NYC After The Election

Oh, please. The tolerance in this city is only skin deep. Scratch just about anyone and you'll find a racist and/or sexist. The only reason why it's kept quiet is because there are some things more important to New Yorkers than race: parking and seats on the subway.

I was born in New York City, I live in New York City now, and I'll drop dead in New York City some day (later rather than sooner, now that we've kept that communist from getting the White House), and this sentiment of "bringing New York to the heartland" may be the most retarded use of an overblown ego that I've ever heard. The fact that you're full of yourself to the point where you think the rest of this country either gives a shit about our way of life, or somehow needs to give a shit about it, is simply sad. Perhaps even sadder than Frankenkerry's pathetic campaign attempt to curry favor with NASCAR fans.

hey, um, just over half the voters voted for BUSh. NYers are not out of the mainstream--just under half of all voters voted for Kerry. it would be different if the popular vote was 75-25 or even 60-40, but that is not the case. this country is almost evenly divided--we are just barely out of the majority--so, i don;t think this election, if it was in fact not tampered with, is some sort of huge mandate for homophobia, destruction of the bill of rights, and evangelical christianity. IF there were 100 people voting and 52 voted for Bush and 48 for Kerry, would that mean that the Kerry voters were far out of the mainstream? NO.

A road show? A joke, but I think you highlight why Bush won. People outside of NYC don't think the city or it's values are nearly as important or awesome as New Yorkers do. The election underlines this- the nation isn't alienated from the city, the city is alienated from the nation.

Last I checked this country was founded on separation of church and state. Just because I want to keep it that way doesn't mean I have less morals than some born-again country bumpkin in Idaho.

The "moral" voters are imposing their particular brand of personal beliefs on everyone--which is ironically one of the most immoral things they could do.

We are the direct victims of 9/11 terrorism (as well as New Jersey). We simply don't feel Bush has made us safer or that he is even aware of what is needed to win the war on terrorism. It is quite interesting that the two states most impacted by 9/11 roundly rejected Bush. Especially Manhattan.

honey2, I hope your brother's safe. I know he's keeping me safe. Please thank him for me.

"We need to bring our way of life, which is honoring diversity and having compassion for people with different lifestyles, on a trip around the country"- ? (qtd. from film producer). Which is worse- her contradiction, or her condescension? I love the "non-dogmatic dogmatism"- believing in tolerance and accepting diversity, until one *actually* encounters someone who holds radically different ideas about faith, morality, politics, etc. The reaction we're always seen to this confrontation is not tolerance-it's pity. "Poor ignorant, fearful fools, they just don't know any better. They must be taught!" What the liberals fail to realize is that their own ideas have been spread through the country for at least 10 yrs. now- via the educational system, the media- with little or no trouble. What I mean is that most,if not all, of America knows very well the ideals that liberals uphold. We get them from K-12, at least- even in little ol' Montana, my home state, I could count on my white teachers to wax on and on to us, their white students, about diversity and tolerance. What the heartland has said with this election is not "we don't know or understand your values," it has said "we know them, we understand them-and we don't want them."

Janine, thanks for the reply. I'm curious, is it all USA Today's fault that we are now considered "red" and "blue" thanks to their 2000 county voting record map? I'm surprised that the left leaning states weren't colored "red" to begin with. But that's another topic in itself. I don't know if Gothamist wants an ongoing conversation taking up their cyber real estate, but I'm eager to discuss these issues with someone who has a perspective like yours. I think your checklist of "the right" pretty well matches what the talking heads on newscasts seem to mean when they use the term. As for me...small gov't fiscal conservative? yes. Corporate interests? Nope. Neo-cons? Double nope. Values set? Probably. I think the neo-cons are the most dangerous group we've had in power in the modern era. My sincere hope is that they (Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, et al) will soon slink back down into their PNAC hole mumbling about why the Iraqi's didn't throw our soldiers bouquets. The 'moral values' folks do often seem like total fakers to me even though most folks would lump me in with them. Unfortunately, much of what passes itself off as "Christianity" is merely a knock off of the rest of American culture with slightly different jargon and a standing appointment on Sunday morning. I mostly agree with you that "Christianity is supposed to be a religion of love." But who defines "love" is the critical point. A lot of us "know it when we see it." But the only one who can truly define "love" is the one who thought it up. As a Christian, I believe that God is the author of love and only He can declare what is love and what isn't. As you are a self-described atheist, I'm not sure how you define love. In fact, I'm not sure how love could exist in a godless universe. But if you suppose for a moment that God does exist, and he sets the terms for what love actually is, then we can only refer to what his standards are when we judge whether something is "loving" or not.

Gloating isn't a Christian thing to do by my reading of the Bible. I think a case can be made for war in a Christian world view, but I don't think this Iraq war fits. I didn't like it during the buildup, during the invasion, or anytime since then. The death penalty and special rights for homosexuals are too thorny to discuss in this forum, but the short answer for me is like what I said about love. If God is real, it is his and his alone to decide what is right and wrong. People interpret the Bible the way they see fit, but ultimately it is the source of truth for me.

Gothamist mentioned "some sort of traveling road show about how NYC is fabulous".

Well maybe this wouldn't have been necessary if protesters hadn't been punching and spitting on Republican delegates during the RNC in August. Civil discourse counts for a lot in persuading folk's minds. And believe me, the examples of "NY tolerance" were spread by word-of-mouth to all the swing states.

I think the Mouse Bloc hurt us more than helped.