Maggie Gallagher Defends NOM's Race-Baiting Attacks on Gays: VIDEO


MSNBC's Thomas Roberts asks NOM's Maggie Gallagher about the document dump earlier this week that showed that NOM worked to stir tension between Blacks and gays:

"Do you defend your own race-baiting to further bigotry and homophobia on a national level?"

GOP presidential candidate Fred Karger also appeared to discuss his work to expose NOM's finances and election tactics.

Check it out, AFTER THE JUMP...

Visit for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Watch, Listen and Learn.

    Posted by: Dale | Mar 30, 2012 12:22:27 PM

  2. Her body language speaks volumes. She squints and avoids looking into the camera. I think she knows this was a devastating loss.

    Posted by: Trev | Mar 30, 2012 12:28:54 PM

  3. Wow, Maggie Gallagher reminds me so much of Jabba the Hutt.

    Posted by: skyglider | Mar 30, 2012 12:32:28 PM

  4. ....a stunning, natural beauty.

    Posted by: Bertrille | Mar 30, 2012 12:36:38 PM

  5. "We wish they would stop calling us bigots and haters." Then stop what you're doing, and we will. Until then, we tell the truth.

    Posted by: JIm | Mar 30, 2012 12:36:51 PM

  6. He's really a terrible interviewer--she keeps going off-topic, he never brings her back to his OWN question. Karger is even worse. STAY ON THE TOPIC!!

    Posted by: Jeff Kurtti | Mar 30, 2012 12:42:02 PM


    Posted by: Scott Rose | Mar 30, 2012 12:45:52 PM

  8. "...truth, goodness, and beauty." NOM is seeking spokespersons that espouse this because they currently don't have it.

    Posted by: benjamin | Mar 30, 2012 12:47:45 PM

  9. Not sure why almost everyone who interviews her goes so soft. Roberts should have followed up because her excuses are contrary to what is exposed in the released documents.

    It was odd to see her downplay the power of Nom. Her attitude and demeanor was off. She seemed way less sure of herself than usual and if the proper follow-up questions had been asked I think she could have been destroyed. Why Roberts allowed her to get off so easy is very disappointing.

    Posted by: Mickey | Mar 30, 2012 12:48:24 PM


    Posted by: Scott Rose | Mar 30, 2012 12:48:52 PM

  11. Thomas Roberts was too easy on the bigot sow. The documents describe goals of driving wedges between minority populations, but Gagginwhore here says "oh, those divisions existed anyway."

    Posted by: Scott Rose | Mar 30, 2012 12:52:30 PM

  12. Surprised somebody actually combed her hair and slapped some make up on her. I guess you really can put lipstick on a pig!

    Posted by: Cinemaniac | Mar 30, 2012 1:01:36 PM

  13. Thomas should have called her when she trotted out the "majority of American people support us" bit.

    According to every poll that is no longer true.

    Posted by: David Ehrenstein | Mar 30, 2012 1:04:43 PM

  14. What a sad little... muppet? is that what she's going for? Body language and all her sociopragmatic/pragmalinguistic cues just yell out "LIE"! As we say in the South, "bless her heart!"

    Posted by: Richard | Mar 30, 2012 1:13:38 PM

  15. I've yet to see an interview with any of these folks that actually goes for the jugular.

    We see people hosting "anti-gay Christians", the "we think homosexuality is a sin" thing comes up and no interviewer ever follows it with a theologically-based question of UTTER RELEVANCE such as "well, do you believe it's a sin to be Jewish? if you believe these gay people are sinful, what do you believe happened to all the Jewish victims of the Holocaust?"

    incendiary? better believe it. and relevant.

    If people are so proud of their anti-gay stances I'd love to see them attempt to evade the reality of everything else their "faith" encompasses.

    I'd love for someone to ask Maggie, on camera, what she feels about this culture of anti-gay prejudice, and how the anti-marriage-Equality community are contributing to it.
    I'd love for someone to ask her "Do you believe, Maggie, that if your own son was gay he'd feel safe enough about it to tell you? Do you think your work against LGBT-Equality and the gay community is something that would give your own child the idea that you have a negative opinion of gay people?"

    let's see her claw her way outta that

    Posted by: LittleKiwi | Mar 30, 2012 1:20:49 PM

  16. It bothers me that Roberts did not zero in precisely on the term "non-cognitive," and ask her, "Is 'non-cognitive' NOM's market?"

    Not surprisingly, Gallagher completely dodged the matter of NOM's interest in pitting blacks and gays against each other (ignoring, of course, those who are both). Roberts did not call her out on that, which is very unfortunate.

    I wish also that Roberts had at the ready legit, recent survey results refuting Gallagher's claim that a majority of Americans (still) oppose same-sex marriage.

    Oh yes, Ruben Diaz is *such* a good guy - such a hero. He's up there with Abe Lincoln and Martin Luther King, Jr. I'm sure some day there will be Ruben Diaz Boulevards and Ruben Diaz Elementary Schools all over the country.

    NOM's celebrity (or "celebrity") pool, by the way, is extremely small.

    It's a stretch to compare Gallagher and Hitler, but they do have one thing in common: They are both OK with acting out their own personal emotional problems at the expense of millions of strangers.

    By the way, on another matter, why don't more of us know better than to make comments about Gallagher's appearance or weight? Neither is relevant, while going there HURTS our position as being on the *moral* side. It is only what Gallagher says and does that matters.

    People who say "she's so fat," "she's ugly," etc. are blithely introducing a drag on progress toward marriage equality. It's not intellectually consistent; it's counter to the whole concept of empathy; and it's very likely to effect a loss of respect in those who might be on the fence. It's a pretty damn non-cognitive thing to do.

    Posted by: Third base | Mar 30, 2012 1:27:54 PM

  17. UGH, another month and I won't have a chin!

    Posted by: Maggie | Mar 30, 2012 1:28:45 PM

  18. MG is losing her battle an interview after an interview.

    Posted by: Matt26 | Mar 30, 2012 1:31:39 PM

  19. As much as I love Roberts and love what he's TRYING to do, he really does a very mediocre job of nailing Maggie. He should have quoted her the memo where NOM calls for "provoking" gays to call black NOM supporters bigots. He should have asked her, "what did you mean by 'non-cognitive'"? He needs to not let her ramble but hold her feet to the fire with very specific words that SHE and her colleagues used in these memos. She claims that NOM doesn't have the desire or power to make gay people call them bigots but in THEIR memo NOM calls for doing just that! She is a MASTER manipulator of words and uses it to her best advantage every time she's interviewed.

    I think the interview made her look bad but not nearly as bad as it could have.

    Posted by: TampaZeke | Mar 30, 2012 1:35:34 PM

  20. Journalists these days are so soft and squishy and fluffy. They wouldn't even threaten a fly.

    Posted by: Winston | Mar 30, 2012 1:42:52 PM

  21. Sweet FSM, I can't get over that awful hairdo. She definitely has a gay hairdresser, because there's obviously some revenge behind that 'do.

    "Oh honey, ginormous jowly necks look GREAT on TV! Let's emphasize yours with a pageboy bob. No, you don't look like a bloated mushroom at all!"

    Posted by: Moondog | Mar 30, 2012 1:45:49 PM

  22. i've long withheld making cracks about maggies tendency toward avoir du pois but after seeing this interview in which she's so smug, so evasive of the actual questioning, so full of herself, that now, i believe i can only refer to her as "fat bastard."

    Posted by: alguien | Mar 30, 2012 1:46:07 PM

  23. I suppose all intelligent viewers will see this and go "wow. she knows she's lost, she knows she's got no factual arguments, so she's just going to ramble and evade"

    all the stupid viewers will see this and go "yeah! that's what i always say!"

    you know, the kind of people who think "Adam & Eve, not Adam & Steve" is a sound, logical, factual, relevant and intellectual "argument" for why gays can't marry.

    Posted by: LittleKiwi | Mar 30, 2012 1:55:22 PM

  24. Rachel Maddow would have nailed her for good, gone for the jugular right off the bat. Gallagher came off in her usual smug manner. Thomas Roberts did a pretty dismal job trying to dismantle her as did Karger. A missed opportunity for sure.

    Posted by: Robert in NYC | Mar 30, 2012 2:12:11 PM

  25. To digress a bit, do any of you post on JoeMyGod? For several weeks, I've been unable to post any comments. Never had a problem with Towleroad though, thankfully.

    Posted by: Robert in NYC | Mar 30, 2012 2:13:27 PM

  26. 1 2 »

Post a comment


« «Gay Man Speaks Out About Homophobic Cane Attack by 71-Year-Old Woman: VIDEO« «