RECENT  POSTS:  » Video: Ad for blemish remover/ tourist spot for our new, bettered America » Whether justified or Kim Davis-ed, individualistic rage rarely outplays broader truths » Kim Davis: The almost too perfect coda to the marriage discrimination fight » Anti-gay clerks are going to have to do their jobs. Because of course they are. » Jeb really wants to remind voters of his anti-'same status' plan for gay couples » Maine: NOM finally forced to hand over its tiny, out-of-state, incestuous donor roll » This delusional primary: Huckabee claims 'same-sex marriage is not the law of the land' » The 'Yeah. Duh. Of course' phase of this fight » Trailer: 'Stonewall' » And now NOM is literally pleading with its (theoretical) supporters  

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


NOM's new fundraising pitch: Give us money to shape an outcome we can't possibly change

by Jeremy Hooper

With the months since the November elections playing out like a bad dream, the National Organization For Marriage is simply desperate to find something—anything, maybe, please—that can bring in the money. Their latest: telling supporters that they still have the theoretical chance of winning one of the cases that have already been argued before the U.S. Supreme Court and begging these same supporters to give them money to shape an outcome that they have no way of changing:


First things first: the "generous donor" thing has become absurd. At this point, NOM only leaves about three weeks on the fiscal calendar where some sort of anonymous deep pockets aren't supposedly matching their cash. It's just silly.

But the bigger point: why the hell would anyone give this organization money at this point? They keep on losing and these court cases have already been (largely) decided. We are all just waiting for the opinions—we can't really do all that much, at this point, to shape them. And the things that we can do (i.e. win more states, increase public support, remind John Roberts of civil rights history and how Chief Justices are forever attached to bad rulings, etc.) are all things that break in our favor, not NOM's. I just don't get why any citizen, no matter how anti-gay, would choose NOM. Why not an FRC or an AFA or one of the other groups? Why NOM?

Sure, NOM wants to stay in business. It's been a pretty easy cash cow for Brown, Gallagher, et al. But is keeping these senior staffers in six-figure salaries really enough to drive the "pro-family" base to give to this, an org. with nothing but losses on its recent record? I'm thinking not.

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