RECENT  POSTS:  » POTUS believes in fifty-state equality, happy with way it's playing out » But your subjective view of 'real' marriage is factually irrelevant, Ryan » Flip Benham (yes, their dad) reportedly protesting outside NC weddings » TV's Duggar family continues anti-LGBT activism » Caught ya: Far-right's latest marriage 'victim' edited website to make more solid legal case » Read: Wyoming to become our 32nd marriage equality state » GLAAD: Victory is what happens while you're busy making other plans » What fake victimization sounds like in Arizona » Federal judge strikes Arizona's discriminatory marriage ban; marriages should begin today! » NOM's latest desperation: Relying on hearsay James O'Keefe video to smear Democrat for 'secretly' not opposing equality  

« Go back a post || Return to G-A-Y homepage || Haul tail to next post »

09/15/2008

Video: Dueling ads, one of which is tyrannical

by Jeremy Hooper

In a new ad, "ProtectMarriage.com," the folks behind the anti-gay ballot initiative known as Proposition 8, say the following:

In a newer ad, GoodAsYou.org, the folks who unapologetically look falsely compassionate proponents of bias in the eye and tell them that their discriminatory ways are unbecoming, say this:

(note: please ignore the extra 0 in 4,300,000)

space gay-comment gay-G-A-Y-post gay-email gay-writer-jeremy-hooper


Your thoughts

Hey Jeremy,

Not sure what software you're using, or how easy this is to fix, but you have an extra zero in 4,300,000 (i.e. you have 4,3000,000)

Otherwise, cool ad, and certainly makes more sense than their version.

best,

M

Posted by: Morry | Sep 15, 2008 6:00:37 PM

BOO! That's SO annoying!

Oh well. It would be a real pain in the ass to change, so I'll just make a note of it.

Posted by: G-A-Y | Sep 15, 2008 6:18:16 PM

Well, they are always adding at least one zero to the end of all of their numbers, so I thought it was a jab at their over-inflated and mostly bogus accounting practices.

But, do you think they actually test these ads? I mean, who are they trying to "sway" with that kind of ad? Maybe they are just trying to make sure that the "faithful" get their butts out to the polls, but I can't see that actually convincing anyone to change their opinion.

Maybe they are targeting the ex-cons who believe they have a reason to dislike judges (that is ex-cons who aren't disqualified from voting because they're felons). But I can't see the little old ladies who watch Judge Judy or Hatchett being swayed by the "activist-judges" spiel.

And, it may just be me, but I would think that postulating that 61% of voters voted for something in the past might build an air of over-confidence among those who support their bigotry. The "well, everyone is going to vote for this, so I don't need to bother" mentality.

If I were them (while still retaining my sanity and penchant for rational thought), I would sound a completely different alarm. More like: this (unconstitutional pile of legislation) passed before, but now this (same stinking pile of) legislation is facing an enormous uphill battle that will be lost (to the glee of the majority of the population) if you don't get your butts out to vote (your small-minded bigotry).

Posted by: Dick Mills | Sep 15, 2008 10:28:08 PM

The "activist judges" speech did not work for Bush when he pushed for a US Constitutional Amendment nor Romney in Mass. so why do they think it will work in California now?

Posted by: Christian | Sep 16, 2008 8:08:53 AM

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails