Why Obama’s Same-Sex “Marriage” Gamble Backfired
May 28, 2012
By Christopher G. Adamo, www.chrisadamo.com
In what now appears as the worst blunder of Barack Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign (and the entire effort has thus far been less than stellar), he announced on ABC News last week that he has “evolved” to the position of supporting same sex “marriage.” Perhaps such rubric resonates in certain countercultural conclaves as superior to “I was against it before I was for it,” but to the rest of America, this charade was as transparent as cellophane, merely shameless political posturing.
Predictably, the entire liberal establishment responded on cue with thunderous and near universal support. Obama was roundly lauded by the network anchors, and in an unparalleled irony, he was portrayed on the cover of Newsweek sporting a rainbow hued “halo.” This, we must understand, is liberalism’s concept of an angel. Nevertheless, in the real world, his polling numbers have since plummeted.
Amid the apparently unexpected public rejection of his new enlightenment, the Monday morning quarterbacks have been out in force. Even some who claim to be in his political camp are speculating as to why he chose this juncture of the campaign season to bring the same-sex “marriage” debate to the forefront, and furthermore are lamenting that he did not wisely avoid such a “hot button” issue. With the voters of North Carolina, where the 2012 Democrat National Convention is to be held, decisively passing a state constitutional amendment upholding traditional marriage, it would seem that his timing was severely off. Theories abound, but the obvious and time-proven explanation is never mentioned.
To begin with, it needs to be understood that this whole debacle was completely premeditated and purposeful. It was no impromptu attempt at damage control in the wake of Joe Biden’s seemingly unauthorized pronouncement that Barack Obama had emerged from the closet on the counterculturally approved side of the matter. Nor was it the blossoming epiphany that Obama sanctimoniously asserts it to be.
Nothing in this Administration happens on that basis, with the exception of the occasional revealing comments secretly recorded on somebody’s cell phone, or drifting into a microphone that is presumably turned off, and which invariably expose a consistent undercurrent of complete contempt for Heartland America or her allies on the world scene. And in every one of those instances, the reaction from the Obama Administration is extreme embarrassment and frenzied efforts at damage control. In stark contrast, such a staged and practiced event as his profession to ABC reporter Robin Roberts that he now takes the side of those who would eradicate traditional marriage could not have been motivated by anything other than his determination to be reelected in November.
Nor was the plan to cash in all of his chips in a desperate effort to change the subject from the nation’s disastrous economy. America’s economy indeed remains in the throes of a catastrophic downturn, and the people on Main Street are fully aware of it despite contorted and contradictory Democrat efforts to first deny that this is the case, immediately followed by finger pointing at George W. Bush as the culprit.
Ultimately, the Democrats are aware that in this election cycle, their electoral fortunes are entirely dependent on the actions of the Republicans, which is just as it has invariably been in recent decades. Rarely could a Democrat hope to win on his own merits by honestly trumpeting his support for the liberal agenda. And that is particularly true in this election cycle, as the “merits” of Barack Obama’s policies and their effects on the country have proven so detrimental to America. When considered against such a backdrop, they now appear as a skeletal caricature of the grandiose “hope and change” and “sea level” declarations of his 2008 campaign.
In short, Barack Obama will most certainly lose in a direct comparison between his leftist worldview, and what it portends for the nation, if weighed against the free market capitalism that characterizes Mitt Romney. Consequently, the essential task must be to foment a split between Romney and the Conservative base. And this is where the Democrat political strategists severely miscalculated. Still, it is crucially important to realize that had they been successful, the November elections could already have been a “done deal,” with Obama’s second term all-but guaranteed.
All efforts to denigrate Romney based on his business ventures, which on balance have been overwhelmingly successful, ring completely hollow when contrasted against the sordid “community organizing” background of Barack Obama. On cultural issues, Obama is inarguably worse. Nevertheless, Romney has historically been weak (at best) in this area over the years. Thus his vulnerability might have presented a critical opportunity to the Obama operatives.
Had Romney followed up on Obama’s revelation by posturing to the “center,” the betrayal of conservative America would have been complete and most likely, irreparable. Under such circumstances, the Obama political machine would no longer need to amass a majority of the electorate in November, but merely continue fanning the flames of discord between the conservative base and an unacceptable Republican candidate. A repeat of the fates of Bob Dole or John McCain would be entirely adequate for Obama and his minions to claim a “mandate” from the American people, ostensibly validating socialized medicine, the destruction of the private business sector, and every other detestable leftist precept.
Thankfully, Romney did not cooperate. Instead of seeking “common ground,” he flatly avowed his support of marriage as it has always been in America, buttressing his claim by pointing to his track record on the topic while Governor of Massachusetts. Three days later, in a commencement speech delivered at Liberty University, he reiterated this stance while affirming the critical importance of faith and family to America’s future. As a result, his ties to Heartland America have since been strengthened, and his standing in the tracking polls has soared.
Clearly, this episode is a harbinger of the impending liberal strategy, which will be to make every effort to disenfranchise the vast base of conservative voters in like manner. The unfolding of events, and their actual repercussions, are an encouraging lesson Mitt Romney would do well to remember in the upcoming months. The frequency and intensity of these liberal broadsides can only be expected to increase as Election Day approaches. Yet if Romney remains steadfast, he will be impervious to them.