call me Roy, October 14 at 3:15 pm

It seems worth noting that the mid term election is generally a defeat for the “in” party. A bit of research will surely validate this political truth.

We do see, with the manipulation of our electorate with knee jerk issues guaranteed to stir up the testosterone and adrenaline, and mostly rather irrelevant ones at that, a more generalized dissatisfaction with all things incumbent. The extremists seek to take over the GOP and turn it even more radical than it may currently be, and ,of course, the Democrats are simply useless in a fight having wasted their majority and sold their birthright for a few corporate dollars.

It might be funny if it werent so damn serious. Damn the Dems for raising taxes and taking away our guns, yet Reagan raised taxes twice, and left us with the largest deficit in American history , until Shrub came along and broke that questionable record. A pity that the democrats are so absolutely incapable of doing anything at all, it would be nice not to have to build a new political party from scratch..but thats the way it goes.

It all depends what you mean by ‘govern’.

Setting all the obvious (and correct) rejoinders re extremism aside, there are two things that give one pause.  First, this man wants to be the governor of NYS, which means he has to win NYC.  NYC has the second largest gay population after SF.  So why on earth would he alienate one of the largest voting blocs in NYC?  Second, his comments should disqualify him entirely: one cannot be the governor of “all the people” if he is so hostile to a large constituency.

Peace.

Paladino has that Roy Cphn look, doesn’t he?

There is a law that seems to be operating strictly - extreme homophobia almost always covers for clandestine homosexual ‘involvement’ - like prostitutes - gay clubs etc…
That’s why it doesn’t surprise me that Carl has some ties to the gay community. Ted Haggard is a classic example.

“American politics has come to this?”

“This” has been going on at least since Nixon and Spiro Agnew.  The passage of time has made it increasingly brutal and stupid and created a palpable undercurrent of Nazi style fascism which means “Destroy your opponents, your enemies.  Kill them all and exult in their deaths.”  But what else could you expect in the place Gore Vidal recently called “the crookedest nation on the face of the earth”?

Republicans have hopes that they’ll be able to replace dozens of Democrats in the House of Representatives in this year’s midterm election on Nov. 2, cutting into the Democrats’ current 253-177 majority.
They have good reasons to think they’ll pick up some seats this fall. According to the political analysts we surveyed, the Republicans are expected to gain about 20 to 35 seats, just short of the 40 they would need to take control.
Larry Sabato’s Crystal Ball is currently projecting a 27-seat pick up for the Republicans. The Rothenberg Political Report estimates the Republicans would gain 26 seats, if they won all the seats now rated as toss ups. Congressional Quarterly predicts the Republicans would take 20 seats if they win the toss ups.
The latest betting on Intrade markets looks for the Republicans to pick up 35 Democratic seats. The Intrade markets give the Republicans about a 43% chance of controlling the House. Finally, RealClearPolitics figures the Republicans could take as many as 47 seats, if all the toss-up seats go their way.
Only a fraction of House seats are in play, the experts say. As usual, most incumbents of both parties should have an easy path to victory in November.
The Republicans have history on their side. The party that controls the White House almost always loses seats in the midterm election. Over the past 65 years, the president’s party has lost an average of 24 House seats in the midterm elections. The president’s party has gained seats in only two of 16 midterm elections since the war.
This means: Bye bye Lame stream media and no more Commie Fest’s

Why is that? It could be due to some buyer’s remorse on the part of the voters, but the far more likely explanation is that the winner of the presidential election has coat tails that help elect members of his party in districts that are evenly divided between the parties.

Two years later, the president isn’t on the ballot, and can only help his party indirectly. Voter turnout in midterm elections usually falls by about a third from the turnout in a presidential election year. Voters in midterm elections are usually more politically active, and are more likely to identify with a political party.

I suppose Paladino and the Tea Parties in general are another example of the ‘What’s The Matter With Kansas?’ syndrome (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/What’s_the_Matter_with_Kansas?): the situation in which both parties have been taken over by big money, so the only thing left to fight over are non-economic social issues like abortion and homosexuality.  It’s weird that someone as thuggy and oafish as Paladino can command enough votes to win even a primary, though.

This campaign, and this candidate in fact, are symptomatic of how far off the mark our political life has aimed and how reluctant to deal with real , and very important issues, those running for political office seem to be.

An electorate manipulated by non issues and testosterone driven and manufactured issues, and ,despite the words of So.TexGuy, homosexuality is such, can be seen to being tricked rather than offered real choice.

By the by, SoTexGuy, ones sexuality is as much a choice as is eye color or any other involuntary characteristic, and sexuality in children is a normal part of the process of maturation. I refuse to call you homophobic as there is not enough evidence presented to reach said conclusion. However, your reaction to children exploring their world, their feelings and their orientations as a perfectly normal part of the maturation process seems more than a bit alarming to me.

Here’s a good example of Paladino-style politics: http://www.theawl.com/2010/10/my-war-bradlee-deans-popular-struggle-against-those-criminal-child-molesting-gays

What ever happened to “minding our own business”?
What ever happened to “consenting adults”?
What ever happened to “equal under the Law”?

Why do so many people feel they have the right to not only TELL others how to live, but to dictate it?

SoTexGuy, October 14 at 10:45 am:

‘... On the subject of kids… it’s shocking, I think, to see so many very young people being overtly homosexual or heterosexual or sexual in any way.. Very young people, grade-schoolers, declaring that they are gay or not gay.. Parents, proudly backing their eleven-year-old’s decision to be straight or homosexuals.. Bizarre and good press! but disturbing.

To the extent that Paladino’s thoughts touch on this worrisome trend (kids saying and doing stuff best left for adults) there is something in what he says. ...’

Many people seem to become conscious of sexuality before they show any evidence of physical maturation, like at nine or ten years of age.  This has not generally been considered a problem as long as it followed the social norms of the time and place, for example among the lower social classes of the U.S. the attractions had to be strictly heterosexual and pretty abstract.  However, it seems more reasonable to allow ten-year-olds generally to consider and discuss their sexuality rather than to suppress it, since they’re going to have to deal with it in the near future, and if you acknowledge equal rights then that will apply to homosexuals and bisexuals as well as heterosexuals.  I really don’t see what the problem is.  I’m assuming reasonable public comportment here (regardless of orientation).

Paladino is a basically a thug who has apparently never given any thought to anything.  I don’t see why his opinions, which are the prejudices he thoughtlessly learned fifty years ago and never questioned, should carry any weight.  His own life has been rather irregular for someone who carries on about the sexual behavior of others.

Increasingly, no candidate of either party satisfies homosexuals and their vocal advocates. Not that Paladino is any peach. His remarks were ill-considered at best.

But where does it end? Is it even enough for a lawmaker or candidate to back laws and initiatives favored by homosexual groups? For many so-called progressive talkers, perhaps not.

There is an issue on which I think most everyone could agree and that’s the health and welfare of our children.. and we might agree to give some lee-way to those who say or do things we dislike or disagree with in the cause or context of helping our kids.

On the subject of kids… it’s shocking, I think, to see so many very young people being overtly homosexual or heterosexual or sexual in any way.. Very young people, grade-schoolers, declaring that they are gay or not gay.. Parents, proudly backing their eleven-year-old’s decision to be straight or homosexuals.. Bizarre and good press! but disturbing.

To the extent that Paladino’s thoughts touch on this worrisome trend (kids saying and doing stuff best left for adults) there is something in what he says.

Like most everything written or said anywhere that doesn’t clearly and completely celebrate homosexuals and the culture of homosexuality.. my remarks here are sure to rile some people.. I hope they also make some people think.

Adios!

Paladino just got nailed again: Apparently he was landlord to two Gay nightclubs, one called Cobalt managed by his son…oops.  This was after publicly telling Cuomo he was a bad father for bringing his daughters to a Gay Pride event.

To which Cuomo responded: He’s the last person I’d take parenting advice from.

The Gods were watching out for the democratic candidate when this yahoo got the
nod—now he will get the nudge.