We know that Sarah Palin does not believe in abortion under any circumstances. Not rape; not incest. So it probably comes as no surprise that she has acted on her beliefs.  David Talbott, writing at Salon.com interviews Rev. Howard Bess. A retired American Baptist minister who pastors a small congregation in nearby Palmer, and whose book “Pastor, I’m Gay” was targeted by Palin’s church for removal from the Wasilla Public Library.  According to Bess, Palin was a leader of the local Religious Right — including its antiabortion activities.

Bess has been tangling with Palin and her fellow evangelical activists ever since she was a Wasilla City Council member in the 1990s. Recently, Bess again found himself in the spotlight with Palin, when it was reported that his 1995 book, “Pastor, I Am Gay,” was among those Palin tried to have removed from the Wasilla Public Library when she was mayor.

“She scares me,” said Bess. “She’s Jerry Falwell with a pretty face.

“At this point, people in this country don’t grasp what this person is all about. The key to understanding Sarah Palin is understanding her radical theology.”

Bess — a fit-looking, 80-year-old man in a gray University of Illinois sweatshirt and blue jeans – spoke with me over coffee at the Vagabond Blues, a cafe in Palmer with a stunning view of the nearby snow-capped Chugach Mountains. The retired minister moved to the Mat-Su Valley with his wife, Darlene, in 1987, after his outspoken defense of gay rights at Baptist churches in the Santa Barbara, Calif., area and Anchorage landed him in trouble with church officials. In the Mat-Su Valley, Bess plunged into community activism, helping launch an assortment of projects, from an arts council to a shelter for the mentally disabled.

Inevitably, his work brought him into conflict with Palin and other highly politicized Christian fundamentalists in the valley. “Things got very intense around here in the ’90s — the culture war was very hot here,” Bess said. “The evangelicals were trying to take over the valley. They took over the school board, the community hospital board, even the local electric utility. And Sarah Palin was in the direct center of all these culture battles, along with the churches she belonged to.”

And after she became mayor of Wasilla, according to Bess, Sarah Palin tried to get rid of his book from the local library. Palin now denies that she wanted to censor library books, but Bess insists that his book was on a “hit list” targeted by Palin. “I’m as certain of that as I am that I’m sitting here. This is a small town, we all know each other. People in city government have confirmed to me what Sarah was trying to do.”
At one point during the hospital battle, passions ran so hot that local antiabortion activists organized a boisterous picket line outside Dr. Lemagie’s office, in an unassuming professional building across from Palmer’s Little League field. According to Bess and another community activist, among the protesters trying to disrupt the physician’s practice that day was Sarah Palin.

Soon after the book controversy, Bess found himself again at odds with Palin and her fellow evangelicals. In 1996, evangelical churches mounted a vigorous campaign to take over the local hospital’s community board and ban abortion from the valley. When they succeeded, Bess and Dr. Susan Lemagie, a Palmer OB-GYN, fought back, filing suit on behalf of a local woman who had been forced to travel to Seattle for an abortion. The case was finally decided by the Alaska Supreme Court, which ruled that the hospital must provide valley women with the abortion option.

Governor Deval Patrick’s ill-considered casino gambling proposal went down to a stunning, better than two to one defeat in the Massachusetts House of Representatives. The vote was 108-46. Now casino proponents are whining that the governor’s bill did not receive a full and fair hearing, even after many months of very public discussion. The simple fact is that the proposal to place three one billion dollar casinos in the state lost on its merits.

I will never understand why Governor Patrick blew so much political capital and public good will in making the three casinos the central feature of his economic plan. Patrick the candidate opposed casinos, knowing full-well the social and economic destruction they leave in their wake. To call his plan regressive, is to generously overstate what casinos are all about. But we have had that debate, and the regressives were routed.

Frank Phillips reported in the Boston Globe:

One of Patrick’s most immediate problems is that the casino initiative alienated a good chunk of his political base, particularly the progressive Democratic coalition that was at the core of his landslide election in 2006.

“I am saddened that he has greatly disillusioned his political base,” said state Representative Jay Kaufman, a Lexington Democrat and early Patrick supporter who voted against the casino plan.

Indeed. Candidate Patrick urged us to a higher standard of discourse. He called on us to become more deeply involved not only in politics but in the process of governance. He called for greater transparency in government and broad civic engagement. He said he would set a higher standard and restore trust in government. But, he delivered none of this in his casino gambling gambit. Instead, he fronted for a disreputable “industry;” using data derived almost soley from gambling interests, and those financed by gambling interests. He developed his plan with none of the transparency or civic engagement we expected from candidate Patrick.

I think Candidate Patrick needs to have a heart-to-heart talk with Governor Patrick. I think they have much to say to each other.

Laurel writes over at Talk to Action:

Holocaust revisionist and homobigot Scott Lively is moving to Springfield, MA. Lively has been the CA state director for Don Wildmon’s American Family Association.

Most recently, Lively co-founded Watchmen on the Walls, a quasi-religious anti-gay hate group which calls homosexuality “inherently evil”. His collaborators include Alexey Ledyaev and Ken Hutcherson. Alexey Ledyaev is the leader of the Latvia-based international New Generation church. New Generation’s flagship location in the USA is Springfield, MA, to which Lively plans to move. Hutcherson is founder of Antioch Bible Church, another anti-gay enterprise located near Seattle, WA.

Lively, Hutcherson and Ledyaev spend a good deal of time traveling around the former Soviet Union and the US spreading the anti-gay message of hate.

As now seems likely, Massachusetts may reschedule its primaries from March to February 5th. The Boston Globe reports:

“February 5 has become a de facto national primary day,” [Secretary of State William] Galvin said. “This gives Massachusetts voters the first chance in years to participate in some significant way in the selection process for nominees in both parties.”

Most analysts agree that the results of Feb. 5 primaries could well mark the end of the presidential nominating races in both parties. There will be as many as 21 primaries that day, including votes in delegate-rich states of New York, New Jersey, Illinois, and California… The new date for a Massachusetts primary could create a political problem for Mitt Romney. The former governor, who is not as popular among Bay State Republicans as he once was, may be forced to compete here in an effort to avoid an embarrassing loss in his home state.

Indeed. The Republicans have a winner take all primary, and Romney is not nearly as popular among Bay State Republicans as outsiders might think.

On the Democractic side, my raw speculation would be that this gives an advantage to Obama since Governor Patrick is mobilizing supporters on Obama’s behalf and no one else seems to have much of a presence in the state, having assumed that the primary, if it mattered at all, would be in March.

At the same time, Galvin says that one of the reasons for doing this is to simultaneously schedule five party primaries for vacant state legislative seats. And there is at least one blogger running. Lori Erlich is running in the Dem primary for State Rep from Marblehead. She is a environental activist, a CPA and based on the profile of the field in The Marblehead Reporter, she sounds like the progressive choice — and of course, being a fellow blogger gets her a mention here.

The current issue of Hustler magazine has an interview with the woman who says she was Republican Sen. David Vitter’s hooker — as well as a “naked pictorial” — according to The Advocate newspaper of Baton Rouge.

But first, let’s underscore that the man who campaigned against “Massachusetts values” has made his career grandstanding on the sanctity of marriage — apparently while breaking laws as well as his marriage vows. Here is what he had to say when running for the U.S. Senate:

    Vitter Statement on Protecting the Sanctity of Marriage

We need a U.S. Senator who will stand up for Louisiana values, not Massachusetts’s values.  I am the only Senate Candidate to coauthor the Federal Marriage Amendment; the only one fighting for its passage… stated David Vitter.

Much more.

Is the governor’s proposal to expand gambling addiction in the state in trouble? The evidence suggests so.

The Massachusetts Council of Churches has a footnoted list of Economic Arguments Against Casino Gambling. Here is one compelling point that we won’t hear the Governor’s spokespersons even try to rebut:

Gambling addiction to slot machines is all about speed…the faster you play, the more likely you will play out-of-control and be more reckless with your money as you lose it in the machine. Today’s slots are meticulously designed computers, generating precise profits, deliberately creating a false sense of “near wins” and regular small payoffs that create an illusion of sporting chance. They are the most addictive form of gambling ever devised.[7]

Anyone comforted by the idea that casino gambling is voluntary should spend a day with the casino staffs that target people based on how fast they play a slot machine and track prospects’ and players’ observed worth, define their predicted value, and systematically maximize individual “share of wallet” through targeted and customized promotional messages, limited-time cash offers, and carefully tracked time-to-response and spending analysis. This predatory marketing explains why for people who live within 50 miles of a casino, at least 1 out of every 20 people becomes a gambling addict.[8] But while these problem gamblers are very lucrative for the industry, their addiction leads to crime, distressed families, suicide and bankruptcy.[9] Non-gamblers are left paying the tab for these costs through higher taxes.

And the new statewide coalition, Casino Free Mass, has a useful set of talking points.

Is the Catholic League of Massachusetts a Sham? The evidence suggests so.

Just one question: Who said this?

“Taxing the poor through casinos is cynical and cowardly”

A: The Massachusetts Council of Churches

B: The Amherst Democratic Town Committee

C: The Boston Business Journal

D: Some Lefty Blogger (like me.)

Correct answer at the bottom of this post!

If you guessed the correct answer — you are the winner in the FrederickClarkson.com Sweepstakes! And unlike Governor Deval Patrick’s casino gambling proposal, what you get is nothing but satisfaction. The FrederickClarkson.com Sweepstakes has no history of causing addictive behaviors; bankrupsies; divorses — and has no known ties to organized crime!

The Boston Business Journal argues that we should all be responsible for fixing our roads and bridges rather than trying to scam the poor and the vulnerable. But beyond the social costs, the Journal also thinks it’s bad business — and bad for business.

As a matter of economic policy, expanded gambling is a non-starter. The commonwealth stands to skim $600 million off the top in licensing fees, one-time revenue that quickly becomes lost when it gets absorbed into $26.8 billion budget. Then it expects $400 million per year in additional tax revenue. But has anyone counted the taxes it won’t take in when $1.5 billion — the amount gamblers will need to spend in the state annually to raise the tax expected tax revenues — is sucked out of the local economy?

One of the fundamental fallacies of the casino revenue scheme is that casinos generate new money that falls out of the sky. No, most of this money simply won’t be spent elsewhere in Massachusetts. Perhaps $500 million will be redirected from Connecticut casinos. The rest is money Massachusetts residents will plunk into the pockets of casino operators and won’t spend on other things: meals, clothes, vacations, toys. Lawmakers should ask for a reasonable estimate of what the impact of squeezing more from Massachusetts gamblers will have on the income and sales tax figures.

The correct answer is “C”.

As I wrote the other day, the opposition to Governor Deval Patrick’s casino gambling gambit — is gathering steam. Those who enjoy political spectacles — particularly those among the Patrick’s political opponents — will be breaking out the popcorn to watch this classic case of slo-mo road kill. As a fan of the guv, that is a show I would rather see cancelled after these first few disastrous episodes. My friendly advice from this distance is that the sooner he starts shopping plan B to address the state’s economic issues — the better off we all will be.

A statewide coalition, Casino Free Mass, was formally launched on Monday in Boston, and is organizing statewide.

Supporters of the Casino Free Mass coalition include: The National Association on Mental Illness, Massachusetts Chapter; the League of Women Voters of Massachusetts; the National Association of Social Workers, Massachusetts Chapter; the Massachusetts Catholic Conference; the Massachusetts Council of Churches; the Massachusetts Family Institute; the Interchurch Council of Greater New Bedford; the Muslim American Society, Boston Chapter; Casinofacts.org

Press coverage has been intensive all over New England. The announcement of the coalition was, for example, the headline frontpage story in the Springfield Republican newspaper.

BOSTON – Religious groups, political activists and human service workers yesterday launched a statewide effort to oppose casinos in Massachusetts.

Members of the Casino Free Mass coalition said they will hold meetings around the state to organize people against casinos. They said they have no plans to lobby legislators.

Members said casinos in Massachusetts will create a new generation of addicted gamblers. They warned that casinos take money from the poor and elderly, those who can least afford it.

The Rev. John V. Johnson, executive director of the Massachusetts Council of Churches, said casino gambling is a moral issue. The council is helping lead the coalition.

“Raising revenue off the addiction of its citizens is both a bad bet and bad government,” Johnson said at a press conference outside the Statehouse.

The Berkshire Eagle was one of many media outlets in MA and around the country to run the State House News Service or the AP wire stories.

The League of Women Voters of Massachusetts first voiced its opposition to casino gambling in 1982, said Diane Jeffery, president of the league. The league opposes casinos because casino jobs are short term, such as construction jobs, or low paying. In addition, casinos sprout crime, gambling addiction and traffic, according to studies conducted by the league.

“At a time when cities and towns are looking for money, this is not the time to bring in gambling,” said Jeffery, in an interview. “We need to focus on industries that don’t drain the economy.”

The Massachusetts Council of Churches has anti-gambling resources posted on its web site — including economic arguments against casino gambling.

The National Gambling Impact Study, created and funded by Congress, found that the rate of problem and addicted gamblers doubles within a 50-mile radius of a new casino.

State sponsored revenue-by-addiction is a non-starter. Give it up now please, Governor Patrick.

Massachusetts is routinely taken for granted in American politics. We are an early primary state — but not early enough apparently. But there is more. This taking for granted is particuarly acute in the progressive and Democratic political communities — including the national political blogger community,, which finds itself fascinated, just fascinated by obscure precincts in Montana or who said what to whom in the halls of Congress and even on Fox News — you know the network True Dems are not supposed to appear on… there is more, but I digress.

Let us now celebrate Massachusetts — one of, if not THE bluest state in the nation.

Let us celebrate our all-Dem Congressional delegation and Senators Kennedy and Kerry. (Aren’t we glad Senator Kennedy is back at work after a hospital stay?)

Let us celebrate a progressive Democratic electorate who had the vision, the wisdom and the energy to get Deval Patrick the nomination for governor over overwhelmingly better funded and more established candidates.

Let us celebrate the good sense — and the enthusiasm — of the wider electorate who rejected yet another GOP hack in favor of a pragmatic statesman who also happens to be the first African American governor of Massachusetts and only the second African American governor –after Doug Wilder in VA. And let us celebtrate that — Inside the Beltway conventional wisdom be damned — among the ways that Patrick distinguished himself as a candidate was to be articulately and unapologetically prochoice and promarriage equality and pro- stem cell research.

Indeed, let us celebrate the simple fact that Massachusetts has led the way in the instituting of marriage equality, thanks to the wisdom of our Supreme Judicial Court. In the several years since the legalization of gay marriage, nothing untoward has happened, the dire and histrionic warnings of the religious right and the Catholic bishops not withstanding. Come visit us and you’ll see that nothing has changed, except that some people are happier and more secure in their lives. More recently, our state legislature blocked a ballot initiative that would have amended the state constitution to overturn the court decision. The initiative would have been on the ballot in ’08 and served as a further distraction from the real issues facing our state and the nation. We reject hate-based politics and refuse to put bigotry on the ballot, let alone in the state constitution.

The religious right is going to try to target the courageous state representatives and senators who took a chance and did the right thing. But we will not forget them and leave them vulnerable — and we are already blogging and organizing fundraisers.

I am proud to report that the Massachusetts state senate has passed a bill that would establish a 35 foot buffer zone between clinics and religious right zealots who routinely harrrass people going in and out. The Boston Globe reports:

During a press conference… [Senator Harriette] Chandler, Senator Susan Fargo, a cosponsor, and advocates from Planned Parenthood League of Massachusetts and NARAL Pro-Choice Massachusetts stood next to large photographs of a protester dressed as a Boston police officer talking to a driver entering a healthcare facility.

“This is the level of protesting that is going at reproductive health centers in Massachusetts,” said Angus McQuilken of Planned Parenthood. “This is the type of protesting that this law is designed to prevent.” …

Expansion of the buffer zone has the support of House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi and nearly half of the 160 state representatives, said Representative Carl Sciortino, a cosponsor. Attorney General Martha Coakley testified in support of the bill at a hearing in May.

Governor Deval Patrick released a statement of support.

“Women in the Commonwealth have the right to medical care free of violence, harassment, or intimidation,” Patrick said. “The Senate’s decision today to widen the buffer zone around reproductive clinics will protect patients from the abuse that so many have encountered as they seek care.”

“We’re not talking here about denying people the right to have freedom of speech,” Chandler said. “What we’re talking about is allowing people to access healthcare.”

Let me just say that this stands in sharp contrast to other states that turn a blind-eye to the harrassment of patients and staff of clinics that provide abortion care, among other womens health services. If you want to see what Democratic values in action look like — take a look at Massachusetts. My state is not an oasis to which progressives can look longingly — it is a stronghold — and we are intent on making it stronger.

And presidential campaigns — I am talking to you. You come to our state looking for volunteers for your New Hampshire operations. We are glad to help. But I also hope that you will look to our state as the epitome of what the Democratic Party stands for and the kinds of approaches to politics and public policy it can bring.

For the first time in the better part of a generation, we have a Democratic governor and legislature that is not only overwhelmingling Dem, but is also far more progressive than it was just a few years ago. They are all still finding their sea legs, but I can’t wait to see what they can do once they learn the ropes.

In the media it seems like all we hear about are how white evangelicals are disgusted with Bush and the GOP — well, who isn’t? But let us recall who we are as Democrats. We welcome those white evangelicals who are not already with us — after all, Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton and Al Gore are white evangelicals. But let’s also not forget who we are, and never allow those who make a buck off of selling us new ways to appeal to hypothetical microdemographics dominate the conversation at the cost of our most deeply held values as Democrats.

As my colleague Chip Berlet recently wrote:

“Human rights are not political commodities.”

The problem is not “abortion” or “reducing the number of abortions.” The problem is unwanted pregnancies, how to prevent them, and how to support women who get pregnant in the decisions they deem appropriate. This includes access to legal and safe contraception and abortion; as well as access to health care and child care for women who choose to give birth and raise children—concepts seen as fundamental rights in other industrialized countries. Our rights, and the rights of our friends, relatives, and neighbors who are women, are not political commodities to be traded for votes.

The problem is not “gay rights” or “gay marriage.” The problem is building a society where the basic human rights of all people are respected and defended. Under the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights, there is no such thing as “Special Rights.” When some Christian conservatives claim that gay people want “Special Rights,” it is a falsehood. Our rights, and the rights of our friends, relatives, and neighbors in LGBTQ communities, are not political commodities to be traded for votes.

We intend to vote in the upcoming elections in 2008, and we intend to vote for candidates who make it crystal clear that they support basic human rights for all. At the same time, we will continue to build broad and diverse coalitions seeking fundamental progressive social change. As we rebuild our progressive social movement, we will pay special attention to politicians who have through words or actions objectively undermined basic human rights for women, the LGBTQ communities, or any other group in our society.

Oh yeah, and Chip is from Massachusetts too.