Comments

  1. says

    Well, that opening sentence is an extraordinarily Freudian bit of dissonance:

    “The surest sign one is losing a debate is to resort to character assassination. The Southern Poverty Law Center, a liberal fundraising machine whose tactics have been condemned by observers across the politicial spectrum…”

    Uh huh. They don’t even see what they just did there, do they?

  2. says

    “they can’t win in this debate” LOL What mirror world do they live in?

    “the research we put out” “empirical peer-reviewed research”
    that’s where they’re lying (well, ONE place)

    SPLC is a “very marginal group”???? right!

  3. alguien says

    no, i don’t think i’ll watch tony perkins spew his lies. i already know what he’s going to say and that the folks at fox & friends (we should all be suspect of a purported news show that has the same name as a kids’ show, anyhow)will say nothing to contradict him on his message of lies.

  4. Tommy C. says

    Hey there, Andrew W.,
    Rest assured that the FRC does indeed know what they’ve done there. They are more sophisticated than most bigots. After Tony Perkins listed his military and police background, he then asserts the “fungible” hate message, this time against gay folks, another time against “abortionists” both patients & their doctors, repeating their organization’s Major Lie that they don’t hate these targets of their intolerance. They merely spend all of their donor cash on attacking them with vitriol. As Will Rogers once said, “Never trust a man who keeps telling you how honest he is!” These barbarians in finely tailored suits & ties have as their primary goal the traitorous goal of an American Theocracy. These are well-practiced deceivers who justify any means to their ultimate goal of a Christian Dominionist takeover of all levels of American government in order to exterminate, in the name of God, all who differ from a New Testament co-opted message that sees the Jewish Jesus Christ as being born into swaddling clothes colored red, white and blue. They’re stupid but cunning, and have no scruples in misleading the heathens amongst them in order to dominate, convert, or eliminate non-believers.

  5. Natira says

    The Southern Poverty Law Center is “a very marginal group”? The SPLC has been attacked by domestic terrorist hate groups before, and they still are.

  6. Dave says

    Steve Doocy goes to my gym and I have seen him check out guys in the locker room. He’s a total closet case. Creepy old lurker.

  7. Craig says

    And they Klan never burned crosses in people’s yards, either. BBQ’s that got out hand, don’t ya know? They were just being neighborly and wanted to welcome blacks into the neighborhood. Right.

    Nice try Tony. Freak.

  8. says

    “SPLC is a “very marginal group”???? right!”

    Yes they are.

    But that DOESN’T excuse the hateful and prejudiced antics against gay people done by FRC and others. SPLC has for the most part lost much of its cred by only targeting groups on the right, which means that they themselves ARE biased and in the end only inflict more harm than good to the groups they declare to defend.

    One way the SPLC can regain any form of credibility as to also pay attention to the hate groups on the LEFT. Maybe they can start with some commenters on here who foam at the mouth, bash, and spout hateful, demeaning rhetoric against those they disagree with (mainly non-liberal non-Marxist gays).

  9. David in Houston says

    I love how the Fox & Friends host doesn’t even try to be impartial. “If you’re part of a conservative group, then you’re a hate group!” Of course, that’s not why the SPLC labeled the FRC a hate group. The host is either ignorant or is lying. Either way, they’re hardly “Fair & Balanced”.

    PEPA: Apparently, the SPLC hasn’t lost any cred, considering how these newly labeled hate groups are foaming at the mouth. They keep saying it’s a badge of honor, but based on their incessant need to go on TV to defend themselves, I think they might be lying… which is nothing new for them.

  10. says

    “Not many…”

    Exactly.

    “but that’s not the fault of the SPLC.”

    Not exactly. For one, how do I know its not their fault? I don’t know if its laziness or what have you, but there is TOO MUCH hate going around from too many groups and left-leaning web sites…(ie calling others “closet cases” “faggots” “brainless” “idiots” “racists” etc etc)

    Secondly you cannot call out on other people’s hate, when you yourselves engage in it as well. Again just for starters take a gander at some of the comments posted on here with respect to people who disagree with liberals. We are called every name in the book, even though I support gay rights.

  11. says

    “PEPA: Apparently, the SPLC hasn’t lost any cred”

    In that case why hasn’t the MAJORITY of people agree with them on the fact that FRC and the other “pro-family” groups are in fact hateful.

    The facts are in, and yes FRC is hateful. But whether you like it or not, the SPLC cannot convince a lot of people on this issue nor on many others. What else could it be besides lack of CREDIBILITY?

    A CREDIBLE agency/organization would have no problem convincing the public that these groups are indeed hateful. But unfortunately many people perceive the SPLC as being a left-leaning org with liberal sympathies and bias, therefore negating and jeopardizing its supposed objectivity. And it is a well known fact that the SPLC is left leaning and Fox News will run with it, in essence killing any possibility to actually convince the audience that indeed the FRC IS a hate group.

  12. BobN says

    “For one, how do I know its not their fault?”

    Well, go out and identify the left-wing, organized groups you think are promoting hate and see if you find any that the SPLC doesn’t list.

    As for your conflation of organized hate groups with anonymous internet posts calling people names, well, it’s too silly to address.

  13. says

    “As for your conflation of organized hate groups with anonymous internet posts calling people names, well, it’s too silly to address.”

    It has the same effect though. The reason why FRC is a HATE group (the way that many understood it) was because it facilitated a platform for certain individuals to DEMEAN other people based on who they are.

    This is no different.

  14. ravewulf says

    @pepa

    Us Liberals/Bold Progressives may certainly be pissed off to no end at certain things, but we aren’t actively trying to take away other people’s rights / dehumanize minority groups etc.

    Disliking someone for their views vs disliking someone simply for who/what they are (gender/sexual orientation/racial/ethnic/religous) are completely different things.

  15. nic says

    loosey goosey doocey is the last faggot that should be hitching his easter parade wagon to the falling star that is the extreme right-wing. fox news has its dependable whores. fox and friends is replete with subservient hookers.

  16. anon says

    The influence of the SPLC is that groups on their list have a hard time getting insurance and donations from Corporations. Also, they are essentially one step removed from domestic terrorist organizations, in which case donations would be illegal. However, DTOs are listed on the AG level.

  17. Craig says

    @Pepa. Hate to tell you this, but just look at the tone of your own comments versus everyone else’s. The right loves to throw this hate on both sides stuff, but frankly, I’ve been both a Republican and a Democrat, and an ultra conservative and a ultra-liberal to boot, and I just don’t hear the hate speech on the left that I do from the right right now. It’s why I left the Republican party in 2003 when Bush made gay marriage a central part of his campaign. The SPLC is a very respected organization, Pepa. FRC is a professional hate group, there’s no other way of putting it. That’s all they exist for: hate. They make big salaries to be professional haters on TV and radio. I can’t think of a single organization on the left or center that does any such thing. My church is very liberal, and you won’t hear a word of hate directed at anyone. I truly wish I could say the same for the religious right.

  18. ichabod says

    @ ANON: “The influence of the SPLC is that groups on their list have a hard time getting insurance and donations from Corporations.”

    Ah, now I see why they’re all getting do bent out of shape. They’re not offended that they are being called out as the hate mongers they are, they’re scared their cash flow is going to dry up (and rightfully so!)

    It always comes down to money…

  19. says

    “Us Liberals/Bold Progressives may certainly be pissed off to no end at certain things, but we aren’t actively trying to take away other people’s rights / dehumanize minority groups etc.”

    The Taking away of rights is another argument altogether, and one that needs to be looked at from all angles, and YES liberals have taken rights away from people, from imposing laws against the consumption of marijuana, the intake of SALT, to keep guns, and to keep the money that YOU make. In fact property (whether monetary or real) is a civil rights issue, all man have a right to life, liberty, property … and I met to many liberals that HATE IT when people actually use their talents to gain WEALTH and want to take that away from them. This is a violation of their rights because YOU are taking away something they have dully EARNED. You cannot take away someone else’s marriage license (a la prop 8) and same goes to their property and wealth. So I don’t buy that BS that liberals don’t take away rights, they DO ALL THE TIME.

    “Disliking someone for their views vs disliking someone simply for who/what they are (gender/sexual orientation/racial/ethnic/religous) are completely different things.”

    We are not talking about “disliking” here, we are talking about HATE. And no, I don’t see both perceptions differently because the FRC HATES gay people not just because of who they are but ALSO because of what gay people BELIEVE IN (tolerance and equal treatment etc). I’ve been subjected to hatred by liberals for being BOTH a non-liberal (libertarian) as in my IDENTITY and for what I BELIEVE IN.

    I mean look no further than the following comment:
    “@Ravewulf: Thanks for shutting PEPA up.”

    Liberals are culpable as well for they are in many respects driven by ANIMOSITY.

  20. says

    “The influence of the SPLC is that groups on their list have a hard time getting insurance and donations from Corporations.”

    We’ll have to wait and see. However since the SPLC is viewed as a liberal organization, the designation of FRC as a hate group can do the opposite effect and embolden social conservatives and they will try to double or triple fund-raising efforts. Since, like in this segment of Fox and Friends, the FRC is being painted as a the latest “victim” of character assassination by the left. Trust me, they will play on that, and use it to strengthen (or it least try) their base.

  21. says

    “@Pepa. Hate to tell you this, but just look at the tone of your own comments versus everyone else’s.”

    Obviously you have tunnel vision. I’ve been called a faggot, a Nazi, a mental patient, a “troll” just because of my IDENTITY and my BELIEFS.

    Just stick around, you’ll see some of that “tolerant tone” that you so “tolerant” liberals are so famous for. LOL.

    “I can’t think of a single organization on the left or center that does any such thing. [Hate]”

    Of course you can’t, because you are already biased as you have a preference with liberals. The skunk cannot smell its own stink… so they say. Again, stick around and watch how your liberal friends are so “tolerant” of my views and me even being here, I mean it is already working out pretty well already:

    “@Ravewulf: Thanks for shutting PEPA up.

    There is more hatred and animosity to come.

  22. nic says

    @PEPA,

    you are an idiot. FRC may try to play the victim, but they are hardly credible. the SPLC is reacting to hate mongering by special interest groups. the SPLC haS a long history of standing up to bullies, racists, and bigots. more power to them.

  23. says

    It is interesting how when they are called out on what they spew, they deny that they promote anything other than peace and love, fox news is not on my viewing schedule nor will it be any time soon, they are a hate group unto themselves. btw, I don’t need to see the host lurking in a gym to think he is gay.

  24. Rob says

    Let’s not forget that FRC members are part of this shadowy “Family” organization on C-street (that starts with single men living together, then having bizarre sex scandals later- Ensign, Sanford, others.) They are on record as supporting, and have traveled to implement, the “Kill the Gays” bill in Uganda. Supporting killing gays is exactly what the KKK does. Connection doesn’t seem remote to me, at all.

    To call the SPLC far left, or marginal, when they have single handedly dismantled the KKK creeps me out. The SPLC is effective.

    Morris Dees makes me hard.

  25. Bud Burgoon-Clark says

    Now I ask you: does Ms Perkins have the pucker of a cock-sucker, or WHAT?

    He NEEDS to be throwed down, rode hard, and put away wet.

  26. Brad says

    @PEPA

    You wanna talk hate from the extreme left, let’s talk. Whenever I leave a comment on this blog that a atheist, socialist, democrat, etc. person disagrees with, I get nasty comments every time. But at least TOWELROAD doesn’t delete my comments like some blogs. Back in the day when the commenter’s email address was available, whenever I left a comment that some didn’t like, I could except a slew of virus ladened emails. Many times when someone disagrees they’re labeled a “troll” or “flamer”. And then there’s the bloggers who even go as far as posting your I.P. address when you disagree with them.

    I’ve learned, that as a rule of thumb, you can leave a comment that disagrees with the blogger, but NEVER substantiate that with references.

  27. Natira says

    Here’s what’s bothering me. If we want the mainstream media to ignore these groups and stop giving them a platform, shouldn’t bloggers and other net areas also stop paying attention to them?

    If you google these groups and people, many of the links are for pro-gay sites opposing these groups. The media also searches for opposing views for their discussions and coverage of gay issues. To an extent, the community is giving credence to these groups by featuring them negatively.

  28. justiceontherocks says

    It’s interesting, to me anyway, that the head of FRC (which is not to be confused with HRC) chose “Tony Perkins” as his stage name. We all know about the Tony Perkins who played Norman Bates in “Psycho” and was in real life a terribly conflicted and highly promiscuous homosexual.

    Just a thought.

  29. TJ says

    Interesting comments here. I, too, have seen those who post opposing views unfairly labeled as “trolls.” But to characterize many of those who disagree with you, PEPA, in a way that equates the defensive response to people who use words like abomination to the offensive belief systems and resultant call to action of the extreme right, just doesn’t make sense.
    Philosophically, I don’t even know where to begin to address in a way that would make someone like you understand how reasonable regulation of firearms might be necessary in a civilized society. Or how living in a civilized society necessitates supporting one’s community through sharing of resources, because no man is an island. We will have to agree to disagree. But on the main issue, I’m going to call you out.

  30. says

    @ TJ

    Again you are being biased. You would think that being called a “troll” is nothing. Already I am being called an idiot on this board by YOU “tolerant” liberals. Already I am being told to shut-up. In other boards I was called a “teabagger” by the Andy and others, I was threatened, called an “abomination” and that my mother “should have aborted me” by YOU LIBERALS.

    If that isn’t hate, what is it then? Disagreement?

    If that is the case, then what FRC is doing is not hate (since they say the same things to all of us but in “a nicer way”) is just merely “disagreeing” with homosexuals.

    As far as regulating guns, well, you don’t know what you are talking about. “Regulate” supposed to mean (in a legal way) to “make regular” so in essence you want guns to be made regular. A person has a right to self defense, period. Whether it is against a gay-bashing homophobe, or what have you, we have A RIGHT TO LIFE, and we must be free to PROTECT that right against all aggressors. You libs don’t see it that way. You only see victims, not defenders of oneself.

    “living in a civilized society necessitates supporting one’s community through sharing of resources…”

    Give me your address, I need some groceries LOL. Oh do you have a plasma TV, I always needed one of those, you don’t mind sharing that, would you? Oh since its Saturday I will being going out on a date, while I am at your house show me where your closet is… I need some new clothes for my date… Oh and where is your bathroom… need some soap and lotions, and oooh, some towels too… now lets head to your attic see what else you can “share with the community” LOL.

  31. TJ says

    Never said being called a troll means nothing. And I specifically stated that i wouldn’t engage in a philosophical debate on some issues, for reasons you just proved. I maintain that you are comparing apples with oranges in your other argument. If you get how awful it is to be called an abomination, I don’t get how you can defend FRC or others of their ilk. It doesn’t make sense. And comparing being treated poorly on a message board with institutional hate again speaks to your lack of perception re: fruit recognition. Done.

  32. says

    “And I specifically stated that i wouldn’t engage in a philosophical debate on some issues, for reasons you just proved.”

    Yes, but YOU are the one that brought up those issues, so in return I thought it would nice to at least RESPOND to them. As I am allowed to do so on this board. This isn’t just the matter of philosophy, but rather POLICY. One can argue that gay marriage is merely a “philosophical” issue, but I think it is more than that, I think gay marriage is a right to life issue that merits a change in POLICY to insure equal treatment under the law for people who “are similarly situated.”

    “I maintain that you are comparing apples with oranges in your other argument. If you get how awful it is to be called an abomination, I don’t get how you can defend FRC or others of their ilk.”

    Yes I get how awful it is to be called names and to have your character assassinated on a constant basis by people who are bigoted, and ONCE AGAIN, I agree FRC is a HATE GROUP just like those who spout HATRED on these boards and elsewhere. They are not apples and oranges, hatred and bullying does have the same ramification whether institutional or by some anonymous hack on a gay blog. They both result in the same ill effect, that of DEHUMANIZING your opponent through HATEFUL rhetoric, which in turn disenfranchises those with specific interests in the debate on hand.

  33. ravewulf says

    @pepa you are so irrational I don’t know where to begin or how I can possibly ever make you understand, but I’ll try anyway.

    “ imposing laws against the consumption of marijuana”

    That was Ronald Reagan and his war on drugs. Liberals generally see no problem with legalizing marijuana. After all it is even less potent and harmful than alcohol, and we allow that. Besides banning a low substance like this (or alcohol) leads to illegal trafficking and gang violence (drug gangs now, gangsters/mobsters back in prohibition).

    “ the intake of SALT,”

    Some groups of Liberals may be for it, but most I have seen don’t care. We like to maximize personal freedoms and restrict companies/corporations from doing things that are harmful to people and the environment.

    “to keep guns”

    Usually we have no problem with people having guns so long as they can prove they are of sound mind (why would anyone give a gun to someone who is unstable?) and so long as you only use it in areas that make sense (we have to keep people safe at large public gathering places like concert halls, theaters, schools, airports, etc). If you want to keep one for sport or self protection, that’s fine.

    “ and to keep the money that YOU make”

    Now here is an area I take issue with. When you become a part of a country and want to live there you enter a contract to abide by the laws of that country and to collectively help to pay for the upkeep, improvement, and defense of that country. Otherwise you are simply arguing for anarchy.

    “many liberals that HATE IT when people actually use their talents to gain WEALTH and want to take that away from them. This is a violation of their rights because YOU are taking away something they have dully EARNED You cannot take away someone else’s marriage license (a la prop 8) and same goes to their property and wealth.”

    Here you are painting liberals with your own interpretation of them, which is incorrect. We do not hate people for making money, we simply ask that they help pay for the government for the reasons stated above. They want to be part of a country they need to help fund that country. You pay taxes in return for the services that the government offers you.

    The top 2% have 80% of the money and the other 98% are left with 20% of the money. To me it seems fairer to base taxes on the percentage of the nation’s money you have rather than on individuals. It is an undue hardship to ask people who have very little money to pay the same percentage as those who have almost all of the money. Now there are many ways of going about doing the actual math, which way is best to use is up to debate.

    “So I don’t buy that BS that liberals don’t take away rights, they DO ALL THE TIME.”
    Again you are painting all Liberals with a broad brush and your incorrect interpretation/assumptions about them.
    “Disliking someone for their views vs disliking someone simply for who/what they are (gender/sexual orientation/racial/ethnic/religous) are completely different things.”
    We are not talking about “disliking” here, we are talking about HATE. And no, I don’t see both perceptions differently”

    The two cases I stated are fundamentally different. Otherwise you are committed to labeling any insult or slightest negative emotion as qualification as a hate group, or completely denying the existence of such a thing as a hate group. The line of distinction between what is and isn’t a hate group is relatively clear, but apparently you cannot see it.

    “because the FRC HATES gay people not just because of who they are but ALSO because of what gay people BELIEVE IN (tolerance and equal treatment etc).”

    That simply isn’t true. FRC isn’t asking gay supporters (people who believe in equal rights, tolerance, etc) to be excluded from marriage or the military, only gay people themselves (ie for who/what they are)

    “I’ve been subjected to hatred by liberals for being BOTH a non-liberal (libertarian) as in my IDENTITY and for what I BELIEVE IN.
    I mean look no further than the following comment:
    “@Ravewulf: Thanks for shutting PEPA up.”
    Liberals are culpable as well for they are in many respects driven by ANIMOSITY.”

    Again you are committing yourself to labeling any insult or slightest negative emotion as qualification as a hate group. As I said before, the two cases I stated are fundamentally different.

    Disliking (or hating) someone for their views vs disliking (or hating) someone simply for who/what they are (ie based on a label (gender/sexual orientation/racial/ethnic/religous)) are completely different things.

  34. justiceontherocks says

    @PEPA – I don’t know if you are an idiot, although you did admit to being a tea-bagger, but I do know that you write way too much and it’s all so incoherent no one has any idea what your point is. Have a good holiday.

  35. Christopher Yellen says

    If Perkins’ group is first and foremost worried about the family unit, what are they doing to advocate for legislation against divorce? Show us the proof that this isn’t just about hating gay people.

  36. Skooter McGoo says

    From the document I can see that they are pissed about Apple pulling some BS app. I bet they made money off of that as well. These fools don’t hate gay people that stay in the closet and cower in fear, they just don’t like we who refuse to believe that our lives should be lead by a book of stories. It’s sad that he and Maggie Gallagher preach about saving “families” when in fact the “work”(only job either could get) they do actually keeps families from being formed. All this money spent to make others second class citizens that could be put to use in a more positive manner.
    @Tommy C Had never heard that Rogers quote b4 but I love it, thanks.

  37. TJ says

    @RAVEWULF – thanks for saying that for which I had neither the time nor the energy. Not that I expect the intended audience will listen, but excellent post nevertheless.