About
Learn More about our progressive online community for the Granite State.

Create an account today (it's free and easy) and get started!
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


The Masthead
Managing Editors


Jennifer Daler

Contributing Writers
elwood
Mike Hoefer
 susanthe
ActBlue Hampshire

The Roll, Etc.
Prog Blogs, Orgs & Alumni
Betsy Devine
Blue News Tribune (MA)
Democracy for NH
Live Free or Die
Mike Caulfield
Granite State Progress
Seacoast for Change
Susan the Bruce

Politicos & Punditry
Krauss
Landrigan
Lawson
Pindell
Primary Monitor
Scala
Schoenberg
Spiliotes
Welch

Campaigns, Et Alia.
Paul Hodes
Carol Shea-Porter
John DeJoie
Ann McLane Kuster
ActBlue Hampshire
NHDP
DCCC
DSCC
DNC

National
Balloon Juice
billmon
Congress Matters
DailyKos
Digby
Hold Fast
Eschaton
FiveThirtyEight
MyDD
The Next Hurrah
Open Left
Senate Guru
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo

50 State Blog Network
Alabama
Arizona
California
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Missouri
Missouri
Montana
Nebraska
Nevada
New Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York
New York
North Carolina
North Dakota
Ohio
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Dakota
Tennessee
Texas
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virginia
Washington
West Virginia
Wisconsin

Politics of [marriage] Equality

by: Kathy Sullivan 2

Fri Apr 24, 2009 at 15:27:40 PM EDT
( - promoted by Dean Barker)

It occurred to me that it is a mistake to refer to the marriage equality bill as the marriage equality bill. Actually, it should be the Equality Bill, because as everyone has been pointing out, the bill is about equality, not marriage. It really took reading a lot of the comments yesterday and today to drive that home to me.

So, to the politics - which is what I am much better at than policy. If I were going to discuss the politics of the Equality Bill with the Senators, here is what I would say:
Kathy Sullivan 2 :: Politics of [marriage] Equality
1. Senators, you probably are not going to lose your seats over voting for the Equality Bill.  I love you all dearly, and I know you work hard and your hearts are all in the right places, and I know you probably wish the House hadn't sent you the Equality Bill, but they did. So, think about the reaction to your vote on the Civil Unions bill.  There wasn't much of one, was there? The people who aren't going to vote for you over the Equality Bill aren't going to vote for you anyway, for the most part.  There may be a few who will, but....

2. Take a chance! Make it happen!  So you lose a few votes?  Pick up some other votes by fixing the budget!  Explain to your constituents why you voted for Equality. I don't want you to lose your seat either, not with redistricting coming up, but when November '010 comes around, voters will be thinking aboiut how you handled the economy and budget, not the Equality Bill. And if you do lose, well, the cause was righteous. This is one of those very few, really rare times when a vote is worth taking a chance.I know, easy for me to say, but wouldn't you rather be able to say you lost because you did the right thing, rather than say, you were on the side of - John H. Sununu....  

3.  And speaking of John H. Sununu - he is so '80's New Hampshire. 1880's.  Voting for Equality is the right thing to do, but it also will really anger him, which is a good thing.  Reject the politics of fear and homophobia promoted by Sununu, and please vote for Equality.

4. Senators, this not a crazy lefty thing. The Equality Bill is a civil rights, equal rights bill, which are not crazy, lefty issues. They are basic Democratic issues.

5. I don't want to get into "some of my best friends are gays or lesbians", but - some of your friends, colleagues and perhaps family members are gays and lesbians. You like them better than John H. Sununu and those people from the Cornerstone Whatever Foundation.  

6. Well, now that I mention it, one of the reasons I feel strongly about this is that I do have two really good friends who have been together longer than my husband and me.  They live in Vermont. I want them to move to New Hampshire.

7. Oh, for goodness sake. Forget the politics. Just do it.  
Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Politics of [marriage] Equality | 25 comments
DO IT! Because you'll be smeared either way (4.00 / 4)
Any group that thinks of equality as "garbage" will hold no bars in '010.

So I offer two GOP rhetorical tactics in the upcoming election:

1) You are weak. You voted for equality because you are victim to some strong arm agenda pressed down upon you from some foreign, far left, San Francisco, George Soros loving, dirty hippy, socialist elites. You don't understand what makes NH unique and a vote for you would be the eventual destruction of all that allows keeping NH, NH!

2) You are weak. You see that the (see italics above) agenda is morally bankrupt, so you are trying desperately to ride the sympathies of the flinty, conservative mindset that is the REAL NH. If you had a real back bone, you'd tell those far-left yahoos to go pound granite! But NO! You voted no against "teh gay" marriage with your tail between your legs. You have no spine and thus, no character. You are not fit to represent the fine, God fearing, tax hating, rugged individualists that dream at night about keeping NH, NH!

www.KusterforCongress.com  

If nothing else... (0.00 / 0)
... Deb Reynolds' explanation was purest crap. If it is a matter of rights, then she should say so and support it. If she is opposed to it, then she should say that and vote against it. "We're not ready" is the most puerile sniveling "Please don't hate me, I didn't want to have to get involved in this" waste of breath since, well, the last time Sununu opened his mouth. Deb Reynolds is not the only Democrat who can hold Senate District 2; far from it. She had better come out with an actual position when the vote comes before the full Senate - so her challenger, whether in the primary or the general, can get started. She's going to have one either way, now, and there are going to be a lot of Democrats not very interested in supporting her.

IT for John Lynch '04 and NHDP '08 - I'm liking my track record so far!
Not into the vitriol (4.00 / 2)
Sorry, not into comments like puerile sniveling and not supporting the Democrats in the general election and all of that. You want some Democrats to sit at home because they are mad in '010?  Then you take responsibility for the repeal of civil unions, return of parental notification, and a lot of other bad legislation that will take place with a Republican governor and legislature. Good luck with that.  

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    
[ Parent ]
why would I think (4.00 / 2)
that Democrats who are too spineless to stand up for marriage equality would defend civil unions?  
[ Parent ]
ummm (4.00 / 2)
Because they voted for civil unions?


"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    
[ Parent ]
people who don't stand up (4.00 / 2)
for civil rights can't be trusted to protect them.


[ Parent ]
Not into the vitriol (4.00 / 1)
You want some Democrats to sit at home because they are mad in '010?  Then you take responsibility for the repeal of civil unions, return of parental notification, and a lot of other bad legislation that will take place with a Republican governor and legislature.

[ Parent ]
That wasn't vitriol (4.00 / 2)
Vitriol would have been something like, "you'll have blood on your hands if the anti-choice nuts get back into power", and RealNH doesn't deserve vitriol in response to righteous anger.

I know vitriol. Vitriol was a friend of mine.  That sir, was no vitriol.  

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

[ Parent ]
Come off it. (4.00 / 1)
That comment was, in fact, puerile and sniveling. Take a position one way or another, not sob that you don't wanna.

Also, you misinterpret my terminal comment - I'm saying she's going to have a lot of Democrats not supporting her in the primary because of this, harkening back to that bit I wrote about how Deb Reynolds is not the only Democrat who can hold SD2. She's no Kathleen Sebelius, holding a spot in the middle of a blood-red electorate. SD2 is ripe for a primary challenge, and spitting in the face of a strongly-favored position by Democrats is a great way to make sure one happens. I thought I'd written often enough about the utility of coming out even for a disappointing Democrat in the general, but apparently not.

IT for John Lynch '04 and NHDP '08 - I'm liking my track record so far!

[ Parent ]
? (0.00 / 0)
Penultimate, not terminal:

so her challenger, whether in the primary or the general, can get started.

Plus the comment to Democrats not interested in supporting, in light of the penultimate, is easily inferred as sitting on one's hands in the general. But if that was not intended, great!

Not sure how callilng someone puerile and snivelling fits with the strategy of trying to turn their vote around.  

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

[ Parent ]
Terminal. (4.00 / 1)
She's going to have one either way, now, and there are going to be a lot of Democrats not very interested in supporting her.

That's where I said she's going to have Democrats not interested in supporting her, referencing the primary. The Republican challenger in the general is going to accuse her of being 'anti-marriage' unless she comes out and makes a much more stridently anti-marriage statement; the Democratic challenger in the primary is going to hold this vote up to demonstrate her lack of commitment to Democratic principles. She needs to make an honest statement of her own position one way or another, not this mealy-mouthed "We're not ready for it" garbage. That is an absolutely shameful display of refusing the accept responsibility for her vote. If it is a right, she needs to say so and admit to her cowardice on the committee vote; if it is not a right then she needs to declare in front of the Democratic voters of Senate District 2 that she does not share the majority-Democratic position in favor of equality. "We're not ready for it" is saying it's something we should do, but that she lacks the courage to actually do it.

I am comfortable with politicians taking principled positions, even when I may disagree with them. I am comfortable with politicians in red states or red districts being further to the right than I am, as long as they're more sensible than their Republican opponents. I am comfortable with the idea that politicians will make decisions based on political calculations like "Supporting an income tax will probably do the party a great deal of harm and might not pass anyway." What outrages me is the sheer lack of spine on display from Senator Reynolds here on an issue which she has already faced in the civil unions vote, and which she therefore knows perfectly well she will not face a backlash for voting the party line for.

I supported Tester and Webb and Casey in their general elections, knowing they were going to not be as progressive as, say, Russ Feingold, because they were enormously better than their Republican alternatives. I supported Ned Lamont in his primary against Joe Lieberman, because Lieberman was so clearly a party cancer and was so openly lying (I received in one day two fliers from him - one to me, one to the Republican previous occupants of the condo I was in at the time. One said in no uncertain terms he would support Bush; the other in no uncertain terms said he would demand investigations and withdrawal). I supported John Lynch in picking Bonnie Newman to replace Judd Gregg, because Newman is a more rational person than Gregg and was going to leave the seat empty anyhow. I am totally fine with strategic and tactical moves. Senator Reynolds did not make a strategic or tactical move, nor did she make a principled one. She made a cowardly one, blaming New Hampshire for her failure to act, and I am in fact outraged at her terrible performance this week.

Blaming the people of New Hampshire for her refusal to support equality is puerile; blaming someone else for one's own failings is indeed childish. Being too afraid to make a statement of principle does indeed make her performance a sniveling one.

As for my strategy? There are more tools than carrots. When you want to train a puppy you use treats to reward good behavior, and you rub its nose promptly and vigorously in its errors. Senator Reynolds has made a monumental error, and she will not change her behavior if she does not become aware of the consequences of it. She needs to become very, very aware that people in the party are disgusted with her right now. Then you and Ray and the Senate Caucus gain the 'change your vote and we can help defend you against the angry base' carrot you can employ; I'm fine with being part of the stick every once in a while if it gets results.

IT for John Lynch '04 and NHDP '08 - I'm liking my track record so far!

[ Parent ]
Kathy, I hope you're sending this to the Senators and not just posting it here. (4.00 / 1)

Done (4.00 / 3)
I also e mailed 20 people this morning asking them to contact not only their senators, but also Senators D'Alessandro, DeVries, Gilmour and Reynolds. They need to hear from us, too, to let them know we will have their backs if they vote for the bill. It is important for people to know that if they go out on a limb, someone is there to catch them.


"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    
[ Parent ]
E-Mails Might Not Work So Well Now... (0.00 / 0)
...they are getting so many on various issues.  So in addition, hard-copy letters are GREAT -- as are FAXES to the offices.  On Monday and Tuesday delivering letters to each Seante Office will get to our Senators.  

But this shouldn't just be about numbers -- it should be about right and wrong.  Of course, the letters, phone calls, E-Mails, and personal visits help.  

Going to the State House in person on Monday or Tuesday and visiting each Senate Office will help immensely for anyone!

[ Parent ]
It is about right and wrong. (0.00 / 0)
But if I were a State Senator, I'd appreciate knowing there's a base that will back me up after I do the right thing.
[ Parent ]
Here's the thing: (4.00 / 4)
I don't believe any Senator, including Senator Reynolds, is worried about the voters. They can count too; they saw that civil unions was no big deal. They saw the same line-up this time.

I believe they are instead worried about their relationship with John Lynch.

And I Can't Believe... (4.00 / 6)
...that John Lynch would veto this bill.  I'm hoping he knows that it's time to put this issue behind us, and have New Hampshire -- a state he loves -- stand for equality and fairness.  
[ Parent ]
Thank You Kathy! (4.00 / 3)


No'm Sayn?
[ Parent ]
Burt! You are welcome n/t (4.00 / 2)
   

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    
[ Parent ]
Nice To See The Two Of You... (4.00 / 1)
...so sweet and happy together again.  Equality Unites!
[ Parent ]
:) (0.00 / 0)

[ Parent ]
"Equality Unites!" (0.00 / 0)
Inequality secedes? :)

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    
[ Parent ]
If you want to put this behind you, then vote for it. (4.00 / 10)

The history of expanding rights is that it is always a big deal until it happens and then those who were frightened by change for the most part realize that it doesnt really cause their universe to collapse. Think Catholics as president-- pre-Kennedy, huge issue; post Kennedy, who cares?
Civil unions-- almost a civil war in Vermont before it happened; now, barely mentioned. (Abortion is an isolated example where this has not been the case, but that perhaps was because of the manner and timing of Roe v Wade).

As Kathy says, if you put it behind us,very few people who wouldn't always vote against the Democratic Senators are going to do so based on it-- they will do so based upon the real issues involving the financial meltdown that threatens them every day and not something that has been shown to have no effect on their lives. If you keep it alive, it remains an issue to be pulled out and abused by the troglodytes.

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

Going to your point, (4.00 / 1)
Three months ago, the first Catholic Vice President was inaugurated.  Nobody noticed.
[ Parent ]
Politics of [marriage] Equality | 25 comments
Connect with BH
     
Blue Hampshire Blog on Facebook
Powered by: SoapBlox