I Have No Idea What Katrina Swett Supports, and That's Precisely the Problem

Annie is the "real deal." (0.00 / 0)

CHICHESTER - It's hard to put your finger on why, exactly, Ann McLane Kuster's campaign seems so different.

Maybe it's the enthusiastic young interns who have come from all over the country to support her. Maybe it's the impressive efficiency and organization of her campaign, or the crowds that flock to her house parties. Or maybe it's the candidate herself, incredibly warm and down to earth.

But it seemed perfectly summed  up by the supporter who told me, "you just know when you see the real deal." For a lot of voters, Kuster seems to be the "real deal."

...

Ask her about this tonight, in Bow!

Whack-a-mole, anyone?

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 15:22:09 PM CDT

It would be very nice (4.00 / 4)

to have TWO real deal congresswoman.  Let's make it happen.

---

by: Lucy Edwards @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 15:23:20 PM CDT

I'm neutral in this primary and I live in NH-01 anyway, but (4.00 / 3)

I can't hide my confusion at a non-incumbent Democrat running to represent a marriage equality state--especially this one (Live Free or Die)--and not supporting marriage equality.

--
No tea; no decaf.

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 17:13:16 PM CDT

Yes. (4.00 / 1)

Confusion was the first thing I felt.

It's true, as Jim says below, that plenty of House Dems at the state level did not vote for marriage equality.

But to me this is very different.  The stakes are quite high in the US Congress, because of DOMA, and because of the rapidly shifting (in a good way) attitudes about marriage.

Of course I'm not a single-issue voter; but it would be an awkward position indeed for someone representing a new marriage equality state in Congress.

birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 20:54:37 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Calling BS (0.00 / 0)

Dean, you know damn well that Katrina Swett wants to repeal DOMA, and that she supported the NH marriage bill.  So does anyone who has asked her during the untold number of forums and debates that she has participated in as a candidate.  (Wouldn't be too hard to check that before front paging it, Dean.)  

As for supporting national legislation on marriage: For years, many of us decried efforts by right-wing judges and politicians to nationalize this issue, and to undermine the legitimate right of states like Vermont to grant civil rights to its citizens.  It's hardly radical to believe that usurping state marriage laws is not the best solution to this challenges.

Furthermore. . . . .I have spent the past year watching my friend get treated like a pinata on Blue Hampshire by Ann Kuster's supporters, and I am sick of it.  I don't know who will win this primary.  But Katrina Swett has fought for the Democratic Party for her entire adult life, and she deserves better than the constant barrage of crap she gets here.  

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 21:29:02 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sounds like I was right to be confused. (4.00 / 1)

The rumor is viral, though, and it behooves the Swett campaign to put out a detailed statement on the issue--I don't see one on the website.

--
No tea; no decaf.

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 21:48:17 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I am *so* sick of this (4.00 / 1)

I have done my part to keep the focus on Charlie Bass, and have held my tongue when Ann Kuster supporters on this site attacked Katrina Swett over and over and over again during the past year.  I have tried to defend my friend without raising legitimate concerns about Ms. Kuster, since I realize that she could well be our nominee against Charlie Bass.  

But this is ridiculous.  And I have had just about all I can handle.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 21:52:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm not a supporter of either Kuster or Swett, and I didn't attack anyone. (4.00 / 1)

I'm not the one who decided that all political rumors require quick response. Am I wrong? Ask President Kerry.

--
No tea; no decaf.

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 22:21:18 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Wasn't criticizing you, Doug (4.00 / 1)

This wasn't meant as a response to your comment.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 22:22:28 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Slow down with the buckshot. (4.00 / 1)

Somewhere in there, you just affirmed this news, that Katrina Swett does not support a federal freedom to marry.

As for the related question of DOMA, Rep. DeJoie just answered that below.

birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 21:52:16 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Take a deep breath, DD. (0.00 / 0)

Let me preface this by saying this isn't a judgement on Katrina Lantos-Swett, nor am I going to say something disagreeable about her. OK? I'm just trying to raise a legitimate point.

A careless and reactionary blogger and a Nashua Telegraph sidebar made some headlines and it was misleading. It was just something that took us by surprise and it was worth highlighting. Had the blogger and the Telegraph said the same thing about Ann McLane Kuster, we'd be on it as well. It was making news, so to speak, and it was worth highlighting, whether it was accurate or not.  

So it went around the blogosphere and now things are cleared up. If anything, the Nashua Tele"laugh" should write a correction. If I were Lantos-Swett's campaign manager, I'd be pissed off too and let them know about the mistake they made. The Telegraph was irresponsible for not confirming Lantos-Swett's position to begin with. As for the blogger, screw him. What the Telegraph did was worse.

Feel free to agree or disagree, DD. All I/we ask is we keep this conversation rational and civil. We all know this is someone you know really well. That's fine. I respect that. Just go easy on Dean.  

---

by: NH Ex-pat @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 22:09:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

"Rational and Civil" (0.00 / 0)

Feel free to agree or disagree, DD. All I/we ask is we keep this conversation rational and civil. We all know this is someone you know really well. That's fine. I respect that. Just go easy on Dean.  

You know that I respect you, in spite of our differences on certain issues.  But I have been reading this malicious garbage about Katrina Swett on Blue Hampshire for the past year.  If it was someone other than Dean, then I would "go easy on" him.  But he knows better.

And I will not give him a pass.  

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 22:19:12 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Sigh, OK : ) (0.00 / 0)

At least you know where I'm coming from and what I suggest happens next: Let the Nashua Telegraph have it!  

---

by: NH Ex-pat @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 22:25:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

word n/t (0.00 / 0)

for transparency sake ~I represent Union print shops

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 21:34:57 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

We Need National Leadership On Marriage Equality (4.00 / 1)

Until the New Hampshire Legislature approved House Bill 436 last year, neither Jeanne Shaheen, Paul Hodes, or Carol Shea-Porter said they supported the bill -- leaving it as a state issue.  But they quickly came out in favor, and have been leading national efforts to end DOMA, and I think each have been clear in their support for marriage equality, with the word, nationally.  

It's obvious that to provide equality nationwide, we need to see Congress eventually act, so it isn't just a state issue -- it's a national one.  I would hope Katrina Swett would be willing to open the dialogue.  

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 17:21:48 PM CDT

My Jaw Actually Dropped Reading That (4.00 / 1)

I am truly shocked that any Democrat running for major office would not support marriage equality.

It used to be that some candidates took that mushy position to protect themselves, when it appeared equality was not a safe position to take. But now it's clearly, unquestionably safe to support simple equality...in addition to just being the obvious right thing.

I am amazed. Go Annie Go!

No'm Sayn?

---

by: BurtCohen @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 17:54:54 PM CDT

Let's Keep In Mind... (0.00 / 0)

...that the battle still has to be won.  Throughout most of the country, a goodly number of our Democratic office holders -- some very, very good people -- do not support marriage equality.  What is President Barack Obama's position on it? Last year, Senator John Kerry, a man who would have made a great President, was still opposed.  Any update on him?  

We should keep in mind that we still have hearts and minds to win, and that comes with dialogue.  No one supports marriage equality more than I do -- many support it as much, but not more.  But I can accept that not everyone does, and I can support Democrats who are good on other issues, yet aren't quite there (yet) on marriage equality.

An excellent NH State Senator opposed House Bill 436, yet I support his reelection and hope he wins.  We need him.  Several Democratic House members are running for reelection who opposed HB 436 and still today don't support marriage equality -- though most all Democrats voted against repeal earlier this year.  But I can support them because many other issues are at stake, and having a Democratic majority in the NH House is important.  We need every Democrat we can get.

I'm saddened Katrina Swett doesn't support marriage equality (again, yet), and I like Annie Kuster -- I don't have a choice between them.  I'm happy Paul Hodes and Carol Shea-Porter do.  But I wouldn't discount Katrina just because of her lack of support.  She has done many great things for Democrats, and if she were to get the nomination for Congress we need to be behind her.  

In the meantime, perhaps Annie, Paul, Carol, Jeanne Shaheen, and John Lynch can all talk with her about the Democratic ideal of equality for all!  

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 18:34:07 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Obama (0.00 / 0)

State Senator Obama is documented to have been for it.  It seems he changed his position out of expediency in seeking statewide office during his US Senate campaign in 2004.  Not exactly a profile in courage, but understandable given the political climate of that cycle.

Although, in my view, every generation of Americans has advanced the cause of freedom and equality, it seems many elected officials are trapped in the social attitudes of the year of their first major electoral victory.  I think that is the lens with which to view our President's half-hearted opposition to marriage equality, and I'm inclined to think his opposition to Prop 8 is more reflective of his actual views than his publicly stated position on the issue in general--not that that makes it okay, but it's what I assume.

It's also that theory of mine--about first-time major office winners and their lasting positions--that puzzles me with respect to non-incumbent Katrina Swett, who I am not opposed to and will wholeheartedly support if she is the nominee, just like Kuster.

--
No tea; no decaf.

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 21:19:55 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

A Game of Telephone (4.00 / 2)

As children we all played the game of telephone to see how much a story would change from one person to the next. The issue of Katrina Swett's position of Marriage equality is the telephone game all over again.

I am now a supporter of Katrina's, but before I "signed on", I had conversations with her about all of the salient issues, including equality. I remain satisfied that her position on equality is the same as Ann's and mine.

Unfortunately Howie Klein and BH have taken the Nashua Telegraph's sidebar comment without an understanding of Katrina's position on equality. The focus of the Telegraph article was on congressional pay, not social issues. We do not know where the sidebar information came from or what specifically was said. Sidebars are a ccompilation and may or may not reflect the candidates true beliefs, as is the case here.

As a candidate for this seat, I sat beside Katrina night after night in town after town, where she called for a repeal of Don't Ask Don't Tell and a full repeal of DOMA. That continues to be Katrina's stance on marriage equality.

The Swett campaign issued a statement today on equality to clarify the Telegraph's misstatements. This was sent to Howie Klein, which he chose not to include in his blog.

Swett statement on equality 7/15/2010:

As it often does, NH led the country by being the first in the nation to proactively enact marriage equality through the legislative process.   In so doing, NH stood up for the proposition that all members of our community should be treated with respect and deserve an equal place at the table.  I support federal civil union legislation that will extend the full range of federal benefits and legal protections to all families in our country, especially those who live in states that don't yet provide marriage equality.

Unfortunately papers do not always get it right. We owe it to our candidates to ensure our understanding of their positions. This is the only way we achieve a full understanding of the issues and the candidates positions on the issues.

"Never doubt that a small group of dedicated people can change the world...it's all that ever has."
~Margaret Mead

---

by: johndejoie @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 21:24:10 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Rep. DeJoie, (0.00 / 0)

Thank you for your thoughts (according to which, the DOMA question is settled), and for sending along the Swett statement.

Please correct me if I am wrong.  But that statement, the Telegraph caption, and the WMUR policy statement to me are all in harmony, and all opposed to a federal freedom to marry.


birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 21:40:13 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Dean, you are incorrect... (4.00 / 1)

and please call me John. I am only a Rep for another few months and I am trying to get used to being a civilian.

The statements are in harmony, but are not against federal marriage equality. I think you are reading into the statements and making assumptions that are simply not supported.

None of us as candidates took a position of federal marriage equality. Katrina has consistenly stated that the federal government should not interfere with state efforts to recognize marriage equality. DOMA today prevents New Hampshire couples from exercising their full federal benefits, as would a hetero-sexual couple. This is where Katrina's focus has been, to get the feds out of the way and support the NH equality law.

As I said, the statements are in harmony and speak to her belief that the federal government's policy should support state marriage equality initiatives.

The question has never been asked of any candidate, to the best of my knowledge, do you think marriage equality should be a state or federal issue?

"Never doubt that a small group of dedicated people can change the world...it's all that ever has."
~Margaret Mead

---

by: johndejoie @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 21:54:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

George W. Bush (0.00 / 0)

He thinks it should be a federal issue.  That we know.  

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 21:59:50 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thanks, John. (0.00 / 0)

Your further elaboration was helpful, but I do not believe I am assuming more than what's there.

If I have you (and the caption, WMUR, and statement) correct, Swett supports federal civil unions, opposes federal same sex marriage, and leaves it as a states rights issue.

birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 22:07:15 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I think it's also important to point out (0.00 / 0)

that nowhere in the Swett statement does it say she supports Gay marriage, simply 'federal civil union legislation.'  If these were synonymous then our State Legislature wasted a lot of time making the change...  

"He who loves correction, loves knowledge.  He who hates reproof is stupid." - Proverbs 12:1

---

by: jdblanch @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 21:42:24 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Nor does Kuster's... (4.00 / 2)

Kuster's statement on WMUR as posted above by Dean:

Ann McLane Kuster (D): I support marriage equality and believe the government should stay out of our personal lives.

Reading this literally, Anne does not support federal marriage equality. However, I know that was not the question she was asked. If I tried to make that leap, I would possibly be taking her comment out of context. That is what is being done here and what is being done by Howie Klein nationally.

Let's deal in facts, not innuendo and supposition; we are better than that.

"Never doubt that a small group of dedicated people can change the world...it's all that ever has."
~Margaret Mead

---

by: johndejoie @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 22:06:32 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Big difference (0.00 / 0)

Ann McLane Kuster isn't the whipping post on this site.  Katrina Swett is.  Hence the double standard.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 22:12:38 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ann Kuster on Marriage Equality (4.00 / 4)

I'm a newbie and normally wouldn't jump into a discussion like this at the last minute, but I just wanted to clarify Annie's positon on marriage equality.

When asked about the issue yesterday, Annie said the following:

"I was a vocal supporter for passing marriage equality here in New Hampshire and I'll continue to support marriage equality in Washington. We should have less government interference in our personal lives, at both the state and federal levels."

Neil

---
T. Neil Sroka
Communications Director
Ann McLane Kuster for Congress (NH-2)

neil@kusterforcongress.com

---

by: neilsroka @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 23:08:04 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Welcome to BH (0.00 / 0)

Neil, I'm glad that we have two candidates in this primary who are committed to repealing DOMA and standing up for civil rights.  I commend Ann for her stand.

It would also be nice if we also had two candidates who encourage their supporters to campaign in a fair, positive, and truthful way.  Unfortunately, we only have one of those.  I note with disappointment your refusal to take a stand on the garbage that Dean is pushing here (or, for that matter, the constant barrage of negative campaigning that Ann's supporters have thrown at Katrina on Blue Hampshire).

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 05:24:10 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Good God man give it up. (0.00 / 1)

I have struggled in vain to find examples of this. Is it just the knee jerk response to leap to the defense of any right-leaning Democrat or do have you legitimate reasons for your seemingly endless supply of bile?  

---

by: measurestaken @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 09:11:21 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Here are some for you to chew on (0.00 / 0)

http://www.bluehampshire.com/s...

Obviously, this is only a partial list.  And my legitimate reason was that I was hoping for a clean primary between two progressive Democrats, so that the winner would be positioned to defeat Charlie Bass this September.  Am not sure why that's so difficult to understand.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 09:24:31 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

"Right-Leaning Democrat" (0.00 / 0)

Please identify a single issue in which Katrina Swett is to the right of President Obama.

Thank you.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 09:53:55 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

and I accused of you being knee-jerk...sigh n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: measurestaken @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 10:37:20 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

and I thought you cared about truth and fairness. . . .sigh (0.00 / 0)

I guess we were both wrong.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 10:45:27 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I can't improve on Laura's position... (0.00 / 0)

"One: I disagree with Obama's position and don't see Obama holding a position that I disagree with as being a validator of other candidates holding the same position.

Two: I recognize that candidates for national office, or in states where this is a politically difficult issue, will have to hedge their wording on this. But that's not the situation here. This is a candidate for House in a Democratic district in a state that already has marriage equality."

---

by: measurestaken @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 11:07:45 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yes, but you can interpret it with some measure of sanity (0.00 / 0)

"One: I disagree with Obama's position and don't see Obama holding a position that I disagree with as being a validator of other candidates holding the same position.

No argument there.  But this concerned your double-standard characterization of Katrina Swett as "right-wing," a term which I don't recall you ever applying to President Obama (or Jeanne Shaheen, or Paul Hodes, or any number of prominent progressives who hold the same positions as Katrina Swett.

Two: I recognize that candidates for national office, or in states where this is a politically difficult issue, will have to hedge their wording on this. But that's not the situation here. This is a candidate for House in a Democratic district in a state that already has marriage equality."

Yes.  And she does support marriage equality.  I'm not sure how else that can be made clear other than citing her support for the NH law and repealing DOMA.  There is no congressional legislation other than DOMA that imposes a single marriage standard nationally (only one that would support recognition of marriages from one state in another).

Stop.  Lying.  

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 11:22:07 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

in what possible way can what I posted be viewed as lying? absurd... (0.00 / 0)

---

by: measurestaken @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 11:33:21 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

It's a "judgement" thing n/t (0.00 / 0)

Whack-a-mole, anyone?

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 20:56:15 PM CDT

Thank You Dean (4.00 / 1)

Thank you for posting the WMUR comments before I could. We must be particularly careful when news reports fit into our particular "meaning making" of a candidate. I appreciate your effort to bring the full picture to the fore.

"Never doubt that a small group of dedicated people can change the world...it's all that ever has."
~Margaret Mead

---

by: johndejoie @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 21:31:44 PM CDT

Agreed (4.00 / 1)

And the intensely misleading front-page headline of this diary should be changed.  Immediately.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 21:35:06 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Please see above. (0.00 / 0)

How are the caption and the WMUR statement different?

birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 21:44:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

If you were listening at the state convention ... (4.00 / 1)

You would have heard Katrina voice strong support for our marriage equality law.  Like most other speakers, she received boisterous applause for her pronouncement.

Katrina has been a fighter for human rights on so many fronts throughout her life and career.  She is a strong ally of the LGBT community and I trust her leadership on equality issues without hesitation.  Many leading LGBT voices in the state are enthusiastically supporting Katrina because of her opposition to DOMA and DADT.

I don't for a second believe this blurb from the Telegraph.   It is unsubstantiated and not reflective of anything I have heard from Katrina.  So before you fall all over yourselves trying to score Kuster points in this primary, I'd urge you to take a step back and take a true measure of these candidates.  

---

by: chris pappas @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 21:34:47 PM CDT

As I just posted above, (0.00 / 0)

the WMUR statement and the Telegraph caption to me are in agreement.

What am I getting wrong here?

birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 21:41:41 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Just posted above how you got it wrong (4.00 / 1)

"Never doubt that a small group of dedicated people can change the world...it's all that ever has."
~Margaret Mead

---

by: johndejoie @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 21:57:13 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Unfair headline (4.00 / 1)

You're trying to unfairly paint Katrina as a foe of the LGBT community.  The WMUR statement does not confirm your headline.  It simply shows that Katrina is focused on making forward progress for LGBT families.  But it does not say that she's against anything.

---

by: chris pappas @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 22:10:39 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Unfair comment. (0.00 / 0)

The headline was an accurate description of this line from the Telegraph:

not in favor of legalizing same-sex marriage nationwide

The subsequent statements and commentary corroborate that statement.  She's for fed civil unions, against fed marriage.

This diary is not about Katrina Swett and the LGBT community.  It's about a legitimate - and very surprising to me - policy difference.


birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 22:21:26 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

What policy difference? (0.00 / 0)

I have been looking for public statements by Ms. Kuster supporting a federalization of the marriage issue.  Other than support for repealing DOMA (a position long held by Katrina Swett as well, in spite of your statements to the contrary), I can find nothing.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 22:30:36 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Great Puritan Backroom Ice Cream tonight in Bow! (4.00 / 1)

I won my bet with Chm Buckley...we had great 2nd CD Ice Cream from Beech Hill in Hopkinton, and because Sen. District 16 Candidate Kathy Kelly from Manchester brought incredible 1st District Black Raspberry from the Puritan Backroom we had 1st CD Ice Cream as well !

Did you know that Merrimack County includes a small portion of CSP's district in North Hooksett? We are Pan-Hampshire.
Chris I hear you and in all fairness we have two fantastic candidates.I don't think the Marriage issue separates Ann and Katrina. They are just different flavors.

for transparency sake ~I represent Union print shops

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 21:46:28 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Glad you liked it! (4.00 / 2)

Ice cream brings people together!

---

by: chris pappas @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 22:15:45 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

totally ! n/t (0.00 / 0)

for transparency sake ~I represent Union print shops

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 22:42:31 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Props to the RRT n/t (0.00 / 0)

Whack-a-mole, anyone?

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 21:41:15 PM CDT

In All Fairness... (0.00 / 0)

Just so the Swett Supporters understand, Blue Hampshire isn't the only reason people support Kuster or don't support Swett. I was at the convention, and I sat and listened to Katrina and have NEVER felt so talked down to by a candidate before. I can't vote for either one of them, but Kuster is NH...Swett is manufactured DNC.

---

by: ChrisMelcher @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 00:06:10 AM CDT

Sure Thing (0.00 / 0)

Kuster is NH...Swett is manufactured DNC.

Funny you say that.  One of the reason some people support Katrina Swett is that they are sick of the negative, nasty garbage being jammed down their throats by Kuster supporters.

As for "manufactured DNC", whatever that means, Katrina Swett has lived in New Hampshire for nearly three decades, and has devoted more hours to supporting progressive candidates than damn near anyone I know.  

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 05:17:59 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

bs alarm (0.00 / 1)

we had about 80 Kuster supporters in the room last night, maybe 20 Swett supporters...there was absolutely no"negative, nasty garbage being jammed down their throats by Kuster supporters." That's your immature reaction to being trounced.

for transparency sake ~I represent Union print shops

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 08:15:14 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

No BS (0.00 / 0)

I'm glad you had a nice event.  Read the damn diary, JB.  

Or, for that matter, check out any number of past hits by you, Jack, Burt, and now Dean on Blue Hampshire.  Do I need to provide examples again?  

Since I have not responded in kind, and have limited myself to defending Katrina against repeated slurs by Ann's supporters, I consider myself pretty mature.  But that will change if this garbage doesn't stop.  I am sick of it.  

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 08:54:31 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I thought you were referring to Howie Klein (0.00 / 0)

John DeJoie pushed back in a fair and detailed manner without the continuing 'buckshot' of threats and fight club mode you like to portray.He made specific references to things he felt were abusive, and centered his criticism on the blogger Howie Klein. To the best of my knowledge he doesn't blog here. Furthermore no one of us has any power to curb the thoughts or responses of others on this blog or off it.Thank you for clarifying that Jack and I and everyone else here spreads vicious slurs, and garbage.

for transparency sake ~I represent Union print shops

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 11:25:16 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

In response (0.00 / 0)

This is a partial list:

http://www.bluehampshire.com/s...

To your credit, you have not made any such comments on this diary, or in recent months.  But please don't attribute my desire to stop the constant negative barrage on this site as my "immature reaction to being trounced."  Rather, it's about my desire to have a clean primary and a nominee positioned to defeat Charlie Bass.

Do you recall a single diary in which I attacked Ann Kuster?  Don't you think it would be pretty damn easy for me to take a microscope to her multi-decade career as a corporate lobbyist?  I haven't, and I don't want to, because I recognize that she could well be our nominee.  

I just wish that some of Ann's supporters would show the same restraint before publishing false, malicious screed like Dean has here.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 11:48:36 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm totally confused (0.00 / 0)

I just read the updated diary and the comments, and I am confused. Could someone objectively give an apples to apples comparison of the candidates' positions? It seems both oppose DOMA and would work to repeal. It seems both support marriage equality here in NH.  What I don't see an apples to apples comparison is, where does each candidate stand on whether there should be federal legislation on either marriage equality or civil unions? Without the drama, please!

Thank you! I have repeatedly said both candidates are friends and I am not endorsing either but I will make that point again
now.    

 



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 06:40:37 AM CDT

thank you Switzerland ! n/t (0.00 / 0)

for transparency sake ~I represent Union print shops

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 08:08:44 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Each wouild make a terrific congresswoman (4.00 / 1)

Each is very progressive.  
So there you go!  



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 08:29:19 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I've made my choice (4.00 / 2)

But that fact was obvious in the room last night.I closed the event to loud cheers by saying how lucky we were to have "two such terrific candidates".

I happen to have been with Annie since before she had staff, when we would meet in my Concord office, Bagelworks.
I have no official role, just a kitchen cabinet volunteer.

Ann works incredibly hard. She has the best interests of the voters in mind and it comes across. I believe she will get more votes on 9/14. That and $1.75 will get you a cup of coffee unless you have your own mug, then its a buck.

for transparency sake ~I represent Union print shops

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 11:31:32 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

When I get a chance tonight, (0.00 / 0)

I'm going to re-post all the statements I can find.

Right now I'm with you on one of those "seems" and not sure  of another.  

birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 08:12:27 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Am I missing something? (4.00 / 3)

This is my interpretation of the candidates' positions.  Could someone let me know if this is a bad interpretation?

1. Both candidates strongly support the NH marriage equality law.

2. Both candidates strongly support repeal of DOMA (& DADT).

3. Both candidates strongly support the generic idea of having marriage equality throughout the entire country.

3a. Katrina expanded on this generic support by suggesting a federal Civil Union law, which would allow individuals in states without marriage equality to obtain the federal benefits of marriage.  This advances the cause of equality without infringing on states' rights.  It is intended as a stop gap measure, not a permanent solution.

3b. Annie hasn't gone into specifics of what interim measures she supports, but I am 99.99% sure she would support a strategy like Katrina's if asked.

Conclusion:  It is extremely unlikely there would be any difference in the lists of bills each of these candidates would sign onto and/or vote for.  Therefore, marriage equality is a non-issue in the primary.

Karen (married for 197 days.  Woohoo!)

---

by: Karen @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 08:51:04 AM CDT

Nationally... (4.00 / 3)

Support of repealing DOMA is considered the pro-marriage equality position.

In NH....

Pro Repeal:

Governor Lynch
Senator Shaheen
Congressman Hodes
Congresswoman Shea-Porter
Ann Kuster
Katrina Swett

Pro DOMA:

Judd Gregg
Every 2010 Republican candidate

2012 starts today.

---

by: Ray Buckley @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 10:25:01 AM CDT

"Mr. Barker, Tear Down this Headline" (0.00 / 0)

How many sources do you need to confirm its distorted inaccuracy?  

It's time to acknowledge the reality that Katrina Swett does NOT oppose marriage equality nationwide.  And to apologize to her.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 10:44:02 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I spoke to a Swett staffer last night (4.00 / 1)

First, they said that they didn't know where the Telegraph statement on marriage equality came from because social issues like marriage and abortion were not even discussed during the interview.   However, after discussing Katrina Swett's position with the staffer, this Telegraph statement seems to be correct.

Katrina Swett does support repeal of DOMA, which would give access to federal benefits to people married in states that recognize such marriages.  However, she supports a federal civil union law, rather than a federal marriage law, to provide access for couples who live in states that do not recognize marriage.

Like Kathy Sullivan, I would like to hear Ann Kuster address the issue of access to federal recognition for couples in states that do not recognize our relationships.

The other part of the conversation that I had with the staffer is that Katrina Swett believes that marriage equality should be handled on a state-by-state basis rather than at the federal level and that marriage should be decided legislatively rather than by the courts.

I find this to be disturbing.  The very purpose of the courts is to limit the government when the government discriminates against people in an unconstitutional way.   It is well established that laws that discriminate against people must at least pass the "rational basis" test to be constitutional.  Bans on interracial marriage were struck down because they were discriminatory and the government had no legitimate interest in supporting them.  The same is true in this case.

Everyone has a right to challenge laws in the courts if you believe those laws to be unconstitutionally discriminatory, as the marriage bans are.  Again, I would like to hear Ann Kuster's position on this.

I say this as someone who was supporting the Swett campaign until I had this conversation last night.

---

by: brianrater @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 11:14:56 AM CDT

I respect your view (0.00 / 0)

. . . as well as your honest, open presentation of it.

I do not work nor speak for the Swett campaign.  But I, like many other folks, was strongly opposed to the Bush Administration's efforts to undermine VT/MA laws preserving marriage rights.  Given the still viable threat of a judicial blanket that usurps state civil rights laws, this approach is not without problems.

This is probably the reason why our Democratic President and Congress has not passed (or, from what I can find, even introduced) legislation to impose a single marriage standard across the country.  And it is why, as Ray noted above, DOMA is the principal focus of the civil rights community in Congress.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 11:36:15 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thank you. (0.00 / 0)

You have confirmed what each Swett statement says, that she essentially leaves it up to the states, legislatively, and supports civil unions federally and repeal of DOMA.

birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 13:53:52 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I just received a response from the Swett campaign (0.00 / 0)

Here is an email that I just received from the staffer that I spoke with last night.  I am posting it here with that person's permission.

I just read your post on BH, and I think I need to clarify something I said last night.   What I meant to say (and thought I did, but perhaps not) is that Katrina thinks NH's  proactive passage (i.e. without a lawsuit) is preferred as obviously 'easier' in terms of complication.  In a perfect world my home state of Tennessee wouldn't need a court case to spur the legislature into action.   In no way does this mean she doesn't support the role of the judiciary or understand it's importance in achieving marriage equality.  In fact, she and I had a long conversation on the drive up north this am about how important it would be for the US Supreme Court to make a clear and constitutional stand on equal protection and justice in the case of same sex marriage.  What Katrina was bemoaning in the car (as well as at a recent public forum) was that we seem to now have an activist conservative court, and she's very concerned that cases dealing with choice and marriage among other things face very uncertain prospects.

I understand that you have a genuine disagreement with Katrina re: how marriage should be addressed at the federal vs. state levels, but I wanted to make sure I hadn't misspoken and misled you re: role of the courts.

---

by: brianrater @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 18:04:14 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

For what it's worth, (4.00 / 1)

ACLU and their partner organizations that won the battle to bring marriage equality to California by state courts had similar hesitations about going forward with Perry v. Schwarzenegger, the high profile challenge to Prop 8 on grounds of violating the national constitution--they were afraid a loss at SCOTUS now would mean having to wait longer for another shot with a more friendly court.  Of course, since Perry is going forward after all, ACLU et al are on board.

Still neutral,

--
No tea; no decaf.

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 20:30:27 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

so typical of Dems (4.00 / 1)

Let's all stand in a circle and shoot each other.  

---

by: Unagiboy @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 11:27:09 AM CDT

The game of telephone continues (4.00 / 1)

Over at Daily Kos, Laura Clawson has a front page diary entitled "NH-02: Swett does not support marriage equality."  This is blatantly false, though it's surely a great online fundraising tool for the Kuster camp.

I find this BH diary very irresponsible because it has taken a candidate's nuanced view of how we get equal rights for all couples and turned it on its head.  And now the misinformation is spreading to folks around the country and could be used against a candidate (Katrina) who would be a 100%, steadfast ally of LGBT rights in Congress.

As a progressive, it's disconcerting to me that we are wasting our energies beating up our own when we should be holding the real enemies of equality accountable.

---

by: chris pappas @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 12:49:20 PM CDT

Laura and Dean should be ashamed of themselves n/t (0.00 / 1)

This is disgusting.  It's a misleading, nasty, and blatantly false political hit.  

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 13:10:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

It is none of the above (0.00 / 0)

While you seem convinced that anyone's analysis of candidate's positions other than yours are fundamentally dishonest, there is no justification for such over the top characterizations of Laura and Dean's analysis.

---

by: measurestaken @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 13:17:48 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Wrong (0.00 / 0)

Have you read this blog?  Can you really justify supporting a front page diary entitled "Swett does not support marriage equality" when there is not a single minute gap between the stated positions of both our candidates (and the GLBT community) on DOMA, the NH law, and the need for additional legislation?

If you deny facts, it doesn't make them true.  Even if you replace them with insults of me.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 13:23:59 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Oops -- Replace that last line. . . . (0.00 / 0)

If you deny facts, it doesn't make them UNtrue.  Even if you replace them with insults of me.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 13:25:01 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

in answer to your question - "yes." (0.00 / 0)

Call me crazy, but I think supporting the right of all Americans regardless of their state of domicile to be able to marry people of the same gender is supporting marriage equality. I take the view that everything else is a half measure and not adequately supportive of marriage equality. I fail to see how that is denying facts.  

---

by: measurestaken @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 13:28:49 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Good to know (0.00 / 0)

. . . that every member of the United States Congress is opposed to gay marriage, as no one has introduced legislation to federalize marriage.

And I still haven't seen a statement by Ms. Kuster indicating that she will support one.  Her only stated positions -- to support the NH law and repeal of DOMA -- are shared by Katrina Swett.

But, of course, you already know that.  You just choose to ignor it because it would get in the way of your ridiculous slur.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 13:33:47 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

slur? n/t (0.00 / 0)

---

by: measurestaken @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 13:34:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Yes (0.00 / 0)

A statement that says that "Swett does not support marriage equality" is a patently false slur.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 13:42:26 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ann uses the term "Marriage Equality" (4.00 / 1)

Katrina uses "Civil Unions". There is a difference, IMHO.  On her campaign page, Ann mentions that she believes DOMA is unconstitutional, hinting at the fact that she would look to address equality at the national level.  I would try to defend Katrina's position, but she doesn't have an issues page on her website.  You have mentioned that she believes this should be legislated by the states, while still encouraging the repeal of DOMA.

I'm trying to determine the nuances between their positions, and I think this is an important issue.  I agree generally that marriage should be an issue left up to the states, but this is an issue of equality, just as it was with interracial marriage.

You are being overly dismissive of this discussion, claiming that it's an attack on Katrina. It is not.  It is concerned citizens trying to determine the policy positions of candidates they need to choose between.

That said, it would be great to get statements from each candidate clarifying their positions.  Would Candidate X fight to end marriage discrimination at the federal level?

because who is to doubt the American Way is not the way?

---

by: peacekeeper @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 14:21:19 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

In Response (0.00 / 0)

I respect your explanation, and agree with you that there should be a formal statement on the Swett for Congress web site on this.  But Katrina Swett is publicly and passionately for repeal of DOMA.  There is no question about this.

Why am I frustrated?  Because some Kuster supporters on this site have no problem attacking Katrina Swett without being able to answer the question you raised:  What's the difference?  

We know this: On the main federal issue (DOMA), both candidates support repeal.  On the main state issue (NH law), both candidates are 100% on board.  Some people are trying to claim that there is a difference on federal/state juridication on this issue, but there is NO effort by our Democratic President or Congress to take this course of action (not even a bill introduced), probably because they realize that federalizing gay marriage could well undermine it.

And the most frustrating aspect of this diary: While Annie's supporters are bashing Katrina, no one can seem to produce a single statement from her attesting to her own position on the federalization of marriage law.  Kathy, Jon, and others have asked about this, but to no avail.  

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 14:40:52 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

it's all insulting (4.00 / 2)

these 'nuanced' positions on equality are insulting. We either support our LGBT community or we treat them as second class citizens. Perhaps I'm of a 'new' generation and 'change happens slowly', but any justification of this discrimination is a justification of bigotry and intolerance. This is a message for both cd2 candidates and people in general: just tell me that gay people are entitled to every right guaranteed to them, just as straight people. This is all a bit bullshit and out of touch with reality.

DD, I'm sorry this is all a response to you. But if you are a friend of the campaign, as you mentioned, I would love for an encouragement to them to establish an 'issues' page on the campaign website.

(also: I don't think either candidate is a bigot. I just want a candidate who isn't afraid to shout from the rooftop equality, just as it was and is important for gender and ethnicity.)

because who is to doubt the American Way is not the way?

---

by: peacekeeper @ Sat Jul 17, 2010 at 00:51:43 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

Noted (0.00 / 0)

Thanks, peace.  I don't disagree with you on the need for a better (and more engaged) communications approach by the Swett campaign.  You are right.  And I appreciate your constructive tone, and your encouragement.

But it's one thing to say that "the campaign's statement on gay marriage sucks," and an entirely different approach to frontpage a diary falsely claiming that the candidate is opposed to gay marriage.  I agree with the former; the latter repulses me.

On a personal note, I can tell you that I have known Katrina Swett for nearly twenty years, and it would never cross her mind to treat gays and lesbians as "second class citizens."  She's a human rights policy professor with an acute understanding of the civil rights imperative.  Her father, for whom I once worked, was a San Francisco congressman who took to the House floor to stand up for the city's right to conduct marriage ceremonies for members of the LGBT community.  This is no gray area for her.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Sat Jul 17, 2010 at 07:09:23 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

I'm aware of Katrina's human rights work (0.00 / 0)

and I'm sure that both candidates personally are very supportive of the LGBT community.  I'm also aware that personally many Republicans are supportive of the LGBT community as well.  Unfortunately, politicians are still afraid to be publicly supportive and that is what I'm annoyed with.

because who is to doubt the American Way is not the way?

---

by: peacekeeper @ Mon Jul 19, 2010 at 08:09:02 AM CDT

[ Parent ]

NH Freedom to Marry Coalition Endorses Kuster (0.00 / 0)

From Annie's facebook page:

Ann McLane Kuster: Humbled to hear I just received the endorsement of the NH Freedom to Marry Coalition (http://www.nhftm.org/). I'm proud to be a vocal supporter for passing marriage equality here in NH and I'll continue to support marriage equality in Washington!

Whack-a-mole, anyone?

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 13:12:30 PM CDT

I don't know what that means (4.00 / 1)

That is why I am trying to get apples to apples. I do not know if there is a difference in the candidates' positions.  



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 13:35:27 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Ask Mo. n/t (0.00 / 0)

Whack-a-mole, anyone?

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 14:16:23 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Fair is fair (4.00 / 1)

I want to be careful here, because I don't want anyone parsing this comment to try to find an endorsement, and also I have a lot of respect for everyone here. But I just re-read the diary and the comments, and I don't think the title of the diary is accurate.  It says Katrinna Swett does not support marriage equality at the national level. That is wrong.  I feel like she is being beat up here for a position she does not have.

Both candidates supporte NH's law, and also the repeal of DOMA.  Karen's post above puts the policy positions in proper perspective.

Anyway, feel free to disagree, but from the Alps, that is how I see it, and if I thought Annie was being treated unfairly, I would say so, too. Actually, I think I did when another Sullivan said something that I thought was wrong.  

Have a great weekend!    



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 16:01:42 PM CDT

Ref (4.00 / 3)

Politics is the only sport where the Refs get bloddied.

I don't think you are playing favorites.

Whack-a-mole, anyone?

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 16:18:37 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

Thank you, Kathy (0.00 / 0)

I think this fiction has been pretty well exposed -- now by several of our respected and unaligned friends.

Apologies are in order.

---

by: Dartmouth Dem @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 17:09:46 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

I agree - go ahead and start anytime (0.00 / 0)

Just because Kathy doesn't see a difference doesn't mean none exists. The only who should be apologize on this thread is you for your belligerent foot-stomping.  

---

by: measurestaken @ Fri Jul 16, 2010 at 17:46:34 PM CDT

[ Parent ]

"...in the spirit of not electing Bass or Horn or Guida." (4.00 / 1)

Never! Its GIUDA !!!
http://www.bobgiuda.com/
pronounced guy.duh

for transparency sake ~I represent Union print shops

---

by: JonnyBBad @ Fri Jul 23, 2010 at 22:34:01 PM CDT