Deconstructing the way the right-wing tries to dominate arguments

Now the following blog entry is just merely from something I have observed regarding how the right-wing (i.e. religious right, conservatives) sometimes dominate arguments. Don't quote me on this, but if I am wrong, by all means, let me know.

The Supreme Court rules for against a law the religious right and other conservatives favor. Let's say the ruling is a victory for the lgbt community.

What happens next is the following:

• One News Now, owned by the American Family Association, prints an article (biased, of course) against the ruling, and quoting only so-called “pro-family” leaders such as Gary Bauer, who claim that the ruling is a travesty on the country.

• Other talking heads such as Pete LaBarbera and Matt Barber write columns falsely claiming that the Supreme Court ruled against conservatives because of alleged biases of the justices. These columns are filtered to other right-wing publications and blogs.

• James Dobson (Focus on the Family) criticizes the ruling on his radio program, as does Tony Perkins (Family Research Council). Other articles are written trying to prove how the ruling will hurt America. More articles are written digging up speeches that the judges made, hinting on flimsy correlations between their ruling
and so-called personal biases.

• The think tanks emanating from conservative circles smear the reputations of the judges. The phrase “activist judges” is used over and over again in columns, articles, and books. Specifically these books will be written by think tank "experts" and will be driven up the New York Times best seller list by organizations such as the conservative Town Hall buying a bulk number. This way, the books can be referred to as best sellers, giving a false impression that a majority of Americans feel the same as the authors.

• Meanwhile, The Traditional Values Coalition, the Family Research Council, and other so-called “pro-family” groups solicit donations making the claim that either the ruling will doom Christians and will lead to homosexuality being taught “as normal” to children or it will lead to criticizing homosexuality as being designated as a hate crime. They get people of faith who are gullible enough to believe their lies to write letters to Congress and their local newspapers (using a script of anti-gay industry talking points.)

• So-called news programs (such as those on Fox News) and conservative commentators (i.e. Sean Hannity, Bill O'Reilly, Mike Huckabee, Glenn Beck) begin debating whether or not judges have a bias against people of faith, making sure to invite only folks like Matt Staver of the Liberty Counsel or Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council.

•Right-wing bloggers (i.e. Michelle Malkin) and columnists on webpages like Town Hall will write piece after piece after piece about “activist judges.”

•Conservative leaning Congressmen will be begin using the phrase "activist judges."

And boom, conservatives have control of the argument before the lgbt community has an opportunity to get our teeth into the discussion.

If I didn't despise it so much, I would give the conservative/religious right machine huge points for ingenuity, technique, and planning.

What gets me is that they like to accuse lgbts of these things, but we aren't nearly coordinated as they are.

Maybe one day we will be.