NOM throws Janet Corwin to the wolves after election upset

Republican Janet Corwin's recent upset loss in a New York Congressional race to Democrat Kathy Hochul -  that everyone initially gave her no chance of losing - has totally vexed the Republican party to no end.

But one can always count on NOM to advance the theory that Corwin's loss had less to do with her embracing of Rep. Paul Ryan's controversial plan to end present-day Medicare and more of the fact that she was not hot-button enough on social issues:

Pundits are parsing the loss to the Democrats of NY 26--Jack Kemp's old district--in the special election Tuesday. Fears that Paul Ryan's Medicare plan would hurt seniors was clearly issue number one. But Human Events noted how the candidate Jane Corwin, ran away from social issues that could have helped her:

So it was in New York-26 last night. Were it not for the presence of so-called “Tea Party” candidate Jack Davis (who drew about 9% of the vote) or a Corwin campaign that is increasingly being faulted by national conservative and GOP operatives, the results might have been different.

“The only thing the political consultants advising the Corwin campaign seemed to be able to do smartly was cash their big checks,” said former Rep. Fred Eckert (R.-N.Y.), leader of the state Ronald Reagan forces in 1976 and a onetime town supervisor of Greece, N.Y., (within the 26th District). “It’s too bad there is no such thing as malpractice for political consultants, or Jane Corwin could press charges and the whole dumb gang of them would have to pay fines and serve time.”

Eckert was referring to the failure of the Corwin campaign to bring up what he called “hot-button” topics, such as Hochul’s strong pro-abortion stance, including support for the controversial late-term abortion. In addition, he noted the Democrat’s support for same-sex marriage. Corwin described herself as pro-choice but against any federal funding and late-term abortion. She was also foursquare in favor of marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

Eckert noted that “this district has a strong Roman Catholic population and Hochul is a Roman Catholic. Had the Republicans defined where she stands on those two issues, it might have made a difference.”

The idea that Corwin didn't hit the "right social issues" enough will probably be the standard talking point of the religious right. But it's bizarre that NOM would suddenly turn on her seeing that the organization gave her campaign almost $6,000.

Also NOM conveniently omitted this fact:

Corwin appeared at an event  . . . for a conservative Christian group called the New Yorker’s Family Research Foundation. The foundation’s president, the Reverend Jason McGuire, has likened same-sex marriage to child abuse and asserted that gay New York State legislators, such as Sen. Tom Duane and Assemblyman Daniel O’Donnell, are going “against God’s word” by supporting marriage equality and face “an eternity in hell,”

I hope other candidates who working with NOM (surreptitiously or openly) to derail marriage equality is paying attention to this about-face.

And yes, that means you, Ruben Diaz.

Civil conversations about gays should not involve pedophilia, bestiality, or feces

The American Family Association (AFA)'s phony news service, One News Now has covered the recent vote by Minnesota legislators to put the issue of gay marriage up for a vote in 2012.

Par for the course with One News Now, only person - a religious right figure - is quoted in the story. Now usually when I point this out, it's to show how hypocritical this supposed Christian news service (and the AFA) are. But this time, one has to simply be amused by not only who One News Now chose to quote but also what this source says. The source is Chuck Darrell of the Minnesota Family Council (MFC) and he said the following:

"We have some work to do, but what's great about it is that we've got an 18-month period that's going to allow the people of Minnesota to have a conversation -- a civil, respectful conversation -- about why the amendment should be adopted and the importance of marriage."

Bear in mind that this is the same Minnesota Family Council who was recently busted for spreading inaccurate information via its site that gays engage in pedophilia, bestiality, and the consuming of urine and feces. It also cited the work of discredited physician Paul Cameron. Since this discovery became public, the Minnesota Family Council scrubbed these references from its site. However, you can still view the information here.  To top it off, even though the items were removed, the head of the Minnesota Family Council, Tom Pritchard, actually defended the material:

Prichard defends the postings as getting "into the nature of homosexuality and homosexual behavior," but says that won't be the focus of his group's efforts to pass the constitutional ban. "The focus of this campaign is the nature and purpose of marriage -- not a referendum of homosexuality per se, or its lifestyle activities and behaviors," he says. "I would see that as a separate issue."

I cringe to think about MFC's definition of a "civil, respectful conversation."