Good riddance to Maggie Gallagher

This afternoon, as probably many of you have probably heard, Maggie Gallagher has stepped down as chairwoman of the National Organization for Marriage.

Details are extremely sketchy, but NOM has put on a brave face on the announcement by giving accolades to Gallagher and introducing, with much fanfare, her replacement - law professor and tea party favorite, John Eastman.

Personally, I am not impressed. Most likely, Gallagher stepping down is probably the best thing for the organization. I for one have never bought into the idea that Gallagher herself personally founded NOM.

Let's face facts - Gallagher was probably more likely a figurehead, a puppet picked by shadowy individuals out to stomp out the progress of marriage equality. And if that was the case, she wasn't a good one.

Gallagher had an awful television presence in that she was combative and evasive. She did well in front of audiences who agreed with her opinions regarding marriage, but on televised debates when faced with someone from the Human Rights Campaign or any other lgbtq group, Gallagher came across as phony. She tended to talk over folks, shout a bit, and if all else failed, pretended to be personally offended when someone actually called her out on her lies.

Other times when questioned about NOM's tactic, she deferred to an absent Brian Brown - NOM's president, leaving folks to wonder how much was she in the loop as NOM's chairwoman if she couldn't answer basic questions about how the organization is spreading its message.

It didn't matter to the lgbtq community that Brown was president. With her faults outnumbering her attributes, we did good job of "gingriching" Gallagher, i.e. making her the persona folks would think of when NOM's name came up.

Any success NOM has had is due to only one thing - its deep pockets. When it's all said and done, one could easily pinpoint NOM's finances as the reason why the organization is able to motivate so many "leaders" to its cause and blanket each area of its choosing with so much inaccurate literature via brochures and commercials.

To this day, NOM continues to fight tooth and nail in order to hide its funders even after losing several court cases. So in hindsight maybe it is a good idea for NOM to pick a lawyer to lead it. I have a feeling that the organization will need a good one very soon.

The Catholic Church and the 'political process' and other Thursday midday news briefs

North Carolina's leading 'protect marriage' group: Gays die early -- see, Paul Cameron says so! - Ugh. Do you notice a trend amongst these "morality groups" and junk science?

NC Anti-Marriage Amendment Language Leaves Off Key Provision - Speaking of NC, look what those "we need to protect marriage" dunces forgot to do.

Thomasson Suggests Larry King Provoked His Own Murder - Blaming a murder victim for his own death. So classy.

Catholic Priests Removed Over Anti-Gay Remarks - From the article - "The Catholic Diocese condemned Rodriguez’ 'intervention in the political process,” saying that it “is not permitted under Section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code.'" Oh really? Well what's the explanation regarding NY Archbishop Timothy Dolan's letter to President Obama? We need some clarification here.

Focus on the Family is having justifiable money problems

According to media reports, Focus on the Family - the anti-gay group started by James Dobson - has been having revenue problems and subsequently was forced to layoff several employees:

The antigay ministry Focus on the Family announced . . . it will eliminate 49 more jobs, reports Denver Post.

The Colorado Springs-based organization had a $105 million budget this fiscal year ending September 30, but its officials now estimate it will receive donations of only $90 million to $95 million.

No one likes to hear about layoffs, but it's hard for me to feel sorry for FOF when it pushes nonsense like the following:

What better way to capture a child’s imagination than with a heart-warming story about cute, fuzzy little animals?

That’s the latest method homosexual-advocacy groups are using in their efforts to reach the youngest minds in our public school system.

Whether it’s stories about penguins, guinea pigs or even elephants, they’ve figured out how to use fun anecdotes about animals to familiarize children as young as preschool with the idea of homosexuality and gay marriage.

After all, they know if they can capture the hearts and minds of the young, they can permanently change the culture.

So according to FOF, the gay community is intentionally using stories about "cute, fuzzy animals" in order to "indoctrinate" children.

And here I thought we were using Spongebob Squarepants.

No, I don't feel the least bit sorry for FOF for its money problems, particularly when its executive director, Tom Minnery is begging for funds.

That's the same Tom Minnery who was publicly embarrassed by Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) during a Congressional hearing for misrepresenting a study to make the case against same-sex households.

No doubt the irony using a man who lies about studies in an effort raise money is lost to FOF.

But not to me and certainly not to others.