Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed

VIDEO: NOM sinks $235,000 into TV/radio ad buy targeting Iowa Supreme Court

NOM Exposed Right-wing Videos

Check out the TV ad below and read Jeremy’s post. $235,000 is a lot money, given Iowa’s small media market. — Eden

(Cross-posted at Good As You)

By Jeremy Hooper

NOM is all kinds of proud to partner with the Sandra Day O’Connor-misrepresenting group “Iowa For Mob Rule” “Iowa For Freedom.” Here’s Brian Brown’s latest e-blast, promoting the majority tyranny coalition’s latest TV spot:


Perhaps the biggest waste of 200+k in American political history! Because first and most obviously: The attempt to use this one UNANIMOUS decision against these three justices simply because the findings don’t jibe with certain LGBT-hostile religious beliefs is a major threat to the nature of the fair and independent judiciary.

But beyond just that: Even if the anti-equality crowd was to remove the three (or even all seven) judges, the chances of them finding a majority of replacements that will go the faith-based, anti-LGBT way is slim to none (and growing slimmer every day). Because in any given state Supreme Court appointment, the three potential justices who are delivered to the governor are selected by a nominating commission. Seven members of that commission are indeed appointed by the governor, but they must then be confirmed by the senate. The other seven members are attorneys elected by the state bar association. And of course the nominating commission culls their three possibilities from those who have demonstrated the merit needed for the job, not the partisan politicking that NOM and Iowa For Freedom would like to see.

So the point: There are so many parts of this process that are completely out of NOM and Iowa for Freedom’s control. Sure there are some partisan elements, due to the governor’s role. And ultimately the governor’s office, which could possibly turn GOP in the election, gets the final say in who gets the appointment. But Iowa’s process is not a partisan election where interest groups can easily sneak in seven ideologues via the deceptive campaigns that they call normalcy! Firing these three won’t mean that Maggie Gallagher gets the job by default. Rejecting their accurate assessments won’t change said accuracy.

What NOM/Iowa For Freedom (and their more silent partners at AFA) really wants is an overhaul of the constitution. And not just a marriage amendment, which courts will ultimately roll back. At the end of the day, what these folks want is a newly written document that grants heterosexual, faith-based superiority. Fortunately, the constitution’s retention is not up for a public vote this November. At least not directly.


*Oh, and just a reminder (because it can’t be stated enough): “Liberal activist” Marsha Ternus was already appointed by the man who could be Iowa’s next governor: Terry Branstad, Republican former governor and current GOP nominee to retake the governor’s office. (*check bottom of this post to read what Brandstand said about Ternus back in ’93)



  • 1. Lesbians Love Boies  |  September 16, 2010 at 7:33 am


  • 2. Bob  |  September 16, 2010 at 7:40 am

    better not be using tax free dollars

  • 3. Lesbians Love Boies  |  September 16, 2010 at 7:41 am

    The video had to cost about $300-400 to produce (it's pretty amateurish).

    I'd be interested in how many times, when and where it's airing for that amount of money. At least someone is getting rich off of NOMs failures.

  • 4. Ann S.  |  September 16, 2010 at 7:45 am

    Subscribe me, baby.

  • 5. Kate  |  September 16, 2010 at 7:50 am

    Is Justice O'Connor actually going to let them get away with this?????

  • 6. Teddy  |  September 16, 2010 at 7:51 am

    When will NOM learn that we Iowans don't give a damn about them? Seriously, most people in Iowa support same-sex marriage rights. You already lost in the Heartland, so please accept our religious freedoms and civil rights. That's Iowa's core value and motto, after all: Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain.

  • 7. Mark M. (Seattle)  |  September 16, 2010 at 7:56 am


  • 8. Kate  |  September 16, 2010 at 7:59 am

    That is a terrific motto; must be the best one of the 50.

  • 9. Ann S.  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:00 am

    For your amusement, the latest homespun filing in Perry v. Scharzenegger. Robert Wooten wants to file an amicus brief. Isn't that cute? It would be if he weren't so misguided.

  • 10. Ronnie  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:00 am

    Once again NOM shows how non-Christian they are….the only thing they care about is destroying innocent peoples lives & American Freedom…Brian Brown & Maggie Gallagher should be prosecuted as accessories to murder for the deaths of Baby Ray, Billy Lucas, Justin Aaberg, Lawrence King, the 30+ murders of innocent LGBT people in Puerto Rico in that last 8years , & more…..They should be tried for crimes against humanity, violating the constitution & the law….We should bring about a nation wide class action lawsuit against them…end their tyranny once & for all…..We the people means ALL the people not just Fascist trash like Brian Brown & his un-American ilk…. > I ….Ronnie

  • 11. Kate  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:00 am

    Ann, how is it that people can just file this stuff? So ANYONE can file whatever they want in any case???

  • 12. Michelle Evans  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:07 am

    I'm sure that they understand that ousting these three judges won't directly accomplish their task. What it does do–in their eyes–is to send a clear message of fear to every other judge who would vote for our equality. What they want is for the judicial branch to be as afraid of them as the legislative branches in many states already are. It has been shown in places like New York and New Jersey that the fear they inspire does shut down the process.

    Fear and Intimidation are the only things they have on their side, so they will brandish those things as broadly as they possibly can.

  • 13. Kate  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:09 am

    And the bible is "beyond the reach of the courts?" Theocracy, here we come.

  • 14. Owen  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:10 am

    Hopefully this is as futile as their failed attempt to influence the primary for D.C. city council in Ward 5.


  • 15. Steven  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:16 am

    OMG I hope Iowans won't buy into these lies from NOM.. I can't wait till tomorrow when files their briefs………

  • 16. fiona64  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:19 am

    I think that "Robert Wooten" should not be allowed to file diddly-squat unless and until he can spell the name of both parties in the case.


  • 17. fiona64  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:21 am

    Back in my theatre days, we did a little Meredith Wilson show called "The Music Man." As I recall, one of the songs was all about how Iowans didn't like outsiders coming in and telling them how to run the show. The lyrics were as follows:

    Iowa Stubborn

    Oh, there's nothing halfway
    About the Iowa way to treat you,
    When we treat you
    Which we may not do at all.
    There's an Iowa kind of special
    Chip-on-the-shoulder attitude.
    We've never been without.
    That we recall.
    We can be cold
    As our falling thermometers in December
    If you ask about our weather in July.
    And we're so by God stubborn
    We could stand touchin' noses
    For a week at a time
    And never see eye-to-eye.
    But what the heck, you're welcome,
    Join us at the picnic.
    You can eat your fill
    Of all the food you bring yourself.
    You really ought to give Iowa a try.
    Provided you are contrary,
    We can be cold
    As our falling thermometer in December
    If you ask about our weather in July.
    And we're so by God stubborn
    We can stand touchin' noses
    For a week at a time
    And never see eye-to-eye.
    But we'll give you our shirt
    And a back to go with it
    If your crops should happen to die.

    So, what the heck, you're welcome,
    Glad to have you with us.

    Farmer and Wife:
    Even though we may not ever mention it again.

    You really ought to give Iowa
    Hawkeye Iowa
    Dubuque, Des
    Moines, Davenport, Marshalltown,
    Mason City, Keokuk, Ames,
    Clear Lake
    Ought to give Iowa a try!

  • 18. Lesbians Love Boies  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:22 am

    lol … I didn't need to know about protect marriage filing their briefs tomorrow. Now I will be hooked again reading, conversing and waiting ; )

    I think Iowans are smarter than the NOMbies think.

  • 19. pgbach  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:27 am

    NOM obviously doesn't understand Iowans. This is not a cause that is going to move them. Iowa has a long history of being a leader in social justice.

  • 20. Leo  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:30 am

    Will anyone even rule on this motion? The parties have already consented to all amicus briefs in advance, and you don't need a motion if you have consent of the parties. (But Robert Wooten probably doesn't know that.)

  • 21. Ann S.  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:31 am

    Pretty much, if meets the requirements for paper size, headings, etc., and they pay the fee.

    Access to courts is a good thing, yo. It shows us how crazy some folks are, for one.

  • 22. Cat  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:33 am

    Why does Brian keep using that portrait of his in these letters? It just screams "my smile is as fake and ill-conceived as the words that come out of my mouth", and "I'll say anything to get your money into my pocket".

  • 23. Joel  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:36 am

    I LOVE that musical. It opened on Broadway the year I was born. In the movie, Harold Hill says something along the lines of "if you keep saving up tomorrows, all you'll end up with is a whole heap of yesterdays". Forgive the paraphrasing, I haven't watched the movie in a while.

  • 24. fiona64  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:36 am

    'Cause someone told him that his portrait from the used car dealership office could "totally be used again."

    Sort of like a bridesmaid's dress.


  • 25. bJason  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:37 am

    Animaniacs RULE!!

  • 26. bJason  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:39 am

    SPOT ON!

  • 27. Ronnie  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:40 am

    Because he's a narcissistic f@#k who is obsessed with himself…similar to that of Hitler, Stalin Mao, & Castro….<3…Ronnie

  • 28. nightshayde  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:41 am

    LOL — but shouldn't that be "NARTH" at the end?

  • 29. Mouse  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:41 am

    No, we should not.

    Freedom of speech is one of our most precious freedoms and must be protected. It is precisely when we encounter deplorable people like Brian Brown and Maggie Gallagher who use that freedom to spout forth horrible hateful things that we must protect it the most.

    It would be so easy to say, "See this? See what happens? This filth, this scum of the earth, THIS is what you get when you allow freedom of speech." So easy to justify carving out special circumstances of the sorts of horrible things one could use their freedom to say, things that obviously deserve to be punishable for saying… and then we've all lost that freedom.

    Because once we silence people like Maggie and Brian who deserve to choke on their hateful words, we open the door for other Maggies and other Brians to silence US for being what they don't want to hear about.

    So, no. The constitution protects them, too, regardless of how undeserving of that protection we might think them to be.

  • 30. Richard A. Walter (s  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:42 am

    This really does NOT surprise me. Just like Inhofer, the only time NOM wants the majority opinion on ANYTHING is when it is just as bigoted as their opinion is.

  • 31. Mouse  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:42 am

    Pet rocks are smarter than the NOMbies.

  • 32. Steven  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:44 am

    I hope you are right.. they said, samething about Prop 8's outcome. CA wouldn't vote against equality.. but it has been 19 months since their decision when Iowa votes on renewing their terms…

  • 33. AndrewPDX  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:52 am

    d'oh!!!! You are soo right, nightshayde… I'm kicking myself for missing that additional reference.

    Liberty, Equality, Fraternity

  • 34. Ronnie  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:52 am

    Unacceptable…the way they use free speech enables murder & they should have to pay for that….They are taking away our free speech by denying us our right to say "I do, this is my husband/wife, I am married", etc

    They are destroying the Constitution…they might as well just spit on it……They should be held accountable for their actions…NO JUSTICE NO PEACE!!!!!

    >I …Ronnie

  • 35. bJason  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:54 am

    Heretofore unseen secret video of Brian at home after a long day:

  • 36. JonT  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:56 am

    Send me more packets of love.

  • 37. Kate  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:58 am

    I am giving no Woots to Wooten.

  • 38. Leo  |  September 16, 2010 at 8:59 am

    I'm kind of looking forward to his actual brief, where he will explain exactly where the word "homosexual" is defined in the bible.

  • 39. AndrewPDX  |  September 16, 2010 at 9:00 am

    So… NOM's Summer Tour of Discrimination made two stops in Iowa:

    Des Moines, IA (8/1): 298 equality supporters, 86 NOM supporters
    Sioux City, IA (8/3): 64 equality supporters, 54 NOM supporters

    That's 362 Equality supporters vs 140 pro-discrimination folks — 72% of the turnout was for Equality. And NOM has the gall to talk about 'Activist judges overturning the will of the people'?!!!?!

    Doesn't NOM learn anything?

    Liberty, Equality, Fraternity

  • 40. Ann S.  |  September 16, 2010 at 9:00 am

    Given how many LOLs just this motion gave me, the brief should be a laff riot, and I'm looking forward to it.

  • 41. JonT  |  September 16, 2010 at 9:01 am

    Hehe, yeah – I love the names these people choose for themselves.

    It's like if the KKK renamed themselves to: 'The Kute Kittens Klub' in order to seem more 'mainstream'. With some of the dumb-asses out there, it'd probably work.

    Freedom. Uh huh.

  • 42. MichGuy  |  September 16, 2010 at 9:05 am

    Current Language in the DADT repeal Law is found here :…

  • 43. Sagesse  |  September 16, 2010 at 9:07 am

    Luv Pinky and the Brain…. life lessons :).

    Great parody.

  • 44. MichGuy  |  September 16, 2010 at 9:10 am

    UPDATE: Wyoming couple drops gay marriage lawsuit

    I am sure glad they decided to drop their lawsuit because I truly believe that due to their background they would not have been the "IDEAL" plaintiff's.

    They seemed to have a laundry list of criminal convictions and pending criminal charges for all kinds of questionable stuff. And they had no attorney's to represent them in court so they were representing themselves

  • 45. JonT  |  September 16, 2010 at 9:13 am

    Ha! I loved that movie.

  • 46. Mouse  |  September 16, 2010 at 9:15 am

    Doesn't matter that they wipe their fat asses with the Bill of Rights, those rights still protect them, too.

    Even if the majority of voters don't think it should.

    They haven't taken away our right to say "I do." We can still say it. In a church or place of worship of our choosing. Before friends, family, religious leaders, and any gods, goddesses, and imaginary friends we believe in. They have done NOTHING to rid us of our freedom of religion to have a religious ceremony marriage performed – all they took away was the non-religious secular recognition of that; and as this whole case was about, Judge Walker told them what amounts to, "You're a bunch of small-minded, hateful little people and your opinion about the fundamental rights of your fellow Californians is irrelevant to constitutional law. Run along, now."

    I agree with you that they are horrible people, that they are not even a little bit Christian (if Jesus wasn't 2000 years dead and were around to hear the garbage people like them do in his name, he'd call them out and shame them for it), that there are millions of better uses for the carbon that makes up their bodies than what the world gets with them… but none of that change that if they want to devote their lives to publicly demonstrating their stupidity and their hatred for gay people then they have the right to do so.

  • 47. John B.  |  September 16, 2010 at 9:16 am

    What NOM really wants is to flex their political muscle to show that they are still relevant. If they can get even one one of these justices voted off the bench, it will be a huge coup for them and we will never hear the end of it.

    Not to mention it would distract everybody from their total failure to affect the DC city council primary elections this week, when they couldn't get their Ward 5 candidate (Delano Hunter) elected even after he was endorsed by the Washington Post (the Post assuring us he wasn't a homophobe, although he supported a referendum on marriage equality, took money from NOM, attended their rallies, and benefited from the money they spent on his behalf for their homophobic mailings and robocalls):

  • 48. Sagesse  |  September 16, 2010 at 9:21 am

    It would be really great if the good people of Iowa, who frown on outsiders like NOM messing in their business, just trounced the NOM-backed position this election. And if independent mid-western Minnesota wanted to do the same thing, that would be good too.

  • 49. Richard A. Walter (s  |  September 16, 2010 at 9:21 am

    We have four dogs–a beagle, a cocker spaniel, a poodle, and a Pomeranian, and any one of them is smarter than the entire realm of NOMbiedom combined!

  • 50. Ronnie  |  September 16, 2010 at 9:34 am

    Then we have the right to defend ourselves against their hate both in public & in court….oh but they don't believe that…they say we have no rights…we are not entitled to anything in the constitution or what the government gives them unless we live our lives exactly how they want us too..Well I say NO MORE!!!!….F@#K Shoes….I can fling them too…& I hope one knocks Brian Brown right in his head…knock some Armani sense into his dense little skull….<3…Ronnie

  • 51. Richard A. Walter (s  |  September 16, 2010 at 9:49 am

    Ronnie, don't waste a good Armani on Brian Brown. Go to Wally World and buy a cheap imitation!
    ♥ ♥ ♥ ♥ ♥ ♥ ♥

    Dopty Daddy

  • 52. bJason  |  September 16, 2010 at 9:50 am

    @ Mouse:
    If Jesus were around today they would all snub their noses at that loud-mouthed hippie.

    THey know not what they do.

  • 53. JonT  |  September 16, 2010 at 9:53 am

    Ha! The 'money quote' in that article for me:

    '"If we defeat Harry Thomas," Brown said, "the lie that you can vote for same-sex marriage and there won't be consequences will be done away with."

    So Mr. B, since you failed at that task, I assume that by your logic, that now means that you can, in fact, vote for marriage equality and still win elections.

    I think the lesson for BB is that in DC, you can't be a bigot without suffering some consequences. Heehee. Delicious. :)

  • 54. bJason  |  September 16, 2010 at 10:01 am

    Yeah. The word genius gets thrown around too much. The "Les Miserables" echo in the South Park Movie pretty much wrapped it up for me.

    Sorry. Had to find, watch and post (NSFW):

  • 55. Ronnie  |  September 16, 2010 at 10:07 am


  • 56. bJason  |  September 16, 2010 at 10:43 am

    Good night, all!

  • 57. sue jeffers  |  September 16, 2010 at 11:00 am

    so if all of iowa already agreed with them, why do they have to spend a 1/4 million dollars on propaganda?

  • 58. Ray in MA  |  September 16, 2010 at 11:15 am

    Fiona, I couldn't resist … (I love this sutff)

  • 59. Tomato  |  September 16, 2010 at 11:17 am

    "They are taking away our free speech by denying us our right to say “I do, this is my husband/wife, I am married”, etc"

    No, you can do it anyway.
    I refer to myself as married, I have a wife.
    My church married us, our minister performed the ceremony. In the eyes of our church and all members of our faith, we are married.

    Own the words. Use the words. "Partner" is so anemic. Tell it like it is, tell the truth: HUSBAND. WIFE. FIANCEE.

  • 60. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  September 16, 2010 at 11:19 am

    Thank you Fiona for posting πŸ˜€

    I've sung this song MANY times since Iowa expanded their marriage rights! I memorized this song in in the mid 1970's when I was in Jr. high musical and have not forgotten it since!

  • 61. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  September 16, 2010 at 11:20 am

    Yay Ray!

  • 62. Tomato  |  September 16, 2010 at 11:25 am

    I would love to see a video of Iowan grandparents talking about how marriage has allowed them to have grandchildren in their lives, with all the legal rights children need. Thanking the justices.

    Skipping a generation and pointing out that it's not just the gay folks who benefit from equal marriage in Iowa. Grandparents benefit, too.

    We need to show the full impact on ALL the generations of Iowans of the decision made by the justices.

  • 63. Ray in MA  |  September 16, 2010 at 11:26 am

    I read it. What a piece of crap… headed for the circular file.

  • 64. Mark M  |  September 16, 2010 at 11:31 am

  • 65. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  September 16, 2010 at 11:35 am

    What the Hell!? I watch the video a few times and can't make any sense of it! *shaking head in bewilderment* Who is the target audience? Very very strange and remarkably pointless. Seems like an attempt by Brian to "do something" so can justify his salary…

  • 66. Bryan  |  September 16, 2010 at 12:06 pm

    …So if you don't let us f*ck this a$$hole… we're gonna have our dicks AND our pussies… all covered in shit….

    I love how just…perfectly well that fits with Brian.

  • 67. Ray in MA  |  September 16, 2010 at 12:06 pm

    OT, but…

    To Gregory: My HS did elaborate musicals with hired professional orchestras and professional sets/costumes… from a young age I saw my older siblings participate in them… Showboat, Oklahoma, The King & I, Hello Dolly… I got to particpate in the stage crew for Mame. Loza people thin they were so corny,,,the music has stayed with me all my life.

    I can't resist (again)… here's Judy Garland with a tune from Showboat…

  • 68. Ray in MA  |  September 16, 2010 at 12:11 pm

    Maybe it was these musical that made me gay?!!??! LOL!

  • 69. Ray in MA  |  September 16, 2010 at 12:13 pm

    Lady GAGA, Eat your heart out!

  • 70. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  September 16, 2010 at 12:32 pm

    Ahhhhhh….Dear Judy G Lovely, Lovely! I hadn't seen that one Ray…thank you!

  • 71. Gregory in Salt Lake  |  September 16, 2010 at 12:32 pm

    rather "heard" that one πŸ˜‰

  • 72. Catherine  |  September 16, 2010 at 1:10 pm

    Yeah, except for those Civil War Amendments, suff-er-age and some of them there other amendment thingeys about equal protection and due process, the Constitution has absolutely nothing to do with civil rights. You dumb queers.


    Maggie and Brian

  • 73. Rich705  |  September 16, 2010 at 1:49 pm

    Wasn't NOM ordered by the courts to produce their donors list since they were acting as a PAC in both Maine and California?.. I mean who is paying for all this hatred to be spewed? Has there been resolution to the donor lists?

  • 74. AndrewPDX  |  September 16, 2010 at 2:41 pm

    How do you spell ‘Hypocrite’?
    β€œIowa For Freedom.”

    Freedom to remove the rights of others… just doesn’t sound quite so ‘free’ to me.

    –Gee, Brian, what do you want to do tonight?
    –Same thing we do every night, Louis – Try to take over the world!
    They’re dinky; They’re Louis and The Brian, Brian, Brian, Brian, Brian, Brian, Brian, Brian

    Liberty, Equality, Fraternity

  • 75. Michelle Evans  |  September 16, 2010 at 5:26 pm

    Yes, as I recall, even after the court ordered them to do it, they still have refused. They really don't care about the law and our justice system. Just like with voting away our rights, they feel they are above non-theocratic laws.

  • 76. Elizabeth Oakes  |  September 16, 2010 at 5:45 pm

    I'm having the same reaction *projectile blerfing* now that you mentioned Brian, Bryan.

  • 77. BK  |  September 16, 2010 at 9:55 pm

    I find it rather ironic that NOM claims to support the voters' right to decide on marriage, yet they haven't made one peep about those evil judicial activists who are imposing opposite-sex marriage on their citizens! I mean, come on! Let the people decide what marriage should be!


    I wonder if they would support gay marriage if the large majority of Americans did.

    O.o That was a wasted sentence, wasn't it?

  • 78. Straight Grandmother  |  September 16, 2010 at 11:16 pm

    That is a good insight Michelle

  • 79. Straight Grandmother  |  September 16, 2010 at 11:25 pm

    MichGuy, thanks for the info this has always been on the back of my mind. You often bring us pertinent info here, thank you for that. Musta been earlier int he week or last week even you posted something really interesting. I did up a reply post but forgot to put in my name and e-mail address so it got wiped out. Then I got a phone call or something and didn't go bakc and re enter it. You bring us good stuff for us to be aware of, thanks!

  • 80. Straight Grandmother  |  September 16, 2010 at 11:32 pm

    errrrr, yeah! That is why I am on here every single day unless I have an itnernet outage… I am fighting to be the legal grandmother to my 2 year old twin grandchildren. My daughter in law conceived with fertility clinic help using a sperm donor and my daughter is not equally recognized as the twins co-parent. That makes me a Stranger In Law to my own grandchildren. We msut all Fight, Fight, FIGHT to end this discrimination against GLBT people. It is nt jsut the couple themseves it is whole families on each side that are negatively affected.

  • 81. Straight Grandmother  |  September 16, 2010 at 11:35 pm

    As someone earlier ont his website commented, yes lets see who is under those white hoods over at NOM. Let's see the donors!

  • 82. Straight Grandmother  |  September 16, 2010 at 11:37 pm

    Sue, I dont' recall you posting previously or if you did perhaps it has been a while. Thanks for sharing.

  • 83. Regan DuCasse  |  September 17, 2010 at 12:51 am

    Hi Mouse,
    The very last sentence of your post is exactly what MG and BB have to heed. Anyone that's determined to compromise the tradition of protection of the Constitution for ALL citizens doesn't understand or appreciate it enough.

    These people will invoke THEIR Constitutional privilege in a heartbeat, while at the same time disregarding it as 'man's law' in defense of Biblical standards for a select few of people in this country.
    You speak wise words.

    WE have full respect for the Constitution and ALL of us benefit from it. MG and BB are the ones that need to learn that very important lesson.

  • 84. Regan DuCasse  |  September 17, 2010 at 12:55 am

    Excellent Michelle. But their activity echoes that of Nazis closer than any other I've seen in our century.

    If these ignorant creeps actually knew how segregationists and Nazis went about their dirty work, they should recognize it in themselves.

    I don't throw that analogy around lightly, nor care to evoke it casually. This is EXACTLY how the worst human rights violations were enable, initiated or maintained.
    And shame on NOM and their ilk for working so hard at repeating that process.

    They treat their targets, whether it's allies or their perceived enemies as monumentally stupid and insulated.
    And consider how they are confident people will buy their bullshit, and how many actually do…they ARE stupid.

  • 85. mackenzie  |  September 17, 2010 at 1:09 am

    That was my first thought too. We have ourselves a verifiable political add here. If they are a tax free org i am gonna have words to say about this one.

  • 86. Straight Grandmother  |  September 17, 2010 at 1:13 am

    I transposed the Iowa commercial.
    1. Activist Judges on Iowa’s Supreme Court have become political, ignoring the will of the voters and imposing same-sex marriage on Iowa.

    2. Liberal, out of control judges, ignoring our traditional values and legislating from the bench, imposing their own values on Iowa.

    3. If they can usurp the will of voters and re-define marriage, what will they do to other long established Iowa traditions and rights.

    4. Three of these judges are now on the November ballot.

    5. Send them a message. Vote NO on the retention of supreme court justices.

  • 87. Teddy  |  September 17, 2010 at 1:19 am

    I'd also like to point out that not only is Des Moines our biggest city and a progressive one (though less so than others in the state), but Sioux City is known to be a conservative stronghold. So they couldn't rally people in the middle of the state, and they couldn't get people in a conservative hub of the state. We win. :)

  • 88. Chris From CO  |  September 17, 2010 at 3:12 am

    You give all respect and love when needed. You are appriciated though i don't know you I come on this site to get updated and to see what Straight Grandmother has to say. Thank you.

  • 89. Hank (NYC)  |  September 17, 2010 at 3:16 am

    Have NOM ever produced for the courts the documents showing who donates all this money they spend? How do they keep operating above the law?

    They keep loosing these cases, but it doesn't seem they are ever forced to follow thru.

  • 90. VIDEO: Exposing NOM/̶&hellip  |  September 17, 2010 at 8:16 am

    […] September 17, 2010 (Cross-posted at Good As You. Also, read Jeremy’s post yesterday here on NOM sinking $235,000 into a TV ad buy targeting the Iowa Supreme Court) […]

  • 91. sue jeffers  |  September 17, 2010 at 9:28 am

    i don't comment here often, but have been reading since the site was born.

  • 92. boycott imperial cou  |  September 21, 2010 at 2:07 am


Having technical problems? Visit our support page to report an issue!