Update, on Radio Tonight: N.Y. Times Cites 3 ‘Conservative’ Financiers, Principle Backers of New York ‘Gay Marriage’

Original post, June 28, 2011, 2:07pm CT:

Corruption is corruption is corruption.

From the New York Times via Yahoo, emphasis the bound’s

The Financiers Who Helped Back N.Y. Gay Marriage Campaign

Much of the attention around the legalization of same-sex marriage in New York has revolved around the back-room politicking involved: the deals, the cajoling, the organizing.

But as The New York Times reported over the weekend, a crucial fount of support came from a seemingly unusual source: Wall Street donors known in large part for conservative leanings.

According to The Times, Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo sought the backing of three financiers: Paul E. Singer, the founder of Elliott Management and an ardent Republican donor; Clifford S. Asness, the head of the quant fund AQR Capital; and Daniel S. Loeb, the leader of Third Point.


This of course begs the question.  Wall Street, it is said, went for Obama in 2008.   No accounting was found in this article for the contributions of the more thoroughly neo-Marxist financiers on the Street, for  the oxymoronic and dissociative cause of “gay marriage.”

G u l a g    B o u n d

Update, June 30:

Paul Singer was exposed in Cliff Kincaid’s “Republicans Play into Obama’s Hands on Wall Street,” which cites the research of author, Zubi Diamond and the corruption of recent, bipartisan legislation on financial “reform.”  In addition to homosexual causes, Singer is a member of the Managed Funds Association, an especially malevolent force in politics, especially in the Republican Party.  The result?

Hedge funds remain unregulated and can continue to work very destructively together, shrouded in darkness, to undermine and even cripple our economy, just as they were very instrumental in the Mortgage Meltdown of 2008.  Also, the Securities and Exchange Commission was removed by this legislation from the purview of Freedom of Information Act requests.

Now, how about those financiers, and the Soft War for global Marxofascism they finance?  We must not allow the ethnicity of so many of them to prevent us from exposing their enmity with America.  That is the subject of much of my conversation today with Rick Wiles of TruNews, broadcasting tonight at 8pm CT on World Harvest Radio and then archived at TruNews.com.

Atlas statue, Rockefeller Center; photo, Javier Carbajal, Wikimedia: Javiertz


  1. But are those ‘conservative’ contributors actually conservative? I’ll hazard a guess they’re more likely neo-cons, as neo-cons are Marxists, the founders of neo-conservatism weren’t conservative in any way shape or form, they were Trotskyites, who sought to destroy the republican party from within. Or perhaps they’re just globalists. If they’re Log Cabin types, well, they aren’t conservative either, they don’t respect the constitution and bill of rights, they view rights as a one way street, all for them and none for us. They’re fascists.

    I’ll hazard a guess that Grover Norquist was among those heavy hitters as he’s seeking to devide fiscal conservatives and social conservatives, as he’s very anti-Christian, married to a woman whose brothers and father are part of the Muslim Brotherhood, and Norquist himself converted to Islam after his marriage.

  2. If America does not soon recover its moral bearings, returning to its Crhistian roots is as if Israel stopped being Jewish; no sense of nothing.

    What scares me as a Jew is decay will also turn into antisemitism. Really, believing Jews should go after the liberal Jews, discredit them as enemies of the Jewish people because their relentless demolishing success of Christian America will make millions of non-Jews freak out and irrationally and violently go after all Jews.

    Believing Jews have the moral obligation to attack those secular jews who, along with many other Liberal non-Jews, are destroying morality in America. In their efforts to make America perfectly free for everything they are creating an America without self controls, without moral limits.

    I prefer the inevitable hipocrites who will violate moral rules they profess to cynics without them. The former know the difference between righ and wrong and will break the rules in private, tha latter do not care about rules. To them anything is ok if you can not scientifically prove it is harmful, it is crazy.

    We better do it fast.

Speak Your Mind