Newsom hasn't been ad-libbing (Gay marriage stunt orchestrated by Dems)

San Francisco Chronicle ^ | Feb. 29, 2004 | Phillip Matier, Andrew Ross

[FairOpinion]

While it may appear spontaneous, Mayor Gavin Newsom's leap onto the national stage has been a controlled performance from the get-go -- complete with story line, image control and attention to detail aimed far beyond the San Francisco audience.

From the minute Newsom lifted the curtain with his call for gay marriage licenses, to his cross-continental debate with President Bush, Team Newsom has done its best to manage the image coming out of City Hall.

[FairOpinion]

Some of us suspected that this whole thing was deliberately planned by the Dems in election year, to try to force the Republicans to stand up and present them as intolerant, and to put this on the front pages, instead of talking about national security and the War on Terror.

[FairOpinion]

You were right!

From your earlier post on another thread:

"IMO, this "homosexual marriage" campaign has been planned and coordinated by the Left and the Democrap Party to become a distraction from national security issues in the 2004 election. I hope this backfires on them with massive punitive results."

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1087073/posts?page=140#140

[ServesURight]

This has backfired big-time on the Rats.

[stopem]

I wish you are right, explain how it has so far?

(BTW, Freep a cnn poll on this subject.)

[FairOpinion]

That's why we can't underestimate the Dems -- they are very creative, when it comes to dirty tricks.

[madprof98]

This has backfired big-time on the Rats.

Wishful thinking? Or do you have some evidence?

[AntiGuv]

What I see is the Republicans all riled up and divided on the issue while the Dems are just: jobs, jobs, jobs, let the states decide, jobs, jobs, jobs.

If anyone's been taken off message, it seems to be the Republicans.

[whereasandsoforth]

Any one with half a brain knows it was a democrat scam for the start. What happened? Did Newsom show up in the office that fateful morning and annouce to the staff, "If any gays happen in wanting a marrige lisence, go ahead an give it to "um"? And then, perchance, a gay couple did walk in?

[billorites]

We're voting for Kerry!
He's dreamy...

[FairOpinion]

"If anyone's been taken off message, it seems to be the Republicans."

===

We have to get back on message -- which should include keeping our eye on the ball: the real underlying problem is the activist judges. We can't get a Constitutional Amendment over every issue, but it won't be necessary, if we focus on appointing judges who interpret the law, not liberal activists. See my sig line.

I think Republicans should use this gay marriage thing to focus on the judges, instead of getting sidetracked with the Constitutional Marriage Amendment.

[Redcoat LI]

"Overseeing the spin was press secretary Peter Ragone, a New York transplant who has worked the media for a number of Democrats, including Andrew Cuomo, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore and most recently Gray Davis."

What a Resume.

No wonder he got a job in Hells' waiting room.

[trek]

You got that right. I am reminded of the quote from the elite journalist I believe after Nixon crushed McGovern.

"But how could he (Nixon) have won? I don't know a single person who voted for the man!?"

The elites are WAY out of touch on this one.

[claudiustg]

---This has backfired big-time on the Rats.---

I agree. This election will be about turnout and this issue will energize the conservative base like the gun control issue did last election.

[trek]

ROFLMAO!

[AntiGuv]

I am in complete agreement. The Republicans should focus squarely on elite judicial activism and subverting the rule of law, which strikes a chord with the great majority of the electorate. That has not been the case thus far and in my opinion last week's FMA trial balloon was one of the more poorly organized political moves that I've ever seen.

The Republicans of the administration and the congress and in the states seem to be reading off of a dozen different pages on this one..

[claudiustg]

---The Republicans should focus squarely on elite judicial activism and subverting the rule of law, which strikes a chord with the great majority of the electorate. ---

I disagree. Intellectualizing this would be a big mistake. To move the electorate you need a simple gut issue. Why waste time and resources trying to shift the argument?

[Starve The Beast]

I really doubt this. The Dems aren't stupid (sleazy, maybe, but not stupid). A sizable majority of Americans across the board oppose gay marriage. This has put prominent dems, like Kerry, on the spot. On one hand, they need to pander to the gays in their base; on the other hand, they don't want to alienate large numbers of swing voters by looking extreme on the issue.

Even Barbara Boxer, the drooling idiot from California, has issued a statement opposing this, and just look at the tap-dancing Kerry has had to do. If it was a Dem plot, it sure was a mistake.

[Starve The Beast]

I think Republicans should use this gay marriage thing to focus on the judges, instead of getting sidetracked with the Constitutional Marriage Amendment.

Outstanding point.

[AntiGuv]

Even if my personal approach is wrong, the most important political requirement is that the Republican Party approach the matter with a reasonably unified voice. That has not been the case thus far, which is the main point I am trying to make.

Even though I disagree with many conservatives on the basic matter, I have every reason to think that it should be a political winner. It'll be amazing if the GOP manages to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory on this issue.

[FairOpinion]

"If it was a Dem plot, it sure was a mistake."

===

Not necessarily -- I think the jury is still out.

It did accomplish, what may have been their objective: it took Iraq and WoT off the front pages.

Everyone has heard about the gay marriage "issue". How many people have heard of the discovery that Saddam diverted billions into his own bank accounts from the UN's "oil for food" program, while giving kickbacks to countries friendly to him, such as France?

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1087479/posts