Perfect timing.Perfect storm.
Prop 8 trial reveals LDS interest in maintaining plausible deniability + Cindy McCain ad + CNN names “8: The Mormon Proposition” one of top five movies to see at Sundance:
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/vid…
Add Fred Karger to the mix and we’ve got our word maven word o’ the day: superfecta.  Four winners, four walls that will continue closing in on the Mittster.

Relevant testimony in Perry vs Schwarzenegger today….

B: What is this document?
S: This is a personal email from the chairman of ProtectMarriage effort. Recounts the financing of petition gathering phase of Prop 8 campaign.
B: From ronp-at-californiafamily-dot-org?
S: That’s Ron Prentice.
B: What’s notable about this document.
S: The part about the total costs.
B: Read that.
S: The total projected cost is $1.5 million. It has come from four primary sources: the Catholic community of San Diego, Fieldstead and Co., Focus on the Family, and small donations from ProtectMarriage.com.
B: What’s Focus on the Family?
S: A conservative Christian group.
B: Are they politically active?
S: Very.
B: Read this paragraph.
S: I serve as the CEO of the California Family Council… I serve as the volunteer coordinator for ProtectMarriage.com.
B: What strikes you about this?
S: Very early involvement of organized religion. And this was a national political campaign, leaders far and wide were involved in the effort, like Focus on the Family.
B: Where else would this kind of coalition emerge?
S: Maybe the pro-choice, abortion rights issue. I can’t think of a minority group going up against this kind of power.
B: Here’s a new document.
Pugno objects to the admission of the document.
Pugno: This is still under attorney’s eyes only. This is internal communication among the leadership of a particular church.
Boutros: This references the fact that the effort being discussed in this email is in concert with other religious groups about the ProtectMarriage.com coalition. I think it’s not subject to a First Amendment privilege. It was disseminated widely.
Pugno: Churches shouldn’t lose their ability to communicate within the church because they are working with other churches.
Walker: But this was in ProtectMarriage.com’s file.
Pugno: An individual in the organization… he was an individual in the church. This is a communication about Prop 8 (whoops!) among church officials…
Walker: But it relates to the Prop 8 campaign.
Pugno: It relates to the church’s support for Prop 8. This is an internal church communication.
Walker: This doesn’t fall under First Amendment privilege.
Pugno: No, we’re under a different field here. It’s an internal document.
Boutros: I don’t see how ProtectMarriage.com have standing to assert First Amendment privilege on behalf of the church.
Walker: He could on behalf of the defendant.
Boutros: OK, assuming someone with standing. I can direct the court to the first sentence….
Pugno: This shouldn’t be read aloud in court.
Boutros: It says it relates to the public affairs of the Prop 8 campaign. This was in the files of a person on the executive committee of ProtectMarriage.com. It’s hardly a sensitive religious tract that might be subject to protection under First Amendment.
Pugno: He was talking about the Public Affairs office of the LDS Church. That was a role that this individual played separate from ProtectMarriage.com. This is an internal communication of the church. It refers to Prop 8 effort. But unless there’s a communication that’s not internal, then this is a First Amendment right for Mr. Jansen (the defendant) to have this in this possession.
Walker: Mr. Jansen is a party to the litigation. The issue of his role in the campaign is very much an issue in the case. So it’s appropriate to read this document. Objection overruled.
Boutros: OK, read the first paragraph, Mr. Segura and explain significance.
Segura: Since the First Presidency letter was read in every ward throughout CA, I was asked what our Public Affairs role would be in the campaign.
B: Third graf?
S: As you know from the first Presidency letter, this campaign is entirely under priesthood direction – in concert with leaders of many other faiths… all of us working in Public Affairs will simply stand by and wait to be engaged as the time comes.
B: 5th graf?
S: What is the next step in this campaign? All grassroots organizing efforts in OC will be led by Gary Lawrence, who will report directly to ProtectMarriage.com coalition leaders. He has also been hired by the coalition to do the polling work for Prop 8.
Pugno objects again to Mr. Lawrence’s name being read. Walker knocks the objection down.
Pugno: Individuals have privacy rights to be involved in the campaign.
Walker: But this came out through other means. This was not a privileged communication.
Pugno: This reveals without opportunity to redact, a different role that he had which was not public.
Boutros: Mr. Lawrence was publicly associated with the campaign. Religious orgs participated in political debate, fine, but there’s no reason to keep the names secret because they’re associated with religious orgs.
Walker: This was a public political campaign. It was out in the open. People who advocate on either side inevitably subject themselves to disclosures of this kind. No privilege or protection in this document. Objection overruled.
Boutros: Finish reading that paragraph.
Segura: He has also been hired by the coalition to do the polling work for Prop 8. The main CA grassroots leaders are in the process of being called…. with responsibility for areas that generally correspond to each of the 17 LDS Coordinating Councils… Thereafter priesthood leaders will call Local Prop 8 coordinators over each stake and leaders by zip code within each ward – potentially working not only with LDS but non-LDS volunteers.
B: Significance?
S: There is close coordination here between church leaders and campaign. The other word here is “called.” There was an LDS volunteer in every zip code. That’s a very enviable political organization.

Romney Facebook pageask Romney on his facebook page to tell Mormons to back off
http://www.facebook.com/mittro…

Don’t forget the other Neanderthals… (with apologies to our cousins).
The catholic cult and the southern baptists like Obama’s buddy Rick Warren all played important parts in taking away our right to marriage. However none were as effective as Obama, who said that he was obeying divine wishes fighting to end our right because “gawd’s in the mix.” He galvanized the hate vote.
We should demand an end to the tax exempt status of all the cults and do all we can to support left wing alternaives to the sell out Democrats.  

Mormon Church’s anti-gay activitiesAs the Mormon Church is an off-shoot of the Christain faith, why is it that they claim tolerance, but in practise they do the opposite?
Hypocricy in the extreme!

This will go to the USSCand they will rule that the material was priviledged

He gave Dems an excuse to vote against usand to give in to their bigotry.
If the champion of the “Audacity of Hope” could oppose SSM, and it was not part of the “Change you can believe in” then it made it that much easier to destroy our rights,

Tolerance is encouraging the spread of Momron influenceintolerance is opposing any of their beliefs and political agenda and ambitions