Vote for Marriage NC, the referendum committee heading up the campaign to approve an anti-LGBT state constitutional amendment in May, is playing catch-up today. They’re trying to convince the public that their communications director, Rachel Lee, didn’t so much as “lie” about polling numbers on the amendment at the Greensboro City Council meeting Tuesday as she merely “misspoke.”

Lee’s Tuesday-night remarks (h/t Roch101):

Activist Tyler McCall caught Lee’s remarks and reached out to Public Policy Polling via Twitter on Tuesday evening. That short convo, as I reported on Wednesday morning:

According to Tyler, the NC4Marriage rep said Durham-based Public Policy Polling had found that 70 percent of Greensboro residents were in favor of the amendment. To his credit, Tyler sniffed a rat in that mountain of a woodpile.

He contacted PPP via Twitter: “@pppolls – Speaker at Greensboro City Council tonight said that 70% of #GSO residents support #Amendment1, according to your poll. True?”

PPP’s response was simple enough: “We have not done a poll of Greensboro residents.”

Greensboro blogger Ed Cone was able to speak to Lee. His account of his telephone conversation with her (h/t Roch101):

She said that on Tuesday, as she was rushing out the door for a television interview, a coworker gave her a spreadsheet with a lot of numbers on it.

This led to confusion. The numbers she attributed to PPP in Greensboro were actually, she said, from Civitas and for Charlotte.

She says poll numbers for Greensboro are actually 61% for Greensboro and 66% for the Piedmont. A comment from her coworker in the thread below this post indicates that these numbers also come from Civitas, not PPP.

I asked her if my reading of the amendment is correct, that it would outlaw civil unions in North Carolina.

She said the amendment defines marriage.

I repeated my question about outlawing civil unions. She said she was in a hurry, but civil unions already are not legal in this state.

I said, OK, but since you are in a hurry, could you tell me, yes or no, if this amendment would indeed make civil unions unconstitutional in North Carolina.

She said, I’m calling you back in reference to the poll question.

I said, So you will not answer the question, yes or no, would this amendment make civil unions unconstitutional in North Carolina?

She said, You have a good day, Ed, bye, and she hung up.

“Lenny” from Vote for Marriage NC (who is this guy, exactly) also commented on my Wednesday morning post regarding Lee’s lies. He wrote:

Greetings Matt,

Thanks for contacting us. I wanted to share with you those numbers she mentioned from the Civitas Jan 2012 poll. Support for the Constitutional Amendment to protect the definition of marriage:

Total Support: 62%
Charlotte Media Market: 74%
Greensboro MM: 61%
Piedmont Triad: 66%
Men: 64%
Women: 61%
Piedmont Triad: 66%

There is also a majority support among Men (64%), Women (61%), registered Republicans (75%), Democrats (58%), Independents (52%), all categories of likely voters (62%-78%), African Americans (66%), and whites (62%). You’ll find the Civitas Jan 2012 poll posted on their website soon.

Have a great day!

PS: We talked to Ed Cone and supplied him with some information. You can find it here:http://edcone.typepad.com/wordup/2012/02/they-write-letters.html#comments

He made the exact same comment at Ed Cone’s pad. To which Roch101 responded:

“Lenny,” thank you for commenting. I see that you are with Vote for Marriage NC. In light of this week’s events, you will understand if we simply do not accept as credible another undocumented assertion from your Political Action Committee.

Since the poll you cite is not listed among the poll results on the Civitas website, please provide a link to these poll results or email them to me: sysop@wirecom.com

Roch hits it right on the nail. Vote for Marriage NC is still attempting to deceive the Greensboro and North Carolina public. Regardless of their attempts to spin, none of the numbers they’re providing now even come close to Lee’s comments. Even the Civitas numbers Vote for Marriage NC says Lee was really citing don’t say that 70 percent of Greensboro residents support the amendment. That number is just 61 percent.

Yesterday’s post on Greensboro City Councilmember Trudy Wade was harsh — I admit it. But, certainly it wasn’t any harsher than the painfully bigoted position Wade took heading into last night’s debate on a resolution to oppose the state’s anti-LGBT, anti-family constitutional amendment.

The resolution passed 7-1, with Wade the lone dissenter.

Wade had wanted to postpone last night’s debate on the resolution. She insisted that the city should hold public hearings on the matter, despite the fact that her Republican colleagues in the North Carolina House and Senate failed to just that, rushing the proposed amendment through the committee process in the House and attempting to conceal its identity in the Senate.

But, nonetheless, it was a public hearing Wade wanted and a public hearing Wade got.

Council members went wide when nearly the whole room stood in favor of #gsoresolution
@reldredg
Robert Eldredge

 

From the looks of the livetweeting last night by @racetotheballot, @nc4equality and others, Wade got more feedback than she’d ever need. So much so, that the Greensboro City Council decided to take a 10-minute recess in the middle of the public comment period.

 

A few highlights from those opposed to the amendment and in favor of the resolution, who, by far, outweighed the number of speakers standing in favor of discrimination:

"We urge the city council to oppose [#Amendment1]. We stand for equal rights for all." -Rep. from League of Women Voters #GSOresolution
@RaceToTheBallot
RaceToTheBallot#May8
A recently naturalized citizen shares her opposition to #Amendment1. This amendment doesn't aline with pledge of allegiance. #GSOresolution
@NC4Equality
NeighborsforEquality
"1 in 10 #Guilford county residents are unemployed...[and] we don't need divisive mean-spirited amendments right now." #GSOresolution #may8
@NC4Equality
NeighborsforEquality
"If Amendment One is adopted cities like #GSO will no longer b able 2 provide DP benefits to city employees" -AndrewSpainhour #GSOresolution
@RaceToTheBallot
RaceToTheBallot#May8

 

And, when it was time for discussion by council itself, I don’t think I could have been any prouder:

"I believe taking a stand can only lead other municipalities to take a stand." -Marikay Abuzuaiter #GSOresolution
@RaceToTheBallot
RaceToTheBallot#May8
"[#Amendment1] will affect domestic partnerships & unions & has the potential to take away benefits." - Yvonne Johnson #GSOresolution #may8
@NC4Equality
NeighborsforEquality
Yvonne Johnson asks "do we want to take the risk of Bank of America leaving #CLT?" on opposing #Amendment1 #GSOresolution
@RaceToTheBallot
RaceToTheBallot#May8
Truth from Nancy Vaughn of the #GSO city council: neither the house, nor the Senate, had public hearings on #Amendment1. #GSOresolution
@NC4Equality
NeighborsforEquality
"Perhaps if they had listened to their constituents...they wld hv learnd amending our const. is poor pub. policy" -N. Vaughan #GSOresolution
@RaceToTheBallot
RaceToTheBallot#May8
"Gay people are just like you & me. They pay their taxes...and they're our neighbors." - Nancy Vaughn #GSOresolution #Amendment1
@NC4Equality
NeighborsforEquality
"I dont want to send the message to our gay citizens that they R not valued in our community." -N. Vaughan #GSOresolution
@RaceToTheBallot
RaceToTheBallot#May8
Councilwoman Nancy Hoffman believes #Amendment1 brands state as "regressive and noninclusive" #GSOresolution
@RaceToTheBallot
RaceToTheBallot#May8

 

Perhaps the most inspiring comments from council came from none other than Greensboro’s Republican mayor, Robbie Perkins, proving that the amendment isn’t a gay-straight or Democratic-Republican issue, but rather one that affects all people:

Republican #GSO Mayor Robbie Perkins sharing his evolution on #equality. #GSOresolution #Amendment1
@NC4Equality
NeighborsforEquality
"I can take a stand...bc...we R all in this together." #GSO Mayor Robbie Perkins #GSOresolution
@RaceToTheBallot
RaceToTheBallot#May8
"We can build a strong city, state, and country...I am in support of the #GSOresolution." - Mayor Robbie Perkins #Amendment1
@NC4Equality
NeighborsforEquality
"Willing to use the differencein us to build a stronger city, state & country....I will support resolution"#GSO Mayor Perkins #GSOresolution
@RaceToTheBallot
RaceToTheBallot#May8

 

In Mourning: Trudy Wade comes to the realization that bigotry isn't a winner.

And, while all this was going on, Dear Trudy (in center, photo at right) stayed silent. Her somber mood and her in-mourning-like dress was all quite fitting. If you’re going to stand up for evil, might as well wear its colors.

There were few people who spoke out against the resolution and in favor of the amendment. Of those who did, however, one person stood out of the pack.

Tyler J. McCall, an activist with Neighbors for Equality, tweeted that communications director for Vote For Marriage NC, the referendum committee pushing for the anti-LGBT amendment, shared not-so-accurate facts.

According to Tyler, the NC4Marriage rep said Durham-based Public Policy Polling had found that 70 percent of Greensboro residents were in favor of the amendment. To his credit, Tyler sniffed a rat in that mountain of a woodpile.

He contacted PPP via Twitter: “@pppolls – Speaker at Greensboro City Council tonight said that 70% of #GSO residents support #Amendment1, according to your poll. True?”

PPP’s response was simple enough: “We have not done a poll of Greensboro residents.”

If you’re going to religion and God to push discrimination into the state’s constitution, one might think you’d try to at least be honest with it. Nope. Anti-gay zealots have a tendency to suspend that scriptural prohibition against lying when attacking the gays. Rule numero uno in their “How to Malign the Fags Handbook” — it’s in chapter one, “Distractions and Division 101.”

 

Tonight, the Greensboro City Council will consider a resolution opposing the impending anti-LGBT constitutional amendment set to go before North Carolina voters on May 8.

Trudy Wade

The resolution (read it here, item 33), supported by Mayor Robbie Perkins and Councilman Zack Matheny, primarily addresses the impact the amendment will have on city government’s ability to offer health and other benefits to the same-sex partners of their LGBT employees. For sure, there’s no soaring rhetoric about full marriage equality. Because after all, as the wise Ed Cone reminds Greensborians, the amendment does more than “define” so-called “traditional marriage.”

Still, Councilmember Trudy Wade says she is opposed. She stands in favor of the constitutional amendment and wants to postpone tonight’s vote in order to conduct public hearings.

But why the public hearings, Mrs. Wade? Isn’t your mind already made up? Via Jeff Martin:

The May 8th election is an important one for the future of our state. The very basis of our legal system — our Judeo-Christian principles — is on the ballot. I hope that each citizen will register to vote and make sure that conservative family values are not compromised in our great state.

Martin says Mrs. Wade has “consign[ed] herself to that shameful pantheon of reprobates otherwise known as dumb conservatives.”

I won’t be as nice…

Let me put this as plainly as I can: Mrs. Wade, you are a bigot. In what just world is it appropriate to support a constitutional measure that forever encases an entire minority of people in second-class citizenship? Would you have supported public votes on any number of this country’s other historic civil rights measures? If your answer is yes, you’re even more of a bigot than you appear. If your answer is no, then you’re just an anti-gay bigot. Either way, you’re a bigot.

4

‘Porn’ at the Greensboro library?

An old Greensboro friend and blogging buddy Roch Smith asked me a couple weeks ago if I’d be willing to help him out with a little project. Of course, I said yes.

The Greensboro City Council was considering the addition of stronger pornography filters to the computers at its libraries. Unfortunately, most porn filters end up filtering out more than just porn. Many times, the filtering software limits access to non-obscene, medically accurate and beneficial information. Sometimes that is an unforeseen byproduct of the service/software providing the filtering. Other times, as was the case in the Winston-Salem/Forsyth County School System when I was a student there, improper filtering of non-obscene material is by design. Continue reading this post…