Good times in the NY gubernatorial race. GOP hopeful Carl Paladino gave some interesting social commentary this weekend. From the NY Daily News...
"Carl Paladino says it's the bumping and grinding he finds disgusting. "
"Appearing onNBC's "Today" Monday morning, the Republican gubernatorial candidate Paladino said he has nothing against gay people in his work or personal life - he just doesn't want to be exposed to their culture."
So why is Mr. Paladino saying these things?
"Paladino ignited a firestorm Sunday when he declared that being gay is 'not the example that we should be showing our children.'"
What sort of example does having sex and conceiving our children set, exactly? Mr. Paladino went on...
"'I just think my children and your children would be much better off and much more successful getting married and raising a family,' he said."
"He later added: 'I oppose the homosexual agenda, whether they call it marriage, civil unions or domestic partnership. Marriage is between a man and a woman - period.'"
After telling us all how we should live our personal lives, Paladino added one more gem...
Oh no he didn't just say that. This is the same man who sent these emails? (Warning, Graphic) You know, the emails that depict the President and 1st Lady as a pimp and prostitute? Or the pornographic emails, including bestiality videos? Or the racist videos likening black people to chimpanzees?
This is the man who know sees fit to pass judgment upon a segment of the population. And not passing judgment about their stance on the issues, but upon what they do in their private lives.
This is the "religious values candidate" that has run on the notion of fixing what is unquestionably wrong in Albany by reducing the governments role and adhering to a strict, conservative interpretation.
It is yet another example of some opportunistic carpet-bagger who is taking advantage of the sound message that emanates from the Tea-Party movement and manipulating it further their own agenda.
When Mr. Paladino contradicts himself in this way, he begins to pander in the very same way that all of the politicians that he rails against pander. Mr. Paladino has begun to tell us not what he believes, but what he believes we want to hear.
Back in 2008, Paladino said that the only reason Buffalo Public Schools Superintendent James Williams had been hired was because he’s black. Agree or disagree, at least he was being honest.
With all the ills facing our nation, your first concern is political correctness in dealing with gay culture?
ReplyDeleteI see the Lame Stream Media have you very well trained indeed. They say jump and your only question is "how high?".
Now, ROLL OVER Fido!
Mr. Paladino said what he said, I found it to be an interesting hypocrisy, so I posted it. It's my blog and I post what I want. So there! Thanks for reading.
ReplyDeleteoh, and don't try and be funny. It's not your thing.
That's a good little Comrade...
ReplyDeleteDo just as the media want you to.
Pay no attention to the real issues. Focus on purely partisan trivia.
GOOD COMRADE!
Spasiba. Hypocrite.
ReplyDeleteThe media will do anything they can to divert your attention from substantive issues.
ReplyDeleteWhy? Because they know that if you focus on substantive issues, the media backed candidates will lose (and lose big).
In this case, as usual, silly little you jumped feet first right into the media trap.
The media are repeating the exact same strategy they employed in getting Obama elected.
Click here, watch the entire video clip and you will see that -- in 2008 -- the media got exactly what they hoped for -- the single most ill-informed electorate in history.
Fool me once…
Fool me twice…
How big a fool are you?
I knew you'd bite. You're so cute that way. And predictable.
ReplyDeleteI have a question. Answer honestly.
What are the basic tenets of the Tea-Party movement or conservative thought overall?
C'mon boy!
If Carl the ass gets elected we will realize that the fools are those who believed his BS.
ReplyDeleteThe real issues are not these idiot faux tea party candidates and after Nov we will see who was the fool in the voting booth.
AJ (October 11, 2010 6:05 PM),
ReplyDeleteThe most succinct answer to your question is:
Limited government in strict accordance with the United States Constitution.
Click here for a more expansive discussion.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteCharlene (October 11, 2010 6:05 PM),
ReplyDeleteThere is -- of course -- no guarantee that Tea Party backed candidates will keep their promises.
But, if they don't they will be voted out at the earliest opportunity.
You so-called "Progressives" have awakened a sleeping giant and we will not be letting up the pressure anytime soon.
Pay attention -- you are living through an historically critical moment. The outcome will determine nothing less than whether all of human civilization will or will not experience exactly the sort of fiscal collapse witnessed in the former Soviet Union (with nobody left to bail anybody out).
AJ, et al,
ReplyDeleteBy the way, what you failed to understand in all this silliness is that the only thing Paladino was trying to say is that the Marxist indoctrination camps you call "schools" have no business pushing a gay rights agenda on small children -- that ain't the proper role of a school.
Now, if you're interested in my views on gay marriage, click here and examine a proper view for anybody with a limited government agenda.
Why I love SBVOR reason #237: "Limited government in strict accordance with the United States Constitution."
ReplyDeleteSo - Where, in the US Constitution does it say who a person may or may not have sex with? Where, in the US constitution, is marriage defined?
As cute as you as you are, you need to begin to realize that you can't have it both ways. The fact that you blind yourself to the totality of these candidates tells us everything we will ever need to know about you.
And that is exactly my point, which you so readily waltzed into - that your politicians, like all politicians, are panderers, and full of hooey. That they will embrace any position that they believe the rubes will buy into, you, first and foremost. That that very basic tenet that you so eloquently put forth is immediately and incontrovertibly shown to be a shame by the candidates own words.
Keep drinkin the kool-aid.
Stop leading with your chin.
AJ (October 11, 2010 7:13 PM),
ReplyDeleteDo you intentionally make yourself look foolish or does it just come naturally.
Try reading the link contained in my comment bearing the following time stamp:
October 11, 2010 6:39 PM
AJ,
ReplyDeleteThe American people have -- for so long -- been so thoroughly indoctrinated in a big government agenda that it will take a very long time both the Tea Party and the politicians endorsed by the Tea Party to fully understand all the implications of the concept of a limited government in strict accordance with the United States Constitution.
Now, take a deep breath and examine my previous comment before making a fool of yourself yet again.
P.S.) At the moment, the #1 concern of the Tea Party is the out of control spending (as opposed to gay marriage). If we don't correct that problem, there will be nothing left to correct.
ReplyDeleteBut, again, if you insist on allowing media Leftists to cynically divert your attention from the critical issue of the day, click here for the only proper way to address gay marriage.
Its unfortunate that you dont see your otherwise worthy cause being hijacked by opportunists like this.
ReplyDeleteSore loser.
Oh, and I followe your little linky-link there.
ReplyDeleteAn interesting point, which proves my point - that politicians that such as Paladino are full of it. They don't believe in limited government. They simply pander to their target audience. Like all politicians, regardless of ideology or labels.
Now stop posting links to your blog on my blog, you silly Hanger- ONer.
Perhaps we have forgotten that 60% of heterosexual marriages end in divorce these days. I have luckily been married to my wife for almost 50 years, but we are the minority. Why is it that certain individuals believe that homosexuals will somehow damage heterosexual marriage? Can it really get much worse, folks?
ReplyDeleteWhy is it that few of us explore the overly sexualized and commercialized messages forced into our children's minds? Why are we so intent to blame one group for our collective matrimonial failures. As a man who witnessed the atrocities of WWII, I am concerned that we are being Hitler-ish. Why are we pointing fingers at one group, when all of us have failed?
Please, put your preconceived notions away and look at true statistics. Do you remember when some state laws outlawed interracial marriage? What gives this governor or any of us the right to take away a decision between two consenting adults, based on our own egoistical fears?
If you lived in a nation where you paid the same taxes as everyone else, were a law abiding citizen, and a responsible parent, but were denied basic rights based on your sexuality, you might take issue with this as well SVBOR. In fact, a great parallel can be drawn between the original Tea Party and current homosexual Americans. Do you remember the slogan, "No taxation without representation"? When colonists realized that they were being treated unfairly, they protested. They comprehended that the powers that be were gladly collecting heavy taxes without returning fair representation in Parliament. How could King George or any of his cohorts possibly understand the plight of the colonist? They did not face the same issues, the same conditions, the same challenges. How is this any different? Similarly, those Americans who enjoy the benefits of basic social freedoms could not possibly understand the plight of the American homosexual.
ReplyDeleteIf you support the modern Tea Party, then understand that fighting for equal rights is an enormous part of our country's heritage. First colonists, then slaves, the women (suffragettes), now homosexuals. I am sure there were several slave drivers who didn't feel that African Americans deserved rights either, but what is right is right. And in this country, all of us are allowed to fight for basic liberties.
My parents taught me to save and not overspend. Why is that so hard? The more I learn about our government, the more I see that politicians are in it for the money. If politicians didn't get so many benefits, have super high salaries, and get pointless tax breaks, we may actually attract people who are in it to help others, not just for the personal gain.
ReplyDeleteAs for gay rights, I don't understand why anyone cares what someone else does with their "partner". I have plenty of gay friends and want them to have the same rights as me. It doesn't make me less straight.
AJ (October 12, 2010 4:57 AM),
ReplyDeleteNo hijacking has taken place -- quite the opposite. On this silliest of all issues, Paladino has not proposed any further expansion of the scope and scale of government. To the contrary, Paladino has -- at most -- merely inferred that he would not be interested in passing any further legislation which invents any new special interest "rights".
Again, click here for the best way to address gay marriage and click here to address the issues that actually matter.
Gasper (October 12, 2010 7:16 AM),
ReplyDeleteRegarding fiscal discipline..
Rand Paul, Congressional candidate in Kentucky, has proposed the best idea I've heard yet. He proposes legislation which requires Congress to reduce the deficit by 20% each year or take a 20% cut in their own pay each year they fail to do so.
So, young as you are, if Rand Paul could actually get this legislation passed, you would wind up saving yourself a ton of money over you lifetime by donating to his campaign.
Lizzardo (October 12, 2010 6:38 AM),
ReplyDeleteSadly, you would not recognize the concept of liberty if it leaped forth from your morning latte.
Government can never provide liberty -- it can only take it away. Liberty (in a relative sense) is only achieved by limiting the power, scope and scale of government.
Well, I agree with the governor. I don't want their gayness pushed in my face. It is gross. I don't push my straightness in their face. Even if that is exactly what they need to reform. It is time for us to take our country back from the fairies.
ReplyDeleteIrving1923,
ReplyDeleteAs always, you see what you want to see.
It's terribly ironic for you to twist the concept of a limited government into a vision of totalitarian hatred.
But, that is what you have been indoctrinated to see by the purveyors of big government.
SBVOR:
ReplyDeleteI agree with your second comment and am choosing to stop addressing your negativity, since, by the way, I am not a coffee drinker. LOL!
Governments across the world notoriously exploit people in the name of greed and power. Nothing new there. Thanks for sharing!
SBVOR:
ReplyDeleteI have not twisted anything, except your panties, apparently.
Lizzardo (October 12, 2010 8:13 AM),
ReplyDeleteI'm speculating here, but I suspect that you have consistently voted in ways that promote the steady expansion of the scope, scale and power of our own government. Why would you do that?
Now, before you cry "Patriot Act" (which can be legitimately debated), remember that the Patriot Act included a sunset clause. No such clause exists in ObamaCare (or any of the rest of the Entitlements which are slowly killing us).
Interesting...let's hope it works!
ReplyDeleteGasper (October 12, 2010 8:27 AM),
ReplyDeleteThe dirty little secret which few (even within the Tea Party) are ready to swallow is that putting our nation back on a sustainable path will require -- at a minimum -- significant reductions in all entitlement programs, Medicare in particular.
Again, click here for the incontrovertible quantitative facts from across the political spectrum.
ObamaCare, of course, has to be repealed. And, the best course of action would be to immediately eliminate all entitlement programs at every level. The inherent fraud, waste and abuse in these programs is -- in itself -- enough to put us all in the ground.
Lizzardo - "Basic socail freedom." Thats it in a nutshell.
ReplyDeleteIrving - Thanks for the great comments. I was going to defend you, but you seem to have things well in hand.
SBVOR - Unfortunately, Paladino has begun to exploit this "sillient of issues" by attacking Cuomo for marching in a gay pride parade with his daughters. Hmmm....hypocrite?
"silliest." sorry.
ReplyDeleteAJ,
ReplyDeleteAgain, your puppet masters in the media want you to focus your attention on anything other than the issues that actually matter.
Obviously, you are very easily manipulated by them -- sad.
SBVOR:
ReplyDeleteI am glad you were speculating because you are incorrect. I am not a fan of government interventions. I am a fan of equal rights for equal contributions to society. I have never indicated support for our current governmental system, however, I have adamantly opposed those politicians whose opinions explicitly exclude me. I also am not a fan of preferential treatment or favors, just of equal access to constitutional rights.
Lizzardo (October 12, 2010 10:39 AM),
ReplyDeleteFor what you say to be true, you would have to have never voted for any Democrat in your entire life.
I would wager that is not true.
Can't you at least be honest with yourself?
SVBOR:
ReplyDeleteI don't recall making any declaration as to my political party of choice. But more importantly, I think you need a hug.
October 12, 2010 12:25 PM,
ReplyDeleteEwwww....
You made him say Ewww...
ReplyDeleteAnywho, I saw and heard the words coming out of Mr. Paladino's mouth.
As far as "The Media" goes...It's all b.s. There is no such thing as Media without an agenda.