California Gov. Gavin Newsom responded to Sen. Tommy Tuberville's criticism of New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani by calling the Alabama Republican "a racist piece of shit" on X Thursday, bypassing the actual controversy to launch a personal attack on the senator instead.
Tuberville had reposted an image circulating online that paired a photo of the Sept. 11 attacks with a picture of Mamdani. His caption was blunt: "The enemy is inside the gates."
Newsom fired back:
"Tommy Tuberville proves to the world that a football hitting your head can turn you into a racist piece of shit. Congrats, Tommy."
Notice what Newsom didn't do. He didn't defend Mamdani's decision to host an activist who has publicly rationalized the Oct. 7 Hamas massacre. He didn't explain why Tuberville was wrong on the substance. He reached for the only tool in the California governor's rhetorical toolbox: the racism card.
The actual story here isn't a senator from Alabama posting a provocative image. It's the mayor of America's largest city personally welcoming Mahmoud Khalil, a man who described the Oct. 7 attack carried out by Hamas as "an unavoidable moment in the Palestinian struggle," into Gracie Mansion to break the Ramadan fast.
Khalil also called the assault "a desperate attempt to show the world that Palestinians remain part of the political equation." When later allowed to condemn Hamas during an interview, he declined, arguing that demands for condemnation were disingenuous, as The Daily Caller reports.
Mamdani said he and his wife hosted Khalil, his wife Noor, and their son Dean for the meal. This was separate from the mayor's first iftar held at New York City Hall, which also drew criticism.
Mamdani pushed back against the backlash with his own post:
"Let there be as much outrage from politicians in Washington when kids go hungry as there is when I break bread with New Yorkers."
A neat deflection. Reframe hosting a Hamas apologist as simply "breaking bread with New Yorkers." Wrap it in concern for hungry children. Hope nobody notices the pivot.
Newsom's outburst is worth examining not because it's surprising but because it's so perfectly representative of how the left handles these moments. The pattern is reliable:
That's exactly what happened here. Tuberville pointed at the problem. Newsom pointed at Tuberville. And suddenly the discourse is about whether a football metaphor constitutes racism rather than whether the mayor of New York City should be hosting a man who won't condemn the deadliest attack on Jewish civilians since the Holocaust.
This is a feature, not a bug. Newsom has no interest in defending Khalil's record. He can't. So he makes the conversation about something else entirely. Call the critic a racist, generate outrage about the language, and let the original story die in the noise.
The New York City mayor's decision to host Khalil at Gracie Mansion didn't happen in a vacuum. This is a man who, upon taking office, immediately signaled that activist politics would define his administration. Hosting an iftar at City Hall is one thing. Personally inviting a figure known for rationalizing the Oct. 7 attacks to the mayor's official residence is a deliberate provocation dressed up as hospitality.
Mamdani's "hungry kids" response tells you everything about his approach to criticism. He doesn't engage the substance. He changes the subject to something unobjectionable and implies his critics don't care about it. It's a rhetorical shield designed to make any further questioning look petty.
But the question remains simple and unanswered: Why is the mayor of New York City giving the prestige of his office to a man who described the slaughter of Israeli civilians as an "unavoidable moment"?
Newsom calling Tuberville racist for criticizing Mamdani's Khalil dinner is the kind of accusation that once carried weight. It doesn't anymore, and Democrats like Newsom are the reason why. When every criticism of a progressive policy, every objection to a controversial figure, every pointed question about national security gets the same one-word response, the word stops meaning anything.
Tuberville's post was pointed. You can debate whether the 9/11 imagery was appropriate or effective. But "racist" doesn't describe anything about what Tuberville actually said or did. It's not an argument. It's a shutdown attempt from a governor three thousand miles away who has no stake in New York City politics but never misses a chance to perform for the national progressive audience.
Meanwhile, Khalil still hasn't condemned Hamas. Mamdani still hosted him. And Newsom still hasn't said a word about either of those facts.
That silence tells you more than the profanity ever could.
