Blue Mass Group

Reality-based commentary on politics.

Who paid for the buses?

By

MFI and VoteOnMarriage say they were not sponsoring the free buses for yesterday’s rally. Anyone know who paid for them?

Just curious. That must have been some chunk of change.

Please share widely!
fb-share-icon
Tweet
0

Comments

  1. They’re either full of crap, or these were paid for by churches who used them to bring their congregations out. The nuns in habits came from one of the buses.

    • after closing and selling numerous parishes, they can now afford to finance transportation to a hate rally?

      • when the Unitarian Church in my hometown sent a group of parishoners to DC to march  for access to abortion, or when they hung a huge banner on the building facing the Statehouse in favor of gay marriage.  If the parishioners want to spend their tithes on that, good for them for acting on their beliefs.  Likewise, if the finance committee of a Catholic parish wants to expend the funds to rent a bus for an afternoon, I’m not going to deny them their rights either.

        • and a rally trying to deny civil rights to a group of people. Would you have been so supportive if they had rented buses to send folks off to a KKK march? Like it or not, hate is what motivates these people, not adherence to rule of law.

          • Who said “I may not agree with what you say, but I would die for your right to say it.”

            <

            p>
            I don’t agree with the fundamentalists who are trying to limit the civil right of civil marriage to gays. However, attacking the fundamentalists is a waste of time and energy. They’re not going to change, but the average voter who is non-committal on the issue could.

            <

            p>
            The only way to combat bad speech is with more speech, not censorship or outright condemnation. Let the bible-thumpers and end-timers rally. Let Mitt stand with them. Then go and do your thing and try to win over real people and how gay marriage hasn’t caused hetero marriages or civilization to collapse.

            <

            p>
            Personally, I don’t care where the fundamentalists came from, how they got here, and what they said. What I do care about is continuing to work to make regular people, not zealots, see our side of the issue and bring them in.

          • Would I have supported the KKK?  No, of course not.  Would I have supported the congregation (or any other group for that matter) exercising their right to free speech and association?  Absolutely.  100%.  Then I’d do it again.

            <

            p>
            I don’t care if a church wants to support gay marriage or oppose the death penalty.  I may vehemently disagree with their policy objective, but I support their right to vocalize their opinions as individuals and  as a group, whatever their motivation.

      • Remember him? He ran for Congress up here in MA, and then put his tail between his legs and ran home to Georgia when he found out that most people here weren’t hate-filled bigots like him.

        <

        p>
        In case you weren’t paying attention, Liberty Sunday hosted the who’s who of homophobes, including Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council and James Dobson. They have bussed their freaky evangelical followers in from out of state, and interfered in a states rights issue. It’s funny how ‘states rights’ was always the Republican mantra during segregation, but now they’re eager to interfere when it involves one of their pet ‘moral’ issues like gay rights and abortion.

        • Ron Crews claimed that he lost his state legislature seat in Georgia because too many gays moved into his district in order to vote him out.  I think he’s saying that even in Georgia he’s too much of a hate-filled bigot to hold office.

          <

          p>
          As for James Dobson, some of his best friends are gay.  Well, one of them, anyway.

          <

          p>  – Dan

          • You make a ridiculous assertion that the gay marriage supporters were flown in from the Netherlands? Certainly most of the misinformed citizens or outright homophobes at the protest yesterday were from Mass. The fact is a lot of the anti-gay groups here are funded by right-wing groups from out of state. I think Fred Phelps and family should make an appearance at one of Mittster’s Presidential rallies-they’d fit right in.

            <

            p> 

            • No, Kathy, people did not fly in.  And at least you now admit that the people there are from Mass. and disagree with you instead of just squaking about sinister out of state influence.

            • Look…things got somewhat vicious on both sides. I was less than impressed a few times by the lack of Civics 101 knowledge on the “Let the People Vote” side. The fundamental lack of understanding of one’s own government irks me but…Actually, part of why I made my post about the event in the first place was to try to humanize both sides. I knew what side I would be on, but I tried to imagine the Bobs of BMG over on the other side of the street. In the heat of the rally, I found instead:

              <

              p>
              -Many people who could not complete a discussion of where the line is to be drawn as to what rights are subject to vote. No surprise, I found the same thing here. No one wants to talk about resegregation or reintroducing restrictions on interracial couples, etc. However, none of you called the cops over to have me moved away, as happened to me in a mostly civil discussion of the issue. Granted, my “foe” and I were yelling, but that was just to overcome the noise of the crowd. Another member of the group summoned a cop and informed him that I was being confrontational. The fellow I had been having a discussion with looked rather perplexed, not knowing whether to repudiate his “friend” or to allow me to be escorted away.

              <

              p>
              -A woman who shouted at me for talking during the National Anthem. In fact, God Bless America was the song being sung. When I informed her of this, she became very upset and walked away, yelling obscenities at me.

              <

              p>
              -Multiple people who addressed me as a gay man, and were SHOCKED to find out that I am straight and yet still standing out for the rights of same-sex couples.

              <

              p>
              -Etc…

              <

              p>
              Point being, as ugly as things got, and they got ugly…Once things were wrapped up a few people from the “Dark Side” came to talk to me. Civilly, even. My sign said “Civil Rights: Not Subject to Popular Vote!” and some folks wanted to talk about that. What I found was not those who would spit in my face or whatever actually had similar concerns to mine. They’re worried about the runaway powers of government…Me too! They’re worried their voices are not being listened to…I sympathize! We fundamentally disagreed on what the judicial decision meant, and what role the Legislature had in upholding this particular ruling, but…They had a fundamental disagreement with my assertion, and we could discuss it like adults.

              <

              p>
              My point? We can disagree. This is a hot button issue, and we’re bound to. But let’s keep it in line, let’s treat each other like human beings. I have a profound respect for anyone engaged enough to be here at BMG voicing their opinion just as I did for anyone standing out yesterday. Democracy lives through these heated discussions. But when we cuss and spit and such, we lose that. Giving PP zeros and threes for everything he writes is pretty much equivalent to this. And it’s not just him…I’ve criticized and will continue to criticize those who hijack the ratings system or discussion simply because they don’t like what is said or who it comes from.

              <

              p>
              For the sake of the life of this vibrant community, please don’t yell at and/or zero rate those you disagree with, unless it is truly warranted. Thanks!

              • “Giving PP zeros and threes for everything he writes is pretty much equivalent to this.”

                <

                p>
                I don’t give everything he writes ‘3s’. Just the snarky BS comments. He’s actually one of the more civilized Republicans I’ve encountered, and the poor bastard is tilting at windmills here on BMG.

              • You’re surpised because you didn’t find civil discussion at something that is, for everyone on either side, a chant-a-thon rally?  That’s like looking for civil debate on the abortion issue outside the USSC in late January.  The only people who show up are people who enjoy shouting epithets at another bunch of peole shouting counter-epithets.

  3. I didn’t go, because I only support the vote and not the amendment – but Mass. Family Institute, VoteOnMarriage.org, any NUMBER of Mass. conservative groups, probably paid for the buses.

    <

    p>
    And no, they WON’T be submitting invoices to Karl Rover for reimbursement!

    • The link said that vote on marriage didn’t pay for the buses.  It’s reasonable to wonder who did, even if they are local folks.

    • Some people apparently can’t deal with anyone who disagrees with them, hence the undeserved 3’s and 0’s.

      <

      p>
      To the point, VoteOnMarriage claims they didn’t pay. However, anyone who saw the event yesterday could see that it was a highly organized endeavor on their side. Buses came in in an orderly fashion, a parade of vehicles full of thousands of ready-made signs, tons of stickers. It looked like a Patrick campaign rally, actually.

      <

      p>
      So, I don’t know who paid, but I do know it was a heavily coordinated effort.

      • Look at the Nazis. They made the trains run on time.

        <

        p>
        Having faced many of these people (freepers, anti-gay bigots, etc.) in my life during various protests, I have to say they’re pretty well-organized and very frightening. Nothing rational about them, and I have never seen so many faces contorted with hate and rage. No amount of psychotherapy in the world could cure what ails them.

        • Maybe you should try talking to some of them. Most of them are… gasp… actually people with opinions!

          <

          p>
          Also, just remember…When you go to a rally and encounter people you don’t agree with: At least they showed up to stand in the cold and hold a sign. It’s more than the vast majority of our population would bother to do…

          • I travel all over the country for a living (sales), and have had respectful conversations with many right-wingers in airports, on airplanes, and in bars. You may think that you’re having a civilized exchange, but once you scratch the surface you find that these people are motivated by fear or hate.  When they’re not trying to sell me religion, or saying that the victims of Katrina deserved their fate, or telling me why the Jews are running the US government, many are nice folks. I don’t mean to sound harsh, and I apologize to BMG’s resident wingnuts if I’ve offended them.

            <

            p>
            I agree that you have to give them credit for standing up for their beliefs. Many of them do have the authoritarian mindset though, as someone else mentioned on this thread.

            • Sure, some of “these people” may very well hold the beliefs you mentioned, but equating all right wingers with Jew conspiracies is like equating all left wingers with 9/11 conspiracies.

              <

              p>
              Pick a new brush. The one you’re painting with is way too broad.

              • Yours is probably different. I did not say all right-wingers spout these theories. I’ve said that quite a few of the ones that I’ve spoken with have held some less than charming beliefs. I have probably been unlucky enough to meet the equivalents of the free Mumia/International Answer contingent, only on the other side of the coin.

                <

                p>
                There are Republicans in my family-the socially liberal/fiscally conservative Northeast Republicans that seem to be a dying breed. You seem to be very defensive on this matter, so I’ll let it drop.

                • Just trying to clarify what you did not. You say now that quite a few have these beliefs, but look at your previous post and you’ll see you used no such qualifier, leading the reader to believe that this is how all right wingers are.

                  <

                  p>
                  I’m not defensive, and I’m certainly not a right-winger. I’m just trying to point out where you are either unclear or just plain wrong. Coming from someone who cites Nazis in this very thread, I’ll take your assessment with a grain of salt though.

                • Or trying to prove that your approach to politics is best, or whatever. The air must be pretty rarified up there. Thank you for enlightening me-I don’t know what I ever would have done without your sage advice.

                • with the one that follows. 

                  <

                  p>
                  This subject is like catnip for liberal progressive types.  We  should all try to disagree without being disagreeable, but we’re also human and humans tend to be passionate. 

                  <

                  p>
                  Kathy, I appreciate your passion, and I respect that you’re willing to apologize when your typing gets ahead of your comity. 

                  <

                  p>
                  That’s good community building. 

        • If we are going to win this round in the legislature, we need to convince certain legislators (mine for example) that it is safe to stand up for equal marriage. Hyperventilating like this makes it look as if there are nice, otherwise reasonable church goers who can at least be quiet during services on one side and MILITANT, ANGRY ACTIVISTS ON THE OTHER WHO OPPOSE EVIL IN ALL ITS FORMS!!!!!

          <

          p>
          Not a recipe for victory.

          <

          p>
          This is not to deny that freepers suffer from dangerous authoritarian personality disorders that are not ego-dissyntonic enough for therapy.  Nor is to deny that this is fundamentally a question of justice or that comparisons to other civil rights issues shed light on this one. 

          <

          p>
          I’m reminded of Howard Dean saying that the Republicans are tough but they aren’t smart and tough.  Let’s be smart and tough about this.

        • Wikipedia

          <

          p>

          As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one

          <

          p>
          Just sayin’

          <

          p>
          A person can only smack their head against a brick wall for so long before either the wall gives, or their head does.  The types of activists (on both sides) who show up to these types of events tend not to be what I call “persuadable.”  I’ve had cordial discussions with folks like this, but the real change is going to come from a different group. 

          <

          p>
          The folks you see in your day-to-day contacts, using the same method that Deval Patrick supporters did during the campaign.  One-on-one, person-to-person, and the best way to get that message across is to be thoughtful and respectful.  Make your points, but be nice.  It makes a difference. 

          • …and it is the only comment I delete from my blog.  Call me wacky, homophobe – but my dad was a liberator of the Camps in Poland, and that I will not tolerate.

            <

            p>
            Just sayin’.

          • Susan, I had never heard of Godwin’s law before now (gotta love Wikipedia), but it is absolutely true. 

            <

            p>
            I was on the debate team back in college (I know, I know . . . geek alert), but one of the first things that we learned as a novice debator was to avoid comparisons to Hitler or the Nazis, no matter how apt the comparison may be (also learned to avoid abortion, euthanasia and religion at debatable topics).  Also, as PP points out, the side that made the Hitler or Nazi comparisons were generally viewed as the losing side of the debate.

            <

            p>
            I also found interesting this explanation of Godwin’s Law:

            Godwin’s Law does not dispute whether, in a particular instance, a reference or comparison to Hitler or the Nazis might be apt. It is precisely because such a reference or comparison may sometimes be appropriate, Godwin argues in his book, Cyber Rights: Defending Free Speech in the Digital Age, that overuse of the Hitler/Nazi comparison should be avoided, as it robs the valid comparisons of their impact.

Archives