Opinion: Biggest Losers in Election Were Boston Globe, AFL-CIO and Democratic Party Illegal Tactics against 'Protection of Marriage' Amendment Were Their Downfall MassNews Staff November 8, 2002
Massachusetts Republican gubernatorial candidate Mitt Romney waves to a crowd of supporters and media at a hotel in Boston, when making his victory speech after Democratic gubernatorial candidate Shannon O'Brien conceded defeat. But many voters are concerned that he does not understand the dynamics of his victory. (AP Photo/Steven Senne)

The biggest losers in the election were the Boston Globe, AFL-CIO and the Democratic Party.

The Globe appeared determined to prove that it is a toothless has-been, a relic of better days when it was locally owned. The Globe had a headline the day after the election, "Party base deserted O'Brien." But that's not true, it was O'Brien who deserted the Democrats because she listened to the Globe. She ended up in a disaster as a result.

The newspaper wrote: "Union members, many of whom are socially conservative, lunch-bucket Democrats, may have been put off by O'Brien's stance on gay marriage, which she said she supported late in the campaign ."

May have been turned off? Everyone knows they continue to be turned off.

The main reason for the turn-off is the Protection of Marriage Amendment, which has proven to all that you are not a "homophobe" because you want to hear a debate on the Amendment. Therefore, the illegal shenanigans by Tom Birmingham and the Democratic Party to block a debate of the Amendment, did not sit well with anyone.

Sen. Birmingham and the other legislators violated their oaths of office when they disobeyed the Constitution. It was also terrible politics because over 60% of the voters favor the Amendment. A poll of 500 voters in October showed that 64% favor calling the Legislature back for the required vote and only 14% oppose it. The other 22% did not know enough at the time to have an opinion.

The surprising part about the poll was the universal support for calling them back. It reached across the entire spectrum with a majority of Democrats (65%) and self-described liberals (60%) supporting a special session. Some 61% of men favored the recall, while 67% of women did.

The Globe was so desperate that it even resorted to race and gender bigotry by advising Irish women that they must vote for O'Brien because she is also Irish and a woman.

Leaders of Democratic Party Still Do Not Understand

		Sen. Travaglini (D-East Boston) is the choice to be the new President of the Senate, but he does not yet appear to understand the significance of this issue. He will not officially take office until January when a new session of the Legislature starts and the Amendment dies unless someone takes charge and sees that action is taken before then. If it dies, the full responsibility, fair or unfair, will be on the Democratic Party. Travaglini does not have any understanding of the measure and is refusing to meet with anyone from its sponsors, Massachusetts Citizens for Marriage. He says he is too busy now but may be able to do so next March. But of course the Amendment would die long before then. MCM is running radio ads across the state to educate the public more on the issue and is also sending letters to thousands of random voters in Travaglini's hometown of East Boston.
The Globe was embarrassed on election day. They had been unable to win the election for O'Brien. They were wrong on two ballot questions and almost lost the third. They lost the N.H. Senate race. In every other slot, there not a viable contest.

It is clear that this issue is having a big impact and is a big reason for the negative effect on the election for the Democrats. But the leaders don't understand that yet.

Some do, because Sen. Kerry, Robert Reich and Michael Dukakis all say that a vote should be taken.

Unions Also Losing Their Base

Many union members are also expressing anger when they discover that union lobbyists visited every legislator before the July 17 vote and gruffly told them they had to deny a vote on the Amendment, even though this was illegal. This was demanded by the union. As the voting was taking place, there was an undercover chant, "This is a union vote."

The Globe story said that the unions "gave her [O'Brien] a weaker victory over the Republicans than expected." It said, "That result, like those of other recent elections, reflects the declining clout of union leadership in political campaigns."

But the leadership of the Democratic Party does not yet understand that truth when it allowed union chanting on the floor as a vote was taking place.

The Director of the UMass poll told the Globe, "Union households have not been voting Democratic on social issues for something like 20 years." One hopes that the leadership will begin to understand the realities.

MCM Will Be Helping Everyone to Understand

MCM will be helping everyone to understand what is happening. They are running advertisements on major Massachusetts radio stations and just started mailing two-page informational pieces to voters in key areas. They sent 22 such pieces during the week before the election, not with the intent of influencing the election, but to let the voters understand the issue.

The mailing to voters in Sen. Travaglini's hometown of East Boston is a part of that effort. They are also mailing to those in Jane Swift's home of Williamstown and North Adams because she has not yet called the Legislature back as she is required to do under the Constitution when they fail to take a vote on an Amendment.

There will also be a hearing on their suit against Sen. Birmingham during the first week of December. It will be before all seven Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court on MCM's request for the Court to repeat to the politicians what is required of them under the Constitution. MCM says the SJC might say they have no standing to sue the President of the Senate anymore than any other unhappy citizen. MCM also says that would not affect the law which is already clear. But their hope is that the Court might clarify some extraneous statements that appeared in two opinions in the 1990s which the unscrupulous hide behind even though it is clear to every lawyer that these statements were only unfortunate dicta and had nothing to do with the holding in the case.

Tuesday January 13, 2004 News Links World Net Daily **Agape Press * TownHall.com * FreeCongress.org FoxNews.com *Media Research * CNSnews.com * Human Events **