By Dave Andrusko
My family was at a restaurant last night and playing on television the whole time was a program examining the terrible behavior exhibited by one player at the conclusion of the NFC championship game played last Sunday. Whoever advises him knew it was time to cut his losses so the player released one of those “that-was-really-not-the-real-me” statements.
What choice did he have? Since about a gabillion people saw him utter his disgraceful remarks, it was hard to argue he was misquoted or taken out of context.
Not so for pro-abortion maximus New York Governor Andrew Cuomo.
Last Friday in off-the-cuff remarks to reporters, Cuomo said that “extreme conservatives who are right-to-life” have “no place in the state of New York, because that’s not who New Yorkers are.” This remark had traction because of Cuomo’s volcanic temper and his history of abortion advocacy which is second to none.
But according to Cuomo, in a letter to the editor of the New York Post, that’s not what he said and he accused the Post of being “entirely reckless with facts and the truth.”
The governor’s office included a transcript which (it argued) showed that Cuomo was saying only “that an extreme right candidate cannot win statewide because this is a politically moderate state.” In fact, that’s not what the transcript says or suggests.
What Cuomo was saying was that if you didn’t agree with him on abortion, you are an “extreme conservative” who is “right to life.” Period, end of sentence. And that you are not a real New Yorker so find someplace else.
But aside from being still another example of Cuomo’s well-earned reputation as a bully, this is just another Democrat jockeying for position in anticipation of the intra-party fight to be the Democrats’ 2016 presidential nominee. You only a few point for being pro-abortion (since all the candidates will be pro-abortion), so why not go over the top? That might make for a huge harvest.
And don’t forget Cuomo is already comfortable on the far, far end of the spectrum, even for Democrats. Last year NRL News Today carried 23 columns about his commitment to the (ultimately unsuccessful) Reproductive Health Act (RHA).
Of course, like all experienced pro-abortion politicians, Cuomo insisted he would be breaking no new ground—he would be just “codifying Roe,” in case the Supreme Court overturns Roe. This was/is preposterously misleading.
The RHA was a frontal assault on conscience rights, the taxpayer’s pocketbook, the unborn child who survives an abortion or is killed when his or her mother is attacked, and it would open the door to an even greater expansion of abortion by widening the categories of people who can perform abortion.
New York is already a kind of secular heaven for the pro-abortionist. NARAL routinely gives it an A-. It has no parental consent law, no 24-hour waiting period, and publicly funds abortions for women who receive public assistance.
New York already has a major metropolis in which in some zip codes the abortion rate has reached a ghastly 60% among African-Americans. Who but the likes of Andrew Cuomo could possibly believe there is a “need” for more abortions including more late abortions?
If the test of a “real” New York is whether they agree with Andrew Cuomo, no telling how few residents would be left.
Please join those who are following me on Twitter at twitter.com/daveha. Send your comments to email@example.com.