Recall the profile of Mass. state rep Eugene O’Flaherty called a social conservative by the Boston Globe in a profile last week. As I said at the time, only in Massachusetts and the Globe would a “personally opposed on abortion, but ...” Catholic politician be called a social conservative, but apparently that was because he was opposed to gay marriage and embryonic stem-cell research. Well, no longer.
Apparently, O’Flaherty felt the heat from the Globe, the number-one cheerleader for the gay agenda, and he now thinks it’s time to move on from the gay marriage debate. What’s done is done, and now there are more important issues to deal with. Funny, but how did a guy who was vociferously and adamantly opposed to gay marriage and was in fact a legislative leader on the matter suddenly “see the light” and switch sides?
This switch was predictable because the gay lobby now has the leadership of Beacon Hill firmly in its grasp and as head of the Judiciary Committee I’m sure O’Flaherty has had both the carrot of increased donations from gay groups and the stick of opposition activism in his next election waved in his face.
Anyone want to take bets on how long before O’Flaherty jumps the fence on stem cells? And can someone call the Globe and ask them if O’Flaherty still qualifies as a conservative?