Archive from January, 2006
12 Jan
2006
Posted in: Blog
By    Comments Off

Senate Democrats Are No Saints When it Comes to Abramoff

Consider this a sneak peak into Friday’s Federalist Patriot Digest:

We would suggest that DNC Chairman Howard Dean think before he speaks, but since he’s always good for a laugh when he doesn’t, we like him much better as he is now. His latest sound bite states that “every person named in this [Abramoff] scandal is a Republican.” And that would be true if you didn’t count the 40 Democrat Senators who have taken money from Jack Abramoff. Included in the list of Abramoff beneficiaries are Joseph Biden, Barbara Boxer, Hillary Clinton, Jon Corzine (like he needs the money), Byron Dorgan (at least $79,000), John Kerry (at least $98,000), Pat Leahy, rising star Barack Obama, and Chuck Schumer, who already has what may very well be the largest campaign war chest in Washington.

And there are a number of Democratic beneficiaries, like Minority Leader Harry Reid, who have no intention of returning the money they received from Abramoff because they maintain that the contributions were perfectly legal. So, according to the Democrats, the money they received from Abramoff is legal, but the money Republicans received was illegal. It must be tough being so perfect all the time.

The Federalist Patriot is read by over 500,000 subscribers every week. If you would like to read the full Friday Digest, and I heartily recommend you do, zip on over to www.patriotpost.us/subscribe. It’s Right and it’s Free.

12 Jan
2006

NYYRC Supports President’s Wiretap Authorization & Calls for Prosecution of Leaker

For Immediate Release
Contact: Jen Saunders
Email: pr@nyyrc.com

NEW YORK YOUNG REPUBLICAN CLUB, INC. SUPPORTS PRESIDENT BUSH’S WIRETAP AUTHORIZATION & CALLS FOR FULL PROSECUTION OF LEAK SOURCE

New York, NY (January 11, 2006): The New York Young Republican Club, Inc. (NYYRC) supports the President’s decision to allow National Security Agency (NSA) wiretaps of international phone calls involving persons with links to terrorism, in the United States without a court order. Russell Tice, a former NSA employee, admitted to ABC News yesterday that he was the source of the NY Times article, which exposed the NSA wiretaps.

NYYRC President Dennis Cariello said, “For our own protection, we need to allow the government to do what is necessary to track down these terrorists before they can strike again within our borders. If the NSA has the ability to intercept an al Qaeda order to a terror cell in New York and prevent another September 11th, we should allow our Government to exercise that option and protect us.”

President Cariello remarked, “Considering all of the calls from the left for an investigation into the Valerie Plame case, I find it interesting that they are now regarding Mr. Tice as a “whistleblower” and a hero. Congress enacted the whistleblower law so that employees, who had concerns of illegal activity, could bring them to Congress. Mr. Tice, however, decided to go to the NY Times instead.”

The New York Young Republican Club supports the investigation into the source of the leak and calls on the Justice Department to fully prosecute anyone who illegally leaked information to the media.

The New York Young Republican Club, Inc., is a not-for-profit political organization that exists to bring Republicans aged 18-40 together to discuss the Republican Party platform and aid the Republican in the education of the public about the Republican agenda and the promotion of Republican candidates for office. To find out more about the New York Young Republican Club, Inc. please visit the Website at http://www.nyyrc.com.

Jen Saunders
Public Relations Chair
New York Young Republican Club, Inc.
www.nyyrc.com

12 Jan
2006
Posted in: Blog
By    Comments Off

NYYRC Welcomes Journalist Claudia Rosett To Their January 2006 Meeting

For Immediate Release
Contact: Jen Saunders
Email: PR@nyyrc.com
MEDIA ADVISORY:

THE NEW YORK YOUNG REPUBLICAN CLUB, INC.
WELCOMES JOURNALIST CLAUDIA ROSETT TO THEIR JANUARY 2006 MEETING

New York, NY (January 11, 2006) The New York Young Republican Club will hold their first general meeting of 2006 on Thursday, January 19. The featured speaker will be Claudia Rosett, Journalist-in-Residence at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and contributor to the Opinion Journal.

During her 22 years as a journalist and editor, Ms. Rosett has covered historic events around the world, including Tiananmen Square, the war in Chechnya and the collapse of the Soviet-installed regime in Kabul. Her column for the Wall Street Journal’s Opinion Journal, “The Real World,” examines human rights and tyranny issues.

Ms. Rosett was awarded the Seventh Annual Eric Breindel Award for Excellence in Opinion Journalism for her coverage of the UN Oil-for-Food scandal. She received widespread praise from her colleagues for her reporting of the issue. New York Times columnist William Safire remarked in Nov. 2004 “Thanks to Claudia Rosett, an enterprising reporter, the world now knows that some information put out by Secretary-General Kofi Annan about his son’s involvement is untrue.”

The January meeting will also feature the annual State of the Club address from President Dennis Cariello.

Please join the New York Young Republican Club, Inc. at the Union League Club, located at 38 East 37th Street, on Thursday, January 19, 2006, beginning at 7PM.

This event will be open to the media that RSVP by January 16th at PR@nyyrc.com.

Business attire required.

The New York Young Republican Club, Inc., is a not-for-profit political organization that exists to bring Republicans aged 18-40 together to discuss the Republican Party platform and aid the Republican Party in the education of the public about the Republican agenda and the promotion of Republican candidates for office. To find out more about the New York Young Republican Club, Inc. please visit the Website at http://www.nyyrc.com.

Jen Saunders
Public Relations Chair
New York Young Republican Club, Inc.
www.nyyrc.com

12 Jan
2006
Posted in: Blog
By    Comments Off

NYYRC Calls on Sen. Clinton to Denounce Belafonte’s Comments

For Immediate Release, January 12, 2006
Contact: Jen Saunders
Email: pr@nyyrc.com

THE NEW YORK YOUNG REPUBLICAN CLUB, INC. CALLS ON SENATOR CLINTON TO DENOUNCE HARRY BELAFONTE’S COMMENTS ON BUSH

(New York, NY) The New York Young Republican Club, Inc. (NYYRC) calls on Senator Hillary Clinton to denounce singer Harry Belafonte’s recent remark that President Bush is “the greatest terrorist in the world.”

Senator Clinton is scheduled to appear with Belafonte at a Children’s Defense Fund luncheon on January 12 honoring Susan Thomases -a longtime friend of the Clintons’ who was investigated in the Whitewater probe.

Clinton has previously offered support to Belafonte’s anti-American rhetoric. According to Newsmax.com, on September 22, 2005, Belafonte told the Congressional Black Caucus that “Our foreign policy has made a wreck of this planet.” Clinton’s response to his outrageous speech: ‘What Harry said is so important.” At this same event, Rep. Rangel compared President Bush to the racist ‘Bull’ Connor.

NYYRC President Dennis Cariello stated, “If Senator Clinton is going to make public appearances with Belafonte, she owes it to her constituency to denounce Mr. Belafonte’s outrageous statements against the President.” He continued, “Otherwise, she should be held to account for such views, as if they were her own.”

The New York Young Republican Club, Inc., is a not-for-profit political organization that exists to bring Republicans aged 18-40 together to discuss the Republican Party platform and aid the Republican in the education of the public about the Republican agenda and the promotion of Republican candidates for office. To find out more about the New York Young Republican Club, Inc. please visit the Website at http://www.nyyrc.com.

Jen Saunders
Public Relations Chair
New York Young Republican Club, Inc.
www.nyyrc.com

12 Jan
2006
Posted in: Blog
By    Comments Off

An “Unflappable Witness”:

The Financial Times (only the best paper in the world and yes it’s pink) is reporting in an article that “the signs suggest that the sheer weight of his [Judge Alito] worthy if tedious performances will eventually crush the opposition”

It’s a great article and you should check it out before they lock it up to subscribers only.

11 Jan
2006
Posted in: Blog
By    1 Comment

The Jokes Keep Coming

Well, Nick, if you were laughing at Schumer yesterday, you certainly had to continue to laugh today. Teddy Kennedy’s idle threats to have votes again and again to subpoena William Rusher’s papers at the Library of Congress and Specter’s response was classic. I don’t know how Specter kept from getting up and smacking him upside the head Homey the Clown-style throughout that exchange. I would have. heh.

Seriously, though, it was nice to see the RINO senator stand up to Baby Huey….my goodness, I think he beat out your son in the “Throwing the Biggest Tantrum” department….

11 Jan
2006
Posted in: Blog
By    Comments Off

Trying to Keep Good Kids Down:

With Governor Pataki’s reign over New York coming to end, he has shown that he wants to go out with a bang. His most recent plan is to throw his support behind tuition tax breaks for parents who choose to send their children to private school.

As you can imagine the left has already rallied behind the United Federation of Teachers (UFT) Randi Weingarten who has come out swinging against the plan. The lefts complaint is that the Governor’s plan for tax credits is really just another way to pass school vouchers. Now I’m not going to argue with the Queen of the Damned because she’s right.

However instead of fighting with the left and Ms. Weingarten wasting energy on why it’s not a voucher, the Governor should be taking it to the people why vouchers or tax credits are not a religious conspiracy but a chance for children from lower income households to raise their chances of succeeding in the future. Unfortunately there is allot of people living in New York that, may I dare say it, believe in God and would love the opportunity to send their children to a private school but can’t do so because of the cost. With the program that the Governor is looking to implement it will open up the possibility for those inner city kids to get out of the schools that currently damn them to a future of mediocrity and into an environment of discipline, faith and culture of success. These three characteristics are the reasons why the Kennedy’s are the Kennedy’s, the Bush’s are the Bush’s and every other successful wealthy family’s children generally succeed in life. Success breeds success and that is something our public school currently doesn’t do as well as our private. It’s amazing how the party of the left that supposedly is there to champion the upward movement of the lower class fights hard to not allow the one thing that would give their base the best chance of upward social mobility. The Governor needs to go to the people of New York and ask them how come the Democrat party and its instance on the redistribution of the wealth doesn’t support the one time it makes sense. For the left to only allow the upper class the benefit of a private education is discrimination at its finest.

For me the obvious reason why the UFT doesn’t support the program is because they view it as a threat to their monopoly and continuous subsidizing of mediocrity by the taxpayers. A tuition break program would actually give more New Yorkers a choice of where to send their children. As we have experienced in business and politics, choices breed competition and competition breeds efficiency and quality, something the UFT couldn’t handle.

For the Democrat party their objection is just a result of their understanding that as people in society become successful they tend to become conservative as they now have something to conserve. A tuition break program would make lower income children successful in the future and as a result hurt the Democrat base. By keeping them chained to the current system they can predict those children will remain low on the ladder and dependent on the party.

11 Jan
2006
Posted in: Blog
By    4 Comments

re: The Great Cable TV Debate

[I think I wrote too much in the response area earlier and it never published…the window froze…so here are my thoughts….]

I don’t know….being the TV junkie that I am, I like the fact that I have a bundled basic package with the option to add any of the premium channels at an extra cost. Yes, there are a lot of unnecessary channels — most of which I don’t watch — but on the other hand, there are many channels that I’ve discovered because they’re there and I stumbled upon them while channel surfing. They’re the ones that I normally don’t watch but every so often they’ll have a show or a movie I’m interested in, like We or National Geographic or Spike (and now there’s the new Sleuth TV that airs the old Knight Rider; hours of Hoffy!!)

Concern #1: I have about 20 or so favorite channels. How much, on an ala carte basis, is TimeWarner going to charge me? If they’re ripping me off now, is it going to cost me a gazillion dollars to just have those channels? Is Congress going to step in and set a pricing guideline to ‘protect’ me from getting ripped off? Oh, I just love the sound of that.

Concern #2: I have a roommate. So, on an ala carte basis, we’re going to have to sit down and figure out who wants what channels and that can lead to stupid arguments like, “Well, I would kill myself before paying for the Fox News Channel, so if you want that, you’re going to have to pay for it.” And then I’d come back with, “Well, I’m not paying for VH1, MTV and Sundance Channel, so you pay for that.” Heaven forbid one of gets caught watching someone else’s channel.

I understand parents with young children don’t want to pay for smut, but there are other ways to prevent kids from watching certain channels….and, let’s face it, when we were kids we all had friends whose houses you knew you could go to to watch the stuff you weren’t allowed to at your home, so who’s kidding who.

At the end of the day, this America — land of excess, where we have more channels than we know what to do with and waste most of what we’re paying for. That’s what we do, that’s what makes us great. Do we want to sit there, like in England, with ABC1, ABC2, ABC3, ABC4? Bo-ring….(and far more smutty than most of what we’ve got on tv)

The better solution is some good, healthy competition. No government intervention or regulation. Look at the mess that was made of the telecoms…..

At least here in Manhattan, some people have a choice of TimeWarner or RCN. Most people don’t have that and that’s why Cablevision, Comcast, TimeWarner, etc., etc., can rip you off. Government shouldn’t be involved. All government should do is mandate that all markets are open and let the consumer decide which service he wants. Let the cable companies compete by offering packages or ala carte options, or both, and let the consumer decide which company will provide him with the service he wants. This is America. Let the consumer decide what’s best for him, not the cable companies and certainly not the government.

10 Jan
2006
Posted in: Blog
By    2 Comments

The Great Cable TV Debate

An argument is fast approaching in Congress about what to do with cable and satellite television pricing. As eloquently described in the Christian Science Monitor, there are two schools of thought:

whether paying for TV channels should be like shopping at the supermarket, where customers choose the products they purchase, or like buying a newspaper, which comes packaged with the same sports, business, and comics sections regardless of whether readers want them all.

And since we’re all slaves to the Tube, this is a pretty darn important argument. So if you don’t think you have an opinion on this, you better get one.

Personally I hate the idea of paying for something I don’t use. Like for instance, cable TV in general. I’m rarely home, and when I am, it’s generally in front of a computer. I get my news and information from the Internet, I get my movies from Netflix, and I get my TV from whatever I can tune in with a pair of rabbit ears and a roll of tin foil. Time Warner, Cablevision, and their dastardly posse of overpriced pawn brokers can go pound sand for all I care.

When I did subscribe to cable, I always felt that I was getting the shaft for having to pay for some 65 to 70 channels when I only really watched nine or ten. For years I pined for a subscriber service that allowed me to pay for only the channels I wanted to watch.

Now, the opponents of the pay-for-what-you-watch idea have a number of reasons why people should continue to pay more to watch less. Among them, the cable companies claim you will actually pay a higher bill if they switch from the current bundled pricing system to the a la carte model. But they’ll find any excuse they can to raise rates.

Supporters of minority programming claim that Latino and African-American programming will suffer because they will not be able to reach enough viewers. Basically, what they’re telling us is if white households aren’t getting Tavis Smiley, then he’ll be kicked off the air. This is a specious argument. Engaging programming and willing audiences will always find each other in the entertainment marketplace.

Thanks to technology we live in an age when we can tailor our entertainment options down to the finest detail. We can creat our own music mixes of our favorite artists. We can DVR our favorite TV programs without commercials. We can train our satellite radios to play only our favorite songs. Why shouldn’t we be allowed to pick and choose the cable stations we want on our dial?

10 Jan
2006
Posted in: Blog
By    Comments Off

Chuck Schumer: The Champion of all…Democrats:

Listening to Senator Schumer attack Judge Alito, I have to laugh. Does anyone really take anything Democrats say during this hearing serious? You have to be from another planet to look at these hearings and not think that the questioning of Judge Alito is nothing more then a left-wing attack. I would give Schumer some credit for champion the concerns of the left against a conservative judge if he showed those same concerns for the conservative New Yorkers who didn’t vote for him who feel with his election they are not being represented the way liberals are concerned that they won’t be represented if Judge Altio is appointed.

Finally what’s with Ted Kennedy bringing up a search case that Jude Alito ruled on where officers were accused of using excessive force on a family? How can Ted Kennedy sit there and talk about the “scars of a child”. Who is this guy to judge; last I checked Judge Alito never drove off a bridge with a suspended license leaving a young girl to drown while he saved his own life.