Connect with us

Opinion: Anti-Semitism Also Part Of NOM’s Hateful Wedge Strategies

Published

on

When a judge ordered the release of the so-called National Organization for Marriage’s anti-gay, race-baiting strategy documents, the towering civil rights leader Julian Bond said, “It confirmed a suspicion that some evil hand was behind this.”

The NOM strategy document said, apropos of NOM’s obnoxious “Not a Civil Right” gay-bashing campaign: “The strategic goal of this project is to drive a wedge between gays and blacks— two key Democratic constituencies.”

NOM’s hate document also stated that “Fanning hostility” — between anti-gay African-Americans, and LGBTers — (many of whom, of course, are African-Americans) — is “key” to its War on Gays.

The deliberate, shameless, disingenuous lying that NOM officials have been doing about their wedge strategies since the documentation was released only confirms that those officials are absolutely despicable gay-bashing bigot monsters.

Just as NOM’s race-baiting strategies involving African-Americans and Hispanics were manifest and evident before the release of that documentation, it has for a long time been manifest and evident that NOM uses similar, ruthless tactics involving other minorities.

NOM is not entirely antisemitic per se — NOM co-founder and Chairman Emeritus Robert George‘s wife was born to a Jewish family — but National Organization For Marriage bigots exploit antisemitic sentiment in parts of the population, when doing so advances NOM’s War on Gays.

Often, NOM is confined to using dog whistles for Jew haters, because in some parts of the U.S. today, antisemitism is viewed as unacceptable, so can not be spoken forthrightly out loud, in the manner NOM gay bashes daily at the top of their lungs.

What is the historical background of anti-Semitism in the United States? How is NOM able to profit from hatred of Jews?

In colonial Maryland, it was illegal not to believe in Jesus; the third offense got non-believers the death penalty. Jews did not have the vote in the state until 1826, and even then, to vote, they had to sign a paper saying they believed in an afterlife. The reason the United States first had “Jewish” hospitals, was that most Anglo-Saxon-led hospitals would not hire Jews. In the 20th century, most top universities placed maximum quotas on Jews permitted to enter, so there would not be “too many.” The stereotype by which all Jews are rich — and not coincidentally, viewed with suspicion — in this society, that all too often views with contempt the plight of its poor — distracts from the fact that there are indeed poor Jews living in the United States.

My point would be that while antisemitism is far from being the most severe of anti-minority bigotries in America, it exists. The white supremacist vote is a key swing Republican vote; you will almost never hear a Republican candidate unambiguously condemning white supremacists. And, white supremacists hate Jews at least every bit as much as they hate blacks. There are many such groups, with enough supporters that former KKK Grand Wizard and Republican Louisiana State Representative David Duke has been able to make a career off of Jew haters.

President Richard Nixon frequently disparaged Jews. He was especially fond of pointing out that among American conscientious objectors who would not fight in his dirty southeast Asian war — (where innocent men, women and children were maimed and killed with napalm) — Jews were “disproportionately” represented. Understand what Nixon was doing; he was cultivating support for his dirty war among antisemitic Americans — who already thought of Jews as being “not really American” — by leading them to think that the Jewish conscientious objectors were “anti-American.”

On an international level, Jews have been maligned — and often still today are maligned — as the masterminds of world capitalism, socialism and communism.

NOM, of course, is eager — very eager indeed to exploit antisemitism towards anti-gay political ends.

During Elena Kagan’s Supreme Court confirmation hearings, South Carolina’s Senator Lindsey Graham made a point of asking the Jewish nominee where she had been on Christmas. That was a dog whistle for anti-Semites. Nothing about Graham’s question was relevant to her qualifications.

NOM, too, uses dog whistles for anti-Semites. Last week, when the First Circuit court found DOMA unconstitutional, NOM’s Brian Brown said: “It’s obvious that the federal courts on both coasts are intent on imposing their liberal, elitist views of marriage on the American people.”

“Coast,” “liberal,” “elitist;” Brown was using the dog whistles to suggest “Jews.” Notice that Brown talked about the “coast,” “liberal,” “elitist” judges “imposing” equality “on the American people,” (as though gays were not part of the American people, and as though “coast,” “liberal,” “elitist,” (bigot dog whistle code for: Jews) were not part of the American people; this is similar to Nixon’s dirty trick of hinting that Jews are not real Americans, or even perhaps, that they are anti-American, simply because of a progressive human rights-related view.

Brown and NOM have few if indeed any evidence-based, constitutional arguments to make against equality — (in talking about “elitist coast liberals,” they conveniently forget to mention that Iowa judges ruled for equality) — but now NOM seeks to identify — in their gay-bashing bigot followers’ minds — federal court votes for equality with “Coast,” “liberal,” “elitist;” — you know, like Elena Kagan. Where was she on Christmas?

Sometimes NOM subcontracts the antisemitism to its best friends, in hopes of avoiding having the accumulated stench of all of it sticking only to NOMzis. In the Kagan confirmation matter, for example, NOM was raucously beating the drums against Kagan. One NOM online donation form actually allowed donors specifically to give money to “expose” Senators who were supporting Kagan. Notice 1) that Vision America’s Rick Scarborough has appeared at conferences together with NOM’s Brian Brown and Jennifer Roback Morse, and then notice 2) that NOM friend Rick Scarborough published a piece titled Elena Kagan and the War Against Christianity.  Get it? Kagan equals Jew equals a war against Christianity. Nice! Logical!  Here, if you can bear to look at them, are photos of a conference attended by NOM’s Maggie Gallagher and John Eastman along with their very close anti-gay bigot ally Phyllis Schafly.  What did Schafly say to demonize nominee Elena Kagan? Schlafly used, as a weapon against Kagan, that Kagan as Dean of the Harvard Law School once had invited — as a speaker — former Israeli Supreme Court Judge Aharon Barak, who favors equality.  Schafly, obviously, calculated a value to smearing Kagan with her association with another Jew who not only favors equality, but also happens to share, with the man who nominated Kagan, the Middle Eastern-sounding name Barak/Barack. And, there was a broader, fraudulent effort among U.S. Christian, anti-gay reactionaries to tar-and-feather the Jewish Kagan with the Jewish Barak and the Jewish Barak with the Jewish Kagan.  It was a giant “Where were you on Christmas?” festival. Despite Kagan having once referred — for reasons of her own — to NOM’s Robert George as one of the country’s “most respected legal scholars,” NOM was busy ripping Kagan a new one, accusing her left and right of “sabotaging” a DOMA-related case as Solicitor General. (Meanwhile, after House Speaker John Boehner appointed Robert George to the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom, he was sworn into that office by the Jewish woman his Catholic NOMzis had pursued with unrelenting vengeance, Justice Elena Kagan).

How else is NOM willing to exploit hatred and resentment of Jews in order to further its War on Gays?

Maryland State Senator Anthony Muse, an anti-gay African-American minister, works closely with NOM, who have made robo-poll calls for him. The stated aim of the robo-polls was “to identify marriage equality opponents who they can push to support Mr. Muse in the Democratic Primary.”

Look what Muse did here. He created a campaign flyer that suggested President Obama had endorsed Muse in the 2012 Democratic primary for U.S. Senate, when in fact, Obama had endorsed the incumbent Senator Ben Cardin, a Jew who has co-sponsored legislation to repeal DOMA. The Muse campaign flyer shows the “Composition of the 112th Senate,” purportedly broken down by race. There are no African-American U.S. Senators. On whom does Muse pin the blame for that? On the Jews. His racial breakdown gives “White” and “Jewish” as separate races. The Muse hate document shows that there are 84 “white” Senators, and that “whites” are 62% of the U.S. population, and it shows that there are 12 Jewish Senators, and that Jews are 1.8% of the population, while blacks are 12% of the population.

This sickening, cynical hate document has NOM’s fingerprints all over it. We know that NOM actively planned to “drive a wedge” between other minorities; we know that NOM said that “fanning hostility” between minorities is “key” to its strategy. The Muse pamphlet very conspicuously sought to “drive a wedge” and to “fan hostility.” Remember; NOM’s goal in the Democratic primary was “to identify marriage equality opponents who they can push to support Mr. Muse in the Democratic Primary.” Having identified Democratic marriage equality opponents — many of them African-Americans — Muse sought to stoke African-American resentment and/or hatred of Jews by separating whites from Jews as “races,” and showing that while there are fewer Jews than blacks in the population, there are 12 Jewish U.S. Senators, but no African-American ones. Of course, the Jew-clobbering strategy was dependent on Muse’s opponent, Senator Ben Cardin, being a Jewish LGBT equality supporter.

Cardin won the primary, but NOM’s involvement in the Muse campaign left the area poisoned with elevated antisemitic feeling and enhanced hatred of gays and lesbians.

NOM’s boycott of Starbucks, because of Starbucks’ support for equality, also manifests appeals to antisemitism. Microsoft and Apple are at least as dedicated to LGBT equality as Starbucks, but Bill Gates and Tim Cook are not Jewish, while Starbucks’s Chairman Howard Schultz is. Do you get it? “Coast,” “liberal,” “elitist;” “Schultz.” The NOMzi gay-bashers simply can not get enough of saying his name, either, because in American Jew haters’ minds, the words “coast,” “liberal,” “elitist,” and “Schultz” just naturally are a fit for negative stereotyping and resentment. Maggie Gallagher — who has deliberately and shamelessly lied about NOM’s race-baiting strategies — published an article about Schultz and Starbucks in the National Review. It’s title? Church of Starbucks, with the conspicuously Jewish-sounding complete name Howard Schultz mentioned twice.  Do you get it? Jews don’t go to churches — and Gallagher is mocking Schultz’s heritage, beliefs and philosophy by talking sarcastically about Schultz’s Jewish, pro-gay-rights “Church of Starbucks;” this is another NOM antisemitic dog whistle. “Starbucks is no Christian church,” Gallagher seems to be telling her readers, “and this homosexuals-loving Jew Howard Schultz sure as hell doesn’t go to any other Christian church, either,” she seemingly implies. If Gallagher now attempts to deny that she was making a calculated appeal to the anti-Semites in her NOM base, just tell her to shut her lying mouth.

Does this mean that NOM will not now come up with one of its outlier nutbag gay-bashing Jewish supporters to say they do not mind all of this intentional appeal to antisemitism?  Meet NOM’s loony friend Yehuda Levine, who says that acceptance of gays causes God to send earthquakes. Not exactly consensus Jewish-American thinking.

NOM’s international presentation of its Starbucks boycott, too, relies on appealing to hatred of Jews. That NOM has translated its anti-gay hate materials into Arabic and placed them online, for consumption in those countries that have barbaric, murderous anti-gay attitudes at the official government level, is in itself detestable.

Yet additionally, the complicated Starbucks corporate picture in the Middle East must be taken into account. Firstly, it is essential to know that standard-issue Arab propaganda says that all homosexuality in the Middle East is the “fault” of Jewish Israelis. There are no Starbucks in Israel. You can find some anecdotal reports, not necessarily credible, alleging that the Israelis simply did not take to Starbucks coffee. It is possible, meanwhile, that in order to gain entry to the wider Middle East market, Starbucks entered into tacit agreements not to set up shop in Israel. However that may be, NOM has stepped into the Middle East picture, identifying Starbucks as a Jewish-led company that — horror of horrors — supports gay rights.

Get it? NOM is hoping to simultaneously stoke resentment of Jews and Israel, to Middle East populations that widely allege that all homosexuality in the Middle East is the “fault” of Jewish Israelis. NOM’s malevolent intent to deal Starbucks fatal blows, no matter what it takes, is evident. Extremely troubling is NOM’s publication of maps showing the precise locations of every Starbucks in Saudi Arabia, and other such places, with instructions for gay-bashers — who in those environments, could eventually turn out to be suicide bombers — to go to those mapped locations to protest Starbucks’s support for gay marriage.  There is no chance that Saudi Arabia is about to institute marriage equality; so think about NOM’s broader, evil goals in pushing its Starbucks boycott in such a place.

Additionally, it is hardly a coincidence that in its fund-raising video starring the “Spirit Day” gay basher Daniel Glowacki, NOM prominently featured this gay Jewish reporter’s articles about the lying Glowacki.

NOM of course also is stoking anti-Muslim bigotry in order to advance its War on Gays; that will be the topic of a future article.

NOM is comprised entirely of monsters.

And oh — I almost forgot. NOM’s founder Robert George also is founder of the American Principles Project. George sent Thomas Peters — also involved with both NOM and the American Principles Project — to attend a conference in Poland hosted by the notorious anti-Semite and Holocaust denier Father Tadeusz Rydsyk. Rydsyk’s “Radio Marija” once mounted an on-air defense campaign for a cleric charged with child molestation and anti-Semitism.

This tells us everything we need to know about Robert George’s and NOM’s “Principles.” And the amoral Mitt Romney has a lot to answer for, as regards his signature on the hateful NOM pledge.

Remember what Julian Bond said about the document — had only through court-ordered release — that confirmed NOM’s despicable tactics:  “It confirmed a suspicion that some evil hand was behind this.”

New York City– based novelist and freelance writer Scott Rose’s LGBT– interest by– line has appeared on Advocate .com, PoliticusUSA .com, The New York Blade, Queerty .com, Girlfriends and in numerous additional venues. Among his other interests are the arts, boating and yachting, wine and food, travel, poker and dogs. His “Mr. David Cooper’s Happy Suicide” is about a New York City advertising executive assigned to a condom account.

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Marjorie Taylor Greene Says She’s ‘Done Supporting’ The GOP: ‘Party Betrays Its Voters’

Published

on

Former Republican Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene said on Monday that she is “done supporting” her former party—but don’t expect her to join the Democratic party anytime soon.

Greene announced her disillusionment with the GOP on Monday afternoon in a tweet.

“Tucker is not the only one who is done supporting the Republican Party. There is A LOT of us that are absolutely fed up and will not support a party that betrays its voters and country. That does not mean we are turning into Democrats either. But we are DONE with the America LAST Republican Party,” Greene wrote.

She referred to comments made last week by pundit Tucker Carlson. Carlson appeared on the Can’t Be Censored podcast Thursday, saying he would refrain from supporting either major party, and admitted “I’m not sure what I’m going to do.”

READ MORE: ‘Gaslight America’: Marjorie Taylor Greene Blasts Trump Ahead of His Trip to Georgia

“How could I or any American voter support a political party that’s not loyal to the United States. That puts the interests of a foreign country above those of its own citizens. It’s not possible to vote for people like that, and I’m not going to,” Carlson said, according to Mediaite, referring to America’s long-time ally Israel.

Greene famously broke with President Donald Trump earlier this year when she called for the release of the FBI files relating to disgraced financier and sex criminal Jeffrey Epstein. A former staunch ally of Trump, the two started trading barbs. Greene resigned from the House this January. Greene has long called for an isolationist foreign policy, criticizing America’s involvement in Ukraine as well as the current conflict with Iran.

Given that Greene said she has no plans on moving leftward in her politics, it’s unclear if she will refrain from voting or if she’ll throw her lot in with a third party. While American politics are primarily driven by the two major parties, a number of smaller parties also exist.

Greene may find a home in the Libertarian party, the third-largest party by voter registration. The Libertarian party has drifted rightward since its founding in 1971. While initially economically conservative but politically liberal, after 2022, the paleolibertarian Mises Caucus gained control of the party. Paleolibertarianism was developed by anarcho-capitalists, and embraces cultural conservatism. Some of the most widely known paleolibertarians include former Representative Ron Paul and the current president of Argentina, Javier Milei.

Third parties struggle to gain traction in the United States. The closest a third party has come to widespread support was the Reform Party, founded by H. Ross Perot during the 1996 presidential election after he won 18.9% of the popular vote in the 1992 presidential election as an independent candidate. Reform won 8.4% of the popular vote in the 1996 election, but no third-party or independent candidate has been as successful as Perot since.

However, the electoral college makes it difficult for a third-party presidential candidate to be elected at all. Third-party presidential candidates are often seen as spoilers for the major candidates. Perot is often believed to have won votes away from President George H.W. Bush in 1992, giving the election to President Bill Clinton. In 2000, Green Party candidate Ralph Nader was similarly accused of acting as a spoiler for Vice President Al Gore, leading to the election of President George W. Bush.

Third parties, however, have a better track record in down-ballot races. For example, Kshama Sawant won election to the Seattle City Council in 2014 as a member of the Socialist Alternative party. She held office until 2024, when she declined to seek reelection. She is currently running for a seat in the House of Representatives as an independent.

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

News

Donald Trump Says Iran ‘Will Agree to Major Weapons Inspections’ to Ensure ‘Nuclear Honesty’

Published

on

President Donald Trump announced on Monday that Iran “will agree” to allow weapon inspectors into the country in a slightly confusing social media post.

“Everybody is fully aware that Iran will agree to have Major Weapons Inspections in order to ensure ‘Nuclear Honesty’ long into the future,” the president wrote on his social media platform Truth Social.

Vice President JD Vance has been handling the negotiations with Iran to end the military conflict started by the United States and Israel at the end of February. Vance said earlier today that inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency would be allowed to enter Iran. The inspectors could be in the country as soon as Monday, according to the Washington Post.

READ MORE: Large Majority of Americans Say Iran Conflict Should End, Hasn’t Met Any of Trump’s Goals

Trump’s wording, however, is somewhat hard to parse. When he says “everyone is fully aware,” is Trump referring to Vance’s Monday announcement that had been widely reported? Or is Trump attempting to cast doubt, suggesting Iran may somehow be pulling a fast one, allowing inspections to provide cover for a weapons program?

Either way, the allowing of weapons inspectors into Iran is similar to what former President Barack Obama’s administration negotiated for in 2015. The Obama-era deal called for IAEA inspectors to make sure Iran was complying with the deal, and was not developing nuclear weapons. But in 2018, after Trump ended the agreement, Iran started to block IAEA inspectors from parts of their nuclear program. Since then, IAEA inspectors do not know the status of Iran’s enriched uranium, according to the Washington Post.

One year ago from Monday, the U.S. struck Iranian sites believed to hold stockpiles of enriched uranium. Since then, Trump has claimed that the strike “completely and totally obliterated” the country’s nuclear enrichment facilities, however, this has never been verified. Even at the time, the Pentagon said that Iran’s nuclear program had only been “degraded…by two years.” Trump’s national intelligence director testified prior to the strike that there was no evidence that Iran’s existing nuclear program was meant to build weapons, according to the Military Times.

Iran has long promised not to build or obtain nuclear weapons. In 1970, Iran signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which deemed the country a non-nuclear state.

While Trump has warned that Iran could have a nuclear bomb “within six months,” the first report from the International Atomic Energy Agency since the Iran conflict started says that there has been no major change to the country’s nuclear program, according to Reuters.

Image via Reuters

Continue Reading

News

Federal Judge Quashes ‘Retaliatory’ Subpoenas Against Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz

Published

on

Six grand jury subpoenas were quashed by a federal judge Wednesday, when it was decided that the subpoenas were filed to retaliate against Democratic Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz’s administration and the city governments of Minneapolis and St. Paul.

Chief Judge Patrick J. Schiltz of the District of Minnesota made his ruling public on Monday, granting the motion requested by the Minnesota officials to quash grand jury subpoenas related to Minnesota declaring itself to be a “sanctuary” state.

Last December, the Department of Homeland Security deployed over 3,000 agents to Minnesota as part of the largest immigration-related operation in the department’s history, Operation Metro Surge. After the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti by DHS agents, the state of Minnesota as well as the twin cities challenged Operation Metro Surge in court, prompting President Donald Trump to rail against the local officials on social media.

READ MORE: Trump Dangles Another Insurrection Act Threat for Minnesota

Days after Minnesota, Minneapolis and St. Paul filed suit, news reports revealed that the Department of Justice had begun to investigate Walz and Minnesota Mayor Jacob Frey. Trump administration officials said that by not supporting the actions of DHS, Walz and Frey were breaking the law.

The Minnesotan officials argued that the subpoenas were “issued as part of an unconstitutional effort to coerce” them into working with DHS and ICE.

Judge Schiltz found that though grand juries traditionally “have broad investigatory powers,” the subpoenas had exceeded those powers. Schiltz agreed that the subpoenas were in violation of the Tenth Amendment, allowing states some degree of autonomy from the federal government.

Schiltz wrote that he had “no doubt” the subpoenas were issued for the “forbidden purposes” of attempting to “harass” or “coerce” Walz and Frey “into taking official action…. a blatantly unlawful and unethical use the grand-jury process.”

“On the one hand, the evidence that the challenged subpoenas were issued for unlawful reasons is overwhelming. On the other hand, the Department has struggled-without success-to identify a single plausible investigatory justification for the subpoenas,” Schiltz wrote, pointing out that the “public record… is replete with direct evidence of the Trump administration—including the highest-ranking officials of the Department—threatening and attempting to punish states and localities that have adopted ‘sanctuary’ policies.”

“To be clear, the Court agrees with the Department that a grand-jury subpoena need not be supported by probable cause. At the same time, a grand-jury subpoena cannot be issued for an improper purpose. The fact that connections between the information sought in the subpoenas and any possible criminal violation range from extremely weak to nonexistent only adds to the overwhelming evidence that these subpoenas were not issued to investigate, but to harass, coerce, and retaliate,” Schiltz added.

Image via Shutterstock

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2026 AlterNet Media.