RECENT  POSTS:  » 'Nonpartisan' NOM's entrenched Republicanism again showing » GLAAD: His other tactics failing, NOM president turns to anti-trans fear-mongering » AFA's Bryan Fischer: Diversity is 'most sinister and dangerous lie' » WND activist: 'Dan Savage has done far worse things than Westboro [Baptist];' says to send him to Iraq to challenge those who hang gays » Michael Sam's teammate offers perfect response to silly shower 'story' » Photo: Negligent NOM posts baby with choking hazard; will someone please think of the children? » Audio: #7thCircuit considers whether marital discrimination is as ugly as other forms (hint: it is) » 'Are you now or have you ever been a gay rights supporter?' » With marriage fight lost, Maggie Gallagher (Srivatav) moves to more neighborly writing » Read: HRC tracks American pro-discrimination activists' international flights  

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

03/31/2014

FRC's 'National Campaign In Defense of Natural Marriage' was a laughable disaster; so let's laugh: ha, ha, ha, ha...

by Jeremy Hooper

Last night, right after 8PM ET, the ever-deceptive Family Research Council sent out a last minute e-blast in support of its rabidly anti-LGBT "National Campaign in Defense of Marriage." In that last-ditch blast, FRC claimed it needed 83,000+ signatures before midnight in order to make its goal of 250,000:

(red arrow is mine)
201403310831
[FRC email]

Only thing? When FRC staff (email is attributed to president Tony Perkins) said they needed "more than 83,000," it seems that the operative words there were "more than." Because if you go to the actual petition, that count, per FRC's own admission, stands at only 4,766 responses:

(red arrow is mine; count recorded at 8:36 AM ET)
201403310835
[FRC.org]

That would mean that here, more than eight hours after the midnight deadline, FRC still needs 245,000+ signatures to meet its (already-missed) goal. Yes, that's technically "more than 83,000," as FRC's Sunday night pitch letter demanded. But just because it's technically true, it doesn't make the sleight of hand any less egregious.

Clearly this is major FRC failure that they wanted to hide behind artful language. FRC will surely be doing a lot of that kind of hiding and masking and twisting in the days and years to come, as more and more people catch on to the years of animus with which this terrible special interest group chose to define itself.

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