The Institutional Left is kicking itself.
The far leftwing hate machine is now targeting the businesses—hotels—of openly gay businessmen who support gay marriage for disagreeing with someone who openly disagreed with them on the issue of… wait for it… gay marriage. In other words, they’re accidentally fighting against gay marriage now.
“The two gay hoteliers whose duplex on Central Park was the site of a small dinner this week with Senator Ted Cruz are facing boycott threats to their properties,” the New York Times’ Maggie Haberman wrote on Friday morning.
Here’s how absurd this is: The Big Gay Hate Machine that forced Indiana Gov. Mike Pence to cave on religious liberty is now targeting businesses with owners that not only support gay marriage, but do so in an open way with hotels that cater to the gay community. They’re shooting at themselves—and proving themselves to be intolerant while doing so.
The backstory here is that Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), an unashamed conservative who is very open and public about his support for traditional marriage and opposition to gay marriage, met this week in New York with, among others, two openly gay hoteliers.
Ian Reisner and Mati Weiderpass hosted Cruz for a discussion on foreign policy in their apartment. Haberman described the two men as “longtime business partners who were once a couple and who have been pioneers in the gay hospitality industry.”
They agree with Cruz on America’s need to stand with Israel. But they disagree with Cruz on gay marriage. Most of the conversation was about Cruz’s and their support for Israel. But, as one could easily expect, the elephant in the room did come up in the discussion at the dinner and of course leaked out to the New York Times reporter, Haberman.
Haberman’s first story was headlined: “Ted Cruz Is Guest Of Two Gay Businessmen,” showing the Times’ bias with the overt implication that somehow a conservative meeting with a gay person was extraordinary. Meeting two gay people is, in the world of the Times, more outlandish for conservatives—so much so that it’s headline-worthy.
In the piece, Haberman argues that Cruz “struck quite a different tone” than his outspoken opposition to gay marriage during the dinner with Reisner and Weiderpass.
“During the gathering, according to two people present, Mr. Cruz said he would not love his daughters any differently if one of them was gay,” Haberman wrote. “He did not mention his opposition to same-sex marriage, saying only that marriage is an issue that should be left to the states.”
Cruz, in an interview with Breitbart News, said that’s not what happened—and Haberman got her details wrong.
“I was asked my views on gay marriage and I said the exact same thing I say every other time, which is I stated unambiguously and directly that I oppose gay marriage and that the Constitution leaves the decision of marriage up to the states—so neither the federal government nor unelected federal judges should be striking down traditional marriage laws developed by state legislatures,” Cruz told Breitbart News.
There is one detail from the dinner that the Times and Cruz agree on.
Haberman quoted Reisner as saying: “Ted Cruz said, ‘If one of my daughters was gay, I would love them just as much.’”
Cruz told Breitbart News that did happen. “One individual at the event asked my wife and me a question about what we would do if we found out one of our little girls was gay,” Cruz said. “Our response without hesitation was we would love her with all our hearts and that our love for our daughters is unconditional.”
Since the New York Times only prints “all the news that’s fit to print,” Cruz wonders why the left wing Gray Lady would consider that detail newsworthy—again, wondering why the Times finds what should be normal and mundane details about conservatives to be somehow extraordinary and newsworthy. “The Times found that apparently quite newsworthy, that conservatives love their children no matter what,” he told Breitbart News.
Nonetheless, the end result was clear from the whole bizarre story in the Times: Cruz met with two openly gay businessmen, they agreed with him on foreign policy, he disagreed with them on gay marriage. Storyline over, right? Nope.
Haberman’s piece on the dinner ran on Thursday. Fast forward to Friday morning. Cruz’s interview with Breitbart News happened late Friday morning around the same Haberman was reporting on this follow-up piece—about how the leftwing hate machine was kicking into full drive again, this time to target the hotels owned by Reisner and Weiderpass.
Haberman’s Friday headline? “Ted Cruz Event in New York Prompts Boycott Threats.”
Haberman wrote that “after” her first story—essentially meaning because of it—”a Facebook page was established calling for a boycott of Out NYC, the hotel catering to gay patrons that the two created, as well as a property Mr. Reisner recently bought on the Fire Island Pines.”
The Facebook page targeting the gay business owners—who support gay marriage and have a hotel that openly caters to gay people who support gay marriage—went viral almost immediately. Haberman’s piece noted it had 2,700 likes off the bat. It’s now up to close to 5,000.
“The man in the picture next to Ted Cruz, one of the most vociferous anti-gay politicians in contemporary U.S. history, is Mati Weiderpass, the co-owner, along with Ian Reisner, of ~75% of Fire Island Pines’ commercial district as well as the XL nightclub (aka BPM) and The Out NYC Hotel in Manhattan,” the boycotters wrote after posting a photograph of Weiderpass and Cruz. “Weiderpass, an out gay man, held an ‘intimate reception’ this week for Senator Cruz. The question, among so many others, is, WHY???!!!”
The Facebook page has been a media sensation all day Friday, promoted by media outlets ranging from the Times to the Washington Blade to Mediaite to the Huffington Post and more. Even though they’re now targeting people who believe in gay marriage for trying to convince people who don’t that they’re right and traditional marriage is wrong.
“Our records make it clear that we support gay marriage 100%,” Weiderpass said in a statement afterwards.
I have been a major supporter of gay causes and gay charities for two decades. People on both sides of the aisle need to be able to communicate with one another even when they ideologically disagree. As a Captain in the Army, I worked tirelessly for the repeal of ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell.’ While serving on the Board of Directors for the Service members Legal Defense Network, I needed to reach across the aisle to make that happen.
The fact that Senator Cruz came to a gay household was a surprise and a step in the right direction towards him having a better understanding of why he should rethink his stance on the gay marriage. We spent most of the time talking about national security issues and in particular the challenges regarding the defense of Israel to ISIS and Iran — these are the only issues where we found common ground. However, I did not shy away from engaging the Senator about social issues, in particular gay marriage.