RECENT  POSTS:  » Why Colorado will soon have marriage equality courtesy of Colorado's head opponent of marriage equality » Audio: AFA owns its extremism » FRC prays for God's people to 'arise' against LGBT rights » Michael Brown will save his waning movement by grouping homosexuality with incest » GOP pollster Luntz to Heritage Foundation's Anderson: 'Gay marriage is harmless' » Read: Federal court judge rules against Colorado's discriminatory marriage ban » You guys, will you please pipe down so Sen. Rubio can dismantle your deserved freedoms? » 'Mask is coming off' LGBTs, says man who vowed to export and/or criminalize LGBTs » Exxon, infamous holdout on fair and decent employment protections, could be running out of options » Oregon baker who refused same-sex wedding cake bakes for 'ex-gay' org  

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

11/01/2011

NOM finally responds to Obama photo snatching; response as egregious as the act itself

by Jeremy Hooper

I'm not surprised that NOM failed to credit me or this site for discovering their egregious photo manipulation, since I have in my possession an intra-NOM email that instructs staffers to never respond to me. However, I am surprised by the unbelievably dim bulb nature of the response itself:

It's no accident that Maddow and her allies in the gay activist community chose Tuesday to issue their breathless "expose" about NOM's Nh4M Email 2011-10-28 Header-Blankphoto "controversy"—on Tuesday the New Hampshire House Judiciary Committee voted overwhelmingly to repeal same-sex marriage! Neither Maddow nor her friends at the Human Rights Campaign can defend imposing same-sex marriage on New Hampshire with no vote of the people. So they issue "reports" and press releases criticizing NOM over a photo collage! They object to us using a photo of a crowd scene, which symbolizes the tens of thousands of New Hampshire voters who are part of our effort. They're upset that the photo was not taken at a NOM rally. Seriously?! NOM using a common use photo in the public domain is considered a great scandal, yet they can redefine marriage—the most important social institution of society against the wishes of New Hampshire voters—and nobody is supposed to object? It's as if the institution of marriage gets mugged, and they complain about speeding in the neighborhood when someone rushes it to the hospital!

Let's teach Rachel Maddow and her pals at the HRC what's really important in this debate in New Hampshire. We've swapped out photos on the www.NHforMarriage.com site to avoid the distraction, now it's time to focus on the real controversy.
The Great NOM Photo "Controversy" [NOM]

Seriously?! NOM (these words are attributed to president Brian Brown) is really acting like it's some sort of standard practice for an organization to take the historically sized crowds of one of their biggest political foes and Photoshop said crowd into the organization's own collage, as a de facto symbol for their own support base?! That's fair and common use in NOM world?!

And it's even more galling when you consider that NOM has its own crowd shots from its own New Hampshire rallies. It's just that the Obama crowds are infinitely larger and are not half-filled with counter protestors, so therefore more convenient to use. Even if it's the crowd of a man who opposes most every plank on which the organization stands!

Ugh. Can't this organization take responsibility for ANYTHING?!?!

6A00D8341C503453Ef014E88E5D8A5970D-74

*Oh, and reminder: Those swapped photos that NOM/Brian mentions in that last line above? Yeah -- they're not of New Hampshire either!

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