General impression: NOM is in serious trouble - derision hurts, but irrelevance is fatal.
Random notes:
Interesting framing from Richard Piatt of LDS-owned KSL: "Given the past power of the ultra-right on this issue ..."
Huntsman: "If it equates to equal rights for all of our citizens, it's a conversation we need to have."
Lisa Riley Roche (Deseret News): "Do you support that [NOM] campaign that seems to be suggesting there's an increasing threat to the American way of life by people seeking equal rights?"
Huntsman: "I haven't given that [campaign] a second's thought."
Ouch.
Irrelevance.
But then Huntsman pivots with a nod to (what he seems to agree/suggest are) supposedly more pressing concerns (food, shelter, clothing and the like). A false choice? Sure. Am I bothered? Not so much. If/when Huntsman decides to run, Steve Schmidt will be on staff. This Steve.
Moving on ...
Huntsman: "The Republican Party needs to let a thousand flowers bloom ... [allow] preeminence [to] stand taller than partisanship ... and see where that takes us ..."
Amen to that, Guv. Amen.
P.S. Speaking of Steve Schmidt, this recent NOM press release exemplifies, for me, all that's wrong with Maggie's and Brian's and the ultra-right's approach:
PRINCETON, NJ, April 17 /Christian Newswire/ -- Today, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) responded to Steve Schmidt on CNN:So, if you happen to work for a media outlet that might benefit from an in-person display of NOM's increasingly ugly and shrill appeals to fear, I guess you now know the numbers to call and the folks to email. Enjoy. But, your professional predicament aside, on a personal level, just talking among ourselves, before you decide to make that call or send that email to Liz or Mary at CRC, please know that I would enjoy reading your admission (even if merely posted anonymously in comments here) that you, too, also realize just how sad and pathetic NOM's schtick has become. I mean, at this point, who among us still believes that NOM have any useful advice left to give regarding how to win elections? I mean, at this point, even our colleagues in the Utah press have gathered that they don't.
"Steve Schmidt's first national TV address this week is part of a coordinated campaign to manufacture a message point: Americans are ready to give up on the marriage issue. I'm not worried about this press spin, because the people who believe it are going to wake up to find the political landscape is very different than they imagine," said Brian Brown, executive director of NOM. "People are responding very powerfully to our ads and other messaging because they don't want politicians imposing gay marriage on them or their children or their grandchildren."
"Steven Schmidt? Isn't this the guy who ran a failed presidential campaign, who advised a failed governor (Arnold Schwarzenegger) who insiders say was recently fired by Meg Whitman?" Brown continued, "Sure, we can understand why Steve would be looking for a way to make some new friends -- but why would anyone take his advice on how to win elections at this point?"
"Imagine what America -- or the GOP -- will be like when anyone who believes marriage is the union of husband and wife can be excluded from high office, or public influence, in the way we now exclude bigots and racists. What does that do to the electoral map?" Brown asked.
"There is no conservative case for gay marriage. Gay marriage represents the overthrow of the core idea of marriage in our tradition and every faith tradition. And it will put government on the side of excluding traditional faith communities from the public square," said Maggie Gallagher, President of NOM.
To schedule an interview with Maggie Gallagher, President, or Brian Brown, Executive Director of NOM, contact Elizabeth Ray (x 130, eray@crcpublicrelations.com) or Mary Beth Hutchins (x.105, mhutchins@crcpublicrelations.com) by calling 703-683-5004.
Why? Because since their Pyrrhic victory in California, NOM have done nothing but lose.
Why? Because, at this point, NOM have become ringleaders of the sort of media circus that any right-minded conservative abhors and any serious Republican recognizes as the central challenge facing the party: how to best usher their clowns offstage to the benefit of both the GOP and the country.
Final thought: Last time I checked, Steve was not a member of the press, Brian. But you insinuate otherwise.
Why? Because you're a clown, Mr. Brown.
---
Miscellany:
Official NOM press release announcing Matt Holland's departure and Orson Scott Card's appointment to the NOM board of directors. At this point, it seems reasonable to assume that the LDS church owns a permanent seat on that board (which would suggest significant and ongoing Mormon financial support for NOM).
Orson Scott Card's article addressing his work for the George Wallace campaign. Not a bad read, actually.
Posts
4 comments:
It's an admittedly strange li'l diary ...
And I'm probably just piling on NOM at this point.
But I've not even seen David Benkof doing much lately to defend NOM, which leads me to suspect it's truly over.
Unless Orson Scott Card has some magic trick up his sleeve?
In which case, who better than a homophobe on the board to defend against charges of homophobia?
I have a suggestion for a better person: someone who can be called "homophobe" and use the fallacious designation against those who throw it around with irresponsible abandon. No better way to discredit your opposition than demonstrating that they're incapable of distinguishing between malice and benign disagreement.
By the by, in case my mildly facetious response in the CAH blog didn't properly convey the fact, I do not own a blog.
Got it. You're not Victoria "Painting the Targets in the Culture War" Taft, just a fan.
Precisely. It's more entertaining to read than commentate on, however, since bouncing thoughtful commentary off empty skulls becomes frightfully dull after too long a period. And no, the "empty skulls" does not refer to Victoria and her two co-commentators.
Post a Comment