David Freedlander writes in the Daily Beast about false expectations -- and about what the real consequences of voting to redefine marriage are:
"... It wasn’t supposed to be this way.When the four bucked their party leadership, renounced their longstanding opposition and voted to bring gay marriage to New York, they were hailed far and wide as the fearless four, touted for their courage and independence. Their votes came after marriage equality failed in the legislature in 2009, and Andrew Cuomo made it a major focus of his first term in office. Supporters of the bill launched a months-long, full-throated lobby campaign, complete with celebrity pitchmen like Lady Gaga and Larry King. After voting with the Democrats to legalize same-sex marriage, the four GOP senators were granted long, loving profiles in The New York Times Magazine and Time. Mayor Mike Bloomberg threw a pricey fundraiser for them in Manhattan. Gay marriage backers assured them that they would remember their vote for every Election Day hence—even if the candidates were running against Democrats.
“We are in it for the long haul with any supporter of gay marriage,” Brian Ellner, the lead lobbyist behind the effort, said in June 2011 as he was trying to convince the four to support the bill. “We have not lost a single supporter because of their support of marriage equality in an election and we are certainly not going to start now.”
But the results so far have left supporters of gay marriage fearful that the primary will dissuade other Republicans around the country from supporting same sex marriage.
... But anti-gay-marriage groups like the National Organization for Marriage used the little-noticed primary to send a message to Republicans around the country who are thinking of switching over. “The message we sent was pretty simple,” said Brian Brown, executive director of NOM. “If you are a Republican and you vote for [gay] marriage, you are going to lose.”
6 Comments
Great job NOM. Love it and keep it up.
Good work, NOM.
“We are in it for the long haul with any supporter of gay marriage,” said Brian Ellner,
All statements from marriage corruption extremists come with an expiration date.
A great paragraph from the article:
"The results may also confirm fears that outside of liberal enclaves on the coasts, the support of same-sex marriage is overstated. Thirty-one times the issue has been placed before voters in statewide referenda around the country, and 31 times voters have rejected marriage equality. The only states in which gay marriage is legal are those in which either the legislature or the courts have legalized it."
NOM wants to strong arm Republican representatives who support SSM or believe they are representing their constituents in doing so. So who's the bully here?
I know, I know. It's all politics. But don't pretend you have a moral high ground. You're turning the screws (or trying to) on these representatives (many of whom enjoy bi-partisan support--I know because I live in NYS).
You may energize your base. But ultimately, you should yourselves in the foot in the general election. DiCarlo will lose agains Gipson, for instance. Saland will win...if he wins the recount.
Gregor wrote, "NOM wants to strong arm Republican representatives who support SSM or believe they are representing their constituents in doing so."
Do you ever quit spinning things? If they're "representing their constituents," then they'll get reelected. If not, they won't. They got plenty gobs of money from the other side, too.
NOM makes it hard for politicians to sell out their constituents, while they're asleep, in exchange for the pink dollar.
NOM alerted Republicans that these sellouts didn't represent them. That's all.
Great Work NOM, pandering to the ignorant LCD everywhere as usual