Jeff Flint, the Prop.8 consultant, defines marriage his way
So who are the nefarious forces behind Prop. 8 – the measure to deny California’s gay community the right to marry? A blog called My DD (Direct Democracy) has put up a post by a fellow named Chino Blanco that goes to great lenghts to point the finger at the Prop. 8 culprits.
Apparently a fellow named David Benkoff, who was the proprietor of a blog called “Gays Defend Marriage,” became upset with the forces behind Prop. 8 – so he took down his website and quit the campaign. Blanco then theorized that perhaps Benkoff was disgusted at the folks running the Prop. 8 campaign.
So who are the consultants to Prop. 8? None other than Schubert Flint Public Affairs – the brainchild of Jeff Flint, who is a blogger over at Red County. Flint is also a longtime friend of Red County Editor Matt/Jubal Cunningham and a former legislative chief of staff to Anaheim Mayor Curt Pringle, who is also a political consultant. Flint also ran Pringle’s mayoral campaign in 2002 and his failed State Treasurer campaign in 1998.
Flint, and his partner Frank Schubert, who has admitted that McCain’s campaign is “dead” in California, hired a gal named Jennifer Kerns to be the Communications Director for Prop. 8. And what has Kerns communicated thus far about Prop. 8? Check out this unbelievable statement by Kerns, “One of our campaign cornerstones will be the fact that if the initiative [to ban gay marriage in California] doesn’t pass that public schools will be forced to teach the difference between gay marriage and traditional marriage.”
Unbelievable. Perhaps the schools should teach about how so many conservative Christians are divorced, undermining marriage in the process, no?
But what about Flint himself? Blanco found that Flint is a staffer for an association of security guards! Classic! Who knew the rent a cops had their own association? Do they know that Flint is trying to stop Prop. 8? I would imagine that the security guards who are gay won’t be very happy about that.
I previously wrote about the sleaze in Anaheim, where Flint got a job pimping for Earthlink Wi-Fi and sure enough his boy Pringle had the City of Anaheim sign up with Earthlink, even though the deal sucked for the residents of Anaheim – better systems are already cropping up.
Flint was also the consultant on the Measure M renewal campaign – which extended a sales tax increase. In Santa Ana the local City Clowncil is trying to use that money to build a street car connecting their lame downtown with the one in Garden Grove.
The fact that Flint is running Prop. 8 should give us all hope. He has a long history of raising tons of money, spending it, and then losing. He lost this year in fact as the consultant to a fundraiser for Doug Ose, who lost a congressional race to Tom McClintock.
Another GOP consultant, Arnold Steinberg, pointed out Flint’s mistakes in a column published by the L.A. Times, “Putting Proposition 8 on a high-turnout November presidential election ballot is dumb. Trying to pass it once same-sex marriages have become a legal, daily occurrence throughout the state is dumber. And now, if Californians vote it down, conservatives can’t blame judicial tyranny for imposing same-sex marriage on the unhappy masses.”
And Flint did a fine job of looking stupid recently in a Red County post, where he wrote this about Barack Obama, “I’m for change….blah blah blah…I’s for bringing people together…blah blah blah…let me quote Obama some more….blah blah blah….” Wow. Flint doesn’t think he needs any votes from Obama supporters? He is writing them all off even though his own partner thinks that Obama is going to wipe out McCain in California? How completely asinine!
Be sure to read Blanco’s entire post as he went to great lengths to discover all of Flint’s assorted activities.
ANNOUNCEMENT
Pacific Gas & Electric, as the founding member of the Equality Business Advisory Council, was proud to announce its corporate contribution of $250,000 today to the No on 8 EQUALITY CALIFORNIA campaign today. PG&E’s point-They believe that Equality is Everyone’s Business.
As to the polling numbers, they havent changed. The projection is that they will not. The YES on 8 Campaign is headed for a major defeat. The Sac Bee today reported that the Yes on 8 campaign is suing the California Attorney General over the revised wording on the ballot initiative, The revised wording reflects the California Supreme Court decision. The odds of the Yes on 8 suit being successful. next to nil.
FLowerszzz
You are referring to the Bradley effect named after the late Tom Bradley in his campaign for governor. Much has been written about the possibility of this happening again in this fall’s Presidential campaign. To wit, a lot of vocal support for Obama but when it comes time to pull the lever many votes for McCain.
The odds of this happening again are not very good. The polling numbers for Obama and McCain indicate a 20 pt spread in favor of Obama. That is a huge hole for McCain. I voted for McCain in 2000 in his campaign against W. But he is changed. Many Reps are voting for Obama. I am one. While the spread may tighten up, it will not reverse. This will have tremendous bump for the No on 8 campaign. And the Yes on 8 campaign knows it. The coming Tsunami will swamp the Yes on 8 supporters.
From the Sacramento Bee today
Backers of same-sex marriage ban to challenge rewording of Proposition 8
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Proponents of a ballot measure to ban same-sex marriages in California plan to appear in court today to challenge state Attorney General Jerry Brown’s rewording of the measure’s ballot summary.
On the petitions circulated last year to qualify the measure for the Nov. 4 ballot, it was described as a “Limit on Marriage.”
But Brown’s new title and summary of Proposition 8, posted on the Secretary of State’s Web site on July 22, states the proposed constitutional amendment “Eliminates right of same-sex couples to marry.”
The summary still says Proposition 8 provides that “only marriage between a man a woman is valid or recognized in California.”
The titles and summaries of ballot measures are typically scrutinized by both sides in a campaign and often challenged in court if one side feels the wording could sway voters against them.
Jennifer Kerns, a spokeswoman for the Yes on Proposition 8, confirmed that proponents “will file a ballot challenge (today in) Superior Court in Sacramento.”
In an e-mail, Kerns declined to state “what specifically we will challenge” and said the campaign would “not be releasing any additional information until (today).”
Gareth Lacy, a spokesman for the attorney general, said the title was reworded because of a state Supreme Court ruling in May that overturned a ban on gay marriages in California.
“We had a very significant Supreme Court decision, and the title and summary accurately reflect the measure,” Lacy said.
He said the attorney general’s office regularly changes “title and summaries to make them as accurate as possible at the time of the election.”
Opponents said that although changes to ballot measures are subject to legal challenge, the attorney general’s rewording accurately describes what the measure would do.
Steve Smith, a strategist for the No on 8 campaign, said he is working on two other measures on the November ballot, and the title and summary for “all three were changed.”
Schwarzenegger Centrist Republican
Changing title and summary is similar to a candidates ballot designation when running for city council. While I have no clue as to the impact it made on the election, the Title of Prop 98 was altered last spring.
Art:
How many factual errors can you make in one post?
Jeff,
I don’t think there is any upper limit to that.
Matt/Jubal,
And yet I will never goof the way you did when you outed the names of molestation victims. When John and Ken ripped you for that it made for fantastic radio. In fact I think they still have that clip on their website…
Matt/Jubal,
One more thing. Google “Jeff Flint.” This post comes up as the second search result. We will be haunting him forever.
In fact after Prop. 8 loses I suspect a lot of folks will NEVER hire him due to his work on Prop. 8. Talk about bad karma…
Art:
My big, inadvertant mistake, that I rectified immediately, versus your continual mudslide of errors, lies, and half-truths – virtually all of which go uncorrected and unacknowledged.
I’ll take my track record any day.
As for your Google boast — you’re bragging that your sloppy, error-riddled post will haunt Jeff? You really don’t care a whit about being truthful, as long as you think you are wounding those you dislike.
I think Jeff will be just fine. And you will continue to be viewed as a vicious kook.
Matt/Jubal,
You can call me names if you like, but that does not take away from the fact that mine is the #1 political blog in the OC.
The only people who believe that are you and SMS.
Keep hallucinating, Art — and keep sitting on those Google Analytics stats that no doubt belie your claim.
I thought #1 OC political blog was Jubal’s Red County.
Matt/Jubal,
The onus of proof is on YOU. We already make our Sitemeter data available to the public. You continue to refuse to.
Why don’t YOU prove that you are number one. Put a Sitemeter link on your blog. Otherwise you are just talking out of your a**.
choo choo,
Not according to Alexa.com. Check it out for yourself. We have been trouncing Red County for almost two months now…
We already make our Sitemeter data available to the public.
You don’t have any choice in that, Art. Making it public is a condition of use for Sitemeter, as you well know.
You continue to refuse to.
I cannot refuse to do something I never promised to do in the first place.
I’ve never used Sitemeter and unlike you, I never promised to make our Google Analytics data available to readers.
Strange how Google Analytics is the only metric you keep under wraps…
Choo choo:
Google around and you’ll quickly get an idea of Alexa.com’s reputation for reliability…or more accurately, lack thereof.
Which would explain why Art likes it.
Why don’t YOU prove that you are number one.
I don’t have to. I can compare our traffic with your Sitemeter numbers, and OJ isn’t even close. Never has been. Even before Red County came along.
We’ve traditionally utilized traffic monitoring services for our own internal use, and to share with advertisers — not as a tool to make ourselves feel important.
You’re traffic is up, Art. Even your content is better lately. Take pride in that — why exaggerate when the truth will suffice?
Matt/Jubal,
So post your readership data and prove me wrong. What do you have to lose? If you are number one your numbers should prove it.
Matt/Jubal,
Not good enough. I am going with Alexa’s data until you can prove they are wrong. We have always posted our readership data. Always. If you want any of us to believe your blog is number one you will have to give us the data – otherwise you are just blowing hot air.
BTW, your blog is a compilation of 13 blogs. If we aren’t beating the entire Red County I bet we are trouncing the Orange County part of it.
Post your data Matt or else concede that we are #1.
Not good enough.
Of course it isn’t…for you. Which is why you’ve shifted into “When did you stop beating your wife?” mode, as you are wont to do when you are cornered in an discussion.
We have always posted our readership data. Always.
You HAVE to, Art. Sitemeter requires that you do. You know that. Taking credit for that is like taking credit for breathing.
If we aren’t beating the entire Red County I bet we are trouncing the Orange County part of it.
Already backtracking, are we?
Post your data Matt or else concede that we are #1.
Nice straw man/false dichotomy maneuver. Remember who starting bragging about how big their numbers are? It wasn’t me, which is one reason I don’t have to “concede” anything — another reason being your claim ain’t true.
Just be happy with the traffic you have and let go of your Red County obsession.
I’ve linked to this post again in the recently-published diaries listed below. I know this post has long since moved off the front page here, so this is mainly just to say ‘hello’ to any readers that might be dropping in from any of these blogs:
“Yes on 8” RSVP? Need your advice, Daily Kos.
“Yes on 8” RSVP? Need your advice, MyDD.
“Yes on 8” RSVP? Need your advice, OpenLeft
“Yes on 8” RSVP? Need your advice, Booman Tribune
“Yes on 8” RSVP? Need your advice, Pam.
“Yes on 8” RSVP? Need your advice, TPMCafé
Hope everyone’s having a great weekend. Cheers.
Any serious person who understands search engine optimization (SEO) knows the credibility gap left by those who use Alexa as a tool for website analysis.
Here are some excerpts from an SEO expert. Obviously, Art will need to have the last word, but rest assured, the more he talks about this topic, the less credible he becomes (if that is even possible).
EXCERPT FROM “AlexaRank, Compete, Google Toolbar PR, and other SEO quackery”
Posted by Michael Martinez on July 31, 2007 in Competitive Analysis
“I usually form an opinion of someone’s SEO capability within 30 seconds of reading the subject line of their forum posts. If their opening sentence or paragraph mentions Alexa, Google Toolbar PR, or some similar popular “ranking” value, I usually write them off as having no substantial knowledge fo search engine optimizaton.
Now, there are quite a few “A list” and “B list” SEO bloggers and forum operators out there who still bring up Alexa rankings, Google Toolbar PR, and a few other SEO buzz expressions. I give none of them any credibility for understanding what to do with numbers. I put no stock in their analyses.
High Alexa rankings have been shoved into people’s faces as some sort of vindication of competence and skill for years. Those numbers really mean nothing. Alexa’s data is a fringe snapshot of Web traffic and it will be more accurate for some sites and less accurate for others.
Unless Alexa can offer a consistency of accuracy, however, its rankings are meaningless babble with no relevance whatsoever to any useful comparison of site visits and visitors. If you consider (for the sake of discussion) that an Alexa ranking of 50,000 is at best 50% accurate and an Alexa ranking of 256,000 is at best 10% accurate, what sort conclusion can you draw about the quality of either Web site? None, really.
The problem with Alexa rankings is that we have no way of knowing how far off their estimates are from reality. Every Web site that Alexa reports on potentially receives more or less traffic than Alexa suggests it may be receiving. There no signals that tell you whether the Alexa numbers are close, too high, or too low.
Analyzing other people’s guesswork means your own analysis can never be more informed than guesswork, and it’s not fair to say that you’re making educated guesses. You’re making guesses based on guesses and ignorance, just as the guesses made by Alexa and Compete are based on ignorance.
But as far as comparing Alexa ranks and Compete traffic with other sites goes, you might as well hang a shingle on your door that says you’re a qualified dinosaur doctor. You have as much credibility that way.”
Scott,
So post your numbers already and settle the issue.
Art –
You chose to publish your data and we did not. As private enterprises, we are each entitled to our respective choices . Matt and I have both made very clear on this thread that your claims are not supported by your numbers. We know they are not supported because we have the benefit of knowing all of the facts while you only have the benefit of knowing half the facts. Just because we have a policy of not sharing our numbers doesn’t make you any more right.
Remember, you raised the issue. You boasted based on inaccurate and incomplete information. You are the one who’s claims were factually wrong.
Moving forward, we will be happy to debate the issues and appreciate your enthusiastic (albeit somewhat irrational)editorial contributions to the political arena.
I think we can all agree that this matter is settled.
Regards,
Scott Graves
P.S. Look on the bright side… at least this thread has generated some badly needed traffic to your website 😉
Scott,
“We know they are not supported because we have the benefit of knowing all of the facts while you only have the benefit of knowing half the facts.”
Exactly. And until you post your numbers NO ONE will have all the facts. So post them already. What do you have to hide? Is the Emperor lacking in clothes?
As for our traffic, we are now averaging 1,000 visits M-F. That is ten times what I used to get five years ago. I’d say we’re doing just fine…and we are STILL beating Red County, according to Alexa.com.
I was warned that you were irrational beyond words. Amazingly, you have justified those warnings on an apolitical topic that warrants no debate or disagreement.
I am sorry I even stopped in to take a look.
FYI for anyone planning to drive out to Irvine the evening of August 14th: the parking attendants at the 2020 Main bldg. leave by 6:30 everyday, so if you plan on staying past then, your parking is FREE. Just grab a ticket on your way in, and the gates will be up when you leave.
Since I can’t be at 2020 Main in Irvine in person on August 14th, I’m thinking I’d like to pay for some yard signs. The only ones I’ve found so far are here:
signs.cafepress.com/item/no-on-prop-8-yard-sign/284449088
But maybe there are better signs already out there?
In any case, if you’ve got PayPal, I’m ready to reimburse you for the cost of purchasing and planting a “No on Prop 8” sign at 2020 Main from 5:30 pm – 8:30 pm. You can keep the sign, I just wanna know it’s gonna be there for those 3 hours on the day. Deal?
This Thursday, August 14th, from 5:30 p.m – 8:30 p.m. at 2020 Main Street, Irvine, California:
ACTION ALERT: Tell the Right-Wing Consultants NO to Prop 8!
http://www.theliberaloc.com/2008/08/13/action-alert-tell-the-right-wing-consultants-no-to-prop-8/
Hi, it’s David Benkof – one f. If you could correct it I’d appreciate it, thanks.
Why Vote Yes on Prop 8
The people of the State of California have approved state licensed marriages only as between a man and a woman. We, the people, want to have state licensed marriages to demonstrate our societal approval of and support for a monogamous sexual relationship between those being married because we believe the relationship is morally acceptable and is good for our society. By voting for Prop 8, we, the people, are saying that we desire only to approve monogamous sexual relationships between men and women, and have no interest in promoting any other sexual relationships. We are NOT saying that the state should prohibit all sexual relationships which are not between monogamous heterosexuals; it’s just that we don’t want to promote them.
Whether or not a particular sexual relationship should be encouraged is not always an easy decision, and people can have differing views. For example, in most states, marriage between first cousins is not permitted, but in other states, including California, this is allowed. Where marriage of first cousins is permitted, the people of the state determined that it was morally acceptable and beneficial for our society.
The State of California does not make illegal many sexual relations. In fact, any consenting adult may lawfully have sexual relations with any other consenting adult. For example, a man can live with and have sexual relations with two women, but the State of California does not want to promote this so the state does not permit a man to marry two women because we, the people, believe polygamy is not morally right and good for our society. Likewise, an adult woman can lawfully have sexual relations with her father’s brother, but the State of California does not want to encourage this so the state does not permit a woman to marry her uncle because we, the people, believe the relationship is incestuous, and is not morally right and good for our society. Even a group of men can lawfully have sexual relations with a group of women, but the State of California does not want to encourage this so the state does not permit a group of men to marry a group of women because we, the people, believe polyamory is neither morally right nor good for our society. By voting YES on Prop 8, we the people are affirming that even though two individuals of the same gender can lawfully have sexual relations, the State of California does not want to promote homosexual relations because we, the people, believe homosexual relations are not morally right or are not beneficial for our society.
Are homosexual relationships morally right?
Whether engaging in homosexual relations is morally right is a decision for you to make, based on your sense of right and wrong and your religious beliefs. You will need to determine where you stand regarding homosexual relations. If you are not sure, you may want to talk with family, friends and your pastor, priest, rabbi or other religious leader. The doctrine of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints regarding the matter is set forth in The Family – A Proclamation to the World. If you believe that homosexual relations are morally wrong, vote YES on Prop 8 so that the State of California does not license marriages between people of the same gender.
Are homosexual relationships good for our society?
Whether homosexual relations should be approved and encouraged by the people of the State of California as good for society, is another decision you will need to make. A few of the related arguments for and against Prop 8, set forth below, may be helpful in making this decision. If you believe that promoting homosexual relations is not beneficial for our society, vote YES on Prop 8 so that the State of California does not license marriages between people of the same gender.
Arguments For Prop 8 (With Rebuttals)
In all human societies throughout history, marriage has always existed, has always only involved men and women, and has always existed to serve the family. It has never existed solely for individuals or for couples, and though marriage benefits adults, offspring are the primary reason societies favor marriage. Anthropologists tell us marriage has always been about the next generation. Marriage, as a fundamental tool of society, is used to promote the best home life for children, that being the child’s father and mother who are married to each other. Children have a fundamental right to be raised by their mother and father. Marriage between same gender persons will encourage and give approval of children being conceived by artificial means and born into a family where they will not be raised by their mother and father. Scholars agree that the best for every child is to be raised in a loving home by its own mother and father who love each other. (The rebuttal to this argument is that being raised by a mother and father is not necessary as evidenced many individuals that are healthy, stable and successful in life and who were not raised in a two parent home. One, two, or more, caregivers can raise children successfully. In addition, there is no data available yet to support the idea that just because they are raised by two homosexuals, children will not be healthy, stable and successful in life.)
Arguments Against Prop 8 (With Rebuttals)
The primary argument by opponents of Prop 8 is that “getting married” is a fundamental human right of every person in a committed loving relationship, and therefore should not be denied to homosexual couples. (The rebuttal to that argument is that marriage is not a fundamental human right available to everyone, as evidenced by the fact that incestuous, polygamous and polyamorous marriages are not permitted. Only certain relationships that society wants to encourage are afforded marriage rights.)
A secondary argument by opponents of Prop 8 is that the rights afforded to married couples are not the same as the rights given to domestic partners. (The rebuttal to that argument California law grants exactly the same legal rights to registered domestic partners as every married couple has. “Registered domestic partners shall have the same rights, protections, and benefits, and shall be subject to the same responsibilities, obligations, and duties under law, whether they derive from statutes, administrative regulations, court rules, government policies, common law, or any other provisions or sources of law, as are granted to and imposed upon spouses.” 2003 Domestic Partner Act, California Family Code, Sections 297.) A related argument by opponents of Prop 8 is that because health care providers and other people in society do not understand the rights of registered domestic partners, homosexual couples are not treated the same as married couples. (The rebuttal to that argument is that anti-discrimination laws exist to protect the rights of individuals in domestic partnerships.)
Another argument is that discrimination in the workplace and in public accommodations will continue until homosexual relationships are respected by society, so by allowing homosexuals to marry, the State will give homosexual relationships respect and dignity so that there will be less discrimination. (The rebuttal to that argument is that laws already exist to prohibit discrimination, and the State has just as much an interest in protecting against discrimination in the workplace and in public accommodations of those engaged in multi-partner or polygamous or other lawful sexual relationships, as it does in protecting against discrimination against homosexuals, yet we do not grant them the right to marry.)
Another view is that encouraging marriage between homosexuals will encourage monogamy between homosexual individuals, which will be good for society because promiscuity, whether between same gender or different gender people, tends to spread sexually transmitted diseases and is otherwise not good for society. (The rebuttal to this view is that individuals in committed relationships do not need to be married to be committed to monogamy, and there is no data to support the view that homosexuals in committed relationships are less monogamous than married homosexuals.)
For more info, go to http://www.protectmarriage.com
Interesting, Sam, interesting.
You wanna hear my main argument against Proposition 8?
GAY PEOPLE KICK ASS!!!
I cant believe we live in an age where the rights of people who are supposedly “created equal” according to our United States Constitution, (you know…that document that our founding fathers created when building the country you now squaller around in, that establishes the rules we would all abide by?) could just be simply voted on and taken away. The supreme court should throw this trash to the curb and ‘out’ the ones proposing it to the ballots for all to see, as example citizens of what NOT to be.
I am ashamed of my country, my neighbors, and my state for even having a prop on the ballot that starts out with “Eliminates the right for…”
That is all I have to say.
No more faith in our country,
James W. Carriger
San Diego, CA
Memo to Little Jimmy Carriger…
Sorry things aren’t going your way, Jimmy. Guess you’re going to take your toys and go home, huh?
Too bad about Prop 8. That “majority rules” thing really sucks, doesn’t it?
jeff flint is the vice president of the lincoln youth soccer club in Lincoln, CA. He is also involved in 2 other leagues and baseball. he is a “big deal” living in a million dollar home up here. there is something strange about him but we don’t know what it is.
Well, Prop 8 won, didn’t it, and among the four major ethnic groups, the better Obama ran, the better Prop 8 ran! A motivation to become at least a nominal a Democrat.