Bullshit Alert: N.Y. Democrats May Skip Gay Marriage Vote

[cboy4]

Yea, you gays just cozy up in the back of the bus until we're good and fricken ready to waste our time over your civil rights :puke:

Yea, yea I know you say you don't have the votes or whatever, but this is a continuation of the same vicious cycle. As Martin Luther King Jr. said, and it's one of my favorite quotes, "A right delayed is a right denied."

Damn right.





Hiroko Masuike for The New York Times
“We want to get there, but we want to get there the right way or else we risk setting ourselves back another decade.”
SENATOR LIZ KRUEGER

=================================================================================

By JEREMY W. PETERS
Published: November 28, 2008

ALBANY — After a pledge from New York Democratic leaders that their party would legalize same-sex marriage if they won control of the State Senate this year, money from gay rights supporters poured in from across the country, helping cinch a Democratic victory.

But now, party leaders have sent strong signals that they may not take up the issue during the 2009 legislative session. Some of them suggest it may be wise to wait until 2011 before considering it, in hopes that Democrats can pick up more Senate seats and Gov. David A. Paterson, a strong backer of gay rights, would then be safely into a second term.

The question of how aggressively to proceed has touched off an intense debate among legislators and gay rights supporters about how ready the broader electorate is to embrace same-sex marriage, both in New York and across the country.

Many are still stung by California voters’ approval this month of a measure that reversed a court decision that gave gay and lesbian couples the right to marry. Heavy spending by church groups and others opposed to same-sex marriage helped the proposal win.

“We want to get there, but we want to get there the right way or else we risk setting ourselves back another decade,” said Senator Liz Krueger, a Democrat who represents the Upper East Side. “I think the California proposition and the recognition that entities with large amounts of money who oppose same-sex marriage have decided to be large players in this have a lot of people going back to the drawing board.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/29/nyregion/29marriage.html?hp

[Name removed]

1. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[cboy4]

3. AND our votes.

Infuriating to say the least.

On a national level, let's see what Democrats do after Obama is sworn in.

Because I'm down to my last fucking nerve about all of this.

[bluedawg12]

2. Thank you (for nothing) Mr. Diaz Sr.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/24/nyregion/24bronx.html

F.B.I. Agents Investigate 2 Lawmakers in the Bronx

By MANNY FERNANDEZ
Published: March 24, 2007

The elder Mr. Díaz said in an interview yesterday that the authorities had not contacted him. He said he had no knowledge of anything wrong with his voter records or his petitions. “I don’t know what they’re talking about,” he said of the investigation.

Mr. Díaz is a Pentecostal minister who has been an outspoken opponent of same-sex marriage and abortion. In 2003, he sued the city over the expansion of a small public school for gay students. He called for the resignations of Schools Chancellor Joel I. Klein and Deputy Mayor Dennis M. Walcott last month after the city cut and consolidated school bus routes.

He said he wondered if his political stances played a role in the inquiry. “I’m aware that I’m making a lot of enemies,” he said, adding, “Somebody is pushing the F.B.I. to find something.”

<snip>

The elder Mr. Díaz has been no stranger to controversy. When Gov. Eliot Spitzer was attorney general, he found that Mr. Díaz had improperly spent almost $5,000 in government grants intended for a Bronx nonprofit group on furniture for his district office and loudspeakers for his campaign. Yesterday, he said all of the money had been repaid, and he described that case as a misunderstanding. “We put the money back and that’s it,” he said.

<snip>

[bluedawg12]

4. Thanks for running on empty (promises) Mr. Smith

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/29/nyregion/29marriage.html?_r=1&hp

“Since when are fixing the economy and civil rights mutually exclusive?” said Daniel J. O’Donnell, an assemblyman from the Upper West Side who led the push for the bill in the Assembly.

Mr. O’Donnell added that expectations are high in the gay community that New York will be able to deliver the movement’s next victory. “The leadership of the Senate and others in our community collected a lot of money from a lot of people with the promise — spoken and unspoken — that if the Democrats won the Senate, they would take a vote,” he said.

Mr. O’Donnell plans to introduce a bill relatively early in the 2009 session, setting up a possible confrontation with the Senate

<snip>

With that threat looming, Mr. Smith, Mr. Paterson and other supporters of the bill have been more measured in their comments in recent weeks.

Mr. Smith, speaking about same-sex marriage at a fund-raiser for the Empire State Pride Agenda last year, was emphatic, saying, “We’re going to make sure that happens in ’08, when we take over the majority.” He now avoids questions on the topic and instead gives a standard reply about the need to focus on the economy when asked about it.
<snip>

[bluedawg12]

5. Woops, he did it again. Mr. Smith waffles in 2006.

Two years of waffling? This was in 2006.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/06/nyregion/06senate.html

Democrats’ New Chief Strides to the Forefront, Then Sidesteps
By JONATHAN P. HICKS
Published: October 6, 2006

There were congressmen like Charles B. Rangel of Manhattan and Joseph Crowley, the Queens Democratic chairman who helped engineer support for Mr. Smith, who represents southeast Queens. There were the elder statesmen, like H. Carl McCall, the 2002 candidate for governor. Nearly every Democratic state senator from New York City was on hand — and even some from as far as Buffalo.

But amid the excited praise for Mr. Smith, who will succeed David A. Paterson, the Harlem Democrat who gave up his Senate seat to run for lieutenant governor, there was one note of tension. It came at the end of yesterday’s news conference, when Mr. Smith sidestepped several questions from reporters regarding his personal views on same-sex marriage.

The issue carries some strain among Senate members. One of Mr. Smith’s colleagues, Thomas K. Duane of Manhattan, has sponsored a bill to legalize same-sex marriage. And some others, like State Senator Rubén Díaz Sr. of the Bronx, oppose the bill.

“When Senator Paterson was the leader, he was supporting Senator Tom Duane,” Mr. Smith said yesterday, answering a question about his personal views on same-sex marriage. “As a good soldier, I was supporting Senator Paterson in the direction that we were going.”

Mr. Smith added: “But I must tell you, I haven’t even been leader for about five minutes. So you have to at least give me the opportunity to talk to my colleagues and find out how they feel about that.”

Afterward, Senator Duane said he had little concern regarding Mr. Smith’s commitment. “Malcolm is on record as supporting same-sex marriage,” Mr. Duane said. “It’s a very important issue to me and I am comfortable with his support.”





<snip>

[xchrom]

6. par for the course any more it seems. nt

[bluedawg12]

7. Which is why my votes, time and money are going to carefully screened

candidates who support gay causes.

[Smarmie Doofus]

8. If they do not bring this to a vote NOW, they never will.

1. DEM assembly.( huge majority)
2. DEM senate ( newly DEM; very slight majority but possibility of some GOP votes)
3. New DEM GOV who is hugely popular and has been ostensibly pro-gay and pro marriage equality since marching in NYC GP March ( it was a 'march' in those days, not a "parade") in the *1970s*.


Duane should introduce the bill in the senate regardless of the political fallout. If Paterson's going to wimp-out let him wimp-out in public. It sounds like he thinks his nightmare scenario is that the bill will pass both houses and he will have to sign it.

Or not.

Again: the pieces are in place for the first time in a generation. It is unlikely that there will be another opportunity like this.








>>>>Senator Thomas K. Duane, the Senate’s leading advocate on gay and lesbian issues, said the odds of a vote reaching the Senate floor in the 2009 legislative session are 50-50.

“I can’t even imagine before the budget’s done that we would do anything,” Mr. Duane said. The Legislature is required to pass its budget before the state’s fiscal year begins on April 1.

But even once the budget is passed, Mr. Duane said, other factors will have to be weighed, like whether the timing is too politically risky for the governor.

“We definitely want David Paterson to run for re-election and to win,” he said. “There’ll be a discussion. And we’ll have a point of view about time frame; he’ll have a point of view on time frame.”

People with knowledge of Governor Paterson’s position on gay marriage said the governor is wary of making a big push for the bill as the Senate leadership remains in flux. >>>>

[TheWraith]

9. Does anyone here actually know who Liz Krueger is?

She's one of the most solidly progressive and reformist Democrats in the New York State Senate. If she says it's a not going to happen yet, then that's simply the case, and forcing a vote would only be self-destructive.

[bluedawg12]

10. Is Sen. Krueger saying anywhere: don't fight?

Don't place pressure on the three dems who oppose it?

Don't hold Smith accountable?

I have no doubt Sen. Smith knows her political terrain, what the article fails to discuss is, any idea of fighting, the only thing it tells gays is: wait some more.

[Smarmie Doofus]

11. So, we can't have marriage in NYS because of a vote in Calif?

>>>>>“We want to get there, but we want to get there the right way or else we risk setting ourselves back another decade,” said Senator Liz Krueger, a Democrat who represents the Upper East Side. “I think the California proposition and the recognition that entities with large amounts of money who oppose same-sex marriage have decided to be large players in this have a lot of people going back to the drawing board.”>>>>>

What is she talking about?

[bluedawg12]

12. I guess she sees a fight, big money from haters and it's troubling.

I hate to say this about a supporter, but I don't even see marriage equality as one of her issues on her current web site.

http://www.lizkrueger.com/issues.html

ON THE ISSUES

Liz Stands For:

Legislative Reform and a More Democratic Governmental Process
Renewal of Rent Laws & Repeal of Vacancy Decontrol
Expansion of Access to Rent Increase Exemptions for Seniors (SCRIE) & People with Disabilities (DRIE)
A Woman's Right to Choose
Repeal of the Rockefeller Drug Laws
An End to the Death Penalty
Corporate Accountability
Transparent and Reliable Voting Technology
Stem Cell Research
Expansion of Recycling
Animal Welfare/Humane Farming Practices
Development on the East Side that is Compatible with Existing Communities
Expansion of Community Participation in Power Plant Siting Decisions
.........

Likewise, I see no pro-gay marriage equality mentioned on Sen. Smith's web site.

http://www.nyssenate14.com/14/Default.aspx

[Smarmie Doofus]

13. Apparently a case of "what you see is what you get."

>>>>I hate to say this about a supporter, but I don't even see marriage equality as one of her issues on her current web site.>>>>

It's not a biggie in that district. Easy for her, politically, to back-burner it. It's a historically republican and relatively conservative district. Not a huge GLBT consitutency.

She's about as progressive as she thinks she can be given the rarified political sensibilities of the upper -east side. Think : Bloomberg. ( who BTW, is also nowhere to be found on this issue.)

Nice homework, BTW.

[bluedawg12]

14. It sure seems like it is turning into the third rail of politics

There is always another (re)election looming, always other more pressing issues on the front burner. There always will be!

I guess, the only time politicians will find it suitable to support equal marriage rights for gays is when:

There's only one party, Dem's, and no re-election worries remain.
The economy is perfect.
Poverty has been erased.
There is not one speck of violence in the world.
Everyone is healthy, wealthy and lives to be a happy 125 years of age, in a tranquil world and people are so damned bored that, "What the heck, let's bring up 'that gay marriage thing', this seems like good time. I'm bored." :sarcasm:

p.s.

Thanks for the kind words, PaulHo.

[Creideiki]

22. I read it the same way you do

The Democratic Party does not want us. Hey, in some states, it may only be 3% of the voting public, and we vote regularly and overwhelmingly Democratic. So if the Democratic Party keeps on this course, I suggest the next "Day without a Gay" is election day in 2010.

Selfish? Single-issue? Nah.

But without my support how will pro-union, pro-choice, pro-woman, pro-people of color, (truly) pro-family candidates fare?

[MNBrewer]

15. "or else we risk setting ourselves back another decade."

SO we'll wait a decade until we decide it's the "right" time. Geez. Useless Democrats. Totally worthless. Their ONLY redeeming feature is that they're not actually Republicans. (most of the time)

[bluedawg12]

16. "soft bigotry of lowered expectations"

OMG! Never thought I'd be quoting dumbya. :rofl:

But somehow, that phrase popped to mind.

Reference:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/onpolitics/elections/bushtext071000.htm
Text: George W. Bush's Speech to the NAACP

Discrimination is still a reality, even when it takes different forms.
Instead of separate but equal, there is separate and forgotten.

...........

Same crap... different day...and so it goes. :grr:

[Ian David]

17. I think we should strike now while everyone in Apalachia is too broke 2donate to the anti-gay fight.

[bluedawg12]

18. Good point about our enemies, I wonder if the mor*ons are shaken up

by the backlash?

Maybe the NY pols got it wrong and the rw opposition has weakened itself with their all out effort in California?

I know the rw makes noises that they plan to fight from sea to shining sea, blah, blah, blah...but..I wonder if the boycott, the exposure of donations from businesses, the publicity that major Churches funded and incited the proHate8 fight has taken the wind out of their sails?

[IndianaGreen]

19. Democrats love LGBT money and support

but they are nothing but cowards when it comes to defending LGBT rights, just as they were cowards when they refused to buck heads with segregationists.

[mitchtv]

21. Nov was my last "straight Dem" vote

I will only support pro equality candidates from now on. No more settling.

[bluedawg12]

20. the article three "dissident" Dem Senators do not support g-m.

--does anyone know who they are?

Is there potential work to be done there?

"Despite the fact that Democrats will hold 32 of the 62 Senate seats in the next legislative session, three dissident Democrats have not pledged their support for the would-be majority leader, Malcolm A. Smith. One of those senators, {u}Rubén Díaz Sr., has specifically said he would not support a majority leader who would allow a same-sex marriage bill to come to the floor."