NOM Political Director Schubert in NYT: "The More I Learned About the Marriage Issue, The More Committed I Became"


Our president Brian Brown says of our political director Frank Schubert in the New York Times that he is simply "the best in the business" and all of us could not agree more!

"...Mr. Schubert, 56, attended Catholic schools in Sacramento, Calif., where he still lives with his wife. At age 22, he was chief of staff to a Republican assemblywoman. He entered public relations and became known, in the world of political consultants, for winning dozens of issue-oriented ballot campaigns on behalf of corporations: defeating proposals to increase tobacco taxes and to require restaurants to offer health insurance to employees.

He had not thought much about the marriage issue, he said, before he was tapped in 2008 to run the Proposition 8 campaign, which was mounted by religious conservatives to override the California Supreme Court decision permitting same-sex marriage. With a budget of $40 million, more than matched by opponents, he mounted a campaign with button-pushing ads.With that victory, Mr. Schubert won national attention, and his life took a sharp turn.

“The more I learned about the marriage issue, the more committed I became,” he recalled.

He threw himself into the cause, teaming with the National Organization for Marriage, which pays him a retainer for strategic advice. Brian S. Brown, the organization’s president, praised Mr. Schubert in an interview as “the best in the business.”

This year, as his activism began to turn off corporate clients, Mr. Schubert left Schubert Flint Public Affairs, the consulting firm he founded in 2003, and started a new one, Mission: Public Affairs, which he says will be entirely devoted to social causes.

“I think God has a plan for our lives,” Mr. Schubert said of his shift."


  1. Zack
    Posted October 10, 2012 at 12:12 pm | Permalink

    God bless this man.

  2. Bruce
    Posted October 10, 2012 at 4:44 pm | Permalink

    I believe Mr. Schubert is a pious and observant Catholic.

    Some would say however that at times he may have been careless about getting some of the true facts properly documented, thus opening himself to claims of misrepresentation. In the long run however, one's reputation for truth is more precious than short term potential gains from not accurately depicting a group that is being targeted for limitation of society rights and privileges.

  3. Posted October 10, 2012 at 6:46 pm | Permalink

    Frank Schubert is the genius who turned the tide on Prop 8 with a single, never-to-be-forgotten political ad.

    Anyone who saw it knows which one I mean.

    "Whether ya like it or not..........."

    God grant us four more victories this November..........and a President committed to the defeat of the marriage corruption movement.

  4. Daughter of Eve
    Posted October 10, 2012 at 7:24 pm | Permalink

    No group is being limited, unless they limit themselves, which is an option.

  5. Susan Rosenthal
    Posted October 10, 2012 at 10:08 pm | Permalink

    By the way, he is divorced, so he has not always observed the tenets of marriage. Additionally, his daughter has a substance abuse problem (this is publicly acknowledged). Imagine if Mr. Schubert were a gay man with a chemically dependent daughter. According to NOM, his daughter's problems would be the result of having a gay parent. However, Mr. Schubert is a straight man who is against same sex marriage, so he is depicted as a very pious man, and the relationship between his divorcce and his daughter's problems is not mentioned. This is despite the fact that children of divocred parents have higher rates of subsance abuse than those of parents who stay married.

  6. Daughter of Eve
    Posted October 10, 2012 at 10:25 pm | Permalink

    Susan, you present straw man & red herring arguments. One of the saddest aspects of the gay identity mindset is that people can't ever change, that they are irrevocably chained to past mistakes, & that they are perpetual victims. Such hopelessness is conducive to anger & despair.

  7. Susan Rosenthal
    Posted October 11, 2012 at 11:40 am | Permalink

    Daughter of Eve,

    My point is not that people cannot change. My point is a history of broken relationships and poor outcomes for children is conveniently ignored when it applies to your heterosexual allies, but when it comes to gay people,NOM makes a huge issue of these issues. I think Mr. Schubert has every right to get married, and to get involved in your campaigns. I just wish that he and NOM would stop arguing that gay folks can't get married because that is not what is best for children. After all, he got divorced, and raised a daughter with a substance abuse problem, and this did not prevent him from getting another marriage license.

  8. Randy E King
    Posted October 11, 2012 at 12:40 pm | Permalink

    @Susan Rosenthal,

    Referencing poor examples as good examples as to why the meaning of marriage should be changed are not the winning strategy you seem to think it is.

    i.e.; But little Johnny is just as bad as I am and he still gets to stay up late...

    The biggest problem with your argument is that the example did not start out corrupt; whereas you are demanding the fact that you are corrupt not only be ignored, but deemed moral by the laws of nature and natures God.

  9. Daughter of Eve
    Posted October 11, 2012 at 12:59 pm | Permalink

    NOM doesn't now, nor ever has asserted that "gay" folks can't get married. They can. But NOM also affirms that if a man and woman make a child together, they owe it to each other and their child to marry and raise the child together. Are there too many divorces for mostly selfish reasons? Yes. Does divorce have harsh consequences for children? Yes. NOM is not promoting or glorifying or excusing away divorce. SSM does not improve the situation for children. SS"M" only caters to the wants of the homosexual subset of same-sex relationships, while ignoring all the other same-sex individuals raising children together, who will never qualify (together) for a marriage license, AND it strips all women of the protections of presumption of paternity, etc. SSM is a step backwards for protecting children--not forwards. Anyone who agrees to help preserve the man/woman definition of marriage is a valuable asset, no matter past mistakes and regrets. Not all "gay" people approve of the neutering of marriage. Some of NOM's allies are "gay."

  10. David
    Posted October 11, 2012 at 1:38 pm | Permalink

    Susan - Unfortunately, life gets messy, and marriage is not what it is supposed to be. But, how is PURPOSELY denying a child a mother or father ever in the best interests of a child? Men and women bring different personalities, perspectives and biological idiosyncrosies to a marriage. We should do everything we can to encourage a male-female bonding with their children, and not resort to encouraging relationships that don't have this, just because life is difficult and heterosexual marriages don't always work.