Archive from January, 2006
18 Jan
2006
Posted in: Blog
By    2 Comments

RE: Quality of Reporting:

I could see where that post by Gos could be interpreted in a negative light. However I think anyone reading the article in the Observer and the post below need to understand the heart, sweat and hours that a number of people have put into this club, so like-minded individuals could have a place to go, meet and escape the liberal speak that consumes this city (you don’t know what it’s really like being a Young Republican in this city until you have been spat on in the street, something some of my colleagues have experienced).

Readers of the post below have to understand that all the work that is done on a daily basis by the board of governors of this club is not for personal fame or economic ends. Most don’t even know the name of our membership chair, our events chair, our community outreach chair and others who work everyday to make the club better. These individuals get no compensation except for the satisfaction that maybe their work made a difference to somebody in the club or community.

From my experience, I believe the perceived animosity toward the other club is really just frustration at how our club, despite all its efforts otherwise, somehow have to continually be dragged into this so-called “feud” as if we’re the Hatfield’s and McCoy’s. The frustration on our end is from the fact that whenever the issue comes up it’s always started by a source other then this club. As Dennis mentioned in the article, “he never says a bad word about them” and anyone who ever came to any of our general meetings or events will never hear one either. In fact it is our clubs policy when asked about the other club, to recommend them check out both clubs. I personally can say that the one Hornack club meeting that a friend and I went too; we did hear him make negative comments about our club in an obvious attempt to make it appear to his members that they were being held down by the man. The meeting also included attacks on Governor Pataki and Mayor Bloomberg but I digress.

My point is this club will continue to carry on so it can make a difference in the community and with its members. Unfortunately as part of that mission we will have to just be cognizant that there will be moments like the Observer article where our past differences will be exploited for a story or for a chance for one side to get some gratification. Fortunately for those really involved with our club, they know what our time is spent on, which if I may say, would make a much better story.

18 Jan
2006
Posted in: Blog
By    10 Comments

Quality of Reporting

By now, I am sure that many of you have read the swan song article by Jessica Bruder in the Observer. Talking about going out on a high note; writing about the NYYRC, Inc. “Feud”. I am curious what she does for an encore.

First of all, the article was clearly one-sided with person after person quoted who could not be further in the Hornak sycophantic corner. For purposes of full disclosure, she did contact me over the Holiday Weekend, but when I called her back on Tuesday, she had already submitted it. That being said, where was the reach out to County or State Committee’s? Where was the reach out to the various candidates that we help? Where was the reach out to other political bodies that we have developed strong relationships with? There was none of that. The article took things at Robert’s words and was shoddy at best.

Secondly, I am sick of this Robert as the victim nonsense. All of us know that the Host Committee for the Convention took everyone and anyone who wanted to volunteer. Unless there was some legal or mental issue with an individual, they took you. Furthermore, its not like the work many of us did for the Convention was glamorous. I don’t recall too many YR’s sipping drinks in the sky boxes during the Convention.

Also, we put together quality events for YR’s who could and could not help out at the Convention with speakers such as Rep. Bob Barr and Amb. Jean Kirkpatrick. Noone outside of the YR’s helped us with that. Its not our fault the best they could come up with is a pub in Brooklyn. Maybe they should be more focused on their club activities than sitting around whining about not get hand outs.

Thirdly, we get little to nothing from the State Party. Direction? Marching Orders? Give me a break. If any organization is Borg-like in its construct its Hornak’s crew. Isn’t Paul the President, but Robert speaks all the time. When will he give up the reigns? He has his club only endorse candidates that Robert gets a salary from. I can’t seem to recall his people helping many to any people this last cycle. I also don’t seem to recall them flooding the streets with volunteers for those who has hired him. And to make matters more interesting, they seem not to have a problem endorsing Democrats. Some GOP activist group I guess. This does not even begin to mention the questionable legal situations Robert’s activity is with State and Federal Election law, but I digress.

At the end of the day, we have a reporter who has written an article about nonsense and taken them at their word while doing little to research our side. His 500 members (a lie and what little they do have are over 40), his activism (endorsing employers and even Democrats) and their quality are all questionable at best and a bit of research would display that. Once again, Robert plays the victim where there are no crimes because he has nothing else better to do.

18 Jan
2006
Posted in: Blog
By    1 Comment

Unless You’re Lead Dog, the View Never Changes:

Over the last couple of weeks I have spoken how America’s economy is much more resilient than its European counterparts. I pointed out how on average America’s developed economy has outpaced Europe continually in all categories from higher GDP growth to lower unemployment. If you recall one of the reasons I gave was because of the efficiency of our work force and the flexibility our government gives business to react quickly to a changing business environment. I said how Europe continues to struggle because business won’t take the risk in highering more employees when times improve because Europe’s labor laws have created a culture of inefficiency.

Today new economic data continue to prove this point. A global business organization, the Conference Board, reported figures for 2005 that showed the U.S. leading Europe when it comes to productivity growth. The report showed the U.S. had a 1.8% productivity growth rate compared to 0.5% in Europe. More startling is that over the last decade the U.S. has averaged 2.4% versus 1.4% in Europe.

One has to wonder at what point does European governments finally throw in the towel on their labor model and admit the U.S. has it right. Currently there are signs that they are trying like certain attempts to overturn the 35-hour workweek. Despite some voices of reason in their governments the socialist labor movement is still strong with a recent example being yesterdays protests against a move to try and liberalize European docks that would make them more productive. The protest, which turned violent, ended up costing hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages and now looks to be defeated.

Finally if you don’t believe what I have been saying about the benefits of a flexible labor force, just read what the Conference Board stated in their report:

“If Europe can stage an expected economic rebound, it might experience some acceleration in productivity growth. But in the longer run, productivity growth depends more strongly on the structural characteristics of the economy. These include the flexibility of labor and product markets, which foster the reallocation of labor and capital from less to more productive economic activities.”

If I didn’t know better I would say the Conference Board has been reading this blog. :)

17 Jan
2006
Posted in: Blog
By    1 Comment

That’s What I’m Talking About

“The question is whether you trivialize the suffering that people experienced on plantations by applying that word to a different setting,” [Dartmouth College Professor Linda Fowler] said. “It’s just really a question of appropriateness – making a connection between the badly treated Democrats in the House of Representatives and people who are enslaved against their will. It just seems like a stretch.”
I’ll say.
Actually, thanks Hil. A full-court press of several months by your media allies intended to convince America of your centrism, your moderation, your ability to play well with others hits the can after 30 seconds of you opening your friggin mouth and vibrating those lovely vocal chords of yours. I know it doesn’t matter much to your supporters, they agree; or to the press, as accurately reporting on your alternatively shrill and soulless comments would require actually listening to you and doesn’t fit the template of Bold Spirited Run for ’08 by Smartest Woman in America; but to us, your sensible opposition, our resolve stiffens even as the rest of us within earshot cringes.

Unlike the Sharpton-Baron ugliness, I was fortunate enough to attend the CORE King Holiday “Living the Dream” Celebration where citizens gathered to recognise honest progress with an optimistic determination to face existing problems and better our country; booed Belafonte’s most recent loathsome comments ; and honored, among others, Ambassador Bolton, Governor Barbour and the citizens of Mississippi (BTW, the Guv currently owns Most Unabashed Accent: I love how he can get “Mississippi” done in two syllables while “flood” requires four!), and Usher (! huge with the Kids I’m told, and looks about 12 himself).

17 Jan
2006
Posted in: Blog
By    4 Comments

A Woman’s Scorn:

By now we’ve all read or heard the Junior Senator from New York comments about how the house “has been run like a plantation, and you know what I’m talking about”. No actually I don’t and I don’t think any of those in attendance at her speech know either since none of them were ever slaves.

What I found interesting though was not her comment but what she meant by it. She went on to explain how “nobody with a contrary view has had a chance to present legislation, make an argument, to be heard”. This is where Senator Clinton and the rest of her party get it wrong. If the Senator would recall this nation was founded over a war on the issue of taxation without representation. The purpose of our Congressmen, Senators and even Councilmen is to represent the people of this country. To listen to those people and represent their view, not Hillary Clinton’s view in government.

If the Senator would also recall currently the majority of those citizens, some of whom she supposedly represents, in the last several elections voted by majority to have Republicans run the House, Senate and White House. So Senator though it pains you to admit it, the American people have spoken and said by giving Republicans complete control that they want them to draft the legislation, not you and other Democrats.

The confirmation of Judge Alito is another example why Americans gave Republicans the majority. The 2004 elections was not a referendum on the Iraq War as Democrats made it out to be but instead on the Supreme Court. Conservatives in this country came out in droves to vote to give President Bush over 50% of the vote, something Bill Clinton never got, because they wanted a conservative to pick the next judge if not two. And by President Bush picking Judge Roberts and Alito he is simply representing the 50% that voted him in and their wishes.

So Senator Clinton can complain all she wants about how she and her Democrat friends are in the minority because she’s right. What she’s wrong about is her opinion that it’s not what the American people want because every election since 1998 has shown otherwise.

17 Jan
2006
Posted in: Blog
By    1 Comment

This war in Iraq doesn’t look like a bad idea after all:

When it comes to foreign policy decisions by any government I tend to be a realist. Most of this stems from my sick infatuation with history, mostly military, where I have come to appreciate the chess moves made by every nation since the invention of the spear. For instance President McKinley annexed Hawaii in 1898 because of the behind the door urging of Admiral Alfred Mahan. Admiral Mahan told President McKinley he believed it necessary to annex Hawaii before the Japanese did, which would create a launching point for an invasion on the United States. At the time Americans and Europeans went crazy calling us imperialist hypocrites. At least we were right hypocrites as World War II would have not been pretty had Japan held Hawaii instead of us. Another one is President James Polk’s decision to start a war with Mexico to obtain California. Polk was an expansionist who saw the value in controlling the whole west coast. It is said he had his people come up with a case for war (sound familiar). The war happened, we won, controlled California turning it into the Liberal hot bed of America. How ironic that the liberals who attack the current administration for misleading the public on the war got their home state through the same methods. Besides getting Hollywood Polk’s decision to control the west coast was brilliant as it assured an invasion against us from the west would have to come by sea and it allowed us to control deep water ports on both sides of the country.

So where am I going with this? To today’s war in Iraq. Since the first days of the war all we have heard is “it’s all about the oil”. Well being the realist I’m going to say there probably right in a sense that it is one of the reason and with today’s events in Iran and Nigeria I’ll say it was a great foreign policy decision right up there with Hawaii and California. The truth is between America and Europe we consume over half the worlds oil. This oil is the blood of every economy in the world allowing everything to move. Unfortunately it’s also controlled by some of the most hostile nations in the world who are unstable politically.

Today the price of oil is moving again as Nigerian oil facilities have come under attack from militia and possible UN sanctions against Iran bring up the idea of a possible oil embargo. Between Nigeria and Iran they have enough oil combined to make them the fourth largest producers. If their oil were to come offline for any reason the effect on the world would be crippling, hence the reason oil traders are currently pricing in additional risk premium.

Is it possible by invading Iraq and installing a friendly democratic government the world has the benefit of increasing its supply of oil so it may act as a cushion if Nigeria, Iran, Venezuela or even Saudi Arabia goes offline? When you have a resource that is important to running the world, making sure it’s in the right hands is not a bad move in the world of foreign policy. Hell if you ever played Sid Meier’s Civilization you would know what I mean. It’s easy for liberals to call America imperialists until one day when Iran and other countries go off line and they’re standing there unable to heat their home. It’s like wondering where would Hollywood be if President Polk hadn’t given them that sunny coast to base their operations.

16 Jan
2006
Posted in: Blog
By    1 Comment

Munich

I ventured out this past weekend to take in Steven Spielberg’s film Munich, and I’m still not sure what I think of it. I can’t say it was a bad movie. I’ve always maintained that Spielberg is to motion pictures what Mozart was to music, and he is virtually unrivaled in his ability to stir the emotions of his audience. The movie has more than its fair share of action, suspense, and outright terror, which particularly comes across in the vivid recreation of the capture and murder of the Israeli Olympic team in Munich in 1972.

Unfortunately the further into the film I got, the more I sensed an agenda. There was a real message being communicated through the characters and their dialogue that dared to question the righteousness of the Israeli assassins who were ordered by Golda Meir’s government to avenge the cold-blooded murder of their countrymen. It made sense for the characters within the story to question their own motives and whether they were doing the right thing. When the results of your actions mean life and death, your morality is in constant conflict with your sense of duty, or at least it must be if you are to maintain your humanity.

However, as Munich proceeds toward its conclusion, Spielberg seems to be telling his audience that since the actions taken by the Israeli government did not stop the violence and bloodshed, the work itself was futile. And there’s a point where you’re made to think, “What’s the point? If you kill the terrorists, they will only be replaced by men who are more violent, more zealous.”

Well, then you will have to kill them too, I guess. It’s not the greatest way to go through life, but it’s better than being dead. The Palestinian terrorists and their affiliated groups throughout the Middle East deliberately sought attention through bloodshed. They would not be ignored then, and they certainly cannot be ignored now. They are committed to continuing the fight until either they or we are dead. They have forced our hand, and we cannot just turn away and hope the problem will just disappear.

Spielberg apparently doesn’t see it that way. He is one of the many liberals who believe they are above both the terrorists and those who fight them, choosing some vague third way that allows them to criticize everyone without getting themselves involved. And he goes so far out of his way to demonstrate this point that he offers up one of the biggest anachronistic gaffes in recent cinema history. In the film’s final panning shot of the New York’s 1973 skyline, we are treated to a view of the World Trade Center. It is a heavy handed symbolic statement that backs up this message of futility that we are treated to throughout the last half of the film. Of course, the World Trade Center was not completed until 1974. But if you’re going to view the world through a surrealistic prism, then you have the power to bend time and space to your wishes. It sometimes makes for good filmmaking, but never for sensible debate.

13 Jan
2006
Posted in: Blog
By    Comments Off

Charles Schumer is Watching You:

A CNET.com investigation has found that as certain members of Congress sit there and attack President Bush of spying on the American public they too are watching.

The representatives in question have been found to employ tracking cookies on their sites that can follow visitors around the Internet. One of those on the list is Senator Schumer who has been vocal on the issue of spying on Americans.

13 Jan
2006
Posted in: Blog
By    Comments Off

What, me — a hypocrite?

The jokes keep coming from good ol’ Teddy Kennedy. NewsMax is reporting that Kennedy is still a member of a Harvard social club that was kicked off campus for being discriminatory. But that’s just a minor detail….

13 Jan
2006
Posted in: Blog
By    Comments Off

Some Recent Economic Data to Support Tax-Cuts:

Economic data in the United States continue to prove that the Presidents tax-cuts are working.

Yesterday’s trade data showed that U.S. exports hit a record $109.3 billion. Where’s Lou Dobbs on that one?

Further the U.S. government reported a surplus for the month of December with gross corporate tax receipts hitting a record high! So isn’t that interesting how under Bush and his tax cuts corporate tax receipts are higher now then under the Clinton administration during the roaring 90’s!