counter statistics

Wednesday, August 18, 2004

Anti-Gay Vernon Robinson Loses Big in North Carolina Republican Primary

55% Virginia Foxx
45% Vernon Robinson

Robinson's Gay-baiting Radio ad.

More of Robinson's gay baiting attacks on Foxx here and here.

Winston Salem Journal has a strongly worded editorial against Robinson.

One possibility is that the Democrats will regain the seat. Robinson is so extreme, and runs such a nasty, demagogic campaign, that he is unlikely to attract wavering Democrats or independents. For the same reasons, if Robinson is their party's nominee, some Republicans might be tempted either to vote Democratic or not vote at all. Surely some moderate GOP voters, those who favor their party's traditional pro-business stance but reject the politics of hate and bigotry, would find it hard to vote for Robinson.

Of course, there's always a possibility that the Democratic candidate might win in November even if Robinson's opponent, state Sen. Virginia Foxx of Boone, is the Republican nominee. Dr. Jim Harrell Jr., a Surry County commissioner and chairman of the American Dental Association's Council on governmental affairs, is an attractive, moderate candidate.

The No. 1 reason that Republicans should vote for Foxx on Tuesday lies in the other scenario for November - the possibility that the Republican nominee will win.

Sending Vernon Robinson to Washington to represent the 5th District would be worse than sending no one at all.

In the only elective office he's ever held, on the Winston-Salem City Council, Robinson has been negative and divisive, apparently more interested in attracting attention than in getting things done. Rarely does he have anything constructive to offer. He's quick to point out problems, and often quick to create problems, but he's short on workable solutions.

A member of the U.S. House is supposed to represent the citizens of his district, to look out for their specific interests and for the good of the country as a whole.

Robinson's record suggests that he would instead be looking after his own interests, bolstering his image as the new darling of the nation's right wing. As a city council member, he has gone to Florida to demonstrate in a highly publicized right-to-die case and installed a Ten Commandments monument in front of City Hall in imitation of Alabama's Judge Roy Moore. Imagine what he would do as a congressman.

Robinson, with no inclination toward cooperation and a studiedly abrasive approach, would likely accomplish nothing in Congress, certainly nothing that would benefit the 5th District.

Worse, though, by making a spectacle of himself, he would draw the wrong kind of attention to the district. That would be precisely the kind of negative, embarrassing publicity on the national stage that an area that is trying to redefine itself does not need. Having Robinson as the 5th District representative would make it extremely difficult if not impossible to attract the new business and industry that the 5th District needs.

Far from helping the district, Vernon Robinson would taint it with the muck that fuels his self-aggrandizing efforts. The 5th District is better than that. Republican voters should make that clear on Tuesday.


Characters like this will turn pro-business Republicans away from Republican candidates. The Bush campaign should take note.




Tuesday, August 17, 2004

Moderate Republican Mayor supports Musgrave's Democratic Opponent

July 26, 2004
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
http://www.stan2004.com/press/2004/jul//news News Room
http://www.stan2004.com/press/2004/jul//press Press Releases

Press Contact

Selders Endorses Stan Matsunaka in Race for 4th Congressional Seat

Greeley Mayor Says Former State Senate President Will Do 'The Right Thing'

Loveland, CO ­ Greeley Mayor Tom Selders, a Republican, has endorsed Stan Matsunaka, a Democrat, in his race in Colorado's 4th Congressional District. Matsunaka is looking to unseat first-term incumbent Marilyn Musgrave, a Republican from Fort Morgan.

"I'm supporting Stan because he's the right man for the job," said Selders. "I witnessed his work in the state senate, including his work as President, and he represents the people in an effective way. He always does the right thing."

Matsunaka said he was pleased to have the backing of a prominent, mainstream Republican, who represents the interests and sensibilities of the people of Greeley and Weld County.

"Mayor Selders' vote of confidence in me means a lot and points to the appeal my candidacy has among a growing number of people, including Republicans," said Matsunaka. "I am committed to uniting people from all parties. It's not about 'soccer moms' versus 'NASCAR dads,' but about doing the best possible job representing everyone, whether we're talking health care, jobs and the economy, national security or energy independence.

"My opponent has made a career over one issue: gay marriage, while the needs and interests of the people of the 4th District have been ignored," said Matsunaka. "Being an effective representative in Washington D.C. means paying attention to a whole range of issues and building coalitions. Unfortunately for all of us, in the two years Mrs. Musgrave has been in office, effective representation just hasn't happened."

CONTACT: Michael Kerrigan at press@stan2004.com
970-744-0209 (press line) or 970-461-0945 (campaign HQ)


Obviously, Musgrave's single issue focus on gay marriage is backfiring if she is losing the support of a Republican mayor.

I was just in the area (Estes Park) for vacation the last few weeks.

Kerry supportive of Missouri anti-gay amendment

from comments posted on Trailmix, the Stonewall Democrats blog:



Friday's Kansas City Star reported that John Kerry would have voted for Missouri's anti-gay amendment

"Kerry did say that he would have voted for Amendment 2, the constitutional amendment banning gay marriage that passed overwhelmingly Tuesday. He said that Massachusetts passed the same type of amendment a few years ago and that he supported it."

Ever since Kerry locked up the nomination, I've been wondering how far he would pander the center-right for votes.

Well, I've got my answer.

This time, it's my life, my civil rights, my family he's decided to trade in.

To say nothing of the small matter of the 14th Amendment's guarantee of equal protection for all citizens, not just those the majority approves of.

Please understand, we just worked our tails off for four months to defeat this hateful, unnecessary amendment, all the while contributing what we could to the Kerry campaign. Our community sacrificed and came together like never before to defeat this attack on equality and on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Missourians.

And then Kerry has the gall to come out in favor of it. Publicly. More than once.

I'm having difficulty putting my rage into words. But once I've got some together, I'm sending them to Tony Wilson, Kerry's MO co-ordinator.

Posted by Michael in St. Louis at August 7, 2004
10:08 AM


Another poster added:

READ THE ARTICLE. Kerry never says he supports the amendment - that is what the reporter confers. What he says is that states should have the right to define marriage law (which is what Log Cabin, HRC, Stonewall, Andrew Sullivan, Michelangelo Signorile, NGLTF, Dale Carpenter and ever single LGBT organization and thinker says).

The reporter - through sloppy journalism - assumes what Kerry's position is. Perhaps the best thing is for the campaign to clarify it.
Posted by Leslie at August 9, 2004 09:35 AM


I tried to add the comment that if this was the case, the Kerry campaign in
Missouri should send a correction to the paper. The server crashed when I tried to add this comment.

To send an email to Kerry Missouri Chair, write: twilson@johnkerry.com

Will the Kerry campaign ask the paper to publically issue a retraction? Inquiring minds want to know.

Eva

Kerry supportive of Missouri anti-gay amendment

from comments posted on Trailmix, the Stonewall Democrats blog:



Friday's Kansas City Star reported that John Kerry would have voted for Missouri's anti-gay amendment

"Kerry did say that he would have voted for Amendment 2, the constitutional amendment banning gay marriage that passed overwhelmingly Tuesday. He said that Massachusetts passed the same type of amendment a few years ago and that he supported it."

Ever since Kerry locked up the nomination, I've been wondering how far he would pander the center-right for votes.

Well, I've got my answer.

This time, it's my life, my civil rights, my family he's decided to trade in.

To say nothing of the small matter of the 14th Amendment's guarantee of equal protection for all citizens, not just those the majority approves of.

Please understand, we just worked our tails off for four months to defeat this hateful, unnecessary amendment, all the while contributing what we could to the Kerry campaign. Our community sacrificed and came together like never before to defeat this attack on equality and on lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender Missourians.

And then Kerry has the gall to come out in favor of it. Publicly. More than once.

I'm having difficulty putting my rage into words. But once I've got some together, I'm sending them to Tony Wilson, Kerry's MO co-ordinator.

Posted by Michael in St. Louis at August 7, 2004
10:08 AM


Another poster added:

READ THE ARTICLE. Kerry never says he supports the amendment - that is what the reporter confers. What he says is that states should have the right to define marriage law (which is what Log Cabin, HRC, Stonewall, Andrew Sullivan, Michelangelo Signorile, NGLTF, Dale Carpenter and ever single LGBT organization and thinker says).

The reporter - through sloppy journalism - assumes what Kerry's position is. Perhaps the best thing is for the campaign to clarify it.
Posted by Leslie at August 9, 2004 09:35 AM


I tried to add the comment that if this was the case, the Kerry campaign in
Missouri should send a correction to the paper. The server crashed when I tried to add this comment.

To send an email to Kerry Missouri Chair, write: twilson@johnkerry.com

Will the Kerry campaign ask the paper to publically issue a retraction? Inquiring minds want to know.

Eva

Students for Family Values Web Forum

from a MN Politics Announce post:

For those who are interested in a healthy debate on the leading
issues that affect most Minnesotans today; you are invited to the
new web forum sponsered at www.studentsforfamilyvalues.com, a
student organization located at the University of Minnesota - Twin
Cities campus. Although this group is made up primarily of social
conservatives, the web forum is open to all political persuasions in
order to foster greater understanding between competing views which
are held by members of the community. If you are passionate about
your beliefs, we encourage you to join in and voice your opinions.
For more information, goto www.studentsforfamilyvalues.com and
select the "forum" option.


Contact name: Joel Flake
Contact Number: 612-624-7191