RECENT  POSTS:  » Maggie Gallagher forfeits right to ever again talk about gay-related 'slippery slopes' » Extremely anti-gay FRC to lecture folks how to 'rightly' respond to 'wrong' SCOTUS decision » This is such a corrosive idea to put out into the world » Audio: Will you please stop 'attacking' NOM president for saying your sexual orientation, family are 'disordered'? » Video: Mike Huckabee, Republican candidate for increased book sells, vows to defy pro-equality SCOTUS ruling » Reliably tacky NOM turns Memorial Day into day of anti-gay politicking » Ireland: Not only a practical win, but also another tremendous psychological shift » Hillary Clinton campaign honors Harvey Milk, LGBTQ rights » You don't have to pounce on every less-than-pro-gay retailer, anti-gay conservatives! » Video: Tony Perkins tells pastors they 'may have five years' before being 'dragged kicking and screaming from your church'  

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

02/09/2011

NOM's been chopping at CPAC tree; Maggie will still eat its fruits

by Jeremy Hooper

The National Organization For Marriage may be on the official boycott list, prominently signing on to the coalition letter (assembled by NOM co-founder Robert George) that kicked off the boycott. But that minor point isn't stopping Maggie Gallagher from crossing the CPAC picket line:

"I will be at the Conservative Action Political Conference this week as an opinion journalist, covering the speeches of major potential presidential candidates with an eye toward answering this question: What do they think of life and marriage? And how do they explain, in a principled way, why these are core conservative issues?" [Maggie's syndicated column]

Isn't that just a tad hypocritical? I mean, Maggie's not only NOM's chairperson, but also its most prominent face (and other co-founder, along with George). People don't really even separate the two these days -- Maggie essentially is NOM. So since NOM has been front and center in announcing "withdrawal from participation," isn't a bit bullcrappy for Maggie to reap benefits from CPAC's offerings? We're going with yes.

***

*SEE ALSO: Chris Geidner's cover story on the CPAC brouhaha.

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


Your thoughts

comments powered by Disqus

G-A-Y Comments Policy


 
Related Posts with Thumbnails