Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Rush: Cuomo Takes Revenge Against the Clintons (By Plugging Gore)
NewsMax.Com ^ | August 10, 2003 | Carl Limbacher

Posted on 08/10/2003 2:02:25 PM PDT by PJ-Comix

Bill and Hillary Clinton's decision to yank the rug out from under their one-time loyal lieutenant Andrew Cuomo in New York's 2002 governor's race was the last straw for his dad, former Gov. Mario Cuomo.

And that's why, suddenly last week, Cuomo, Sr. began urging Al Gore to get back into the presidential race - a move that would break Bill and Hillary's stranglehold on the Democratic Party.

That's the intriguing theory floated by number one talk radio host Rush Limbaugh on Friday, with the conservative star telling his audience there was more to Mario's recent Gore endorsement than meets the eye.

"Behind the scenes it is quite possible that Gov. Cuomo has the Clintons' power grab on [the Democratic Party] in his sights and is using Al Gore as the wedge . . . to wrest the party from the Clintons," Limbaugh told his audience.

"Who was it, ladies and gentlemen, that ultimately forced Mario Cuomo's first son, heir to this political dynasty, out of the New York gubernatorial race?" he reminded.

The Clintons' last minute decision to endorse Andrew's rival in the state's Democratic primary came after Mr. Clinton privately urged Cuomo, Jr. to get out of the race.

"Who was it who provided the foot to the rear of Andrew Cuomo that booted him out? Why it was none other than Bill Clinton," noted Limbaugh, adding, "Do you think that it's possible that Mario Cuomo might just be secretly seething at Bill Clinton?"

Limbaugh recalled that it wasn't the first insult suffered by the Cuomos at the hands of Bill and Hillary. In 1992 Mario had to swallow his ethnic pride for the sake of party unity and not complain after Gennifer Flowers' tapes revealed Clinton agreeing that the top New York Democrat "sure acts like" a mafiosi.

Continued Rush:

"Those of you who are fathers who have, not just sons, but heirs, can understand what would happen if some hillbilly-hayseed-philandering-muckety-muck came along and ruined your son's future."

"Do you think Mario just smiled at that and said it was best for party unity?"

Read how Mrs. Clinton sabotaged Al Gore's 2004 presidential run in "Hillary's Scheme," now available at NewsMax.com's bookstore.


TOPICS: Extended News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2004; algore; andrewcuomo; billclinton; dnc; hillarysscheme; mariocuomo; rush
Go Mario! The more likely it is that Algore becomes a candidate again, the more likely it will be that Al Gore At The Movies will be published.
1 posted on 08/10/2003 2:02:25 PM PDT by PJ-Comix
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
I wonder how many Dims are saying to themselves "what have we gotten ourselves into" by letting Mr. and Mrs. Evil take over.
2 posted on 08/10/2003 2:05:00 PM PDT by Paul Atreides
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
"Who was it, ladies and gentlemen, that ultimately forced Mario Cuomo's first son, heir to this political dynasty, out of the New York gubernatorial race?" he reminded.

With the tagline that Andrew was running with at the time (It's not the man, it's the banner), I'd guess he ultimately forced himself out. What a half-wit!

3 posted on 08/10/2003 2:08:14 PM PDT by AlbionGirl (A kite flies highest against the wind, not with it. - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AlbionGirl
Andrew was corrupt and bad news. It was good to see him go.

Just the same, I'm sure Rush is right about this. Cuomo must hate the Clintons for what they have done to him.

I remember Rush saying Hillary wouldn't win NY because the Cuomos wouldn't stand for it. I guess they did, or were outfoxed.

In any case, I'm sure there is no love lost here.
4 posted on 08/10/2003 2:11:12 PM PDT by I still care
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: I still care
I remember Rush saying Hillary wouldn't win NY because the Cuomos wouldn't stand for it. I guess they did, or were outfoxed.

Andrew Cuomo was in the Clinton administration. He was the head of HUD or some kind of urban government agency. He didn't actually do anything, which in a way is a plus. He was simply there as a favor to the Mario Cuomo, Mario didn't repay the favor back.

There relationship has grown quite strained, from back when Bill Clinton at one point wanted to nominate Cuomo to SCOTUS, to now tell andrew cuomo to drop out of the governors race.

I don't know when things went sour, I do know that Andrew Cuomo was interested in running for the senate seat that Hillary took. I also know that the Clintons were angry when the liberal party of New York chose Andrew over McCall, and was also going to support Guiliani when he wanted to run for senator. There was alot more to them backing McCall then meets the eye, considering that McCall wasn't lying and neither was Sharpton when they said that Terry McCheat basically cut off dem funding of McCall, and decided, very early on, that he was dead in his campaign.

5 posted on 08/10/2003 2:40:44 PM PDT by Sonny M ("oderint dum metuant")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sonny M
Actually the reign of the Toons was and is the best thing to happen for the Pubbies. He gave us a Rep. House and Senate.

Conservatives should erect a monument to Billybob. He singlehandedly gave the Dims the worst political train wreck in history. Even bettering the Nixon fiasco in spades.

Hopefully Dim Davis will give up CA. Without CA it is impossible for the Rats to regain the Presidency.

6 posted on 08/10/2003 3:04:15 PM PDT by TUX
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: TUX
Do governorships and their political affiliation make that much difference? Bush barely won Florida when his brother was and still is governor. Granted Bush may have lost Florida if it had a Dem governor but my point is: it was not "impossible" for the Dems to have won that state.

Even if California elects Arnold, it is still a very liberal socialist state that trends heavily democratic. How can a governor make that much difference?

7 posted on 08/10/2003 3:23:25 PM PDT by eeman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Paul Atreides
I wonder how many Dims are saying to themselves "what have we gotten ourselves into" by letting Mr. and Mrs. Evil take over.

Two or three, I'd guess.

8 posted on 08/10/2003 3:25:06 PM PDT by RJCogburn ("Shooting is for outside!".............Chin Lee)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
I love it when the Dems back-stab oneanother, If they ever got smart and pulled together, they could have a 50% of winning in 2004. All right-minded Republicans should find ways to aid and abet their fratricide.
9 posted on 08/10/2003 3:31:59 PM PDT by .cnI redruM ("If you think no one cares about you, try skipping next month's car payment" - Daily Zen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
I don't know if anyone remembers this, but when Hillary announced her candidacy for the Senate back in 2000 there were two notable New York Democrats who were nowhere to be seen at her announcement party in Chappaqua -- Mario and Andrew Cuomo.
10 posted on 08/10/2003 4:24:43 PM PDT by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: eeman
You are right. No Republican governor can deliver CA to his party's nominee for president. That nominee is going to have to win the state himself.
I hadn't thought of what was behind Cuomo's statement. So many liberals just pop off because they can't help but flutter towards the spotlight. But the Cuomo familia is an especially nasty band of liberal. A vendetta, when it can be done invisibly, is certainly in the cards.
All of this speculation is quite delicious to consider. Yum yum, eat 'em up!
11 posted on 08/10/2003 4:36:44 PM PDT by thegreatbeast (Quid lucrum istic mihi est?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: eeman
A Republican Governor may not be able to deliver California, but it would in theory make the race more competetive, forcing the dems to spend a lot of money there that they would like to spend elsewhere.

The democrats have an early primary, and only so much money to last all through the summer and fall. Since they can't win the presidency without California, it would be nice if they had to dump tons of money there to ensure a win, leaving other states (Fl, Pa,) underfunded.

12 posted on 08/10/2003 5:44:38 PM PDT by TnGOP (Can't you tell when you are being ignored?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: thegreatbeast
And Italians are a very vengeful group of folks.
13 posted on 08/10/2003 6:01:34 PM PDT by expatpat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
The Dims are only just beginning to realize the damage the Clintons have done, and continue to do, to their party.

The "base" sacrificed credibility and self-respect protecting the rapist/liar to later be betrayed and driven off the intellectual cliff into an abyss of liberal self-loathing fury.

It's time for the party to separate the leaders from the lemmings and choose a course. Hopefully it will be a new one, rather than travelling further down the road to Clintonian rule.
14 posted on 08/10/2003 7:20:12 PM PDT by optimistically_conservative (Can't prove a negative? You're not stupid. Prove it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson