I'm simply curious to know how many of them are LDS.
And, if you happen to be one of the actors from the "Gathering Storm" ad, please feel free to leave a comment explaining your decision to participate in the project.
As far as NOM's new ad ("No Offense") is concerned, Tim Fernholz has an interesting comment re NOM's nod to contingency.
And here's my take on the fresh hoopla that will be accompanying the release of NOM's latest ad:
I'm no fan of beauty pageants and take a dim view not only of contestants but of anyone associated with such productions. Personally, I would prefer being spared the annoyance of hearing anything that pageant participants like Ms. Prejean or Mr. Hilton might have to say about an issue as important as marriage equality. Whether it's his condemnation of discrimination or her defense of religious principle, both are tainted by association with the degrading spectacle that is The Miss USA pageant.
So, anyway, this is me rejecting and denouncing those twin relics of barbarism: theocracy and trash culture.
UPDATE: The correct answer is 10 (ten Mormon actors that have been ID'd in the audition reels and/or final ad).
General impression: NOM is in serious trouble - derision hurts, but irrelevance is fatal.
Random notes:
Interesting framing from Richard Piatt of LDS-owned KSL: "Given the past power of the ultra-right on this issue ..."
Huntsman: "If it equates to equal rights for all of our citizens, it's a conversation we need to have."
Lisa Riley Roche (Deseret News): "Do you support that [NOM] campaign that seems to be suggesting there's an increasing threat to the American way of life by people seeking equal rights?"
Huntsman: "I haven't given that [campaign] a second's thought."
Ouch.
Irrelevance.
But then Huntsman pivots with a nod to (what he seems to agree/suggest are) supposedly more pressing concerns (food, shelter, clothing and the like). A false choice? Sure. Am I bothered? Not so much. If/when Huntsman decides to run, Steve Schmidt will be on staff. This Steve.
Moving on ...
Huntsman: "The Republican Party needs to let a thousand flowers bloom ... [allow] preeminence [to] stand taller than partisanship ... and see where that takes us ..."
Amen to that, Guv. Amen.
P.S. Speaking of Steve Schmidt, this recent NOM press release exemplifies, for me, all that's wrong with Maggie's and Brian's and the ultra-right's approach:
PRINCETON, NJ, April 17 /Christian Newswire/ -- Today, the National Organization for Marriage (NOM) responded to Steve Schmidt on CNN:
"Steve Schmidt's first national TV address this week is part of a coordinated campaign to manufacture a message point: Americans are ready to give up on the marriage issue. I'm not worried about this press spin, because the people who believe it are going to wake up to find the political landscape is very different than they imagine," said Brian Brown, executive director of NOM. "People are responding very powerfully to our ads and other messaging because they don't want politicians imposing gay marriage on them or their children or their grandchildren."
"Steven Schmidt? Isn't this the guy who ran a failed presidential campaign, who advised a failed governor (Arnold Schwarzenegger) who insiders say was recently fired by Meg Whitman?" Brown continued, "Sure, we can understand why Steve would be looking for a way to make some new friends -- but why would anyone take his advice on how to win elections at this point?"
"Imagine what America -- or the GOP -- will be like when anyone who believes marriage is the union of husband and wife can be excluded from high office, or public influence, in the way we now exclude bigots and racists. What does that do to the electoral map?" Brown asked.
"There is no conservative case for gay marriage. Gay marriage represents the overthrow of the core idea of marriage in our tradition and every faith tradition. And it will put government on the side of excluding traditional faith communities from the public square," said Maggie Gallagher, President of NOM.
To schedule an interview with Maggie Gallagher, President, or Brian Brown, Executive Director of NOM, contact Elizabeth Ray (x 130, eray@crcpublicrelations.com) or Mary Beth Hutchins (x.105, mhutchins@crcpublicrelations.com) by calling 703-683-5004.
So, if you happen to work for a media outlet that might benefit from an in-person display of NOM's increasingly ugly and shrill appeals to fear, I guess you now know the numbers to call and the folks to email. Enjoy. But, your professional predicament aside, on a personal level, just talking among ourselves, before you decide to make that call or send that email to Liz or Mary at CRC, please know that I would enjoy reading your admission (even if merely posted anonymously in comments here) that you, too, also realize just how sad and pathetic NOM's schtick has become. I mean, at this point, who among us still believes that NOM have any useful advice left to give regarding how to win elections? I mean, at this point, even our colleagues in the Utah press have gathered that they don't.
Why? Because since their Pyrrhic victory in California, NOM have done nothing but lose.
Why? Because, at this point, NOM have become ringleaders of the sort of media circus that any right-minded conservative abhors and any serious Republican recognizes as the central challenge facing the party: how to best usher their clowns offstage to the benefit of both the GOP and the country.
Final thought: Last time I checked, Steve was not a member of the press, Brian. But you insinuate otherwise.
Why? Because you're a clown, Mr. Brown.
---
Miscellany:
Official NOM press release announcing Matt Holland's departure and Orson Scott Card's appointment to the NOM board of directors. At this point, it seems reasonable to assume that the LDS church owns a permanent seat on that board (which would suggest significant and ongoing Mormon financial support for NOM).
Orson Scott Card's article addressing his work for the George Wallace campaign. Not a bad read, actually.
A couple links that explain my beef with Dan: here and here.
During Dan's first term on city council, he managed to pull down $88K/yr working for Ron Prentice's California Family Council (and according to the Form 990s that the CFC filed, Dan was putting in 40 hrs/wk for them during the years he served on the Monrovia City Council).
All the while maintaining his employment with Rio Hondo Prep.
Not to mention Dan's apparent good fortune at having the Yes on 8 campaign choose his "Patriot Design" as a vendor.
Dan apparently likes to keep busy. Good for him.
He's no doubt been reaping countless blessings for all that work he did for Yes on 8 from his perch at the California Family Council, but it looks like keeping his City Council seat won't be one of them. Shucks.
Unless he's re-appointed ... which I really hope doesn't happen. Dan was fortunate to be appointed a seat once already after his previous loss in 2003, even though his opponent, Pam Fitzpatrick, won more votes than Dan in that election. If he were to be appointed again this time around, folks might start to wonder: why's it so darn important that Daniel J. Kirby keep his seat on the Monrovia City Council, when it's obviously not important to Monrovia's voters, who've rejected him twice now?
Apparently, I'm not the only one asking the new council to do the right thing.
And if I were asked to speculate as to the reason why Dan's presence on the council is so highly-valued, well, it might have something to do with this: Dan Kirby's campaign was paid for by property developers (howdy, Samuelson & Fetter).
I noticed that William Duncan from Utah's Marriage Law Foundation and The Sutherland Institute will be testifying in Maine today at the public hearing for LD 1020. Whenever I read Bill's stuff, the objection that invariably comes to mind is Thomas Jefferson's regarding sclerotic institutions:
"I am certainly not an advocate for frequent and untried changes in laws and constitutions. I think moderate imperfections had better be borne with; because, when once known, we accommodate ourselves to them, and find practical means of correcting their ill effects. But I know also, that laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths disclosed, and manners and opinions change with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also, and keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the same coat which fitted him when a boy, as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."
-- from a letter to Samuel Kercheval, July 12, 1810
Admittedly, other than Bill's suggestion that only God-fearing (presumably monogamous?) straight couples care about the next generation, there's not much to that clip. I'm just dropping it here as a heads up for those who might be interested in recognizing Bill in a crowd (and no, that's not meant to sound ominously threatening - I'm sincerely suggesting it might be interesting for anyone able to attend the hearing today to recognize and politely engage Bill if the opportunity should present itself).
What I'm really wondering is how most folks in Maine would react to Sutherland's - i.e., Bill's employer's - stated position in the "Common Ground" debate with Equality Utah?
“We disagree not only with your views, but with every motivation that goes into the [Common Ground Initiative] bills ... Finding any common ground is impossible ... Sexual orientation is an illusion ... Your [the LGBTQ community] idea of rights is an illusion ... You think a piece of paper will make you a family ... You think that love makes you a family.”
Rough stuff. And needless to say, it's more than likely not the tack that Bill will be taking in today's hearing.
As my readers know, I grew up Mormon. And I count many kind and decent Mormons among my family and friends. Bill Duncan and the crew at Sutherland are also Mormon, but kind and decent they're not. What kind of person flies around the country interfering with the ability of families to enjoy the legal protections of civil marriage?
Anyway, if you're keen, you can watch a live stream of the LD 1020 hearing here (from what I understand, the hearing is going to run for the entire day).
Otherwise, here are some random bits about Bill:
Here's Bill singing praise for Maggie Gallagher and NOM (from last May, back before any of us had any idea just how tight the Mormon hierarchy was with NOM, and Bill certainly doesn't let on in this piece).
And here's a fun debunking of Bill's assertion that "the reason the traditional marriage crowd is losing in New England is because marriage is weakest there." And a sampling of the stats from that worthy post (rates of divorce as of 2004):
So, anyway, so much for Bill's argument re New England. But, that said, while the region looks to be in better shape on the marriage front than Bill's own home turf, Maine itself doesn't score so well (4.3 divorces per thousand). But, working from the numbers, that's an admission that would seem to suggest an obvious solution: Maine should follow CT and MA and allow the power of marriage equality to work its magic on its lousy divorce rate. Ha!
And with that, good luck and best wishes today to the defenders of marriage equality in Maine.
Oh, and here's William Duncan at the hearing (it's a yawnfest, sorry):
Deseret News reports that Utah Valley University President Matthew Holland has been replaced on NOM's board by author and Mormon Times columnist Orson Scott Card.
"How long before married people answer the dictators thus: Regardless of law, marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. I will act to destroy that government and bring it down, so it can be replaced with a government that will respect and support marriage, and help me raise my children in a society where they will expect to marry in their turn."
Thanks, NOM. You've just given me a great idea. Starting now, and for as long as Orson Scott Card sits on your board, we'll be posting a fresh OSC quote here every day. Today's entry will be filed under the title A Planet Called Treason
Oh, and all you Dutch, Belgian, Spanish, Swedish, South African, Norwegian, and Canadian dictators, mark Orson's words, you will be replaced!
Update: This post has now been superseded by the following (identical) "WTF, Orson?" entries: here, here, here, here, and here.
The timing of Holland's departure might suggest displeasure among the LDS leadership with NOM's recent and much reported meltdown.
However, sources inside the COB are reporting that the decision to dump NOM was Matthew Holland's alone and was made on April 13 after he'd read that day's LDS Newsroom press release titled "Mormon Apostle’s Easter Message Becomes Top Internet Video":
"A short Easter video from The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints quickly spread over the weekend to become the top “viral” video on the Internet ... The four-and-a-half-minute video was extracted from an address delivered by Elder Jeffrey R. Holland ...
The video was placed Friday evening on LDS.org ... and simultaneously linked to the “Mormon Messages” channel on YouTube ... Traffic began to build immediately. Mormons spontaneously posted the YouTube video on Facebook, discussed it on Twitter and sent it by e-mail to thousands of others, including their friends. By Saturday, the number of views passed 100,000 and kept climbing ... On Monday morning, views had reached close to a quarter million and reached the top of the Viral Video Chart."
As far as the younger Holland was concerned, the YouTube stats were simply the latest retelling of his life's story:
As he picked up the phone, he felt sorry for Maggie. With 43 out of office, she needed Mormon funding now more than ever. But, then again, it wasn't his fault she'd hired zombies to write and act in that confounded ad. And there it was again, the strange thought that someone was tapping out his inner dialogue on a keyboard somewhere. Then it was gone and he made the call.
UPDATE: Holland's replacement? ORSON SCOTT CARD !!
Behold NOM's newest board member:
How long before married people answer the dictators thus: Regardless of law, marriage has only one definition, and any government that attempts to change it is my mortal enemy. I will act to destroy that government and bring it down, so it can be replaced with a government that will respect and support marriage, and help me raise my children in a society where they will expect to marry in their turn.
In his latest column, Frank Rich reports that Matthew Holland, the son of one of the 12 apostles in the Mormon church hierarchy, has now stepped down from NOM's board: The Bigots’ Last Hurrah
But before you click on that link (and do click, it's worthy), I think this is as good a summation as any ... Giant Puppets:
All fun aside, there's obviously nothing wrong with the right attempting to engage in protest politics. The problem is that it was never clear what they were protesting. So far Obama has cut taxes for most of the population and... well, that's it. The protests of "The Left" have long been mocked for lacking message discipline. That criticism has often been fair. The difference is that our side's protests generally have a single point ("don't do this stupid fucking war in Iraq") which gets hijacked by a bunch of other causes when the speakers hit the stage. But the teabaggers... honestly, I still have no idea what it was about. I mean, I know it was about tribal allegiance against Barack Mumia Saddam Obama III. But it wasn't actually about anything else.
But, then again, I would agree with Atrios, wouldn't I?
Pay special attention to that last frame, wingers. Whine and stomp your feet all you want, but elections still matter in this country.
I've never met any of the crew from Mormons for Marriage in real life, so I'm glad they took the time to tape their "Proposition in All Things" panel at the Sunstone West 2009 symposium.
Here's Lisa Fahey:
To watch and read about the other panelists, please head over to Mormons for Marriage.
On a separate topic, Dan Kirby has lost his Monrovia City Council seat.
During Dan's first term on city council, he also managed to pull down $88K/yr working for Ron Prentice's California Family Council (and according to the Form 990s that the CFC filed, Dan was putting in 40 hrs/wk for them during the years he served on the Monrovia City Council).
All the while maintaining his employment with Rio Hondo Prep.
Not to mention Dan's apparent good fortune at having the Yes on 8 campaign choose his "Patriot Design" as a vendor.
Dan apparently likes to keep busy. Good for him.
He's no doubt been reaping countless blessings for all that work he did for Yes on 8 from his perch at the California Family Council, but it looks like keeping his City Council seat won't be one of them. Shucks.
Sorry, Dan.
Unless you're re-appointed ... which I really hope doesn't happen. You were fortunate to be appointed a seat once already after your previous loss in 2003, even though your opponent, Pam Fitzpatrick, won more votes than you in that election. If you're appointed again this time around, folks might start to wonder: why's it so darn important that Daniel J. Kirby keep his seat on the Monrovia City Council? I mean, it's obviously not important to Monrovia's voters, who've rejected you twice now. I'll save the Letters to the Editor and the blog posts for when/if you are re-appointed. For now, this is simply to note the possibility of your back-to-back appointment (and in low-key fashion, urge against it).
Apparently, I'm not the only one asking the new council to do the right thing.
And if I were asked to speculate as to the reason why Dan's presence on the council is so highly-valued, well, it might have something to do with this: Dan Kirby's campaign was paid for by property developers (howdy, Samuelson & Fetter).
I remember back during the recent Chris Buttars kerfuffle, the official Mormon response went something like this:
"The brouhaha over recent intemperate remarks by Senator Chris Buttars is more than a distraction, as some of his colleagues contend. It is nothing less than an embarrassment for the man, the institution he represents and the state where he lives."
Well, Brethren, it's high time to call out Brother Beck in similar fashion.
OK, so NOM was successful in yanking all those YouTubes. Whatever. Watch this:
And voilà:
Add some bonus director's commentary [ be sure to catch NOM's Brian Brown stammering ... "uh, marriage is the union of at least one man and one woman" ... which I take it is Brian's admission that NOM really is a Mormon front org ;-) ]:
And now you're all set to judge for yourself whether any of the sequels manage to surpass the original:
And this is for all the self-righteous shopkeepers over at the Bloggernacle who've been promoting their inventories of torches and pitchforks the past couple days:
So, my question for Adam, Guy, et al.: did Kaimi float?
And correlation doesn't imply causation. But if you grew up Mormon, I wonder if you share my sense that Beck's antics seem all-too-familiar to those of us acquainted with LDS Fast & Testimony meetings?
Posts
