Lee Atwater was a thug Republican strategist of the 20th century, famous for his unbelievably dirty campaign strategies. He perfected the art of push-polling*, and is responsible for the continuation of the “Southern Strategy” under Ronald Reagan, which was implemented beginning in 1968 as a way to play on the racial fears and prejudices of Southern voters by using code phrases and buzzwords which, to non-Southern, non-racist people didn’t always resonate, but served** as dog-whistles for racist voters. In 1981, Atwater gave an interview in which he explained the evolution of the Southern strategy for the Reagan years:
‘You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘Nigger, nigger, nigger.’ By 1968 you can’t say ‘nigger’ — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.
”And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I’m not saying that. But I’m saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, ‘We want to cut this,’ is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than ‘Nigger, nigger.”’
Atwater went on to manage Poppy Bush’s 1988 campaign.
Okay, why am I talking about Lee Atwater? Because I think we’re seeing something similar happening among the anti-gay movement. Many of you will remember that, during the campaign to strip gay couples of equality in Maine, conscious decisions were made by those running the Yes on 1 campaign to relegate the fringiest of the fringe anti-gay activists as far onto the sidelines as they possibly could. Jeremy Hooper was one of the first to notice this trend, as those running the official campaign did everything in their power to make the fight about “protecting children” and to emphasize over and over again that they were not anti-gay, even though, at heart, they obviously were/are. They did this because it’s no longer okay to appear virulently bigoted against gay people in American society. Or, to put it in Atwater-ese, it’s 2010 and you can’t say “faggot, faggot, faggot” anymore. So, the messaging is changing.
The good news, though? We may actually be a bit further along than I thought, because one of the fringiest of the fringe activists seems to have, in least one instance, fallen under the spell of “political correctness” that he fears the most. Upon hearing that President Obama had appointed Amanda Simpson, who happens to be transgender, to a post at the Commerce Department (that hotbed of LGBT activism), Peter LaBarbera and Matt Barber had these predictably inane things to say:
“Is there going to be a transgender quota now in the Obama administration?” asked Peter LaBarbera, president of Americans for Truth. “How far does this politics of gay and transgender activism go? Clearly this is an administration that is pandering to the gay lobby.” …
Matt Barber, associate dean at Liberty University, said the appointment “boggles the mind.”
“This isn’t like appointing an African-American in order to try to provide diversity and right some kind of discriminatory wrong,” he said. “This is about political correctness.
Right, whatever. They’re weird. We know. But Jonathan Chait of The New Republicnoticed something else*** about those statements:
The interesting thing is that there’s no attempt to show that the administration employed any sort of quota or affirmative action program. It just hired a person who’s transgendered. The religious right obviously opposes that, but they can’t say so. Thus they have come to employ words like “quota” to mean something entirely different than their literal meaning.
It’s very odd to witness a part of the political discourse where one side understands that its actual views are so completely socially unacceptable that they can’t be expressed, and must be replaced with nonsense terms.
Odd, indeed! And good news, ultimately. It’s not good, in and of itself, that they’re using, as Chait put it, nonsense words like “quota,” because those are dog-whistles aimed at the very same low-information voters Atwater targeted. But it’s notable, because it means that, in some way, they’ve recognized that they really no longer have any hope of reaching those who don’t hear the dogwhistles. That bird has flown. And those who do still hear the dogwhistles?
UPDATE: On the other hand, considering the fact that we’re dealing with the “fell off the deep end years ago, never to return” contingent of the radicalized anti-gay set, we still have to acknowledge the fact that the above may be an anomaly, as The Two Pouting Peters of the Christian Right have made other statements on the Simpson nomination where they do indeed wear their backwards bigotry directly on the sleeves of their tattered muu muus. But the point still stands. These two and their sweaty man wrangler friend are more prone to public displays of hatred, and the Atwater-ization of the anti-gay Right is precisely why they’re being pushed more and more into the margins of the movement. They make statements like these, in these settings, because the American Family Association and the Family Research Council are themselves considered fringe by mainstream Christendom. Emerging churches which seek to attract younger followers have nothing in common with organizations such as that. So when they speak for FRC, or in one Peter’s case, to the AFA, there’s no need for dogwhistles. But don’t expect to see them with a prominent role in a statewide anti-gay campaign any time soon.
*A perfect example of Atwater-esque push-polling came during the 2000 South Carolina GOP primary, when the Bush campaign sponsored push-polls wherein voters got calls asking if it would make them more or less likely to vote for John McCain if they knew that he had fathered a black child out of wedlock. McCain, of course, has an adopted Bangladeshi daughter named Bridget, which offered a visual confirmation for voters who didn’t know any better.
**It’s still going on, to be quite honest, but it’s mostly moved into far-right media and talk radio. Example: the use of the term “welfare queens,” used by Rush Limbaugh and others, to convince empty-headed white Republicans that poor black people are coming after them and everything they hold dear.
***The fact that Chait noticed at all should make Peter’s and Matt’s day, to be honest.
The Roman Catholic Diocese of Bridgeport has acknowledged in court papers that it documented 32 accusations of sexual abuse of children by priests associated with a parish here over 40 years.
The diocese made the admission last week in contesting a lawsuit filed by the estate of Michael Powel, who died last year. Mr. Powel had claimed that he was sexually abused at St. Theresa’s Parish in Trumbull between 1968, when he was 9, and 1972, when he was 13.
However, while the diocese admits the abuse, it refuses to accept responsibility — and it is seeking to suppress proof of the abuse:
The diocese is contesting a request from Mr. Powel’s lawyers to turn over all documents regarding sexual abuse by priests at the parish. In its filing in Superior Court in Waterbury, the diocese said it had compiled 126 boxes of documents and files detailing 32 accusations of abuse by eight priests at St. Theresa’s. …
Mr. Powel’s lawyers said that the motion by the diocese was a “bait-and-switch” to avoid producing documents by Wednesday, a date previously agreed upon to provide discovery materials.
The Diocese of Bridgeport is one of 50 dioceses and bishops that donated a total of $550,000 to undermine marriage for same-sex couples in Maine, even as parishes and church charity programs back home are closing for lack of funding.
It is time to admit that the gay community has a gigantic Pope problem. Under the leadership of Benedict XVI, the Vatican has become an implacable foe of liberalism, modernity and basic rights for gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender people. Rome has eagerly jumped with both feet into America’s culture wars and is working on a global scale to punish or purge ideological dissenters within the church. This aggressive activism presents a formidable new front in the fight for parity – one with considerable political clout and financial resources.
Last week, a coalition of totalitarian religious activists and radical clerics joined forces to unveil the “Manhattan Declaration” at Washington’s National Press Club. This rambling manifesto, written by former Watergate felon Chuck Colson, called for “Christians” to disobey laws they didn’t fancy and to ignore civil rights laws that protected GLBT people from discrimination. It was a dishonest document filled with historical revisionism that promoted theocracy, encouraged anarchy and supported the dissolution of the rule of law. It falsely portrayed right wing Christians as victims, even as they pledged to work tirelessly to deny equality to those who would not adhere to their sectarian church rules.
An extreme manifesto of such breathtaking cynicism and insincerity is no surprise coming from what passes for “leaders” in today’s evangelical circles. It was striking, however, that more than 15 key American Catholic leaders signed on to the “Manhattan Declaration”. Signatories included heavyweights such as Timothy Dolan, Archbishop of New York and Donald Wuerl, Archbishop of Washington, DC. This was clearly a call to arms and a powerful signal that the Roman Catholic Church is taking the gloves off to fight political battles in America.
This hands-on involvement from Rome has passed the “trend” stage and appears to be official policy. Consider the significant involvement the Catholic Church had in stripping marriage rights away from GLBT couples in a Maine referendum held earlier this month.
In the same manner, on June 11, the Washington, DC Archdiocese threatened to abandon the homeless and quit charity work in the District if it had to comply with anti-discrimination laws. Catholic Charities had the audacity to believe it was entitled to collect $8.2 million in tax dollars meant to serve all DC residents, and then still get to handpick whom it deems worthy of assistance.
Catholic involvement with arch-conservative politics is growing by the day. In May, Catholic groups tried to stop President Barack Obama from speaking at a Notre Dame commencement ceremony because of his pro-choice position.
Earlier this month, Providence Bishop Thomas Tobin put the clamp on Rep. Patrick Kennedy (D-R.I.), banning the lawmaker from communion because he is pro-choice. This was reminiscent of The St. Louis Archbishop refusing to give communion to John Kerry during his presidential campaign.
The Archdiocese of St. Paul and Minneapolis has suddenly begun to steer GLBT Catholics to 12-step programs that promise to “cure” homosexuality or support them in a lifelong celibacy. The Catholic Diocese in Sioux Falls, South Dakota urged its 128-thousand members to oppose an attempt to bring legalizing embryonic stem cell research to a public referendum. (I guess the sacrosanct “people’s right to vote” on controversial social issues only applies to same-sex marriage)
In fighting back, we must remember that the Vatican is launching these attacks from a position of weakness. It has yet to recover its moral authority from public exposure of rampant child sexual abuse scandals that cost the Church billions of dollars in legal settlements.
The Vatican appears to be acutely aware it is losing its worldwide market share. It is basically defunct in the Middle East, where the religion began, and on life-support in Western Europe, where it once prospered. In Africa, Rome competes with Islam and Anglicanism for a shrinking slice of the pie. (Who can forget that while in Africa the Pope said condoms could make the AIDS crisis worse.) South America, one of its few remaining strongholds, is losing Roman Catholics to evangelical faiths by the millions.
Instead of competing against the conservative evangelical brand, Pope Benedict has decided to embrace it, shaping a conspicuously political Catholicism that embraces extremism and drives out dissenters. The Vatican has become so doctrinaire that it recently launched an invasive probe into the lives of America’s 60,000 nuns to enforce anachronistic rules. In January, Benedict welcomed back excommunicated Bishop Richard Williamson who denied that millions of Jews died in Nazi death camps.
Fortunately, Benedict is a cold, unsympathetic figure and the majority of American Catholics often ignore his edicts. The strategy for the GLBT community should be to stand up to Rome and help mobilize mainstream Catholics to fight back against an authoritarian Pontiff who is hell-bent on making the Catholic Church as unpopular and unappealing as His Holiness.
Instead of validating marriage for same-sex couples, Maine voters cruelly voted 52.75 percent to 47.25 percent (87 percent of precincts reporting) to strip away this most basic right and leave gay families and their children legally unprotected and vulnerable. According to journalist Rex Wockner, “it was the 31st time that same-sex marriage has lost at the ballot box in a U.S. state. It has never won.”
As I watched the World Series this week, I could not help but think: If a player were 0-31 at bat, he would be demoted to the minor leagues. Yet, the major league players in the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender movement can’t seem to change strategies or try new approaches. We are a creative people who produced the likes of Michelangelo, Tennessee Williams, Oscar Wilde and Perez Hilton. Yet, in our collective wisdom, we are unable to switch gears and admit that our tactics are not working
I want to make it clear that I am not blaming the campaign in Maine. They did a fantastic job in all aspects of this fight. NO on 1/Protect Maine Equality Campaign Manager Jesse Conolly took us within a stone’s throw of winning marriage at the ballot box in a rural state.
What I have an enormous problem with is that we keep repeating the same fundamental mistakes. Our wisest and wealthiest made their fortunes by testing and perfecting products before they went to market. They would never think of placing an appliance or software in stores before the bugs were worked out.
Yet, we continuously test-drive our messages while actual campaigns are taking place. We repeatedly act shocked that our opponents are soulless charlatans who lie, cheat and use immoral fear tactics to win. Our persistent “surprise” at the “recruit your children” canard and on-the-fly strategy to counter it is a foolproof recipe for a 0-31 record.
It is time we wake up and acknowledge that the GLBT fight for equality is the world’s first “Civil Likes” movement. Each year, a popularity contest is held somewhere on the map and if the locals find us likeable our families are protected. If the natives have a negative view of gay people, we remain second-class citizens.
Given this reality we have to make a major choice.
We can declare the current process a disgusting and humiliating insult to our humanity and opt out of all future referendums. The movement would make the case to the nation why such votes are anathema to American values and in the process educate people about our families and quest for equality. A powerful campaign of continued and sustainable civil disobedience would have to supplement this strategy.
Or, we can continue to participate in degrading referendums. But, if we do so, we have to stop pretending that the majority of the American people understand the U.S. Constitution, much less the notion of equality. Those who vote against GLBT rights simply do not like gay people and their antipathy, often masked by religious bigotry, overrides the idea of equal protection. What our public relations experts will have to figure out ways to make us more likeable and overcome such objections.
This idea of sucking up to voters is as nauseating as it is un-American. Reality, however, necessitates unless we opt out of the process, we have to sober up and admit that we are perennially running for Prom Queen, yet have failed to take home the crown. If we can’t get people to like us, we will continue to lose for the next five to ten years, until demographics finally shift definitively in our favor.
Our donors will save a small fortune in the long run if they pick a few states where we won’t win marriage in the foreseeable future and test likeability campaigns. Additionally, a few cities should be selected to test pilot programs to focus on winning over minority voters.
It is also crucial that we create pilot programs – while no referendum is underway – where we hit back harder at our opponents. The fact is, religious fundamentalism, whether it is Islamic, Catholic, Mormon, Protestant or Jewish does not appear compatible with equality. Can you name one fundamentalist enclave where gay rights exist? Thus, when these groups attack us we should stop coddling them and join with religious moderates to make the fundamentalists pay dearly by driving up their negatives.
Some of my suggestions will work, while some will not. There are other people who have fresh ideas that need to be tried. But, the bottom line is that we need to stop test-driving the car during actual referendums in states that can actually be won. By the time we get on the big stage, we should understand exactly what makes voters like us, be able to refute our opponents recurring lies and know precisely how to dish out as much pain as we receive.
The old adage is practice makes perfect and we must figure out how to hit the damn ball when it doesn’t count, so when we enter the World Series we don’t approach it like it’s training camp.
The just-passed marriage-equality bill in Maine may be in danger of going the way
of California’s Prop 8. The religious-right site www.OneNewsNow.com is one of several right-wing organizations urging Maine residents to invoke a “People’s Veto” against the legal equality of fellow residents.
Mat Staver, an attorney who works with the religious-rightist Liberty Counsel, isn’t mincing words, according to a story posted at One News Now.
“Unlike other states, where people don’t have the veto right over the Governor or the Legislative branch, here the people under this system do have that right, Staver said. “Now is the time for them to rise up in mass and to literally overturn this insanity of same sex marriage.”
About 55,000 signatures are needed within 90 days after the Maine state Legislature adjourns. Anti-equality activists, with the help of out-of-state funding, are expected to achieve that goal. Maine’s marriage equality law is then put before the voters.
“The politicians have left the planet,” says Staver. “The people need to pull them down to Earth.”
Maine Equality is standing strong against this latest right-wing onslaught. The 25-year-old LGBT civil rights group is conducting door-to-door campaigns, talking to their neighbors face-to-face, letting people see that there’s nothing to fear from LGBT families.
Reportedly, they are indeed changing minds.
In early April, their was a marriage equality town hall meeting at the Augusta, Maine, Civic Center. Those who supported marriage equality were asked to attend wearing red shirts. About 3,000 attendees out of 4,000 did so — evidence that the door-to-door campaigning is having a positive effect.
Statewide polls indicate support for Marriage Equality split at a dead even 50/50, so a ballot initiative could go either way. It’ll be a difficult, uphill battle nonetheless. Equality Maine needs our help. Please visit www.EqualityMaine.org to see what you can do to help Maine gay and lesbian couples preserve marriage equality.
Maine’s governor (pictured) signed a freshly passed bill Wednesday approving gay marriage, making it the fifth state to approve the practice and moving New England closer to allowing it throughout the region.
New Hampshire legislators were also poised to send a gay marriage bill to their governor, who hasn’t indicated whether he’ll sign it. If he does, Rhode Island would be the region’s sole holdout.
The Maine Senate voted 21-13, with one absent, for a bill that authorizes marriage between any two people rather than between one man and one woman, as state law currently allows. The House had passed the bill Tuesday.
Democratic Gov. John Baldacci, who hadn’t previously indicated how he would handle the bill, signed it shortly afterward. In the past, he said he opposed gay marriage but supported civil unions, which provide many benefits of marriage.
The House approved a bill (89-58) that would legalize same-sex marriage. The state Senate voted to approve the legislation last week by a vote of 20-15. The measure will now land on Gov. David Baldacci’s desk. As a reporter in Maine, I had interviewed Baldacci and also eaten at his family’s Italian restaurant in Bangor. He was a nice guy, a smart politician and I hope he does the right thing in this instance.
Unfortunately, the day was partially soiled by the remarkably ignorant views of Rep. Bernard Ayotte, a Republican. Ayotte said that he couldn’t support the legislation because it would provide legal protections to people whom he said suffered from hormonal imbalances causing same-sex attractions.
“By all indications, homosexuality in human beings seems to be generated by imbalances in the human body,” he said. “As legislators, it is important that we do not base our statutes on genetic aberrations. Ayotte added, according to the Washington Blade, that his lack of support for the legislation shouldn’t be interpreted as discrimination against gay people.
Even by the low standards set by anti-gay activists, this level of ignorance was shocking. What evidence does Ayotte have to support his unfounded claims? If he does not have proof, why would he use his public platform to spread harmful misinformation?
The people of Maine should be free to marry the one person they love, under civil law, according each couple’s personal, religious and philosophical freedom of conscience.
Unfortunately, Focus on the Family opposes religious freedom, and further believes that conservative Christians should enjoy sole authority to define marriage and to dictate who is, or isn’t, allowed to marry.
Today, gay couples are under fire. Tomorrow, why not ban marriage for Muslims and Mexican-Americans?
Maine’s governor (pictured) 
Today was a wonderful day in Maine.
