Comments on: Maggie Gallagher Admits NOM Infiltrated New Hampshire

By: BREAKING: Gay Marriage Passes New Hampshire! 198-176 | The New Civil Rights Movement

Wed, 03 Jun 2009 21:29:09 +0000

[...] position against marriage equality. The National Organization For Marriage admitted they had infiltrated New Hampshire. Reports of robocalls, linking conservative voters directly to lawmakers, gave an impression [...]

By: leewaters

leewaters — Sat, 23 May 2009 00:11:20 +0000

NHampshire: I agree. No outside source should infiltrate local government and overwhelm the will of the people unless the will of the people is unConstitutional.

I'm willing to listen if you want to explain this, but let's clear the air. Your comment has a few red herrings to keep us off the actual issue.

Specificially:

• Polls show that a majority of the people of New Hampshire support marriage equality. Some, including me, suspect that the will of the people has been thwarted. It's not a Democrat/Republican thing, though, and that distracts us with irrelevant baggage from the last 20 years.

• I don't see the affirmative action analogy, but this issue is thorny enough without bringing in other, even thornier issues into the discussion. Let's talk about it on its own merits.

With that said, what dirty money are you talking about and who did you mean by "we don't even know who NOM is"?

Lee

By: Alexander Ryking

Alexander Ryking — Fri, 22 May 2009 18:10:50 +0000

#1: The marriage equality fight is not funded by or even being fought for by the Democratic party, which in not the party of the rich but the party that fights for the poor and middle class. Unlike the GOP, which licks the ass of Bug Business every chance it gets while getting dumb rubes like you to support it even as it screws you. #2: Try Google before making idiot statements like "there were NO robo-calls," shit-for-brains. Example: http://is.gd/Cq3V #3: Homosexuals are entitled to the same human rights that everyone else has in this country. That isn't Affirmative Action, rightard. #4: You clearly have no knowledge of what Affirmative Action is. Here's a primer: http://is.gd/Cq7d #5: The only dirty money is New Hampshire is NOM's. #6: Homosexuality is not a preference, it is a genetic trait. Much like your right-wing idiocy. Perhaps we should start forbidding your kind to marry, raise kids, live where you want to live, or work at jobs you're qualified for based on that venereal disease you call an ideology. Maybe you'd have some inkling of what gays through. #7: Please do the human race a favor and kill yourself before you breed; your DNA would like urine in the gene pool.

By: NHampshire

NHampshire — Fri, 22 May 2009 16:10:46 +0000

The Democrats are constantly funded by outside sources whether it be for gay marriage, income taxes, stealing private property to give to corporations, or what have you. TONS OF MONEY. The Democrats are in fact, the party of the rich. And they don't care who they hurt.

Fact is, there were NO robo-calls. We don't even know who NOM is. We just don't want more affirmative action programs, which is what gay marriage is.

Take your outside dirty money and get out of NH please… Stop using your sexual preference to make you a victim class to extort more money from the government.

By: really really

really really — Fri, 22 May 2009 06:40:13 +0000

"Survival"

Call NOM 1.609.688.0450 or call NOM media reps Elizabeth Ray (x130) & Mary Beth Hutchins (x105), at 703-683-5004

Play at top volume (w/o injury) track from Gloria Gaynor / Reba McEntire / Destiny's Child / TV show Survivor / whatever fits theme of SURVIVAL

Tips:
1) Easy source – look up a video on Youtube (or other) — anything that meets the "survival" theme
2) Hold the phone by your speakers
3) Dance
4) If you get a person have some fun with them

We'll 'survive' just fine

By: David Badash

David Badash — Thu, 21 May 2009 18:27:06 +0000

Hey, Lee!
I think Maggie's gloating a bit, and as I alluded to, I think her method was that nasty robocalling effort they had that let's therm call people in NH, get them agitated, then patch them directly thru to their legislator so they can speak with them directly.

That's how you get a state with 55% of the population who support gay marriage, in a part f the country that supports gay marriage, to get nervous and vote against it.

We have 2 weeks to overcome this bump in the road. I'm dedicating myself to jumping this hurdle.

By: leewaters

leewaters — Thu, 21 May 2009 18:17:38 +0000

“We’ve figured out how to go over the heads of the media directly to the people on the marriage issue — even in New England. Some enterprising reporter may just ask how?”

This enterprising non-reporter may just ask how they went 'directly to the people' in such a short period. She makes it sound legally and ethically sketchy. Or is she just trying to be cute?

Incidentally, I'd also like to ask who funded this new 'method', and I'd like to ask her to be a little less coy when talking about her machinations for stripping me of my civil rights.

By: jaysays

jaysays — Thu, 21 May 2009 18:13:59 +0000

You know, I find myself trying to put myself in the shoes of people like Ms. I was an unwed mother but think marriage is required to have children Gallagher and list exactly how gay marriage would harm society and other marriages – in fact, I've read a lot from the other side trying to find any specific factual example of how same sex marriage affects society. So far, not one thing will hold up and I'm really trying to be critical of my own beliefs on the subject.

I'm glad to know NOM is looking to you David. Perhaps you will help them find a critical thinking area and realize that they are nothing but rhetoric with no fact basis.

When do we see you on Maddow?