The Radio Equalizer: Brian Maloney

14 June 2007

Talk Radio, MA Legislature Kills Gay Marriage Vote


Just Like That, A Goldmine For Talk Radio, GOP

Thanks again to the kind of extremism only the Bay State seems able to produce, talk radio and the Republican Party have been handed a great nationwide issue to fuel listenership and partisan donations this summer.

And with core supporters angry over the party's pro- amnesty position for illegal aliens, a reignition of the gay marriage issue couldn't have come at a better time. Thanks, Massachusetts!

Yes, if the Bay State didn't exist, the GOP would have to invent it, as time and again it has proven a useful tool for nationwide fundraising.

Today, within hours of a key decision by the state's legislature to overturn the will of almost 200,000 citizens who signed petitions asking for a vote on gay marriage, talk radio was buzzing across the country.

The Boston Globe's Jeff Jacoby was doing interviews almost immediately, according to this brief but brilliant new column (we will beg his forgiveness in advance and run the whole thing):

THOSE OF US who have lived with the Bay State's marriage war for years can lose sight of how extreme we appear to much of the rest of the country.

This afternoon, the Legislature shot down the proposed constitutional amendment that would have banned same-sex marriage. A few minutes after the vote, I was on the air discussing it with Dennis Prager, a nationally syndicated radio host based in Los Angeles. Citizen initiatives and referendums are nothing new to Californians, who vote on ballot issues all the time, but Prager wanted me to shed some light on the convoluted process a citizen-proposed constitutional amendment in Massachusetts must go through before it reaches the voters.

So I explained that even though 170,000 Bay State voters had signed petitions to put a marriage amendment on the ballot, it first had to undergo a vote in two consecutive sessions of the Legislature, and win support from at least 25 percent of the lawmakers each time. Since it had failed to do that, the amendment was now dead.

Prager wasn't sure he'd heard me right. Are you telling me, he asked in disbelief, that fewer than one in four Massachusetts legislators thinks marriage should be defined as the union of a man and a woman? Yes, I told him; the vote to kill the amendment was 151 to 45. ''Incredible,'' said Prager.

Barring a new petition drive by supporters of traditional marriage, the battle over same-sex wedlock may be finished in Massachusetts. But today's vote on Beacon Hill is a political grenade waiting to detonate elsewhere. It is only a matter of time before a same-sex couple married in Massachusetts finds a federal judge prepared to rule that under the US Constitution, their marriage license must be granted ''full faith and credit'' by every other state. Same-sex marriage will be the law of the land.

Only a federal marriage amendment can keep that from happening. Today's vote may have settled the issue in Massachusetts. It has unsettled it everywhere else.

Jacoby is right on target: what had become a moribund political issue has now been thrust back into the spotlight, just in time for hard- fought national election battles coming just around the corner.

And with his history of battling these very extremists, former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney can only benefit from today's Hugo Chavez- style legislative move.

THERE'S MORE on this topic at SaveWRKO.

SAVE Internet radio: it's almost too late!

Please help support the Radio Equalizer:

Your Amazon orders that begin with clicks here, regardless of what you ultimately purchase, help to further this site's efforts.

Or, if you would prefer, please contribute at the Honor System box in the upper right corner. Thanks again!

Technorati tags:

Photo: Mike Adaskaveg, Boston Herald


  • Why would a decision not to deny ten percent of the nation's population basic human rights be considered "extremism"?

    By Blogger hashfanatic, at 14 June, 2007 23:07  

  • See Hash, the cons are lost and are in complete and total denial. They are the RADICALS, they are the moonbats. The majority of this country to many people's surprise is leaning left. Polls reflect American's prefer constructive government spending over tax cuts, Americas prefer a government that helps the poor, over cutting programs, the American people support gays in the military by a large majority, the American people support closing the income gap between the rich and the middle class by overwhellming numbers.All of the positions once considered "frimnge" in 1994, during the rise of the Republican Party are now considered main stream positions, and the majority of America by a anarrow margin support Gay marriage. Check this report out from Media Matters, based on main stream polling data.

    Ideed, the CONS are now the moonbats, Liberal and progressive positions are the main stream. Cons have nothing left, nothing. THey will run and hide from this data and the raw numbers, but the fact remains on polls regarding , economic, social, and "moral" issuesthe nation has sharply moived to the left. If the right confronted that report I pulled and carefully read each issue, they would come to grips, they are the MOONBATS. When Maloney talks about "extremists" he is projecting.

    By Blogger Minister of Propaganda, at 15 June, 2007 02:08  

  • As usual, the Libs can't allow democracy when the answer of the people contradicts Liberal Democrat positions.

    By Blogger PCD, at 15 June, 2007 08:05  

  • Not everything is fair game to be put to a vote; not under the moral commitment this country made when it ratified the Constitution.

    A municipality or state cannot vote to:
    -- take the right to vote away from women, African-Americans or anyone else
    -- reinstate Jim Crow laws
    -- allow neighborhoods to have restricted covenants barring Jews and Catholics
    -- specify that a citizen has to be a member of a particular religious group in order to vote, sit on a jury or hold public office.

    Doesn't matter how many knuckle-draggers you can get to vote for these things; our laws are based on the Constitution and what cons love to call "the will of the people" is not supreme.

    Not to mention how embarrassing some of the things "the people" have endorsed can be. Last week was the 40th anniversary of the Supreme Court decision striking down laws forbidding "miscegenation" (interracial marriage) and at the time, 70 percent of Americans polled were in favor of keeping the laws.

    There's a "Loving vs. Virginia" moment coming down the pike. Whine all you want, civics-challenged cons, the train has left the station.

    By Blogger talkstocoyotes, at 15 June, 2007 09:01  

  • talksto: Doesn't matter how many knuckle-draggers you can get to vote for these things; our laws are based on the Constitution and what cons love to call "the will of the people" is not supreme.

    Not true any longer, the knuckle draggers are the minority now. IF they had this vote, Gays would have won anyway, but Im sure the 21%ers were creating a way to rig this vote too

    By Blogger Minister of Propaganda, at 15 June, 2007 09:19  

  • The moonbat party (Republican) is so patriotic they import workeres for political aide positions. I guess no American wants to work for the moonbat 21%er party anymore

    yes, conservatism is the fringe ideology in America.

    they are irrelevant

    By Blogger Minister of Propaganda, at 15 June, 2007 09:31  

  • MoP,

    Even you have to admit that some of the questions cited in the Media Matters report were not exactly unbiased.

    By Blogger Snowed In, at 15 June, 2007 12:06  

  • Snowed in
    The questions seemed pretty clear to me, can you point one out to me that sems like a biased question?

    By Blogger Minister of Propaganda, at 15 June, 2007 14:22  

  • MoP,

    Sorry for the delay in interfered.

    The most glaring unfair questions were those such as the following:

    Which do you think is more effective in stimulating the nation's economy: an economic agenda focused on returning money to taxpayers through tax cuts, or an economic agenda focused on spending for improvements to the country's infrastructure such as roads, bridges, and schools?

    These are presented as two choices that cannot both happen simultaneously.

    I also noticed the question that placed all the blame for the deficits on the tax cuts. Well, the tax cuts are still there, and yet the deficits are getting much, much smaller much more quickly than the GAO has anticipated.

    If you want to see a more inflammatory argument against this report, check out

    By Blogger Snowed In, at 22 June, 2007 13:42  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Page Rank Checker

Powered by Blogger