In recognition of the recent departure from the ranks of the Doghouse Democrats (Pedro Espada, Carl Kruger and Ruben Diaz) of Senator-Elect Hiram Monserrate, I’ve marked them down from “The Four Horsemen of the Preposterous," and renamed them "Carl and the Passions" (in memory of what is arguably the worst album ever issued by the Beach Boys while they were still trying). When it comes to loyalty to their political party, the theme song of the Passions is not “Be True to Your School,” but rather “I Get Around.”

I hold no particular brief for Senate Minority Leader Malcolm Smith, and can rattle off the names of several members I think would make a better Party Leader, but, for whatever reasons, Smith was the choice of his Conference by an overwhelming margin, and therefore, he deserves the support of all Senate Democrats when the Senate organizes in January.

The Passions have other ideas.

The saddest thing about the Passions’ self aggrandizing efforts to make the future direction of the New York State Senate about them (and them alone) is that their dragging in the issue of gay marriage may have actually elevated the debate (although at the same time sinking it to a new low).

The Passions’ initial cover story for refusing to support the choice of their Conference concerned "work[ing] together actively to promote a unified vision to support the needs of their diverse communities in the upcoming legislative session," and "working to insure that, in these difficult economic times, state government can function efficiently to protect the concerns of all New Yorkers."

No one sane (or even the looney cult Espada associates with) believed a word, unless the definition of "support[ing] the needs of their diverse communities" is defined solely to mean member items for one’s own districts. As to ensuring the efficient function of government in difficult times, the nature of our fiscal crisis seems to these conspirators a fortuitous bonus--something which can be used as a wedge to leverage others into giving in to their demands.

More credible are the Passions’ plans to "work together and speak with a strong and cohesive post-partisan voice." Well, maybe "post-partisan" is inexact; more like a "pre-Hobbesian state of nature" where roving bands of nomads form momentary alliances of convenience, but essentially, it is every caveman for himself. Still, the essential point about getting beyond parties, which are, after-all, semi-coherent groups organized around a commonly held system of belief, would seem to be accurate.

For all the smoke and mirrors concerning this being about the need for bipartisanship in a time of crisis, few have pointed out that the bi-partisan nature of the current NYS status quo, which Carl and company ostensibly seeks to keep in place, is directly responsible for much of the Albany phenomena Espada calls "dysfuctionality and polarization" which led us into this crisis in the first place. But, nonetheless, the meaningless rhetoric about the utopia of bi-partisanship continued unabated.

"Nationally", says the Passions’ PR Strumpet, Juda Engelmayer, (who should really stick to making bagels), "we are experiencing, in the face of uncertainty, a unique moment of both hope and opportunity. Now is the time to return to our core values."

And surely, this is a return to the core values of Carl Kruger and Pedro Espada, who in the face of uncertainty, have seen their opportunities and took ‘em, much in the manner of George Washington Plunkitt, but without the candor. Nonetheless, one can hardly accuse them of forsaking their core values, which are mostly a matter of "what’s in it for me?"

As I’ve noted before, this is not about, in Espada’s words, bringing an end to the "dysfunctionality and polarization" in Albany; it is about creating dysfunctionality and polarization, and then exploiting them for personal and political gain.

As this became apparent even to the press, newer and lamer excuses had to be concocted; Diaz, who sometimes endorses Republicans, expressed outrage that Smith had once done so as well (in fact, when Smith was first elected Leader, I noted this was the one sure way to ensure he didn't give his vote to the Republicans), and Espada, who actually once became a member of the Republican Conference, had the chutzpah to join with Diaz in this critique. 
 

Does Carl now have to change his nickname from "Mengele" to "Torquemada"?

Not that I don’t think that election as Leader, of a particular Senator, who may be Latino, is possibly part of the Passions’ end game--it could well be. Nonetheless, it is hard to conceive that anyone in Albany, even the Senate Republicans, are irresponsible enough to let Pedro Espada or Ruben Diaz be the "Third Man in the Room." However, it is not inconceivable that the Passions are fronting for someone else who eventually intends to ride in to the rescue on a white (or brown) horse; it is also not inconceivable that the Passions are playing this game in the hopes of seducing someone into playing that role.

It takes thirty-two votes to elect a Leader of the Senate--currently, The Passions hold the balance of power between the parties; in 1965 those playing a similar game tied up the Senate for five weeks before eventually winning with Republican support.

But, this is not really about putting in Joe Serrano or Marty Dilan, anymore than it is about putting in Jeff Klein, Dean Skelos or Tom Libous; nor is it about keeping Malcolm Smith out. This is about being the ones who decide. And while there is probably a hierarchy of preference among each of the Passions (or even the possibility that they may share the same hierarchy), which may place a particular Latino in first place, I suspect that any of the aforementioned names--even Smith, or a player yet to be named (whatever the ethnicity), would suffice, for the right price.

As such, I owe The Passions an apology for previously implying that they were Republican shills; in the last few days it has become clear that The Passions are using and abusing the Republicans in exactly the same manner in which they are using and abusing the Democrats. In the end, on the matter of Red versus Blue, the majority of The Passions know no color but Green.

Which brings us to the refreshing figure of the Reverend Ruben Diaz, Sr; and when I say “refreshing,” I am only half-joking.

There is no doubt that Ruben Diaz shares his fellow conspirators’ hunger for perks, pork and the engorgement to his pinga brought by the ego gratification of being at the center of attention. But, unlike the others, Ruben believes in something larger than his own self- interest.

At the center of Ruben’s beliefs is opposition to same sex marriage. While all of the Passions threaten to put the legislature into an entirely self-generated paralysis, leaving it unable to deal with a fiscal crisis (which the legislature only partially self-generated), at least Ruben, unlike his compatriots, has done so over a matter of principle (or at least partially for those reasons).

But since (pending recounts), the Passions cannot deliver the leadership to any candidate without Ruben’s cooperation, his priorities have become their priorities. Thus, when Ruben said that a promise not to bring same sex marriage to the Senate floor was part of his price, the others were forced to join his crusade.

His co-conspirators do not share Ruben’s enthusiasm.

Former Passion Hiram Monserrate represents a district with a large gay constituency–could this have been one of the reasons he left the group?

Pedro Espada, who’s long palled around with "Doctor" Fred Newman, a "therapist" who gleefully admits to sleeping with his patients, has forfeited his right to moral outrage about something so boring and conservative as expanding the right to matrimony, and indeed, Espada has long favored same sex marriage.

As with any issue, Carl Kruger is probably most interested in cost-benefit analysis, which, in this case, means ascertaining whether the funds he could raise from gay groups would offset any losses from his Orthodox Jewish contributors--although one gets the feeling that, all things being equal, Carl would just as soon change the subject.

Holding their noses, Kruger and Espada joined Diaz in opposing any floor vote on same sex marriage, instead proposing a referendum. Despite the lip-smackingly delightful opportunities such a scenario would undoubtedly afford in allowing observers the chance to watch some supporters of term limits engage in Yassky-like efforts to explain seemingly contradictory stances about the sacredness of the popular plebiscite, I must nonetheless express my outrage over this effort by three petty little thugs to deny the LGBT community the opportunity, afforded to all other citizens, to bring to their elected legislators their concerns in the hopes of having them addressed.

Only recently, in the Hernandez v. Robles case, the Court of Appeals ruled that there was no state constitutional right to same sex marriage, and that the proper forum for addressing such a matter was the Legislature, not the Courts.

Whatever I may think of that decision, it is not facially unreasonable, and many good people who support same sex marriage agreed with the Court’s logic. Some (even on “The Daily Gotham”) also argued that society, and the LGBT community, was ultimately better served by this decision being made through the legislative process.

Fine; in response, the LGTB community effectively organized and sold the State Assembly on same sex marriage, even getting the votes of a few Republicans. Many believe that if this bill is let on the Senate floor, something the Republicans have so far prevented, it will pass, even with the opposition of some Democrats, because enough Republicans will support it. Perhaps they are right; perhaps not.

But, now, Kruger, Espada and Diaz have promised that they will gum up the organization of the Senate unless, among others things, they are given a promise that a law to give state recognition to same sex marriages will not be allowed to come to the floor.

So, the Court of Appeals says "leave us alone, go to the Legislature," but Kruger, Espada and Diaz say, "You can’t do that, because even if you have the votes, we won’t let it come to the floor."

This is plainly an outrage. Those who say they favor same-sex marriage, but agreed with the Court, should be the most outraged of all at this attempt to tie up an entire state in an effort to deny to a minority group the opportunity given to all citizens to seek legislative redress of their concerns.

But, at least Ruben Diaz is acting out of a sincere but misguided belief in a wrathful God.

By contrast, since he forsook Fred Newman, it is doubtful that Pedro Espada believes in any deity, let alone the God of Wrath.

And , Carl Kruger, though embracing Wrath as an organizing principle (as he does unto others before they do unto him), is impressed only with superior beings he can see with own eyes, and even then, knows that even a County Leader (who he must sometime present with burnt offerings) is not truly omniscient.

Once Carl Kruger followed, as his guiding light, a politician named Tony Genovesi. Although condemned by the likes of Gary Tilzer as the embodiment of evil, Genovesi, though one tough and often ruthless cookie, was also a Christian as devout as Ruben Diaz, who was guided by his moral center--a morality so unyielding that Genovesi stood up even for the constitutional rights of repugnant pedophiles like the North American Man Boy Love Association, because he considered it the right thing to do, even though Assemblymembers from far more liberal constituencies were voting the other way.

Devout Christians ask, WWDJ--What Would Jesus Do?

Carl, why not ask WWTD---What Would Tony Do?

He’d say: “Carl, be a fucking mensch!”