Drew McKissick's blog

The Art Director for the largest non-profit musical theatre company has quit after protests and boycotts resulting from the fact that he dared to give money to the "Yes on 8" campaign, which passed California's marriage amendment last week.

Scott Eckern stepped down from his job at the California Musical Theater in Sacramento after some gay and lesbian activists called for a theater boycott.

He said in a statement that he is leaving "after prayerful consideration to protect the organization and to help the healing in the local theater going and creative community."

Eckern said he "chose to act upon my belief that the traditional definition of marriage should be preserved" but had no idea his contribution would generate such controversy. He said his sister is a lesbian in a domestic partnership, which he understands to carry the same legal rights as marriage.

The boycott calls led by artists including "Hairspray" composer Marc Shaiman began after activists learned Eckern contributed $1,000 to the Yes on 8 campaign. Last week, voters approved Proposition 8, which changes the constitution to ban same-sex marriage.

As mentioned previously, the folks supporting passage of the state marriage amendment in California, (proposition 8), which would define marriage as one man and one woman, have gained a good bit of momentum and support in the past several weeks...and their opposition has actually been helpful.

Well now we see some in the pro gay-marriage crowd are actually turning violent as they get desperate.  From OneNewsNow:

A Proposition 8 volunteer in California was recently assaulted, evidently because he supports the proposed state constitutional amendment defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

The victim, Jose Nunez, was preparing to place Prop. 8 lawn signs when the attack happened. Chip White, a spokesman for the "Yes on 8" campaign, explains what happened.
 
"The attacker grabbed about 75 signs, [then] yelled at Mr. Nunez [asking] 'what do you have against gays?' And Mr. Nunez replied that he had nothing against gays -- but he was attacked anyway." ...

It seems like there's something new everyday with this crowd.

Two developments in Ohio... First, the Democrat Secretary of State is appealing to the US Supreme Court a federal circuit court's ruling that she has to check recent registrants against ID records to see that they're legit... From the Plain Dealer:

The U.S. 6th Circuit Court of Appeals late Tuesday sided with the Ohio Republican Party in its lawsuit against Brunner, telling her to cross-check the names of 666,000 new or updated voter registrations since Jan. 1 against a state driver's license database, and report the results to local elections boards. One in five of the newly registered voters lives in Democratic-rich Cuyahoga County.

Brunner said a cursory review found that about 200,000 of the 666,000 had provided a driver's license or Social Security number that does not match government records. That does not mean they committed fraud; they could have simply jotted down an incorrect digit, Republicans and Democrats agree.

200,000?? A 1/3 of all the forms that were turned in? Even accounting for mistakes, pens w/out enough ink or just idiocy, there's no way you account for this without massive fraud. And keep in mind that Bush only won Ohio in 2004 by about 110,000 votes.

Although social/cultural issues are getting little (if any) attention whatsoever in the current presidential election, the campaign to defend traditional marriage rolls on in California, Florida (likely to pass) and Arizona this year via proposed state constitutional amendments.

To date, such amendments have passed over 30 states with an average of about 70% of the vote, only failing in one state (in Arizona in 2006 by a few points, largely due to a poorly drafted amendment).

California is obviously the state that everyone's had their eyes on, for several reasons. First, because it's the biggest state in the country; second, it's home to the epicenter of the gay-culture universe, San Francisco...not to mention Hollywood and third, this is the first time such an amendment has sought to overturn the damage already done by a state court (having ruled gay marriage legal in that state by a one vote margin of its Supreme Court).

With the vote on the California state marriage amendment just three weeks away, it's nice of the proponents of gay marriage to give the voters of that state another stark reminder of just what they could be in for if gay marriage remains legal in that state. Via Protect Marriage:

SAN FRANCISCO, October 11 – In the same week that the No on 8 campaign launched an ad that labeled as “lies” claims that same-sex marriage would be taught in schools to young children, a first grade class took a school-sponsored trip to a gay wedding. Eighteen first graders traveled to San Francisco City Hall Friday for the wedding of their teacher and her lesbian partner, The San Francisco Chronicle reported. The school sponsored the trip for the students, ages 5 and 6, taking them away from their studies for the same-sex wedding. According to the Yes on 8 campaign, the public school field trip demonstrates that the California Supreme Court's decision to legalize same-sex marriage has real consequences. ...

First off, this was a joke of a "town-hall" format. Since when is a town-hall pre-packaged by a moderator? The questions hand selected...

The best questions of this debate were the ones that did NOT get asked.

No questions about abortion...gay marriage...second amendment...William Ayers... Since Brokaw chose the questions, one can only assume he didn't want to get any that would put Bambi on the spot with those nasty "cultural issues"...(since he figures they don't matter anyway).

Luntz focus group: who did you relate to? more Obama. But that Mac did better on the economy (?)

The CNN focus group...(they're "openminded"...heh)...they didn't hear enough specifics...who won? 10 Mac...12 for Bambi... (oooh, almost didn't stuff the audience enough).

CNN's poll: 38% dem, 3% GOP: who did best job? Obama. (well, as Gomer Pyle would say, "surprise, surprise, surprise!)

Mike Murphy says McCain did a better job of connecting w/people in this debate than in the last one.

Are there any re-runs of the VP debate on?

There's a new poll out of Californai voters re: the vote on that state's marriage amendment next month, and the results are encouraging.

SAN FRANCISCO (CBS 5) ― A new CBS 5 poll finds that California's Proposition 8 has picked up support in the wake of a television ad campaign that features footage of San Francisco Mayor Gavin Newsom proclaiming same-sex marriage is here to stay "whether you like it or not."

The poll conducted for CBS 5 by SurveyUSA indicates that support for the measure to ban gay marriage has grown among voters in the state over an eleven day period — most especially among young voters.

According to the poll, likely California voters overall now favor passage of Proposition 8 by a five-point margin, 47 percent to 42 percent. Ironically, a CBS 5 poll eleven days prior found a five-point margin in favor of the measure's opponents. ...

Well the debate everyone was waiting for is over, so now we can get to the tale of the tape and see what everyone had to say about it.

(by the way, my live-blog of the debate is here)

On to the feedback...

* Malkin says "Sarah Rocks!"

She was warm, fresh, funny, confident, energetic, personable, relentless, and on message. She roasted Obama’s flip-flops on the surge and tea-with-dictators declarations, dinged Biden’s bash-Bush rhetoric, challenged the blame-America defeatism of the Left, and exuded the sunny optimism that energized the base in the first place.

McCain has not done many things right. But Sarah Palin proved tonight that the VP risk he took was worth it....

Pause to reflect on this: She matched — and trumped several times — a man who has spent his entire adult life on the political stage, run for president twice, and as he mentioned several times, chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee.

The conservatives and pro-gun moderates in the United States House of Representatives yesterday overwhelmngly passed a bill to protect the Second Amendment rights of the people of the District of Columbia in line with the decision by the Supreme Court wiping out the onerous gun control laws passed by the left-wingers in the nation's capital. The bill -- entitled the "Second Amendment Enforcement Act" and passed after the D.C. Council passed a very weak gun rights bill for their citizens -- was defended yesterday by President George W. Bush's press secretary, Dana Perino. In her statement she said:

The President strongly supports the Second Amendment Enforcement Act, which the House today passed with broad bipartisan support. Congress's proposal guarantees the Constitutional rights of law-abiding individual Americans living in the District of Columbia to keep and bear arms. The President wants to sign the bill this year and urges the Senate to take action on the House-passed bill as quickly as possible to ensure that the residents of the District are able to exercise their Second Amendment rights in a robust and meaningful way.

Well, you may have wondered how long this was going to take. First, a one vote majority of the California Supreme Court (4-3) votes to legalize gay marriage in that state, and now the state begins to issue politically correct marriage licenses that not only make no reference to gender, but refuse to allow recognition of either "party" as "bride" or "groom".

From World Net Daily:

ROSEVILLE, Calif. – "Brides" and "grooms" are no longer allowed to marry in the State of California.

That privilege is only extended to individuals who allow themselves to be called "Party A" and "Party B" on marriage licenses.

Pastor Doug Bird of Abundant Life Fellowship in Roseville, Calif., was alarmed to find the state now rejects the traditional terms after he officiated his first marriage ceremony last week following the California Supreme Court decision to overturn Proposition 22.

The couple had written the words "bride" and "groom" next to "Party A" and "Party B" because they wanted to be legally recognized as husband and wife.

However, the Placer Count marriage license was denied. ...