Sign Up to Receive Email Action Alerts From Issa Exposed
×

Days and Slights: This Week in NOM (Oct. 23 – Oct. 29)

NOM Exposed Right-wing

Cross-posted at Good as You

By Jeremy Hooper

Dear NOM Watcher,

Let’s start with the obvious. This week, there was one NOM story that vaulted above all other, going viral in ways that the more obscure NOM stories can’t always do. I’m of course talking about: That random post I did on NOM’s rhetorical use of the phrase “San Francisco values.” That one caught on like proverbial wildfire, didn’t it?

Just kidding. I’m actually referring to NOM’s unethical, arrogant, and, frankly, bizarre attempt to insert three-year-old 6A00D8341C503453Ef0162Fbe884C1970Dshots from one of then-candidate Barack Obama’s legendary campaign rallies into collages of their own organizational efforts, in hopes that people who visit NOM’s so-called “New Hampshire for Marriage” site would think they, as an organization, have an ability to drive “Yes we can!”-sized crowds. After I uncovered those duplicitous photos in a series of posts on Monday and Tuesday, the Internet went wild with that unique combination of uproarious laughter and appalled jaw-drops that we who follow this sort of thing know so well.

But actually, it wasn’t only the internet. MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow, in her own series of reports, noted NOM’s “Did they really think they’d get away with this?!“-style overreach. Then on Thursday, the Human Rights Campaign (the parent organization of this NOM Exposed project) issued an open letter to NOM’s Brian Brown, Screen Shot 2011-10-28 At 4.32.07 Pmin which HRC President Joe Solmonese called on the organization to “fess up” about “how far [NOM] will go to make people believe [NOM’s] pursuit – the denial of equal treatment under the law — is supported by New Hampshire voters and Americans in general.” These transcendent notices (and others) surely brought NOM’s typically deceptive work to whole new audiences. Yay for that!

That this one incident was able to connect with eyeballs (and in the process, connect so many dots about NOM and the habits of which we NOM Watchers are so accustomed) is a great testament to this work that you and I do in the name of equality!

 

So how did NOM respond to the attention, you ask?

In true NOM fashion, there has, to this point, been no apology for wrongdoing or even public acknowledgement of the obviously unethical practice. Instead, NOM staffers quietly changed the two offending images without comment. Only thing? In doing so, NOM actually upped the laughable failure even further, by posting replacement images that also had nothing to do with New Hampshire, the state they are purporting to represent. One of the shots comes from the New York marriage rally they held on the very day same-sex couples began marrying in the state, with NOM’s new image showing the largely bussed-in crowds that marched against other’s joy on that day. The other replacement shot was of a rally NOM held in St. Paul, Minnesota, which, last time I checked, is actually not part of the Granite State. Weird, because right alongside the offending images is the text, “NH for Marriage is a coalition of Granite State citizens committed to defending traditional marriage in New Hampshire.” One would think with pictures being as 1,000-words-loaded as they are, an organization purporting to speak on behalf of a certain state would see a need to show actual residents from there.

Then again, one would also think a group of American citizens who lead with their supposedly heightened values would see a need to treat their tax-paying neighbors equally. But I digress.

 

Okay seriously, back to that “San Francisco values” thing…

While no, my post on the subject didn’t get the same sort of attention, I do think it’s important to note NOM’s latest campaign in support of the discriminatory Screen Shot 2011-10-28 At 4.33.00 PmDefense of Marriage Act and against pro-equality Senators’ efforts to repeal it. NOM has taken to using the phrase “San Francisco values” whenever referring to the DOMA repeal effort, an attempted knock at both chief proponent Sen. Diane Feinstein (D-CA) and the moral character of a famously accepting American city. (*image at left comes from NOM’s “Defend DOMA” site)

I called the use of the phrase “telling,” because I believe it’s one of those things that might say so little, but at the same time speak volumes about the organization who pushes it. Because just think about it: We all know that NOM is willing to say or do just about anything, against just about anyone, so long as the end justifies (in their eyes) the means. This trite “San Francisco values” thing exemplifies this willingness. Here we have a rich and vibrant city with so much charm, character, and contribution, and an out-of-state group like NOM, in the cockiest of nature, wants to isolate values that it sees as nasty (i.e. the acceptance of same-sex couples’ civil rights) and pit those should-be no-brainer qualities against “real America”? That should outrage not only the residents of San Francisco, but anyone who is tired of the divisive games so common to the far-right “culture war” (a “war” that is itself a divisive label crafted by the far-right for divisive purposes).

 

Golding for Cindy

This week, NOM also upped its expenditures in the Iowa special election for 6A00D8341C503453Ef0154349F168B970C-21a state Senate Seat (District 18). NOM’s total in favor of Republican Cindy Golding is now approaching $30K — a sizable (and likely growing) sum for a single state race!

We’ll keep watching this race, as it is crucial to NOM’s plan of rolling back the benign, peaceful, wholly nontroversial marriages that have been bettering Iowa for over 2.5 years now. If Golding prevails, she has promised to put marriage before the whims of a public vote. Democrat Liz Mathis, on the other hand, is against such a popularity contest. Voters will have to decide between getting behind discrimination or getting beyond distraction

 

Back to New Hampshire for a sec…

NOM touted a “victory” this week in the Granite State. The NH House Judiciary Committee approved a measure that would take away the currently-legal right to marry in the state (a right that is just as benign, peaceful, and nontroversial as in Iowa) and regress it back to an even lesser form of civil unions than the state had before. The effort is, in a word: Cruel.

But don’t be fooled by even that step, as mean-spirited as it may be. All involved admit that even if they succeed with this, they will then move on to repealing rights in full, civil unions included, via a theoretical marriage amendment. The goal is zero recognition, in the ironically nicknamed “Live Free or Die State.”

These newest efforts — be they in New Hampshire, Iowa, New York, or any other equality state — are a whole new level of injustice. Yes, attempting to ban marriage in a state that doesn’t have equality is discriminatory and antithetical to American values. But attempting to take away marriage rights in a state where no one can verbalize any true harms at a time when so many true harms plague us, in every state and federally? It seriously keeps me awake at night knowing that kind of mindset still exists. Or worse yet: Knowing that groups like NOM actively cultivate it.

 

Those who can’t remember the past…

To stop these future awful efforts, we need to learn from the past. That’s why NOM Exposed Project Director Kevin Nix was this week so insistent on NOM Watchers following the info stream that’s coming out about the Question One battle we waged and lost in the state of Maine in 2009.

Kevin noted two things about what’s coming out now: “The campaign manager for their side in the 2009 Maine ballot fight admits a few key things. (1) All they have to do to win is create ‘doubt’ in people’s minds (i.e., it’s not really about persuading folks their position is the right one); and (2) The infamous NOM line about gay marriage leading to teaching the gay in schools is ‘not completely accurate.’ Kevin’s right to isolate and highlight the importance of stuff like this, because if we are going to win, we are going to have to become even better about knowing groups like NOM better than they know their own efforts. And I don’t mean just know them in an anecdotal, “Yeah, yeah, they talk about school books — now can we go have a cocktail?” sort of way: I mean we must truly KNOW what the organized marriage opposition movement is doing in this country to stop or chip away at our existing rights, as well as UNDERSTAND how and why they are doing it.

It’s not the only way we will win, because equality is inevitable. But if we want to win sooner, we will become total geeks at this stuff. Because trust men, I know one thing, without a shred of doubt: The other side is certainly doing their homework on us! We must be as even more committed, as we are the ones with tangibles to lose. To stop such losses, there is no better place for us to focus than NOM, the siphon through which the other side is now agreeably funneling any and all marriage efforts.

 

Until next week, authentic photo fans,

-Jeremy

15 Comments

  • 1. MichGuy  |  October 30, 2011 at 7:26 pm

    Christian university asks staff to sign form stating they're not gay
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2055482/C

  • 2. AnonyGrl  |  October 30, 2011 at 7:56 pm

    When looking at the pictures NOM uses… something strikes me as funny that I am sure was really not intended that way by NOM. On the flyer for Cindy Golding, the one that uses the scales, does anybody else notice that the scale tips in the direction of Liz Mathis? Doesn't NOM realize that the side of the scale that goes DOWN is the winning side, the one with more weight to it, the one you want to be on?

    Really, NOM, have you ever gotten ANY campaign right? I mean, EVER? The Gathering Storm debacle. Carrie Prejean. Fake families pictured on your bus. Bus tour attendance dwarfed by protester attendance. MM4M (I can't even remember what you wanted that to stand for, all I see is the personal ad code for a married man looking for a gay hookup). Roy McDonald, you're fired! Mark Grisanti, you're next! Tim Pawlenty on your bus for a week, then promptly leaves the race. Marriage pledge says homosexuality=slavery, and yet Republicans sign it. Let the people vote in NY!

    Do you ever get ANY of them right?

  • 3. MichGuy  |  October 30, 2011 at 8:13 pm

    Gay U.S. Airays flight attendant found murdered in Mexico City hotel http://www.lgbtqnation.com/2011/10/gay-u-s-airway

    School filtering gay, transgender sites goes to court http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-205_162-20126783/scho

    Antigay Activists Lose Chicago Gay Games Protest Lawsuit http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/10/0

    Little Alaska Property Tax Case Threatens Opposite-Sex Marriage Rights (This is an odd case) http://lezgetreal.com/2011/10/little-alaska-prope

  • 4. Jenny  |  October 30, 2011 at 8:17 pm

    This would be funny except I was at that rally in Columbus and one of those tiny people dots being used to represent anti-marriage equality is probably me. I'm not too thrilled about that….

  • 5. g u e s t  |  October 30, 2011 at 10:55 pm

    Senator Feinstein spells her first name with two "n"s, "Dianne", not "Diane".

  • 6. Bryce  |  October 31, 2011 at 12:45 am

    I was re-re-re-reading the order that stayed the release of the videos in the Prop 8 appeal, and set the schedule, and there is something about it that confuses me.
    So, it says that each side will have 30 minutes to argue, and that–unless otherwise argued–each party/intervenor will get an equal share of the time. So, let's say–for the sake of argument–that there is no objection to that. On the appellee side that would mean: Plaintiffs get 10 minutes, San Francisco gets 10 minutes, the media coalition gets 10 minutes. On the appellant side the State of California gets 15 minutes and Cooper & Co. get 15 minutes.
    To this point, the State has not used any time in court, but since the 2010 election they have stepped up the filing of briefs. Will they take their 15 minutes? If they did, and argued for us it would leave 45 minutes total argued for release, and 15 minutes argued against it. And how will the 30 minutes for appellees be distributed? I don't think anyone knows, but it's kinda fun to think about
    Thoughts?

  • 7. Bryce  |  October 31, 2011 at 12:48 am

    Also, did anyone else see that the Doe v. Reed appellants lost their bid to an injunction pending appeal? Sa-weeeeeet!

  • 8. Gregory in SLC  |  October 31, 2011 at 5:39 am

    …and Vota Tus Valores Bus, translation = throw away your values
    http://www.prop8trialtracker.com/2010/09/27/day-o

  • 9. Gregory in SLC  |  October 31, 2011 at 6:10 am

    The policy may be legal but they are fooling themselves if they think this will prevent any gay person from working there…doh!

  • 10. AnonyGrl  |  October 31, 2011 at 6:39 am

    You are right… I forgot that one!

  • 11. Steve  |  October 31, 2011 at 7:23 am

    Or anyone from drinking alcohol. It will just cause people to lie and deceive each other

  • 12. Gregory in SLC  |  October 31, 2011 at 7:25 am

    agree!

  • 13. Sheryl_Carver  |  October 31, 2011 at 7:55 am

    I find the Alaska case quite fascinating. Talk about unintended consequences! Wouldn't it be interesting if SCOTUS found that, yes, states CAN enact No-Same-Sex-Marriage laws & amendments, but if they do, then Opposite-Sex-Marriage becomes illegal & unrecognized, too. Oopsie!

  • 14. Ronnie  |  October 31, 2011 at 8:34 am

    Subscribing & sharing…….

    Sex and the City's Mario Cantone Weds Longtime Partner: http://www.advocate.com/News/Daily_News/2011/10/3

    Mario Cantone, the actor-comedian best known as Sex and the City's Anthony, married Jerry Dixon, his partner of 20 years, reports Us Weekly.

    The wedding of Cantone and Dixon was presided over by Jay Bakker, son of the late Tammy Faye Bakker Messner. Cantone made the announcement last Friday during an appearance on ABC's The View. He told co-host Joy Behar that he married for a reason similar to hers, saying "We're older now. We've been together 20 years. After 20 years you're like, 'Thanks for the anti-climactic honeymoon government!'"
    Cantone also said of his new husband, "I love him. He's a good man." He also discussed plans for their first Halloween as a married couple, saying they're going to stand outside their apartment building "and hand out scones to all the children."

    (me) Awe!!!…. Congratulations to the happy couple….. Scones?….MMMMMMM…

    & today's 2011 LGBT History Month Icon….

    “As gay young people, we are marginalized. As young people who are HIV-positive and have AIDS, we are totally written off.” ~ Pedro Zamora, born into poverty in Havana, Cuba, the youngest of eight living in a small house with a dirt floor. He, his parents, & two of his siblings immigrated to Florida when he was 8yo as part of the Mariel boatlift. He was an AIDS Activist & reality personality appearing on MTV's "The Read World". He was the 1st openly gay & openly HIV+ person on a TV series. The day after the final episode of his season aired, Nov.11,1994, he passed away. Read more about him here: http://www.lgbthistorymonth.com/pedro-zamora?tab=

    <3…Ronnie:
    [youtube vy4qi5csoqY http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vy4qi5csoqY youtube]

  • 15. Michael in SF  |  October 31, 2011 at 12:28 pm

    I think it would be quite amusing to make a series of t-shirts that say "San Francisco Values" on them with images that represent real San Francisco values, like equality, peace, justice, etc. Or maybe benign local things like Levi's, Rice-a-roni, Twitter, Giants, 49ers or something.

    I wonder what people here would put on a San Francisco Values t-shirt?

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