Radical Governor Supported by Evil Koch Brother Blasts Teacher Scare Tactics

**bluffmanxx** · 03-18-2011, 11:47 AM

Sorry I made you look, but it's N.Y. democrat Andrew Cuomo so it's not important at all.

Can't wait to see the union goons and teachers marching on Albany to threaten radical teabagger Andrew Cuomo.

Governor Andrew Cuomo is blasting education advocates, saying they are making bogus claims that his proposed budget cuts will hurt children.

Cuomo says his plan isn't about laying off teachers in classrooms, or stopping students getting a good education.

Instead, he wants schools to cut bureaucracy.

Cuomo made these comments Thursday, as he and top lawmakers work to finalize the budget.

“I want everybody happy! I want everybody happy!” said Cuomo.

Cuomo may joke about the challenges of satisfying everyone at the budget table. But after a meeting with the top state lawmakers, he got very serious when it came to education cuts. And even angry at advocates who claim children will be hurt.

“If you cut the education budget you're going to hurt children.' That's their premise. No. I'm saying find 2.7 % efficiencies in the education budget that has gotten double digit increases and has gotten amazing increases over the past decade,” said Cuomo.

At rallies against the proposed $1.5 billion in cuts, like the one at HackettMiddle SchoolWednesday, have raised the fear that teachers will lose their jobs, programs will be drastically cut, and students will suffer. Cuomo says it's a distraction, not reality.

“It's a threat it's a game. It's a game they want to oppose the cuts politically so what do they say? I'm gonna hurt your child,” said Cuomo.

Curiously, national media and Democrats are silent when it comes to this showdown. Of course if Cuomo were a Republican there would be national hysteria, as in Wisconsin. Funny how that works.

Considering one of those wicked Koch brothers poured money into Cuomo's coffers last year, we're wondering why there's no interest.

The Democratic candidate for governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo, has been receiving campaign contributions from a surprising source, state campaign finance records show: Julia and David Koch, the businessman-philanthropist caricatured in a recent New Yorker piece (see our commentary here) as a corporate polluter who has secretly poured tens of millions of dollars into anti-Obama causes.

The contributions from Mr. Koch and his wife Julia to the Cuomo campaign total $74,900, according to the campaign finance records. David Koch made three separate gifts: $25,000 on July 10, 2010; $18,000 on November 16, 2009; and $6,900 on November 30, 2009. Julia Koch made two donations: $15,000 on July 10, 2010, and $10,000 on January 4, 2010.

Apparently David Koch lavishing tens of thousands of dollars on Democrats isn't very newsworthy.

Don't you just love the double standard?

**Moab** · 03-18-2011, 01:50 PM

Think of the governors race as a "hedge-fund" you want to invest on both sides for the payoff .. BTW who cares.

**bluffmanxx** · 03-18-2011, 03:11 PM

Originally Posted by Moab

BTW who cares.

right, just like "who cares" about the death threats against the Wisconsin legislators. it's just an example of how the "mainstream" media tries to pretend they are fair, but imagine if the tables were turned and it was a republican governor cutting education or tea party citizens making the death threats. ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN would be all over it. Instead it's as if it isn't happening and you reveal just how biased you are with your "who cares" comment. An unbiased media is essential to the nation. There are plenty of blogs and op-ed sites to get opinion, but please...journalism is about facts and presenting a balanced point of view. maybe if you had to live in the real world where paying the mortgage depended on working your ass off week in and week out you MIGHT have a better grasp of things.

**NoAngel2u** · 03-18-2011, 09:28 PM

Why are you whining about about the lack of unbiased journalism after presenting us a very biased blog article? lol

**skyguy2007** · 03-19-2011, 01:51 AM

WHAT???? A blog being biased....a news company being biased....NOOOOOOOO tell me it ain't so!

**bluffmanxx** · 03-19-2011, 03:00 AM

Originally Posted by NoAngel2u

Why are you whining about about the lack of unbiased journalism after presenting us a very biased blog article? lol

the difference is that one side is assumed to be without bias, while the other is assumed to lack credibility. even our president attacks the media on the right and holds the equally biased left media in high regard, so the examples showing the lack of credibility of the supposed unbiased reporting has value, just as does evidence that sources presumed to lack credibility in fact can and often do present valid coverage.

**NoAngel2u** · 03-19-2011, 06:41 AM

There is no difference. They each see the other as biased and lacking credibility for the most part. I've heard plenty from the right as well about the left bias. Instead of whipping this dead horse of left vs right, why not just put out some unbiased information. Ahhh but then what would we have to argue about

Now, what "examples" are you referring to that are "assumed to lack credibility?" You only provided one example, and one does not have to assume anything about it, it's quite obvious, especially if you read any of the other his other blog postings. You have failed to make a valid point here, just because you think this blog makes valid points, does not mean a left leaning blogger does not. So, if you give this biased blog "presumed to lack credibility" credibility because you believe it "does present valid coverage," then that same assessment applies to the left leaning biased reporting sources as well. Right? That is unless you are of course giving more credit to right leaning reporting sources.

**skyguy2007** · 03-19-2011, 06:48 AM

Beth, I do not believe there is ANY such thing as "unbiased" information anywhere, never has been, never will be.

**NoAngel2u** · 03-19-2011, 08:07 AM

Nope, there aren't. I don't recall the last time I saw someone just list the facts without slanting it with opinion and perspective. I read a lot of both. I lean left on some things and right on others. I read and watch news from all over the world, not just US MSM, because IT IS biased, just as they all are, and when I have time and if it's important enough to me, then I try to find the primary source information myself, because I trust my opinion far more than I do some corporate sponsored talking heads.

**bluffmanxx** · 03-19-2011, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by NoAngel2u

There is no difference. They each see the other as biased and lacking credibility for the most part. I've heard plenty from the right as well about the left bias. Instead of whipping this dead horse of left vs right, why not just put out some unbiased information. Ahhh but then what would we have to argue about

Now, what "examples" are you referring to that are "assumed to lack credibility?" You only provided one example, and one does not have to assume anything about it, it's quite obvious, especially if you read any of the other his other blog postings. You have failed to make a valid point here, just because you think this blog makes valid points, does not mean a left leaning blogger does not. So, if you give this biased blog "presumed to lack credibility" credibility because you believe it "does present valid coverage," then that same assessment applies to the left leaning biased reporting sources as well. Right? That is unless you are of course giving more credit to right leaning reporting sources.

sorry, you saying there is no validity means little. tell president obama that the left media is biased and the right is equally credible/biased. this is just another case of the "mainstream" media (and you apparently) giving a pass to the left when the same actions by the right receive negative reporting. (and our president supports this sort of double standard)