Publisher's Notebook

		MN Staff November 2002 Print Edition What an exciting story about power and intrigue! You won't read it anywhere except in MassNews. And it involves all of you. It's fascinating that the 'Protection of Marriage' Amendment is moving ahead like a steamroller despite the fraud of the extreme feminists and others in vain efforts to stop it. They have the combined power of the Boston Globe, NY Times, ACLU, NOW and others working in an unsuccessful attempt. Those forces finally decided to break the law on July 17, 2002, and then have the Boston Globe declare the Amendment "dead."
Atty. J. Edward Pawlick, Publisher.

They convinced a lot of people that it really was "dead." There is no medium in Mass. that will tell you the truth except for some talk radio. The others all cozy up to the Globe and follow its rantings. It's just good business to do so. And so much easier and safer!

We're indebted to all the culprits because they exposed the cesspool of Massachusetts politics. We at MassNews have often been concerned that our newspaper has been forced to spend so much time and ink on social issues and not gotten more into taxes, corrupt government and other important matters.

But it's the social issues that have finally broken open the stench in the State House!

This could have a huge impact on the upcoming election. The Democrats were the main malefactors with 127 voting to break the law and only 36 opposing it. The Republicans also saw their leader in the Senate, Brian Lees, join in the illegal vote, but only 10 voted to break the law while 17 opposed it. Their leader in the House, Fran Marini, led the fight against the illegal action.

Neither Shannon O'Brien nor Mitt Romney yet understands the huge impact this is going to have on their race. With all the "clean government" reforms we have put in place, we have scared away almost all candidates. Who would want to run for any office when your entire personal life is going to be exposed? We need reform, but not the unconstitutional type that is being pushed in Washington.

We also need independent sources of news again. And we desperately need two strong political parties, no matter what their names - not just one.

Meanwhile, O'Brien and Romney should both urge that the law be followed and the people should decide whether they want the Protection of Marriage Amendment when they go to the polls during the election in 2004. What O'Brien and Romney believe about the Amendment is important, but nowhere near as important as whether they believe in obeying the law.

This will be more difficult for O'Brien because she will be indicting her own party. But what else can she do? It should be a no-brainer for Romney but he doesn't see it yet. (Perhaps he should purge his consultant from Washington, Mike Murphy, who went to a Janet Reno fundraiser. He obviously is not doing well for Romney.)

This should also be a big factor in the races for state Rep and Senator. But it remains to be seen whether the challengers tar-and-feather the incumbents who are part of the stench and would break the law again without question, when told to do so by the bosses.

If the challengers are timid and don't raise the issue in a forceful way, it will die.

But if it is raised, it will be a lasting stain that should follow the legislator for years to come - for he or she is a lawbreaker. They will always find it impossible to explain, because they can't.