NH Republican Radio Host Fired for Homophobic Rant, GOP Response Exposes Their Hypocrisy

Out New Hampshire Democratic Party Chair Ray Buckley and I share the same birthday. November 14. I got to go to Disneyland. He got to step into the line of homophobic fire from Republican radio talk show host Doug Lambert.

After his radio show "Meet the New Press" ended today, GraniteGrok.com co-founder Doug Lambert looked into a live web-streaming camera, mockingly wished state Democratic Party Chairman Ray Buckley a Happy Birthday and then called Buckley a "faggot" before basically wishing him dead.

...After co-host Skip Murphy said that he should probably shut off the feed, Lambert looked into the camera and said, "Speaking of gays, Happy Birthday Ray Buckley. Are you going to Holland or taking another trip with your buddies?"

He then dances in a way meant to mock a gay male and says:"Yeah you Faggot. [Pause.] That's right I said it and I meant it. You are reprobate. How the people, the Democrats, I think of some of the gray haired ladies and older people from the old party would stand behind you is beyond me. You are a disgrace to yourself to humanity to mankind and to your party.

"Other than that Happy Birthday Ray and many more -- not," Lambert continued before the feed was quickly shut off.

Condemnation came quick and fast.

Rep. Jim Splaine, who sponsored New Hamsphire's successful marriage equality bill, said "Ray Buckley has put up with a lot since he let others know he is gay. All of us who are openly gay are at times on the receiving end of such disgusting comments. Some of us receive hate mail or calls for what we do on our fight for equality. But in this case, Ray and the many others who have worked hard this year and in years past to achieve marriage equality in New Hampshire have a louder voice than this GraniteGrok co-host character. The majority of people in New Hampshire are on the side of equality and love, not hate and discrimination."

When GOP state representatives distanced themselves from Lambert, he attempted an apology writing, "To be blunt, what I said is something that never should have been said in any kind of a public setting, or, quite frankly, in a private one either. Being human, and an honest person that is used to freely speaking my mind, my passion got the best of me."

But it wasn't enough.

Nassua Broadcasting, the owner of WEMJ 1490am in Laconia, terminated its contract with Lambert's Meet the New Press on Monday. "Although the comments by Mr. Lambert were not aired on our station, we find the comments by him to be completely out of line and unacceptable, and we will not allow Mr. Lambert the opportunity to continue to air his show on our radio station," said Rob Fulmer, regional manager for Nassau.

On top of that, Ed Engler, the editor of the Laconia Daily Sun, announced his newspaper would no longer carry Lambert’s weekly column. Even more, Lambert is being forced to resign from county co-chairman position on Republican congressional candidate Frank Guinta’s campaign.

Lez Get Real reports that Ryan Williams, a spokesman for the Granite States GOP said, “Mr. Lambert’s comments were completely inappropriate, offensive and hurtful” and they “having nothing to do with the party whatsoever.”

This is where I pause. Really? Really?!

Is it just me, or does that sound a little hypocritical? Isn't it the Granite State GOP who is attempting to overturn New Hampshire's new marriage equality law? Isn't it New Hampshire's Republican legislators who want to strip the state's LGBT citizens of their new found equality? Isn't that just a disguised, "sophisticated" way of saying what Lambert barbarically ranted on his show?

Mr. Williams, your party's actions are also "completely inappropriate, offensive and hurtful" and they having everything "to do with the party."

So I praise Mo Baxley of New Hampshire Freedom to Marry for calling out John H. Sununu, Chairman of the State Republican Party and his silence on the controversy thus far, at a press conference yesterday. Back in April, he called both the marriage equality bill and a transgender rights bill "garbage."

While some Republican candidates and public officials have denounced Lambert’s offensive remarks, the silence from John H. Sununu, Chairman of the State Republican Party, on these hateful slurs is deafening. But his silence comes as no surprise. Over the past few months, he has crisscrossed the state using rhetoric not dissimilar from the hateful things Lambert said on his show. Although he has not used the specific slur mouthed by Lambert, John H. Sununu has continually railed against gay and lesbian families. He has described marriage equality as garbage, called on Governor Lynch to 'veto the garbage,' and accused Democrats of trying to impose a San Francisco agenda on NH dozens of times.

Make no mistake, Sununu’s repeated claims that equal rights for everyone would ruin NH is just coded language. And the sentiment he seeks to foster is no different from the politics of hate and fear expressed by Lambert on his show this past Saturday.

As a frequent guest on Lambert’s show, Sununu should denounce his despicable comments, pledge never to go on the show, and vow never again to use the issue of equal rights as a weapon to gain political advantage. Additionally, the Belknap County Republican website, which is run by Doug Lambert, should post a statement denouncing his comments and remove him from his position of authority. And the radio show WEMJ, which hosts Lambert’s 'Meet the New Press' radio show, should remove him from the air immediately.

I also want to make it clear that this press conference, and the actions we demand, are not about any one person. This is about a greater culture that has been created by John H. Sununu at the New Hampshire Republican Party. He has sought to marginalize the gay and lesbian community over the past several months by using hurtful rhetoric, and should stand against such discrimination. A failure to respond by Sununu, the Belknap County Republicans, and WEMJ would speak volumes. New Hampshire has a long tradition of rejecting discrimination and promoting equality. The libertarian streak in our state lends itself to freedom, and not hate. This type of behavior should be discouraged by all political persuasions—a simple apology is not enough.

ACTION: If you live in New Hampshire, find out who you're legislator is here and then call and tell them to reject these proposals. And if you happen to be represented by any of the sponsors, GIVE 'EM HELL!

To get more involved, go to New Hampshire Freedom to Marry Coalition.

Correction: Earlier, I had the wrong picture up of John H. Sununu. It has been corrected.

Washington Blade and Other Gay Publications Shut Down By Parent Company

UPDATE 2 11/17/2009: Press Release: Falls Church News-Press Owner Won Bid to Buy & Perpetuate Washington Blade; Future of Significant LGBT Publication Uncertain

UPDATE: The Final Hours of the Washington Blade.

With a heavy heart, I report that Windows Media, the publisher for gay news publications such as the Washington Blade, South Florida Blade and Southern Voice, has shut down due to parent company Avalon Equity Fund having been forced into receivership and has effectively closed shop on all outlets immediately.

Staff of the Southern Voice showed up to work over the weekend to discover this note posted on the office door.

It is with GREAT regret that we must inform you that effective immediately, the operations of Window Media, LLC and Unite Media, LLC have closed down.

Please return to this office on WEDNESDAY, November 18th, 2009 at 11:00 AM to collect personal belongings and to receive information on your separation stipulations. Please bring boxes and/or containers that will allow you to collect all your personal belongings at one time.

Regretfully,

Steve Myers
Mike Kitchens

All websites have been taken down.

This is a real blow to the community. Before the internet, these papers were a vital news source to the LGBT population. Even in the internet age, they continued to cover stories that were largely overlooked by mainstream media but important to LGBT citizens.

VIDEO: "How I Met Your Mother" Mocks New York's Inability to Legalize Marriage Equality - Possible Vote Today?

(At the 2:18 mark. H/T Jeremy Hooper at Good As You)

OK, but seriously, what the heck is happening in New York? No one knows for sure. But that seems to be a recurring theme.

Last week, the Senate met for a special session called by Gov. Paterson to solve the state's budget problems and vote on the marriage bill.

They dawdled. Nothing happened.

They met yesterday. Did anything happen? No.

Now, they're expected to meet again today. Don't hold your breath. The new promise on the marriage bill is to have a vote on it by the end of the year.

Let the games . . . continue.

RELATED: New York Conservatives Institute Marriage Equality Test- No Endorsement If One Votes For Equality

New Jersey Marriage Equality Bill May Not Get a Vote

I've been reporting on the developments in New Jersey and the possibility of the state's marriage equality bill being signed before pro-LGBT Gov. John Corzine leaves office. However, the chances of a victory in the New Jersey legislature are growing smaller.

State Sen. Paul Sarlo, who chairs the Judiciary Committee, said Friday that he would not allow the bill to even be brought up in the committee unless he knew it had enough votes to be recommended to the Senate. Sarlo stated that he did not believe it had enough support.

"Today, as I stand here, we do not have the votes in the Judiciary Committee," said Sarlo according to the AP. "Until somebody can demonstrate that we have the votes in the Judiciary Committee, it will not be posted."

"I'm not going to put people in harm's way where they have to vote 'yes' or 'no' when we don't have the votes to get it out (of committee)," Sarlo went on to say.

For the bill to reach Corzine, it must also pass the Assembly, and Assembly Speaker Joe Roberts isn't sure it will be brought up this year because he wants to be sure it will pass before having it posted.

Republican Chris Christie, who is to succeed Corzine in January, is adamantly outspoken against marriage equality and has already stated he would veto any bill that reached his desk. So it comes down to garnering support in the legislature before Corzine is out of office.

New Jersey same-sex couples can enter civil unions, which were established in 2007, but studies have shown that these are not sufficient compared to marriage, which has sparked the push for the marriage equality bill.

New Jersey's Garden State Equality has launched educational ads to build support among legislators' constituents, especially in light of what happened in Maine. If strong support is apparent, it may encourage the representatives to vote on the issue.

Opposition from fundamentalists has been harsh, with the National Organization for Marriage airing radio ads and the Catholic Church organizing statewide sermons against same-sex marriage as well as others organizing protests.

ACTION: Find out how you can help at Garden State Equality.

ACTION ALERT: New Hampshire Marriage Equality Opponents Attempt to Put New Law Up to Popular Vote

UTF NOTE: This story seems to be picking up steam almost two weeks after I reported it. Probably because the anti-LGBT folks in New Hampshire's legislature are trying to make a big stink over Maine and are hoping to continue the trend by rolling back LGBT rights in their own state. The Eagle-Tribune has the story that's now causing the new stir.

Original post 11/5/09:

They will not give up until we have no rights at all.

Lawmakers in New Hampshire, inspired by Maine, are gearing up to put the state's new marriage equality law up to a popular test.

Now that gay marriage has been defeated in Maine, attention again shifts to New Hampshire, where lawmakers say momentum from Tuesday's vote may fuel legislation to repeal the state's law and give voters a say.

Two proposals are being drafted in the N.H. House: One would repeal the law Gov. John Lynch signed in June and re-establish civil unions; the other is a constitutional amendment that would charge voters with deciding if "the state shall only recognize the union of one man and one woman as marriage."

------

Only the proposed repeal would go to the governor's desk in order for it to become law. Constitutional amendments head straight to the voters for two-thirds support upon being passed by the same margin in the Legislature.

Behind the repeal push in the House are Rep. Jordan Ulery, R-Hudson and four other bill sponsors.

"The issue was brought forth against the will of the majority of people, by a minority of people who confuse the issue by saying it was an equal-rights issue," said Ulery, adding that opposing gay marriage "doesn't mean people are against gays or lesbians or whatever you want to call that group of individuals." People are free to live with whoever they want, he said, "just don't call it what is between my wife and myself who are raising children."

Whatever you want to call that group? What the hell?!

The other proposal, the constitutional amendment, is backed by Rep. Dan Itse, R-Fremont who believes that the legislature did not have the authority to redefine marriage.

"Ideally, before legislators took action they should have sought permission from the public," he said. "The people are now in a position where they have to play defense and not offense."

Uhm, they did. When they were elected. Are these people nuts?

Rep. Jim Splaine, who sponsored the marriage equality bill disagrees with Itse, claiming legislators do have the authority because marriage laws fall under state government. "We have some legislators who don't think you can do anything under the constitution," he told Foster's Daily Democrat.

Though both proposals face an uphill battle due to the fact that the make up of the legislature hasn't changed much since it passed marriage equality, it's a reminder that the opposition will stop at nothing to take LGBT rights away until we can't function in society. Or in other words, fail to exist to them at all.

ACTION: If you live in New Hampshire, find out who you're legislator is here and then call and tell them to reject these proposals. And if you happen to be represented by any of the sponsors, GIVE 'EM HELL!

To get more involved, go to New Hampshire Freedom to Marry Coalition.

Website Launched for Volunteer-Based Signature Gathering Campaign for 2010 Prop 8 Repeal

UPDATE: the organizing group Restore Equality 2010, has issued the following in response to the signature gathering campaign.

Restore Equality 2010, the statewide coalition of organizations committed to repealing Californiaʼs Proposition 8 in 2010, applauds the launch of the petition drive and social networking site www.signforequality.com by its coalition member Love Honor Cherish, and is ready to implement a statewide plan to support the volunteer signature-gathering effort.

The proponents of the ballot initiative have until April 12, 2010 to gather approximately 1 million signatures.

“This is the moment activists across our great state have been waiting for,” said Jeffrey Taylor, spokesperson for Restore Equality 2010. “Restore Equality 2010 is thrilled to mobilize in support of SignForEquality.com and Love Honor Cherishʼs inspiring and unwavering stand for the immediate restoration of marriage equality in California. The petition drive will be bolstered by our statewide grassroots effort.”

Since the grassroots organizationʼs establishment on August 29, 2009, Restore Equality 2010 has been working diligently to implement The Davis Plan, a democratic structure to ensure the repeal effort covers all geographic regions, populations and supportive organizations across the state. “We are clear that we have a winning structure, and we are clear that the grassroots is the best place to source the repeal campaign,” said Taylor. “The grassroots is nimble enough to embrace the best strategies and tactics to conduct an effective campaign, such as the first-of-its-kind social networking site for our petition drive, SignForEquality.com.”

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Love Honor Cherish (LHC) the grassroots group leading the charge for a 2010 initiative to restore marriage equality in California, has today launched SignForEquality.com, a social site that will be the hub for the volunteer-based signature gathering campaign to put the Prop 8 repeal on the 2010 ballot.

Here's their press release:

SignForEquality.com today launched a groundbreaking effort to gather signatures to repeal Proposition 8 and restore equal marriage rights for same-sex couples, marking the first time that social networking technology has been used to qualify a California initiative for the ballot.

“We’re taking names,” said John Henning, who is heading the SignForEquality.com effort as Executive Director of Love Honor Cherish. “SignForEquality.com will make history by using custom social networking tools, as well as YouTube, Facebook and Twitter, to support an all-volunteer signature drive to repeal Prop 8. People throughout California can now help us win marriage back by the simple act of signing and collecting signatures.”

Love Honor Cherish launched www.SignForEquality.com as part of the volunteer signature drive, which began today. The site features a downloadable petition form and training videos for signature gatherers, and uses unique social networking technology to help gatherers set goals, build teams, and find signature gathering events. “In its first day, SignForEquality.com is already the state of the art in California petition signature gathering,” said Henning.

Henning noted that in recent years, signature gathering campaigns have been in the hands of a few powerful elite, who qualify ballot initiatives by spending millions on paid signature gatherers. “SignForEquality.com brings the campaign back to the people,” said Henning. “We’re going to qualify this initiative person by person, and signature by signature.”

The proponents of the ballot initiative have 150 days to gather approximately 1 million signatures. The signatures are due on April 12, 2010.

Love Honor Cherish is one of more than 40 groups that support repealing Prop 8 at the next general election in November 2010. The groups include the Latino Equality Alliance, the Mexican American Bar Association, and the San Diego Alliance for Marriage Equality, among others. For a full list, go to www.RepealProp8.com. Love Honor Cherish is also part of the Restore Equality 2010 coalition, which has elected representatives throughout the state.

As signature gathering gets underway, the campaign to change the hearts and minds of voters has already begun and will continue through the November 2010 election. “Prop 8 passed last year with just 52% of the vote,” said Henning. “Now, a year later, a recent L.A. Times poll says that 51% favor marriage equality. In the next 12 months, we’ll make that margin even bigger.”

Proposition 8 was an amendment to the California Constitution passed by voters in November 2008. It reversed a California Supreme Court decision in May 2008, which held that same-sex couples were guaranteed equal marriage rights under the California Constitution. The new ballot proposition is also a constitutional amendment.

The proposed measure reads as follows:

This amendment would amend an existing section of the California Constitution. Existing language proposed to be deleted is printed in strikeout type. Language proposed to be added is printed in underlined type.

Section 1. To protect religious freedom, no court shall interpret this measure to require any priest, minister, pastor, rabbi, or other person authorized to perform marriages by any religious denomination, church, or other non-profit religious institution to perform any marriage in violation of his or her religious beliefs. The refusal to perform a marriage under this provision shall not be the basis for lawsuit or liability, and shall not affect the tax-exempt status of any religious denomination, church or other religious institution.

Section 2. To provide for fairness in the government’s issuance of marriage licenses, Section 7.5 of Article I of the California Constitution is hereby amended to read as follows: Sec. 7.5. Only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognized in California. Marriage is between only two persons and shall not be restricted on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, gender, sexual orientation, or religion.

-------

Signature Gathering will be taking place in locations throughout the state. For more information about locations and other opportunities for media coverage, contact Mike Roth at 310-433-8685 or mike.roth@lovehonorcherish.org

Back in July, LHC released their Blueprint for Equality, their strategy to a 2010 victory. It projects that, over the course of a winning campaign, they will need to enlist 12,500 volunteers and raise $31.3 million to repeal Prop 8.

Specifically for the signature gathering phase, LHC wants to avoid spending $2 per signature through paid signature gatherers, which could cost millions. So their focus is an all-volunteer effort, which is quite a daunting task. The Blueprint states:

An all-volunteer signature gathering effort would be a major undertaking. It takes about 4-6 hours to collect 100 signatures in a public place. Therefore, to get the required 1 million signatures, it would take, for example: (1) 5,000 volunteers spending one full day at a shopping center, or a full evening at a bar to get 100 signatures, for a total of 500,000 signatures, plus (2) 500 “super-volunteers” each doing this 10 times over the course of 5 months, for an additional 500,000 signatures. This is a total of 5,500 volunteers, a number that is large but attainable given the high level of interest in repealing Prop 8. It is also important to note that signature gathering can occur anywhere in the state. The only requirement is that the signatures and the petition circulators are registered voters.

To get involved in this historical effort, go to SignForEquality.com.

VIDEO: NO on 1 Documentary Covers the Last Days of the Campaign

This short documentary released by New Left Media chronicles the final days of the NO on 1/Protect Maine Equality campaign, specifically covering the field operation.





Jesse Connolly, the NO on 1 campaign manager, recently wrote on the Huffington Post, examining what he believes happened in Maine.

It's clear that polling research, both ours and others, did not capture the intensity of Yes on 1 support. Polling cannot predict turnout and the impact of Tuesday's turnout was counterintuitive. We weren't alone: our opponents, political observers and field operatives all believed a high turnout benefited the NO on 1 vote. With voting approaching 60% in Maine, it's clear that wasn't true.

------

I'm not skirting anything here when I suggest that we need to remember that it was not long ago when we were losing in double digits, when they threw an anti-marriage equality question on a ballot in a presidential year to drive conservatives to the polls.

It may turn out to be simply this: that by moving this basic premise of equality from the sink hole of catastrophic defeat state after state, year after year, to within striking distance of a win, that we are almost to the finish line. This tide is turning and you can tell by the histrionics from our opponents, from their "gathering storm."

Jesse also references how entrenched people are in their views on marriage equality, and how difficult it is to change people's minds in a matter of months during a short, initiative campaign.

This just underlines my opinion and push for long-term educational campaigns. During these campaigns, you don't have a time constraint, you don't have a looming vote hanging over voters heads who experience the pressure of two sides pounding their messages unto them. They're more open, more willing to listen, even if they don't necessarily agree.

It's during these educational campaigns that we can have the conversations with those who right now may not be for us, the conversations that Jesse refers to that are so desperately needed. Many believe that an educational campaign is a cop out to going back to the ballot. It's not. It's the foundation for a vote. It's the hard, scary work of endless hours without a definite vote in the future. But without this hard work, a victory at the inevitable ballot becomes further out of reach.