The Mental Recession

Pro-choice... as long as it's the same choice they'd make.

2013-02-02T10:08:00.000-05:00

Why is it that The Right is described as "anti-choice" when The Left is talking about abortion? But The Left is not regarded as anti-choice when they talk about gun control? When The Left talks about "saving just one life" by doing things like banning guns, why doesn't that logic apply to late term, partial birth, or any abortion?

Have you ever seen an Intact Dialation and Extraction procedure? There is absolutely no denying that what the doctor is doing is killing a viable human life.

Let me be clear on this, I believe an abortion, in 99% of cases, is a disgusting and vile act. I believe that more times than not, abortion is simply a method of last resort at birth control. I believe that the same logic a woman uses to kill her child in her womb, could be extrapolated into killing a child, or an adult, at any age. I believe that if a person is capable of the reasoning required to destroy the potential of a human life at one stage of development, they possess the same process of reasoning required to destroy life at any stage. I believe this, because in my belief, there is no difference between the living potential of the fetus or that of the born child. But those are my beliefs.

Fortunately for the supporters of Roe v. Wade, I also believe that my beliefs should not dictate the choices of others.

That being said, I am in favor of a woman's right to do what she thinks is right with her body. But why does the "pro-choice" Left change their logic completely when they turn their attention to gun control measures? The apparent argument is that a woman does not affect anyone but herself when she decides to have an abortion.

With that argument in mind, I'll draw your attention to the more than 54 MILLION abortions in this country since Roe v. Wade. Outside of major world war, there has never been a more prolific assault on innocent human life, in mankind's history. (Unless of course, you count the ultimate Leftist idea... communism... which ranks in at an estimated 100 million killed. Stalin killed more than 40 million personally.)

Let's consider the possibility that only 50% of these aborted lives would have wanted to live, had the choice been given to them instead of their mother ( a very, very generous number given for the sake of making a point). Let's then assume merely 1% of the fathers of these unborn children would have opted to be fathers had they had the choice (again a very generous number). We come up with a number of around 28 million innocent lives affected by abortion (affected being an understatement of astronomical proportions). 28 million lives, and I think we can all agree, that's a very generous number, given that I have never actually met a suicidal infant or toddler. I've rarely ever met a suicidal adult. 28 million people that would be alive today, had the choice been given to them.

54 million, incidentally, is almost as many as total dead in WW2, yet the same "anti-war" Leftist are the same people at the pro-choice rallies.

Given The Left's logic, it would seem gun control as a vehicle to public safety, or as an avenue to protecting the rights of individuals, pales in importance to overturning Roe V. Wade. Using The Left's logic, and obvious disregard for an individual's constitutional rights, I'd say there's a fair chance overturning Roe V. Wade is a very worthy endeavor, as well as a real possibility. Clearly The Left is attempting to demonstrate how important protecting innocent lives are, and how much the public supports this. Perhaps we should start showing more people what a victim of an abortion looks like. Maybe if more people see that these beings are not merely "aborted fetuses", but rather viable human lives with incredible potential, much the same way the Media recently portrayed all the victims of Sandy Hook, perhaps then more of mainstream America might see the abhorrent things we have been doing to innocent life since Roe. V. Wade.

http://www.abortiontruth.com/

McDonald Opposes Reinstatement of Commuter Tax

2013-01-28T12:00:00.000-05:00

Doe Fund Founder and New York City Republican candidate for Mayor George McDonald today stated unequivocally his opposition to asking the state legislature to reinstate the commuter tax.

McDonald said, "Passing the buck to get a buck is not the smart way to strengthen New York City's finances and my first action as Mayor will not be to ask Albany to reinstate a commuter tax. Higher taxes and increased fares are not the default answer that New Yorkers need from City Hall. We need to focus first on common sense budgeting and incentivizing real job growth that will increase bottom line revenues."

The commuter tax was abolished in 1999.

In recent interviews, former MTA Chairman Joe Lhota joined democratic Mayoral hopefuls City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, City Comptroller John Liu and Public Advocate Bill de Blasio expressing his support for reinstating the commuter tax which would require the approval of Albany leaders.

"The easiest thing do is to raise taxes, the hard work is in making tough choices. Higher taxes from Albany or New York are not the way to grow our economy they merely feed a spending addiction," said McDonald.

Mayor Bloomberg on Gun Control: 'Look at the Ass on Her'

2013-01-28T10:09:00.002-05:00

That's not a misprint in the headline.

New York Magazine ran a cover story on mayoral candidate Christine Quinn, and tucked deep into the article was an awkward exchange. The exchange involved a Christmas party goer complimenting the Mayor on his gun control efforts, to which Bloomberg started ogling a woman in a tight fitting dress and said, "Look at the ass on her".

Via the New York Magazine (h/t Politicker):

As it happens, I was at a Christmas party for the rich just a few weeks ago. It was at a townhouse in the East Sixties, just off Park Avenue, and several times over the course of the evening the subject of Quinn came up. Each person I spoke with expressed doubts about whether she’s tough enough and smart enough to run the city. Implied, or overtly stated, was that the Bloomberg years have been marvelous and she’s no Bloomberg. By which they meant, if I understood correctly, that’s she’s just another politician. Later in the evening, the host interrupted me to point out that the mayor himself had just arrived. Did I want to meet him? Sure. My friend and I followed the host over, shook Bloomberg’s hand, and my friend thanked him for his position on gun control. Without even acknowledging the comment, Bloomberg gestured toward a woman in a very tight floor-length gown standing nearby and said, “Look at the ass on her.”

Focus Mr. Mayor ... Focus.

And if you can't handle gawking at a good looking woman in moderation, perhaps the government will have to regulate your intake.

The Problem Isn't Low-Information Voters, It's Low-Information Politicians

2013-01-25T12:00:00.000-05:00

It's the messaging, stupid.

Much has been made since the past election cycle regarding the GOP's inability to reach out to voters. While doing so, many are focusing on the voter themselves, or as Rush Limbaugh refers to them - the low-information voter.

Time Magazine editor, Richard Stengel, explained that his magazine's choice of Barack Obama as 'Person of the Year' stemmed from his ability to get people that "aren't interested in politics" to like him. Or as Limbaugh explained, he is the first politician capable of garnering votes from people "who don't care about anything and who aren't paying attention".

But can we really place blame on the low-information voter's lack of desire in engaging in complex policy discussions, or should we be focusing on the precision effectiveness of the messenger - the low-information politician?

The low-information politician presents a two-headed problem for Republicans.

First, their mass appeal to the low-information voter translates to an uncanny effectiveness for Democrats at the ballot. The left runs on policies and platforms lacking in substance, but overrun with sound bites and clichés. Every single political issue is broken down into a three or four word clip that can easily be digested by a populace which now sports an average attention span of 8 seconds.

Just last year, the Boston Globe ran a report that news sound bites had been dramatically reduced when covering political candidates, from 43 seconds in 1968 to a mere 9 seconds twenty years later. This prompted then-Presidential candidate Michael Dukakis to complain, "If you couldn’t say it in less than 10 seconds, it wasn’t heard."

Democrats have since adjusted, honing their sound bite skills which eventually culminated in the election of the most effective limited attention span appealing politician of our era, President Obama.

While the president ran around the country in 2008 spouting out the phrase 'Hope and Change' ad nauseum, the Republicans had to chase him around and explain to people that this actually meant a massive redistribution of wealth, tax and spend policies that will bankrupt future generations, and a foreign policy of appeasement that would leave our nation weakened in the world's view.

What is the more effective sound bite? A positively toned 'Hope and Change' clip, or a stodgy Republican explaining a negative concept of wealth redistribution? Obama woke people up, while the Republicans put them right back to sleep.

Jon Gabriel provides a more recent example of this:

In November President Obama said of the fiscal cliff, "I refuse to accept any approach that isn't balanced." A few weeks later, the Washington Post conducted a poll and declared, "The public clearly wants a balanced approach to spending cuts and tax increases." Google "Obama balanced approach" and you get 2.4 million hits. Boom, the narrative has been set.

...

Obama chose the term "balanced approach" because it's a blandly positive phrase no one can oppose on its face. He doesn't mention the fact that his idea of "balance" is massive tax hikes and no budget cuts, but few voters delve into the details. Obama is for balance > balance is nice > yay Obama!

Another example of this can be seen with the selling of Obamacare's positive aspects to the low-information voters and politicians. The President could continue to push a concept of 'healthcare for all', while Republicans had to take it upon themselves to spell out the costs involved in that legislation; the taxes (or fees), the effect on our deficit, the burden for future generations, the failures of other socialized medical systems, and on, and on, and zzzzzz.

Low-information sound bites versus well thought-out but boring details?

Sound bites win.

Perhaps far more dangerous than the low-information providing politician is the low-information governing politician. These are senators, and representatives, and public officials who are actually governing and voting on policies that will dramatically affect the American people - without actually looking at the information provided them.

Nancy Pelosi, operating on the low-information concept of 'healthcare for all', famously uttered the phrase "We have to pass the bill so you can find out what is in it." In other words, why bother worrying about details when, well ... healthcare for all!

Other low-information politicians were sold and voted for Obamacare, while Republicans were sent scrambling to try and explain the taxes involved, the individual mandates, taxpayer funded abortion coverage and the assault on the private health insurance market.

To quote Gabriel, Yay Obama!

More examples of low-information governance?

Going back to Gabriel's example of the fiscal cliff bill, our U.S. Senate voted overwhelmingly to approve the bill despite having no more than three minutes to actually read it. Because reading is hard, yo.

Via CNSNews:

The U.S. Senate voted 89-8 to approve legislation to avoid the fiscal cliff despite having only 3 minutes to read the 154-page bill and budget score.
Multiple Senate sources have confirmed to CNSNews.com that senators received the bill at approximately 1:36 AM on Jan. 1, 2013 – a mere three minutes before they voted to approve it at 1:39 AM.

Senator Rand Paul would go on to say that the three minute estimate may be a kind one. "I'm not sure there was ever a bill printed," he said.

Why bother reading a bill when a) You can find out what's in it later and b) it can be summarized in the handy Democrat sound bites 'balanced approach' and 'avoiding the fiscal cliff'?

And even more recently, New York senators passed sweeping gun control legislation that substantially erodes the Second Amendment freedoms of law-abiding citizens, despite having only thirty minutes to read the bill. Again, positive sound bites such as 'saving children's lives' outweigh the concept of the Constitution of the United States.

The process prompted New York Assemblyman Steve McLaughlin to release this statement:

Moscow would be proud of our state Legislature and Executive Chamber, but every New Yorker should be outraged.

Why be outraged about such complex issues as the Constitution, when you've been spoon-fed tidy little bits of absurd platitudes that are easier to comprehend?

All in all, the messaging problem doesn't lie solely with what the Republicans aren't doing. Sure, Democrat success in recent years can certainly be attributed to their opponents fumbling on the concept of messaging. But credit where credit is due. Democrats are appealing to the low-information demographic by providing little to no information on their policies, and ramming through legislation without looking at the information contained within.

What you - and they - don't know, will assuredly hurt all of us in the long run.

This piece first appeared at FreedomWorks

Hypocrisy Alert: Feinstein's Gun Grab Doesn't Apply to Government Officials

2013-01-25T10:51:00.000-05:00

Not simply law enforcement officials, but government officials in general.

Via the Weekly Standard (h/t Weasel Zippers):

Not everyone will have to abide by Senator Dianne Feinstein’s gun control bill. If the proposed legislation becomes law, government officials and others will be exempt.

“Mrs. Feinstein’s measure would exempt more than 2,200 types of hunting and sporting rifles; guns manually operated by bolt, pump, lever or slide action; and weapons used by government officials, law enforcement and retired law enforcement personnel,” the Washington Times reports.

The Huffington Post confirms these exemptions, and adds that guns owned prior to the legislation becoming law will be permissble, too. “[T]he bill includes a number of exemptions: It exempts more than 2,200 hunting and sporting weapons; any gun manually operated by a bolt, pump, lever or slide action; any weapons used by government officials and law enforcement; and any weapons legally owned as of the date of the bill’s enactment.

Guns... Bad for thee, but not for me.

Rand Paul Charges Obama Administration With Using Benghazi to Cover Up Another Gun Running Scandal

2013-01-24T07:49:00.001-05:00

Americans with "assault weapons" - bad.

Mexican drug cartels and terrorists with "assault weapons" that eventually kill Americans - good.

Via Gateway Pundit:

This afternoon Senator Rand Paul blasted Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for her ineptness during the Benghazi massacre. Paul said he would have fired her for not reading her emails from the Benghazi Ambassador before he was slaughtered by Islamists.
Tonight Rand Paul doubled down and accused the Obama Administration of a cover-up for running guns to terrorist groups in the region.
In October, Malta Today reported that a Libyan-flagged vessel was used by a Malta-based humanitarian organization in a covert US arms smuggling operation to Syrian freedom fighters.
More… Hillary Clinton did admit today in testimony that terrorists used Libyan weapons in the attack last week in Algeria.

Here's the video...

New York Senate Had Less Than 2 Hours to Read Gun Control Bill

2013-01-21T16:25:00.000-05:00

By comparison to the fiscal cliff bill, New York Senators had eons to read over the SAFE Act that was passed and signed into law last week.

In reality, anyone of sane mind and body recognizes that Governor Cuomo went out of his way to ram gun control legislation down the collective throats of New Yorkers for political expediency.

He circumvented New York's Constitution which has an amendment requiring a three-day public review of all laws.

So how much time did the New York State Senate have to review a bill that introduces sweeping new gun control laws?

Less than two hours.

In the video above, New York State Senator Terry Gipson says he's voting 'Yes' to a bill that was introduced less than two hours earlier.

Gipson: I'm grateful to have this opportunity to talk about this bill tonight. I think it's important that the voters know that it's been only about two hours since we've had the chance to look over the details of this bill, and I myself, as a newly elected official here, who came here to participate in democracy ... I find it unfortunate that we're not having the chance to debate this bill with all the senators here. I frankly think that with all the talent in this room on both sides of the aisle, we could have done a lot better, and I hope that in the future, on future bills, we will have a chance to do better.

Assemblyman Steve McLaughlin tells the Mental Recession that two hours is a very favorable estimate.

"They didn't even have two hours," he said. "They had the bill for much less than that. About thirty minutes."

Despite the rush, these Senators, of whom Democrats are taking credit for the bill, voted yes.

State Republican Chairman Ed Cox says New Yorkers should be worried about this power grab and usurpation of the Constitution.

"The way Mr. Cuomo is governing in Albany should raise serious concerns among New Yorkers who cherish the democratic process -- even among those who agree with the Governor on the issues," he said.

Republican Senator Kathy Marchione added:

"... the Second Amendment Constitutional freedoms of every New Yorker were weakened by passage of restrictive new gun control. As shortsighted as the new gun control policy is, the hasty process used to adopt it was even worse. It was a shame that a Message of Necessity was used to rush this important measure through without a single public hearing or the proper time to carefully review the bill and consider alternatives. This is not how democracy is supposed to function. More time, more discussion, more dialog would have allowed our constituents to have a greater voice in this process and for legislators to hold town hall meetings and hear directly from the people they serve."

Instead, they voted yes and likely never even read the bill.

This isn't democracy, folks.

Senator on NY Gun Control Legislation: "Will Not Make a Difference" in Controlling Crime

2013-01-21T13:43:00.000-05:00

In the video clip below, Senator Ruben Diaz is speaking on the Senate floor regarding New York's gun control legislation. He pronounces to everyone that it needs to be made clear - the New York SAFE Act is his party's legislation, that "it is a Democratic bill".

Diaz says that he is voting for the bill despite this:

"Yet knowing ... knowing, ladies and gentleman, knowing that even though voting for this ... to give opportunity for crime to come down ... I know, and you should know, that this will not make a difference in (ending) committing crime."

Why pray tell, would somebody vote for a piece of legislation that they fully admit will not make an ounce of difference in stopping violent crime?

Diaz adds later in the clip:

"Nothing is going to change. It's the mind. It is not the weapon, it is not the revolver, it is not the rifle. It is the mind."

Worse, Diaz isn't saying this because he is begrudgingly going along with his party on the matter, he is saying it because he believes the bill isn't strong enough in limiting gun access. Earlier we reported on another Democrat who believed the legislation did not go far enough, even citing some who wish for "one gun with one bullet".

Diaz though, doesn't seem to trust his own mind, as he runs down a litany of reasons why crime is being committed for other reasons:

"It is the mind. Not until we work on people's minds ... We have lost respect for life. We have no respect and fear of God. We have lost everything that made people respect one another. And not until we go back to those standards, nothing is going to control crimes and nothing is going to control (anything)."

Well said, Mr. Senator. Problem is, you now want to do more 'nothing' regarding crime.

That 'nothing' however, does actually turn into a 'something' for law-abiding citizens. While criminals will see no effects from this bill, regular gun owners will see their rights greatly diminished.

You talk common sense, Mr. Diaz. Too bad you and your cohorts don't govern the same way.

"One Gun With One Bullett": More Evidence that NY Democrats Are Coming For the Second Amendment

2013-01-21T12:00:00.000-05:00

Last week we showed you a Democrat wish list for gun control proposals, as presented by Assemblyman Steve McLaughlin. The list was given to McLaughlin by a colleague in the Senate, and includes a host of radical Second Amendment-trampling ideas, including the confiscation of so-called 'assault weapons', the re-labeling of semi-automatic shotguns as 'assault weapons', and the confiscation of magazines hosting 5 rounds or more.

More video clips from the debates leading up to the Governor's over-reaching gun grab are surfacing, and there is clear evidence supporting the list presented by Mr. McLaughlin as reality.

Democrat proposals are so radical for example, that the following video clip not only backs up the wish list, but shows even further evidence.

In this clip, New York State Democrat Assemblyman from Westchester County, Tom Abinanti spoke during an Assembly Session on January 15th, and provided some very revealing statements.

Some of those statements (seen in the clip below) include:

Abinanti explains that the bill could have been much worse. He practically runs down the list of proposals released by Assemblyman McLaughlin as evidence that the gun control bill could have been far stronger. He says the legislation is taking us to a safer place, but very slowly due to defects in the bill. Those defects are by omission in his view.
He backs this up by issuing a challenge to his colleagues saying future legislation of his could say "none of these guns at all. Period."
He claims that he does not "wish to repeal the Second Amendment" rather, "just make it work for everyone."
Accuses civilians of "act(ing) like they're in the middle of a war."
Abinanti is "tired of hearing about legal, lawful gun owners."

Perhaps most strikingly is the Democrat's statement beginning at the 3:40 mark regarding "one gun with one bullet".

Abinanti: "The reasonable gun owners that I talk to tell me they want one gun with one bullet. They're going to lock themselves in their bedroom, and if that guy comes in that's when they pull the trigger."

Apparently Mr. Abinanti has never heard of a situation where more than one criminal breaks into a home, or assaults an innocent civilian.

McLaughlin tells the Mental Recession that when speaking about the New York SAFE Act on the floor, he charged that if proponents of the legislation were being truthful they'd talk about banning all weapons.

He said that's when "some of them started clapping."

McLaughlin suggests that further evidence of their radical proposals could be revealed in the near future.

"We are also going to be reviewing every piece of legislation submitted on guns this year and last. Many of their proposals will be in those bills, I'm sure," he said.

Governor Cuomo would like you to believe that only right-wing 'extremists' think that they are coming for your guns. But it's actually the Second Amendment-trampling Democrat extremists who really do want to take them that are the problem.

In their eyes, "one gun with one bullet" should suffice.

Democrat: Please Don't Release That Document Showing We Actually Do Want to Confiscate Guns

2013-01-18T11:06:00.001-05:00

Late last night, New York Assemblyman Steve McLaughlin, one of the few Republicans with a strong enough spine to stand up to the new gun legislation, released the following statement on his Facebook page.

Here it is. This is the video where I was asked to keep the Democrat proposals for the NY SAFE Act away from the public. This list was given to me by a colleague and it is not confidential.

This bill was an attack on the 2nd amendment and the Democrats clearly wanted to dismantle the work of the Founding Fathers. None of these amendments were included in the final bill thanks to us fighting back. I will not stand silent while these unpatriotic proposals are pathetically thrown at us a 11 o’clock at night:

In the video clip (seen below), McLaughlin is prepared to discuss a list of original proposals from the Democrats regarding gun control. The list, much in the same vein that Governor Cuomo himself had discussed, actually proposed the confiscation of guns and clips

This is essentially a Democrat wish list for trampling the Second Amendment. Here is the video...

In the video, McLaughlin is speaking to Democrat Assemblyman Joseph Lentol. Here is the transcript:

McLaughlin: ... Something that we received from the Senate, Democrat proposals in this gun bill. And I don't know if you've seen this, or if you know that these are there or not.

Lentol: Well we don't have our own list of rejected proposals, that the Senate rejected, so I don't have anything to show you.

McLaughlin: Okay. Alright, then I won't address it then if you haven't seen it. I'll leave that one alone. Okay, thank you, Joe. Appreciate it.

Lentol: And by the way, I would recommend not to have that list shared because it has the capacity to dampen the enthusiasm of compromise.

McLaughlin: Well, it sure does when we talk about the confiscation of assault weapons. It absolutely has the ability to dampen a compromise.

The list of proposals that Democrats would rather you didn't see, can be seen below.

1. Confiscation of "assault weapons"
2. Confiscation of ten round clips
3. Statewide database for ALL Guns
4. Continue to allow pistol permit holder's information to be released to the public
5. Label semiautomatic shotguns with more than 5 rounds or pistol grips as "assault weapons”
6. Limit the number of rounds in a magazine to 5 and confiscation and forfeiture of banned magazines
7. Limit possession to no more than two (2) magazines
8. Limit purchase of guns to one gun per person per month
9. Require re-licensing of all pistol permit owners
10. Require renewal of all pistol permits every five years
11. State issued pistol permits
12. Micro-stamping of all guns in New York State
13. Require licensing of all gun ammo dealers
14. Mandatory locking of guns at home
15. Fee for licensing, registering weapons

Cox: Cuomo Abusing Constitutional Requirements to Build a National Resume

2013-01-17T16:11:00.001-05:00

Governor Cuomo is abusing the powers of his office to ram major pieces of legislation through the legislative process before they can be properly considered.

The "NY SAFE Act," is the latest example. For Governor Cuomo to state that the twenty-year gun control debate justifies limited debate over the specifics of the SAFE Act is intellectually dishonest and downright absurd.

For example, a gun registration law in Canada that turned millions of law-abiding citizens into criminals resulted in such massive resistance that Canada had to rescind the law. Could that happen in New York? Never discussed.

The State Constitution mandates that the "Message of Necessity" only be invoked for bills that are so urgent they cannot wait a constitutionally required three days before being voted on. Yet Governor Cuomo has used the Message of Necessity 35 times since taking office, including with:

● The NY SAFE ACT
● The Marriage Equality Act
● Tier VI Pensions
● Teacher Evaluations
● The DNA Database

"The way Mr. Cuomo is governing in Albany should raise serious concerns among New Yorkers who cherish the democratic process -- even among those who agree with the Governor on the issues," said State GOP Chairman Ed Cox.

The State Republican Party urges Governor Cuomo to review his policy of employing Messages of Necessity.

"Governor Cuomo promised to be the most transparent Governor in New York's history," said Cox. "But by placing unnecessary limitations on public debate in the chambers of the legislature, Cuomo shielded favored legislation from the public scrutiny provided for by the State Constitution."

Independent Auditor That Filed Report Critical of NY Spending on Sandy Recovery, Immediately Escorted From Building

2013-01-17T11:23:00.000-05:00

An independent auditor charged with examining New York state goverment spending on recovery and cleanup efforts after Superstorm Sandy, was fired almost immediately after filing the report according to the Albany Times Union.

The consultant, Thomas Sadowski, was escorted from the building in which he presented his spending report which indicated state employees had made questionable purchases and transactions.

Some of those transactions included "poor oversight of the use of state credit cards, orders for a fleet of SUVs and the purchase of iPads that did not seem necessary for recovery efforts."

Sadowski's report merely provided suggestions on how to improve the state's procurement practices, but was deemed threatening enough to the state spending spree that he was expelled.

An excerpt from the Times Union report reads:

Sadowski said he saw and heard things that disturbed him, including what appeared to be attempts to get the federal government to reimburse for expenses that were not directly related to storm response.

He said managers had no idea where assets were in the field and that procurement policies and practices were not up to the standards needed for response to a large-scale disaster.

Sadowski said one manager provided credit cards to employees who weren't aware of how to document purchases, opening up opportunities for fraudulent and wasteful spending.

He said thousands of dollars of purchased and leased items went missing, could not be found promptly or were not used effectively while leasing bills mounted. He questioned the purchase of the Tahoe SUVs and the acquisition of several iPads for state emergency management personnel.

Bear in mind that New York will now be receiving a substantial portion of the recently passed $50.5 billion Sandy Aid package that some Republicans wanted to trim wasteful spending on - and were villified for doing so.

Petition Urging Repeal of New York's Gun Law Gets 40,000 Signatures In One Day

2013-01-16T18:02:00.003-05:00

Yesterday we reported on only two Republican state Senators here in New York having the courage to stand up against Governor Cuomo's political gun grab legislation.

One of those Senators, Kathy Marchione, had started a petition on her website in an attempt to demonstrate "strong public support for preserving our Constitutional freedoms".

The support is indeed strong, with reports indicating that signatures are being placed on the petition at a clip of over 1,300 per hour.

Since yesterday, the petition - found here - has received over 40,000 signatures in total.

Marchione posted this on Facebook earlier this afternoon:

"40,402. That's how many signatures our on-line petition to repeal and replace the new unconstitutional gun control law in NYS has received since 10:54 a.m. yesterday."

In a statement by Marchione, she explains why she voted 'no' on the bill, and provides a glimpse into her reasoning for the petition.

“Tonight, the Second Amendment Constitutional freedoms of every New Yorker were weakened by passage of restrictive new gun control. As shortsighted as the new gun control policy is, the hasty process used to adopt it was even worse. It was a shame that a Message of Necessity was used to rush this important measure through without a single public hearing or the proper time to carefully review the bill and consider alternatives. This is not how democracy is supposed to function. More time, more discussion, more dialog would have allowed our constituents to have a greater voice in this process and for legislators to hold town hall meetings and hear directly from the people they serve.

Law-abiding citizens are NOT the issue: millions of New Yorkers own firearms and do so safely, responsibly and legally. The real issue, the real threat, is criminals having guns and the seriously mentally ill obtaining access to guns. If tonight’s legislation focused solely on these issues, I would have voted yes. However, along with strengthening Kendra’s Law, enacting Mark’s Law, providing funding to further secure our schools, and cracking down on illegal guns – all of which are good ideas I strongly support – the bill contained restrictive new gun control that could weaken the Second Amendment. That is something I will not support.

The vote tonight is only the beginning of an important debate. I believe we need to repeal and replace parts of tonight’s legislation and keep the sections pertaining to increased penalties on criminals, use of illegal guns, securing our schools and addressing the seriously mentally ill. However, I cannot do it alone: I need Second Amendment supporters to stand strong and stand with me. I will be launching an on-line legislative petition on my Senate page to build public support for repealing and replacing the restrictive provisions passed tonight.

If every New Yorker who supports the Second Amendment makes their voices heard we can forge a true public safety remedy without curtailing the Second Amendment. This is no time to sit on the sidelines: every gun owner, hunter, sportsman and supporter of the Second Amendment must get involved. If you’ve been e-mailing, writing and calling, then keep doing so. If you are not registered to vote, get registered. Now is the time to be heard.”

Sadly, there are few politicians left who have taken an interest in defending our Constitutional freedoms. But when somebody like Marchione comes along and fights a lonely fight here in the liberal haven of New York State, it's important to stand with them.

Please read and sign the petition.

Tell your legislators that you support the repeal and replacement of this freedom-eroding bill.

Gun Control Extremists Are Right - The Children Have Been Saved!

2013-01-16T16:18:00.002-05:00

I can admit when I'm wrong. I've been looking at this gun control debate from a completely obtuse angle. Governor Cuomo and President Obama are right - this is indeed about saving the lives of children. Even if it's just one child.

Can you imagine a scenario almost twice as deadly as the Newtown shooting? A school massacre that outpaces all other school massacres in the United States?

An event in which say, 45 people are killed, with about 38 of those being elementary school aged. A disaster that injures an additional 58 people and nearly wipes out an entire school?

Gun control extremists have it right. Their new laws and executive orders will surely prevent any such disasters from ever happening.

Oh wait... That actually did happened. In Bath, Michigan in 1927.

Via Slate:

The recent shootings in Newtown, Conn., have led many people to characterize school violence as a modern affliction, a byproduct of our national obsession with guns and media violence. But the deadliest school-related massacre in American history happened in 1927, at an elementary school in Bath, Mich. A school board member named Andrew Kehoe, upset over a burdensome property tax, wired the building with dynamite and set it off in the morning of May 18. Kehoe’s actions killed 45 people, 38 of whom were children.

Number of guns used to shoot people?

Zero.

Meanwhile, the real debate, the debate on how to make our schools, our malls, our movie theaters safer, has been completely ignored.

This entire conversation has simply been a Trojan horse to sidestep the Constitution - Cuomo to sidestep the New York state Constitution, Obama to trample all over the document crafted by the Founding Fathers.

It is disgraceful. And we're letting it happen.

New Tone Alert: NY Democrat Compares Republicans to Suicide Bombers

2013-01-16T16:00:00.000-05:00

On the heels of President Obama himself diving into the gutter by comparing Republicans who oppose raising the debt ceiling as having "a gun at the head of the American people", we have a New York Democrat Assemblyman comparing those same Republicans to suicide bombers.

Via the Daily Caller (h/t Weasel Zippers):

New York Democratic Rep. Jerrold Nadler called for Congress to abolish the debt ceiling, comparing congressional Republicans to “suicide” bombers for supporting spending cuts which exceed any increase in the debt limit.
“Paul Krugman used the example on TV the other day — said it’s like somebody wearing a suicide bomb vest walking into a crowded place saying, ‘I’ll blow up the place if you don’t give me what I want.’ That’s exactly what it is,” said Nadler, the Ranking Member of the Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution on Wednesday at the Capitol.
“I use the analogy in speeches saying that it’s like a 1930s movie: ‘Nice economy you’ve got over there, pity if it should have to blow up if you don’t pay me off.’ and that’s what’s going on here.”

So we have Democrats, the media, and the President of the United States all in lockstep as painting Republicans as terrorists once again.

The calming influence of President New Tone is no more.

Where once the President had denounced discourse that places “the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do”, we hear Republicans blamed for holding the American people hostage to their economic policies. Where once we were urged to talk “with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds”, we now hear conservatives being denounced as terrorists.

It is enough to make one wonder, where did our healing President go? Where is the man that calmed during a time of toxic rhetoric? Where is the man who urged Americans to talk in a way that helped, rather than harmed?

That man is a myth. He simply does not exist.

We will never hear the President denounce such vile language from his side of the aisle. In fact, we consistently hear the drone of silence from a supposed leader, where such silence equates to consent.

It's disgusting, and it has to stop.

But it won't. The President and his colleagues, the media, all believe that his re-election has provided a green light to belittle and attack his opposition.

Can the Governor of New York and 2016 Presidential Hopeful Actually Be this Thick?

2013-01-15T20:31:00.000-05:00

In reading up on Governor Cuomo's new gun legislation in New York, I came across a rather startling statement. Startling in it's pure and utter stupidity.

And in what Cuomo termed "the Webster Provision" — a reference to the Dec. 24 killings of two firefighters fatally shot while responding to a call in a suburb of Rochester — the murder of a first responder will become a felony punishable by life in prison without parole.

That's right, a future Presidential hopeful for 2016 is actually bragging about a provision in his gun law named specifically for one individual gun man, even thought that provision could never - EVER - be applied to that gun man.

Completely ignored by the Governor and the Times Union report is the not-so-trivial fact that the man who ambushed and killed the firefighters in Webster, fatally shot himself long before police could ever locate him.

Mr. Cuomo, enlighten the citizens of New York please, and explain how would the Webster Provision have been implemented in the case of say, the actual Webster shooting? Just how much of a f*** do you think the shooter would care about this new law, considering he ... is ... dead?

Perhaps this is just too much of an abstract way of thinking, but there aren't too many dead people that I know of that are concerned about spending their non-existent life in prison without parole.

Could any media types please ask that question of the Governor? How would the WEBSTER provision have stopped, or appropriately punished the actual WEBSTER shooter?

I'm not sure which is the bigger problem in this country right now - low information voters, or low information politicians.

Senator on NY Gun Legislation: The Only Thing We're Saving is Governor Cuomo's Presidential Aspirations

2013-01-15T15:44:00.003-05:00

The NY SAFE Act has passed the Senate, will likely pass in the Assembly despite ongoing discussions, and is poised to be signed into law by Governor Cuomo some time this evening. This packet of gun control legislation is considered by the Democrat governor to be the most comprehensive package in the nation.

The Times Union reports:

The NY SAFE Act would adjust the definition of a banned assault rifle so that any single characteristic — such as a telescoping stock, flash suppressor, bayonet attachment or pistol grip — on a semiautomatic rifle would render it illegal. Existing weapons would be grandfathered in, but their ownership could not be transferred.
A statewide registry of these guns would be created, and the county-by-county process for issuing handgun permits would also be standardized and centralized. In a change to the state's Freedom of Information Law, permit applicants would be able to request their name and address not be released — a point that arose after the Journal News in Westchester County last month published a list of the names and addresses of pistol permit holders.
The maximum capacity of an ammunition magazine would be reduced from 10 rounds to seven, and a current exemption for clips manufactured before 1994 will end.
Private sales of firearms, which now proceed unfettered, would require a background check through a licensed dealer, putting those transactions in line with current purchasing requirements for rifles and shotguns.
At the urging of Republicans in the Senate, the bill also stiffens penalties for people who use guns criminally. It would also include an expansion of mental health providers' ability to commit those found to be a danger to the public — another GOP priority — under what's known as Kendra's Law.

But the content of the legislation is taking a back seat to the imaginary need to get it passed as quickly as possible. The state Senate passed the measure without any debate on the bill, and Governor Cuomo has dispensed with the three-day public review law in an attempt to avoid public debate on the topic.

Warner Todd Huston writes:

... weekend dealmaking behind closed doors resulted in a bill that has bipartisan support, but the full legislature has not yet had a chance to see the back room-written legislation.
New York State has a constitutional amendment that requires a three-day public review of all laws before they are allowed to take effect. However, this bill's backroom deal makers are urging anti-gun Governor Cuomo to issue a "message of necessity" that would cancel the three-day review period.
Further discussion will continue behind closed doors and away from the light of public view.

Sadly Huston is correct, not only has the bill been forced upon New Yorkers with not so much as a discussion, but a dozen Republicans in the Senate went along with it.

Despite Republicans willingness to bow to the governor on this legislation, and emotionally respond to a topic that requires level-headed thinking, criticism of these tactics has been strong. New York Post editor Fred Dicker, a normally reliable ally and current biographer for the governor, ripped these latest measures.

Politico reports:

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo's new gun-control package is drawing sharp criticism from one of his most reliable allies: The New York Post editor and Albany radio host Fred Dicker, who calls it "a Trojan Horse" effort to "regulating every single gun" in New York.
As Capital New York's Azi Paybarah reports, Dicker is usually Cuomo's "closest and most influential ally in the media... a consistent booster of Cuomo and... a useful clearing house for Cuomo's proposals, personnel decisions and political threats, which often appear first in Dicker's column as lightly attributed offerings of sources close to the governor. (He's also writing a book about Cuomo, with the full cooperation of the governor's staff.)
But on today's radio show, Dicker described the package as being "all in secret, typical Albany, behind closed doors," and accused Cuomo of using the tragedy to push his gun agenda, perhaps in order to win national attention.
"This is a Trojan Horse. This is not about semi-automatic rifles. This is a sweeping set of gun laws the governor is using," he said. "The governor is using the tragedy... as a justification for sweeping changes in gun laws including regulating every single gun millions of New Yorkers now own... It's another reason people are going to be leaving New York."

New Yorkers thus far, have only had a minor defense of their Constitutional freedoms on display during the process. Only two Republicans took to the floor of the Senate to speak on the bill. Greg Ball said the measure should have contained a greater overhaul of the state's mental health systems, and indicated the final product would be nothing more than a burden on law-abiding gun owners.

Ball added, "We haven’t saved any lives tonight, except for one: the political life of a governor who wants to be president. I voted no, and I only wish I could have done it twice.”

Ball is right - the perceived urgency of the legislation is completely non-existent. In reality, the Governor was simply hoping to beat vice-President Joe Biden to the punch when it comes to meaningful action on gun control, second amendment freedoms be damned. And Cuomo is about to score a significant political victory. President Obama is expected to announce the recommendations of Biden's gun commission later this week.

Meanwhile, the other Republican to speak on the bill was Kathy Marchione, who is now hosting a petition on her web site in an attempt to show "strong public support for preserving our Constitutional freedoms".

Sadly, there are few politicians left who have taken an interest in defending our Constitutional freedoms.

Mayoral Candidate Urges Bloomberg to Demand Union Drivers to Get Back to Work or Face Dismissal

2013-01-15T14:09:00.001-05:00

Over 150,000 students could be affected by a union strike on Wednesday, as bus drivers for the Local 1811 of the Amalgamated Transit Union continue their battle with the city of New York and Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Of those 150,000 plus students, an estimated 54,000 of those affected have disabilities.

The dispute stems from a city proposal seeking new operators for more than 1,000 routes. The drivers want guarantees that even after the new operators are chosen, the current drivers will still have jobs, a request that the city has said is illegal based on an earlier court ruling.

Meanwhile, mayoral candidate George McDonald is calling on Bloomberg to channel his inner Ronald Reagan, and demand that the workers either report for work or face dismissal. McDonald cites a previous strike in the city that specifically led to a serious accident involving New York City firefighter Matt Long.

Long was critically injured when he was struck by a bus during an illegal MTA strike in 2005.

McDonald said, "We've seen this movie, it can end in tragedy".

Let's hope the union drivers come to their senses and find another means to negotiate, and not continue to use over 150,000 school children as pawns in an attempt to circumvent a court ruling.

The full McDonald press release is below:

With over 152,000 students including 22,500 special needs students facing the prospect of no transportation for school on Wednesday morning, Doe Fund Founder and mayoral candidate George McDonald called on drivers to get back to work and not risk the lives of our young children.
McDonald said, “We've seen this movie before, it can end in tragedy. It is unconscionable that the union would put our children in harm’s way for any reason, let alone for the sake of job protections that a court has ruled illegal.”
In 2005, New York City firefighter Matt Long was critically injured when he was struck by a bus during the illegal MTA transit strike. Long was crushed and nearly killed by a charter bus hired to shuttle workers to and from Bear Stearns.
McDonald said, “Matt Long’s accident was a direct result of the strike, he only survived because of an incredible will, support of his family and superior physical conditioning. We can not and must not subject our children to such unnecessary risks.”
McDonald urged Mayor Bloomberg to follow President Ronald Reagan’s lead in addressing the situation with Amalgamated Transit Union Local 1811. In 1981, President Reagan fired more than 11,000 air traffic controllers who ignored his order to return to work. Lawyers for the school bus companies have indicated that they will ask federal labor authorities for an injunction to stop the strike since the disagreement is with the city, raising the specter that the strike is illegal.
Said McDonald, “I respect the right of workers in the private sector to strike, but I also believe we have a basic obligation to get our students to school safely. Our children face enough obstacles receiving an education, getting to school in one piece shouldn't be one of them. That is why I am urging the Mayor to tell union drivers to get back to work or move forward with bidding on new contracts.”

Obama on Debt Ceiling: Republicans Holding 'A Gun at the Head of the American People'

2013-01-14T15:14:00.000-05:00

Remember when Sarah Palin's target lists were blamed for the tragic shooting in Tucson, Arizona that resulted in Rep. Gabrielle Giffords being shot? Major media outlets were drawing a link to the shooting and the maps Palin used, which featured cross hairs over districts she felt could be won. Of course, this led to President Obama giving a speech about partisan politics and the need for a 'new tone' in political discourse, despite the fact the shooting had no political motivations.

In a piece titled, Obama Calls for a New Era of Civility in U.S. Politics, the New York Times reported:

President Obama offered the nation’s condolences on Wednesday to the victims of the shootings here, calling on Americans to draw a lesson from the lives of the fallen and the actions of the heroes, and to usher in a new era of civility in their honor.

The president directly confronted the political debate that erupted after the rampage, urging people of all beliefs not to use the tragedy to turn on one another. He did not cast blame on Republicans or Democrats, but asked people to “sharpen our instincts for empathy.”

Apparently the President has forgotten his own advice, leaving civility behind a mere month after the tragic mass shooting in Newtown, Connecticut. If somebody somewhere in America, is killed with a gun over the next few days, and that person just happens to be a Republican, will the President receive equal blame in the media?

In the midst of a heated American debate about gun control and a gun's role in such shootings, Obama compared GOP tactics regarding a completely detached topic - the raising of the debt ceiling - to somebody holding a gun to another person's head.

Via the Washington Free Beacon:

Politico reported Monday House Republicans are “seriously entertaining” measures that include default or government shutdown to achieve some kind of spending cuts in the upcoming debt ceiling negotiations.
Obama, who voted against increasing the debt ceiling as a senator in 2006, compared—at length—the debt ceiling negotiations to dining and dashing. The president also compared Republican tactics to holding “a gun at the head of the American people” one month after the mass shooting in Newtown, Conn.
“What I will not do is to have that negotiation with a gun at the head of the American people,” Obama said. “The threat that unless we get our way, unless you gut Medicare or Medicaid or, you know, otherwise slash things that the American people don’t believe should be slashed, that we’re going to threaten to wreck the entire economy.”

Threat? Slash? Guns? Oh my.

If Republicans are being accused of such tactics because they don't wish to unilaterally raise the debt ceiling, does that mean that Obama's vote in 2006 also equates to him holding "a gun at the head of the American people"?

Doesn't that make Obama a terrorist?

State Senator Blames Journal News Gun Map for Weekend Break In, Burglars Targeted Gun Safe

2013-01-14T12:43:00.002-05:00

Was a weekend burglary in which two suspects broke into a home in White Plains, New York, and tried breaking into a gun safe, a direct result of the Journal News publishing a map of people who have gun permits?

One state senator is saying, 'Yes'.

First, via KSL TV:

A house on the now-infamous Journal News gun map was burglarized over the weekend, and burglars' target was the homeowner's gun safe, according to officials.
At least two burglars broke into the home at 9:30 p.m. Saturday and attempted to break into the safe, in which were stored legally owned weapons, according to News 12. The station said there was broken glass in the homeowner's backyard and a ladder leading up to a second-story window.
The burglars were unsuccessful at breaking into the gun safe and one man was taken into custody. Police said it is unclear whether the suspects knew what was in the safe when they tried to open it. They are currently trying to determine whether the Journal News' map had anything to do with the crime.

The Times Union reports that Senator Greg Ball is blaming the Journal News, though his words are clear in that he says "if the connection is proven". Ball made this statement in a press release:

“The Journal News has placed the lives of these folks at risk by creating a virtual shopping list for criminals and nut jobs. If the connection is proven, this is further proof that these maps are not only an invasion of privacy but that they present a clear and present danger to law-abiding, private citizens. Former convicts have already testified to the usefulness of the asinine Journal News ‘gun maps’ yet the reckless editors are evidently willing to roll the dice, gambling with the lives of innocent local homeowners,” Ball said in a press release. “The same elitist eggheads who use their editorial page to coddle terrorists and criminals are now treating law abiding citizens like level three sexual predators. These bills are critical to keep folks safe and fundamentally protect their inherent right to privacy. I hope all of these bills will be brought to the floor for an up or down vote, and allowed to fail or pass on their own merits and not as part of a large, overarching gun-control package. This is not about the Second Amendment; these bills are simply about commonsense and personal privacy. Publishing this information on a website, as we have evidently just witnessed in the recent attempted gun burglary, provides criminals with a map of where they can steal firearms from lawful owners for later use in the commission of crimes. This legislation is critical.”

It may be a bit premature to assume that the burglars knew that the safe was a gun safe, and didn't simply contain something else that they wanted. And while that link is premature, the overall point regarding the dangers of publishing a map of that nature remains the same.

What do you think?

Governor Cuomo Proposes 'Tax Free Zones' to Spur Innovation and Business

2013-01-14T07:31:00.002-05:00

Wait, what? Lower taxes spur innovation, business, and by extension, the economy? Who knew?

Via the Troy Record:

Representatives from area colleges are in agreement that they are interested in spurring innovation in the area, which could be further enhanced through Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s proposal to create tax free zones for higher education institutions and private sector entities to collaborate.
While Russell Sage College’s provost Terry Weiner felt the initiative would mainly affect larger institutions, Michael Hickey, the executive director of the Center for Innovation and Entrepreneurship at Siena College, said that the governor’s program would have a good synergy with the CIE.
“We’re trying to do similar things that the governor is trying to do — spur innovation,” said Hickey. “Our agendas overlap.”
He added that he felt such programs would be “good for everyone... When education and business leaders get together, nothing but good things happen.”

Remember that Cuomo himself has claimed to be running New York as a fiscal conservative. But watch which side of the aisle gets credit for any potential growth. It certainly won't be the notion that a tax free zone could have helped.

Yoko Ono Frets, 'Fracking Kills the Whole World'

2013-01-12T10:00:00.000-05:00

Not content on having broken up one of the greatest rock and roll bands of all time, unhinged tree-hugging liberal Yoko Ono, is now trying to break up the New York state economy with her anti-fracking message.

On Friday, Ono and Sean Lennon, son of singer-songwriter John Lennon, made a stop in Albany to hand deliver an anti-fracking letter to Governor Cuomo. What followed was a textbook lesson on why some unhinged leftists should never, ever be handed a microphone.

Ono went with a Chicken Little 'the sky is falling' routine in trying to convince people of the dangers of fracking (video below).

At the 18:05 mark, Ono frets - "Fracking kills. And it doesn't just kill us. It kills the land, nature, and eventually the whole world." She adds that going ahead with fracking is akin to people deciding to "commit suicide all together."

Melodramatic much?

Unfortunately such unhinged lunacy doesn't quite match up with what scientists are saying. You know, the actual people who study these kinds of things.

Via the Daily Caller:

The New York Times reported Thursday that a leaked study from the state’s Health Department says the drilling method known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, can be safely done in the Empire State.
The eight-page analysis — leaked to the Times by an “expert who did not believe it should be kept secret” — concluded that fracking could be done safely within the state of New York and details the potential impacts on a variety of environmental factors, including fracking’s impact on water resources, on naturally occurring radiological material found in the ground, and on air quality. The analysis also looked at “potential socioeconomic and quality-of-life impacts.”
According to the Times, the analysis says that fracking can be done safely if the regulatory system that has been developed over several years is followed, and the analysis also rejects broad quantitative risk assessments that would attempt to project the probability of different kinds of hazards.

In other words, fracking can be done safely, effectively, and would result in New York state gaining thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of jobs.

Imagine that, Yoko.

Mayor Bloomberg Now Rationing Pain Meds, Tells Poor Patients You 'Have to Suffer a Little Bit'

2013-01-11T16:10:00.002-05:00

The nanniest of all nanny state politicians, New York City's Mayor Bloomberg, has unveiled a new plan to restrict painkillers in the city's emergency rooms. Naturally, many observers weren't too keen on the plan.

Bloomberg however, was quite sympathetic to those who opposed the plan, saying that poor people who have to use the emergency room as their primary care doctor, will simply "have to suffer a little bit".

In other words - Suck it up losers.

Via Politicker:

Yesterday, Mayor Michael Bloomberg and city officials unveiled a new initiative to limit supplies of prescription painkillers in the city’s emergency rooms as a way to combat what they described as a growing addiction problem in the region. Some critics, as documented by The New York Times, however, felt the move would unnecessarily hurt poor and uninsured patients who use emergency rooms as their primary care doctor. Needless to say, Mr. Bloomberg was not swayed by this line of argument.
“The city hospitals we control, so … we’re going to do it and we’re urging all of the other hospitals to do it, voluntary guidelines. Somebody said, oh, somebody wrote, ‘Oh then maybe there won’t be enough painkillers for the poor who use the emergency rooms as their primary care doctor,’” the mayor said on his weekly radio show with John Gambling. “Number one, there’s no evidence of that. Number two, supposing it is really true, so you didn’t get enough painkillers and you did have to suffer a little bit. The other side of the coin is people are dying and there’s nothing perfect … There’s nothing that you can possibly do where somebody isn’t going to suffer, and it’s always the same group [claiming], ‘Everybody is heartless.’ Come on, this is a very big problem.”

Allahpundit at Hot Air writes:

The only redeeming virtue of this bit of paternalistic sadism is that it’ll make great oppo in case this tool tries to be a national player in 2014 or 2016. Lord knows he has the bank to do it, as well as a political brand carefully engineered to make soft-headed centrists and media types swoon. He’s a Democrat who pretends to claim the partisan high ground by identifying as a no-labels independent, a man of “solutions” who’s on the case when it comes to poor people limping home from the emergency room with an extra day of painkillers but not when it comes to preparing the country’s biggest city for hurricanes.

There are new reasons every week why I’m glad he left the GOP, and now here’s this week’s. Imagine a card-carrying Republican instituting this policy and then defending it by shrugging and saying, “So you didn’t get enough painkillers and you did have to suffer a little bit. The other side of the coin is people are dying and there’s nothing perfect.”

Bloomberg is simply continuing his desire to force government into every aspect of our lives, dictating exactly what we can and can not do to our own bodies. But we're entering dangerous territory when a public official can tell a doctor what they can prescribe, and how much they can prescribe to ailing patients.

Discussion:

Which is more burdensome to the city's poorest demographic? This edict, denying them medications? Or the time Bloomberg banned food donations to the homeless due to salt content?

Tough call...

NY GOP Chairman to Cuomo: 'Need to do More than Just Manage Decline'

2013-01-11T15:43:00.001-05:00

The following is an open letter to New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, from Republican Party Chairman Ed Cox.

Dear Governor,

New York Republicans listened to your 2013 State of the State address with great interest, eager to hear your plans to strengthen New York's economy.

Unfortunately, New York is still the tax capital of the Nation, with the highest state debt per capita, the worst-in-the-Nation business climate and poverty and unemployment rates above the national average. Our current state budget contains $4.5 billion in temporary resources, including your temporary tax increase of $2.6 billion.

While we were heartened by your pledge not to raise taxes again and to reform our unemployment insurance and workers compensation schemes and our antiquated job training programs, there is still much more to be done to make New York competitive.

Your address missed that mark by a wide margin. You proposed to use government funds to pick ten venture capital "winners." When government picks winners, "Solyndras" result. The best way to provide investment capital for fledgling companies and to keep successful ones here is to stop taxing capital gains under New York's punishing ordinary income tax regime.

And since small businesses create most new jobs, where are your proposals to reform that ordinary tax regime? What about proposals to eliminate corporate taxes on our steadily thinning critical mass of increasingly high tech manufacturing companies that are struggling and need capital to survive?

Your lack of executive action has killed the development of New York's natural gas reserves, driving this new, high-tech industry - and nearly 60,000 new jobs - into Pennsylvania.

Our extraordinary 2009 Republican victories highlighted voters' frustrations with burgeoning property taxes, and the resulting bipartisan property tax cap put the brakes on rising property taxes. But local governments are still burdened with unfunded state mandates and use reserves or gimmicks to stay within the cap and still provide vital services. Why was your speech silent on unfunded mandate relief?

Charter, parochial and independent schools have been the proving grounds for the K-12 reforms you proposed, but received no mention. New York has the highest per pupil K-12 costs in the Nation, and these independent schools are doing a better job at a significantly lower costs. Support, in the form of tax credits or otherwise, for these schools should be on the table.

You were right to acknowledge that New York has experienced decades of decline. We need to do more than just manage that decline.

To reverse the trend, New York needs a pro-growth job creating agenda first and foremost.

Video: Man Gently Releases Mouse Into the Wild, Hawk Promptly Brings It Home for Dinner

2013-01-11T15:37:00.000-05:00

Sure there's a viral video making the rounds right now involving a cute little puppy desperately trying to climb down a set of stairs, when an older dog comes along to teach the puppy how to do it.

But we're not about cute and cuddly here at the Mental Recession - we're about dark humor.

Which brings us to this instant classic.

A man brought his garbage can outdoors because it had a mouse in it. He releases his furry friend whom he affectionately refers to as "Whiskers", into the wild. One can almost here the song Born Free playing in the background.

The guy holding the camera asks his friend "How do you feel?" To which he responds, ""I'm kinda sad, I just got to know him, and oh no... oh no... NO!"

What happens to cause him to yell? Watch...