THe Maine ballot measure must not be Blue Doggie style enough for Rahmin Noodles.

Jane – how does this usually work – What could OFA possibly say to Gov Baldacchi to justify this ?

There you go again Jane: Looking to BO/ OFA to embrace the left of the left as if it’s the Blue Dogs.

As pointed out in the earlier post about VA and Deeds, the D party is planting the seeds of it’s own destruction in the midterms by viewing the landscape from the village perspective and hewing to the prime US political directive, first punch the hippy.

Your doing good work to create an alternative narrative, but path dependence is a very strong adversary.

Do you want to reject the new law that lets same-sex couples marry and allows individuals and religious groups to refuse to perform these marriges?

Maybe it’s the opt out language that’s the problem.

Nate Silver on the confusing/conflicting polling results. Nate is calling the Yes on 1 side a 5-to-2 underdog.

This really sucks.

If there is a primary challenge to Obama in 2012, expect it to be quite, um, festive.

Defeating (hopefully) Question 1 will establish an important precedent, despite the conspicuous absence of Dem encouragement.

I like festive. Can I blow up the balloons?

That depends on whether you plan to put shaving cream inside them first : )

Sure, just don’t try to blow up the individually wrapped, lubricated balloons. Those are for, um, later.

Most people want to blow up the balloons, real Dems want to inflate Bubbles.

……then punch the second hippy.

Did OFA ever go out to their list on DOMA and DADT? Maybe I missed it.

It’s beyond frustrating at this point. If we get 8 years of Obama, it will be 8 years of being told “This isn’t the right time for it.” One suspect that even if positive bills are passed and/or court decisions come down in states representing 55% of the population of the country, Rahm and Obama would be worried about some poor ConservaDem who might have to run with DADT as a campaign issue.

One really needs to be point blank with Obama and ask him at what point did “This isn’t the right time for it” cease being an acceptable answer for the Civil Rights Movement in the 50s and 60s? When did “separate but equal” laws, and failure to address them in Washington, stop being acceptable to blacks?

One would have hoped for the best. But I think most of us knew it would be the worst. :/

John

“”Do you want to reject the new law that lets same-sex couples marry and allows individuals and religious groups to refuse to perform these marriges?”

Maybe it’s the opt out language that’s the problem.”

Not being in Maine, I’m not sure what the language applies to. But in every state where I have lived, there are two kinds of marriages: religious/moral and civil/legal. They often take place together, with a religious figure serving as a civil magistrate for the witnessing and signing of the license. But they remain distinct, and a judge or sea captain can preside at the civil version.

No clergyman should be obliged to perform religious marriages that run counter to his or her doctrine. This would be an outrageous intrusion of the state into the church.

But one has to ask whether a clergyman should be a magistrate for the same reason, even in this limited case.

“Defense of marriage” amendments are largely the result of confusion over where church ends and state begins. Having clergy officiate over civil marriage is a relic of the established churches of pre-revolutionary Europe. The confusion shows that the time has come to get rid of the relic and mark a clear line.

I think that we need to stop deputizing clergymen and allowing them to serve as magistrates for the purposes of marrying people. Church and state need to be kept separate for the protection of both. So lets require a civil marriage before a county clerk and leave religious marriage to the clergy. Let civil marriage protect the property and family rights of the parties and their children. Let religious marriage protect the morality of the parties.

If memory serves, they do this this way in France and probably in other civilized places as well.

I’m following the ME tally here. So far only 12% in. 53-47

http://www.wmtw.com/politics/feature.html

My fear is that votes are coming in from the more liberal ME-01 district first, and then from rural ME-02. Not to say that ME-02 rural will vote wrong, but it might be close.

OFA Not Big On Teh Gay? I’m shocked.

On question 1, where no (do not repeal the law on gay marriage) is the right answer, it’s tightened, 53/47. TABOR, which would turn ME into CA, but sliding into the Atlantic, not the Pacific, is holding steady 60/40 No.

Ironically, Governor Baldacci has been a horrible governor in almost every respect save the gay marriage law.

Question 1 now 50/50.

Remarkably, ME voted to keep an excise tax. (As I understand it, that money went to localities, so voters knew they’d be destroying their own towns. If it had been to the state, things might have been different.)

Question 3-School Consolidation – The horrible Baldacci administration forced through a plan to make school districts consolidate even though nobody could prove any money would be saved (even after firing the excess administrators). School districts then jockeyed to combine with each other — the law didn’t actually do the redistricting, just mandated that districts do it or face penalties — and this caused a great deal of agita, especially when local governments made the decision without consulting voters. This is not a vote either for consolidation or the Baldacci regime, just a vote that the state just can’t go through a process like that, ever again, which is what the rollback contemplated by the question would entail.

Question 5-Medical Marijuana — 60% steady for legalizing. $4 million dollars worth of marijuana seized up in Aroostock County, and then burned. As if the county didn’t need all the thriving local businesses it could get!

Question 1 still 50/50.