Thursday, March 31, 2005

Gannongate: The Massachusetts Connection

Just in case readers here in Massachusetts were feeling that the Gannongate scandal was but a bizarre, far away, inside-the-beltway story, check this out:

Blogger Ron Brynaert, who has been researching the alleged reporting of Jeff Gannon and his colleagues at (the now defunct) Talon News, has revealed that Gannon plagiarized an exclusive June 13, 2003 story by Melissa Beecher which appeared in the MetroWest Daily News and The Daily News Tribune, that serve suburban Boston and are owned by the The Boston Herald. Brynaert writes: "In response to a 'You Got plagiarized By Jeff Gannon' e-mail that I sent, Ms. Beecher informed me that she 'was the only reporter at this event' and reported on a first-hand experience."

Brynaert's report was picked up by The Raw Story, which further interviewed Beecher and her editor, Richard Lodge. "What bothers me," Lodge told Raw Story, "was that it was so clear that it was our story... He was not there, and yet he represented to his readers that he was. She was the only reporter in that room. The fact that he didn't attribute it, that he represented to readers that he was that was a lie. He is a liar.

Raw Story notes that Beecher and Lodge were shocked to learn that Gannon (whose real name is James Guckert) would be speaking at a National Press Club panel discussion on journalism and blogging, in Washington, DC next week.

"He's not a journalist," Lodge told Raw Story. "And he misrepresented to anyone reading that website that this was his work, and it was not his work, plain and simple."

"When somebody sets himself up to be a credible journalist, however the heck he did that, and I think it happened because nobody questioned him, then he is tainting all of us legitimate journalists," Lodge added. "Because whatever questions he's asking, and whatever stories he's allegedly writing, are suspect. And I think that makes readers suspect all of us."

Gannongate, Continued

Jeff Gannon, the esteemed former White House correspondent and male escort service entrepreneur, has been invited to speak at the National Press Club on a panel of, well, others. The trade journal Editor and Publisher reports that including Gannon on an April 8 panel discussion about journalism and blogging called "Who is a Journalist?," has caused "a flurry."

"In a letter published ...[March 29th] on the Poynter Institute's Romenesko site," Editor and Publisher continues, "Jonathan Salant, vice chairman of the Press Club, asked: 'Is E&P suggesting that we should not invite controversial figures to appear at the Club and be questioned by reporters? ... People get invited to speak at the Club, whether a luncheon, a newsmaker event or a forum, because they are newsworthy.'

Salant was responding to a March 28th article in Editor and Publisher that had questioned the validity of Gannon's inclusion on the panel.

E&P Editor Greg Mitchell responded in letter of his own, according to E&P, noting that "Gannon is appearing as part of a serious journalism discussion, not as a solo newsmaker: 'Should a non-journalist who has worked as a male escort be invited to speak on a journalism panel at the National Press Club?' He asked Salant to supply the names of any suspected 'hookers' who 'have previously appeared as speakers at the Press Club, especially as part of journalism panels.'"

Indeed. This "newsmaker" sat among the elite White House press corps for two years, having zero journalism background, operating under a pseudonym, writing for a fake news agency that was really a GOP political front, and well, immediately prior to his new life as White House correspondent and escort service proprietor, he worked as an office manager at an auto body shop. Now leaders in the Washington press corps have placed him on a panel discussing the difference between blogging and journalism. How's that for muddying the waters?

Now how is it exactly that Gannon got access to the White House for two years to lob softball questions to press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan and president George Bush? Oh, never mind, let's focus on really important questions like, are bloggers really journalists? Let's ask Jeff Gannon!

In fairness, the members of the National Press Club may pose some good questions to Gannon next week, and they may force some interesting answers -- but they are not the folks reporting the story.

The new ePluribus Media (an organization with which I am pleased to be a part) continues to crack open new elements of the Gannongate story. But before we get to the latest news, please consider making a contribution to help ePluribus Media get started. (Formal organizational launch coming in a few weeks!)

The mission statement of ePluribus Media declares that it is a "cooperative of citizen volunteers dedicated to researching issues of common concern, exposing government propaganda and corruption, and encouraging the highest standards of ethics and journalism."

The group is committed to the principles enumerated in the Statement of Shared Purpose and the Citizen's Bill of Journalism Rights composed by the Committee of Concerned Journalists.

Now back to our story.

Susan Gardner, cofounder of ePluribus Media, has a new story, posted on The Daily Kos: Fake Reporter Running Sham Nonprofit?

Gannon advertised that his group, Free Speech Foundation was registered with the Internal Revenue Service as a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization, but, Gardner suggests that its real purpose was to raise money for lawyers defending Gannon's pals in a libel suit.

"Like almost everything else connected with The Great Pretender," Gardner writes, "'Jeff Gannon,' aka J.D. Guckert - his name, his 'news agency,' his purported conservative family values while selling his 'escort services' on the internet - his Free Speech Foundation is looking more and more like a sham 'tax-exempt' organization, with the timing of its founding suggesting it was created primarily in response to a $5 million libel lawsuit filed against a rabidly pro-Bush website called, appropriately enough, ProBush.com."

"It is apparent that the Free Speech Foundation may have been a front organization set up to launder money and provide contributors with tax-exemptions," Gardner stated in an ePluribus Media press release. She also notes that ePluribus Media volunteers have documented much of the evidence available on the Internet before it was "scrubbed," or erased. "Over the past months, we have seen several sites close down altogether or delete all references to Jeff Gannon and the rest of his activities," said Gardner.

Wednesday, March 30, 2005

Setting the Record Straight

Since becoming a blogger about 6 months ago, I have occasionally written about blogs and blogging. But being relatively new to the blogosphere, I am not as deeply steeped in its conventions and history as many others, so I am taking my chances whenever I venture into this area. Unsurprisingly, I have made some errors and significant omissions, (probably more than have been called to my attention).

Time to correct the record.

Awhile back I wrote about the recent rise of progressive religious bloggers. I was immediately notified that I had left out an early and significant progressive religious blog, The Village Gate (formerly known as The Right Christians.)

Sometime later, I noticed a number of recent start-up progressive political blogs, all spin-offs of The Daily Kos. But I missed Newsfare -- that got started when over 550 blogs took a stand against the nomination of the author of torture, Alberto Gonzales as Attorney General. Newsfare features headlines from both blogs and major news outlets.

Then yesterday, I wrote about ePluribus Media, the organization forming to continue the Gannongate investigation -- and launch new ones. I wrote that it was the first large-scale example of open source journalism. I was quickly informed that, without taking anything away from the remarkable achievements of Susan Gardner and her team of citizen reporters, it would have been more accurate to describe it as but the latest example of open source, collaborative journalism, of which there have been a number of varieties over the years. Fair enough.

I appreciate the extraordinary role and promise of blogging and the Internet -- both for politics and for journalism. I, like many of my colleagues, see all this as a democratizing corrective to the trend towards concentration of wealth and power in the U.S. -- and to the antidemocratic movements these concentrations have unleashed. So while carving out my own modest role, I do try to recognize the pioneers and to appreciate what has gone into creating all of this. But I know it is not possible to know, and to be properly respectful of all that I should, and would like to be. So much has gone before. So much is happening even now.

I do try to get the story right. But I can't promise that I will not stumble again. If I do, I hope people will write to me to set the record straight.

Monday, March 28, 2005

Help Launch ePluribus Media

For two years the White House press corps turned a blind eye to a ringer in their midst. The ringer was James Guckert -- known to them, and now to the world, as "Jeff Gannon."

"Jeff," as President George Bush called him at the fateful White House press conference on January 26th, turned out to be not only a fake reporter, working for a fake news agency, and operating under a false name -- but he also operated web sites promoting male prostitution.

The bloggers at The Daily Kos, (one of the nation's most popular political web sites) who led the way in exposing Guckert and the GOP front group, Talon News, will go down in the history of journalism as the first large-scale practitioners of what is being called "open source journalism." The term "open source" derives from an element of the computer software community that seeks to make information widely accessible instead of narrowly proprietary or shrouded in mystery.

They are not only continuing their ground-breaking investigation, but they are also building a new organization -- ePluribus Media -- to carry it and other worthwhile investigations forward. (Full disclosure: I am honored to be among the founders of this organization.)

Meanwhile, ePluribus Media cofounder Susan Gardner and Todd Johnston have a new story published on The Daily Kos, on how Gannon's debut in the national media coincided with the first known published review of his male escort services.

According to an ePluribus Media press release, Guckert first emerged "as conservative pit bull 'Jeff Gannon,"' on Nov. 12, 2002, as author of an article published on ConservativeMonitor.com. This was the same date one of his male escort clients published a "rave review of his services," said Gardner.

Gardner and Johnston detail Guckert's career moves from office manager at an auto body shop in West Chester, Pennsylvania, to Washington DC-based male escort service entrepreneur and White House correspondent. His rise "was nothing short of meteoric," Gardner said. "That this metamorphosis occurred in conjunction with his male escort business leads us to believe that the two may be connected. We are pursuing that investigation."

The group has recently incorporated as a 501(c)(4) non-profit organization and needs your help to get off the ground: ePluribus Media

Friday, March 25, 2005

GOP Leaders Pledge Fealty to Christian Right at Secret Conference

Americans United for Separation of Church and State has audiotape of top Republican leaders promising to support the agenda of the Christian Right. The tapes, made at a closed door "Washington Briefing," sponsored by the Family Research Council at the Willard Hotel, in Washington, D.C., March 17-19, 2005 -- are making big news.

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay(R-TX) is heard on the tapes comparing criticism of his ethics with the situation of Terri Schiavo, according to the Associated Press. "One thing that God has brought to us is Terri Schiavo to elevate the visibility of what is going on in America, that Americans would be so barbaric as to pull a feeding tube out of a person that is lucid and starve them to death," he said in remarks Friday to a conservative group and made public Wednesday.

"This is exactly the issue that is going on in America, of attacks against the conservative movement, against me and against many others," added DeLay, lately at the center of a controversy concerning his overseas travel."

The AP story also quotes DeLay as saying: "The point is the other side has figured out how to win and defeat the conservative movement," he said after mentioning Schiavo, "and that is to go after people personally, charge them with frivolous charges and link that up with all these do-gooder organizations funded by [liberal billionaire] George Soros and then get the national media on their side."

"That whole syndicate that they have going on right now is for one purpose and one purpose only, and that's to destroy the conservative movement. It's to destroy conservative leaders."

In a press release about the tapes, Americans United reports that DeLay and Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist (R-TN) "assured attendees that they would do what it takes to keep Schiavo connected to a feeding tube and also would exert great power to push a whole host of issues central to the Religious Right's agenda."

DeLay urged the gathering to contact lawmakers in both chambers to support legislation that would allow churches to become much more involved in partisan politicking. The Texas Republican blasted current federal tax law, which bars both secular and religious nonprofit groups from endorsing political candidates.

"It forces Christians back into the church and that's what is going on," DeLay claimed. "That's not what Christ asked us to do. We have to fight back."

FRC President Tony Perkins assured DeLay of the group's support and asked audience members to contact Republican lawmakers and demand that they back the House majority leader.

Frist also told the FRC attendees that he was dedicated to issues dear to their hearts.

"You stand up for our families, our children, you never back down," Frist told the gathering via speakerphone. "That's why we are winning these larger battles today. Together we are leading our nation forward. We have a president, a House of Representatives, a Senate that shares our values and the American people are on our side.

"In this Congress we are going to continue to work on the issues that are important to you, to me and above all, America's future," Frist continued.

Those issues include, Frist maintained, the confirmation of "good judges," protecting the "sanctity of marriage" and protecting "the unborn." He said, "I'm also committed to ending the [Senate Democratic] minority's filibuster [on judges] and restoring this 220 years or more of Senate tradition and history."

Frist was particularly adamant about fighting for a Federal Marriage Amendment, saying that, "We will take action to preserve and protect and defend the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman."

"Religious Right leaders are determined to run all of our lives, from the moment of conception through the end of life," said the Rev. Barry W. Lynn, Americans United executive director. "And top congressional leaders are conspiring behind closed doors in Washington to help them do it. It's appalling."


The GOP may have miscalculated and blown thier historic opportunity. Iraq is a disaster. The economy is tanking. Bush's Social Security plan is a non-starter. The public is unimpressed with Congressional interference in the Schiavo case and the apparent corruption of DeLay and his cronies.

How desperate must House Speaker Tom DeLay be to compare himself to Terri Schiavo?

(Thanks to Bruce Prescott for flagging the story.)

Thursday, March 24, 2005

Gannongate Update: Gannon Never Served in USMC

James Guckert, the principal figure in the still-unfolding Gannongate scandal, is back in the news.

Guckert, aka Jeff Gannon, served as a White House correspondent for Talon News, until he was exposed as a GOP operative, with no journalism experience, who was using a false identity (Jeff Gannon) for two years, while lobbing softball questions to press secretary Scott McClellan and president George Bush. Guckert resigned on Feb 9th, and Talon News shut down soon thereafter. Guckert also maintained web sites apparently advertising his services as a male prostitute. A featured part of his appeal was his claim to be a Marine. Apparently, like much about Guckert, this was also false.

"Fake name. Fake reporter. Fake news agency. And now this ... Fake Marine," writes Susan Gardner on The Daily Kos.

Gardner is co-founder of ePluribus Media, a volunteer organization with
more than 700 citizen journalists who are currently researching the Gannongate story. According to an ePluribus Media press release:

"'We first conducted a search of military personnel records at the National
Personnel Records Center in St. Louis,' Gardner said. The facility, a central
repository which purports to hold all military records, can find no service
record under the name and Social Security number of James D. Guckert.'"

"'Our contact there advised us to check directly with the Marine Corps in
Quantico,' Gardner said. 'An inquiry there produced the same results, she
said.'"

"On Guckert's gay escort web sites, he claims he is a Marine veteran,'
Gardner said. 'Yet the U.S. Marine Corps has no record of his service, nor
does the U.S. military's central records division. We are beginning to doubt
he was ever in the military.'"

"Gardner said that Guckert -- as 'Jeff Gannon,' the name he used to gain
entry into White House press briefings for more than two years -- claimed
military service on political web sites such as conservativeguy.com."

"'To falsely claim military service as a way to ingratiate oneself with
conservative political organizations or gay escort service clients seems not
only fatuous but highly insulting to American servicemen and women who
are fighting and dying right now in Iraq and Afghanistan,' said Gardner."

Wednesday, March 23, 2005

National Progressive Blogger Movement Grows

When the history of blogging is written, The Daily Kos will certainly be recognized as the blogfather of many. His offspring are not only striking out on thier own, but they epitomize the rapid growth of high quality, diverse and innovative sites that are not only changing the blogoshere, but politics and culture. Recently a number of veteran kossacks, (as they call themselves), have developed their own group blogs with distinctive identities and progressive purposes. Some of these go back a few months, one is new last week, and one is new last night.

Here is a brief round-up of kosspring worth checking out.

Liberal Street Fighter is a feisty bunch -- who are in the middle of a promising-looking site redesign, so they might prefer you wait to visit until Friday. Faithforward: Progressive Christianity, Progressive Politics has been home to some of the most interesting and humorous writing about politics and religion on the internet.

The Next Hurrah started a few weeks ago, featuring several former Daily Kos front pagers who write with great clarity and force about politics, public policy, and whatever is on their minds. It also sports a design that facilitates easy reading.

A week or so ago, something completely different suddenly appeared: The Booman Tribune. Like The Daily Kos, it features lots of diaries and lengthy comment trails. Unlike its blogfather, the Trib is promoting a culture of not taking itself too seriously -- even when writing about matters of the utmost seriousness. Booman may be onto something. (He has also appointed an equal number of women and men as his front pagers.)

Finally, last night, just after midnight, Tom Tech, (aka Tom Davis), launched BringVisibility.net. Concerned about what he considers to be distinctly fascist trends in American politics, he made a point of launching the site on the 86th anniversary of the birth of fascism in Mussolini's Italy. In his announcement on The Daily Kos, he wrote that he sees the new site as "a place for organizers and others to announce events," both local and national; and for writers, including "the quiet voices" to "highlight their work." On BringVisibility itself, he writes:

"Welcome to what I hope will revolutionize activism in America... The goal of this site is to provide the tools for action.

Bloggers will be able to submit their columns so others can recommend them for everyone else.

Organizers will be able to submit their events so people can find out about events in their areas.

Readers will be able to submit events in their areas where others can affect the political process.

The site will send out personalized e-mails informing members where they be effective locally, or nationally. These E-mails will inform them where they can find out information on issues that interest them.

The site will use a vast list of user preferences to limit the size and content of the E-mails sent to ensure readers will not be overwhelmed... "


I have never seen anything like it. Is it too iconoclastic, too breathtakingly ambitious and unconnected to established groups to catch on? Or is a brilliant idea that in a few months, activists and journalists will be wondering how they ever did without it? I have no idea.

Monday, March 21, 2005

Attn: Progressive Democratic Activists

There are alternatives to the top-down, all-centrally organized campaign model that dominates electoral life.

An exceptionally well informed activist discusses this today on The Daily Kos in a diary titled:
"Neighbor to Neighbor works"
. It crystallizes the debate going on in democratic political circles. Its a must-read. And if you are a registered user of The Daily Kos, please hurry on over and "recommend" this diary. It deserves a wide audience and discussion.

Sunday, March 20, 2005

How to Beat the Christian Right, Part I

What can we do about the Christian Right? (I have been asked this, in response to various diaries on The Daily Kos.) This essay is the beginning of an answer. I suppose its directed to everyone, and no one in particular -- except you, the reader. There is, as you might imagine, no one short answer to the question. But farther down, I am going to offer one anyway. I am convinced that it is the place to begin; the lens through which to view all other elements of the struggle. It is the foundation. Without it, everything else is unconnected dots.

The good news is that it is simpler than you may think, and you may already be doing it.

But no scrolling ahead!  There are reasons why I save the answer 'til the end.

I was inspired, as I often am, to write this essay in response to the Christian Right itself. It happens that there is a small, but significant Christian Right conference in Atlanta next month. It will not get the national attention that D. James Kennedy's recent "Reclaiming America" conference received. And it will probably not be as large, or draw very many people from beyond Atlanta. But it is important for other reasons. The conference sponsor, American Vision, is one of the leading hubs of theocratic education and activism in the United States. And I think a look at the conference agenda, tells us much about the theocratic movement, and how it seeks to take power. And because this is so, or at least thats how it appears to me, it offers us some insight into what we must do in response.

The conference, titled  Restore America Rally, looks from this distance like an ideological indoctrination seminar in Christian nationalism, and a pep rally for the political movement that emanates from it. Let's take a quick look at the featured speakers.

Gary DeMar, is the head of American Vision, which publishes books for the Christian school and Christian home school market. DeMar's own books tend to be works of Christian historical revisionism, which among other things, seek to persuade young people that the U.S. was founded as a "Christian nation." His first presentation at the conference, intended for young people, is on "America's Christian Heritage." This is one way of framing the basic premise of Christian nationalism. And it is important because it is a central underlying premise of all of the Christian Right, and is arguably a necessary ingredient to their success. But it is also a major weakness, because it is a premise that is more than faulty, it is just plain wrong. I have written about this before, and there is plenty of good source material to support this, so I will not dwell on it here. But its a subject we all need to get very good at. I think it is part of the key to turning the tide.

DeMar's vision for America, and his widening influence in the Christian Right in Georgia, and nationally, is disturbing. DeMar is a leader of the Christian Reconstructionist movement, which believes that the U.S. should be governed by a harsh theocracy and impose what they call "Biblical law." I happen to have written a great deal about DeMar and his fellow theocrats in my book Eternal Hostility: The Struggle Between Theocracy and Democracy. Here is a sample: "Gary DeMar in his book Ruler of the Nations wrote that "The law that requires the death penalty for homosexual acts effectually drives the perversion of homosexuality underground, back into the closet...". The longterm goal, he adds, "should also be the execution of abortionists and the parents who hire them. If we say that abortion is murder, then we must call for the death penalty.' DeMar claims that Christians 'are not to impose a top-down tyranny to ram the Bible down people's throats.'  However, he insists "we must elect public officials who say they will vote for Biblical laws." (page 82)

Of course, DeMar probably won't be talking about the more gruesome and totalitarian aspects of the theocratic agenda for America when he addresses young people at the Restore America Rally. The darker side of the Christian Nation will remain deep in the shadows until they are able to take power; and when they do, they will say they are only doing what God requires, even if it is unpleasant. Smart, if disingenuous politics.

During the evening rally, DeMar will answer a rhetorical question: "Is Reclaiming America a Futile Exercise?" And when he is done, young and old will learn just what they can do to restore America's Christian heritage -- the true intentions of the Founding Fathers that, sadly, have been so twisted and thwarted by secular humanism and the runaway federal judiciary.

They will hear a "challenge" from Sadie Fields, president of the Christian Coalition of Georgia. She will tell the rally goers, assembled in the pews of Trinity Chapel, that they can reclaim America by becoming active Christian citizens; by lobbying, and most importantly, engaging in electoral politics, and learning how to do it well -- as has been key to the success of the Christian Coalition, and its historic role in transforming politics in the Republican Party, and in the country.

Finally, they will hear a stem winder from keynoter Roy Moore, who in the program, is referred to as "Chief Justice." Moore will tell his revisionist and self-serving account of how he violated the order of a federal judge to remove the monument to the Ten Commandments that he had installed in the Alabama state courthouse; and how he was fired for it by a panel of retired judges and how the courts turned down his appeals. Then he will tell his audience how the problem is "judicial tyranny," and how he is standing tall, remaining righteous, and true to his understanding of his Oath of Office and the will of God. People will see him as a hero of the faith, a Christian patriot, and a role model. He will also seek to persuade his audience that they, and the true intentions of the Founding Fathers have been betrayed, and that they must restore America's Christian heritage and reclaim America.

Or something pretty close to that.

An aside:  That Moore and his fans continue to use the title "Chief Justice," tells us much about the culture and worldview of the theocrats. Moore was ousted from his post for his crackpot theatrics and his defiance of a federal court order. But notice in the bio on Moore's web site, almost every sentence begins with "Chief Justice," as if he were to the title born.

"Chief Justice Moore served our Country as a Captain in the Military Police Corps of the United States Army. He also served as Battalion Staff Officer at Ft. Riley, Kansas, and Illesheim, Germany, and as a Company Commander in Vietnam. During his professional career, Chief Justice Moore became the first full-time Deputy District Attorney in Etowah County and served in this position from 1977 until 1982. In 1984, Chief Justice Moore undertook private practice of law in Gadsden, until he became Circuit Judge, Sixteenth Judicial Circuit in 1992. Chief Justice Moore served in this capacity until his election as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Alabama in November, 2000."

It is a similar sense of entitlement that animates the Christian theocrats; they believe that God has anointed them, as Christian Right leader D. James Kennedy has put it, as "God's vice-regents" The resentment they feel when they don't get their way, often manifests itself in their political behavior.

There is a tendency, especially among those who are just learning about the Christian Right, to get very worked up about "the dominionists," "the theocrats" and "the Reconstructionists," and so on. And this is understandable. (If it wasn't, I wouldn't have spent so many years learning and writing about these things.) But once you do know, once you do understand, what then? What do we do with what we have learned? How much information do we need to take action? Don't get me wrong. I am not saying that learning about the Christian Right is something we should not do, or ever stop doing. What I am saying is that one does not need to be an expert to begin to take action, and the knowledge that we gain should inform our activism.

Here is the good news. The answer lies in what the what the theocrats themselves are doing to gain power. Electoral politics. Yup. Electoral politics.

The Christian Right spent years systematically raising their constituency's consciousness about politics and public policy; building a culture that includes, rather than excludes electoral politics, a culture that actually sees electoral politics as a natural outgrowth of their religious and home life. We need to find ways to do this in ways appropriate to our own communities, and our own institutions. I am not talking about big opinions about what the Democratic Party should do; or what the mainstream churches, or organized labor should do. I am talking about what I should do, and what you should do, in our own lives, in our own communities, and in the institutions we relate to. These will be different for most of us. I have been trying to do this in my own life, and this is part of why I write this piece. (My main involvement is Progressive Democrats of Massachusetts.)

So the next time someone starts breathlessly talking or writing about what "the dominionists" (or some other powerful opponents) are up to: Don't panic. And don't let that person panic. We know they're bad. We know they have some considerable political strength and momentum. Take a deep breath. Do what so many of us are doing, or are learning to do. Electoral politics. Collectively, we have great power.

I repeat. The answer to the power of the Christian Right is electoral power of our own. No excuses. Many of us have tended to abandon this cornerstone of citizenship in favor of other things. It is time to get our priorities straight. Less talk, more action. Less entertainment, more citizen involvement. Less TV and sports. More electoral politics. Do we want the theocrats to win? More electoral politics.

Yeah, yeah, framing. Yeah, yeah, message. Yeah, yeah, netroots. Yeah, yeah, statements of principles. These, and more are important, and I am not minimizing them. They are all elements of electoral politics, elements of citizenship. It is the path to power in the United States. Each of us, as citizens has the right and the obligation to learn to do it well, just as the Christian Coalition and their allies have learned to do it well. If we believe that democracy is a good thing, we need to learn to get very good at it. We need to be better at it than those who would destroy it.

I don't mean to be simplistic or glib. While the foundational idea is simple, I know the rest may be complicated and hard. But once we accept that orienting ourselves to electoral politics is the necessary foundation, everything else falls into place. Electoral politics is integral to citizenship in a constitutional democracy. How could it be otherwise? Voting alone is not enough. The survival of constitutional democracy depends on the active participation of the citizens. Did you know that the typical turnout for special elections for the state legislature in Massachusetts is 25%? Here in the bluest of the blue states? This kind of statistic is typical around the country, and the problem of citizen disengagement and lack of particiaption needs to change. It's possible; and it's necessary.

And yes, we have some reclaiming to do ourselves. We need to reclaim American history and develop a better, accurate, competing narrative. And part of that narrative must also be our own stories of reclaiming the knowledge and skills it will take to also reclaim the power of citizenship.

Learning political and electoral skills, developing a good political culture in our communities and in our institutions; establishing networks of political relationships; building for power -- all takes time. But it will be time well spent. Let's get to work.

[Cross posted at The Daily Kos where a lively discusssion ensued.]

Saturday, March 19, 2005

Gays in the Holocaust

Historical revisionism is a vital part of the far right's efforts to justify bigotry of various sorts, in many areas of politics and public policy. We see this in, among other areas, the Christian nationalism espoused by leaders of the Christian Right such as ex-judge Roy Moore, James Dobson, D. James Kennedy and a host of others.

I will be writing more about this, but I want to highlight a disturbing essay by blogger grannyhelen, posted on faith forward: progressive christianity, progressive politics.

Here is an excerpt:

"This is a hard diary for me to write. Hard but necessary. Some of my Christian brothers and sisters are using our religion to cover their prejudices with the patina of belief. They rejoice in their acceptance by society, and the stamp of approval they receive by being such good Christian that they could even love a gay person... if only they'd just stop being gay.

I can't tell you why they do this. I can only tell you it's wrong.

How do I know it's wrong? Because I'm a student of history, and specifically the history leading up to and during the Second World War in Germany."

Read on...

Reproductive Rights and Social Justice

The Civil Liberties and Public Policy, and the Population and Development Programs at Hampshire College in Amherst, MA are hosting their 19th annual conference on reproductive rights and social justice, April 1-3, 2005. Hundreds of students and activists from all over the country, and other parts of the world will be attending this unique, and uniquely important event.

In an article I wrote about these annual gatherings, conference organizer Marlene Gerber Fried, a professor of philosophy at Hampshire, acknowledges that it is very unusual for academic programs to sponsor an event that mixes choice-related organizing and scholarship. She explained that the college programs that jointly sponsor the conference are, like Hampshire itself, "committed to knowledge being grounded in the world and in academic work and where the two meet each other."

"We don't bring in the stars," Fried continued. "We place a very high priority on diversity of voices--age and race and country."

"For older activists, it is tremendous," she added. "And for young people, it's not a place where the older people are going to tell you what it's like. It's a place where people's experience is of value, whether it's a year or 50 years."

The work and experience of the past 18 years in refining how to put on this always interesting, engaging and well organized event will be evident to all who attend. Here is the conference description:

"If you are committed to reproductive rights and social justice, this is THE place to be the first weekend in April. For 18 years, people have been gathering over this weekend at Hampshire College to unite and rally for reproductive justice. Each year the conference expands in scope and size. We now expect 500-600 participants and offer over 30 workshops. Conference speakers address reproductive freedom as it relates to a broad range of social justice initiatives including economic justice, healthcare reform, racial equality, peace, freedom from violence, youth liberation, civil liberties, and LGBTQ rights.

Over the weekend, you will have an opportunity to learn and share organizing experiences and strategies, broaden your understanding of reproductive rights, and make connections with other related movements and issues.

The conference is free and open to everyone. Whether you are a long time activist or are new to the movement, there is a place for you here. The conference is intended as a forum for learning and networking for people of all ages and from a variety of different backgrounds.

The time is now. With President's Bush's re-election, the Right is stepping up its assault on reproductive and sexual rights and basic civil liberties, while the war in Iraq and increasing militarism are exacting a heavy toll on human lives. In the U.S., low income people, especially those of color, women, LGBTQ, youth and immigrants will be the first to suffer from new restrictive legislation and repressive social policies, just as they have in the past. At the same time, the conservative agenda harms all of our communities.

The scope of the threats presents an opportunity for people to come together and create a new and inclusive vision of reproductive freedom, social justice and peace. While opposition to abortion and gay rights has taken center stage, the Right's political agenda is all encompassing, and our resistance must be too. We must build bridges between different progressive movements in order to defeat the Right and create a just society. The time is now."


The conference agenda and partial speakers list is posted on the conference web site.

Here is a sample of the interesting speakers on the agenda:

Donna Schaper (The Rev. Dr.) is Executive Director of the Women's Fund of Western Massachusetts and part time pastor of the North Hadley Congregational Church. She was a founding member of Clergy Consultation, an early abortion counseling service.

Pam Chamberlain is a veteran educator and trainer helping organizations plan effective strategies to fight the Right. She helped create four Activist Resource Kits for Political Research Associates and has been the lead researcher on their Campus Activism Project.

Sara Littlecrow-Russell is an activist, lawyer, single mother, award-winning political poet and mediator from the Bear Clan Anishinaabe Metis. She focuses on indigenous women's health, domestic violence, long-term conflict resolution, and restorative justice.

Bill Newman is an attorney and the Director of the Western Regional Office of the American Civil Liberties Union of Massachusetts and speaks regularly about the USA Patriot Act and other government responses to 9-11.

Louis Prisock is currently a visiting professor of African American Studies at Mount Holyoke College. Prisock's research focuses on the participation of African Americans, women, and gays in conservative social movements.

People often travel great distances for this conference, and with good reason. Come with a group, or come by yourself. But do plan to come

Friday, March 18, 2005

The Quietest Christian Rightist

D. James Kennedy has been one of the key leaders in the development of the Christian Right. He has also been a pioneering televangelist, who has methodically build a massive religious, media, and political empire. He recently held his tenth annual conference on "Reclaiming America," one of the premier Christian Right political conferences. But most people have never heard of him. This needs to change.

Fortunately, two fine reporters have recently written important stories, from different perspectives, about the Kennedy empire.

Jane Lampman of The Christian Science Monitor was at the conference and wrote a feature story about the conference and Kennedy's role in public life. One of the conference highlights was a display of the controversial monument to the Ten Commandments, which Alabama Chief Judge Roy Moore had installed in the state courthouse. A federal judge ordered it removed. When Moore refused, Moore was removed from the bench, and "Roy's Rock" was removed from the courthouse.
"For more than 900 other Christians from across the US," Lampman reported, "the draw at Coral Ridge Presbyterian Church last month was a national conference aimed at 'reclaiming America for Christ.' The monument stood as a potent symbol of their hopes for changing the course of the nation.... Their mission is not simply to save souls" Lampman continues. "The goal is to mobilize evangelical Christians for political action to return society to what they call 'the biblical worldview of the Founding Fathers.' Some speak of 'restoring a Christian nation.' Others shy from that phrase, but agree that the Bible calls them not only to evangelize, but also to transform the culture."

"In material given to conference attendees, the Rev. D. James Kennedy, Coral Ridge pastor wrote: 'As the vice-regents of God, we are to bring His truth and His will to bear on every sphere of our world and our society. We are to exercise godly dominion and influence over our neighborhoods, our schools, our government ... our entertainment media, our news media, our scientific endeavors - in short, over every aspect and institution of human society.'"

Kennedy has Washington-based political operation called the Center for Reclaiming America, which is growing in political significance.

"The Center," Lampman reports, "aims to increase its 500,000-strong 'e-mail army' to 1 million, and to encourage Christians to run for office. It has plans for 12 regional offices and activists in all 435 US House districts. And a new lobbying arm in Washington will target judicial nominations and the battle over marriage.

"'If they don't vote our way, we'll change their view one way or another,' executive director Gary Cass tells the group. As a California pastor, Dr. Cass spearheaded efforts to close abortion clinics and recruit Christians to seek positions on local school boards. 'We're going to take back what we lost in the last half of the 20th century,' he adds."

Independent journalist, and columnist Bill Berkowitz also recently published a must-read profile on Kennedy and his multifaceted religious, political and media empire.

Kennedy is a Christian nationalist who believes that the framers of the Constitution did not intend that church be separated from the state, and that the Christian Nation must be restored.

The several varieties of Christian nationalism is a core, animating part of the ideology of the Christian Right. I have long argued that it is essential for those who seek to preserve religious pluralism in the U.S., to understand what Christian nationalism is about, and be able to counter the bogus history and false premises on which it is based.

I sought to do this (among other things) in my book Eternal Hostility: The Struggle Between Theocracy and Democracy. Last December, adapting material from the book, I sought to debunk Christian nationalism in an essay on this site, and crossposted on The Daily Kos.

Kennedy is far less flamboyant than Jerry Falwell or Pat Robertson, and is less likely than James Dobson to get silly and attack SpongeBob Squarepants, and other cartoon characters. His operation is not to be underestimated, and like the others, must not be ignored.

Thursday, March 17, 2005

The Right to Vote "Shall Not be Denied or Abridged"

The story of a small administrative error in Boston offers a window into how injustices can be obscured, downplayed, even denied. It plays into the voter intimidation scandal that has surfaced in the 18th Suffolk District in Massachusetts, which just held a remarkable Democratic primary for state representative.

It all started a week or so ago when Boston Herald columnist Howie Carr, sounded the alarm that BU students might help elect openly gay, and pro-marriage equality candidate Tim Schofield in the Democratic primary for an open seat for state representative. Carr wrote: [I]f I were one of the other two major candidates, I'd be plotting a dirty trick for this weekend."

On March 12th, three days before the primary, a member of the Ward 22 Democratic Committee, Bart McCauley, (who was as a supporter of antimarriage equality candidate Greg Glennon), issued a press release citing Carr's piece. The release was rife with baseless arguments that students who live in dorms do not have the right to vote. He warned of "potential legal issues with fraudulent voter registrations." According to a detailed report by the political blog Blue Mass Group, on election day a gang of "challengers," accosted every prospective voter they could. (It has since come out that McCauley was among the challengers.) Some students cast provisional ballots. Some were turned away. Many others heard about what was going on and didn't bother to vote.

Josh Sugarman, who was Schofield's campaign manager, is a college student himself. He is outraged, and is calling for reform of double standards applied to student voters. He says that early on primary day, students were required to provide proof of residency -- something that Sugarman says may be required of first time voters or those who have registered by mail, but is rarely actually required. Proof of residency for such purposes might be utility bills or bank statements, but of course for students who live in dorms, all they have is a P.O. Box. Mike Jervis of the BU College Dems told me that there is no residency info on thier unversity IDs either. In other words, no one has documentation considered sufficient to prove that they live in a dorm in the district, because such proof does not exist. Word quickly spread that students who live in dorms would not be able to vote, and many did not show up. In fact, students who live in dorms do have right to vote -- but this right is undermined by the shrewd and selective enforcement of this kind of requirement -- and the failure of voting officials, university officials, and officials of both major parties, to reasonably anticipate and provide for ways to verify residency without applying impossible standards.

All of which brings me to the glitch.

In the Democratic primary for state rep in the 18th Suffolk District, comprising Allston, Brighton and part of Brookline, the City of Boston posted just such glitch -- and it plays into the controversy over voter suppression aimed at Boston University students.

Here is what is posted on thier web site two days after the primary. Moran 1,129; Glennon 1,035; Schofield 842; Walsh 301. The problem was that they only included the results from Allston and Brighton, and did not include the totals from Brookline where Schofield pulled about 294 votes, beating the entire field by more than 2-1. This remain uncorrected at this writing.

The actual, but still unofficial numbers accepted by the campaigns show Moran winning a squeaker over Schofield 1200 to 1136. Greg Glennon got 1102 and Joe Walsh, 311.

So there's a discrepancy, so what?

Well, some people say that the aggressive voter suppression campaign aimed at BU students would not have changed the outcome -- and the the incomplete City of Boston figures tend to support that view. (Of course, we we will never know for sure, because you can't count the votes of people who did not vote.) Some people say that because the voter supression did not affect the outcome, we shouldn't worry about it. I disagree. I think this situation commands our attention whether the outcome is affected or not.

But let's look at the numbers anyway. More than 200 students were newly registered to vote in the precinct since September, mostly due to the efforts to the BU College Dems. Mike Jervis said they did a registration drive in support of John Kerry, as well as the more recent drive to register students in time for the Democratic primary for the State Rep. from thier district. Those 200 plus are far more than the margin of difference of 64. There were 48 votes cast at the BU precinct on Tuesday -- 44 of which went to Schofield. (Glennon got zero.) Additionally six provisional votes were cast.

Josh Sugarman says that Schofield will not contest the election, and has already thrown his support to Michael Moran. But he also says that students will be taking the struggle for voting rights forward. They deserve our support and encouragement.

Why, you may be wondering, of all the things one might be concerned about in the country, the world, and so on, am I so concerned about this? Let me explain.

I came of age during the war in Vietnam, when 18-21 year olds were denied the right to vote. But in reponse to the debate over the war, Republicans and Democrats agreed that if you were old enough to be drafted to fight and die for your country, you were old enough to have a say in electing public officials who will make the life and death decisions affecting our troops -- and any other decisions for that matter. This made common sense to the American people, regardless of how they stood on the war, and the Constitution of the United States was amended to extend the right to vote to 18-21 year olds. The 26th Amendment reads in part: "The right of citizens of the United States, who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of age."

The unfair, and misapplied proof of residency standard at BU this week seems to me to be at least an abridgment if not an outright denial of the right of young people to vote. I know that the dust is still settling from the primary, but I hope we will start to hear from our elected officials, party officials, and from university administrators about what actions they will take to ensure that the right of students to vote "shall not be denied or abridged."

All wars are fought primarily by young people. More than 50,000 Americans died in Vietnam, and many more were wounded. Today young men and women are fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq. Some 1500 have been killed. Many more have been wounded. The way things are going, the draft may very well be reinstituted and millions of young people will be eligible.

This is one very good reason why we should do everything we can to encourage the participation of young people in public life -- not spread lies to discourage them. We must do everything we can to work out proof of residency rules to facilitate their participation -- not selectively apply rules to deny and abridge their constitutional right to vote.

When we turn a blind eye to the demagoguery of Carr and McCauley, and ignore the actions of their henchmen, we are complicit in the degradation of the Constitution, and the Constitutional rights of our fellow citizens.

Silent complicity in this matter will compound the crisis of confidence in constitutional democracy looming on the horizon. Why should young people believe that voting matters when society and it's institutions tolerate all this? Why should young people believe that the Democratic Party stands for anything, if it turns a blind eye to the bad behavior of party officers like Bart McCauley? (We already know that cheap electoral manipulations are the modus operandi of the Republicans in Florida and Ohio and elsewhere. I am also of the age that remembers when President Richard Nixon was forced out of office because of his personal involvement in "dirty tricks." Carr chose his words carefully and well.)

Meanwhile, The Daily Free Press has further clarified McCauley's attitude, and has begun to solicit the reaction of the Party. "'They [students] don't belong here,' McCauley told The Daily Free Press in an interview Wednesday. McCauley said the BU College Democrats, who have spoken out against McCauley's press release, should 'get a life.' 'I've been working my ass off longer than these little babies have been living,' he said. But Massachusetts Democratic Party officials said McCauley's message was not aligned with that of the party. '[Students] are definitely allowed to vote,' said Party spokeswoman Jane Lane. 'We would oppose any effort to dampen their participation.'"

The story is still unfolding, and the scandal has not yet surfaced in the major media. But we know what Carr and McCauley said. And thanks to Blue Mass Group, the BU College Dems, the Daily Free Press (the BU student newspaper) and Josh Sugarman, we have some idea of what happened. State and local Democratic Party leaders and elected officials must act now. The BU students who were the victims of voter suppression need to know that the Democratic Party believes that the right to vote is sacred -- whether the voters live in Florida, Ohio, or Brighton. They need to know that the election rules are fair, and will be even-handedly applied. In fact, we all need to know that, and we need to know it now.

Currently, few outside of the 18th Suffolk District and BU are even aware there is an issue, let alone a problem. Fewer still, are those who know there is a problem, and that there is anything they can do about it. Let's not let the victims feel alone and powerless.

The BU College Democrats are outraged.

The BU Daily Free Press is outraged

A few bloggers are outraged.

How about you?

Wednesday, March 16, 2005

Standing Up for the Right to Vote in MA

David at Blue Mass Group has further investigated the voter supresion tactics aimed at Boston Univeristy students in the Democratic primary for state representative in the 12th Suffolk District on Tuesday and concludes: "Students are legally entitled to vote in the district in which their dorm rooms are located; challenges to BU students may have been baseless."

The right to vote is about as sacred a civil right as we have in the United States. Efforts to intimidate, or defraud citizens from exercising thier right to vote are repugnant -- and often illegal -- no matter who does it and to whom they do it. No excuses.

Good for Blue Mass Group for standing up for the rights of everyone.

UPDATE: The Boston University College Democrats are not taking this lying down. Links to coverage by the BU student newspaper The Daily Free Press, and other source material is available on the BU College Dems site.

MA Special Election News: Progressives Replace Conservatives

It's the first day of the post-Finneran era.

Tom Finneran who served for twenty-six years in the Massachusetts House, including eight as speaker, has finally been replaced in one of the three Democratic special election primaries to fill recent House vacancies.

Finneran's successor, Linda Dorcena Forry, the daughter of Haitian immigrants, is a progressive where Finneran was conservative. And she epitomizes not only a new era of progressive Democratic reform in Massachusetts politics, but an opening to women and people of color in an institution that has been notable for relative lack of both. Since there is no opponent in the April 12th general election, Forry is the representative elect. The two Finneran loyalists who saw the writing on the wall and departed closely on the heels of their benefactor, also bear little ideological resemblance to their apparent successors.

Unofficial returns showing wins for Chris Speranzo in Pittsfield, and Mike Moran in the 18th Suffolk District, (comprising Allston, Brighton, and one precinct in Brookline) -- while less dramatic than the transition from Finneran to Forry, certainly signal the acceleration of the progressive trend in the party. Both men oppose the death penalty, favor marriage equality, reproductive rights, caps on charter schools and much more. Speranzo faces a token Republican opponent, but Moran has to run against two unenrolled candidates one of whom, Tom O'Brien, is a current Assistant Attorney General and community activist.

According to unofficial results, in the 18th Suffolk race, Moran won by just 64 votes: Moran 1200; Schofield 1136; Glennon 1102; Walsh 311. (This text will be updated when official results are posted by the Secretary of the Commonwealth.)

These races follow the dramatic, high-profile victories of Carl Sciortino in Somerville, (the only candidate to defeat an incumbent last Fall; and a conservative Finneran lieutenant at that), and Peter Vickery, who first prevailed in a multicandidate field in the Democratic primary for Governors Council from western Mass, and went on to decisively win the general election to fill the vacancy created by the death of Eddie O'Brien, who had held the seat for 30 years. The election of Sciortino a young gay man, and Vickery who made increasing the racial diversity of the state judiciary a campaign theme, also highlight the desire of the voters for a departure from business as usual. Both candidates won with the active support of Progressive Democrats of Massachusetts (PDM), a statewide organization formed in the wake of Robert Reich's 2002 campaign for governor. PDM is, among other things, an ongoing effort to build the capacity of progressive Democrats to win elections.

In these three special elections, PDM did not make formal endorsements, but many PDM activists got involved in the campaigns of Tim Schofield in the 18th Suffolk District, and Rhonda Serre running in the 3rd Berkshire District in Pittsfield.

As the unofficial returns rolled in on Tuesday night, I got on the phone with fellow PDM leaders Cathleen Cavell of Brookline, and statewide PDM chair Peter Dolan of Gloucester for an initial conversation about PDM's role in the campaign. Here is some of what we discussed:

PDM activists got most involved in the Schofield race because there is an active chapter in the district. The role of PDM in that race says much about its growing influence and sheer electoral capacity. For starters, PDM members helped secure the enthusiastic endorsement of Robert Reich for Schofield. "I think the Reich endorsement helped give gravitas and credibility to Tim's campaign early on," Cavell noted. "Bob's endorsement impressed a lot of progressive voters and organizations, and it demonstrated that Tim was a serious contender." Cavell believes that Schofield's decision to stake out a strong, progressive candidacy "was a very shrewd, as well as principled position for him to take" in a district that has been historically progressive, the recent elections of Brian Golden not withstanding. PDM and Schofield, she believes, "pushed the whole drift of the election to the left. We had a candidate who we encouraged to run as a true progressive, and every week he grew in his eloquence as a spokesperson for what it means to be a progressive Democrat."

In addition to integrating the PDM effort with the campaign volunteer effort, "there were several specific PDM events," she detailed: "The Brookline phone bank, a coffee in one of the Brookline apartment building, and canvassing with the candidate. And the Newton PDM group hosted a fundraiser." Cavell's house served as the precinct campaign headquarters, as ten Brookline PDM members did get out the vote (GOTV) and poll-watching. In the end, unofficial returns showed Schofield beating the rest of the field by more than 2-1 in their precinct, even as the overall campaign lost, apparently in a squeaker. Cavell reports that the results for Brookline were Schofield 294; Moran 71; Glennon 67; Walsh 10.

The PDM chapter on Cape Ann did a GOTV phone bank for Schofield on Monday night, making nearly 300 phone calls. Peter Dolan said that in addition to helping Tim, the phone bank "gave people a chance to learn, and to get some campaign experience between the main election cycles."

"We use the elections as an opportunity to build political strength and relationships," he added. "The phone bank was an opportunity to engage people who are not ordinarily a part of the political process."

PDM's model for "marshalling progressive support from around the state to focus on particular races" Dolan said, has proven not only necessary, but viable. "We need to understand the broader picture," he stressed. "In order to build progressive strength in the legislature, we need to support progressive candidates wherever we find them. And by doing this," he concluded, "we strengthen the progressives who are already in the legislature."

While the PDM-supported candidates did not prevail in the two races where members got involved, Cavell and Dolan agree that the effort enhanced the knowledge and electoral skills of PDM activists, their working relationships with one another, their network of contacts, and PDM's capacity to play a significant role in future contests around the state.

In an email to PDM members the next day, Dolan stressed that Moran also has strong progressive credentials, and that "Schofield has asked his supporters to give Moran their support in the general election next month... One final note," he added, "the margin of victory in the Schofield race and the level of voter turnout (less than 25% of eligible voters) brings home once again the need for us to expand the universe of politically engaged progressives everywhere."

Indeed, the closeness of this race was startling to many -- including Michael Moran. The Boston Globe reports: ''I am honored and humbled by the support shown to me tonight," Moran, who narrowly lost a race in 1998, said in a statement released by his campaign. ''I know what it's like to lose by 89 votes. Now I know what it's like to win by 64."

Tuesday, March 15, 2005

What's That Smell in Brighton?

Blue Mass Group has an important post about possible voter intimidation and disenfranchisement aimed at Boston University students in Tuesday's Democratic primary for state representative in the 18th Suffolk District.

"According to Mike Jervis, VP for Communications of the BU College Democrats, by early this afternoon as many as several dozen students had faced challenges, and at least one or two were actually prevented from voting. Jervis said that as far as he knew, the students who were turned away were not allowed to vote provisionally or otherwise; they were simply sent home."

These events come in the wake of a column by Howie Carr in The Boston Herald last week, which was substantially devoted to a small voter registration drive by BU students. Carr was worried that the students might be gay, and be supporters of the openly gay candidate Tim Schofield." [I]f I were one of the other two major candidates," Carr declared, "I'd be plotting a dirty trick for this weekend."

On March 12th, a member of the Ward 22 Democratic Committee in Brighton, apparently also concerned that BU students might vote for Schofield, issued a press release alleging that students might be registered improperly, and that their registrations should be challenged by operatives of the candidates at the polls. Perhaps coincidentally, the Ward 22 Democratic Committee voted to endorse Schofield's opponent, Mike Moran.

Attorney General Tom Reilly should take immediate action to determine if anyone was illegally denied the right to vote -- or to clear the air -- because something stinks.

Today Is The Day

Today is the Democratic Primary in the three special elections for State Representative in MA. In the 12th Suffolk District, the winner of the primary has no opponent, and so will assume office after the April 12th general election. In the 18th Suffolk District, the winner will face off with two unenrolled candidates. In the 3rd Berkshire, the winner of today's Republican primary will go one-on-one with the winner of the Democratic primary.

For the rest, I leave it to fellow bloggers Blue Mass Group and NoHomissives to fill-in the details on how to get involved with last-minute campaign activities, and how to find out when and where to vote, if you don't already know.

Monday, March 14, 2005

The Big Smear: Anti-Gay Bigotry in MA Special Election, 12th Suffolk District

The most animated far-right group in Massachusetts since the Supreme Judicial Court ruled same sex marriage constitutional, has been the Article 8 Alliance, a project of the Waltham-based Parents Rights Coalition (PRC). The Alliance's main project has been to seek the removal of the court majority in the Goodridge decision on marriage equality.

But last Fall, the Alliance distinguished itself with an ugly, antigay smear campaign against Democratic candidate for State Representative, Carl Sciortino, who went on to oust incumbent State Representative Vincent Ciampa (D-Somerville). Their featured tactic was a nasty pamphlet delivered to every home in the district. The Alliance was widely denounced, and Ciampa, their champion, lost decisively in the general election, after losing narrowly to Sciortino in the Democratic primary.

Typically, these groups issue distorted attacks on anything to do with homosexuality, but especially efforts by the public schools to try to teach about it and to promote tolerance and understanding. These distortions become further magnified in the heat of an election campaign.

Now, the PRC/Article 8 Alliance has issued a campaign flyer -- a last-minute hit piece -- which it is mailing and otherwise distributing around the 12th Suffolk District prior to Tuesday's Democratic primary to fill the seat vacated by former House Speaker Tom Finneran. According to the Alliance, the Kerby Roberson campaign is collaborating in the distribution of the flyer.

"In our last email," The Alliance reports on thier web site, "we asked for contributions to mail out the flyer. (Thousands of copies of the flyer were already printed.) We needed as much money as we could get by Thursday -- less than 24 hours. We received about $450.00, which paid for about 1100 stamps and some other materials. This was given to the Roberson campaign, which immediately started mailing and passing out the flyers in the district!"

The flyer urges voters to support Roberson ("the one candidate you can trust") and denounces Linda Dorcena Forry ("supported by homosexual extremists pushing their gay propaganda in the schools") and Stacey Monahan (supports homosexual marriage. Will she represent you?") The flyer ignores the other candidates.

"Kerby Roberson, according to the flyer, "is willing to protect our children from the homosexual fanatics in our public schools;" and "will vote to stop homosexual marriage, no matter what the powerful politicians say."

The fear-mongering flyer asks: "Do you want a State Representative who SUPPORTS pushing homosexuality on your children in the public schools? Or a Rep. who will vote to stop it?"

There is plenty more ugliness in the flyer, which I will leave for others to dissect. In the meantime, voters in Dorchester, Mattapan, Hyde Park and Milton (Roberson's home town), can expect to be seeing this hate literature around their neighborhoods, in their mailboxes, and perhaps even stuffed in their front doors.

Saturday, March 12, 2005

Bloggers, MA Special Elections, and More!

Here we are in the closing days before the Democratic primary in the special election for three vacant seats for state representative. Along with the snow, there is a blizzard of last minute Get Out the Vote activities. Since I first wrote about the special elections in January, I have tried to underscore how these are not routine elections: they signal an historic shift shift in state politics. Following House Speaker Tom Finneran's announcement last Fall, that he would retire, two Finneran allies also resigned. In November, the only incumbent to lose his seat in the House was Finneran ally, Vincent Ciampa, who lost to a young progressive, Carl Sciortino. The likely winners in the three special elections will also be far more progressive than their predecessors, and signal a strong, clear trend in Massachusetts politics.

One of the remarkable features of this set of special elections has been the emergence of progressive democratic bloggers. No one knows for sure how large or little a role we played, however we can certainly say that three blogs played prominent roles -- at once as partisan supporters of candidates, but also providing otherwise hard-to-get information about the candidates, the races, the media coverage and more that would be useful to everyone. My fellow progressive democratic bloggers Blue Mass Group and NoHomissives have written about these races with insight and humor, as well as providing links and commentary on breaking news. We have all provided an additional dimension to news coverage and to information from the campaigns themselves, and engaged and encouraged citizens to participate in these important races. As I have noted previously, candidate Tim Schofield linked to blog coverage alongside clips from the mainstream press on his campaign web site, a first to my knowledge, in Massachusetts politics. But there was more. I personally received emails from Democratic activists trying to research the candidate fields, because information about many of the candidates was often hard to find. And although I clearly had my preferred candidates, in my main round-up on the races, I provided links to every campaign that had a web site that I could find, and shared what information I had with anyone who asked. [UPDATE: Candidate Chris Speranzo has posted a web site since I last checked.]

In the closing days, its worth checking in with my fellow bloggers:

NoHomissives has several recent posts on the 3rd Berkshire race in Pittsfield, and highlights how to help candidate Rhonda Serre in Pittsfield.

Blue Mass Group is worried about progressives splitting the vote (in this four-way race) between Schofield and Michael Moran -- and urges progressives to go with Schofield.

In the same post, BMG also underscores the oddness and difficulty voters -- or anyone -- faces in finding out about the candidates: "I tried to learn more about Moran, but his website is a disaster -- in particular, if you click on "News & Views," you bring up blank page. Nor does his site list his endorsements or, really, anything about him other than the fact that he is running for state rep and the most barebones biographical information. Everything I could learn about Moran was from Googling him and coming up with media reports (mostly in the Phoenix) covering the race."

Here is a sampler of some of the kinds of the end-of-the-campaign efforts I am hearing about -- to get activists to help with the canvassing, visibilities, lit drops, and phone banking. I know that my sampler is far from comprehensive (hey its just the info that has come my way) but it is particularly interesting to me to see how some of the progressive organizations are helping the three candidates that have emerged as the progressive choices: Linda Dolcena Forry, Tim Schofield and, Rhonda Serre. (This is not to say that any of these groups are necessarily opposed to such candidates as Stacy Monahan, Michael Moran, Pam Malumphy and Chris Speranzo, its just that these were the choices that most -- but not all -- progressive groups and activists agreed on.)

Boston area activists from Progressive Democrats of Massachusetts (PDM) are helping Tim Schofield while PDM members in Western, Mass, such as Governor's Councilor Peter Vickery, have been helping Rhonda Serre. Berkshires for Progressive Change is also mobilizing activists for Serre.

Democracy for Massachusetts has sent out emails to members encouraging members to help in specific GOTV activities posted on their web site on behalf of Serre, Schofield, and Forry. DFA nationally has also emailed members in MA with similar information.

All of the candidates in all of the races are undoubtedly doing similar such traditional GOTV activities in tandem with their most active supporters. For example, the AFL-CIO, in its weekly Labor Reader email to activists has called for help for its three endorsed candidates, Speranzo in Pittsfield, Monahan in the 12th Suffolk District, and Moran in the 18th Suffolk District. The Boston Central Labor Council is also doing phone banking for Moran and Monahan, and a labor lit drop for Moran.

Its all as it should be. Democracy in action. On Tuesday, we will have three Democratic candidates for the three vacant seats for state representative. The general election will be April 12th, and while the races will not be uncontested, the winner of the primary in each case will likely be the victor on April 12th.

They will be the fresh faces who never served with, or rather under, Tom Finneran. They will epitomize the post-Finneran era.

Friday, March 11, 2005

Censored Again! UCC Buys Ads on Blogs

Last December, NBC and CBS played Scrooge to the message of welcome that the United Church of Christ (UCC) wanted to place on national television. The 1.3 million member Protestant denomination didn' get thier ad on network TV, but it made national news as religious leaders and editorial writers -- and bloggers -- denounced the censorship. Consistency being the hobgoblin of small minds, when the UCC sought to place the same ads with the networks this spring, of course they refused to run the ad. But this time, in addition to airing the ad on cable networks and purchasing a mix of radio and print ads, the historic church took another major innovative step, and placed ads on the top 50 blogs, such as The Daily Kos, according to a story by United Church News, as well as such UCC-affiliated blogs as faithforward and Chuck Currie.

The UCC's blogads feature still photos from the censored TV spot -- inviting readers to "see the ad the networks didn't want you to see." The UCC expects to reach 1 million people in this way.

"Knowing little of blogs six months ago," said Rev. Robert Chase, director of communications for the 1.3-million-member denomination, "we increasingly recognize that these folks are informational trend setters. If this ad campaign goes as planned, we'll consider shifting even more to blogs and away from traditional media the next go around."

"'The blog's emergence,' Chase said, 'can be equated to the invention of the printing press, the development of radio and television, or the availability of 24-hour cable news stations."

"'It's a great investment of our advertising dollars,' he said."

"'In December 2004, the earliest reports of the networks' reject of the ad were written by bloggers,'" Chase pointed out. "Because of the attention that bloggers gave to the UCC's story, the networks no longer could hide their censorship of an intentionally-welcoming, progressive religious message," Chase said. 'It's something we're seeing happen more and more - the most credible, engaging news reports are coming from bloggers.'"

"'While many are still unaware of it,' Chase continued, 'the blogosphere has emerged as the next great revolution in journalism. In the tradition of this nation's earliest pamphleteers, bloggers are sharing news and information as a mark of a truly free society, not as something that can be controlled and manipulated by multi-national corporations.'"

Wednesday, March 09, 2005

MA Special Elections: The Home Stretch

You don't have to be a Massachusetts political junkie to appreciate the historic nature of next week's Democratic primary to fill three vacant seats for state representative. The likely winners in all three races are proponents of same-sex marriage, and opponents of the proposed constitutional amendment that would ban same sex marriage, but recognize civil unions. And they will be the likely next state representatives in these overwhelmingly Democratic districts. Their predecessors were all conservative Democrats who epitomized the era of former House Speaker Tom Finneran -- who infamously rose to the speakership by cutting a deal for Republican votes.

Its the home stretch, and all three races promise to be exciting -- and possibly be photo finishes.

Meanwhile, the far-right is flailing and is concerned that they will lose all three races. However, adding drama to the final week, it is also possible that in the multicandidate fields in the two Suffolk County (Boston area) races, a conservative in each field may yet be able to pull ahead, as progressives divide the moderate and liberal votes.

Interestingly, in these two races most progressive groups, notably the statewide Commonwealth Coalition have lined up behind the leading candidates, while the State AFL-CIO, and some member locals have endorsed others. In the race in the 3rd Berkshire district, the Commonwealth Coalition has joined the AFL-CIO in endorsing one candidate, while some leading progressive groups are backing another. Whew! Its not really as complicated as it sounds. Read on.

The race that has receive the most attention to date, is in the 18th Suffolk district, that comprises Allston, Brighton and part of Brookline in greater Boston. The leading contender has been Tim Schofield, who has convincingly presented himself as the clear progressive in the field. But old time liberal, Michael Moran has the support of the AFL-CIO and is a strong contender. Oddly, Moran posted a slick web site which has almost nothing in it. Suffice to say that Moran is running an old-fashioned campaign and has no use for the netroots. In contrast, Schofield has by far the best, and most frequenlty updated web site of any candidate in the three special elections. Schofield, who also has significant support from organized labor, keeps racking up significant endorsements from pols, progressive organizations, and editorial writers, including The Brookline Tab and Bay Windows.

Some observers have felt that the election would significantly turn on the Brighton section of the district. If that's so, then the endorsement of Schofield by the Ward 21 Democratic Committee in Brighton, may prove to be one of the pivotal endorsements in the race. On the other hand The Boston Globe as well as The Allston TAB and The Boston Phoenix endorsed Michael Moran on Wednesday. Like all the special elections, the race will probably be close, and in the end pivot on orgnanization and getting out the vote, than endorsements.

The Brookline chapter of Progressive Democrats of Massachusetts, (PDM) has been active in Schofield campaign from early on, aided by the PDM group in nearby Newton.

In the 12th District, where there are five candidates in the primary, issues of race and marriage equality are dominating news coverage, although it remains to be seen whether those matters will really be the driving concerns of the voters. The district, which comprises parts of Mattapan, Dorchester, and Milton, figured into a federal civil rights redistricting lawsuit after the last census, that resulted in a district with an almost 70% minority population. But, the closing weeks of the campaign have seen African-American leaders expressing public concern that efforts to ensure minority representation may be undermined because there are three minority candidates in the field, creating the distinct possibility that one of the two white candidates could prevail.

State Senator Diane Wilkerson has called on Emmanuel Bellegarde and Kerby Roberson to withdraw in favor of apparent front-runner Linda Dorcena Forry, who has received the support of progressive and marriage equality groups, as well as The Boston Globe, while liberal Stacy Monahan, who has been chief of staff to U.S. Rep. Steven Lynch is backed by the AFL-CIO. The division of liberal and labor voters, as well as the division of minority voters, seems to provide an opening for Eric Donovan, who is a more of an old school conservative Irish Catholic style Democrat.

In the 3rd Berkshire race in Pittsfield, city attorney Christopher Speranzo received a last-minute endorsement from the Commonwealth Coalition, the only race in which it has coalesced with the AFL-CIO behind a single candidate. The endorsement comes so late, it is hard to say what, if any effect the endorsement will have. Progressive activists and organizations that have taken a position in the race, have generally lined-up behind the candidacy of Rhonda Serre, an economic development aide to U.S. Rep. John Olver.

Blogger Nohomissives has a report on the final candidate debate in which he underscores some odd phrasing (positioning?) by candidate Pam Malumphy. Was her declaration that people have a "right-to-work," a general statement of the need for jobs? Or was it a not-so-coded opposition to organized labor? It could be a costly gaffe in this tight race.

Now you may have been wondering what is the far right thinking about these races. No? Well I was. So I checked back at the web site of the Article 8 Alliance -- which has posted a handy detailed round-up of the three races. The Article 8 Alliance, the virulently anti-marriage equality group that was so active in the 2004 legislative races (and distinguishes itself with persistent antigay bigotry) doesn't seem to have the juice to do much this time. But, that doesn't mean they aren't doing what they can.

They note that in the 12th Suffolk District to replace former House Speaker Tom Finneran, "Kerby Roberson is fighting the good fight against the homosexual lobby’s favorite, Linda Forry... pro-gay Senator Dianne Wilkerson (D-Roxbury) called for Roberson and the other black candidates to withdraw from the race so Forry could win! What an outrage!"

"This district is largely a working-class, pro-traditional marriage area," The Alliance continues, "and it would be terrible for the homosexual lobby to win there and represent those people by taking advantage of this situation. Anyone who can help out, or donate money, please call him!"

Roberson is a perennial candidate who seems to have little chance of winning this one. Based on statewide polling data and news accounts, it is unlikely that very many people outside the Article 8 Alliance are voting primarily on the issue of marriage inequality. From this distance, it appears more likely that Roberson staying in the race, will as Wilkerson and other black leaders say, divide the minority vote, and possibly boost the chances of attorney Eric Donovan, the white conservative with long roots in the district. Donovan supports putting the antigay marriage amendment to the state constitution on the ballot, which is what promarriage equality forces are trying to thwart.

Meanwhile in the 3rd Berkshire race, The Alliance likes Rinaldo del Gallo, a gad-fly write-in candidate, best known as a father's rights activist. They think he has a chance, tho. And report that the other candidates are "completely gonzo on this issue."

In the 18th Suffolk race, The Alliance complains that Schofield is supported by "homo PACs." But they like Greg Glennon, who was until two years ago, a Republican. "Glennon is first-rate!," they report. "It'll be tough, tho. Shofield (sic) is a gay activist, and is getting big financial and organizational help from the homosexual lobby."

The Alliance, (a project of the rightist Parents' Rights Coalition) first came to public attention via a nasty statewide campaign to oust the majority of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court that legalized same sex marriage in the Goodridge decision. The Alliance derives its name from article eight of the Massachusetts state constitution, which it cites in its effort to remove the Goodridge judges.

The Alliance was widely condemned last year when it waged a vicious smear campaign against Carl Sciortino, who was running against then-State Representative Vincent Ciampa (D-Somerville) in the Democratic primary. One of the group's main tactics was the publication of a bizarre tract which was dropped off at every home in the district. The screed was titled: "A Special Report on the Homosexual Lobby's Secret Campaign to Install a Homosexual Anti-Catholic Extremist in the State Legislature." The voters sent Ciampa packing.

Should any decent, self-respecting Democrat be involved with or accept support from this outfit? It is not too late for Glennon, Del Gallo, and Roberson to take a stand.

There you have it. There will probably be exciting developments every day from here to next Tuesday, March 15th, primary day.

Late Breaking News: The Massachusetts affiliate of Democracy for America, an outgrowth of the presidential campaign of Howard Dean, has announced a statewide email effort to recruit volunteers for Get Out The Vote (GOTV)activities for Rhonda Serre, Tim Schofield and Linda Dorcena Forry. Check their web site for details.

Saturday, March 05, 2005

Who is America's Top Theocrat?

Mirror, mirror on the wall, who's the biggest theocrat of all? There sure are a lot of candidates for top theocrat these days. Two major contenders emerged this past week.

House Majority Leader Tom DeLay, in anticipation of two cases about public displays of the Ten Commandments in public spaces, declared, "I hope the Supreme Court will finally read the Constitution and see there's no such thing, or no mention, of separation of church and state in the Constitution."

It certainly true that those words do not appear in the Constitution or any of the amendments. But the idea of church state separation is present in the clear intentions of the framers. As I noted in December, the Framers did their damndest to disestablish what were then called "established churches" in the states -- which had had mini-theocracies to varying degrees for some 150 years. One had to have been a member of the correct sect to vote and hold public office. Here, as in Europe, there was often state funding of the church in power. The Framers not only wanted to put a stop to that, but they wanted to enshrine the notion of religious equality, which meant the right of individual citizens to believe as they will, or not. This idea is present in Article Six, Clause Three of the Constitution, which states:

"The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

There is no question that the framers meant separation of church and state as part of the notion of religious equality extended to citizens in Article Six, and the disestablishment of churches as specified in the First Amendment. The phrase "separation of church and state" was not only in common use at the time, but it was central to the thinking of James Madison in 1786 when he pushed the crucial Virginia Statute of Religious Freedom through the legislature -- just prior to the writing and ratification of the U.S. Constitution. Madison is credited with being the principal author of the Constitution and of the First Amendment. (The Virgina Statute was written by Thomas Jefferson.)

Dr. Bruce Prescott, (whose Mainstream Baptist blog is must read for those following matters of church state separation} notes that prior to the ratification of the Constitution, Madison "wrote a letter to James Monroe discussing opinions about Patrick Henry's bill to provide government funding for religion in Virginia. Here's what he said:

"The Episcopal clergy are generally for it. . . . The Presbyterians seem as ready to set up an establishment which would take them in as they were to pull one down which shut them out. The Baptists, however, standing firm by their avowed principle of the complete separation of church and state, declared it to be 'repugnant to the spirit of the Gospel for the Legislature thus to proceed in matters of religion, that no human laws ought to be established for the purpose.'"

"Henry's bill failed," Prescott continuted, "after Madison circulated his Memorial and Remonstrance as a petition throughout the state. Then Madison successfully won passage of Thomas Jefferson's Act for Religious Freedom. Virginia Baptists were instrumental both in defeating Henry's bill and in promoting Jefferson's Act."

DeLay gets major points in the contest for top theocrat for his insistent use of crackpot Constitutional literalism in the service of the historical revisionism -- an intergral part of the theocratic game plan.

Not be to upstaged by the likes of Tom DeLay, Supreme Court Justice Anton Scalia engaged in one of the ugliest displays of religious majoritarianism ever seen in the high court. Scalia made his move during oral arguments in a case in which the justices will decided whether display of the Ten Commandments in the Texas state legislature is unconstitutional. According to The Washington Post's account, "The Commandments" [Scalia told Duke University Law professor Erwin Chemerinsky] are "a symbol that government authority comes from God, and that's appropriate." When Chemerinsky objected that "it is a profoundly religious message," Scalia responded: "It is a profoundly religious message, but it's shared by the vast majority of the people. . . . It seems to me the minority has to be tolerant of the majority's view."

"I've heard Scalia say some pretty callous things about separation of church and state over the years," Rev. Barry Lynn, wrote on The Wall of Separation blog, "but today he hit a new low. According to Scalia, government-sponsored Ten Commandments displays are only intended to reinforce the idea that our government flows from God. He had an easy remedy for those who might be offended: "Look away if you don't like it."

Scalia clearly made such effective use of this high profile case, and his aggressive display from the bench, that he remains in the first teir of contenders for top theocrat.

Well, those are this week's top contenders for biggest theocrat. Based on this week's extraordinary performances, it is fair to expect the competition to heat up.

Eternal Hostility, by Frederick Clarkson, has been hailed as the best book about the religious right. Buy Now or learn more...

Learn more about WriterTypes Editorial Services

Site Feeds

 Subscribe in a reader


About Frederick Clarkson

About

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Design copyright ©