Now that we lost a big one in New York,
I have an idea: let’s all the social conservatives stand around in a circle and criticize each other. NOT! I stumbled over two separate social conservatives criticizing the Catholic Church in New York for not doing enough, here and here. These articles were mostly repeats of a New York Times article, with virtually nothing in the way of original reporting. (Why we should repeat the talking points of our enemies is beyond me.) Others seem to think that if we could just get the arguments right, we might have won. I don’t agree with that assessment, in spite of the fact that I spend a lot of effort trying to craft the best possible arguments.
The very same New York Times article which the critics of the Church quoted, made it quite clear that there is in fact, no popular demand for redefining marriage. If the sex radicals had believed that, they would have let the people vote. Truth be told, the ordinary people of New York hate it. And, the redefinition of marriage came about not because its advocates had better arguments. They didn’t make any arguments. They aren’t listening to any arguments.
No, the politicians of New York redefined marriage because they wanted to. It was power politics, plain and simple. A handful of Wall Street Republicans wanted it. Mayor Bloomberg wanted it. Governor Cuomo wanted it. All The Beautiful People wanted it. They had the money. Case closed. The New York Times reported on the brazen corruption of a handful of wealthy Republican donors manipulating legislators, promising them protection against voter backlash.
The donors in the room — the billionaire Paul Singer, whose son is gay, joined by the hedge fund managers Cliff Asness and Daniel Loeb — had the influence and the money to insulate nervous senators from conservative backlash if they supported the marriage measure. And they were inclined to see the issue as one of personal freedom, consistent with their more libertarian views.
Within days, the wealthy Republicans sent back word: They were on board. Each of them cut six-figure checks to the lobbying campaign that eventually totaled more than $1 million.
They should all be ashamed of themselves. Yet the NYT reports this without a hint of shame or irony.
The Left is very good at staying on message, staying focused on the people they regard as their enemies: that would be us. Why can’t we stay on message and go after our enemies, just a little bit?
So let’s say it loud and clear. We lost in New York because corrupt politicians, the Governor, the Mayor and Wall Street financiers wanted to redefine marriage. They had the money and the power and there’s nothing more to say. There are no arguments we could have made that would change this outcome. They don’t listen to arguments. They don’t listen to their constituents. They don’t care about their constituents, unless they can write big checks.
And to all of you commenting on the above mentioned articles: stop complaining and start doing something. If you think people need to be more forthright about the connections between marriage redefinition and all the other social issues you are were talking about, you need to come over to the Ruth Institute. We are working on all those issues every day.
Get off the bench and on to the playing field. It is not permissible for anyone to be idle.
