Open Thread: Question 1

by: Gerald Weinand

Sat Oct 31, 2009 at 14:48:58 PM EDT

A new poll from Daily Kos/Research 2000 shows that Question 1 is still neck and neck, with NO holding a slight lead, 48-47:

NPR drops claim against Stand for Marriage Maine, the PPH reports:

In a written statement Friday, Dana Davis Rehm, executive vice president of marketing, communications and external relations for NPR, said the radio organization believes the PAC's use of content didn't meet fair use standards, because of the content used and the "effect of the use on the value of the content."

"NPR's audio content comprises virtually the entire length of the political ads, which clearly constitutes substantial use," said Davis Rehm. "The manner of use and presentation of this news spot undermines the journalistic value of the work and the reputation of NPR as a credible and unbiased news source."

But, Davis Rehm said, press coverage of the issue has let the public know of NPR's position. It also has let the public know that NPR didn't license the use, has no position on the issue, and would have taken similar steps with any advocacy or political group that used its news content in a similar way.

"With the election only days away, we've decided not to pursue further legal steps against Stand for Marriage Maine and the Schubert Flint agency at this time," said Davis Rehm. "Litigation is expensive and such actions move slowly through the court system, and we've determined this isn't the best use of our limited resources under these circumstances, despite high confidence that our position would prevail."

A Catholic church in Lewiston has a Gay marriage supporter removed from ministries:

Pamella Starbird Beliveau of Lewiston, Maine, was removed as a lector and Eucharistic Minister after her pastor read an opinion piece she wrote for the local newspaper approving of same-sex marriage.

The Yes campaign has been highlighting vandalism of its signs, but one reporter has an interesting take on it:

Here's my point... To those who vandalized these signs, let me be plain.  You're an idiot. In fact, you're a group of idiots, because given the fact that this happened in a number of places around the area at roughly the same time, it had to be a small group effort.

To everyone else, take a step back and think for a moment and ask yourself a question... Do you really think this was an orchestrated campaign tactic from someone high up in the No on 1 campaign?

My opinion?  It's absurd.

I'll put it to you this way... And please read this through to the end before you react.  If you were to say to me that you had concrete evidence that one of the campaigns had done this on purpose as a campaign tactic, and you put a gun to my head (please don't) and forced me to guess which side did it-- it's more logical to guess it was the Yes on 1 campaign vandalizing their own signs from a pure political strategy standpoint. Now, I'm not saying I really think that happened!!! As I said, I blame a group of likely young, likely male idiots having a go at messing with people in a vile way.  And this is important-- it's even likely this could prove to be low-level volunteers for the No on 1 campaign (clearly they're passionate and committed to the cause-- in a twisted, hateful way), but it stretches credulity to the breaking point to believe these people have actual decision-making power in the No on 1 campaign. They're political vigilantes who should be prosecuted.

Gov. John Baldacci is interviewed in this Sunday's NYTimes Magazine.

An open thread.