Spitzer swallows marriage equality, but to what degree?
NY's Eliot Spitzer, the only governor in the nation to ever voluntarily introduce a marriage equality bill into the legislature, has once again publicly expressed his support for getting the measure passed in the Empire State. However, to what degree he made that support known is up for debate. An attendee of a recent Manhattan fundraiser recalls Spitzer's support as going something like this:
"One of the first things we're going to do when [Senate Minority Leader] Malcolm Smith is [majority] leader is gay marriage," the witness recounted Spitzer as telling some 60 people who paid up to $10,000 each to attend the event in Greenwich Village Wednesday night.
"Everybody applauded when he said that," said the witness, who was among senators, Democratic activists and lobbyists at a fund-raising event for the Senate Democratic Committee. It was held in the library of the elegant West 13th Street home of HBO's "Oz" creator Tom Fantana.
However, other witnesses tell the paper that the governor simply suggested that Senate would soon follow the Assembly and pass marriage equality, but perhaps in not as strong of language. And Spitzer spokeswoman Christine Anderson also denies to the Post that Spitzer said anything about this issue being a top priority. However all agree on one thing -- Spitzer's still quite down with seeing two dudes or chicas dancing the horah at the Waldorf, regardless of exactly how much political capital he intends to expend on the the concept. And that's always nice to hear.
But on the disgusting end of the spectrum, a spokesman for current Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno is voicing opposition to marriage equality by attempting to link it to Spitzer's controversial, news-making licenses to illegal immigrants thing. Bruno's mouthpiece is quoted as saying:
"Driver's licenses for illegals and gay marriages are not what the people of New York want"..."This is Gov. Spitzer promoting another divisive issue, and it indicates that his priorities are all wrong"
Because, of course, what two two ideas could possibly be more similar? Maybe Senate Republicans want to throw in some abortion or terror threats while they're at it? After all, why should they just tackle how and why they can, in good conscience, oppose the legal rights of gay citizens, when they can capitalize on wholly unrelated political issues in order to paint Spitzer as that wacky dude who dares to view humans and their rights in non-simplistic ways?
SPITZ VOWS TO PUSH FOR GAY MARRIAGES [NY Post]
comments powered by Disqus