October 16, 2010
Republican gubernatorial candidate, Carl Paladino just can’t seem to stay out of the news. After speaking against gay pride parades and the “brainwashing” of children into accepting the lifestyle, Paladino came under severe attack from the media and found himself apologizing for his remarks.
“I sincerely apologize for any comment that may have offended the Gay and Lesbian community or their family members. Any reference to branding an entire community based on a small representation of them is wrong.”
Yes, it is wrong to “brand an entire community based on a small representation of them.” Too bad nobody in the main stream media points out how militant gay activists brand anyone who disagrees with their lifestyle as “hateful, bigoted and homophobic” even when people are treating them with respect and love; even when most Christians have condemned churches like Westboro Baptist.
But I agree that gay activists are not speaking for all homosexuals. They are merely the squeaky wheels getting the grease. And boy do they get a lot of grease!
On the other hand, if the militant gay agenda was Paladino’s only concern (and examples of such an agenda were the only examples he sited) he does not have anything to apologize for. Gay pride parades do exhibit a kind of behavior that would not be allowed in front of our children if the sexual innuendo were hetero, I mean, who are we kidding? As for children being brainwashed at our schools, what can I say, folks? It is happening in many places, Massachusetts being one example which jumps to mind, along with other states where gay marriage is legal and those who fought for the legality promised that there would be no slippery slope involving our education system.
Now, the Orthodox Rabbis feel Paladino is going back on his first speech. I suppose it can be argued that on one hand, Paladino didn’t mean to offend, while on the other hand he stands by his convictions. Politicians are great with the whole “one hand, other hand” routine. Unfortunately, it comes across like a compromise because at the end of the day, that is just exactly what it is, a compromise, not very promising in a historical election year when we were hoping (naive as the hope might be) to see such political maneuvering go the way of the Dodo Bird.
If Paladino had half a spine, he’d give yet another speech and say, “Why do we keep rolling over and playing dead for those who espouse a lifestyle that most people do not honestly agree with and are afraid to speak up against?”
The New York Times would hate it, and Joy Behar would feel compelled to walk out of the room. But you’d be surprised how many more people might vote for Mr. Paladino in the privacy of a curtain hidden booth after looking both ways and making sure nobody is watching.
This is Bob Siegel, making the obvious, obvious.
Share this on
