Tweet
Why has NOM chair John C. Eastman (left) has been silent during this week's scandal while former chair Maggie Gallagher (right) has been spinning her heart out to explain it away?
We’ve all missed one fact during the scandal this week involving the revelation of confidential documents leaking the National Organization for Marriage’s plans for homophobic race-baiting and other eyebrow-raising tactics to stop marriage equality.
Where in the heck is NOM’s chair, John C. Eastman?
We’ve read statements from NOM president Brian Brown and its former chair, Maggie Gallagher - statements which were obviously coming from a sad attempt to spin this controversy into a minor blip or the fault of the gay community.
And we’ve seen Gallagher on MSNBC furthering that bad spin.
But throughout the entire thing, we have yet to hear or see NOM’s present chair Eastman.
In September of last year, NOM announced that Gallagher was stepping down as chair to focus on specific and outside projects and that Eastman was taking her place.
But since then, Eastman has been pretty much a ghost. And that is his prerogative. Some board chairs are very hands-off.
However, for a controversy of the magnitude we have been seeing (and I think that we will be hearing more as time goes on), isn’t it strange that not only has NOM’s chair been conspicuously silent, but its former chair has been the leading face and voice in trying to quell the controversy?
I think that there is more to Mr. Eastman’s absence than meets the eye.
Photo from LGBTQ Nation.
6 Comments
Can you say “figurehead”?
Eastman needs to be asked by the media if the 2012 strategy memos outline the same tactics as the 2009 ones did, or have they changed course? After all, it was a board report, he’s chair of the board, he’d know.
Are you surprised an organization that lacks collective cognitive ability lacks integrity?
Holy Cow! The whole “Maggie Gallagher” and NOM thing was a conceptual art performance piece by Roseanne Barr!
Very good question, Alvin.
I wonder why no one in the traditional media is asking it.
So does this mean that (diploma mill “Dr”) Patrick Wooden et al were just paid talking heads… allowing their supposed faith and their congregations to be used in exchange for financial compensation?
And did NOM actually select Wooden specifically because they knew he was a joke and a fraud that would make an easy target with his tall tales about butt plugs and cell phones and his store bought college degree…
…for that matter, did the Tea Party engage in similar race-baiting by throwing Herman Cain’s hat into the POTUS race knowing full well that his lack of qualifications and past indiscretions would quickly make him a laughing stock in the media.