Thursday, January 04, 2007

Thank You Rep. Peterson and Sen. McGee

So often this website seems like a tool to bash those who are anathema to the political process and so rarely do I get to tell my elected officials "good job." I'm going to do that today. Here's a public thank you to my elected officials, Representative Doug Petersen and Senator Tom McGee. They're two people who voted with conviction on January 2nd. Both voted in favor of equality and against the kind of bigotry that has thousands of gays, lesbians, friends and family in Massachusetts queasy. I count myself especially lucky that I get to vote for Mr. Petersen every two years; he's one of the strongest and most consistent progressive voices in the State House and has been for a long time.

The next few months are going to be difficult and - as Laurel has mentioned numerous times in the comments - quick. Who knows when Senate President Travaglini will call forth his next hatefest Constitutional Convention (so he can try to do away with the rights of thousands of Massachusetts residents)? We need to rally our progressive allies at the State House, like Senator McGee and Representative Petersen, to not only continue to be on our side - but also to exert whatever pressure they can to make sure the rights of everyone in Massachusetts are protected. If two people who represent parts of a blue-collar city like Lynn can be so open-minded, anyone can.


I had a great time at the swearing-in ceremony today. I'm so glad it was held outside, for everyone to participate. The continued sights of one Senate President Travaglini made me sick, since he pretty much single-handedly got the marriage ban pushed forward (and *voted for it!*) - but I survived.

Oh - and to anyone who thought Mitt tried everything he could do to be there today, since I've been told by some Deval pushed Mitt into changing things around, he was in and around Boston for the ceremony. Instead of participating, he was touring his new Presidential Campaign HQ. Perhaps I shouldn't scold Mitt for not attending - after all, for once he was actually in Massachusetts, but I will anyway. Tsk, tsk, Mr. Romney.

While Willard couldn't make Deval's swearing in, Bill Weld managed to travel all the way from New York to be there. Paul Celluci, Mike Dukakis and Jane Swift managed to make it as well. Heck, there was even a former Governor from Virginia!


Laurel said...

Thnks also to my legislators, Rep. Kaufman and Sen. Havern. Hopefully next concon there will be no "must vote" pretext. Since the legis slinked away from voting on the health care amendmnet, it is clear that they don;t really think voting yea/nay is necessary. Interestingly, VOM just dropped it's Federal lawsuit, saying justice had been served, or some such nonsense. Not too surprising, is it. that NOT voting on the HC amendment fulfilled their rigid definition of oath-bound behaviour.

Glad you enjoyed the innauguration! A good say for MA!

Anonymous said...

Yeah, it was lovely. We should always have outdoor ceremonies from now on, the setting was absolutely perfect.

Ryan, you're messing it all up. Mitt Rommney couldn't do his campaign commercial, uh, I mean the long walk as per tradition, not because he's too much of a yellow bellied coward to be seen in front of a huge crowd of voters in the daylight, but because it would have screwed up the seating arrangements. You'll notice nobody else was able to walk down the stairs and through the gate as is traditional with the long walk, unless you count, everybody, and why would you? Huh? Deval clearly didn't want him within a thousand miles of the place, you didn't see very many other Republican governors. Where were the dead ones? Huh? None of them bothered to show up either.

Anyway, I think that trying to get attention by actually being in the state for the first time eva and setting up his campaign office on Inauguration Day is the most noble, wonderful thing anybody has ever done in the history of the universe, and SHAME on anyone hwo can't see that. And I would like to say that I know all this because Mitt told me so personally and to reiterate that I say that as a free and independent, utterly objective citizen with no ties to any major political parties.

Anonymous said...

"Interestingly, VOM just dropped it's Federal lawsuit, saying justice had been served, or some such nonsense. Not too surprising, is it. that NOT voting on the HC amendment fulfilled their rigid definition of oath-bound behaviour."

Wow, I'm shocked. I guess it really was all based on hate, then, and not the glorious bedrock principle upon which our society rests, the absolute necessity for up or down votes on all proposals? That...that can't be.

The SJC has ruled, why aren't we all in the streets trying to make them vote on HC to preserve our very way of life? Where are the ten NEW lawsuits? WHERE'S WILLARD?

My world is askew. I don't think anyone could ever have predicted this.

laurel said...

Dear 11:06,

Anonymous said...

It's Rep. Doug Petersen. Rep. Peterson is George Peterson from Grafton. I don't think he voted the way you wanted :)

Anonymous said...

Deval changed tradition and wanted an outdoor ceremony. I think it's a great idea and hope it continues. Since the day is about the winners and celebrating that I think the new tradition of the loser leaving the night before is also a good idea. I hope in 8 years when the Republicans win it back, the "new" tradition continues.

Anonymous said...

LOL Anon, I think you meant in 888 years.

Nah, I don't agree. The outdoor ceremony was an inspired idea, it was a great event. It changed tradition by sharing the same ceremony with the public and giving us a chance to experience something that previously had only been experienced by the political elite. People loved it, and weather cooperating they should continue.

But the long walk should be held the same day. It's a tradition there's no reason to change, certainly not for a campaign commercial or because our elected officials are too scared, after holding our state and citizens in such contempt, to face the public (who, btw, were extremely well behaved, respected the import of the occasion, and wouldn't have booed anyway).

It's not only unnecessary but inconsiderate because any citizen who wants to see both The Long Walk, the only time the doors are opened, the tradition that's actually pretty fabled in our state history, and the Inaugural ceremony will have to either stay over or make two trips in on subsequent days. That's not convenient and not even possible for a lot of people.

Anonymous said...

The outdoor ceremony was an excellent idea. I happened to be at the State House the day DiMasi was officially given the speaker position. I though, cool, I'll go watch from the gallery. NO! Only people on a pre-set guest list were allowed into the PEOPLE'S gallery. Well ok, if someone on the PREFERRED list didn't show, rifraf were allowed to take their place (mind you wipe your shoes). I was so thoroughly disgusted.

Shawn said...

With the Jumbotron right there, they could have started the camera inside and shown the walk every step of the way and then the doors burst open and he walks out.

Even though it's only Willard, it still would have been a really cool thing to witness, especially with the new set up.

bostonph said...

My favorite comment on the lone walk (droolingly documented over on PP's blog) was from Scott Lehigh:

Still, as a businessman turned governor, he proved mostly a political-adventure capitalist. He took over the state, addressed an immediate problem or two, but then, faced with knottier issues, contented himself with putting a spit shine on the enterprise and trying to peddle it for political gain. In that way, his lone walk, replete with a series of stops designed to highlight his achievements but which reminded one of the stations of the gubernatorial ego, was emblematic of his public-relations approach to governing.

Unfortunately, Scott also chose to praise Trav for forcing a vote on gay marriage without mentioning the health care amendment. I don't get it.

Ryan Adams said...

Scot Lehigh is both a confused individual and a master of the obvious.

I don't see how anyone could praise Trav's vote on the marriage amendment. I could see how someone could praise an up-or-down vote, that's just an issue I've agreed to disagree on with all those "process people" - of which I used to consider myself until I saw how fucked up the process was. But Trav voted *for* the amendment. He voted to restrict the rights of a minority. He needs to be tossed out of office for that, no other recourse will satisfy me.

About Ryan's Take