I was emailed a link to this 2007 article by getting-to-be-beleaguered ’safe schools czar’ Kevin Jennings:

This isn’t a fight where neutrality is an option, Mary. As Nobel Prize winner Elie Wiesel has said, “Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” Whether you like it or not, politics does play a role here. So get with the program.

I wish Mary’s fantasy, that we could ignore politics, were true. But her baby will find out that her Mom is just deluded soon enough. Children of the “Greatest Generation” routinely asked their Dads “What did you do during the war?” As Antonin Scalia and Pat Buchanan are so fond of pointing out, we’re in a cultural war right now over whether or not LGBT people are entitled to the same level of dignity and respect as other Americans. Some day little Cheney is going to ask, “What did you do during the war, Mom?” Mary (to date) has sat on the sidelines - helping the oppressor. Too bad some day little Cheney will realize her Mom could have been part of the solution, but instead obstinately stuck her head in the sand over and over and thus was just part of the problem. I hope little Cheney can some day forgive her.

Smug fellow, isn’t he?  Since then, of course, Mary Cheney’s father former Vice President Dick Cheney has forthrightly and openly repeated* his support for same-sex marriage; while Kevin Jennings went on to serve a man who’s too much of a coward to follow suit.  The term ‘irony’ is often misused in this culture, but I believe that we have a legitimate opportunity here to use it.’

Also ‘hypocrisy,’ but that’s common with the Democrats on this issue.  Right down the line.

Moe Lane

Read More →

And here I thought that opportunities to report on the NY Senate’s shenanigans had passed, once Espada flip-flopped back to being a Democrat.  I was wrong:

Elite get fat pay hikes amid Senate stalemate
Democrats reward key staff with up to $32,000 while hitting GOP

ALBANY — Eleven of the state Senate’s highest-paid staffers received raises of up to $32,000 when it appeared likely Democrats would lose control of the chamber during the five-week leadership fight.

The combined increases will cost taxpayers $200,000 annually.

[snip]

Because many of the raises were backdated, staffers are paid the additional cash in a lump sum, said Jennifer Freeman, spokeswoman to state Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli. As a result, staffers expected fat paychecks of thousands of dollars in backdated raises at the exact time that Sampson was accusing Senate Republicans of stalling legislation in an attempt to seize the spoils of majority leadership.

I’d like to note two things about this:

Read More →

The Connecticut Office of State Ethics (OSE) is poised to investigate and penalize the Diocese of Bridgeport for having the temerity to exercise at least four of the five sections of the First Amendment (religion, speech, assembly, petition).

The story begins earlier this year when Connecticut State Senator Andrew McDonald proposed legislation (S. 1098) that would have forced the Catholic Church, contrary to the church’s doctrine, to relinquish control of parish finances (for those from congregationalist traditions who may not be aware of the organization of Catholic Churches, the Catholic Church, by doctrine, is very hierarchical, with Bishops responsible for all the parishes within the bishopric, and those Bishops reporting on up the line, ultimately to the Vatican.  Unlike most protestant demoninations, local parishes exercise little governing control.  This is not merely an issue of secular control but one of theological doctrine deeply entwined in the Catholic Church’s views on the role of clergy, the papacy and the church in fulfilling God’s mission).  Naturally the church opposed this incursion into its governance and doctrine, with the Bishop urging Catholics to contact their legislators and the Church supporting a mass rally in the state capital.

So the state struck back.  From the American Spectator story by Lisa Fabrizio:

It seems that our Diocese of Bridgeport — which in March was forced to marshal the faithful to defend itself from unconstitutional government interference — was notified by the Connecticut Office of State Ethics that it is under investigation for possible violations of the state’s lobbying laws.

Bishop William Lori sent a letter to the OSE challenging the investigation. He describes the activity that led to the investigation:

Following the surprise introduction of Bill 1098, a proposal that singled out Catholic parishes and would have forced them to reorganize contrary to Church law and the First Amendment, our Diocese responded in the most natural, spontaneous, and frankly, American, of ways: we alerted our membership - in person and through our website; we encouraged them to exercise their free speech by contacting their elected representatives; and, we organized a rally at the State Capitol…

On April 23, 2009, the Diocese received a letter from Thomas K. Jones, Ethics Enforcement Officer for the OSE, stating that it was “the subject of an Office of State Ethics evaluation,” which was “being conducted to ascertain whether the Diocese had violated [Connecticut General Statutes Sections] 1-94, 1-95 and 1-96 by failing to register as a lobbyist in Connecticut, by failing to submit all other appropriate lobbyist filings, and by failing to follow all applicable registration procedures.”

The OSE claims the Diocese acted as a “lobbyist” by: participating in a March 11, 2009, State Capitol rally against Raised Bill 1098 (the unconstitutional attempt to reorganize Catholic parishes contrary to Catholic teaching and tradition); making statements on its website urging its members to contact their elected representatives to oppose Raised Bill 1098; and making statements on its website urging its members to contact their legislators to oppose another bill, Raised Bill 899 (regarding same-sex marriage).

The subtext to all this is that the underlying legislation itself appears to be retaliation for the Church’s opposition to same-sex marriage (Sen. McDonald and lead Connecticut House sponsor Rep. Michael Lawler are both gay). 

It’s hard to imagine that in a country with the First Amendment protections we are supposed to enjoy, it should even be a matter of discussion whether it is legal, without government approval in advance, to hold a rally at the Statehouse and encourage fellow citizens to contact their elected officials. Such is the state of “reform” and “ethics” that we do in fact have to have these discussions.

(This post adopted w/ permission from a post by Sean Parnell at the Center for Competitive Politics.