discussed.
A thief ranks number two- and in my book, a "bait and switch" like this is pretty damned dishonest and bad stuff indeed.
We need to get these messages into the head of EVERY POTENTIAL VOTER IN MAINE. That not only was Marc Mutty trying to deceive his own supporters last night, but he was trying to steal from them too.
Thought folks might like to get a glimpse into how the numbers are being given to the Maine public, so here are some snippets- click on the links for full articles.
Both gay marriage camps get out-of-state donations
The campaign to keep Maine's same-sex marriage law on the books has raised more than double the amount of the group trying to repeal the law, according to finance reports released Tuesday.
Supporters of gay marriage have amassed a $2.7 million campaign war chest so far in a political race that is attracting hefty donations to both sides from organizations and activists from around the country.
The anti-gay marriage group Stand for Marriage Maine had raised approximately $1.1 million as of Sept. 30, according to the report. The group has just more than $66,000 left in the bank with about $419,000 in debt.
By contrast, gay marriage supporters, led by the organization No on 1-Protect Maine Equality, reported having $462,000 cash on hand, with no outstanding debt.
"We certainly need some serious money to be able to compete with them," Mark Mutty, a leader of Stand for Marriage Maine, said Tuesday evening. "There is no question we are being outspent. We are the underdog."
Slightly less than half of the amount raised by the No on 1 campaign came from Maine residents, according to its leaders. But they pointed out that more than 12,000 people donated to their cause.
"We are very pleased with the support we are receiving both in Maine and around the country," said Mark Sullivan, spokesman for No on 1. "We think this is an indication of the strength the campaign has in the state."
Not surprisingly, the other side had a starkly different take on those figures.
Mutty said the reports undermine the opposition's claim to be the "home-grown, locally supported campaign."
Instead, Mutty said in a statement that the race remains too close to call despite significant donations from "well-heeled political elite" and gay activists in other states and "the Democratic political machine."
"Mainers won't be bought," Mutty said. "The Maine contributors to our campaign see through our opponent's name-calling and smear tactics for what it is: an exceedingly well-funded effort from outside of Maine, yet one that simply cannot stand up against the facts we present."
Reports show that Stand for Marriage Maine has also received the majority - more than $800,000 - of its donations from outside Maine, however.
That total includes $500,000 from the National Organization for Marriage in Washington, D.C., nearly $100,000 from Colorado-based Focus on the Family and more than $210,000 from Roman Catholic bishops and dioceses outside Maine.
More below the thread; please feel free to add more in comments! :)
Someone get Bishop Malone some gawddamn smelling salts, STAT!!!
Dear Yes on Question 1 supporters,
We knew we were being vastly outspent from the fact that the No on 1 campaign was able to air their advertising upwards of 50% more than our Yes on 1 campaign ads.
We had a clue that the other side was awash in money because of the dozens of paid staff members they have on board their campaign.
But we never dreamed the situation was as dire as it is: our opponents have raised approximately $1.6 more than we have and are conducting a financial assault on the institution of marriage.
Overall, they have raised an astonishing $2.7 million from gay marriage supporters across the country!
We are in desperate need of additional financial support or we risk losing because our opponents are attempting to buy themselves an election - and destroy the institution of marriage in the process.
"Who's having a BAD day???
The rest of Marc's panicked typing below the fold...
Two points of note: I LOVE that Mutty admits he's "only doing this because his boss (Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland's Bishop Richard Malone) told him to..." and I take some offense at the word "schlubby" as a descriptive of 'No On 1' head Jesse Connolly.
Unless it translates to "Super Cool Heterosexual Leader Unifying (from) Biddford (to) Benedicta, Y'All!"
(hey, YOU come up with that "y" word and I'll replace it! ;)
Even as President Obama delivers a high-profile speech about gay rights on Saturday -- the eve of a national march for equality on the Mall -- Maine's landmark gay marriage legislation remains practically a secret. With low-volume murmurs of support from the institutional advocates and opponents of gay marriage, Maine's operatives, on both sides of the issue, are curious to find themselves nearly alone as they contest an election that will determine the national gay-rights agenda.
"We're focused on Maine people talking to Mainers," said Jesse Connolly, who is running the campaign to protect the nation's first gay marriage bill to have successfully passed through the traditional legislative process. A schlubby Red Sox fanatic who wore orange Crocs on a recent rainy weekend, Connolly lives south of the state's largest city (population 65,000) with his wife and son. He's an unlikely figure to be leading the rainbow-bearing ranks as new gay leaders and activists demand concrete results from Congress and the White House.
"If we're successful," said Connolly, "it will give a shot in the arm to Washington."
Connolly's conservative counterpart, Marc Mutty, plays more to type. The chairman of Stand for Marriage Maine said he agreed to lead the opposition campaign"because my boss told me to." His boss is Richard Malone, bishop of the Portland Roman Catholic diocese, which has unequivocally thrown itself into the election, going so far as to pass around collection plates at Sunday Masses to fund the campaign.
But Mutty, too, professes astonishment at the lack of interest from leading national conservatives such as Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee.
"What happens here is of great national import," he said. "A lot of our folks seem to not fully get that."
The state's failure to get noticed is due to the simple fact that the vote will not take place in, say, California, where an expensive and bruising win for gay marriage opponents last year shook the national body politic for weeks.
You see, this right here is what I keep forgetting.
That while I'm living, breathing and sleeping this stuff (as are many others), still more in the country are not awake to what's going on up here in my "neck of the woods"...
If I have time, I will certainly try to transcribe this.
But if you can, please take the time and listen to this discussion between long-time WCSH-6 reporter Pat Callahan, Stand For Marriage Maine's Marc Mutty, and GLAD's Mary Bonauto:
Admittedly my views are not exactly unbiased, but it sure does seem to me that Mutty, um, is very creative with the truth in his statements and that "Mary B" hit this interview easily out of the park.
WVII-7/ FOX-22, ABC Bangor completely mangled it... omfg. Took all of the day's stories and came up with this POS report.
Just in; omigosh- WHAT A DAY!
For more fun, check out the link at the end of the pr and read NOM's letter to the Maine Ethics Committee, dated September 21, 2009.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: Source: Californians Against Hate
On Thursday October 1, 2009
Email: info@californiansagainsthate.com
Californians Against Hate Encouraged by Maine Ethics Commission Decision
Allegations of Election Irregularities in Upcoming Election Will Be Investigated
Augusta, Maine, October 1, 2009 -
Californians Against Hate is encouraged to learn the State of Maine's Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices will further investigate accusations made against the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) and Stand for Marriage Maine PAC (SFMM).
Today's hearing in Augusta, Maine resulted from allegations of election irregularities leveled by Californians Against Hate founder Fred Karger. Reacting to the Commission's decision to pursue an investigation, Karger stated, "I'm extremely grateful for the courageous stand the commission took today."
In a letter, dated September 21, 2009, NOM's and SFMM's legal representatives, Bopp, Coleson &Bostrom, indicate that NOM "makes large contributions to various state ballot measure committees from its general treasury," but claim that, with a few exceptions, the organization "did not solicit or accept designated donations for Maine."
The letter also insists that Maine's registration statute for non-political committees is "unconstitutional because it burdens an association's right of free speech by requiring such to register and report as if they were political action committees, when they are not political action committees, and when they do not have the major purpose of influencing a Maine ballot question."
The State of California, which investigates fewer than 5% of similar complaints, felt compelled to investigate allegations of election campaign irregularities on the part of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints and, among others, the National Organization for Marriage. That investigation, instigated by a complaint filed by Californians Against Hate, is now in its tenth month.
The State of Iowa is currently contemplating its own investigation, as a result of similar allegations against the National Organization for Marriage lodged by the state's Interfaith Alliance Action Fund and One Iowa, into NOM's independent expenditure of $86,060 to influence Iowa District 90's special election.
NOM is aggressively endeavoring to effect bans on same-sex marriage in some 29 states. The aforementioned letter filed by NOM's legal representation reveals the organization's projected 2009 operating budget to be $7 million.
###
Californians Against Hate is the new political watchdog for the LGBT community, and closely monitors all who oppose our civil rights. Individuals and organizations who give millions of dollars to deny LGBT full equality will be held accountable.
Below the fold, the ACTUAL TEXT OF L.D. 1020, as it appears Marc Mutty and his gang have completely forgotten WHAT WAS ACTUALLY DISCUSSED, VOTED UPON, PASSED AND SIGNED INTO LAW...
These are the desperate words of a campaign that will say and do ANYTHING- including lie and manipulate- and use the honest emotions of their supporters towards their children to twist people's minds to be as warped as their own.
This is disgusting- sick- evil- and can be stopped.
Please click whenever you see the green and white No On 1" emblem shown above and give what you can- every little bit is needed and every little bit helps!
Thank you, folks... we're in this together AND WE CAN WIN THIS. ~Louise
Date: September 4, 2009 3:12:09 PM EDT To: Subject:Should children be indoctrinated in Maine schools?
For many of us, this week marks the start of the new school year. So in honor of back-to-school season, let's try a little pop quiz. Which of the following does not belong in the same group as the others:
(A) (B) (C) (D)
History Mathematics English Homosexual Marriage
If you guessed ''D'' - you're right! Mainers firmly believe homosexual instruction has no place in the classroom. Maine's public schools should focus on reading and writing, not mandatory gay sex education.
There's only one problem: an irresponsible piece of legislation known as LD1020. If allowed to take effect this law would throw to the trash heap our decades-old interest in promoting traditional marriage. It would legalize homosexual, genderless marriage. And if marriage is redefined to be genderless, then same-sex marriage must be taught as being the same as traditional marriage. This has profound consequences for your child's classroom education.
Just look at what's already happened in nearby Massachusetts. An eighth-grade teacher in Boston told National Public Radio that she teaches about gay sex ''thoroughly and explicitly.'' When asked if parents complained about their children learning such explicit material, this teacher said, "Give me a break. It's legal now.".
It gets worse. Children as young as second graders have been taught in public schools that same-sex marriage and traditional marriage are simply different expressions of the same thing. Massachusetts schools have used books such as ''King and King'' to instruct second graders about homosexual marriage. This is the story of how a prince married another prince and went on to rule the Kingdom. When parents objected to this instruction and sued, the federal courts ruled they had no right to notice or to pull their children out of class..
Is this what you want for your children? Do you want your hard earned tax dollars to fund ''explicit'' homosexual instruction in the classroom? It doesn't have to be this way.
You may have seen recent headlines about the remarkable 100,000 grassroots signatures in support of Question 1 - the People's Veto of homosexual marriage. Hard work and dedication helped deliver these 100,000 signatures in support of putting the People's Veto of LD1020 on the November ballot. In the next few weeks, we'll need to build a sizable treasury to get the message out about this campaign. This is the fundamental issue of Question 1: if the People's Veto fails, books like "Heather has Two Mommies" will become standard elementary school fare in Maine's public schools.
Make no mistake, if Question 1 fails and LD 1020 takes effect, there will be profound consequences for Maine families. Most troubling is the impact on children, particularly as the public schools begin the process of indoctrinating them on the subject of homosexual marriage. Help us prevent this from becoming a reality in this school year.
Sincerely,
Marc Mutty Chairman Stand For Marriage Maine
P.S. These consequences are not hypothetical - they have already occurred in states like Massachusetts where homosexual marriage has been legalized. In order to prevent this from happening in Maine, it is essential that Question 1 be adopted. So please make your generous contribution of $100 or $50 to fund the People's Veto today! Visitwww.standformarriagemaine.com now to make a contribution.
As the search continues for actors to portray real Mainers, NorthEast NOM Portland Roman Catholic Diocese "loaner"/Stand For Marriage Maine's Marc Mutty penned a guest column for the Lewiston Sun Journal this week.
(Am I the only one who thinks it's really weird that they had to do a "STAR SEARCH" to find participants in their commercials, btw??)
Advocates of legalizing same sex-marriage in Maine usually argue it is a "civil rights" issue, because they know that no one wants to be thought of as opposing the rights of others.
It is obvious that neither the United States nor our state constitutions say anything about an individual's right to their own definition of marriage. Their texts just can't be stretched that far.
The fact is, however, no one has any "right" to marry. Repeatedly asserting there is does not create one.
As has been done throughout the year by others, Mutty drags race into his discussion, even using our Fierce Advocate as an example to uphold his talking point.
The court decisions overturning these odious laws made clear that the institution of marriage shouldn't be hijacked to advance other objectives, in this case the rightly discredited idea that one race was superior to others. Marriage was only one tool.
Marriage clearly has nothing to do with race. It is mostly about children and the social benefits that flow from encouraging men and women to take on the critical roles of mother and father that children need to thrive. Certainly, we should treat all people with dignity and respect, but we must not sacrifice the critical social institution of marriage to do this.
There is another even more troubling aspect of this false "civil rights" argument: the idea that everyone who disagrees must be a bigot. This just doesn't make sense either. President Barack Obama, hardly a bigot and certainly an undisputed champion of true civil rights, said in 2004: "...I do believe that tradition, and my religious beliefs say that marriage is something sanctified between a man and a woman."
Gee, THANKS, Mr. President! /snark
I suspect there is going to be a flood of such garbage over the next 2 months... I'm waiting personally for rebuttals to this current piece by either of both of the Talbots.
Check this out (from their website)- emphasis mine:
Stand for Marriage Maine Campaign Pledge
August 06, 2009
Mr. Jesse Connolly, Campaign Manager
No on One, Protect Maine Equality
Dear Jesse:
We are aware from media reports today that you have sent a "pledge" to conduct an ethical campaign consistent with Maine practice and statutes for Frank Schubert of Schubert/Flint to sign. We are pleased that your campaign has finally responded to our long-standing call for both sides of this issue to conduct an honest, civil and respectful campaign. We are pleased you have accepted our challenge.
Stand for Marriage Maine will be signing the campaign conduct pledge form you provided.
We were delighted to see your commitment to "uphold the right of every qualified voter to free and equal participation in the election process." This is quite a change of direction given the extraordinary efforts made by Equality Maine and your allies to prevent Maine voters from having any say on this issue whatsoever during the Legislative session.
In addition to conducting an honest and forthright campaign, we hope that you will agree with us on the following principles.
Agree to at least one public debate with the media invited to cover it live. The voters deserve to hear from both sides of this important issue in a forum that allows for a full discussion of the ramifications of LD 1020.
Agree that no contributor, volunteer or staff member will be harassed due to their participation in the campaign. Regretfully, supporters of marriage in California and other states were repeatedly harassed by gay marriage activists including posting their personal information on the Web, having their employers called, and subjecting them to various forms of intimidation.
Agree that property will not be destroyed, as has happened elsewhere. This includes destroying or defacing campaign signs, damaging vehicles containing bumper stickers and defacing churches that are active in the campaign.
Agree that churches on both sides of the issue will be dealt with respectfully and no attempt will be made to interfere with their lawful expression of beliefs or discussion with their members and the public.
We hope you can join us in making this pledge Jesse for the well being and safety of all and for the opportunity to have a fact-filled and honest debate over this important issue.
In the future we urge you to address your concerns to those that are charged with the decision making responsibility for our campaign. As I think you already know, Schubert/Flint are under contract with our campaign but it is the Executive Committee, Bob Emrich, Brian Brown, and myself as chair, that make the final call.
Sincerely,
Marc R Mutty, Chair, Executive Committee
Bob Emrich, Executive Committee
Okay, let's parse out this mess... just love the scolding and finger-pointing, don't you?
It's not as if it was rescheduled from its original location at Cony High to the Augusta Civic Center, a much larger place, and certainly it's not as if the entire public hearing, as well as the debates in the Statehouse and votes weren't available live online.
Or covered by both print and television media- locally, nationally and even internationally.
It's not as if the public were invited to testify for an entire day, and even extended an additional hour, as there were so many still waiting in line to speak.
Trying to play the "gay panic card" is repulsive. Trying to use it to damage fellow Mainers and their families is unforgiveable.
----------------------------------
As for "who the spokepeople are", let's examine that; I'm a bit confused.
We had Bishop Malone speaking at the public hearing and to the press, speaking on behalf of all Catholics in Maine- whether or not THEY agree with HIM.
Then Marc Mutty and Bob Emrich, whispering together at the Judicial Committee hearing (a comment from one to the other when the hearing was interrupted by a distraught Christian grandmother, who ended up being escorted out by security, included laughing and agreeing that their official position was going to be "NO COMMENT!" if the press asked them about her).
Nice way to treat one of your own, gentlemen. Class, real class.
Then we had Mike Heath, a constant figure in the Statehouse, who also later said that his pal Pete LaBarbara was going to join in, kicking off his "Truth Tour 2009" in 3 secret locations with NO MEDIA ALLOWED. Funny how that was quietly shut down with STILL no explanation.
Why IS that? What happened to the "Truth Tour"?
But I've got a bigger question: if you've hired Schubert/Flint, why are YOU being THEIR spokespersons?
Powerful pieces. I especially like the tone of the conversations and know it does indeed reasonate with Mainers, as was demonstrated during the public hearings and legislative process.
Gay-marriage supporters and foes on Thursday exchanged vows to take the high road in their campaigns in an anticipated referendum.
The lead organization fighting to keep the state's gay-marriage law on the books made its request of Frank Schubert of Schubert Flint Public Affairs. Schubert Flint led the successful Proposition 8 proposal to overturn same-sex marriage in California, and it has been hired to do the same in Maine.
"Maine voters expect us to take the high road, avoid poisonous attacks, and make our case based on fact and principle. Today, NO on 1 pledged to abide by that high standard," said Jesse Connolly, campaign manager for NO on 1/Protect Maine Equality.
Reached in Washington, D.C., Frank Schubert said his firm's campaign to toss out Maine's gay-marriage law will be conducted in an ethical manner.
"I'm not sure what point they're attempting to make, but every campaign we've run has been an ethical campaign based on factual information. We plan to run exactly that type of campaign in Maine," Schubert said Thursday.
But here's the thing- who really IS in charge of the opposition and do they indeed have a track record of ethical behavior?
So let's just look at Flint and Schubert, shall we? Oh my, this raises some questions:
Clients facing difficult public policy challenges come to Schubert Flint Public Affairs when success is the only option. Businesses, trade associations, nonprofit organizations and government agencies seek our counsel in developing and managing strategic, integrated public affairs campaigns because we deliver results they need.
I'm sure that the omitted "ethical" part of this is a mere oversight...
Schubert Flint Public Affairs is a full service public affairs firm with offices in Sacramento and Orange County, California. With a dedicated staff, the firm serves a diverse roster of clients throughout the nation.
Firm president Frank Schubert has twice been named America's most valuable public affairs professional. He has also been honored with two national awards for assembling and managing the nation's Public Affairs Team of the Year. He is joined by partner Jeff Flint, a highly-regarded public affairs strategist and manager who brings years of experience to the firm, including having served as Chief of Staff to the Speaker of the California State Assembly. Firm partner Richard Wiebe, a former California Deputy Insurance Commissioner and manager of public affairs for two national trade associations, is an accomplished public affairs professional with three decades of experience in communications strategy, planning and execution. Together, the three head an experienced staff of public affairs practitioners with expertise in all public affairs disciplines.
So guessing Wiebe will be the NEXT spokesman- and funny- again, no mention whatsoever about ethics.
BTW, I haven't seen so many Californians come to Maine since the Beach Boys were last here...
And I have gotta ask something that's been really puzzling me this week:
