FIC Blog

Same-sex “marriage” and FIC Action’s Let the People Decide press conference were widely covered by local media this week. You can read the Courant’s story here, the Waterbury Republican-American here, the Associated Press here, the New London Day here, the Stamford Advocate here, the Manchester Journal Inquirer here, and the Meriden Record-Journal here.

During the Q and A the media appeared to subject Brian’s message to far greater scrutiny than that of our opponents–which he handled with his usual aplomb. But, with rare exceptions, coverage of Wednesday’s dueling press conferences was notably balanced. Some of you have noticed that our opponents got the larger photo on the Courant’s front page. True, but we are pleased to see the paper put Brian on the front page for the first time in the all the years we’ve been doing this. (And the photographer, Shana Surek, does good work. I don’t think she was the one who decided on the relative size of the photos.)

The Stamford Advocate, which does some of the best reporting on this topic, put appropriately neutral quotes around “marriage equality,”–our opponents’ preferred buzzphrase–and noted the 26 House Democrats who voted against civil unions in 2005. And the AP took the time to get another quote from the governor’s office as to her intentions:

A spokesman for Republican Gov. M. Jodi Rell, who signed the civil unions law, said Wednesday that she would veto a gay marriage bill.

“She continues to believe that marriage is between a man and a woman,” spokesman Christopher Cooper said. “She believes that the civil unions law … is the way to go with this.”

Of all the print media, only the Journal Inquirer wrote its story without any reference to FIC. But except for the JI, the coverage was fair and balanced–and the New London Day in particular stands out for its colorful description of our fearless leader:

Brian S. Brown would like to say he told you so.

The president of the Family Institute of Connecticut was his animated self Wednesday morning, gesturing forcefully with his hands from behind a podium, his voice peaking and diving as he declared that the civil-union bill approved two years ago for same-sex couples was now being used to bring about what he and his organization most fear: full-fledged, state-acknowledged marriage for gay couples.

“They’re using civil unions, and they’re not hiding it, as a tool for their ultimate goal, which is full gay marriage,” Brown said only minutes before his opponents convened across the hall to announce just that — a push to permit same-sex couples to be legally married in Connecticut.

I was at our opponents’ press conference too. We’ll be responding to their arguments in the coming days and weeks. But what especially jumped out at me was the claim by Lawlor and McDonald that their re-elections demonstrate public support for same-sex “marriage.” McDonald claimed same-sex “marriage” was “front and center” in his election and that his opponent, Rick Giordano “didn’t want to talk about anything else.”

That’s interesting, because during the campaign the Left was complaining about just the opposite: that Giordano and other pro-family candidates were “stealth” candidates who were not being up front about their opposition to same-sex “marriage.” Here’s an excerpt from the New Haven Advocate’s October “Closet Conservatives” article:

But Giordano’s own eight-minute biographical video, posted on the campaign Web site, makes no mention of gay marriage, abortion or other bedrock values of the Family Institute. Instead, Giordano talks about lowering taxes, improving transportation and making health care flexible. The only hint of his conservative leaning whatsoever is a vague reference to his opponent’s “personal agenda.”

So the Left tells us during the campaign that Rick was a “stealth” candidate who won’t discuss gay marriage and then, after he loses, they claim that he didn’t want to talk about anything else. This is the sort of hypocrisy that the MSM will never call them on.

Nor, for that matter, was McDonald open with his constituents during the campaign about his support for same-sex “marriage.” Here’s an excerpt from an Oct. 5th Stamford Advocate article on a debate between McDonald and Giordano:

McDonald made a point of saying he is proud to support stem cell research and voted for a bill that would have required all hospitals to dispense emergency contraceptives, also known as Plan B or the morning after pill, to rape victims. He said he was proud to author a gun-control bill that would have required gun owners to report lost or stolen weapons within 72 hours or face criminal charges. He said he is opposed to school vouchers. He accused Giordano of being aligned with a “radical, conservative zealot group” and challenged him to give his positions on the same four issues.

Note which issue McDonald does not challenge Rick to give his position on: same-sex “marriage.” Why? Because McDonald knows the public doesn’t support him on it. To now turn around and pretend that this issue cut his way in the last election is a deliberate misreading of the record.

The same holds true of Lawlor, who complained bitterly throughout the 2006 campaign that Dan McCann was discussing everything except same-sex “marriage” but now claims that it was all Dan talked about. Lawlor and McDonald make these false assertions about the electoral politics of same-sex “marriage” because they know the MSM will not call them on it.

One final note: tonight I will be appearing on CPTV’s On the Record show at 9:30 to debate Anne Stanback, head of Love Makes a Family. Anne is always a gracious opponent and I expect you will find our 20 minute discussion to be a little more detailed than the usual soundbites of commercial television.