NH Dem Chair Ray Buckley (GG file photo)
Click here first to read my post: Is Civil Union Legislation Based on Lies? Then click here and read “Gay-Rights Group Pushed for State Democrats in ’06.” More disturbing is this article from the Boston Globe. Yep, that's right, they were the single biggest donor to the democrats. But, of course the dems weren't influenced by the money, geez, ya gotta explain everything. da mi il soldi!
Spending almost $150,000 on New Hampshire state races by the Human Rights Campaign...I wonder why they just don't call it what it is; i.e., Gay Rights Campaign?...paid off for them. They switched their focus from national politics to influence state politics, particularly NH, Iowa and Oregon. Smart move, I’d say.
I recently read an opinion published in one of the papers that said there was no out-of-state influence regarding pushing civil unions in NH. Well, the Human Rights Campaign donation would prove that person’s theory wrong. Not only did they contribute money, according to the editorial, but an employee traveled to NH to assist with get-out-the-vote efforts and phone-banks. Do you think he was encouraging Republicans to vote?
The President of the Human Rights Campaign states:
“We understood that in order to change things at the federal level, we had to play a role in changing things locally.”
Of course they were successful in changing things here locally. They don’t live in NH and NH citizens didn’t get a chance to vote on the issue of civil unions, but I guess many NH citizens simply are too apathetic to care that NH was being influenced by “outsiders.”
I love Ray Buckley’s comment that “How could you make any sort of promises?” but then goes on to say that he’s known Human Rights Campaign staff for years…ten. Well, duh, most alcoholics know a lot of other alcoholics and most gays know a lot of other gays.
And, of course, Buckley helped engineer the Democratic takeover of the Senate. He stated previously that the number one priority for him was passing civil unions. Screw what voters might have voted on or what their priorities were. We just don’t get a vote, period.
And, yes a “common Republican critique of the issue centered on the lack of public discussion of the issue during the 2006 campaign. Opponents argued that Democrats didn’t campaign on a platform favoring civil unions, and that as a result, voters never had sufficient opportunity to weigh in on the issue.” Hey, I’m an independent and I didn’t get to vote either.
Well, double duh, GOP Chairman Fergus Cullen is absolutely right when he states:
“When voters gave (Gov.) John Lynch the Democratic majority he asked for last fall, it wasn’t because voters wanted to redefine marriage or make radical changes to social policy.”
But that didn’t stop the Democrats from unanimously backing the bill after it passed the House though either did it? Be careful what you wish for, you just might get it.
Now Senate President Sylvia Larsen does say something very interesting:
Senate Democrats “had our sights on other topics; it wasn’t on our list.”
By golly it sure jumped on the list and rather quickly I’d say right after the democrats took control. Plus, sorry, but I don’t buy her statement that civil unions weren’t on the list before the election. They just didn’t want NH citizens to know it was on the list since they knew it wasn’t a burning issue for a vast majority of the population.
The stupidest thing Ms. Larsen says though about her meeting with Mr. Solmonese supposedly “once” when she was in Washington D.C. is this:
“There was not a big discussion about legislation that they wanted to see come out of it, but they felt that by helping Democratic efforts they were moving a majority that would be more understanding of the discrimination” facing same-sex couples.
Triple Duh, on this one. No “big”, a nice subjective choice of adjectives…just apparently a small discussion was held. Now what on earth would a homosexual group want to see come out of a discussion, Sylvia? Probably not less discrimination and more rights for the much larger disabled population in NH, huh? I wonder how many phone discussions you had with Mr. Solmonese.
Sorry, but I just don’t buy that Senate Democrats were completely caught off guard on the civil union issue. Obviously, Ray Buckley wasn’t caught off guard. As mentioned in my previous post, there’s been a lot of manipulation and deception going on at the State House and certainly everyone knows Ray Buckley’s a gay activist about as much as everyone knows Bishop Robinson’s a gay activist.
Gov. Lynch certainly didn’t provide any leadership regarding the issue other than to say that he’s against gay marriage. What the heck does he think is the ultimate goal of homosexuals? The slippery slope will continue unless NH citizens demand a repeal of civil union legislation and demand that it be brought to every citizen in NH for us to vote on it.
I’m willing to live with the outcome; I just don’t like politicians telling us what we would have voted for had we been given the opportunity. I wonder if you polled married couples and included that their vulnerable male and female children with raging hormones were going to be intensely recruited by homosexuals to practice homosexuality, are you for civil unions? What's the answer to that "poll?" Oh now, don’t say that doesn’t happen. Ron Tunning said on MTNP that they were “recruiting” new members at Laconia High School. What do you suppose is happening in the Middle School?
Sorry, but a “poll” of any kind is no substitution for a vote exercised by every citizen in the state. We’ve been robbed of our rights here in the State on this and many other issues. Haven’t you had enough? Let’s take back New Hampshire from out-of-state special interest groups and let people living in our state decide what “The New Hampshire Way.” is.
