Take a good look at the asinine image posted above and ask yourself the following question: if I was running for the position of Governor of New York state, and I came across this Internet image in the middle of the campaign, even if for some reason I found it funny or witty rather than racist and stupid, would I be hapless enough to forward it on to friends, coworkers and associates? If you answered "yes" and would like to also forward some bestiality videos and a poster prominently featuring the word "niggers," then you, too, might be qualified to run for governor of the great state of New York.
As a one-time New Yorker, the ongoing tussle between Carl Paladino and Andrew Cuomo for the position of Governor is something I can't help but take some interest in, but the race and in particular the details surrounding Mr. Paladino's campaign would probably be of interest even without my four year sojourn to the Empire State. Because in the guise of Paladino I see the larger national pattern of insurgent candidates trying to unseat political careerists (not always a bad thing) by tapping into a vague populist rhetoric (not always a good thing) that ultimately masks their utter lack of either original or practical ideas (almost always a bad thing). Let's examine the evidence, shall we? Paladino's resume contains few surprises - real-estate CEO (and thereby a pure product from the bedrock of contemporary political expertise), Italian-American (certainly not the first Italian-American to espouse the conservative cause, cf. Justices Alito and Scalia), a prior registered Democrat (from 1975 until 2005), married with three children.
I won't dwell on this final point, but it should at least be noted that Paladino has had to grapple with the untimely revelation that he also has a ten year old daughter from an affair conducted with a prior coworker. And while the details of this act of adultery don't interest me in the slightest, it's worth keeping his cheating in mind as one details some of the stances and positions Paladino has taken in his race to the top of New York politics. This controversy was merely one of several to rain down upon Paladino over the past six months, and with each new outrage or pseudo-outrage, the pundits have definitively produced death certificates, only to be stunned by Paladino's resurfacing the following week, scarred but generally none the worse for wear.
Make no mistake, Paladino has committed gaffes that any reasonable outside observer might logically conclude would sink a governor's quest in one of our more consistently left-leaning states. Consider his pious announcement that, if elected governor, he would utilize the machinations of eminent domain to halt the construction of the Lower Manhattan mosque that has so captivated the minds of millions of American citizens who spend most of their time dismissing New York as a cabal of radical elitists but perk up their ears whenever a hack politician or talking head utters the phrase "scared ground". More specifically, Paladino insisted that members of the Islamic faith not be allowed to erect "a monument to those who attacked our country" and added that, "Ground Zero for me is the extended site over which the dust cloud containing human remains traveled" - a fallout zone where any and all traces of Islamic culture must not ever desecrate.
It's the kind of principled opposition that rouses the patriotism of a certain subset of voters, even if the calm certitude Paladino expressed during the above exchange almost instantly devolved into cringe-inducing absurdities (interviewer: That was a vast [dust cloud] -- if you recall -- it stretched all the way to Weehaken, to parts of Hoboken, miles from where this thing happened. Candidate Paladino: Well, I don't think it went out that far. It went out about a quarter of a mile, I think. Well, I don't know the exact distance. I don't mean to make out that I know the exact distance. But wherever it went, wherever that dust is caught in the crevices of buildings or in the crevices of sidewalks, that's human remains, and it should be treated that way).
I'm pleased to note there was much less backtracking when Candidate Paladino offered up his thoughts on the concept of a free press when he snarled at New York Post reporter Fred Decker his plans to "take you out". There was little in the way of outrage when he confidently suggested that the recent passage of health care reform legislation would prove a day that "will be remembered just as 9-11 was remembered in history". And when confronted with the undeniable reality of the explicit and racist emails he forwarded to friends and associates, he offered up an apology only to "the ladies" out there, coyly adding that he'd apologize to any man who never forwarded similar Internet outrages during their time here on earth. When pressed for a more specific explanation of why a candidate for governor was forwarding bestiality videos in the first place, he simply noted that he "was human". I'll admit, it's a potentially risky stance for a politician to take.
But let's look once more upon these forwarded emails, these proofs of Paladino's humanity. Not literally - aside from pasting the image of the President and First Lady as Pimp and Ho, I don't feel an aching desire to trawl the Internet for white supremacist propaganda or woman/horse love. But let the record show that Candidate Paladino did forward a video entitled "Obama Inauguration Rehearsal" that consisted solely of footage from an African tribal dance. Equally hilarious was a fake motivational poster of a small airplane crashing into a dusty field, with African men rushing out of the flight path. The legend for the poster reads: HOLY SHIT - run niggers, run! For those uninterested in the politics of racial antagonism, Paladino included a few instances of hardcore pornography and the aforementioned moment of tenderness between woman and horse.
What's that you say? Tsk, tsk, a man's previously visited websites history is his castle? Even if said man constantly offers up encomiums to his own identity as a guardian of the family?
Then what to make of his most recent public statement, in which he turned an address to Orthodox Jewish leaders in Williamsburg, Brooklyn into an anti-gay rant that dominated local and national coverage? His talking points were run of the mill - he spoke of innocent children being "brainwashed" by seditious homosexuals, noted that homosexuality was "not" a "valid and successful option" for life, and attacked his opponent for choosing to march in a recent Gay Pride parade. "That's not the sort of example we should be showing our children," he loftily concluded, later adding details on just the distasteful sorts of man-on-man gyrations he observed during the parade festivities in some major Canadian city.
We could reflect momentarily on the sheer audacity of a man who has publicly admitted to forwarding videos of a woman being mounted by a horse also claiming to be mortified by the image of a man dancing during a parade. And any discussion of the Williamsburg event must take into account the cold and tone-deaf timing of a politician choosing the first week of October to launch a preemptive attack on the gay community - a mere two days after the New York area was startled by the kidnapping and torture of three gay individuals by a Bronx street gang, and a few weeks after a Rutgers student committed suicide off the George Washington Bridge after being secretly videotaped and outed by fellow students. Advice columnist Dan Savage's response to the Rutgers case and other recent gay teen suicides was to start up the ongoing video project It Gets Better, in which grown individuals offer words of encouragement for making it through the horrors of high school. Paladino's response, apparently, was to speak of imperiled children and brainwashing.
And yet. I must admit to harboring a bit of sympathy for the hapless Candidate Paladino. Having actually viewed the video footage of his anti-gay speech to the Orthodox Jewish audience, it's difficult to argue with his eventual excuse that he had simply been handed a speech prior to taking the stage and that the views expressed within were those of the speechwriter, supposedly a member of the synagogue, and not himself. Being a bit of a public speaker myself, I'll agree that he reads the statement as if he was seeing it for the first time, with long pauses, mis-pronunciations and awkward phrasing. And news organizations have widely reported the fact that the original text of the speech included the sentence, "There is nothing to be proud of in being a dysfunctional homosexual. That's not how God created us". Paladino declined to read this particular sentence, and I suspect that this on-the-spot editing accounts for at least one of his long pauses during the video (see here to decide for yourself).
It's become immediately clear that the Williamsburg speech was actually written by Rabbi Yehuda Levin of the Rabbincal Alliance in Brooklyn, which should come as no surprise to anybody even remotely familiar with Mr. Levin's career. Yet another classic example of a fraud hiding behind the cloak of religious respectability, Mr. Levin is a former Pat Buchanan supporter who has routinely sided with Christian evangelicals over matters of gay rights. Most notably, he inserted himself into plans for a Gay Pride parade in Jerusalem, urging protesters to resort to violence to stop the event, warning, "I promise there's going to be bloodshed". This would not prove the first time Mr. Levin has advocated the spilling of blood to halt the outrage of homosexuality - he went on record blaming the gay lifestyle for the recent Haitian earthquake which killed over 200,000 individuals.
Paladino has since apologized for his Williamsburg speech, which promptly led to today's news flash that Rabbi Levin had withdrawn his previous support for the candidate. While claiming he did not write the speech in question, Mr. Levin noted that he did offer some "input" on the text and at any rate "stands ready to defend it". Whatever Mr. Levin's input did or did not consist of (and for the record, I'm guessing he wrote a considerable amount), the controversy is important for several distinct yet related reasons. Lest we forget, it's notable to acknowledge the existence of hateful religious rhetoric emanating from focal points other than Christian evangelicals, as in this case the bigotry spewed forth from Orthodox Judaism. And Paladino's decision not to read the "nothing to be proud of" line is to his credit. One might even note that during the whirlwind final month of a major campaign, a candidate might simply find themselves reading aloud speeches without first analyzing them for content (although it must be noted that Paladino had earlier complained of Gay Pride parade activity without any speech in hand. And, cough cough cough, that he also somehow attempted to compare his anger over the Holocaust with his anger over gay marriage - it's a deep pit you're digging there, Carl, better take a lunch break).
But more to the point, the Williamsburg controversy highlights the deep instability and confusion displayed by many politicians attempting to huddle under the Tea Party dome, from true libertarian Rand Paul actually expressing some examples of libertarian thought to the anti-onanistic absurdity of Delaware's rising star Christine O'Donnell. By aligning themselves unreservedly with reactionary figures on the religious right, the hopefuls of 2010 simply dilute whatever mildly interesting argument they might otherwise be capable of making in regards to governmental overreach.
I can't bring myself to condemn taxation, I don't shriek socialism when mild health care reform passes, and I have never prayed at the alter of the free market. But as a rational and open-minded individual with a keen sense of my own limitations and ignorance on many matters, I'm always willing to consider reasoned arguments in favor of reigning in spending or halting the growth of a steroid-injected government. While I don't sympathize or agree with their worldview, a true burst of authentic libertarian sensibility might prove a useful counter punch to the untrammeled greed and corruption at the heart of both major political parties.
But if the U.S. military budget is off limits for spending cuts, if attacks on gays and opposition to gay marriage continues unimpeded, and if unwavering opposition to abortion rights remains the rule of the day among the Tea Party crowd - well, you'll have to forgive me if I suggest that the members of our newest third party uprising brush up on their Ayn Rand and Robert Nozick texts. And I'd further recommend that Carl Paladino best rethink his campaign strategy of reading out loud a third-party speech handed to him by a superstitious bigot who thinks earthquake fault lines were put in place by an angry God to rid the world of queers (actually, I don't recommend he change his strategy at all, and therefore continue to flounder,but I digress). Prove to me and to any other moderately open minded individual that one can run a fiscally conservative campaign without resorting to culture war vocabulary, and without groveling at the feet of censorious crusaders wielding religious dogma and their own tax-free status as a weapon. That in itself might prove to be revolutionary.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment