JUST RELEASED: Our New Prop. 8 Web Ad

Donate your Facebook status and tweet it far and wide: No on 8! - Todd

Folks, I'm so proud of this.  Today we're releasing the final product of a totally volunteer, self-financed, zero-budget mostly netroots effort just finished today.  My brother hekebolos and I wrote the script based on his original concept this week.  It was produced by myself, my girlfriend theKK, and Reality Bites Back, with them doing the majority of the legwork to the tune of countless hours on the phone and tapping away at emails.  I can't say enough of the efforts of Reality Bites Back, who directed the piece and walked it through pre- and post-production.  Professional actors, crew and editors volunteered their time and talent for free, coming through in spades to support this production and very important cause.  The Courage Campaign provided organizational backing, location and help with promotion.

A little background on this: the LDS Church has donated over $20 million to the hate-filled Prop. 8 campaign, but it was unwise to go after them and their involvement, as it would have caused the tenor of the campaign to degenerate into a mudfest.  That changed, however, after hekebolos wrote a little-noticed diary asking for volunteers to help look into the donors to the Yes on 8 campaign.  The LDS Church freaked out over the diary, and responded by trying to blackmail businesses that donated against Proposition 8--thereby earning my brother and his diary exposure in the Salt Lake Tribune and on Salt Lake's ABC affiliate.

This was a classic example of what Markos called in his excellent book Taking on the System"feeding the backlash": an old strategy hearkening back to the days of Saul Alinsky, it involves poking your opponent until he draws a sword, then fighting him toe-to-toe on more even footing.  Now that the LDS Church has come out full throttle against us, we need to fight back against them with equal vigor, and inform voters of just how far this corporate organization is willing to go to impose their version of morality on our state's Constitution.

That's why it's so important to show this video to everyone you know, especially to friends outside your regular progressive circles.  The sordid tale of the Mormon Church's involvement in this hate-based debacle is just beginning to trickle out to average voters, and they need to know that by casting a vote for Proposition 8, they are doing little more than doing the bidding of the Mormon Church, without whom this anti-Constitutional effort would barely have even gotten off the ground.

If you're in California and haven't been involved in the No on 8 campaign yet--or even if you have--stand up for your neighbors, family and friends, and get involved today in this fight to protect equal rights from the predations of an outside religious organization today.  Californians need to know what's at stake here, and that if successful this effort will be seen not as a final victory but as a humble beginning to the LDS Church's efforts to buy their way into enshrinement in California's constitutional law.

We're ahead in the polls--but not by much.  We need your help.

Send this video to friends and family in California.  Don't let them get away with it. If they do, what will they ban next?

Tags: advertising, CA Proposition, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints, courage campaign, mormon church, Proposition 8, Taking on the System, Youtube (all tags)

Comments

50 Comments

tips

for victory over the forces of hate and bigotry.

by thereisnospoon 2008-11-01 04:05PM | 0 recs
Re: JUST RELEASED: Our New Prop. 8 Web Ad

Now THAT'S a good No on 8 ad.

Finally!

by reggie44pride 2008-11-01 04:38PM | 0 recs
Re: JUST RELEASED: Our New Prop. 8 Web Ad

Great job.  I just hope lots of folks see it.  I've emailed your ad to everyone I could think of.  No on Hate!!!!!

by calwoman 2008-11-01 05:58PM | 0 recs
Re: Ad rocks!

You should be proud.  Thanks!!

by Chino Blanco 2008-11-01 06:37PM | 0 recs
tapping into anti-Mormon bigotry

is kinda poetic justice.

Did you know Missouri repealed the law making it legal to kill Mormons in 1976?

But if the Mormon church wants to build up its credibility among reactionaries by peddling bigotry, it's hard to feel sorry for the church when the opponents of anti-gay bigotry fan the flames of anti-Mormon bigotry.

by Carl Nyberg 2008-11-01 08:40PM | 0 recs
Re: tapping into anti-Mormon bigotry

Yay, bigotry! You're no better than conservatives counting on the Bradley effect, and you clearly don't have the inconvenience of having Mormon friends.

by JoeFelice 2008-11-01 10:47PM | 0 recs
Re: tapping into anti-Mormon bigotry

I have the inconvenience of Mormon friends and relatives.

And I don't give a fuck.

by thereisnospoon 2008-11-01 10:56PM | 0 recs
Re: tapping into anti-Mormon bigotry

Classy. When I don't give a fuck about who I trash in a campaign, I know who to call. (If Mark Penn, Rick Davis, and Karl Rove are busy.)

by JoeFelice 2008-11-01 11:31PM | 0 recs
Re: tapping into anti-Mormon bigotry

Yes, you do.  Call Frank Schubert, Jeff Flint or any of the other Yes on 8 PR flacks who've been pounding us with deceptive, fearmongering, exploitive garbage ads for months.

by Chino Blanco 2008-11-02 06:07AM | 0 recs
Re: tapping into anti-Mormon bigotry

And your Mormon friends won't have the inconvenience of being legally prohibited from marrying the person they love.

Now I'm as strong a defender of religion as you'll get on this site, but quite frankly, their involvement of their church organization in this campaign is fair game.  I stand with the Courage Campaign in condemning and calling out the LDS church for its antigay bigotry.

by mistersite 2008-11-02 04:02AM | 0 recs
Re: tapping into anti-Mormon bigotry

There's a difference between calling-out the church and using stereotypes against the church.

by Carl Nyberg 2008-11-02 05:09AM | 0 recs
Re: tapping into anti-Mormon bigotry

How exactly does it use stereotypes against the church?

by Chino Blanco 2008-11-02 06:16AM | 0 recs
Mormons on mission as enforcers of ban

on gay marriage.

Picture an ad making a point about the Israel lobby exerting to much influence using two characters dressed as Hassidic Jews to make the point.

Or picture the gay marriage commercial using two guys from the Fruit of Islam as the enforcers.

The commercial ties together something intrinsic to Mormonism (going on mission) that is pointless to the commercial.

by Carl Nyberg 2008-11-02 08:34AM | 0 recs
Re: Mormons on mission as enforcers of ban

If Hasidic Jews were backing Prop 8 to the tune of $20 million dollars, I'd be fine with seeing them replace the Mormon missionaries in this ad.  Ditto for the Fruit of Islam.

But the problem with your hypothetical is that if Hasidic Jews or the Fruit of Islam were playing the same role in this campaign as the Mormons are now, there would be no need for the ad you're objecting to here.

In other words ...

In the real world, the stars of the Prop 8 ads are Mormon.  The lead spokeswoman for the Prop 8 campaign is Mormon.  The folks out on the street corners waving those Yes on 8 signs are mostly Mormon.

In your hypothetical world, all those people would be either Hasidic Jews or the Fruit of Islam.  In such a hypothetical world, our side would have no need to run hard-hitting ads, much less advertise.  

by Chino Blanco 2008-11-02 09:34AM | 0 recs
Re: tapping into anti-Mormon bigotry

I guess I should have said it explicitly.

I'm uncomfortable with the ad tapping into anti-Mormon bigotry.

by Carl Nyberg 2008-11-02 05:08AM | 0 recs
This is a MAJORLY lame-o ad.

Seriously, people.

As a gay ex-pat NoCaler, who thinks Prop 8 should go down flaming bright, I think this ad is really fundamentally bad tactics.

The fact that the Who Broke My Window!? crowd are bankrolling the Yes on 8 campaign is extremely troubling.  But why demonize them?  It's transparently petty, and politically inconsistent.

Prop 8 is not about a cultural war of us vs. them.  It's about civil rights (remember?).  Is it worth totally alienating reasonable Mormons (they exist!) to score a point of pride?

by tjf1977 2008-11-01 09:18PM | 0 recs
Re: This is a MAJORLY lame-o ad.

THANK YOU!

I watched this and was rather horrified at how bad it was. It seems sinister, anti-mormon, and utterly silly.

I think a lot of the debate is rather poorly framed. Prop 8 doesn't take away the rights of gays it takes away the rights of all Californians. As a straight man I won't be using my right to marry men anytime soon but it doesn't mean I don't have it. If prop 8 passes my sister will have rights that I do not, that's a 14th amendment violation and the grounds on which all anti-gay marriage statutes are going to be struck down.

Ex Post Facto laws are prohibited and as such it wouldn't revoke the marriages which have already occurred but rather prevent more from happening. Although, it would be in pretty clear violation of a few more 14th amendment statutes and be lined right back up to be slapped right back down.

Finally the sinister anti-Mormon vibe is pretty stupid. Mormons want to control you! Mormons want to steal your rights. Fear the Mormons! You don't fight bigotry with bigotry. As an atheist, I certainly don't agree with any bit of Mormonism and am probably more versed than most of you as to how silly it is. They are certainly wrong to fund this bigoted proposition but making them out like evil slimy right stealers out to victimize you and your wife is unacceptable.

by Tatarize 2008-11-01 09:07PM | 0 recs
Re: This is a MAJORLY lame-o ad.

I am not persuaded that this would constitute an "ex post facto" law, if passed.  The State of California has the ability to void its own acts as a matter of public policy, or to deny them future legal effect.  This is different from criminalizing ex post facto an act not illegal when done; the first is administrative and civil, the latter criminal.

It's more akin to the state granting a business license to a casino, then revoking that license or passing a law banning casino gambling; they don't have to grandfather the old casinos in for future business, but they cannot prosecute them for violating a ban that had not yet existed.  If you are a scholar on this point, please correct me; it's been 14 years since I had to examine this question.

The LDS Church has made a very specific point of jamming this through as a church project, even to the point of interrogating church members during Temple Recommend interviews about whether the member has not only put up a Prop 8 yard sign but also donated substantial sums to the effort.  The church's activities in this regard are extremely fair game; they are misusing their tax-exempt status as a church not to minister to their faithful or to teach their dogma, but to make their dogma the law of California, non-Mormons be damned.  But reasonable minds can absolutely differ on the prudence of this choice of tone.

by Bruce Godfrey 2008-11-01 09:39PM | 0 recs
you're wrong on this point

Prop 8 is not a law.  It is an amendment to the California constitution, stating that only a marriage between a man and a woman shall be recognized in California.

That automatically invalidates the thousands of same-sex marriages currently recognized in the state as unconstitutional.

It's not an ex-post-facto law.  the marriages themselves become unconstitutional.

by hekebolos 2008-11-02 12:09AM | 0 recs
Re: you're wrong on this point

The marriages would not be recognized by the state but they wouldn't be revoked. If you went to MA or some other some of the states where it is legally recognized they would still be recognized. However if you take a California gay marriage to say Texas, you'll see pretty quickly that it is denied (in violation of the 14th amendment/this is why a number of states recognize without allowing filings) they still exist and even though the marriages exist it would make California like other states that don't recognize them.

It's an oddity to be sure, if you went to New Jersey the marriage would still be seen as valid, but California wouldn't recognize the California marriage license. That's different than invalidating. When the amendment gets overturned again (and it would if it passed) the original marriages would just be again recognized and not need to be redone.

by Tatarize 2008-11-02 01:27AM | 0 recs
Re: This is a MAJORLY lame-o ad.

How can an ad seem "sinister" and "silly" at the same time?  If it's silly, that kind of takes the edge off the sinister, don't it?

by Chino Blanco 2008-11-02 10:03AM | 0 recs
Re: This is a MAJORLY lame-o ad.

I suppose this speaks to the issue of ads that are both effective and unfair.  Trading upon anti-Mormon bias could very well work for a good percentage of the electorate and I am inclined, given how strongly I feel about this issue, to accept any tactic, but, in the end, I personally would not green-light this.  I thought the letter linked to here earlier this week from a Mormon arguing against Prop 8 using an insider's knowledge was far more effective, even to people of other Christian faiths (As an atheist I'm probably not the best judge but the sincerity of the letter was the key thing for me).  

I guess, for me, I'd rather that this ad not be out there but, if it does have an impact against 8, I can live with that.  It can probably be said that the the Church of LDS is more annoyingly aggressive about imposing their beliefs on others than many other faiths.  Certainly I find great irony in the Mormon Church's hamfisted stance against one pretty simple variation away from "traditional" marriage given their history of promoting other more complex models of marriage.

by cthulhu 2008-11-01 10:01PM | 0 recs
It's not so much

designed to play up anti-Mormon bias as it is designed to talk about the issue of one single religion trying to impose its will on the state government.

It happens to be the Mormons, which makes it more effective, given existing anti-Mormon bigotry.

by hekebolos 2008-11-02 12:12AM | 0 recs
Re: JUST RELEASED: Our New Prop. 8 Web Ad

Devastatingly good.  Am pushing this like wildfire.  I didn't see it up over at Big Orange.  

Funny - my gay ex-mormon pal from college just walked out the door before I saw this ad.  Hope he reads my email when he gets off the DC Metro....

by Bruce Godfrey 2008-11-01 09:18PM | 0 recs
To the Heart of it all

WOW! GREAT ad!  Because you nailed it; some religious people are attempting to govern their beliefs over other American citizens. I feel we must campaign for our country's religious freedoms. Since our founding, when white men were the only ones allowed to vote and hold property, most Americans (women, ethnic and people of color) have struggled for true freedom.  Progressives are united to continue our collective civil rights struggle.

by dogenman 2008-11-02 01:51AM | 0 recs
Re: JUST RELEASED: Our New Prop. 8 Web Ad

I am 100% against prop 8.  Its just wrong.

But this ad, the way it tries to demonize the LDS just seems to employ the sort of prejudice, and politics of division we're supposed to be fighting against just makes me a little uncomfortable.

Lets be pro-marriage equality rather than anti-mormon.

by liberalj 2008-11-02 02:28AM | 0 recs
Re: JUST RELEASED: Our New Prop. 8 Web Ad

Seconded,

This ad makes me really uncomfortable- it seems like an attempt just to get votes off of anti-Mormon bias. I'm actually shocked so many progressives are ok with this.

And whats weird is that the LDS thing is totally unnecessary for the point of the ad.

by js noble 2008-11-02 04:45AM | 0 recs
Re: JUST RELEASED: Our New Prop. 8 Web Ad

I think the ad could be done without mentioning the Mormon Church, but it is an effective way of painting the "Yes" side as being deep pocket interlopers.

But including the door-to-door Mormons on mission as the enforcers is the part that crosses the line into denigrating Mormon religious practices in a way that's unconnected to Prop 8.

by Carl Nyberg 2008-11-02 05:18AM | 0 recs
Re: JUST RELEASED: Our New Prop. 8 Web Ad

Knocking on doors is NOT a religious practice.  It's a way of contacting potential converts.  Mormon missionaries could just as well work phone banks or organize house parties to accomplish the same thing.

There are countless Mormon-produced, Mormon-directed movies about mission life, with depictions that range from dramatic to zany.  For example:

God's Army (2000)

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0238247/

What better visual shorthand for "Mormon" is there than a couple of missionaries?

And how could this ad be done without mentioning the Mormon church, when that's the whole point of the ad?  Should the ad have simply run a scrolling screen with the words:  "Somewhere in California, some church has become the major force behind the push to eliminate marriage equality.  If you'd like to know the name of this church, please read a newspaper or ask a friend."

by Chino Blanco 2008-11-02 09:53AM | 0 recs
Re: JUST RELEASED

the ad narrated by Samuel L Jackson (i think it was him, sounds like him anyway) on the front page yesterday is the kind of ad that NO on Prop 8 can be proud of.

I think its much more effective too.

by liberalj 2008-11-02 05:20AM | 0 recs
Re: JUST RELEASED: Our New Prop. 8 Web Ad
OUTSTANDING ad... brutal and true. Congrats on a job well done.
by Nag 2008-11-02 03:31AM | 0 recs
Re: JUST RELEASED: Our New Prop. 8 Web Ad

Best one I've seen yet.

(Except they should have shown the mormons trashing the funiture and saying something like "now we'll go after single mothers" or "couples living in sin" when they were leaving.)

by Bush Bites 2008-11-02 04:29AM | 0 recs
Is this ad actually going to make it on TV???
because that's where it would have the most effect...
many of Prop 8's proponents aren't exactly big on the internet....
by mrburns17 2008-11-02 04:45AM | 0 recs
dream tuesday night
Prop 8 wins 52%+
Obama wins 55% nationwide 390 electoral votes
Dems wins 250+ house seats, 60 senate seats
----
I support Obama in being against gay marriage.
by yellowdem1129 2008-11-02 05:02AM | 0 recs
if my gay family and friends want to marry

what is the compelling public policy reason to use the government to prevent this?

by Carl Nyberg 2008-11-02 05:13AM | 0 recs
Re: if my gay family and friends want to marry

If you read Yellowdem's diaries on this, you'll see that he doesn't have any compelling public policy point to make. The best he could reply last time I asked that was to say that gay people disgust him, and we have the right to legislate things for the good of society.

But I never quite understood why establishing legislation that caters to Yellowdem's personal level of disgust is somehow good public policy.

by fsm 2008-11-02 08:58AM | 0 recs
Re: dream tuesday night

Obama opposes Prop 8.  But, of course, you already know that.

by Chino Blanco 2008-11-02 06:22AM | 0 recs
Re: dream tuesday night

So it's clear that Obama opposes Prop 8 but that, in general, their position seems to be a support for the civil union option.  I find this somewhat contradictory and confusing and it doesn't surprise me that people think Obama supports the opposite view.  The answers in the VP debate were so mushy on both sides.  Moving forward, while the Dems have made some noise about dealing with DADT in cooperation with DOD, I haven't heard any perspectives about what should be done, if anything, about DOMA.

by cthulhu 2008-11-02 08:32AM | 0 recs
Re: dream tuesday night

As the Democratic nominee for President, I am proud to join with and support the LGBT community in an effort to set our nation on a course that recognizes LGBT Americans with full equality under the law. That is why I support extending fully equal rights and benefits to same sex couples under both state and federal law. That is why I support repealing the Defense of Marriage Act and the "Don't Ask Don't Tell" policy, and the passage of laws to protect LGBT Americans from hate crimes and employment discrimination.

And that is why I oppose the divisive and discriminatory efforts to amend the California Constitution, and similar efforts to amend the U.S. Constitution or those of other states.

For too long. issues of LGBT rights have been exploited by those seeking to divide us. It's time to move beyond polarization and live up to our founding promise of equality by treating all our citizens with dignity and respect. This is no less than a core issue about who we are as Democrats and as Americans.

Finally, I want to congratulate all of you who have shown your love for each other by getting married these last few weeks. My thanks again to the Alice B. Toklas LGBT Democratic Club for allowing me to be a part of today's celebration. I look forward to working with you in the coming months and years, and I wish you all continued success.

Sincerely,

Barack Obama

by Chino Blanco 2008-11-02 10:09AM | 0 recs
Re: JUST RELEASED: Our New Prop. 8 Web Ad

I understand the "don't bash the LDS church sentiment" BUT this is a reasonable time to do so.  One of the most outlandish things about Prop 8 is that the backers are from LDS.  It's a big deal.  Very wrong for Utah to set the laws of California.  

by Quint 2008-11-02 05:05AM | 0 recs
New Prop. 8 Web Ad Diminishes MyDD
This ad is beneath us.  If ads against Democratic LDS members Tom Udall or Harry Reid appealed to this sort of anti-Mormon bias, I expect this site would rightly condemn them as bigotry.  Same with Right-wing appeals that play on intolerance towards Muslims.  
The LDS Church's stance on prop 8 is awful, and seizing on prejudice towards homosexuals to drum up support for the measure is deplorable.  But playing on prejudice against Mormons to build opposition to prop 8 is not the right answer if we want to retain the moral authority to criticize others for using the same tactics.
by benk 2008-11-02 05:10AM | 0 recs
Re: New Prop. 8 Web Ad Diminishes MyDD

As i said above, I completely agree with this.

Please, progressives... we are better than this. We must not start using conservative tactics.

by liberalj 2008-11-02 05:22AM | 0 recs
Re: New Prop. 8 Web Ad Diminishes MyDD

We must not start using conservative tactics.

How is this a conservative tactic?  

Moreover, Democrats should stop playing "nice."  If Democrats played by the rules of the GOP in marketing their policies, we'd never have gotten Bush or a GOP majority for 8 years.

Playing nice = losing.

by reggie44pride 2008-11-02 02:25PM | 0 recs
If this ad had been released earlier ...

... before Mormon donations to the Prop 8 campaign totaled $20,000,000 ... or before Richard Peterson, a Mormon, appeared in the first alarmist Prop 8 TV ads ... or before the Wirthlins, also Mormons, appeared in later, equally alarmist, ads ... or before Sonja Eddings Brown, another Mormon, took over as spokeswoman for the campaign ... or before sign-waving Yes on 8 volunteers (predominantly Mormon) took over California's street corners ... or before Mark Jansson, Mormon, signed his name to a letter from the Prop 8 campaign seeking to extort contributions from No on 8 donors ...

... if this ad had been released before all of that had already happened, it might have been out-of-bounds.

But it wasn't and it isn't.

by Chino Blanco 2008-11-02 06:47AM | 0 recs
Re: If this ad had been released earlier ...

In case you hadn't noticed, there are a few prominent Muslims who have said and done some pretty vile things about/to our country in the name of Islam.  That doesn't mean playing on anti-Muslim bigotry is an acceptable tactic in political campaigns, and I'd like to think that this community would be the first to say so.  Taking advantage of bigotry against Mormons is no different.  

by benk 2008-11-02 07:06AM | 0 recs
don't forget there Jews and Christians

who have done terrible stuff to the USA in the name of their political-religious ideology. The whole Neo Con movement falls into this category, Christian Zionists and Likudniks alike.

by Carl Nyberg 2008-11-02 08:37AM | 0 recs
Re: If this ad had been released earlier ...

So, the Mormons can spend $20 million on an initiative to deprive Californians of civil rights, but what we really need to be worried about is offending precious MyDD sensibilities with a tongue-in-cheek depiction of a couple Mormon missionaries?

Is the viewer of the ad led to believe that these guys are actually Mormon missionaries?  Of course not.  The ad's over-the-top style makes the parody obvious.

Or is it that you find ANY depiction of Mormon missionaries to be somehow off-limits?  C'mon ... a campy depiction does not equal denigration.  

Someone up top even seemed to suggest that depicting a couple of missionaries at work was somehow disrespectful of Mormon "religious practices" ... Look, I was a Mormon missionary for two years:  Walking up to a house and knocking on a door is NOT a religious practice for us.  It just happens to be the easiest way to find out if anybody is home.  In fact, on my mission in Brazil, we didn't knock, but rather, per local custom, would stand at the gate and clap.  

Re your overwrought Muslim/Mormon comparison:  would a depiction of a stereotypical Manhattan taxi driver in a movie or TV show always necessarily be an attempt to exploit anti-Muslim bigotry?  (I'm using "stereotype" here in the sense of "the cowboy is an American stereotype")  The ad is all about calling out the Mormons for what they're doing in California.  What's the most widely-recognized Mormon stereotype available?  Mormon missionaries.  If you needed a visual symbol of "The Mormon Church" isn't using the missionaries kind of a no-brainer?  

And, anyway, there are plenty of Mormon-funded movies that include humorous depictions of Mormon missionaries at work, so it's not like there's some religious injunction against such a depiction.    

As far as taking advantage of bigotry is concerned, any bigotry against Mormons on the part of the viewer remains the viewer's problem, not the ad-maker's.  The ad is clearly camp/parody/tongue-in-cheek ... And the ad's criticism is specific to Mormon political involvement, saying nothing about Mormon beliefs.  Bottom line, ANY church that decides to invest so heavily in a political campaign should not be surprised to become the target of political ads.

The LDS church chose to enter the political arena, and now that they have, they're fair game, just like everybody else.  

Equality.

by Chino Blanco 2008-11-02 08:48AM | 0 recs
Re: JUST RELEASED: Our New Prop. 8 Web Ad

The point isn't that all depictions of "stereotypes" are intended to exploit bigotry.  It's just that this one clearly is.  "Don't like Mormons?  Then vote no on 8."  We wouldn't stand for this kind of "parody" if it were coming from conservatives, so we shouldn't be promulgating it ourselves.  

by benk 2008-11-02 02:29PM | 0 recs
"Conservatives" and "parody"

"Conservatives" don't do "parody" ...

When was the last time conservatives answered attacks with anything as remotely humorous as this ad ?

What if this had been a solemn ad showing a picture of the Salt Lake Temple accompanied by a straightforward presentation of the facts regarding Mormon involvement in the Prop 8 campaign?  Would that be exploiting bigotry?  Of course not.  But it would be boring.

Look, this ad is clearly asking the viewer to get angry at Mormon involvement in the Prop 8 campaign.  That's the whole point of the ad.  It's important to note that the reasons for getting angry are stated upfront and openly in big bold yellow letters.  This ad clearly does not rely on bigotry to make its case.  

My sense is that most of the objections here are coming from folks who simply feel uncomfortable seeing Mormon missionaries being parodied.

If you've been paying attention to the garbage spewing from the Yes on 8 side, I think you'd agree that this 11th-hour spoof is in no way equivalent to the shameless tactics that have been used against us.

by Chino Blanco 2008-11-02 05:11PM | 0 recs
Re: JUST RELEASED: Our New Prop. 8 Web Ad

I am saddened with the depictions of the Mormon church in the add. It surprises me the same campaign that is asking for tolerance is mocking a religious group. This tactic seems inconsistent to me. Focus the attack on the issue at hand, not the people involved. Let the mormons be, let them have their opinion and vote. Make your voice heard at the ballot box, not in parody.

by Change4America 2008-11-03 05:18PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads