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.
AUGUSTA -- From January through December, one story dominated the state's political scene in 2009: gay marriage.
Just 13 days into the new year, same-sex marriage advocates gathered in the State House Hall of Flags to announce they would push for legislation to have Maine join a handful of other states to allow gay and lesbian couples to marry.
And from then on, in every month of the year, the story advanced.
The Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices is still investigating the National Organization for Marriage, the largest single contributor to the gay-marriage opposition in Maine. The commission will determine whether the group is required by Maine law to disclose its donors, a law the group is challenging in federal court.
At her campaign Web site, Anne Marie Schubert, a deputy district attorney for Sacramento County, promotes herself as a law and order and victim's rights candidate with several endorsements from local law enforcement organizations.
Anne Marie Schubert, 45, doesn't mention her family or sexual orientation on her campaign Web site. But Sacramento County tax records show that Anne Marie Schubert purchased her home with Julie Greenberg in March 2005, where the women live together raising two children. Frank Schubert told the Bay Area Reporter the two women are in a registered domestic partnership.
Funny how this news hasn't "come out" (Whoops! My bad!) before now...
Frank Schubert said that he tries to keep his family separate from his political activities.
"I have tried not to bring discussion of Anne Marie into my political activities," explained Frank Schubert. "Our relationship is entirely personal and should have no role in any political campaign. I did not want her to be a focus of comment from either side of the marriage debate."
Yeah, I bet THAT is true!
"My activities in politics are mine alone - she doesn't have anything to do with them," Frank Schubert said.
"I tried to focus the Prop 8 and [Maine's] Question 1 campaigns on the various issues associated with redefining marriage, not on the personalities of the people involved on either side. Anne Marie and I disagree on the marriage issue. I am certain that she opposed Prop 8. Neither of us has allowed that single issue to define our relationship as brother and sister."
Frank Schubert also said he supports his sister's judicial campaign.
"I believe she will be an outstanding judge for the people of Sacramento County," wrote Mr. Schubert. "She is a fair and diligent prosecutor who has distinguished herself for a considerable period of time. ... I am not playing any role in her campaign beyond contributing to the effort."
Check out what Frank had to say about his sister's family:
Anne Marie Schubert, 45, doesn't mention her family or sexual orientation on her campaign Web site. But Sacramento County tax records show that Anne Marie Schubert purchased her home with Julie Greenberg in March 2005, where the women live together raising two children. Frank Schubert told the Bay Area Reporter the two women are in a registered domestic partnership.
"She and Julie are in a domestic partnership, and they have two wonderful children," Frank Schubert said.
Asked if he considered the children and Greenberg to be a part of his family, Frank Schubert replied, "Of course I consider them and their children to be part of my family, and I love them very much."
But... but... (say it with me, folks!)
"Won't Someone Think Of Teh Preshush Childrun (TM)???"
And wouldn't she qualify as a "gay activist judge"?
"I am deeply disappointed in the Maine Legislature and the Governor for making same sex-marriage legal in our state. The family, consisting of mother, father and children, has served throughout the ages as the natural place for the healthy development of children into well adjusted and productive citizens.
Same-sex marriage is a dangerous sociological experiment that I believe will have negative consequences for society as a whole. These are profound changes that will reverberate throughout society with tragic consequences."
Note that the mansion is constructed out of brick, the choice of smart pigs, and not a "glass house", so vulnerable to stones cast by angry parishioners...
Let's go below the fold and see what Bishop Malone and the Roman Catholic Diocese of Maine together have done to preserve the safety of the children, shall we?
By Jesse Connolly
Former Campaign Manager of No on 1 / Protect Maine Equality
While it's difficult and, one might suggest, even slightly irresponsible to weigh in on our marriage equality loss so soon, it's also tough to sit on the sidelines while others make sweeping proclamations or conclusions, usually hundreds or thousands of miles away from Maine.
This was a very painful loss. The simple fact is that their margins were wider in the places they needed to win, and our winning margins were either smaller than we projected, or we lost bigger in places where we needed to keep it much closer. Clearly, there is town-by-town, city-by-city analysis we need to do and much of that is already underway.
Nonetheless, permit me to make a few observations.
First and foremost, marriage equality is a complex issue. Many people are conflicted and we know from national and state specific polling that it is very difficult to move people on this issue, particularly in the confines of short campaigns.
Secondly, our opponents capitalized on that conflict by constant distortion and misrepresentation. It reminds me of the movie, Supersize Me: why order a midsize coke when you can have a giant coke? Their bar is much lower than ours. They only have to plant and feed the doubt. And it is difficult to fully restore any reputation, be it an issue or character, that's plagued by constant doubt.
Remember, this was a campaign where we got up on the air first and where we put genuine Maine values as the context for supporting marriage equality. We used real Maine families: gay and lesbian Mainers and their kids, and parents who wanted all of their children treated equally under the law. In sharp contrast to other campaigns, gay and lesbian families were woven into our advertising and images as they are in society - organically and realistically.
We also acted and responded like a campaign: no negative went unanswered, and any paid media attack got a swift rebuttal, usually within 24 hours. The messages were tested, we were disciplined across media lines -- from earned and paid traditional media, to new media, including social networking sites and outlets.
We were also benefited by a strong coalition of 60 state and national organizations who gave us the help we asked for, but didn't ask to run the campaign. In short, we got the money and the support we needed to run the campaign we wanted to run.
But here's where it gets tricky and here's where we need some answers over the next several weeks or months. It's clear that polling research, both ours and others, did not capture the intensity of Yes on 1 support. Polling cannot predict turnout and the impact of Tuesday's turnout was counterintuitive. We weren't alone: our opponents, political observers and field operatives all believed a high turnout benefited the NO on 1 vote. With voting approaching 60% in Maine, it's clear that wasn't true.
Here's what I do believe after some sleep and a break from the caffeine: we moved the equality ball further up the hill, not just in Maine, but everywhere else. Voters do need these conversations which we had by the tens of thousands; they do need to see real gay and lesbian couples and their children up close and personal; and they do need to be reminded that these are neighbors and soccer coaches we're talking about, not "homosexual activists" which is the well worn handle our opponents trot out.
I'm not skirting anything here when I suggest that we need to remember that it was not long ago when we were losing in double digits, when they threw an anti-marriage equality question on a ballot in a presidential year to drive conservatives to the polls.
It may turn out to be simply this: that by moving this basic premise of equality from the sink hole of catastrophic defeat state after state, year after year, to within striking distance of a win, that we are almost to the finish line. This tide is turning and you can tell by the histrionics from our opponents, from their "gathering storm."
It's not fast enough for most of us, certainly not for the families who deserve the same basic protections my wife, son and I enjoy, but we're getting close. We will learn more from Maine, we will keep making progress and we will win.
Let no one doubt -- least of all our opponents -- that we're in this for the long haul, until all Maine families are treated equally. This has always been much more than another campaign. It's about love and family and that will always be something worth fighting for.
Jesse Connolly was the NO on 1/Protect Maine Equality campaign manager.
Voting places open between 6:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m., depending on the size of the town. Local officials can give you the exact opening time for your community. All polling places close at 8:00 p.m. on Election Day.
Can I have help voting?
Yes. If you need help reading or marking the ballot, you may ask a relative or friend for assistance. The helper does not have to be a voter or old enough to vote. An election official can also help you read or mark a ballot. However, your employer or union official cannot help you vote.
You may also contact: Office of the Secretary of State
Division of Elections
101 State House Station
Augusta, ME 04333-0101
(207)624-7650
CEC.Elections@maine.gov
http://www.maine.gov/sos/cec/e...
Registering to Vote
Who can register and vote in Maine?
To register, you must be a United States citizen, at least 17 years of age, and live in Maine.
To vote in the November 3, 2009 General Election, you must be registered in the community where you reside, and be at least 18 years of age.
Where do I go to register?
You can register to vote at your town office or city hall, through any Motor Vehicle branch office, in most state & federal social service agencies, or at voter registration drives. Completed voter registration cards may be hand delivered or mailed to your town office or city hall, or sent to the Secretary of State's Office in Augusta.
Is there a deadline for registering?
No. It's never too late to register to vote in Maine. You can register to vote until, and including, Election Day. There is no cut-off date for registering to vote in person at your town office or city hall.
More photos and the story of these moose, LL Bean's latest exhibit, below the fold.
Nore from Louise: This loon is a "professor"? Of WHAT? Drunkology? Bigotry 101?
Frary: ... now I'm not getting into sex questions... sensational stuff there I do sex in a dreadful morass of confusion you all know perfectly well when you heard somebody say I just got f*cked in one meaning it means I just got f*cked in another meaning
(he does says "fuck" from what I'm lipreading, suddenly the moderator wakes up )
moderator: JOHN! Can you watch your language a little bit here ?
Frary: Do I have to?
moderator: yes
Frary: excuse me then spare your pretty blushes but it's a fact you all know this to be true
face it sex is a realm of family love procreation
venereal diseases adultery manipulation mendacity the whole morass so I'd rather not get into that subject whatsoever
If you're in the mood to spare 45 minutes to follow a recent debate about marriage equality, here you go.
Somehow, the director of the MCLU got paired with an eccentric curmudgeon in a debate about Question One. If you've not got the time to watch the entire sequence, I'd suggest clips #3 and #7. This John Frary character is a hoot. Did the Yes on 1 campaign approve John's participation in this debate? And is the Yes on 1 campaign now willing to concede the wisdom of conducting pre-debate field sobriety tests?
Warning: Things get really weird after the second clip. Rough transcript of the third and seventh clips below.
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."
News 13 held a debate on Question 1, Same-Sex Marriage Thursday. News 13 welcomed Brian Souchet of the "Yes on 1" side, and Mary Bonauto, of "No on 1," to explain why you should vote for one or the other.
Many thanks to Chino Blanco, for this footage- we watched this as it was broadcast last night on WCSH-6 (NBC Portland) and its sister station WLBZ-2 (Bangor).
Please watch it through:
More in-depth with the Moritz-Jones family below the fold.
Press Conference Sheds Light on Same Sex Marriage Debate
Three well-known pro-family activists appeared at a press conference in Augusta on Wednesday to expose the hidden agenda of the same sex marriage movement.
The press conference was heavily attended by reporters, who in addition to hearing the unvarnished truth about the homosexual rights movement, got a much-needed lecture on journalistic ethics.
After the three pro-family leaders huddled for prayer, Paul Madore, director of the Maine Grassroots Coalition opened the press conference by saying that the campaign for homosexual marriage was like a Hollywood production, "a 'Rocky' movie in which the referee is on the fight."
I wasn't gonna SAY anything about that, but...
Throughout the press conference, Madore faulted the media for their blatantly obvious double standard in the battle over homosexual marriage.
Madore then introduced Peter LaBarbera, founder of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality. LaBarbera pointed out that the media have failed to explore the connection between national homosexual "rights" groups such as the Human Rights Campaign, the National Gay and Lesbian Taskforce, and the No on 1 campaign.
LaBarbera brought up the connection between the National Gay and Lesbian Taskforce and the Woodhull Freedom Foundation, an organization which promotes an extremely liberal view of human sexuality. LaBarbera claimed that this aspect of the homosexual "rights" movement is as offensive as Fred Phelps, but is entirely ignored by the press.
LaBarbera also claimed that the wholesome images shown in the No on 1 TV ads hide the true nature of homosexuality and the homosexual subculture. LaBarbera shared his own horror at the exhibits he saw at Chicago's "Leather Museum".
Is THAT what he was doing??? Looks like a working vacation to me...
Towards the end of the press conference, Paul Madore stated that there will be voter fraud on November 3rd by activists trying to win by any means possible.
Peter LaBarbera summed up the press conference by saying that the vote on same sex marriage is really about the acceptance and normalization of homosexuality.
It should be noted that many of the reporters took an adversarial tone, and many of the questions were intended to score points for the homosexual "rights" movement.
But the closing scene in which fawning reporters swarmed around a beaming Jesse Connolly (shown below), says it all. Jesse Connolly is of course, the leader of the No on 1 campaign, and finds a willing echo chamber in a biased and compliant press.
As the reporters and the public filed out of the Hall of Flags, Madore, Camenker, and LaBarbera all seemed exceptionally pleased with the result of the press conference, confident that the truth about the homosexual "rights" movement was being told at last.
Below the fold, some sh*t video clips that are gonna be damned hard for the Portland Diocese and SFMM's Marc Mutty (who was strangely absent/replaced in tonight's televised live debate against Mary Bonauto, with no explanation given!) to "scrape off the bottom of their shoes..."
" . . . Maine has a very strong interest in providing its voters with information about the source of the money that funds the campaign on either side of a ballot issue."
In response to today's decision, Connolly released this statement:
"We believe the voters of Maine were well served today in federal court as the National Organization for Marriage and American Principles in Action were denied their attempt to skirt campaign disclosure laws in a final push to buy this election.
NOM is the largest, single contributor to the Yes campaign, so far funneling $1.6 million in the campaign, yet they were seeking to pump in even more, but only if the court would shield their donors from public view.
"Our goal in this campaign has always been full disclosure. The goal of the Yes campaign and its largest contributors has been the opposite -- to hide the sources of their war chest until this campaign is over."
PORTLAND, Maine (AP) -- A federal judge has turned down a request by the National Organization for Marriage to suspend Maine's campaign reporting requirements for ballot initiatives.
But the judge's decision on Wednesday will have no immediate impact on the biggest contributor to the group that's trying to overturn Maine's gay marriage law.
The ethics commission voted Oct. 1 to examine contributions by the National Organization for Marriage after it was accused of not reporting the names of many donors. But the commission's investigation won't be completed until long after Election Day.
The lawsuit, meanwhile, will carry on. Jim Bopp, lawyer for NOM, says Maine's reporting requirements violate the Constitution's First Amendment.
Note from Louise: I will have my own posts later about what I just witnessed at the State House; omigawd I am just shaking my head over this one!
--------------------------------------------
Just in to the Blend comes the following release:
NO on 1 Campaign Slams Anti-Gay, Anti-Marriage Equality Attacks
Radical Hate Groups Come to Maine State House
Portland, Maine (October 28, 2009)---
Jesse Connolly, the NO on 1 campaign manager, today released the following statement regarding the press event by the Maine Grassroots Coalition and Stand for Marriage Maine at the State House. In addition to featuring Paul Madore of the Maine Grassroots Coalition, who is responsible for some viscous, anti-gay print advertisements (see attached), the event also featured Brian Camenker of MassResistance and Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth, two well-known anti-gay organizations.
"This is not the new face of the Yes campaign, it's been there all along. They can swap out their TV ads from attacks that have been called baseless by the Maine Attorney General and Maine newspapers across the state, to a gentler, softer approach, but the result is the same. They don't believe in treating all Maine families equally and these national and local spokespeople represent some of the most vitriolic, anti-gay voices in the country.
"They can't have it both ways -- to pretend to back civil rights, yet stand behind a group like Mass Resistance which is one of only 11 designated anti-gay hate groups listed by the Southern Poverty Law Center. And they can't stand behind Peter LaBarbera who has attacked Ben & Jerry's, supported rescinding women's right to vote and believes we should return to the Old Testament where gay people were stoned. And they can't stand behind Paul Madore and the Maine Grassroots Coalition which is behind some of the most anti-gay hate speech over the last 20 years.
"It won't wash. It doesn't fly. And we call on the Yes campaign to stop the attacks and get back to talking about what's really at stake in this election -- and that's whether or not we will treat all loving, committed Maine couples and their families equally under the law.
"And I'd like to hear what the leadership and the big funders of the Stand for Marriage campaign have to say about the hate-filled speech we heard today in our State House. Are they in line with these people and these organizations or will they disavow what was said?"
From the "new and improved", Maine Family Policy Council now led by "Two Fisted Man of God" Mike Hein- the very same folks who gave Mikey Heath the boot, er, sent him to hock crock pots in Tanzania, comes the following missive:
The Maine Grassroots Coalition will hold a press conference in the Hall of Flags at the State House in Augusta at 11:00 on Wednesday October 28th, to alert the public to the dangers of the radical homosexual agenda.
The press conference will feature three well-known pro-family speakers, Peter LaBarbera of Americans for Truth about Homosexuality, Brian Camenker of Mass Resistance, and Maine's own Paul Madore, from the Maine Grassroots Coalition.
Paul Madore warns that clever advertising by pro-homosexual groups is trying to portray the Yes on 1 campaign as dominated by out-of-state money, when in fact, the pro-homosexual marriage campaign has raised three times more money than our side.
Madore also warns that pro-homosexual marriage groups are recruiting same-sex marriage activists from around the country - including San Francisco - to take "Maine Volunteer Vacations" and campaign against our Peoples Veto.
Who sez Christmas is in December???
Here are some of the best of:
This first post shows LaBarbera's obsession with attending and covering fetish events. His reports have made mainstream fundie orgs distance themselves from Peter's bizarre rants - it completely discredits him:
AN IMPORTANT REQUEST/ NOTE TO ALL PLANNING TO ATTEND THIS EVENT:
Just like at the Augusta Civic Center Public Hearing in April, PLEASE WEAR RED TO SHOW YOUR SUPPORT FOR MARRIAGE EQUALITY- let's have another "Sea Of Red"! :)
Oh man; do I like this match-up of GLAD/ No On 1's Mary Bonauto versus SFMM's Marc Mutty (the link is to a prior televised discussion they had earlier this month).
Date: Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Time: 5:00pm - 6:00pm
Where: Hannaford Hall, Abromson Community Education Center, Portland
Seating will be on a first come, first-served basis. 100 seats are set aside on the main floor for USM students, faculty and staff. Those 100 free tickets can be picked up at the info desk in the Abromson Community Education Center between 10 a.m. and 2 p.m., this Monday and Tuesday, October 26-27, or between 9 and 4 p.m. on the day of the debate, October 28.
Members of the public will be invited to pick up free tickets for the remaining seats on the main floor between 9 and 4 p.m. on the day of the event, October 28.
PLEASE NOTE that if the USM seats are gone, students, faculty and staff can request public seats on the 28th.
There also will be a remote video broadcast available in Rooms 214-215 of the Abromson Center, which will accommodate 100 viewers. Those seats also will be available on a first come, first-served basis.
The debaters, who were selected by the campaigns, will be Marc Mutty (Yes on 1 - Stand for Marriage) and Mary Bonauto (No on 1 - Protect Maine Equality).
The panelists will include reporters Matt Wickenheiser of the Press Herald/Maine Sunday Telegram and Susan Cover of the Kennebec Journal and Central Maine Morning Sentinel. Dan MacLeod of the Free Press also will be asking a question.
President Botman will give a brief welcome.
Questions also will be taken from the floor and can be submitted via e-mail on the 28th by going to pressherald.com.
If you have any questions, please e-mail or call USM Public Affairs at 780-4200.
This is why I'm not in charge; I would not have been HALF as diplomatic as this!
But this is imo some damned fine stuff... and loving this; just loving this move.
Check this latest press release out- GO, JESSE, GO!!!
NO on 1 Calls for Full Campaign Disclosure; Slams Question 1 Campaign for Raising New Distortions, Hiding Donors
------------------------------------------
The NO on 1 campaign called on the Question 1 campaign to stop changing the subject and focus instead on its issues oflopsided funding by a national organization intent on hiding its donor base from the voting public.
The NO on 1 campaign noted that instead of answering those questions, the Yes campaign turned its attack guns on Maine House Speaker Hannah Pingree.
"It is both ironic and insulting that the Yes on 1 campaign tries to attack a citizen legislator who fully discloses her livelihood on the very day their largest donor is in court to hide its fundraising base from the Maine voting public," said Jesse Connolly, NO on 1 campaign manager.
According to Maine campaign finance reports, the Yes campaign has received more than $1.55M from the National Organization for Marriage which is essentially financing that campaign.
Today, NOM is in federal court seeking a temporary restraining order to prevent Maine campaign officials from asking them to reveal its individual contributors.
Today, in another attempt to distract voters, the Yes campaign alleged that Maine House Speaker Hannah Pingree did not disclose a short-term consultancy with the NO on 1 campaign.
In fact, Pingree serves as a citizen legislator and makes her livelihood as a professional fund raiser for causes and organizations she supports.
The NO on 1 campaign, operating on a full transparency basis both with Maine campaign officials and voters, revealed a $5,175 payment to Pingree on Oct. 7 in its latest campaign report.
"We engaged Hannah Pingree because she's a fundraising professional and she helped us for a short time," said Connolly.
"Now, they've launched yet another baseless attack which is simply to cover up the big story today, that their number one donor doesn't want anyone in Maine to know where their money comes from. Do they honestly think we just fell off the turnip truck?"
And I have gotta ask something that's been really puzzling me this week:
From the "new and improved", 
