All posts by Robert Cruickshank

Marriage Equality

Join the Impact – Seattle

1 Comment

Seattle has our back. Big time. This picture at right is of the huge march down Broadway in Seattle’s Capitol Hill neighborhood – the Emerald City’s version of the Castro. A friend in the crowd spoke to someone in Mayor Greg Nickels’ office who estimated over 12,000 people were in this march.

I will have more photos and information up later once my sources get their stuff uploaded and sent to me. The Stranger has some more photos of the march.

Prop 8 is catalyzing a nationwide marriage equality movement. Washington State’s Supreme Court upheld the state’s marriage ban in a shocking 2006 decision widely believed to have been motivated by 3 liberal justices facing well-funded conservative challengers that year (WA elects Supreme Court justices in contested races). But marriage equality advocates have vowed to undo this by, piece by piece, legalizing marriage.

With 2/3 majorities in both houses and Democratic Governor Christine Gregoire winning reelection last week, Democrats in Olympia are now strongly considering overturning the state’s marriage ban (which exists in the law and not the state constitution) as marriage rights activists mobilize in the Evergreen State.

Our opponents may have won the Prop 8 battle but it may prove to have been a pyrrhic victory.

Budget

The Ultimate Betrayal of California’s Future

3 Comments

I will be on KRXA 540 AM at 8 this morning to discuss this and other issues in California politics

In 1960 the state of California made a promise. All students who met eligibility requirements would be given a place in the state’s higher education system, and that education would be provided free of charge (although students would be responsible for room and board and books, they were not to be charged for the cost of instruction). Sure, that place might be at a UC, or a CSU, but under Governor Pat Brown both Republicans and Democrats agreed that for the good of the state, its economy, and its future, affordable higher education had to be guaranteed.

That was the essence of the 1960 Master Plan for Higher Education and it perhaps more than any other project of the Pat Brown era was responsible for catapulting California to global economic leadership, creating broadly shared prosperity, and making this state a better place to live. Without it we would be much worse off than we are today.

The Master Plan has been betrayed before, starting with Governor Ronald Reagan’s 1967 student fee hikes. Over the decades the promise of free college has eroded, but at least those who met the eligibility requirements could get a place. In recent years that opportunity became more remote and more dependent on debt, but at least it was there.

Under Arnold Schwarzenegger the slow but steady decline of California higher education has dramatically accelerated. Arnold has shown nothing but contempt for higher ed and no interest whatsoever in upholding the promises of the Master Plan or securing a prosperous future for all Californians.

So it comes as no surprise that he is again targeting higher ed for massive cuts, and cuts that are leading the Cal State system to turn away eligible freshmen for the first time ever:

Under one of the cost-cutting proposals, the CSU system may turn away eligible freshmen for the first time in its history. If the proposal from Chancellor Charles Reed is enacted, schools will give priority to freshmen in their “service area,” meaning CSUMB would first admit Monterey County residents. Students from outside the county would be put on a waiting list.

Institutions of higher education statewide stand to face a staggering $464.1 million in combined cuts under the governor’s plan to plug an $11 billion drop in state revenue projections.

During a recession, you want students to attend college. Regardless of age, students get education and job training that will help them grow the economy upon graduation. It is a tried and true form of economic stimulus. Arnold’s cuts are going to forestall this:

The community college system, which would be hardest hit by the cuts, would lose about 10 percent of its state funding under the governor’s plan….

“When unemployment goes up, enrollment at community colleges goes up,” Pyer said. “So we’ll have more students, and we won’t get money for that.”

Tough economic times also force some four-year students to drop down to two-year institutions, Pyer said.

The proposed budget cuts are not the only fiscal adjustment to education bouncing around Sacramento. The state Legislative Analyst’s Office has proposed fee increases that would raise community college tuition by 50 percent by fall 2009…

“It’s the community college’s feeling that it’s the worst time to raise fees when the economy is in a slump,” said Monterey Peninsula College spokesman Rich Montori.

Disclosure: I teach part-time at MPC but do not anticipate being affected by any of these cuts.

Community college cuts are especially pernicious. These schools are the primary location where working-class and lower middle-class Californians get a chance at upward mobility. Even small fee increases can put college and work skills further out of reach, especially since most of these students already work full-time.

As this budget crisis unfolds it is becoming clear to everyone that what is at stake is more than just a fiscal plan for the state government. Our very future is at risk here. I don’t know how to put it more clearly. If these cuts continue, if this overall situation is not reversed, California will simply not be sustainable for most of its residents. The prosperity of the 20th century will have given way to the aristocracy and inequality of the 21st.

Are we going to let the Yacht Party get away with it?

California, Election 2010, Jerry Brown

DiFi’s High Unfavorables Among 2010 Dem Candidates

17 Comments

The latest Field Poll is out (SF Chronicle here and Field PDF here) and it shows the favorability ratings of various leading contenders for 2010 gubernatorial race in both parties. And while the Chronicle wants to make this an “omg DiFi is the favorite” and “ha ha – Newsom sucks” story, the two most important things the poll actually tells us are:

1. DiFi has very high unfavorability ratings among Democratic contenders, and

2. Nobody – and I mean nobody – knows a thing about the Yacht Party potentials, except that they don’t like them.

Let’s take this in order. First, the Dems:

Name Favorable Unfavorable No opinion
Dianne Feinstein 50% 39% 11%
Jerry Brown 34 34 32
Antonio Villaraigosa 28 33 39
John Garamendi 27 20 53
Gavin Newsom 25 41 34
Jack O’Connell 10 16 74

Among Dems only Gavin Newsom has higher unfavorables, but not by much, and since this poll was taken right before the election – when Newsom was getting pounded in the press and on the airwaves by the Yes on 8 campaign – this may be a low point for Newsom.

That makes the 39% unfavorable figure for Feinstein rather significant. Sure, she has the highest favorable rating – 50% – of anyone in the field regardless of party, but that’s not a great figure for such an established politician. As we’ve noted before, her numbers among Dems aren’t so hot either. I don’t see much basis for a DiFi inevitability argument, which the Chronicle is trying to get started.

Jerry Brown has a lot of room to grow, since much of that 32% “no opinion” are probably younger Californians who (like me) were born late in or after his previous terms as governor.

Antonio Villaraigosa has to be considered a sleeper here. At 39% “no opinion” that gives him room to grow as well. He has been building a solidly progressive reputation over the last year, coming out strong against Prop 8 and leading the fight for mass transit in LA (seriously, getting to 2/3 with a sales tax for rail in LA County is a major achievement). As Brian noted a few weeks ago, his endorsements were the closest match to our own. He is also making a high profile link with Barack Obama, serving on his economic advisory team. If you want to run for governor, it is a damn smart move to link yourself to a popular president who won CA by 24 points.

And what of the Yacht Party contenders? They have Bill Simon written all over them:

Name Favorable Unfavorable No opinion
Meg Whitman 17% 16% 67%
Tom Campbell 14 13 73
Steve Poizner 10 14 76

Even with enormous unknown ratings, none of them have a net favorability rating outside the margin of error, and Steve Poizner already has a significant unfavorability rating that will only grow once his links to voter registration fraud get a wider airing. The Chronicle article promotes Meg Whitman as a breakout star, but I’m not seeing it here. All California voters will need to hear is that she’s a Republican and that she was an advisor to the McCain campaign and that may be enough to torpedo her.

The only Republican who might have a snowball’s chance is Tom Campbell, the moderate Republican, but he didn’t fare well in a statewide race in 2000 (losing to DiFi). Of course it’s highly unlikely that the “down with the ship” Yacht Party primary voters will vote for a moderate like Campbell.

This goes to show that the 2010 governor’s race may well be decided in the June primary, which should be one of the most interesting primary fights we’ve seen in this state in a long, long, LONG time.

Uncategorized

Nate Silver Mythbusts Prop 8

5 Comments

Earlier today Dan Walters repeated the canard that Obama brought new voters to the polls who voted for Prop 8, providing its margin of victory:

Last week, however, 10 percent of voters were African American while 18 percent were Latino, and applying exit poll data to that extra turnout reveals that the pro-Obama surge among those two groups gave Proposition 8 an extra 500,000-plus votes, slightly more than the measure’s margin of victory.

To put it another way, had Obama not been so popular and had voter turnout been more traditional – meaning the proportion of white voters had been higher – chances are fairly strong that Proposition 8 would have failed.

That brought out Nate Silver of Fivethirtyeight.com to bust this particular myth:

But the notion that Prop 8 passed because of the Obama turnout surge is silly. Exit polls suggest that first-time voters — the vast majority of whom were driven to turn out by Obama (he won 83 percent [!] of their votes) — voted against Prop 8 by a 62-38 margin. More experienced voters voted for the measure 56-44, however, providing for its passage.

Now, it’s true that if new voters had voted against Prop 8 at the same rates that they voted for Obama, the measure probably would have failed. But that does not mean that the new voters were harmful on balance — they were helpful on balance. If California’s electorate had been the same as it was in 2004, Prop 8 would have passed by a wider margin.

That’s the first point we all need to internalize and repeat often – Obama brought out a more progressive electorate that improved on the 2004 numbers and made Prop 8 a closer battle than it might otherwise have been. And while Prop 8’s passage is a catastrophe no matter the margin of its victory, closer is better as we lay the groundwork for a repeal vote.

The second key point is Obama brought out a younger electorate, and that voters under 30 were strongly against Prop 8 – regardless of racial identification:

Furthermore, it would be premature to say that new Latino and black voters were responsible for Prop 8’s passage. Latinos aged 18-29 (not strictly the same as ‘new’ voters, but the closest available proxy) voted against Prop 8 by a 59-41 margin. These figures are not available for young black voters, but it would surprise me if their votes weren’t fairly close to the 50-50 mark.

At the end of the day, Prop 8’s passage was more a generational matter than a racial one. If nobody over the age of 65 had voted, Prop 8 would have failed by a point or two. It appears that the generational splits may be larger within minority communities than among whites, although the data on this is sketchy.

Perhaps what’s needed over the next few years is a California version of The Great Schlep – younger Californians, no matter the community in which they live or identify, ought to do all they can to convince their family members to not vote against marriage rights.

Even if that particular strategy isn’t used, Nate Silver’s analysis shows that the effort to turn Prop 8 into another opportunity to divide us on racial lines and to scapegoat African Americans is missing the point rather dramatically.

Arnold Schwarzenegger, Budget

Arnold Is A Failure – Will He Drag the State Down With Him?

8 Comments

With the latest figures about the state budget deficit – $28 billion over the next 2 years – it seems beyond all doubt that Arnold Schwarzenegger is a failure as governor. The sole justification he gave for replacing Gray Davis in 2003 was that Davis faced a similarly large budget deficit and failed to solve it. Arnold promised to end this, and it is clear he has failed to deliver. Instead the state of California stands on the precipice of bankruptcy and crippling service cuts that will dramatically worsen the economic downturn.

And it is clear this is primarily Arnold’s fault. His first act as governor was to roll back the VLF, blowing a $6 billion annual hole in the state budget (roughly half the annual deficit – remember that the $28 billion figure is for two years). That act of irresponsibility was compounded by using borrowing to close the rest of the 2003-04 deficit. As the budget deficit returned in 2007 Arnold stubbornly refused to admit the need for new revenues.

He has also refused to engage in the necessary lobbying to produce a budget solution – instead he wishes and hopes Republicans will see the light despite years of evidence suggesting they instead see a budget crisis as an opportunity to ram through far-right ideas that nobody really wants.

The Legislative Analyst Office, under its new leader Mac Taylor, directly calls for taxes as the solution to the budget deficit. The report is a bit too favorable to Arnold’s plan and suggests too many cuts, but it makes this all-important point about spending cuts:

The state’s main options for addressing its budget dilemma-cutting expenditures and/or raising revenues-would both have adverse effects on the economy. Either type of option would reduce money held by or received by individuals or businesses that otherwise could be used for consumption or investment purposes. Because the state’s economy totals more than $1.7 trillion in economic activity each year, however, spending reductions or tax increases totaling between $20 billion and $30 billion would have a relatively small impact on the overall economy.

Here again I think the new LAO is being too moderate. The report notes that much of the upward pressure on spending is coming from increased usage of Medi-Cal, for example, suggesting that government services are becoming more necessary in a recession. It’s the safety net at work – and cutting the safety net is the last thing we ought to be doing.

Republicans like Mike Villines might be peddling books by Arthur Laffer, but as the California Budget Project explains the evidence proves that tax increases are the best way to provide a budget fix that doesn’t hurt the economy. Add that to the LAO’s point that $20 billion in taxes “would have a relatively small impact on the overall economy” and we have our answer.

And of course, spending cuts and tax increases hit different Californians. Spending cuts hit working and middle-class people particularly hard, especially the truly insane proposals to increase student fees for higher ed or to cut back Medi-Cal even further. But a return to the pre-1998 tax levels would hit the wealthy while providing the working and middle classes with the safety net and economic opportunities they need.

Some Democrats are looking to a federal bailout to help solve things. Such a bailout is necessary – for example the feds could help meet our Medi-Cal obligations and help with higher ed, reducing dramatically our overall deficit and making it easier for, say, a reinstatement of the VLF to close the remainder. But a bailout isn’t likely to come without state-level solutions.

That we have to face such choices at all is a testament to how epic a failure Arnold Schwarzenegger has been for California. The LAO’s report is damning:

The state’s revenue collapse is so dramatic and the underlying economic factors are so weak that we forecast huge budget shortfalls through 2013-14 absent corrective action. From 2010-11 through 2013-14, we project annual shortfalls that are consistently in the range of $22 billion, as shown below.

Those are shocking figures, and they should indicate to every progressive and Democrat just how important it is to push out our own fairer, sensible, long-term solutions.

Uncategorized

Arnold Says “Don’t Give Up” On Equal Rights – One Week Late

6 Comments

Don’t get me wrong, these comments are the right ones that should be made by the Governor of California:

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger today expressed hope that the California Supreme Court would overturn Proposition 8, the ballot initiative that outlawed same-sex marriage. He also predicted that the 18,000 gay and lesbian couples who have already married would not be affected by the initiative.

“It’s unfortunate, obviously, but it’s not the end,” Schwarzenegger said in an interview on CNN this morning. “I think that we will again maybe undo that, if the court is willing to do that, and then move forward from there and again lead in that area.”…

Today, Schwarzenegger urged backers of gay marriage to follow the lesson he learned as a bodybuilder trying to lift weights that were too heavy for him at first. “I learned that you should never ever give up…. They should never give up. They should be on it and on it until they get it done.“

This is precisely the message that needs to be delivered to California. Prop 8 was unfortunate, and it must be reversed, and we will not give up until it is.

If the repeal vote comes up in 2010, while Arnold is still governor, then he ought to repeat these comments and speak out for equal rights. Of course…he should have done that this year.

These comments do beg the question of where Arnold was these last few months on Prop 8. Even if the No on 8 campaign did not solicit him to cut an ad (and I don’t know if they did nor not) Arnold ought to have spoken up himself and explained why it would be “unfortunate” to take away marriage rights. Arnold still has a lot of pull and credibility with swing voters in California, and in parts of red California. He should have spoken up sooner.

Still, this is the right framing, and helps build the narrative that Prop 8’s passage is a Bad Thing for California and something that needs to be reversed.

Uncategorized

Pledge to Repeal Prop 8: Restore Marriage Equality

7 Comments

I am proud to work for the Courage Campaign

The more I look at the passage of Prop 8 and the reaction to it – the outpouring of anger, the determination to not let this stand – the more I realize that we have been here before.

In 1963 the state legislature passed the Rumford Fair Housing Act, outlawing racial discrimination in the sale or rental of property. Housing segregation was one of the main targets of the Civil Rights Movement and the Rumford Act was a major victory.

But it also provoked a conservative reaction. In 1964 the California Real Estate Association put Proposition 14 on the ballot, a constitutional amendment repealing the open housing law. A former actor named Ronald Reagan launched his political career serving as the spokesman for the campaign, especially in TV ads. Despite a major mobilization against Prop 14 – leading to, among other things, the Berkeley Free Speech Movement – Prop 14 passed by a 2-1 margin in November 1964.

It was a bitter blow to the California civil rights movement. The anger it provoked was so intense it led to the Watts Riots the following summer. But the main reaction among the California civil rights movement was to organize. By 1970 activists had forced the Democratic Party in CA and in DC to embrace open housing and enshrined it in law as soon as Prop 14 was overturned by the US Supreme Court.

Many Californians are asking us “what now?” The protests we have seen are the beginnings of a new civil rights movement – the marriage equality movement – but we need a grassroots movement to make this movement grow and succeed. And to do that we need a goal. A court case doesn’t sustain activist energies – something the civil rights Movement, which was organized long before Brown v. Board or Reitman v. Mulkey and achieved its main successes by mounting the most effective and important grassroots movement in our history, understood quite well.

The goal, then, ought to be a repeal of Prop 8. We can and must do the groundwork, field organizing, and outreach to block by block reverse this defeat and show Californians the importance of restoring equal rights – exactly as the civil rights movement did 40 years ago.

The birth of a new Marriage Equality Movement — the civil rights movement of the 21st Century — is unfolding before our eyes.

Movements are visceral and popular, often borne of outrage and anger. What we are witnessing on the streets and online is a community of people who have come together to say: “These are our lives. This is our time. This is unacceptable.” Organized from the bottom-up by thousands of ordinary people in the last 48 hours, this people-powered phenomenon is exponentially growing by the minute, online and offline.

This is our moment to stand strong together — gay and straight — and say that we refuse to accept a California where discrimination is enshrined in our state constitution. Please show your support by pledging to support our campaign to repeal Prop 8 and restore marriage equality to California.

Our email to our members is over the flip.

“Not everyone was as jubilant about the gains for marriage as (the) Family Research Council and our supporters. This morning, FOX News posted photo after photo of the anti-family rioting in Los Angeles…” — Tony Perkins, President of the Family Research Council, a powerful right-wing religious think tank that helped lead the campaign to pass Proposition 8.

Dear Robert,

“Anti-family rioting.”

That is how the religious extremists behind Prop 8 are characterizing the protests that have spread across California in the aftermath of Tuesday’s passage of the ballot measure that eliminated the right of same-sex couples to marry.

I was at the heart of one of these amazing marches in Los Angeles on Wednesday night. And it was anything but “anti-family rioting.”

It was history in the making — thousands of passionate Americans spontaneously speaking out against enshrining discrimination into the California state constitution.

We are witnessing the birth of a new Marriage Equality Movement — the civil rights movement of the 21st Century. Organized from the bottom-up by thousands of ordinary people just like you in the last 48 hours, this people-powered phenomenon is exponentially growing by the minute, online and offline.

You are at ground zero in this movement. And we need to take it to the next level — a new initiative campaign to repeal Prop 8 and restore marriage equality to California. Please pledge your support now to repeal Prop 8 — then forward this message to your friends:

http://www.couragecampaign.org…

California had the chance to do what no other state has done and uphold equality for all. Instead, a slim majority decided to strip fundamental human rights from a minority. As Jonathan Stein writes at Mother Jones:

“The decision violates, violently, the image of my state that I have held with such pride my entire life. California is a wonderful place for a lot of reasons, but foremost among them is the way in which it welcomes people.”

Movements are visceral and popular, often borne of outrage and anger. What we are witnessing on the streets and online is a community of people who have come together to say: “These are our lives. This is our time. This is unacceptable.”

This is our moment to stand strong together — gay and straight — and say that we refuse to accept a California that enshrines bigotry into our state constitution. Please pledge your support now to repeal Prop 8 and restore marriage equality to California — then forward this message to your friends:

http://www.couragecampaign.org…

Thank you for mobilizing your friends to fight the religious right and restore marriage equality to California.

Rick Jacobs

Chair

P.S. My friends Zach Shepard and Geoffrey Murry helped spark Wednesday and Thursday night’s marches in Los Angeles, activating their social networks via email and Facebook. These two young lawyers have never led a protest in their lives, but they decided to take matters into their own hands, along with thousands of other concerned citizens shocked at the passage of Prop 8.

Like Zach and Geoffrey, you can help build California’s new Marriage Equality Movement today by taking action in your own community. Will you start by pledging your support to repeal Prop 8 and then forward this message to your friends?

http://www.couragecampaign.org…

Budget

The Mouse That Never Roared

1 Comment

I will be on KRXA 540 AM this morning at 8 to discuss this, as well as to recap the California election results

There’s been a consensus among California progressives that as far as our state was concerned, the 2008 election was either a disappointment or a disaster. Silver linings are few. But there was a significant development that should not only give us hope for the future – but MUST give us direction and focus over the next few weeks as the budget battle resumes in Sacramento.

As I explained back in August, conservatives were planning to unite around the issue of taxes in this election. We saw it here in California when right-wingers like Joel Fox were concern trolling small businesses and working Californians to vote against badly needed government programs like Measure R, the LA mass transit expansion. Nor did it help when credulous journalists repeated this framing themselves.

These anti-tax politics were part of a larger effort to revive the policies of Herbert Hoover and prevent a New Deal from coming to California (little known fact: California never had a New Deal the first time around either). Their argument is that instead of using government to provide a safety net and stimulate economic growth, we should cut back government in a time of crisis, no matter the social or economic cost.

On Tuesday Californians resoundingly rejected these arguments. The Reason Foundation and the Howard Jarvis Association threw everything they had at Proposition 1A but it passed anyway and we’re gonna build that SUPERTRAIN.

Voters also approved a number of tax increases, which is all the more stunning because of the absurd 66.7% requirement. In addition to LA’s Measure R, Sonoma and Marin counties approved Measure Q, a tax increase to build a passenger rail line near the Highway 101 corridor. Santa Clara County voters may have approved a BART sales tax. Voters in Imperial and Stanislaus counties renewed transit taxes. Here in Monterey County we fell just short of approving a transit tax – 62% is a significant show of support.

Other tax proposals fared well. San José approved a telephone tax. Alameda County approved a parcel tax to pay for AC Transit bus service. Voters in small towns in Monterey County rejected efforts to repeal utility and sales taxes. Nine of 13 tax proposals in LA County were approved.

This should not actually surprise us. Polls have shown that Californians DO support higher taxes including as a solution to our budget crisis. They understand the value of taxes for government services. Mass transit, schools, libraries, police and fire departments – all those things create economic value, jobs, and save people money. Californians get that.

It also helps when a specific tax is connected to a specific service. State legislators are loath to do this, wanting more control over the general fund and the revenues going into it. I do not think that is the right approach to take, at least not until the structural revenue shortfall is ended.

Sacramento Democrats would do well to remember that when Arnold Schwarzenegger calls them into special session today. Mike Villines is already throwing down the no new taxes gauntlet.

Democrats should ignore his concern trolling (and that of journalists like Kathleen Pender, who doesn’t know what she’s talking about). Conservative anti-tax neo-Hoover whining is the mouse that never roared in the election. It doesn’t move the electorate the way they claim it does. Californians understand that during this economic crisis taxes for services are the right way to grow the economy.

Uncategorized

The End of the Beginning

3 Comments

We California progressives have come quite a long way in this decade. Whereas America had its catastrophic political moment eight years ago, ours came on October 7, 2003. A disorganized and demoralized Democratic Party, out of touch with its base, saw its governor recalled and replaced by an Austrian actor.

Just as American progressives used the defeats of 2000 and 2004 to learn how to organize and place ourselves on the brink of an historic presidential victory, California progressives used the 2003 defeat to start doing the hard and necessary work of rebuilding a party and a movement. We saw some early rewards in 2005 when we beat Arnold’s special election. And we saw some setbacks in 2006 when top-down party establishment led us into another gubernatorial defeat.

At the same time California progressives helped send Jerry McNerney to Congress and put Debra Bowen in the Secretary of State’s office and helped Marcy Winograd nearly knock off Jane Harman. Immigrant rights activists took to the streets and created a new civil rights movement for a new generation. Those campaigns helped sow the seeds of the remarkable grassroots energy we have witnessed here in 2008. Up and down the state progressive activists have organized to help Democrats have a fighting chance at a 2/3 majority, helped put candidates like Charlie Brown and Debbie Cook on the brink of defeating two of Southern California’s far-right freakshows.

And the outpouring of activism for the No on Prop 8 campaign is something to behold. That race is still WAY too close for comfort – if you have not yet volunteered for the campaign, be sure to do so as part of your Stay for Change action. Vote early and then get to work – we have an election to win.

As the history of California progressives in the 2000s shows, sometimes you’ve gotta hit rock bottom before you can make it back to the top. We’re not there yet, and no matter how the results turn out today, we still have a long way to go. With Arnold Schwarzenegger still governor, with millions of Californians facing unemployment and foreclosure and the loss of health benefits, with the state budget in deficit and Republicans insist on using it to ram through Grover Norquist’s radical agenda – we still have plenty of work left to do no matter what happens today.

But today’s election is the end of the beginning. California progressives are no longer the party doormat, no longer a disorganized group. We are not just here to stay, but we are here to lead and we are here to resuscitate this state. The right-wing remains strong – so strong they may well pass Prop 8 – but no longer will they have the state to themselves. Today, the battle has been joined.

Let’s go make history.

Uncategorized

Prop 8: It’s In Your Hands Now

2 Comments

There are 72 hours left to determine whether California will take a massive step backward on human rights and allow the far right to dictate policy here – or whether we can rally voters to make a stand for equality. Polls don’t vote – it’s time for us to go all out on GOTV to defeat Prop 8.

This is especially important given how motivated our opponents are. They are raising money hand over fist and have thousands of fervent followers planning to get out the vote on Monday and Tuesday. We know their GOTV operation is exceptional.

Your job now is to volunteer to defeat Prop 8. Our goal is to reach 1000 netroots volunteers for No on Prop 8 GOTV. Have you signed up yet? You need to take action, NOW, to make sure that our supporters get to the polls.

As I write this Yes on 8 supporters are gathering at Qualcomm Stadium in San Diego for “The Call.” See their crazy video – this is what is going to be unleashed on California over the next 72 hours. Are you going to help us fight back?

“The Call” organizers are billing this as “a confrontation between light and darkness will happen this November. To the victor goes the soul of the nation.” Some of their featured speakers – a who’s who of the theocratic right:

Lou Engel, founder of The Call: “The powers of darkness shall not prevail – this is a call for war. California is the Armageddon of the cultural wars of today.”

James Dobson, Focus on the Family (he has donated over $550,000 to the Yes on 8 campaign): “Tolerance and its first cousin, diversity, ‘are almost always buzzwords for homosexual advocacy.'”

James Garlow, Skyline Church: Garlow said of gays: “Homosexuals are not monogamous. … They want to destroy the institution of marriage. It will destroy marriage. It will destroy the earth.”

Tony Perkins, Family Research Council: Tony Perkins says humanity will not survive if Prop 8 loses:  “It’s more important than the presidential election….  We’ve picked bad presidents before, and we’ve survived as a nation.  But we will not survive if we lose the institution of marriage.”

These are the people who will be the new power brokers in California politics if Prop 8 passes. They will be emboldened to unleash the full brunt of their far right agenda on California and ALL of us are going to be its targets.

So let’s make sure they don’t get that chance, and that Prop 8 is defeated. Sign up to defeat Prop 8 now!