I previously talked in depth about the Sarah Palin/condoms issue, a post which was prompted in part by a post from Matt Munson. In a subsequent comment, Munson noted that the condom issue wasn't the one that really concerned him:
[F]rom an interview from a journalist/commentator:
She assured me that Palin is not in favor of giving any rights to gays and didn’t want to give domestic partnership rights to government employees but that she had to veto the bill that would have rescinded such rights because of the Alaska Supreme Court ruling. So can we please cut this crap Log Cabin and the McCain campaign have been trying to put out: Palin only vetoed an antigay bill because she had to, by law.
And this time, Munson was right:
News Release
For Immediate Release
August 29, 2008
Log Cabin Republicans Statement about Gov. Sarah Palin
Log Cabin President Patrick Sammon made the following statement about Sen. McCain's selection of Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin:
"Alaska Governor Sarah Palin can help Sen. McCain win this election by appealing to independent and young voters. She's a mainstream Republican who will unite the Party and serve John McCain well as Vice President. Gov. Palin is an inclusive Republican who will help Sen. McCain appeal to gay and lesbian voters."
###
Log Cabin Republicans promotes legislation to provide basic fairness for gay and lesbian Americans and works to build a more inclusive GOP. The 30-year old organization has state and local chapters nationwide, a full-time office in Washington, DC, a federal political action committee and state political action committees.
Munson isn't the only one who disagrees with Log Cabin on this one. Duncan Osborne:
In 2005, Alaska's highest court ruled, in a case brought in 1999 on behalf of nine couples, that the state could not deny benefits to the domestic partners of state government employees. The court ordered the state to implement that ruling in late 2006.
The ruling was seen by right wingers as conflicting with a 1998 amendment to the Alaska Constitution, passed by voters in a ballot referendum, that defined marriage as solely between one man and one woman. The Republican-dominated State Legislature passed a bill that barred the state's administrative agency from implementing the ruling. Palin vetoed it.
"The Department of Law advised me that this bill... is unconstitutional given the recent court order... mandating same-sex benefits," Palin said in a statement. "With that in mind, signing this bill would be in direct violation of my oath of office."
The statement added, "The governor's veto does not signal any change or modification to her disagreement with the action and order by the Alaska Supreme Court. It is the governor's intention to work with the Legislature and to give the people of Alaska an opportunity to express their wishes and intentions whether these benefits should continue."
Eight days before signing the veto, Palin signed another bill that called for a "statewide advisory vote" regarding the ruling from Alaska's high court, saying in a statement, "We may disagree with the rationale behind the ruling, but our responsibility is to proceed forward with the law and follow the Constitution... I disagree with the recent court decision because I feel as though Alaskans spoke on this issue with its overwhelming support for a Constitutional Amendment in 1998 which defined marriage as between a man and woman. But the Supreme Court has spoken and the state will abide."
Well, I guess there's some benefit in being a constitutionalist...
Thrown for a (school) loop
-
You know what they say - if you don't own your web presence, you're taking
a huge risk. For example, let's say that you decide to start the Red Green
Compa...
4 years ago