"The backers of the successful ballot proposal to constitutionally ban gay marriage did not get the occupations of the majority of those who contributed to the campaign despite a state law requiring them to gather that information. But the state's top election official said Monday that the wording of the law allows them to get away with that. Joe Kanefield said they do not have to give back the donations that came without the required information or even to pay a fine. A review of the public reports filed by the Yes for Marriage campaign shows occupations listed for only about one out of five contributors." [Yuma Sun]
So Does Under Sec. of Defense Hopeful Clifford Stanley Want to Repeal DADT Or Not? (1)
· Rich says: Keep drinking the Kook-Aid and thinking the adminstration has any plan for ending DADT... »
Oprah’s Tear-Filled Goodbye to Viewers (A Year Early) (15)
· tjr101 says: I have to laugh at people who think we would be living in utopia had Hillary been... »
· AxelDC says: @InExile: You mean the wife of the guy who signed DOMA & DADT? >>>No. 13 ยท... »
· InExile says: If only she would have supported the woman candidate (HRC), we wouldn’t be... »
EXCUSES: The Senate Just Knocked DADT’s Hearings Into Next Year (9)
· Rich says: They’ll be too busy campaigning in 2010 to take up this legislation. When the 2010... »
· InExile says: This is what happens when there is NO LEADERSHIP in the White House. »
“Did any provision in the Constitution guarantee a right to homosexual sodomy?” (39)
· 1EqualityUSA says: Rainfish, must you pour salt into my wounds? »
World Brief: Jamaica Faces Gay Boycott (76)
· Abdullah Aziz says: I say Boycott away. I am from Iraq and it is so the same over there. Boycott... »
What Happened Last Month Before Your Little Boycott? The DNC Raised $11.5 Million (15)
· christopher di spirito says: John Aravosis screeching about a DNC boycott is just his latest ploy to... »
· InExile says: dontblamemeivotedforhilla ry, we sure could use her leadership now. This man is not... »
Gee, if it was one of the gay groups that did this, they would be penalized in a heartbeat. Gotta love that double-standard!
@Arden McHugh:
Yeah, ain't that the gawd-awful truth, Arden?
But, if you have God as your backer and you can ignore the Constitutional rights of taxpaying American citizens, why should they have to worry about dotting every "i" and crossing every "t"?
Details. Details. Who needs details. Obviously, these people have more important things to worry about, like deciding on what the next civil-right they will vote away, for instance.
Idle fingers are the devil's play toy, you know? ;-0
thank you for alerting me to this. i will be contacting my state rep. first thing monday
"But the state's top election official said Monday that the wording of the law allows them to get away with that."
Whereas violating the spirit if not the letter of the law is reprehensible it is the American standard. It's called a loophole folks. Our movement has done similar things since day one.
perhaps the story should be reworded from "…without the required information" to " without (apparently) optional information…"
Gee, it's the tainted Blood Bank all over again!
(Run from room screaming…..)
Aaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhh! (still running)
Aaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh!
The wording for Amendment 2 in Florida wasn't clear at all. Had I not researched the Amendment before I went and voted I could have unknowingly voted the wrong way. I think the language on ballots needs to be written in a way people understand what they are voting for.
Debby – it can be. In Michigan, voting yes means you are FOR the proposal and obviously vice versa.
Start a petition drive – it would be interesting to see crooked politicians say they are against CLEAR referenda! :)