VT-NEA HEAD MAKES THREATENING ANONYMOUS PHONE CALL

Angelo Dorta, the head of the Vermont National Education Association, confirmed today that he was the source of a September 26 anonymous call to  Bruce A. Wilder, president of For the Children, Inc., a call which Wilder described as "threatening." 

For The Children, Inc. is an organization which formed in May primarily in reaction to the civil unions law. On their web site is posted a letter from Mount Mansfield Union School Board member Wolcott "Tut" Parmly about homosexuality and the schools. Dorta has publicly expressed his opinion that the letter is offensive.

Dorta made the call to Wilder a little after noon on Tuesday, September 26. 

The text of the call is as follows:

"Yes, this is for Bruce Wilder, ah, I'm calling in reference to your web site, and I'm requesting that you remove the, uh, uh, scurrilous piece relative to the Mount Mansfield Union High School and get it off your web site, get it off now! I will pursue this, and continue to pursue it until you will be compelled to take it off.  Take off the MMU piece."

Dorta hung up without leaving his name. The anonymous nature of the call and its "threatening tone," Wilder says, concerned him enough to report the matter to the Williston State Police Barracks.  He was told that there was nothing illegal about the call but he should continue to monitor the situation.

Among the items Wilder took with him to the police were two digital photos of his Caller I.D. display screens which showed the call came from a phone with the number 223-6375.  That is the phone number of the Vermont NEA office.

Contacted today about the call, Dorta was unavailable at first because he was in a meeting.  But  VT NEA Communications Director Laurie Huse said, "I don't know a thing about it. I can't imagine that anybody in this office would be making an anonymous phone call.  I cannot imagine who it might be." 

Wilder, however, mentioned that several people who had listened to the tape thought they recognized the caller's voice as that of Angelo Dorta himself.

Dorta confirmed this himself later today.  "Absolutely. It was me," he said.  Dorta said he was spurred to make the call after a letter from For The Children, Inc. came into his possession that he claims said that schools were promoting homosexuality. 

When asked what he meant when he said Wilder would "be compelled" to take Parmly's letter off his web site, Dorta said he meant he would "bring enough pressure to bear" on the organization to have them remove the letter. 

Why didn't Dorta leave his name?  "There was no need for a call back," he said. 

The letter that Dorta wanted to compel Wilder to remove from the web site detailed Parmly's struggles with the Mount Mansfield School over a diversity day celebration. When a gay man was asked to make a presentation as part of the day's activities, Parmly, a school board member,  asked that an ex-gay also be included in the schedule.  Parmly believed his request was not treated fairly and wrote a letter complaining about this. In the letter he referred to homosexuality as a "deviant lifestyle," a comment which he subsequently said he regretted, on a radio show appearance with the editor of this newsletter. 

The letter is posted on the Forthechildreninc.com web site. Once its presence on the web site became known, the VTNEA president publicly complained and asked that it be removed. Dorta has said that he was not speaking for the VT NEA when he complained about the letter, but rather as a parent. The letter remains posted on the web site, but Parmly was publicly criticized by the MMU school board and some asked him to resign.

HAND THIS MAN A TOWEL

A disturbing  moment occurred in the gubernatorial debate when Republican Ruth Dwyer asked Governor Dean whether he feels it is more important to obey the Supreme Court than it is to obey the Constitution.  Dean had an answer that pleased the state's pundits.  In a nutshell, he said that the court's powers were enshrined in the constitution and that when the court found the state's marriage laws discriminatory, he had no choice but to obey. 

In other words, the court says "jump," and the guv says "how high?"

But what if the court had ruled the other way?  What if the justices had said "sorry, marriage is for one man and one woman."  Would he have stood back and shrugged his shoulders, said 'c'est la vie,' and moved on?  Or, would he have talked of civil rights and discrimination, and carried the banner for civil unions legislation in spite of the court? 

Hmmm…having a little trouble conjuring up that image? So are we.

There was something a little….Pontius-Pilate-like in Dean's answer to Ruth Dwyer -  "The court ruled, so it was out of my hands. Does anybody have a towel?" 

But the Supreme Court is not a supernatural body.  It's made up of men and women whose word is far from sacred.  It's not always the best word.  It's just the last one. And people are free to disagree with it. 

Heck, even the governor can disagree with the court.  He can then use his bully pulpit to enumerate the reasons why the court is wrong, and he can rally the people to overturn the decision through the appropriate process.  In this case, that would have required the beginning of the constitutional amendment process. 

But Dean even had a few Pilate-like words for that as well.  The amendment, he told Dwyer, was rejected in the state Senate by Republicans and Democrats. 

So there you have it, he can wash his hands of this nasty business once again (will someone PLEASE give this man a towel?).  He is free to speak loftily of bravery and progress and freedom all the while saying that "THEY (the court, the senate) made me do it." 

Anthony Pollina, on the other hand, spoke his mind when he declared what a shame it was the state had to wait for the court to chart the way.  Somehow, we can imagine a Governor Pollina condemning the court if they ruled the other way.  But Dean? That picture's still blurry…..

You might not agree with civil unions, but good ol' Tony has a point.  If The Deanster was such a gay rights advocate before the ruling, why wasn't he (or any of the other "courageous" legislators) speaking out for gay marriage last year or the year before, or lo, the other many years he has held public office? It's a question we seriously doubt we'll hear posed to him by any members of Vermont's Chattering Class any time soon.

KEEP THOSE ADS RUNNING

Vermonters for Civil Unions, a pro-CU PAC, has been running ads telling Vermonters they're akin to racists. 

The ads, which are airing in print and on radio, carry this message from former Governor Phil Hoff:  "When I was Governor of Vermont in the mid '60s, there were those who felt that African-American children from urban areas should be excluded from summer programs in Vermont…..Now, some Vermonters are saying loudly that committed Gay and Lesbian couples should be excluded from the basic civil rights available to most Vermont couples..."

What a strategy!  Insult those you are trying persuade. What Madison-Avenue guru came up with this idea?  That's why they pay them the big bucks, we suppose.

CENTRIST? DEPENDS ON WHERE YOU'RE STANDING

Vermont Press Bureau reporter Tracy Schmaler referred to the guv's health care policies as "centrist" in a recent report on candidates' health care positions.  Dean's health care policies "centrist?"  Well, maybe if you're standing in Cuba.  To some people, believe it or not, Ruth Dwyer's way is the middle way - less government intrusion, more marketplace pressure, more freedom to choose.  There are even some states in the U.S. of A. where Dean's proposals would be seen as downright leftist. And while we're on coverage of the candidates, Ms. Schmaler recently was seen on Vermont This Week remarking how it's number-crunchin' time for Pollina and Dwyer's proposals to see if they make sense. 

While you've got the calculator out, try crunching in these numbers: how many kids in the Bennington area will be unable to access Dr. Dynasaur programs because doctors there can't afford to take on these new patients with their low reimbursement rates? 

PRIMARY OPINION

Tired of reading about the Vermont primary?  If so, skip this story. 

Sure, there were few surprises. (Well maybe we did think Jan Backus, scrappy campaigner that she is, would win, but the crossover vote probably did her in).   Dwyer and Dean beat their challengers.  Some anti-civil union folks won, a few lost.   But the buzz in the GOP was the defeat of a couple of respected legislators who went down because of their support of civil unions. 

Even the venerable Barbara Snelling barely hung on to a sixth place spot on the Chittenden County Senate ticket. The loss of Peter Brownell in that race, and Snelling's close call have some GOPers walking around shaking the finger of accusation at those who worked against the two. 

But the coffee's been percolating for months now, ample time to wake up and smell it.  It should come as no surprise that Peter Brownell was defeated when he couldn't even muster a huge vote count at the state Republican convention in the spring when party members were asked to choose representatives to the national convention in Philadelphia.  Brownell came in 26th out of a pack of only about 31 (only the first 24 get to go). That should have been a "heads up" right there to those shaking their heads in dismay over his loss today.  There was plenty of time between that low vote and September to help Brownell move up.

Secondly, does the phrase "last straw" mean anything?  Our sense is that many of the Great Unwashed in the party were getting tired of being asked to put out lawn signs, volunteer at headquarters, come to fundraisers, make phone calls - in short, be loyal soldiers - only to have their leaders diss them after the victory and strike deals with their opponents. Good souls or not, Brownell and Snelling are not viewed as champions to the social conservative crowd. 

Which leads us to point number three: the social conservatives for the most part are not asking for the whole pie.  They just want a little compromise, a little give. It's the so-called moderates who often dig in their heels. Forget about overturning Roe v. Wade. How about championing something as pro-family as parental notification laws?  Forget about statewide voucher plans for now. How about charter schools or educational tax credits? And finally, they didn't expect the same-sex marriage issue to be decided without a lot of debate.  They did expect, and rightly so, that their representatives would treat their views with respect.

And that leads us to concluding point number four: the state's pundits might gasp behind their fluttering editorial fans over the loss of people like Brownell and Marion Milne and John Edwards on the Republican ticket.  But what we would like to celebrate is Vermont voters' good sense. 

The pro-civil union representatives who managed to hang on to their seats did not have, for the most part, credible opponents.  We heard a story, in fact, of one such opponent sending a fundraising letter out that urged people to give to him because God wanted them to. But a majority of Vermonters weren't willing to cast their votes for just anyone who espoused an anti-civil union view.  Vermonters chose to vote FOR candidates who have something to offer them.  Good for them.

"The primary put to rest the theory long espoused by civil union lobbyists and some wishful thinkers in the Montpelier press corps that their (civil unions opponents) movement was all bark and no bite. Sorry, folks, this is real."  --October 2 Monday Briefing

AND RELIGION IS SUPPOSED TO ...WHAT?

Anyone who thought that most religions strive to impart to their followers a sense of what is morally right and wrong should take a peek at the September issue of The Mountain Echo, the newspaper of the Episcopal Diocese of Vermont.  In it, Bishop Mary Adelia McLeod wrote the following:

"It is my hope that we, as a diocese, will continue to study and be in conversation around the issues of human sexuality... As our conversations go forward, it is my earnest prayer that each voice be heard, honored and respected. In addition it is my fervent wish that who is 'right' and who is 'wrong' will not have any place in our holy listening and conversation."

A WILD GUESS - DANZIGER DOESN'T LIKE GEORGE W. 

Here's a round-up of some of the famous cartoonist's drawings during early September. See if you can detect a pattern:

 
Sept. 2: cartoon making fun of GOP-backed estate tax cut
Sept. 4 (BFP): cartoon making fun of Bush campaign
Sept. 7: cartoon making fun of George W. Bush
Sept. 11: cartoon making fun of Bush campaign
Sept. 12 (BFP): cartoon making fun of Bush campaign
Sept 12 (RH): cartoon making fun of Bush campaign

But our personal favorites are the two cartoons that ran, respectively, in the Sunday, Sept. 10 Rutland Herald/Times Argus and the Sunday, September 17, 2000 Rutland Herald/Times Argus.  In both of these drawings (which - what a shock - make fun of state Republicans) GOP Gubernatorial candidate Ruth Dwyer is depicted WEARING A NEO-NAZI UNIFORM!  Uh…isn't this a little offensive…and a lot "uncivil?" Throw in a soupcon of "ironic" too.  One of those neo-Nazi cartoons appeared on the same page as an editorial about keeping Vermont civil.  Puh-lease.

OUT OF THE MOUTHS OF BABES

The following description of a diversity-training session for college freshmen was sent by the son of one of the editors and is used with his permission:

"We did what the diversity jargon calls a "target/non-target" exercise.  They bunch us up in a long row along one wall of the room. They call out various characteristics, such as 'people wearing glasses.' Those with glasses are now in the target group. They move to the other side of the room and stare at the non-target group while the non-target group stares back... Then they called for people who knew someone who had been killed by a handgun. And then it was 'who knows of someone who has committed suicide.' And then who knew a victim of cancer or AIDS. 

"...All of these things are incredibly traumatic for the unfortunate folks who suffered through them. I think it is amazingly insensitive for the organizers of this seminar to awaken these emotional issues yet again, when the participants in the program are already under all the stress that comes from moving into college, tired from lack of sleep, trying desperately to fit in with everyone else instead of highlighting their differences. On top of this to have memories of a horrible experience called back to mind?! And for what? So that the diversity office administrators can assuage their own guilt or make the people who have not had all of these experiences feel guilty because 'we can never really understand'?" 

IN CASE YOU MISSED IT: GORE SUPPORTS CU'S

On September 26th's Inside Politics, CNN's Jonathan Karl captured some of this exchange with student James Christie: "As a gay man, I can't fathom, and frankly I'm mad as hell, that why I don't have any guarantees to the kind of protections that marriage offers... You call yourself a champion of equal rights. Well, I'd like to know how you plan to protect my and my partner's rights to the benefits of marriage when I'm in a relationship."

Gore replied: "I favor legally recognized civic unions that have the legal protections of the kind that marriage confers. The most literate statement I've seen on this is by the Vermont Supreme Court, that said it is unfair to discriminate against gays and lesbians in this whole area of the law, and it ordered the legislature to come out with some approach to equalize the legal protections, and that's my position."
 
 

The Dwinell-Sternberg Report is published weekly by JDLS Publishing, LLC.

Contact the Editors with news and comments at: Dwinell@adelphia.net or LSternberg@aol.com or 802.862.5031 or 802.773.3740.

The mission of the Dwinell-Sternberg report is to give readers another view of the news that is refreshing, provocative and sometimes irreverent.