It’s a NOM eat NOM world
October 7, 2010
Community/Meta NOM Exposed NOM Tour Tracker-California Right-wing
By Adam Bink
A coupla things going on around and about in NOM news:
- P8TT friend Karen Ocamb reports that NOM is launching a new Spanish-language ad in California in support of Carly Fiorina:
In English:
“Our values make our people special.
Work. Family. Children.
Barbara Boxer doesn’t share our values.
She supports abortion and homosexual marriage…
…and voted against immigration reform to permit our people to come here legally to work.
We’ve had enough of her talk.
Carly Fiorina for US Senate. Our values. Our senator.”
NOM is spending $200,000 on the ad, which will air on Telemundo, Telefutura and Univision for one week in the San Diego, Los Angeles and Fresno markets beginning today. And hey, look what got a mention in their press release too:
The effort coincides with a $100,000 SBA List voter education effort including a Google ad campaign focusing on California Latino voters and a “Vota Tus Valores” bus tour sponsored by SBA List, NOM and the American Principles Project making 43 stops in Latino neighborhoods throughout the state.
Funny, because their original announcement said 42 stops, and they ended up with 38 because they skipped a few. We’ve got the Google cache to prove it.
- Comically and perhaps coincidentally, I see they also launched a one-week “moneybomb” aiming to raise $200,000 – two hundred thousand dollars – in just one week in response to the NOMExposed.org website HRC and Courage Campaign launched earlier this week (per the banner at the top of the page). It’s weird because the ask is all over the map. They write:
Our goal for the ExposingNOMExposed Money Bomb is to raise $200,000 in one week.
and then:
All of that will be doubled by our matching grant so you will have effectively raised $400,000.
and then:
All donations will be doubled up to $1 million.
Huh? And in their e-mail blast announcing this yesterday:
On Friday evening, we’ll let everyone know just how many people donated and how much money we raised. We have just three days left to raise $185,000 to reach our goal.
What?
- Highlights of last night’s debate between Maggie and Freedom to Marry’s Evan Wolfson can be found here. Maggie, as usual, said her signature line, “It is not discrimination to treat things differently.” Awesome. Evan made a great point here:
“When women began practicing law, there was no new word for lawyer, or change in what a lawyer was,” he said, likening the ongoing campaign for gay marriage to the women’s suffrage movement. “When they were allowed to vote, there was not change in the definition of voters.”
- Is it just me, or are you also disappointed that Brian Brown and all his nonsense backed out on coming to California? Maybe he decided filing another lawsuit to go around state disclosure laws was more fun than a sad, sad bus tour. Maybe he saw Vota Tus Valores averaged, what, 3.4 people per stop and suddenly came down with a bad case of shingles. What happened?
- The Washington Times profiles Hispanic voters for the upcoming election, and quotes Alfonso Aguilar:
“When conservatives reach out to Latinos and you have a candidate that is staunchly conservative on social issues but also has a palatable position on immigration, Latino voters will respond favorably,” he said.
Rubbing my eyes
Did he really just say “palatable position on immigration”?
Mr. Aguilar is finishing a 10-day bus tour in California trying to spur Hispanic support for Carly Fiorina, the Republican nominee who is trying to unseat Sen. Barbara Boxer, a Democrat. Mr. Aguilar said many Hispanic voters are pro-life and oppose gay marriage and are open to his pitch to back Mrs. Fiorina.
“The lesson for conservatives from that poll is if you reach out to Latinos they’ll respond favorably. Obviously, if you just go out with negative rhetoric on immigration and enforcement-only positions on immigration, you’re not going to do better,” he said.
Amusingly, the only comment on the piece as of 8 AM PST this morning (from user “3bdf9”) calls Alfonso out on his credibility:
For information on how wildly unsuccessful Mr. Aguilar’s bus tour was (our estimate, they talked to possibly a total of 75 to 100 Latinos on the total 10 day $1,000,000 tour) please check out Prop8TrialTracker.com. The entire Votabus tour from start to finish was documented by a Courage Campaign team on the ground that followed the bus from stop to stop. They would have just gone to the next announced stop on the tour, but the bus repeatedly varied from its schedule to go to restaurants, other locations, or skip stops entirely. They did not seem to have either permits, or permissions for any of the stops they announced, and as the tour progressed, they were turned away or thrown out of announced locations. Even the Spanish that was written on the bus was clumsy, using the wrong form of address, as though it had been written by non-Spanish speakers using an online free translator. The fiasco is documented with videos, pictures and first hand accounts.
69 Comments
1.
Kathleen | October 7, 2010 at 3:33 am
subscribing
2.
Ann S. | October 7, 2010 at 3:34 am
subsubscribing
3.
Alan E. | October 7, 2010 at 3:51 am
tertiary level subscription.
4.
JonT | October 7, 2010 at 6:56 am
quad-scribing?
5.
Lesbians Love Boies | October 7, 2010 at 5:49 am
Fashionably Late Scribing
6.
Jonathan H | October 7, 2010 at 6:11 am
Unfashionably late scribing
7.
Sagesse | October 7, 2010 at 9:27 am
Just late.
8.
Anonygrl | October 7, 2010 at 3:43 am
FYI, that comment was MINE! 🙂
9.
Gregory in Salt Lake | October 7, 2010 at 3:45 am
YAY! WOOT!
10.
Ann S. | October 7, 2010 at 3:50 am
Go, Anonygirl!
11.
AndrewPDX | October 7, 2010 at 3:57 am
WTG Anonygrl!
Liberty, Equality, Fraternity
Andrew
12.
Phil L | October 7, 2010 at 4:42 am
That doesn't surprise me, seeing as it was quite well written and is entirely accurate.
🙂
13.
Ronnie | October 7, 2010 at 3:51 am
$200,000…could feed a lot of starving people & the children they are trying to "protect"…provide clothing & health care for those in need….pay for the house of an innocent Lesbian couple whose house was set on fire by a homophobic troglodyte…..well I may be reaching with that last one….NOM festers that kind of unacceptable behavior…… : I …Ronnie
14.
AndrewPDX | October 7, 2010 at 3:58 am
True… but as we have shown time and again, NOM et al really don't care about the children. They care about the money.
Liberty, Equality, Fraternity
Andrew
15.
Mark | October 7, 2010 at 4:30 am
NOM is launching a new Spanish-language ad in California in support of Carly Fiorina:
“Our values make our people special.
Work. Family. Children.
Barbara Boxer doesn’t share our values.
She supports abortion and homosexual marriage…
…and voted against immigration reform to permit our people to come here legally to work.
We’ve had enough of her talk.
Carly Fiorina for US Senate. Our values. Our senator.”
Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to all campaigns including campaigns at the federal, state and local level. Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Political campaign intervention includes any and all activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office.
IANAL, but it sounds to me as if NOM needs to have their tax-exempt status revoked.
16.
elliom | October 7, 2010 at 4:42 am
I believe NOM is a 501(c)4, which is allowed to do campaigning, but their daughter groups are 501(c)3s, which cannot.
17.
Anonygrl | October 7, 2010 at 4:31 am
On Friday NOM is going to let everyone know how MUCH they raised. They will not ever share WHO they raised it from.
18.
Bennett | October 7, 2010 at 5:15 am
$1,000,000 bus tour. Hmm. Mentally calculating the cost of diesel fuel, luxury accomodations, jelly beans, and souvenirs. Where's the change?
19.
Kate | October 7, 2010 at 5:19 am
My guess is that doesn't even include the cost of that very, very expensive custom bus.
20.
Bennett | October 7, 2010 at 6:25 am
Now that the tour is over, do they get to keep the bus for future vacations?
21.
Anonygrl | October 7, 2010 at 6:34 am
Really, the bus was not that expensive. Companies rent those fancy tour busses all the time… and the paint job is just a plastic wrap, printed on a giant printer, and applied to the bus, then sort of heat sealed on, like a giant shrinky dink.
Expensive, yes, but not as crazy as all that. And the Vombies don't own the bus when the tour is over, they return it to the rental company.
I would guess that part of the money goes to paying salaries and per diems to all those folks on the bus who have nothing better to do than ride around, sleeping if they don't have events. Those busses are pretty cool inside… 8 to 12 bunk beds with TVs and vcrs in each bunk, a seating area up front with upholstered couches, a kitchen with a sink and mini fridge and small range top and microwave and cabinets, a bathroom with a shower, either a "star" bedroom in the back with a queen sized bed or more seating area with tables and tv, depending on what is needed…
The bus driver also gets a nice salary, and those hotels were not cheap, although if WE were on tour in that bus, we'd sleep in the bunks which can be quite comfy…
Meals, internet, printing costs for the hundreds of thousands of flyers they handed out (LOL), disposal costs for those hundreds of thousands of flyers they did not hand out, rental and set up of the sound system under the bus, ummm…. incidental expenses ("Allegra! I forgot to bring a toothbrush!", "That's OK, Alfonso, I saw a gold plated one we can get at the spa."), fuel costs which run up when you leave your bus parked and running both at scheduled locations and random places you stop instead of going to your scheduled locations in order to be able to make quick getaways if either the Tour Trackers or police catch up with you, rental costs for the FLEET of matching white SUVs (who did they think they were transporting? The king of Denmark?), petty cash to pay homeless men from a shelter to come to your event to make it look populated, more petty cash to make a donation to a church group to get them to follow you around for a few stops for the same reason, speaking fees for soap stars who leave early on because they figure out what you are really on about, first class tickets to ship Dr.s of Economics in to screw up their own IRS tax statuses by admitting they are doing illegal campaigning… and mariachi music!
The costs add up!
22.
Bennett | October 7, 2010 at 6:40 am
Nice. And fully itemized. Thank you.
23.
Richard A. Walter (s | October 7, 2010 at 5:23 am
Is it just me, or are these people getting crazier and crazier by the second? Every word they speak shows how delusional they are.
24.
Judy | October 7, 2010 at 5:40 am
"Same Sex" Marriage? What Intersex Does to the Gay Marriage Debate
Thanks to all the hostility to gay marriage, it’s looking like judges in the U.S. are about to start on a learning curve now familiar to the International Olympic Committee. That’s because, to categorize people strictly into men and women—as both gay marriage prohibitions and sex-segregated sports require—you have to figure out for sure what makes a man and what makes a woman. And that ain’t simple.
In fact, the IOC has given up on what was once called “gender verification.” They’ve given up because they figured out what the U.S. courts apparently soon will: There isn’t any rational way to decide, in many cases, whether a person should count as a male or a female.
There are at least three dozen well-documented variations in humans that result in something called “intersex,” or non-standard male and female anatomy. Though the mythical hermaphrodite—fully male and fully female—is a physiological impossibility, some people with intersex conditions are indeed born with both ovarian and testicular tissue. Some are born with both an apparent penis and an apparent vagina. Some are born looking really female but with XY chromosomes, and some are born looking really male but with XX chromosomes. Some are all male, except for a small or even non-existent penis, and some all female except for a big clitoris.
But this is terribly rare, right? Wrong. How common you think intersex is depends on what you think counts as standard male and standard female. (For example, you have to decide how small a penis must be before it counts as non-standard, and that isn’t a scientific decision—it’s a social one.) But conservatively speaking, one in 2,000 children is born with notably “ambiguous” sex. Many more than that are revealed later to have a non-standard version of sex. To consider just one possible example, Klinefelter’s Syndrome (where a child is born with a Y chromosome and multiple X chromosomes) shows up once in every 500 newborn boys, and in over 3 percent of men seeking infertility treatment. A peer-reviewed article published by the American Journal of Human Biology in 2000 estimated that one in 100 people are born with non-standard sex anatomy.
The International Olympic Committee figured out the high frequency of intersex the hard way. Before the 1936 games, athletes were allowed to sort themselves out. But then Hermann Ratjen cheated by trying to pass himself off as a woman and, though Ratjen lost, he set Olympic officials off on a quest for the ultimate divider of males and females. First they tried genital exams, but that didn’t work so well. They found that a lot of athletes had confusing parts. (Intersex.) Then in 1968 the IOC turned to buccal smears for would-be competitors in female sports. The idea was to rout out anyone with a Y chromosome. That didn’t work well either; a number of women athletes had Y chromosomes because they were born with androgen insensitivity syndrome. (Intersex again.)
Now wait, you might say: why not insist those people with androgen insensitivity syndrome (AIS) were really men, and call it quits at the chromosomes? Because that wouldn’t make any sense! Women with complete AIS are women—they look like women, feel like women, and live as women. From birth on, they are identified by others and themselves as girls and women. And, in matters of sports, they are theoretically are at a natural disadvantage compared to women without Y chromosomes. That’s because though women with AIS are born with testes, and though those testes make testosterone, their bodies can’t “hear” the testosterone; that’s why they develop to look classically female (except they lack certain body hair). Meanwhile, XX women typically produce androgens (though less, relatively speaking, than the average man) and do have the receptors to hear them—so they have it easier, biologically speaking, than an AIS woman athlete.
For a few years, the IOC in fact did try to insist that AIS women were men; once they figured out which women had AIS, they tried to get them to give back their medals. But the medical establishment, to its credit, rallied around these women and explained the facts of biology—especially intersex—to the IOC. And so the IOC finally gave up gender verification.
Whether or not the medical establishment rallies to explain intersex to the U.S. courts remains to be seen. If history is any guide, as gay marriage prohibitions make their way through the courts, a scientific expert here and a medical expert there will offer up one little gene or one type of anatomical tissue that might be used as a male-female sorting mechanism. But such a sorting system simply won’t accord with what people see on the outside and feel on the inside. The fact is, every anatomical bit you think of as female (breasts, XX-chromosomes, even ovarian tissue) can be found on someone who has looked and felt like a male since birth. The opposite is also true. Think about it: if sex categories really were naturally strict, we wouldn’t see so many cosmetic surgeons offering men breast reductions and offering women facial electrolysis.
There is a historical precedent for the collision of intersex and gay marriage. As I documented in Hermaphrodites and the Medical Invention of Sex (Harvard University Press, 1998), in the late-nineteenth century doctors came across many cases of “homosexual marriage” cased by “mistaken sex” (intersex). A few of them quite actively tried to break up those marriages, marriages they considered “unnatural.” But in many cases, so far as I can tell from the record, love was stronger than medicine, just as nature is stronger than science.
Will intersex have to show up in the families of Congress before they wake up and smell the coffee? Oh wait; statistically speaking, it already has.
25.
Kathleen | October 7, 2010 at 5:49 am
Very interesting article. Just points out once again the difficulty of looking at the world in binary terms, whether it's in physiology, gender roles or any of the myriad other things our culture seems intent on so classifying.
26.
Sheryl Carver | October 7, 2010 at 5:59 am
Love it, elliom!
27.
elliom | October 7, 2010 at 6:00 am
Sorry, didn't mean to go OT.
It was either tell a joke, or have my head explode. And I can never pass up a bad math/science joke. :>
28.
Elizabeth Oakes | October 7, 2010 at 6:24 am
Yeah, what I've been sayin'. Do we deny people who aren't clearly one or the other the right to get married just because they don't fit neatly into a gender box? Anyone who wants to should be able to marry the person of their choice, no panty check required.
29.
Elizabeth Oakes | October 7, 2010 at 6:25 am
Elliom, this Sunday is 10/10/10, not just a huge wedding date for geeks because of the binary twos, but because it's also "42" in binary, the answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything. 🙂
30.
Lesbians Love Boies | October 7, 2010 at 6:41 am
I can hear the Feed Equality brains humming from Elizabeth's post…
10 : )
31.
elliom | October 7, 2010 at 6:46 am
EO: But we STILL don't know the question!
32.
elliom | October 7, 2010 at 12:52 pm
There are 10 types of ppl:
Those who understand binary
And those who don’t
:>
33.
Anonygrl | October 7, 2010 at 6:52 am
I have a very dear friend, who is male, and discovered only when he and his wife were having trouble trying to conceive a child that he is XXY.
As far as HE is concerned, he is male. He looks male, he has all the male parts. The sadness for him and his wife is that this condition renders him sterile, so no kids.
There is no real point to this story, except that he is male, despite anything his genetic chart may say, and I guess that the answer really has to be based on what the person in question considers themselves to be.
And if they consider themselves intersexed we need to find a way to make that another normal, acceptable gender, just as homosexuality is another normal, acceptable sexuality.
This world is certainly an interesting place, with all its variety!
34.
elliom | October 7, 2010 at 6:55 am
And the definitions we place on things are a matter of convienence. When you pick things apart, they don't really MEAN that much.
35.
Elizabeth Oakes | October 7, 2010 at 10:27 am
I agree, but that's going to take a while. Humans love simplifications and pattern-seeking–variations throw many brains into a tizzy, so any changing of the paradigm is going to be resisted.
That being said, another nice big lawsuit about intergender persons who want to marry would raise a lot of people's awareness right quick. I'm still thinking about that couple in TX that was able to get a marriage license in one county after another refused them because the documents declaring legal gender were at odds with one another. Government should get out of the genital business!!!
36.
Michelle Evans | October 7, 2010 at 11:20 am
Interestingly, people who are transgender, such as myself, are never officially considered intersexed. The definition is pretty exclusively limited to those people with some sort of ambiguous genitalia, or some variation, as talked about in the above article.
A trans person is someone who happens to have their brain wired the opposite of their physical gender. So people will often literally say that being trans is all in our head. But I would say that indeed my brain is wired female, and my brain is obviously a very physical part of my anatomy, so why would this not be considered as intersexed? Should it matter exactly which part of the physical body is gender incongruent?
Maybe if anyone who is trans was also considered as intersexed, people in general would have an easier time in trying to understand what this is all about, instead of constantly trying to label us (as NOM and so many others do) as being psychologically ill. This idea is reinforced by the fact that to be treated, we must still go by the DSM, instead of other standard medical texts.
37.
Ann S. | October 7, 2010 at 11:25 am
Thank you for your perspective, Michelle. I learn so much from you and all my other fellow Trackers. I fervently hope the mix-up over your marriage will be sorted out to your satisfaction, and soon!
38.
Elizabeth Oakes | October 7, 2010 at 11:33 am
Exactly, Michelle. All the more reason why basing marriage status on body parts is just stupid.
I add my wishes to Ann's that your marriage status problem gets sorted out quickly in your favor. What a freakin' nightmare…
39.
Joe | October 8, 2010 at 1:38 pm
Unfortunately a person's perceived gender and their physical appearance are so ingrained in society that it's hard to break out of that line of thinking. A friend of mine, born male, started the process of gender reassignment and it took a while for us to constantly refer to her appropriately.
One thing to think about though about the DSM and psychology, there are many things listed as disorders, including homosexuality (at least until the newest version IV). But even the things listed are only disorders under two main conditions, if the person can not cope with it, or if it prevents the person from functioning in society.
For example, in the Beautiful Mind, the main character, Nash, has schizophrenia. In the beginning it was a serious disorder, but once he found out how to cope, and was capable of functioning in society by the end, he still had it, but it wouldn't be considered a disorder anymore.
So pretty much anything can be a disorder, if the person cannot accept or cope with it, or if it prevents him/her from functioning. Just my understanding of the DSM and psychology mostly from talks with my psychologist dad.
40.
Rhie | October 7, 2010 at 5:43 am
Subscribing
41.
Straight Ally #3008 | October 7, 2010 at 5:56 am
They trot these points out every election, like clockwork. I can't wait for the Religious Right to lose their second go-to talking point. I'm positive that they will always be able to turn to the first one, no matter what, just as sure as I am that there will never be full prohibition of abortion, with the subsequent associated horrors of illegal abortions. The only way to make progress on the first point is good sex education for teens – I think both sides would favor a reduction in abortions arising from responsible behavior. But no, we can't teach the kids about sex. Then again…perhaps LGBT equality will make people less uptight about sex education? The future will be…interesting.
42.
Joe | October 8, 2010 at 2:35 pm
The first point is horribly misleading. I have met many pro-choice people, but I have never met anyone who is truly pro-abortion.
43.
Rhie | October 8, 2010 at 2:43 pm
I know, right? I want to see abortions become infrequent, personally but not through outlawing. I want to see better access to proper sex ed, birth control. I want to see better access to childcare and the close of the gender gap. i want to see better rape laws and better prosecution of rape and incest.
In short, I want to see abortion rare by attacking the reasons why women have them. I want abortion to be available in all 50 states up through viability, and the decision left entirely to the woman. THAT is pro-CHOICE.
44.
Sagesse | October 8, 2010 at 10:05 pm
@Rhie
Very well said. I will never describe my political stance as anything other than pro-choice. I have never had to use my choice, and am well past the age of using it for myself anymore, but I will work till I die to protect the choice of any woman who needs it.
45.
elliom | October 7, 2010 at 6:18 am
WAY OT…..
As NOM, et al continue to implode, I'd like to share some wonderful news….
Food for Thought: FeedEquality.org…the grass-roots food drive for equality born right here on these pages has 101 friends on Facebook.
Thanks Y'all! This is AWESOME!
46.
Anonygrl | October 7, 2010 at 6:55 am
Woo hoo!!! And we launch so VERY soon! Keep your eyes open, we are JUST ABOUT ready to go! Yay!!!!
47.
Bennett | October 7, 2010 at 6:32 am
http://action.billwhitefortexas.com/page/s/corrup…
Have a few minutes and a legitimate interest in Texas policits? I know most of yall are from Cali. Maybe you would want to sign this petition. Texas' current governor needs to go. He is basically "Marriage Equality? Not in MY Texas." And a very literal empahsis on the MY texas part.
48.
Kathleen | October 7, 2010 at 7:07 am
Bennett, does it help to have out of state people sign it? The petition asks for zip code. Be glad to sign if it will help.
49.
Bennett | October 7, 2010 at 8:31 am
Yes, out of state participation is needed as well. Thanks.
50.
Kathleen | October 7, 2010 at 8:34 am
Done.
51.
Kate | October 7, 2010 at 8:36 am
Ditto.
52.
Ann S. | October 7, 2010 at 8:36 am
Ditto also too.
53.
Elizabeth Oakes | October 7, 2010 at 11:06 am
I dooz it.
54.
Lesbians Love Boies | October 7, 2010 at 11:10 am
done
55.
Caitlin | October 7, 2010 at 1:08 pm
It's so nice to see NOM telling Latinos what their values are. Better a largely white group of Relgious Right bigots than, you know, actual Latinos.
56.
Joe | October 7, 2010 at 2:08 pm
"It's not discrimination to treat things differently". That stuck out to me as one of those half truths that sounds like crap when said. There is a way to treat something differently without discriminating, it's called deference, but something tells me showing respect isn't what she had in mind by treating someone differently.
57.
Sagesse | October 7, 2010 at 9:52 pm
“It’s not discrimination to treat things differently”
In the couple of months, I saw this phrase, or something very similar, quoted in an opposition court filing. I didn't make note of it at the time, figuring I'd be able to find it again, but the source was an old Supreme Court judgment. It may have been Koramatzu, the original strict scrutiny case in 1944. Can't locate it now.
It sounds as though Maggie and co. have lifted it without context. If the Supreme Court said it, preferably before 1980, and it supports our case, it must be true. I've also seen similar wording on Catholic websites. If there's a way to undercut the 'authority' for this particular argument (as well a shooting holes in the logic, it weakens her case.
58.
kf | October 7, 2010 at 11:42 pm
Forget Whitman because she is a feminist. It is better to elect the libertarian from San Pedro, he is for Prop 8 but will waste the dem union base. If Brown is elected then the state can recall him then put him in jail for consiracy with this fake issue introduced by Arnold and his rep CA supremes. If pushed the state a secede and push farther Mex Mafia troops can be imported (as in the Spainish Civil War when Franco wasted the spainish gays plus 1 million of their supporters) courtesy of Iran to waste gay power permanent with a seige of SF. This is your choice.
59.
Rhie | October 8, 2010 at 1:15 pm
What?
60.
alaneckert | October 9, 2010 at 1:13 am
Rhie, did you see this shiny object over here to distract you from responding to this post? I assure you it is far more interesting than trying to figure this one out.
61.
Ann S. | October 9, 2010 at 2:07 am
Ooh, shiny!
62.
Rhie | October 9, 2010 at 6:16 am
Heh. You are most likely right. *goes back to watching the new Hawaii Five-0*
63.
John | October 8, 2010 at 1:31 am
Hmmm…Money Bomb…
Well, if they think some marriages are fake, it's only fitting that I send them some fake money.
Now to find some good quality play money!
64.
John | October 8, 2010 at 1:32 am
(sub'n)
65. how to change a tire&hellip | May 11, 2011 at 9:46 am
Tire ratings guide…
[…]we like to honor other sites on the web, even if they aren’t related to us, by linking to them. Below are some sites worth checking out[…]…
66. Colon Cleanse Weight Loss&hellip | May 11, 2011 at 11:52 am
Colon Cleanse Review Site…
[…]while the sites we link to below are completely unrelated to ours, we think they are worth a read, so have a look[…]…
67. Woodworking Plans&hellip | May 11, 2011 at 4:50 pm
Steve’s Woodworking Site…
[…]these are various links to sites that we link to because we think they are worth visiting[…]…
68. Rokko&hellip | September 6, 2011 at 1:56 pm
I want to start a blog. How do I get free web site traffic?…
I am just starting out and want to get a blog started…..
69. doctor who&hellip | November 2, 2011 at 7:54 pm
I developed a joomla site on my localhost. Now I want to upload it to GoDaddy. How do I do that?…
GoDaddy tech support is so frustrating. First, I used their applications panel to install joomla, but when I uploaded my local site via ftp, it didn’t work. I called GoDaddy support and they do not give support for migrating a local site to their host…