Posted on 01/21/2014 5:03:12 AM PST by Kaslin
Everyone knows by now that the governor (and possible presidential contender) can be a hothead. Some have called him a bully. Even if you think that's too strong, it's undeniable that a trace of bellicosity has been important to what the professionals like to call his "brand."
Still, he shouldn't have said what he did in that radio interview. However strongly he may feel about those who disagree, and certainly he has his reasons for feeling aggrieved, he shouldn't have said that his opponents "have no place" in his state. It's understandable, considering the intemperance and intolerance he demonstrated, why the press is going wild with this story.
What? Did you miss it? That's because it wasn't possible presidential candidate and Republican Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey who said those things about his opposite numbers, it was possible presidential candidate and Democratic Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York. Speaking on WCNY radio, Cuomo told listeners that Republicans are in the midst of a civil war:
"Who are they? Are they these extreme conservatives who are right-to-life, pro-assault weapon, anti-gay? Is that who they are? Because if that's who they are, and if they are the extreme conservatives, they have no place in the state of New York, because that's not who New Yorkers are."
Naturally, there has been no outcry in the press. With the exception of the vigilant Kathryn J. Lopez of National Review and a few other "extremists," the interview had all the impact of a feather floating onto a blade of grass.
Let's put the equivalent words into the mouth of Christie. To do so, we must mischaracterize the Democrats' views as Cuomo was caricaturing Republican views. "Pro-assault weapon"? Few second amendment defenders see themselves as pro-assault weapon. The term "assault weapon" is inexact -- and can sometimes amount to a matter of cosmetics, not ballistics. In any case, people who resist gun control have solid arguments and can be found in all counties of the state of New York. Those who believe that the right to bear arms is a personal right that cannot be unduly infringed by the state also form a majority of the members of the United States Supreme Court. Are they not welcome in the state of New York?
As for "anti-gay," it isn't clear how Cuomo would define the term, but he is presumably referring to people who oppose same-sex marriage. Again, people who believe that a traditional understanding of marriage is a key pillar of family and social life would not characterize themselves as "anti-gay." They would observe, for example, that they had also opposed liberalizing the divorce laws (New York was a "pioneer" in that, too), and opposed the normalization of unwed parenting. According to a 2012 Quinnipiac poll, "extremists" opposing same-sex marriage still comprise about a third of New York State's population. Are they "not who New Yorkers are"?
Cuomo has grouped those who call themselves "pro-life" together with other "extremists." That's 48 percent of the U.S. population, according to a 2013 Gallup poll, and includes 31 percent of self-described Democrats, along with 46 percent of women and 51 percent of non-whites. Are they unwelcome extremists?
People who call themselves pro-life do so because they believe that every human life, at every stage, is deserving of honor and human dignity. They hold this view though they know it to be unfashionable. Fifty-one percent of those surveyed told Gallup that they believed most Americans are pro-choice, while the actual number who describe themselves that way was only 45 percent.
If Christie were to use comparable language about Democrats, he'd probably have to describe them as "pro-criminal, gun-confiscating, anti-Catholic bigots": "Pro-criminal" because some Democrats have been opposed to the death penalty; "gun-confiscating" because some Democrats have proposed gun-control measures; and "anti-Catholic bigots" because the Democratic party is responsible for Obamacare, which forces Catholic institutions and individuals to violate their religious beliefs.
Obviously, such careless and inflammatory language from the governor of a state -- all the more so when he is being mentioned as a candidate for president -- would provoke a shrieking nervous breakdown by every on-air personality at MSNBC. The cacophony would be only slightly less pronounced on other outlets.
Conservatives are accustomed to slander. But in this case, they should learn from the professional offense-takers on the other side and demand that Cuomo apologize.
It is always best to understand the true nature of people like Cuomo. There is decadence at the core of every liberal. They can never be trusted in any matter.
shows the mindset of the evil Progressives
if you disagree with them off with your head
I’m thinking he won’t want those low-life, pro-assault weapon folks VISITING his state and leaving money there, either.
Based on what I have seen too many times for too many years here at FR, I am afraid that too many Freepers (and by extension, non-Freeper conservatives) are, in fact, viciously "anti-gay."
It is one thing to support traditional marriage and oppose gay marriage. But I am too often appalled at the name-calling and mean-spirited invective I have seen against gay people at this site.
People throw the word "faggot" around here like it's nothing here.
I have known some wonderful gay people in my life (including two elderly gentleman who who have been a Godsend to my family, befriending, helping and being true friends to my elderly widowed mother who unfortunately lives 1500 miles away from me and my brother.)
Although I have been an active Freeper since 1998 (posting 544 threads and 18,475 replies thus far) and love this site, the outrageous gay-baiting I see here is the major reason that I almost never recommend this site to anyone I know. Frankly, it embarrasses me. And it is decidedly un-Christian.
An awful lot of people here should be ashamed of themselves, and I wish that Jim Robinson and the moderators would enforce a policy of deleting threads that use derogatory terms like "fudge-packers" and "faggots."
And that’s why God created the “Abuse” button. Use it.
I do use the abuse button not infrequently. I have never seen it work when it comes to anti-gay slurs.
Shall we just agree to the word queer then as a better choice than the euphemism gay?
I have to agree with you. It is one thing to be against gay marriage but another thing entirely to use insulting language to describe gay people. It only confirms their stereotypes of conservatives as stupid and intolerant. Those same people who use the word “faggot” would not use the word “nigger”.
I agree with you too
The military was the same, all the jokes were about homosexuals, I got real tired of it
“Tolerance” is one of those flexible terms, like “democracy” or “freedom” that means just about anything the speaker wants it to mean at the moment.
There is an adjustment as to what is “tolerated” and what is to excised altogether from the public marketplace. Urinating in corners and defecating on the public thoroughfare is not generally tolerated in civilized and polite societies. But to be branding as unsuitable just some kinds of personal opinions completely from open discussion is no longer a civilized or polite behavior.
Governor Cuomo has defecated on the public thoroughfare, and seems to have no shame in having done so. He is completely unapologetic for his transgression against open exchange of ideas and opinions, and shows extreme prejudice not unlike that of a KKK gathering for the presence of an American of African origin.
And he believes himself to be “tolerant”? About as “tolerant” as the Salem Witch Trials of 1692.
From http://www.history.com/topics/salem-witch-trials
“The infamous Salem witch trials began during the spring of 1692, after a group of young girls in Salem Village, Massachusetts, claimed to be possessed by the devil and accused several local women of witchcraft. As a wave of hysteria spread throughout colonial Massachusetts, a special court convened in Salem to hear the cases; the first convicted witch, Bridget Bishop, was hanged that June. Eighteen others followed Bishop to Salem’s Gallows Hill, while some 150 more men, women and children were accused over the next several months. By September 1692, the hysteria had begun to abate and public opinion turned against the trials. Though the Massachusetts General Court later annulled guilty verdicts against accused witches and granted indemnities to their families, bitterness lingered in the community, and the painful legacy of the Salem witch trials would endure for centuries.”
Are we returning to those days in New York State?
Tolerance = .010"
This guy is such a load. Hopelessly in need of a pie in the face.
There was a discussion between two people in which it was said that Progressives are ignorant and illogical people. The answer to that was that they’re not ignorant, just dedicated to the Progressive movement and to he%% with logic and reason.
I agree that gay-flaming on FR is obnoxious, particularly since many of the "sheeple" in that life are persons who may have been drafted into the lifestyle via child abuse over which they were powerless. They do deserve basic human dignity and thoughtful encouragement to find a way out, not wholesale schoolyard derision.
By comparison, one thing the zealous civil rights movement has done for prostitutes is to advance the understanding that many of these females are, or were, abused children in need of support for rebuilding their lives, and there are ministries with a compassionate approach that have helped many of them leave the "oldest profession." It may be easier in the case of what are now called "sex workers", however, because of the exploitive and often violent presence of pimps in the situation of prostitutes, and because of the gay lobby's tyrannical determination to destroy any "ex-gay" organizations.
Your example of the gay men who help your elderly mother is instructive. Many of us in or past middle age have known lots of gay people who acted as supportive resources in the prevailing family-oriented structure that existed before the Sexual Revolution. The environmentalist/animal behaviorist author Farley Mowatt, who observed packs of wolves in the wild, reported on the stable mating patterns, supplemented by the presence of "uncles" and "aunts" who did not mate, but attached themselves to mated couples and helped raise their cubs. This seems a more natural pattern for mammals than gay couples attempting to raise children as an extreme minority.
cuomo=hitler... no difference in their ideology or intentions.
No, they wouldn’t... but you did.
Add to this the concept that New York is “his state”> Since when?
BTW How will he behave once he becomes the former governor of New York? Or, was his election as governor an election that made him “Governor for life”?
Cuomo is okay with Communists in NY academia, media, and public service office (elected and appointed).
Screw the bastard.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.