Connect with us

Wall Street Journal Calls NOM Deceptive Again – Here’s Why They’re Right



The Wall Street Journal two weeks ago characterized an anti-same-sex marriage equality campaign by the National Organization For Marriage (NOM), as “deceptive,” and, even after a response from none other than NOM Chair Maggie Gallagher, reiterated the “deceptive’ label again today. Here’s why they’re right.

In his July 26 Wall Street Journal column, James Taranto wrote, “If the National Organization for Marriage were a commercial enterprise, its ‘Let the People Vote’ campaign would be a case of deceptive advertising.”

“‘Let the People Vote’ is a futile venture; Roe v. Wade is likelier to be overturned than New York’s Marriage Equality Act is to be repealed or nullified,” Taranto concluded, adding, “the language on the [‘Let the People Vote’] site implies that the Legislature acted illegitimately when it ‘imposed same-sex marriage on New York with no vote of the people.’ Such a vote is not part of the ordinary procedure for enacting legislation in New York, and it is misleading to pretend otherwise.”

WATCH: Maggie Gallagher: “It’s Gonna Be A Bloody Mess In New York” (Video)

Unsurprisingly, NOM’s Maggie Gallagher was none-too-pleased, and penned a response, which the WSJ generously published today (about half-way down the page.) Here’s a portion of Chairman Gallagher’s screed:

“To compare this Let the People Vote effort to the likelihood of repealing Roe v. Wade is seriously misplaced. 80% of New York voters want the right to vote on marriage, just as voters in 31 other states have been able to do. Some cultural elites said the abortion debate was over when the Roe decision came down, and it was time to move on. But people of faith did not rest, and now a majority in this country are pro-life. With marriage, 62% of Americans already support the belief that marriage is between one man and one woman, as do a majority of New Yorkers, and an overwhelming majority of New Yorkers want to be able to vote on the issue. Those numbers do not suggest it is time for surrender. Its time to come together and fight for the survival of marriage no matter the procedural obstacles we face. That’s what we at NOM and our allies intend to do.”

Even if you read Gallagher’s entire response, you’ll see that it contains no effort to repudiate the accusation that “Let The People Vote” — at its core — is deceptive. And Gallagher, a rather intelligent individual, must know it is.

Gallagher isn’t intending to “let the people vote” on marriage equality at all, despite the campaign. I could hold a “let me lose 30 pounds without trying” campaign too, but it would be equally futile and self-deluding.

A few more important points.

READ: NY Same-Sex Marriage: Why NOM’s 10,000 Protesters Lie Is So Embarrassing

Taranto today responds to Gallagher’s response:

“Meanwhile, ‘NOM Staff’ blogs on the organization’s website: ‘There will be an election in 2012, in which we will find out if Republican elites are right they can pass a gay marriage bill in NY without consequences.’

“Imposing ‘consequences’ on ‘Republican elites’ is a perfectly legitimate goal,” Taranto writes. “But to the extent that that is the objective of the ‘Let the People Vote’ effort, it reinforces our view that the effort is deceptive.”


(Side note: as usual, NOM posts only the parts they liked from the WSJ on their site today, of course.)

But wait, there’s more!

Gallagher writes above, “80% of New York voters want the right to vote on marriage…” But no one The New Civil Rights Movement reached out to, nor any Google search, could provide us with a poll or other document that finds that result — or anything like it.

What a Gooogle search did net — in addition to today’s claim of,  “80% of New York voters want the right to vote on marriage…” is this:

“80% of Rhode Islanders want the chance to vote on marriage…” from a NOM press release dated January 11, 2011, and this quote, which appeared in a One News Now article titled, “NY Republicans sell out on marriage vote.”

“The poll shows that 57 percent of New York voters believe marriage should be defined only as one man and one woman,” says Gallagher, “and that in addition, the vast majority — I think it was close to 60 percent — said that they think the people of New York should have the right to decide this issue, not the legislature.”

So, which is it?

Do an amazingly consistent 80% of New Yorkers and Rhode Islanders “want the right to vote on marriage?” Or is the number “close to 60 percent?,” Maggie? Or, is this number just made up? If there is a “poll,” is it a reputable, real, and accurate poll? Not like some others NOM has publicized.

Gallagher has not responded to a request for comment on this issue.

But wait, there’s more!

Gallagher’s NOM, the National Organization For Marriage, is fundraising on the “fact” that “New Yorkers Stand 10,000 Strong for Marriage!,” and, “By the time we reached the United Nations plaza, nearly 10,000 people were present,” referring to their anti-gay hate rally held in midtown Manhattan July 24, the day same-sex marriage became legal in New York state.

The NYPD puts the attendance at NOM’s anti-gay hate rally at 3000. That’s an official number obtained by The New Civil Rights Movement.

There’s a big difference between 3,000 and 10,000, and as we wrote a week ago, there’s a really big difference between 3,000 and 20,000. What’s 20,000? The number of confirmed protesters at NOM’s anti-gay hate rally in 2009.

Looks like the people are voting Maggie. Against you, NOM, and against anti-gay hate.


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.


McCarthy Blocks Bipartisan Bill Approved by 77 Senators to Avoid Shutdown as He Moves to Pin the Blame on Democrats



Republican Speaker Kevin McCarthy is saying he will not allow the House to take up a compromise bill supported by a large and bipartisan majority of Senators that would allow the federal government to continue operating past the midnight Saturday deadline.

“I don’t see the support in the House,” for the Senate’s proposed continuing resolution, McCarthy said on Wednesday, according to Punchbowl News’ Jake Sherman. He also reports that “this is the most explicit he’s been” in saying “he won’t take it up and pass it as is.”

Chad Pergram, the Senior Congressional Correspondent for Fox News reports, “McCarthy says he won’t allow the House to consider the Senate’s stopgap spending bill to avert a gov’t shutdown for 45 days. 77 bipartisan senators supported the package on a test vote last night.”

Earlier Wednesday, inside the House Republican Conference’s meeting, Sherman reported that Speaker McCarthy “said he told” Senate Republican Minority Leader Mitch McConnell “that he cannot take up a bill that funds Ukraine and doesn’t fix the border.”

READ MORE: ‘Fire Sale Prices’: Biographer Predicts Trump ‘May Soon Be Personally Bankrupt’ and Could See His Assets ‘Liquidated’

“In other words,” Sherman adds, “if it wasn’t clear, the CR [continuing resolution] the Senate is taking up is dead on arrival in the House.”

Meanwhile, House Republicans, and especially Speaker McCarthy, are attempting to blame the likely shutdown on Democrats. House Democrats, Senate Democrats and most Senate Republicans have been working to avert a shutdown but Speaker McCarthy’s most extreme members have been pushing to shut down the federal government. Political observers say he could keep the government running by putting together a majority of House Democrats and a handful of moderate Republicans to pass a continuing resolution, but would likely lose his Speakership as a result.

“A shutdown would furlough millions of federal employees, leave the military without pay, disrupt air travel and cut off vital safety net services, and it would be politically punishing to lawmakers whose job it is to fund government,” the Associated Press reported Wednesday. “The Republican McCarthy, pushed by a hard-right flank that rejects the deal he made with Biden and is demanding steep spending cuts, showed no interest in the Senate’s bipartisan effort — or the additional money for Ukraine.”

“’I think their priorities are bad,’ he said about the Senate effort.”

Political pundit and journalist Bill Kristol, a Republican who became a Democrat in 2020, Wednesday afternoon pinned the expected, coming shutdown on Speaker McCarthy.

READ MORE: ‘Poof’: White House Mocks Stunned Fox News Host as GOP’s Impeachment Case Evaporates on Live Air

“One man, Kevin McCarthy, is responsible for the looming government shutdown, because he won’t bring to the House floor a funding bill supported by a majority of senators from both parties, the administration, and a majority of House members. It’s the Speaker’s Shutdown.”

Wednesday morning, The Washington Post reported, “Facing a potential government shutdown in four days triggered by House Republicans’ inability to unite to pass spending bills, House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) is trying out a new strategy: shifting the blame.”

“McCarthy is starting to point fingers at Democrats in a bid to pin a shutdown on disagreements over border security. It’s an attempt to rewrite the record of the past several weeks, during which House Republicans have been unable to pass a short-term bill to prevent a shutdown — even one that includes the border security policies his conference overwhelmingly supports.”


Image via Shutterstock


Continue Reading


‘Fire Sale Prices’: Biographer Predicts Trump ‘May Soon Be Personally Bankrupt’ and Could See His Assets ‘Liquidated’



Donald Trump, the one-term, twice-impeached ex-president who is running for the White House while facing four criminal indictments that include 91 felony counts across three jurisdictions, “may soon be personally bankrupt,” according to a journalist who has written two books on the man he calls a “self-proclaimed multibillionaire.”

Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative journalist David Cay Johnston, author of “The Making of Donald Trump,” and “The Big Cheat: How Donald Trump Fleeced America and Enriched Himself and His Family,” reported on Tuesday’s decision by Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron. The judge ruled Trump had committed fraud for years, by massively inflating the value of his assets. He ordered Trump’s business certificates revoked and his assets dissolved.

“Donald Trump is no longer in business,” Johnston writes at DC Report. “Worse, the self-proclaimed multibillionaire may soon be personally bankrupt as a result, stripped of just about everything because for years he engaged in calculated bank fraud and insurance fraud by inflating the value of his properties, a judge ruled Tuesday.”

READ MORE: Trump Goes on Wild Rant Targeting Judge and Attorney General After Being Found Liable for Fraud

The ex-president’s “gaudy Trump Tower apartment, his golf courses, his Boeing 757 jet and even Mar-a-Lago could all be disposed of by a court-appointed monitor, leaving Trump with not much more than his pensions as a one term president and a television performer,” Johnston wrote.

Trump will likely appeal any ruling, but Johnston, who has chronicled Trump for years, says it’s “highly unlikely” an appeals court will reverse Justice Engoron’s decision.

“Barring a highly unlikely reversal by an appeals court, Trump’s business assets eventually will be liquidated since he cannot operate them without a business license. Retired Judge Barbara Jones was appointed to monitor the assets, an arrangement not unlike the court-supervised liquidation of a bankrupt company or the assets of a drug lord,” Johnston writes. “The various properties are likely to be sold at fire sale prices and certainly not for top dollar when liquidation begins, probably after all appeals are exhausted.”

READ MORE: House GOP Shutdown Demands Include Gutting Billions From Dept. of Education, Costing Over 200,000 Teachers Their Jobs

Johnston last year said “that the former president ‘knowingly’ committed dozens of tax crimes over the past several years,” according to Newsweek. Johnston’s comments in December came “shortly after Democratic-led House Ways and Means Committee held a vote to publicly release Trump’s tax return documents,” and “published a report showing that Trump was not properly audited by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) while he was president. The IRS has a policy requiring that a sitting president is audited each year while in office.”

Continue Reading


Trump Goes on Wild Rant Targeting Judge and Attorney General After Being Found Liable for Fraud



Donald Trump unleashed a wild rant Wednesday morning, targeting the New York attorney general and the Manhattan Supreme Court judge in the State of New York’s $250 million civil case against him. The judge on Tuesday declared the ex-president had committed fraud for years in building his real estate empire and ordered his business certificates revoked and holdings dissolved.

Trump has been warned to not make public attacks against or attempts to intimidate witnesses or officers of the court, or prejudice jurors in one of the criminal cases he is currently facing. Two weeks ago, after appearing to not heed those warnings, the Special Counsel prosecuting the ex-president for his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election asked the judge presiding over that case to limit his speech.

Wednesday morning, Trump called New York Attorney General Letitia James “Racist.” He called Manhattan Supreme Court Justice Arthur Engoron “Deranged,” and “Trump Hating,” alleging he had “made up this crazy ‘KILL TRUMP’ decision, assigning insanely low values to properties.” Trump wrote the judge valued his Mar-a-Lago resort and residence at $18 million, and claimed (in all-caps) “it is worth possibly 100 times that amount.”

READ MORE: ‘Poof’: White House Mocks Stunned Fox News Host as GOP’s Impeachment Case Evaporates on Live Air

The judge, however, according to The Hill, “found Trump consistently overvalued Mar-a-Lago, inflating its value on one financial statement by at least 2,300 percent. The ruling pointed to a Palm Beach County Assessor’s appraisal from 2011-2021, which estimated Mar-a-Lago’s value between $18 million and $27.6 million.”

“In his order,” The New York Times reported Tuesday, “Justice Engoron wrote scathingly about Mr. Trump’s defenses, saying that the former president and the other defendants, including his two adult sons and his company, ignored reality when it suited their business needs. ‘In defendants’ world,’ he wrote, ‘rent-regulated apartments are worth the same as unregulated apartments; restricted land is worth the same as unrestricted land; restrictions can evaporate into thin air.'”

“That is a fantasy world, not the real world,” the judge concluded.

At the end of his diatribe Wednesday, Trump declared: “There is also an IRONCLAD DISCLAIMER CLAUSE!”

READ MORE: ‘Careening’ Toward ‘Risk of Political Violence’: Experts Sound Alarm After Trump Floats Executing His Former General

Continue Reading


Copyright © 2020 AlterNet Media.