Memo to Headline Writers: Try not to get your knickers in a twist over gay marriage

NY Mayor Bloomberg in a Bind Over Gay Marriage

Let’s give them the benefit of the doubt, OK?  I’m sure no one, no one at all, thought twice about the use of the word “bind” in a headline about gay sex.  NTTAWWT!

NEW YORK (Reuters) - New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg faced pressure from both sides over gay marriage on Monday after saying the city would appeal a court ruling overturning a ban on gay unions even though he supports them.

Gay unions?  Is that a new pressure group within the AFL-CIO?  Here we have a classic “conflict first” lede graf.  In the old days, journalists were told to start with the “five W’s”—now it’s if it bleeds it ledes.  And if there isn’t any actual blood,action-oriented words like “pressure” and “bind” are worth mentioning up front.  Let’ s see how many paragraphs in the story below include this kind of colorful language, or as the 2000 year old man used to say, “my peppy words.”

Bloomberg was called a coward by a state senator who advocates gay rights while a Catholic opponent of gay marriage accused the Democrat-turned-Republican mayor of a lack of principles.

“Called a coward,” that’s a good one.  And how about the way “Democat-turned-Republican buttresses the “lack of principles” accusation.  State of the art example of piling spin upon hype, with a cherry on top.

"I think people have the right to love, to live with and to marry whoever they want, regardless of their sexual orientation," Bloomberg told guests at a benefit dinner on Saturday.

If he said it at a dinner on Saturday, does that make it not part of his administration’s policy on Monday?  If this were a story about Donald Rumsfeld’s opinion about female mud-wrestling among the troops, don’t you think they would have put his words in a more official context?

State court Judge Doris Ling-Cohan ruled on Friday that the rights of five same-sex couples were violated when they were denied new York City marriage licenses last year because the state's constitution guarantees equal rights to everybody.

Bloomberg said he would appeal because he did not want a repeat of what happened in San Francisco last year when the mayor issued thousands of marriage licenses to same-sex couples only to have a state court nullify them a few months later.

We can all save ourselves a lot of trouble reading this story and future coverage by imagining this scene: Bloomberg awakes to read of the State court ruling.  He calls for his lawyers:

“Get me Flywheel, Shyster and Flywheel.  Hello boys, what do you think I should do?”

  Lawyers:  Mayor, this is a hot potato you don’t need.It will only cause you tsouris. Don’t be a schlemiel,  file an appeal!

Gay marriage was an election year issue after Massachusetts legalized it last year, and Friday's ruling raised the prospect that New York could be next.

   Of course, Bloomberg probably couldn’t care less, but he has to let the Neanderthals in the Party he chose win this argument.  Did anyone notice the “oops, sorry, guess I was wrong” admission from the leader of the opposition to Bloomberg’s ban on smoking in New York city bars? The Mayor was right, the bars aren't hurting, and New York is marginally healthier.  Chalk one up for the political system, I'd say.

William Donohue, president of the Catholic League, said the mayor was "trying to have it both ways and pleasing no-one."

Some people go this way, and some people go that way, but according to the Catholics, you can’t go both ways, not even in New York.

"That's not a principled response whether you're for or against same-sex marriage," Donohue said, adding that there were many Christians in New York opposed to same-sex marriage.

So it’s a civil rights issue?  Christians for closed minds? 

But state senator and gay rights supporter Tom Duane also slammed Bloomberg. "Mayor Bloomberg is a coward," he said. "He should not file those papers to appeal. He should stand with us during this, the most important civil rights battle."

Finally, that coward quote is attributed.  Now everyone’s happy, the politician who came up with a fiery quote, the reporter who was grateful for the ammunition, even Bloomberg who gets to look conservative to moderates, moderate to conservatives, and radical to gays, (to whom he can say on the sly, “you’re right to hold my feet to the fire.”)

ELECTION LOOMING

The ruling is a major test for Bloomberg as he seeks a second term at the end of this year.

"To forgo an appeal would have been to pave the way for a wave of gay marriages in New York City, which would certainly hurt Mr. Bloomberg ... in a likely primary against two conservative challengers," the New York Times said.

If a primary opponent of Michael Bloomberg’s gets more than 15 percent of the vote, I’ll eat his poll.  More artificial  hype to a story that should have been three sentences long.

Maurice Carroll, director of Quinnipiac University Polling Institute, said Bloomberg's ratings were unlikely to suffer seriously because he could argue his response was practical.

"Even people who favor gay marriage, people in the gay community, will see the practical thing is to get ourselves a decision," Carroll said. The institute's most recent poll in New York state put support for same-sex civil unions at 52 percent but support for gay marriage much lower at 37 percent.

Get “ourselves” a decision?  Odd…is Mr. Carroll making policy decisions now?  Åre there people in the gay community who see other decisions and aspects of this debate?

Republican New York Gov. George Pataki differed from Bloomberg, saying the judge's decision was wrong.

"New York's marriage laws are clear that marriage is between a man and a woman and any changes to our laws should be made through the legislative process, not by a judge or local officials," said Kevin Quinn, spokesman for Pataki.

At least Pataki is comfortable in the Republican party, enough to have delusions of national office.  (If ever there was a man with the soul of a Vice President…)

Judge Ling-Cohan stayed Friday's ruling for 30 days and the city's decision to appeal will put off any prospect of the city performing gay marriages until the legal process is exhausted.

Exhausted!  Me too.

With the backing of President Bush, opponents of gay marriage are seeking a national constitutional amendment to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman.

Oh very good.   This story looked like it was going to fizzle out into another “he said, he and he said” standoff but now you’ve gone and put Bush and the national amendment in.  In just a few words, this story became another red state/blue state, politics of fear/moral values thesis.  Where did this last sentence come from?  Can’t anybody here edit this game?