Here's something for NY's 2006 candidates

In Thursday's New York Sun, John Stossel explains how Wal-Mart is good for America and the attacks against the company are ill-advised.

First, Stossel approaches the myth of Americans not getting something in return as Wal-Mart makes millions. But we are the consumer. We do get something in return.

Take the simplest example. I buy a quart of milk. I hand the storekeeper money; she gives me the milk. We both benefit, because she wanted the money more than the milk, and I wanted the milk more than the money. This is why often both of us say "thank you."

Because it's voluntary, business is win/win. A transaction won't happen unless both parties benefit. Each party ends up better off than he was before. And when you have millions of successful transactions, you end up very well off - like the owners of Wal-Mart.

Why yes, that's it. As a business owner, my job is to provide a service to the consumer who wants my products. My goal is to make money, your goal is to own the goods I provide. Sounds like a win-win, doesn't it?

Wal-Mart started with one man and a vision. He opened a small store and from there expanded that business because that is simply the American dream. Free Market, right? Well, the market isn't as free as it used to be, but Wal-Mart founder, Sam Walton, was able to navigate through government regulations and create a large corporation.

In earlier eras, John D. Rockefeller and Cornelius Vanderbilt were depicted as evil. But the condemnation rarely came from consumers. It was competing businessmen who complained. And newspapers lapped it up, calling them "robber barons."

Vanderbilt got rich by making travel and shipping cheaper. Lots of people liked that. No one was forced to buy the oil on which Rockefeller got rich. He had to persuade people by offering it to them for less. He offered it so cheaply that poorer people, who used to go to bed when it got dark, could now afford fuel for their lanterns. These are "robber barons"?

"You could not find a more inaccurate term for these men than 'robber barons,'" said philosopher David Kelley. "They weren't barons. All of them started penniless. And they weren't robbers, because they didn't take it from anyone else."

Somehow, as time went on, capitalism started becoming evil. You can make money, but as soon as you reach a certain threshold, you become evil and must be penalized. Is that what our Founding Fathers fought for?

As for the issue of Wal-Mart's low wages to employees and lack of health coverage, Stossel hits the nail on its head.

"None of them was drafted. None of them was forced to work at Wal-Mart," said Brink Lindsey, a senior scholar at the Cato Institute. "That means that if they're working there, presumably, that was the best job they could get.

We have to remember, we are free to work anywhere we are offered a job. A Wal-Mart can come into a community and provide lots of jobs for individuals who would otherwise not be working. Many people who seek jobs at a business at Wal-Mart are going to school and simply need part-time work. Other employees are retired and because of how poorly government provides for them with social security, require a job to supplement their income. And work is all voluntary.

I think many anti-Wal-Mart folks forget is the big box store is usually a primer for getting a young person started in the workforce or a job where a local senior can keep themselves busy and be friendly to many of their neighbors. And Stossel closes by including something Democrats don't want you to repeat. A success story because of Wal-Mart.

Before Sha-ron Reese was hired at Wal-Mart she was on welfare. She'd lost custody of her kids and was homeless, living in her car. California store manager W.C. Morrison took a risk and hired her. "She had no references," he told us. "She had no work experience."

In her own words, she was "raw." But Morrison took a chance on her. That changed her life. Today, Reese has two people working for her. She's got her own apartment. She's regained custody of two of her kids. And she's a Wal-Mart customer. "Everything, just about, that's in my house," she said, "Wal-Mart sells."

A Video Message from Assemblyman Pat Manning

The 2006 NY Gubernatorial Election is still a year away, but the State GOP Chairman wishes to call the race before it's even won. There are currently four candidates vying for the Republican Party (Golisano may have switched party registration, but he has not announced he's running as a Republican yet) and Chairman Minarik wants to call it for William Weld. No Primary. Sounds like he's afraid. Or that he looks for the money to flow. It's about money and not victory. Minarik wants to avoid a primary and choose a liberal Republican, which would alienate the conservative base throughout the State. That was what the GOP did in 1990 and it clearly did not bring victory.

Right now, three of the four candidates are seeking the Conservative Party cross-endorsement. It is clear that if William Weld is given the nomination by GOP County Chairs, then the Conservative State Chair, Mike Long, will simply go with either Pat Manning, John Faso or Randy Daniels. But at this point, why not have a Conservative Party primary? Wake up conservatives in New York and make the GOP mumble, "uh oh" as an active and energized conservative base literally goes to the polls for a PRIMARY!

Of the four Republican candidates, the one that I have faith in restoring the republican party and the one that I have faith in fixing the woes of New York State, is Pat Manning.

Today, he released a video message for everyone to see and hear him. From his own mouth, he wants to return New York's GOP to the party of Reagan.

Choose your player poison to watch Pat Manning address the State of the State of the GOP.
Windows Media Player
Real Player Video
QuickTime Player

All the News that's Fit to bend and reinterpret

Today, The NY Times printed an Op-Ed titled: Decoding Mr. Bush's Denials.

Apparently, the NYTimes believes that history shows evidence leading up to removing Saddam Hussein from power went a particular way. The NYTimes is treading on old (false) interpretations of news and continuing to bend and twist it to create an unfavorable view of President Bush.
Why?
I guess they do not wish he wins re-election.

The firestorm attacks on the President continue with the chant that BUSH LIED!
Unfortunately, it is the liberal media, also known as MSM (Main Stream Media) that continues to lie and live in a world of make believe.

Immediately after the Op-Ed from the NYTimes, the White House puts out a press release specifically rebutting the NY Times Op-Ed piece.

Setting the Record Straight: The New York Times Editorial on Pre-War Intelligence.

It states many clear facts on pre-war intelligence.

Foreign Governments That Opposed The Removal Of Saddam Hussein Judged That Iraq Had Weapons Of Mass Destruction (WMD).

The Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) Was Judged Not To Have Different Intelligence Than The National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) Provided To Congress, Which Represented The Collective Opinion Of The Intelligence Community.

Former President Bill Clinton Warned After 9/11 That The United States Could Not Allow Saddam Hussein To Continue Defying Weapons Inspectors.

The Weapons Inspectors Concluded That Saddam Hussein Sought A Nuclear Capability.

The President Never Connected Iraq To The 9/11 Attacks While Other Politicians And Independent Commissions Judged That There Were Contacts Between Iraq, Al-Qaeda And Other Terrorist Groups.

Congressional And Independent Committees Have Repeatedly Found No Political Pressure To Change Intelligence.

Each point is supported with referals.

If you read the NY Times, it's time for you to give the paper a pass. If you want to keep getting it for weekends, fine, but during the work week, Monday through Friday, you should switch to the broadsheet that doesn't have a table of contents for their daily Corrections (Some days, it's really large). That paper is the NY Sun.

"Bush Lied" Setting the Record Straight

Today, Norman Podhoretz writes a very detailed outline of events that led to America toppling Saddam Hussein's regime. Mr. Podhoretz goes over various quotes and remarks made by politicians on both sides of the aisle and it presents a clearer picture on whether or not "Bush Lied" to the American people.

Though this matter has been raised and argued over and over again, Podhoretz says, I want to take one more shot at exposing it for the lie that it itself really is."

His piece is long and filled with detail on various intelligence agencies providing information on the threat Iraq poses. He goes over the intelligence reports reviewed by the Senate Intellegence Committee. How, when and why the Joseph Wilson IV claim became news and the misinformation it provided.

Right now, President Bush's poll numbers are really low. So low, in fact, that re-election seems unlikely. Oh, wait... he can't run again. My bad. Maybe Democrats should move on from their attacks and come up with a positive, progressive agenda to move America forward from where we are today. Otherwise, they lose again with the Iraq situation.

Blogger Bob Krumm has some thoughts on how Democrats should proceed in 2006. It's quite possible that if strong and well organized Republicans, who seek re-election, or plan to challenge Democrats, may present a clearer message to the American people about moving us forward. If Democrats aren't prepared, all their false hopes over the 2005 elections will be realized.

Arthur Chrenkoff, who has retired from blogging, used to compile "Good News" Reports from Iraq & Afghanistan through September and he gave us lots of information that clearly indicated many successes in these two democracies.

Iraqi bloggers have used blogger.com to keep online journals of their cities and neighborhoods. Iraq the Model had consistantly been on top of its game with reporting what Americans need to know about this society. Many other blogs are hyperlinked in the sidebar.

There's also a new website called The Other Iraq which deals with Kurdistan and the progress they've made in the last four years. It even includes promotional videos. Clearly, the nay-sayers must stop believing people from the Middle East are barbarians and incapable of Democracy and a free society. Their public display of bigotry does a disservice to humanity.

If Democrats continue to live in the past and argue that Bush Lied, then they themselves are lying to the American public. We need to move forward. We need progressive and positive ideas so sufficient stability returns to the region so American troops can return home. Until we reach this point, we must support every man and woman who is doing the job his or her country has asked of them.

Rent Exemption Expansion

The City of New York has added a new rent-freeze program to the already successful Senior Citizen Rent Increase Exemption [SCRIE] Program. The new program is called the Disabilities Rent Increase Exemption [DRIE] Program.

There's also a Senior Citizen Homeowners Exemption [SCHE] Program that is available to qualified residents.

For receiving the necessary applications and information, you can call the city at 311 and they will gladly service your request.

First, About SCRIE Program which was started around 1971:

If you are 62 or older, live in a rent controlled or rent stabilized apartment or residential hotel, and have a disposable household income of $25,000 or less, you may be among the thousands of New Yorkers who can benefit from SCRIE.

Of course, not to many people who are 62 years or older are reading my website. I've asked my mom and dad to check in here once and while and they never do. However, some of you may know someone; a grandparent, someone's mother, who rents a stabilized unit and is beginning to feel the crunch of rent increases. Please check out the website for the Department for the Aging to find out more.

For the Senior Citizen Rent Increase Exemption Program application, you can download it here.

Now, the new DRIE Program that has recently been passed by the City Council:

Eligible buildings, as defined by the law, are those that are regulated by the Division of Housing and Community Renewal

To qualify for DRIE, the family member with a disability must be named on the lease for the rent-regulated or co-op apartment.

The applicant must currently be receiving any one of the following forms of financial assistance:
-Federal Supplemental Security Income (SSI);
-Federal Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI);
-US Department of Veterans Affairs disability pension or compensation; OR
-Medicaid-related disability assistance.

For Individuals: Household income must be less than or equal to $17,004/yr.
For Couples: Household income must be less than or equal to $24,372/yr.

Please check out the website for the Department of Finance to find out more.

For the new Disabilities Rent Increase Exemption Program application, you can download it here.
For the questions and answers, you can download the FAQ sheets here.

Many seniors in the outer-boroughs may not know about the SCHE Program and if you know someone who qualifies, you should definitely let them be aware of this benefit offered by the State. What is SCHE?

SCHE provides a partial exemption of the assessed value of a legal residence that is occupied by a senior citizen who has a limited income.

Eligibility

Age -- Applicants must be age 65 or over by December 31st of the year in which the SCHE benefits would begin. If a husband/wife or siblings own the property, only one needs to meet this age requirement to qualify. If co-owners other than spouses or siblings own the property, all must be 65 or over.

Primary Residence -- The applicant must use all or part of the property as his/her primary residence.
Income -- The total adjusted gross income of all the owners of the property from all sources must be less than $32,400, which is the 2004 cap set by New York State (reset annually).

Property Ownership -- The owners must have held title to the property for at last 12 consecutive months before March 15th of the year when the SCHE benefits begin.

For the Senior Citizen Homeowners Exemption Program application, you can download it here.

I hope my posting this information will inform many New Yorkers about the SCRIE, DRIE & SCHE programs and that those who qualify can and will take advantage of City Tax Abatement Credits (TAC) that has been made available to them.

The one thing to remember is that anyone living in the five boroughs can call the City at 311 and inquire about what they qualify for.

Under the Radar

NewsCopy reports that Assemblymen Pat Manning has been building strong ties with New York State Conservative County Committees and being successful in raising funds.

News Copy has learned that Pat Manning is rapidly closing in on additional endorsements and raising dollars at a frenetic pace, so much so that he could emerge in the near future as THE most-favored Republican candidate.

Manning has clearly emerged as a favorite among upstate County Conservative chairs, who view the 6'11" lawmaker as the freshest alternative to Weld or Golisano.

Pat Manning cannot win the Governorship as a Conservative alone, so it will be important to attract Republican Committees as well.

Republican chairs have been more direct in assessing Manning's chance, saying that it will depend on how much money he raises between now and the first of the year.

He may not be a millionaire but our sources continue to confirm that "the tall one" is raising more money than any other Republican statewide candidate, amazing progress for a little-known Assemblyman from Dutchess County.

In 1964, Presidential candidate Barry Goldwater brought the Conservative movement to the Republican Party and formed a new party that spread throughout the country. In New York, an unlikely State for conservatives, was the strongest Conservative Party coalition of all 50 States. It took sixteen years for a real conservative candidate to win the presidency with the election of Ronald Reagan in 1980.

In 1990, The New York Republican Party chose a liberal candidate, Pierre Rinfret, for governor to challenge Mario Cuomo. The losing candidate, Herb London, stayed in the race and ran as the Conservative Party candidate for governor and embarrased Pierre Rinfret's candidacy. Republicans did not make the same mistake in 1994 and was sure to get their candidate, George Pataki, on the Conservative Party line. But we're at a crossroads today. It is sixteen years since 1990. Perhaps Pat Manning is to New York, what Ronald Reagan was to the Nation.

To hear what Pat Manning is saying, visit StandTallNewYork.

Thank You

I'd like to thank all the candidates that ran spirited campaigns for this year's election cycle. There were many good candidates that did not grasp the brass ring, but that doesn't mean we should hang our heads in defeat. The remaining two months of 2005 should be spent analyzing the poll data and the reasons for not picking up any seats for City Hall.

Some positives.

Russell Gallo got home from fighting in Iraq, was elected District Leader, set up a campaign committee and put together a Republican Club for the 47 AD. All this year. Russell pulled in a strong 30.5% in a first time campaign. Congratulations.

Pat Russo, the candidate with the best shot of winning, grabbed 45% of the vote. He had 46% in 2003 and was hoping the Mayor's coattails would push him over the threshold. Apparently, there weren't any. Four years from now, Mr. Gentile will be voted out by term limits. Maybe Mr. Russo will give it a go again. Third times a charm?

Peter Boudouvas took another stab at district 19 and pulled in almost 38% of the vote. District 19 is a winnable district for Republicans so there is definitely hope in 2009 when Mr. Avella cannot seek re-election.

Raquel Walker wanted to run as a Republican, but when she first registered to vote, she decided not to select a party, but did. That's the "Independence" Party con. A friend of mine did the same thing. Ballots are now clearly marked, I choose no party at this time. Ms. Walker ran only as a Conservative and had an uphill battle. But she pulled in a respectable 14% on a third party line. Thank you for the effort and we hope to see you on the Republican line four years from now.

New Yorkers wisely shot down the State Constitutional Amendment. When New Yorkers see Democrats and Republicans agree whole-heartedly on bad policy, then you should vote No. You should vote NO for anything you don't understand. Ballot initiatives always turn up again. If you understand it, then you an decide YES or NO. But if you don't understand it, NEVER vote YES. It is safer to knock something down.

Next year is State elected offices, Congressional seats and one US Senator. Another exciting year in the world of New York politics.

Voting on November 8

Everything went smoothly and it appears everyone knows what to do at Bachetti Plaza on East 4th Street. The lines were short. Could it be a lot of people aren't going to the polls today? That would be disappointing. After hearing that Iraq had high voter turnout hovering around 65% of registered voters, it would be embarrassing if New Yorkers feel the need to poll a bunch of switches isn't important to them.

Since I finally voted in the past half hour, I guess it is okay to reveal my choices.

Mayor - Thomas Ognibene Conservative Party
Public Advocate - Jay Golub Conservative Party
City Comptroller - William Thompson Democratic Party
Supreme Court 1 - Matthew Grieco Republican Party, Karla Moskowitz Democratic Party, Martin Shulman Democratic Party
Surrogate - Kristin Booth Glen Democratic Party
District Attorney - Robert Morganthau Republican Party
Borough President - Barry Popik Republican Party
Civil Court - Ira Globerman Democratic Party, Tanya Kennedy Democratic Party
Councilmanic 2 - John Carlino Republican Party

My vote for mayor is a vote to let the mayor know he needs to shift right. Whether or not a vote for Ognibene does that is up for debate.
My vote for PA is because I know Jay and felt he would make a better Advocate than Betsy.
I chose Thompson simply because he does a decent job, I voted for him last time, I think he is the best candidate since no one else really campaigned or made an effort to let me know if they would be competent.
My reasons for choosing Moskowitz and Shulman as Democrats and not Republicans is simply because the are Democrats and there's no point in hiding that fact by pulling the Republican lever for them.
Surrogate had no competition so whats the point of leaving it blank?
Morganthau has been a very good DA and I want him to know my vote was for his line as Republican.
Civil Court, simply see Surrogate's answer.
I decided to vote for John instead of Claudia. I would like to see him get some kind of total so here's hoping the mayor's coattails will give him something above 20%.

As for the four Propositions:
I voted NO for the Amendement to the State Constitution
I voted NO for the Transportation Bond Act
I voted YES for the Ethics Code for City Administrative Judges
I voted NO for the Balanced Budget & Other City Fiscal Requirements.

Video Voters' Guide

If you have Windows Media Player and want to get informed of who the candidates are in your district and borough, please check out the Video Voter Guide for more information.

Since we don't always get a chance to hear the Republican candidates, here are the "Right Leaning" candidates in high-speed connection who participated. If you have 56k dial-up and wish to view these candidates or others, please click the Video Voters' Guide hyperlink above.

Manhattan
Borough President - Barry Popik - Republican, Liberal

Councilmanic District Four - Patrick Murphy - Republican, Independence, Liberal

Councilmanic District Five - Joel Zinberg - Republican, Independence, Liberal

Councilmanic District Six - Josh Yablon - Republican

Councilmanic District Seven - Michael Petelka - Republican

Councilmanic District Nine - Will Brown - Republican

Bronx
Councilmanic District Thirteen - Philip Foglia - Republican, Independence, Conservative

Queens
Borough President - Philip Sica - Republican, Conservative

Councilmanic District Ninteen - Peter Boudouvas - Republican, Independence, Conservative

Councilmanic District Twenty - Raquel Lacomba Walker - Conservative

Kings
Borough President - Ted Alatsas - Republican, Conservative

Councilmanic District Thirty-Five - Anthony Herbert - Republican, Conservative

Councilmanic District Thirty-Nine - Yvette Bennett - Republican, Conservative

Councilmanic District Fourty-One - A. Brinmore Britton - Republican

Councilmanic District Forty-Three - Pat Russo - Republican, Independence, Conservative

Councilmanic District Forty-Five - Salvatore Grupico - Republican, Independence, Conservative

Councilmanic District Forty-Seven - Russell Gallo - Republican, Independence, Conservative

Richmond
Councilmanic District Forty-Nine - Jody Hall - Republican

Councilmanic District Fifty-One - Andrew Lanza - Republican, Independence, Conservative

Voting Recap

I'm going to point out a few Council races where you do have a choice and hope you consider helping our government balance out between the two parties. For candidate information in the 2005 General Election, please view The Contest List for candidates.

Manhattan
District Two has John Carlino (R,I), Rosie Mendez (D,WF), and Claudia Flanagan (LP). All candidates can claim they can work well with Bloomberg. Rosie is the only one saying she can work with Ferrer. From here on, though, I'll assume Bloomberg is winning, so let's not talk nonsense. John is open to expanding charter schools and a voucher program. I believe if he ran a fully funded campaign, education would've been his No. 1 issue. D2 is all about schools and housing. Claudia was undemocratically knocked off the democratic primary ballot by CoDA, a Dem Club started by Rosie (She claims to have not been involved in CoDA petition challenges). As a Libertarian, she won't win, but she could take protest votes (who are aware of the ballot challenge) away from Rosie. Since no one has really heard of John or Claudia, all Rosie needs to do is run on who has endorsed her and not issues.

District Four has Patrick Murphy (R,I), Dan Garodnick (D,WF), and Jak Jacob Karako (LP). Another district with a Libertarian who won't do much. The real race is Patrick and Dan. The voter ratio between Dem and Rep is the narrowest of all ten Manhattan council districts. Patrick would bring real effective legislating to the council with Bloomberg. Dan would give us another Dem who whines and complains and fights the mayor any chance he gets. I would like to believe residents want to see solutions and will vote for Pat.

District Five has Joel Zinberg (R,I) and Jessica Lappin (D,WF). Joel is not a politician and watching the NY1 debate proved it. I thought he was more polished, but public speaking isn't legislating. Joel wants to save tax payers money by going after medicare fraud. Jessica is a seasoned insider working for Gifford Miller and believing money grows on trees in Albany and Washington D.C. It worries me when a politician wants money for this program and that program without questioning whether government should play a part or the market. Joel has the backing from the mayor.

District Six has Josh Yablon (R) and Gale Brewer (D,WF). If you want tax cuts, cheaper housing, competitive education and government reform, you want Josh. Josh has the experience and drive to bring real republicanism to city government. Gale believes high schoolers and non-citizens should be allowed to vote.

District Nine has Will Brown (R), Inez Dickens (D), Daryl Bloodsaw (I), Woody Henderson (WV) are mixing it up in Harlem. This race would be an exciting one if money was being poured into Brown, Bloodsaw & Henderson's campaigns. When you have a field of four, you can really split votes, but it's likely Dickens, with the support of Mr. Charles Rangel, will easily win. I'm not familiar with Brown's campaign effectiveness, but his year's of experience in the community would be a real asset with a second Bloomberg administration.

...to be continued...