October 25, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – Politics has been compared to chess, poker, boxing, and “show business for ugly people.” But politics is so filled with artifice and contrivance that it can justly be compared to only one sport – professional wrestling.


There is a classic scenario in pro wrestling: A promoter pairs a fan favorite up with a wrestler with a shady past. Over time, the hero is convinced to put his suspicions aside and team with his former nemesis for a high-stakes tag team match against their common foes. The fan favorite enters the ring first and, after absorbing the majority of punishment from both members of the other team, finally breaks free and lunges into his corner to make the tag – only to have his “partner” pull away and let him take the beating alone. It's called the “short-arm.” Here is a classic example:

(The short-arm takes place beginning at 9:10).

Here is a more recent example. [1] 

A political version yet can be seen in the way same-sex “marriage” came to the state of New Jersey.

This week Chris Christie, who has the girth of a tag team, short-armed the entire pro-family movement.

A superior court judge in Mercer County, Mary Jacobson, ruled last month that the state had to legally recognize same-sex “marriage” starting Monday. Christie appealed to the state Supreme Court in Trenton. But when the justices did not grant a stay, Christie backed down and allowed marriage to be redefined by judicial fiat. Pro-family leaders called this act “a disqualifying failure.”

But a failure for whom? Just like in pro wrestling, the former tag partner has been seen plotting with the other side. After the reversal, McKay Coppins wrote on Buzzfeed, “Christie’s true base of supporters couldn’t have been happier.”

One such example is GOP megadonor Paul Singer, who collected $5 million for Mitt Romney in 2012. Jeff Cook-McCormac, a senior adviser to his American Unity PAC, told Coppins, “The donor community are particularly looking for leaders who can unite people, and who can find a path back to winning elections.” Hint, hint.

The Republican Party's top donor in 2012, casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, is a self-described pro-abortion, pro-gay “social liberal” who recently suggested Barack Obama drop a nuclear bomb on the Iranian desert. He, too, must have taken note.

Christie, who has every intention of running for president in 2016, justified his inertia to fellow Republicans by saying the fact that the justices unanimously signed an order for gay “marriages” to take place before they had even heard opening arguments proved they had already made up their minds, and contesting the matter was futile. If true, his words were also a rebuke of his own judgment, since he appointed one of the letter's signatories.

But had the justices ruled against him, perhaps Mr. Christie could remember there is another court with broader jurisdiction to which he could appeal. Perhaps he has forgotten that, as governor, he possesses at least as much “discretion” in applying “laws” decreed from the bench as President Obama does in flouting the laws enacted by a duly elected Congress or established in 1789 by our Founding Fathers.

The pro-family movement has been counting on him and other elected officials to stand up for the family. The Supreme Court dismissed Proposition 8, a voter referendum supported by millions of Californians in an open election, because the plaintiffs lacked standing. Like California's far-Left Governor Jerry Brown, Christie refused to defend the law in court.

In so doing, Christie multiplied his similarities with Governor Moonbeam. Brown and Christie are also the only two governors in the country to sign legislation that makes it illegal for minors to seek out psychological treatment if they suffer from unwanted same-sex attraction. Christie/Brown 2016!

Due to Judge Jacobson's arrogance and Chris Christie's cowardice, gay “marriage” has come to New Jersey the same way it has come to four other states – by a combination of judicial decree and executive inaction.

But never before had it been enacted by a judge in a superior court. The level of unchecked judicial activismshould cause shivers to go down the spines of anyone who cherishes Constitutional order.

Make no mistake: Chris Christie could have led this fight and, if he were half as outspoken in supporting the family as he is attacking labor unions – or he was singing Barack Obama's praises right before the election – he may have won. He simply didn't want to. He short-armed the family.

Conservatives should be used to this song-and-dance. Mitt Romney made similar noises on the campaign trail last year, saying he had no choice but to implement gay “marriage” in 2003 and force Catholic hospitals to distribute the morning-after pill.

He's right there with us, honest. He just didn't have a choice. The judges made him do it.

Liberal Republicans have been using this dodge for decades. Since Roe v. Wade is “the law of the land,” they cannot propose abolishing abortion – but they sure would. Since the other party controls the Senate, they cannot reduce federal spending. Since Barack Obama is president, he can pack the Supreme Court with radical activists of dubious qualifications and start undeclared wars by decree without Congressional authorization.

They'd stop it if they could. What would really help is if you'd make a generous donation to the GOP victory fund, 'kay, thanks.

Candidates who continually bail on their party's most loyal constituency should remember, its members have a history of reciprocating when the candidate is the one who calls for help – like in 1996, 2008, and 2012.


1. For the record, I had to look this one up. I haven't watched pro wrestling consistently since the days of Gene Anderson, who was involved in a famous variation of this tactic himself. 


Commenting Guidelines
LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.