<"www.capecodporcupine.blogspot.com" >

Thursday, November 09, 2006

A Recess Shun

"In July, we recessed with the understanding that the constitutional convention would take up the remaining items on the calendar when we reconvene. We have the shared responsibility to debate and seek final resolution of all the items remaining on the calendar. Next Thursday, it is my hope that we will finish the remaining business of the convention."
Senate President Robert Traviglini, Boston Globe, Nov. 3, 2006

It’s always noteworthy to see somebody you know on television, and on the Eleven O’clock News on Channel 7, Porcupine was interested to see the spectacle of Rep. Cleon Turner, Democrat of Dennis, standing on the marble balustrade inside the State House, waving and pointing in rock star fashion, somewhat reminiscent of Madonna as Eva Peron, smiling down on hundred of cheering same sex marriage groupies, acting for all the world as if he were Paul or Ringo. It was especially surprising, as the newly re-elected Representative Turner had just spent weeks stumping in the district, gravely intoning that he was a conservative and responsible Democrat, not a wild-eyed radical like that Dick Neitz claimed he was. What a difference two days make.

With his fellow legislators, Rep. Turner had just voted to recess, rather than adjourn, the Constitutional Convention which was postponed in July until two days after the elections. Now, the ‘recess’ will last until January 2nd. You see, if they had adjourned, the Governor could – and would – have called them back into Session for a vote. By ‘recessing’, no such action can be taken. Ah, these clever lads! There are so many options open to them on the last day of this legislative Session – a quick roll call and adjournment with no vote, or perhaps a lack of quorum.

The latest polls showed that the residents of Massachusetts had begun to adjust to gay marriage, and that 56% of them would vote against an amendment to the constitution banning it, but that a full 75% DID want to have the chance to vote as their citizen petition stated. Only fifty legislators were needed to advance this petition, and the leadership knew that there were fifty votes to allow the electorate to decide as they have in over 30 other states. So, quick! Watch me pull a rabbit out of my hat!

At the end of the day, Sen. Traviglini had only promised that he would hold the Constitutional Convention and would allow debate on the issue. He did fulfill that. He never said he would permit an up or down vote by the legislators. With the election of Deval Patrick, it is clear that Clintonian literal truth telling has found a new home in Massachusetts.

So, wave and smile, Rep. Turner. If your shenanigans are successful, the opponents will just go out and get the thousands of signatures again. Really, it’s getting easier each time they do – this is the third time. And that 56% willing to vote against a ban on gay marriage erodes a little more with every lie you tell us.

Just for you, Rep. Turner - a link to a ditty about you and your boss, Sal DiMasi - The Weasel Dance.


Anonymous disneybear said...

I say Bravo to your legislator for standing up for the civil rights of a minority! Minority rights should never be put to a majority vote!

1:32 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

People should always be allowed to express their opinions by voting. That is essentially what we're supposed to be doing when we elect representatives, then they represent our interests. Then let the courts decide.

5:30 AM  
Blogger marci said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

9:27 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I understand the concept of letting the people vote as underhanded and clever as it was of the Mass Family people to adopt that slogan but we elect these people to be our representatives and they are supposed to guard ALL of our civil rights, not just a few homophobes who seem have nothing better to do than deprive their fellow citizens of their rights and liberties. It’s over, done. The bigots lost. Now hopefully we can move on. But knowing Mass Family and their ties to Daddy Dobson and his clan I am sure they will continue their obsession with everything gay. Makes you wonder don’t it…. Gay Old Party indeed!

9:37 AM  
Anonymous Sharilee said...

Why are gay advocates afraid of a vote? Let the people of the state vote and then both sides will accept the outcome. Or maybe it's because some people are anxious to start suing priests for not marrying gays (a la Canada). If we have a vote, that might delay things too long.

3:31 PM  
Blogger marci said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

5:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bravo, P.P.! I saw that channel 7 news coverage of Cleon too. He looked a little like Julius Caesar standing by the marble column receiving the accolades of his fellow Romans. "et tu, Bruti?"

9:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hey "Peter"

Weren't you bragging about being a moderate "Goldwater" Republican over on Talking Politics?

From what I read here, you're not even a libertarian. Kinda shakey on the state constitution too.

I'd be interested in hearing what you think the future of MassResistance is? You've been a supporter for a long time, you should have one.

Or, failing that, how about your opinion on letting your neighbors vote on the color you can paint your house.

9:22 AM  
Blogger Peter Porcupine said...

Oddly enough, 'Anonymous', my neighbor's CAN vote on what colour I paint my house, as I live in a historic area called the Old King's Highway Region.

I am a moderate, and pass over your other remarks as taunting. However, I do NOT equate being denied a vote with being for the amendment. I simply think the people of Massachusetts are as good as the rest of the nation, and should be allowed a plebiscite.

11:57 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Plebiscite. Such a delightfully archaic vocubulary word. Almost as cute as your use of "buggery marriage" in a MassRessistance post. I was going to use it to define disingenuous, but that post seems to have expired.

Let's go with this one, from your blog:


I freely admit that I come from a time when gay meant cheerful. Sodomites, as we called them then, certainly existed and many were socially received – but they were expected to be discreet in their relationships, as were heterosexuals, also known as normal men. Only a cad would speak of carnal relations with his wedded wife, but only a beast would speak openly about bedding a person who was not.

12:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I freely admit that I come from a time when gay meant cheerful. Sodomites, as we called them then, certainly existed and many were socially received"

That explains everything.


2:39 PM  
Blogger Peter Porcupine said...

The post must have expired because it never existed.

Who ever you are, Ry...Anonymous - I have never resorted to lies about you, and I have NEVER used such a distateful term on this or any other forum. Ever.

6:56 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Of course not. Just like you wouldn't tape public hearings.

Let me be charitable and say it was "sodomy marriage." To my mind it's a distinction without a difference. The quote from your own blog is equally damning.

Your party's stand on civil rights, gay or otherwise, is despicable. The Healey candidacy is just the latest offense.

9:32 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

I am nerdier than 82% of all people. Are you nerdier? Click here to find out! 

Please take my Blog Reader Project survey.

Listed on BlogShares
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 2.5 License.
« # ! LifePost + ? » -->