RECENT  POSTS:  » Idaho wedding venue can be discriminatory so long as it sticks to new business model » Sunday in Houston: Activists mad that churches were noted for their politicization head to a church—to politicize » Lisa Kudrow thinks my website title is modest, at best » Do you take this man to be your lawfully wedded mission of destruction? » MassResistance's hilarious fourteen-point plan for reinstating marriage discrimination: Get really, really nasty » Concerned Women For America finally learns to call out anti-gay rhetoric » 'Rivka Edelman' responds to me via one of the most bizarre comments I've ever read » Just going to another vendor isn't always easy, isn't good basis for sound policy » Pat Robertson: People who believe in fair nondiscrimination law are 'terrorists, radicals, and extremists' » In which another anti-gay group forces politicos to Gladys Kravitz our way into one family's divorce drama  

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

06/06/2013

Why don't you show what Rep. Blumenauer actually said, NOM?

by Jeremy Hooper

NOM, the National Review, and a host of conservatives have posted the same video:

Screen Shot 2013-06-06 At 1.11.18 Pm
Screen Shot 2013-06-06 At 1.11.31 Pm
Screen Shot 2013-06-06 At 1.11.49 Pm

They are all pushing this 2:07 clip, claiming NOM chairman John Eastman "ripped" eight-term congressman Earl Blumenauer (D-OR3). The clip plays as follows, complete with movement-affirming applause from the partisan audience filled, as it was, with Tea party supporters:

The thing is, when one posts a video of a figure purporting to "rip" or "fire back" at someone for his supposedly "scurrilous" statements, one usually shows the audience what, exactly, that someone said. But in this case, none of those conservatives did that. Not NOM. Not NRO. Not any of them. There isn't a single video of Rep. Blumenauer's comments anywhere on Youtube. They don't show how he noted NOM's stated desire to "drive a wedge between gays and blacks," and they don't address any of his pointed questions about whether NOM, an overtly political and highly partisan group that is obviously in the tank for Republicans (remember that NOM prez Brian brown also runs the partisan ActRight operation), should even qualify as a social welfare organization. They all run Eastman's response without any context.

So let's fix that. Here's what the Democratic congressman said, start to finish:

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