74
CA Gov Gavin Newsom "Completely Aligns" With Charlie Kirk On Trans Issues In Podcast
(www.erininthemorning.com)
this post was submitted on 06 Mar 2025
74 points (95.1% liked)
LGBTQ+
3056 readers
851 users here now
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I didn't say he was right on these issues, and you're correct in taking issue with him because of it. However, it doesn't change the fact that the article is a misleading smear piece capitalizing on Newsom's rather foolish attempt to "cross the aisle" and have Kirk on his show.
I have a lot of problems with Newsom, as I actually alongside his campaign for mayor in the 90s through my volunteer work at Peace Action. I ended up leaving the campaign before he won due to his anti-homeless measure, which (predictably) restricted social services and made the homeless problem worse. It was clear back then he was always going to take the side of the rich in California politics, just as it was clear that he had already been effectively anointed as an upcoming governor by the Pelosi / Feinstein machine.
He's also kind of a dumbass (this was really clear when he was younger - just look at his taste in women), but smart enough to usually listen to the more intelligent people in the room. This has redeemed him during the governorship to some extent, but he's definitely made a rightward turn in response to recent events that's left me less than confident in his leadership ability.
I appreciate what you’re saying, but this is not a misleading hit piece. This is written by a prominent trans journalist (if you’ve seen the trans legislative risk map, that’s her) who is married to a high profile trans state representative (Zooey Zephyr).
You may not like her interpretations of his statements, but they come from a place of familiarity with the political scene for trans people both as a reporter and as a trans person. She has a high reputation with a lot of the trans community who follow political news, and calling her work a hit piece is unreasonable.
Regardless of her credentials, this was clearly written to cast Newsom in the worst possible light. The article is rife with hyperbole and only targets selected statements in the transcript.
And it's absolutely misleading to say someone "completely aligns" with someone on an over-arching concept like trans rights when they agree with one subset of the argument.
It was this statement in particular that changed the tone from an opinion piece to a hit piece IMHO:
Emphasis mine. Here the author makes the claim that Newsom is deliberately targeting transgender people to score political points - yet he's not. In the interview, Kirk brought those topics up, and when they came up, Newsom was describing the political landscape, not justifying it.
I mean, hell, go ahead and call Newsom out for the dumb shit he does (and this shit was not bright), but forcing a purity test on the man who made gay marriage legal is counterproductive. Claiming that he's deliberately trying to target transgender folk is just plain false.