Articles by " Public Relations"
12 Feb
Posted in: Uncategorized
By    Comments Off

Tough Love for the Right – by Brian M.

Dear Republicans,

            Please stop falling prey to standard liberal “gotcha” questions.  It’s embarrassing, predictable, and destructive to your credibility.  Do your homework, or don’t run for office.  Here are a few examples of what I am talking about along with suggested responses and some bonus color commentary:

            Question 1:  Do you believe in evolution?

            Example of a bad answer:  Gov. Scott Walker replied, “I’m going to punt on that one…I believe in the evolution of trade in Wisconsin.”

            Good answer:  Yes.  I also believe that human life on Earth is a miracle.

Commentary:  [Forehead smack.]  The governor’s instinct was to give a diplomatic nod to religious conservatives.  The problem is that this instinct can lead to alienating many voters unnecessarily.  To borrow a sentiment from Ghostbuster Winston Zeddemore, when someone asks you if you [believe in evolution], you say YES.  Even popes have been comfortable discussing evolution since at least 1950.  In that conversation, they have acknowledged that species have undergone physical changes over time, and they have simply separated the body from the soul.  You can be religious and recognize reality.  It’s not that hard.

            Question 2:  Do parents have to vaccinate their kids?

Example of a bad answer:  Sen. Rand Paul said parents should have some degree of choice in the question of whether to vaccinate their kids because of cases where mental disorders have allegedly resulted from vaccines.

Good answer:  Yes, except for certain cases meeting criteria for medical exceptions, i.e. compromised immunities or allergies.

Commentary:  The senator’s instinct was to be consistent since he is a libertarian-minded guy.  The problems are that (1) the research at the foundation of the anti-vaccine movement is obsolete and has been debunked by international studies with millions of subjects, and (2) failing to vaccinate carries externalities, i.e. exposing other kids to diseases like the measles that were essentially eradicated.  If someone asks you if [parents should vaccinate their kids], you say YES.

Question 3:  Do you believe in climate change?

Bad answer:  Congressman Don Young said, “I believe this is the biggest scam since Teapot Dome.”

            Good answer:  I support cleaner air and cleaner water.  The question is what sorts of policies balance environmental concerns and economic security.  That is why I support an all-of-the-above energy policy where we explore for oil while simultaneously developing alternative fuels.  It does not have to be one or the other.

            Commentary:  The left and the media have put politicians into boxes as either deniers or believers.  The Pentagon, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and other credible sources tell us that pollution from fossil fuels harms the environment.  Denying that fact destroys candidates’ credibility, especially with swing voters, and so they should stop doing it.  And, fighting over whether the climate is or is not changing is a distracting side show.  Where right-leaning candidates can catch their opponents on their heels is when they ask, “So what should we do?”  That is when the real debate begins because candidates must make choices that balance economic interests with environmental ones.  The good news is that candidates can deliver a positive message on this issue by an embracing an “all of the above” energy policy.  [Note:  This does not mean that anyone should condone fudging data or that some in the environmental movement are not credible.  It also does not mean that it is a good idea for the government to hand out tax dollars to failing companies like Solyndra.]

            Candidates, I hope that you will take these tips as they are intended – to be helpful in raising the level of political discourse in America as we enter the critical 2016 campaign cycle.



4 Feb
Posted in: Uncategorized
By    Comments Off

Talking Points for The Week

by Staff

Happy February! It’s cold outside, but, considering recent events, your political discussions will likely be very heated. Here are your talking points.

Netanyahu’s Congressional Address:
• Last week, Speaker of the House Boehner invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to address a joint session of Congress and speak about the threats posed by a nuclear Iran.
• The White House complained the invitation was a “breach of protocol,” as foreign policy is assigned to the Executive Branch pursuant to the Constitution.
• There has been no progress in Iranian negotiations for years, only repeatedly delayed deadlines. Congress is considering a bi-partisan bill which ratchets up sanctions on Iran. Israel faces an existential threat if Iran gets the bomb – Netanyahu’s address is both necessary and appropriate.
• While Netanyahu is here, Obama won’t meet with him. His schedule is simply too packed, according to the White House.
• Oh, and just for those folks still complaining – let’s not forget that the President invited South Korean President Lee Myung-bak to address Congress in 2011…without asking Speaker Boehner.

So That’s How You Take Swift Action Against ISIS:
• ISIS (the jayvee team, according to POTUS) recently killed a captured Jordanian fighter pilot, Moath al-Kasasbeh, by burning him alive.
• In response the Jordanian government quickly executed two jihadist prisoners. Jordan’s King Abdullah is ticked, and in a meeting with the members of the House Armed Services committee started quoting Clint Eastwood’s flick The Untouchables.

Robin Hood Budget:
In the past few days, Obama submitted his proposed budget to congress.
• The Obama budget would contain $2.1 trillion in new taxes (although the administration cited lower gas prices as an economic boost similar to a tax cut, they believe a tax increase of $2.1 trillion on businesses and the wealthy would help the economy.)
• The Budget proposed has no chance of being adopted by Congress, but it gives us some insight into the President’s priorities. The proposal indicates that President Obama believes the midterm election meant nothing, and he does not want to “find common ground”. Hence Obama is giving the middle finger to the voters who sent him a message in November, telling America the era of bigger government is not over.
• A recent analysis of the budget predicts that taxes will actually increase on people making between $49,000 and $84,000 – the same middle class folks Obama sought to help in his State of the Union. Only 12.5% of middle class singles would see a tax decrease. Only 10% of elderly taxpayers receive a tax cut under this budget. Most elderly people would pay an additional $152.
• Under this budget proposal, the federal death tax would increase from 40% to 60% on the inheritance’s capital gains, and capital gains taxes on dividends (money that has already been taxed once) would increase from 23.8% to 28%.
• The majority of people that would benefit from “tax cuts/credits” under the proposal pay no federal income taxes anyway. In other words, they would be receiving additional “welfare” through Obama’s proposed tax “credits.”
• All of the new tax revenue will be used for “welfare” tax credits, infrastructure spending, and free community college. On top of that, an additional $474 billion will be added to the deficit as a result of the increased spending.
• The proposal would raise the national debt to $26 trillion by 2025.
• The additional spending includes $48 billion for green energy interests that supported Obama’s re-election as well as $2 trillion for the costs of Obamacare.

The Republicans’ Quest for the 2016 Candidate:
• All factions of the GOP are looking for their perfect candidate. There never will be a candidate that every faction will agree with 100% of the time. The prime characteristic that the factions neglect when vetting candidates is charisma.
• When electability, charisma, and personality are not properly considered, we are dealt candidates who cannot win races that the GOP should not lose. Examples include Doug Hoffman, the uninspiring tea party candidate in New York’s 23rd congressional district in 2009 or the Christine O’Donnell “I am not a witch” disaster of the 2012 Delaware Senate campaign.
• It is time for the partisan talking heads, tea partiers, and the establishment to consider and accept that a candidate with charisma, high likability factor, and 85% policy agreement is a better pick than a candidate without charisma and likability, but agrees 100%.
• We must stop fighting within the party over a meaningless 15%, especially when the candidate with a 100% agreeable rating essentially has a 0% chance of winning. Now is the time for all groups within the GOP to gain some perspective and to realize that a candidate who cannot win, is not a candidate.

Romney for President III (not gonna happen):
• 2012 GOP Presidential nominee Mitt Romney recently announced that he will not seek the party’s nomination in 2016. Governor Romney is a good man and would have made a good President. But it is time for the GOP to move forward and nominate someone new.  To win back the White House, the Republican voters need to select a candidate that is not only articulate and charismatic, but has also demonstrated that he/she is willing to fight and do what is required to defeat the democrat party that will undoubtably sink to unthinkable levels to win.

BallGhazi! Deflated Footballs:
• The New England Patriots and their quarterback, Tom Brady, were accused of illegally deflating footballs to gain an advantage over their opponents. This professional sports controversy, two pounds of air in a football, caused a greater mainstream media firestorm than the Benghazi cover-up, the IRS scandal, and ObamaCare’s disastrous “unintended” consequences, combined.

Quote of the Week
“Prison is a Socialist’s Paradise, where equality prevails, everything is supplied, and competition is eliminated.” – Elbert Hubbard

22 Jan
Posted in: Uncategorized
By    Comments Off

State of the Union Follow Up

Last night President Obama delivered his sixth State of the Union address. The following is the one of our blogger’s response to the President’s remarks.

“But tonight, we turn the page.”

The Blog: Unfortunately, the same words are on the next page.

“Our unemployment rate is now lower than it was before the financial crisis.”

The Blog: Unfortunately, the workforce participation rate is still the lowest it has been since President Carter was in office, and the median household income is 5.7% lower than it was in 2000.

“More of our kids are graduating than ever before”

The Blog: But they can’t find jobs. The youth jobless rate is around 48% according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

“More of our people are insured than ever before.”

The Blog: But insurance is more expensive and covers fewer procedures.

“We are as free from the grip of foreign oil as we’ve been in almost 30 years.”

The Blog: Despite the administration denying and delaying drilling permits for domestic energy exploration.

“Our combat mission in Afghanistan is over.”

The Blog: Because the president said so – not because we have defeated the bad guys.

“Today, fewer than 15,000 remain (in Iraq and Afghanistan).”

The Blog: Which is why ISIS now governs vast territory in Iraq and Syria, and beheads people with impunity.

“We’ve made strides towards ensuring that every veteran has access to the highest quality care.”

The Blog: False. Has he forgotten the problems at the VA?

“Thanks to lower gas prices and higher fuel standards, the typical family this year should save $750 at the pump.”

The Blog: Actually thanks to Saudi Arabia’s manipulating the price of oil to below $60/barrel in an effort to bankrupt American shale oil companies.

“Our deficits cut by two-thirds.”

The Blog: Because one-time bail outs were not repeated. Actually, the national debt has increased under President Obama more than all the other presidents combined.

“Send me a bill that gives every worker in America the opportunity to earn seven days of paid sick leave.”

The Blog: First, the vast majority of businesses already offer paid sick leave. The ones who do not are typically service industry positions. As a practical matter, this just means that paid holidays will be reduced.

“Congress still needs to pass a law that makes sure a woman is paid the same as a man for doing the same work.”

The Blog: That has been the law since the 1960s. This is a purely political talking point that ignores the reality that women often take time out of the workforce to raise a family. Even the White House does not pay women the same on on average for this same reason.

“If you truly believe you could work full-time and support a family on less than $15,000 a year, go try it.”

The Blog: First, people who make minimum wage make up a minuscule portion of the workforce, and at least half of those are kids working their first job where they are either seasonal, or are promoted soon after starting. We are talking about 1% of the workforce. And almost all of minimum wage workers are not the primary earner in their household. Furthermore, if someone only makes $15,000, they are also collecting public benefits the equivalent of tens of thousands of dollars in additional income. Finally, increasing the minimum wage will make it more expensive to hire people, and thus harder for kids entering the workforce to get that first job.

“We still need laws that strengthen rather than weaken unions.”

The Blog: Right to work states have seen jobs arrive and wages increase – not states with strong collective bargaining laws. Eight of the top ten states for economic and employment growth are right to work states whereas the bottom ten are all non-right to work states.

“We still live in a country where too many bright, striving Americans are priced out of the education they need.”

The Blog: Thanks to Government subsidies, the cost of education has increased more than twice the rate of inflation, and federal loan programs have higher interest rates, thus charging students more, than private loans.

“21st century businesses need 21st century infrastructure – modern ports, stronger bridges, faster trains and the fastest internet.”

The Blog: Union jobs, union jobs, union jobs, and union jobs.

“Let’s set our sights higher than a single oil pipeline.”

The Blog: Why not build that pipeline, too? The Keystone Pipeline project would create 42,000 jobs.

“More than half of manufacturing executives have said they’re actively looking at bringing jobs back from China.”

The Blog: But they are unable because American taxes and regulations are not competitive.

Our diplomacy is at work with respect to Iran, where, for the first time in a decade, we’ve halted the progress of its nuclear program”

The Blog: False. Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium has increased since 2009, and production has surged since 2013.

“Last month, we launched a new spacecraft as part of a re-energized space program that will send American astronauts to Mars.”

The Blog: This was years behind schedule because the President dismantled the existing space program and voluntarily ceded American dominance of the final frontier.

“No challenge – no challenge – poses a greater threat to future generations than climate change”

The Blog: Nuclear war? Radical Islamic Terrorism? Bill Bellichek?

“China committed, for the first time, to limiting their emissions.”

The Blog:  No they did not. They agreed to consider it. If China and India do not seriously curb emissions, no real progress will be made on cleaner air, no matter how much we tie our own hands economically.

“(The shift in U.S. Cuba relations) stands up for democratic values.”
The Blog: Cuba is a communist country that exhibits the exact opposite of democratic values.

There are no guarantees that negotiations will succeed, and I keep all options on the table to prevent a nuclear Iran. But new sanctions passed by this Congress, at this moment in time, will all but guarantee that diplomacy fails – alienating America from its allies; and ensuring that Iran starts up its nuclear program again. It doesn’t make sense. That is why I will veto any new sanctions bill that threatens to undo this progress.

The Blog: Just to be clear, you’re saying sanctions don’t work right?

Our shift in Cuba policy has the potential to end a legacy of mistrust in our hemisphere; removes a phony excuse for restrictions in Cuba; stands up for democratic values; and extends the hand of friendship to the Cuban people. And this year, Congress should begin the work of ending the embargo.

The Blog: Ok, got it now. Sanctioning Cuba with an embargo wasn’t a good idea. Totally clear now.

Last year, as we were doing the hard work of imposing sanctions along with our allies, some suggested that Mr. Putin’s aggression was a masterful display of strategy and strength. Well, today, it is America that stands strong and united with our allies, while Russia is isolated, with its economy in tatters.

The Blog: So, ummmm, sanctions worked? Hooray for sanctions????

“Over the past six years, the pundits have pointed out more than once that my presidency hasn’t delivered on this vision (of a united country). How ironic, they say, that our politics seems more divided than ever. It’s held up as proof not just of my own flaws — of which there are many — but also as proof that the vision itself is misguided, and naïve, and that there are too many people in this town who actually benefit from partisanship and gridlock for us to ever do anything about it.”

The Blog: Um, yeah that’s right.

9 Jan
Posted in: Uncategorized
By    Comments Off

We Fought the Bloody British in the Town of New Orleans

By: Chris C.


The War of 1812 provided many low points for our young republic. We had suffered multiple defeats including the embarrassing burning of our capitol. There was doubt that we would survive as an independent nation. Morale and patriotism were low throughout the states despite moments such as our victory at Fort McHenry. On December 24, 1814, we signed the Treaty of Ghent which was to end hostilities, and restore pre-war borders with the British. However, news of this cessation in hostilities did not reach New Orleans before one final showdown.

The British had been preparing to invade and seize New Orleans for weeks as this was an area of vital strategic importance on the Mississippi River. General Andrew Jackson realized the significance of holding the city and region. Consequently, he dug in with his army comprised of volunteer militia, army regulars, freed blacks, Indians, sailors, and pirates. Jackson was in command of approximately 4,500 men and it was an outfit as diverse as the nation itself. Following two weeks of move and counter move, the British planned a massive assault on the American earthworks. On January 8, 1815, the British preceded their attack with artillery and Congreve rockets in an attempt to weaken the defenses, and instill fear in Jackson’s men.  The Americans were unperturbed, and they stopped the onslaught of 7,500 British regulars. In the battle, lasting approximately a half hour, the Americans inflicted over 2,500 casualties and only suffered 71. New Orleans thus became the greatest American land victory of the war.


News of the victory reached the public concurrently with the news of the Treaty of Ghent. Consequently, many Americans mistakenly believed that the victory was the impetus for the peace. The victory caused a groundswell of pride and patriotism throughout our young republic. The Battle of New Orleans was seen as winning our independence from Britain a second time.  January 8th became a celebrated date for our country. Andrew Jackson became an instant celebrity as the “Hero of New Orleans,” and this fame would eventually propel him to the White House. The victory at New Orleans solidified our identity as an independent nation, and prompted unity across the country that hadn’t been seen since the Revolution. This week marks the  200th anniversary of the battle, we should remember the sacrifices made ensure our freedom, and exhibit pride and patriotism as our countrymen did on January 8, 1815.

29 Dec
Posted in: Uncategorized
By    Comments Off

Bush And Rubio Constitutionally Barred From Running On The Same Ticket

by Brian M.


Two of the most talked about presidential hopefuls are Sen. Marco Rubio and former Gov. Jeb Bush, both of Florida, which is a crucial swing state. Many would love to see them on the same ticket in 2016. Here is one reason why they probably won’t be:

United States Constitution Article II section 1 states, “The Electors shall meet in their respective State, and vote by Ballot for two Persons, of whom one at least shall not be an Inhabitant of the same State with themselves.” (emphasis added).

Therefore, Bush and Rubio cannot be on the same ticket and expect to receive the unified electoral vote of their crucial home state.

Of course, there is an easy fix. One of them could become an Inhabitant of a different state. In this case, because Rubio is a sitting senator and Bush is a former governor, Bush is the more likely of the two to change his residency. Not to mention, his former-presidents father and brother live in Texas along with his son (all named George), and the family vacation compound is in Kennebunkport, Maine. So, he has options.
It would just be unusual for the former governor of a state to be voting for himself for president in a different state.
There’s your constitutional conundrum for the day, both presented and solved. Enjoy.
24 Dec
Posted in: Uncategorized
By    Comments Off

The Other Christmas Miracle

By C.T.


It is a fact that is frequently overlooked and one that is often taken for granted; that America almost never was. Our country may have never been but for the stormy Christmas night of 1776. If not for this other Christmas miracle, our nation would not be here today. At the time, the Revolution was going poorly with defeats piling up and limited victories. Morale in the Continental Army and across the colonies was low, and success was looking more unlikely by the day.

1776 was a tumultuous year for our fledgling nation. There were the highs of forcing the British to evacuate Boston and our formal Declaration of Independence; and there was absolute low of being driven from Long Island and New York City. The Continental Army barely escaped. After fleeing from New York, the army was pushed across New Jersey and forced across the Delaware River into Pennsylvania. Our ability to beat the British militarily was very much in doubt. It was from this position of weakness that General George Washington knew he had to be bold to infuse new life into his army and save our cause.

Washington knew he needed to act before the new year since many militia enlistments were due to expire. At his winter headquarters in Pennsylvania, Washington received intelligence reports of a Hessian encampment in Trenton, New Jersey. He decided on a daring plan to cross the Delaware River on Christmas night and take the Hessians by surprise the following morning. Washington hoped a victory here would be the spark needed to save his army and the cause.

Washington’s plan was to begin crossing the river at nightfall; complete the crossing by midnight; and attack the Hessians just before dawn. Washington would cross the river at McKonkey’s Ferry with the main body of 2,400 troops and 18 cannons. Two smaller forces were slated to cross at other points on the river. Under the best circumstances, a river crossing, night march, and surprise attack would be extremely difficult for Washington’s ill equipped army. Christmas night 1776 brought the added challenge of a harsh winter storm. Washington’s plan hit an immediate snag when many of the soldiers did not arrive to cross the river until well after dark. On top of this delay, the crossing itself was slowed by the ice choked river. As the crossing progressed, the weather proceeded to deteriorate. The boatmen were hampered by strong currents, winds and a blinding combination of rain, sleet, and snow. These conditions forced the two smaller forces to scrap their crossing and caused Washington to question continuing with his, but he was committed to seeing it through. Three hours behind schedule the crossing was completed at 3 A.M. Despite the conditions of the crossing, once on the New Jersey side of the Delaware, the army assembled and performed flawlessly. By 8 A.M., the army had reached Trenton, and the attack began. The Hessians were caught by surprise, and the Patriots achieved a resounding victory. In the attack, Washington’s army suffered only nine casualties while inflicting 120 and capturing over 1,000 Hessians. This victory instilled new confidence in the army and its commander.

While Washington crossing the Delaware and subsequently winning the battle of Trenton did not win the Revolution outright, it did save our cause. The bold maneuver to cross the Delaware River on Christmas night 1776 brought an invaluable morale boost to our Army and news of our victories restored hope to Patriots nationwide. It would take five more years to finally defeat the British at Yorktown, but we wouldn’t have gotten that far if Washington hadn’t made it across the Delaware on Christmas night. Having to overcome severe weather and logistical nightmares to make it happen, the crossing was nothing short of a miracle. This Christmas (and every Christmas) it is important to remember how close our country was to losing it all, and the sacrifices that were made to make us a nation.

15 Dec
Posted in: Uncategorized
By    Comments Off

The CRomnibus Is Not Good, But There Is Hope For Change in 2015

by Brian M.

Congress passed a $1.1 trillion spending bill this weekend over the objections of many conservatives and liberals. It is not a good bill, but not because of the reasons liberals offer. It is also not quite the disaster that conservatives think it is. The bottom line is that taxpayers should not be excited by this bill, but they have reason to be optimistic about the future.

First, according to conservatives, the CRomnibus is bad because it temporarily funds the president’s priorities, including his unconstitutional and unilateral immigration action. They rightly argue that no matter what you think about the merits of the President’s policy, as an American, you should be outraged that the President is legislating from the White House, ignoring the system of checks and balances established by our founders. This bill temporarily (until February 27, 2015) allows this policy to proceed.

It is also bad because conservatives rightly point out that it is a pork-laden $1.1 trillion monstrosity when we are already $18 trillion in debt, without accounting for tens of trillions in unfunded liabilities.

Finally, Republicans campaigned against bills, like this one, that are 1,600 pages long, give piles of favors to special interests, and need to be passed to see what’s in them. This appears to fly directly in the face of those promises, and that is bad for taxpayers.

Not only do conservatives dislike this bill, liberal Democrats also oppose it. But, they oppose it for two nonsensical, purely-cosmetic reasons.

First, led by Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts, liberals lit their hair on fire because of the elimination of the so-called “derivative push-out” provision of the Dodd-Frank Act. This is a red herring, a virtual non-issue. It previously passed the House with almost 300 votes, and former Fed Chair Ben Bernanke said that it was difficult to implement and did not ensure the security of our financial system. It has almost no real effect on derivatives trading, which is legitimately used not only by big banks, but also by small banks and agricultural businesses and others to hedge commodity-related risk. It simply requires banks to perform these trades through spin-off companies that are not federally insured. To the extent that losses were insured in the past, those losses were recouped by the government in short order. Despite its relative insignificance, it was seized upon as a lighting rod by liberal Democrats claiming that it will lead to future “bail-outs” of Wall Street banks – a purely political statement to raise the profile of Sen. Warren as she weighs a potential presidential bid.

Second, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi and others lamented a campaign finance reform provision that increased donation limits to political parties – a provision crafted by Democrat Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s lawyer, Marc Elias. In reality, the provision shifts the costs of party conventions from tax payers to private donors. But, the left is seizing on this provision to claim that billionaires are hijacking our democracy. Again, this is a purely political and cosmetic contention.

Now for a bit of good news for the American people.

First, the next government-wide funding process will take place in 2015 when (ostensibly) fiscally conservative Republicans will hold majorities in both houses of Congress. They will have the votes needed to make some much-needed reforms to our bloated federal spending patterns.

Second, in February, the Republican Congress will have the opportunity to stand up to counter the president’s unilateral immigration action when the continuing resolution funding the Department of Homeland Security expires.

The CRomnibus is far from ideal. But, it is not the “hand out” to banks and big donors that Democrats claim that it is. It does, however, provide an opportunity for Republicans to flex their fiscally conservative muscles when they draft the next round of spending bills in 2015.

3 Dec
Posted in: Uncategorized
By    Comments Off


The post below is written by NYYRC Member Dwayne Madison, in response to  New Orleans Saints player Benjamin Watson’s Facebook post regarding the Ferguson grand jury’s decision not to indict Darren Wilson. You can read Waston’s original article here:

Dear Benjamin Watson,

While on the train home to my parent’s house to celebrate Thanksgiving, I came across your thoughtful comments on the Ferguson situation. Well done! You blasted out of the sky two ridiculous stereotypes. The first is the “dumb jock” label since your post is better than most seasoned journalists. The second is that Americans are too sensitive to have a mature discussion about race. With that, I too want to help prove them wrong and respond. Your fan, Dwayne.

I’M ANGRY because the stories of injustice that have been passed down for generations seem to be continuing before our very eyes.
I’M ALSO ANGRY because this is a never ending cycle. Despite progress over several decades, I am convinced that too many politicians, media pundits, and community leaders thrive on these unfortunate incidents. For these people have a lot to lose if we achieve a truly color blind society and, thus, will make every attempt to prevent MLK’s dream from becoming a reality.

I’M FRUSTRATED, because pop culture, music and movies glorify these types of police citizen altercations and promote an invincible attitude that continues to get young men killed in real life, away from safety movie sets and music studios.
I’M ALSO FRUSTRATED because the media and pop culture promote degeneracy and mock decency. People who live honorable, productive lives, regardless of their race, are labeled as sell-outs, old-fashioned, and not cool or hip.

I’M FEARFUL because in the back of my mind I know that although I’m a law abiding citizen I could still be looked upon as a “threat” to those who don’t know me. So I will continue to have to go the extra mile to earn the benefit of the doubt.
I’M ALSO FEARFUL because I know that despite my life’s actions that prove that I am nowhere near a racist, all it takes is for one person to accuse me of such and I will instantly be considered guilty by many no matter what contrary evidence is presented.

I’M EMBARRASSED because the looting, violent protests, and law breaking only confirm, and in the minds of many, validate, the stereotypes and thus the inferior treatment.
I’M ALSO EMBARRASSED that so called educated and professional people give unwarranted attention to people whose only motive is to make the situation worse.

I’M SAD, because another young life was lost from his family, the racial divide has widened, a community is in shambles, accusations, insensitivity hurt and hatred are boiling over, and we may never know the truth about what happened that day.
I’M ALSO SAD because this unfortunate incident has been used to open old wounds. I’m sad because I know based on my own interactions with people from various racial backgrounds that most, almost all, want to achieve a color blind society. I’m sad because another incident will happen again. Why, because the few among us that have a lot to lose if we do move beyond will make every effort to make sure the sequels continue.

I’M SYMPATHETIC, because I wasn’t there so I don’t know exactly what happened. Maybe Darren Wilson acted within his rights and duty as an officer of the law and killed Michael Brown in self defense like any of us would in the circumstance. Now he has to fear the backlash against himself and his loved ones when he was only doing his job. What a horrible thing to endure. OR maybe he provoked Michael and ignited the series of events that led to him eventually murdering the young man to prove a point.
I’M ALSO SYMPATHETIC because I do not know what it is like to have been told my entire life that I have no hope. I have never been preached to by a community leader that no matter how big my effort or how I go about my life, I will never have a chance because a certain group of people are out to get me. If that did happened to me, I cannot say that I would not respond in an overly emotional way and be driven to riot, how would I know any better?

I’M OFFENDED, because of the insulting comments I’ve seen that are not only insensitive but dismissive to the painful experiences of others.
I’M ALSO OFFENDED not just because of those comments that you mention, but also because of the sacrifices and efforts made by millions of people of all backgrounds to improve relations and promote diversity only to hear agitators comment that if any progress has been made, it is hardly noticeable and that America will always be a rotten, racist, nation.

I’M CONFUSED, because I don’t know why it’s so hard to obey a policeman. You will not win!!! And I don’t know why some policeman abuse their power. Power is a responsibility, not a weapon to brandish and lord over the populace.
I’M ALSO CONFUSED because I do not understand why some community leaders and media types abuse their power. While not a loaded gun, a microphone or megaphone can also do significant damage and make a bad situation worse.

I’M INTROSPECTIVE, because sometimes I want to take “our” side without looking at the facts in situations like these. Sometimes I feel like it’s us against them. Sometimes I’m just as prejudiced as people I point fingers at. And that’s not right. How can I look at white skin and make assumptions but not want assumptions made about me? That’s not right.
I’M ALSO INTROSPECTIVE because my immediate, hard-coded conclusion was that there was almost no chance that the police officer was at fault. But, that was not a realistic assumption nor did I consider my own unpleasant interactions with law enforcement officials.

I’M HOPELESS, because I’ve lived long enough to expect things like this to continue to happen. I’m not surprised and at some point my little children are going to inherit the weight of being a minority and all that it entails.
I’M ALSO HOPELESS because while I am not an old man, I have lived long enough to know that these incidents will continue. Too many people want them to continue. If I decide to have children, there will be some in academia and the media that will tell them that they are by default a racist simply by being born white.

I’M HOPEFUL, because I know that while we still have race issues in America, we enjoy a much different normal than those of our parents and grandparents. I see it in my personal relationships with teammates, friends and mentors. And it’s a beautiful thing.
I’M ALSO HOPEFUL because despite the ugly scenes that I see play out on TV and read about on the internet, I do not witness that often in real life. I have come across several calm, throughout responses such as yours, which helps a great deal!

I’M ENCOURAGED, because ultimately the problem is not a SKIN problem, it is a SIN problem. SIN is the reason we rebel against authority. SIN is the reason we abuse our authority. SIN is the reason we are racist, prejudiced and lie to cover for our own. SIN is the reason we riot, loot and burn. BUT I’M ENCOURAGED because God has provided a solution for sin through the his son Jesus and with it, a transformed heart and mind. One that’s capable of looking past the outward and seeing what’s truly important in every human being. The cure for the Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin, Tamir Rice and Eric Garner tragedies is not education or exposure. It’s the Gospel. So, finally, I’M ENCOURAGED because the Gospel gives mankind hope.”
I’M ALSO ENCOURAGED because I read your post!

Dwayne Madison: Dwayne lives in Manhattan. He loves sports, has never acted in a play, has never auditioned for a movie, does not have any tattoos, and has never smoked weed.

25 Nov
Posted in: Uncategorized
By    Comments Off

Thanksgiving Talking Points

by the NYYRC Blog Staff


Thanksgiving is that wonderful time of year when most of us give thanks, spend quality time with loved ones, and watch the Detroit Lions play lousy football. A common downside is that you will likely be pulled into a political debate with your vegan cousin that won’t eat grandma’s food or your sister’s “creative type” boyfriend after he makes a ridiculous comment on the situation in Ferguson, MO. Here is our talking-point cheat-sheet to aid you in your response. Go get ‘em!

–The proponents of Obama’s immigration executive order often argue that America is a nation of immigrants, which is what made the country great. Up until recently, immigrants, as a whole, wanted to be American, they wanted to assimilate into American culture, and they wanted to pursue the American dream.
–Obama’s motives are not so much humanitarian, but rather an obvious attempt to build a permanent Democratic party voting block that will support the party for multiple generations.
–After midterm elections that reflect voter attitudes on issues like healthcare, foreign policy, and the economy, the President and Democratic party clearly want to make immigration the main issue discussed in the media.
–As a national party, they have maxed out their support with single women and black voters. Making immigration a top issue allows democrats an opportunity to expand their party base and to distract voters from their unpopular stances on other key issues.
-Obama’s own Justice Department informed him that his actions on immigration are unlawful and unconstitutional. The DOJ issued a memo based on historical precedent and legal concerns that stated how the White House does not have the authority to change immigration law by executive order. “The Executive cannot, under the guides of exercising enforcement discretion, attempt to effectively rewrite the laws to match its policy preferences. An agency’s enforcement decisions should be consonant with, rather than contrary to, the congressional policy underlying the statutes the agency is charged with administering.”
–The GOP is pro-immigration, legal immigration that involves skilled workers and people from all parts of the world, not just Latin America.

–Americans should ask, who has the most to lose if America becomes a true post racial, color blind society. The answer: racial bullies, university and corporate diversity department personnel, and mainstream media journalists (will have fewer default news topics).

–A color blind society is not desired by the left. Discrimination is not just a political issue, it is also an industry. Many have made fortunes on it and will do anything to maintain the income source that is driven by discrimination.
–A close look at Ferguson reveals true intent. Staged, calculated riots to preserve race tensions, from which the Democratic party benefits.

–The MIT economics professor’s comments demonstrate yet again how liberals push legislation by pretending they are not liberals.
–The lack of coverage in the mainstream media proves that the they are not interested in reporting. They are simply an extension of the democrat party.
–”Obama and Gruber know that had they been honest from day one about what their intentions were and how they intended to go about them, they would never have won the election in 2008.” Rush Limbaugh


–The “historic” pact reached by Obama is not a binding agreement and does not include any benchmarks to measure progress or penalties.
–The administration pledged to impede America’s economic progress by promising greenhouse emission cuts of 26 to 28 percent. This will do nothing other than hurt American workers (via pink slips) and consumers (via fuel price increases). Meanwhile, China does not have to do anything until 2030.
–China alone is firing up a new coal plant every eight to 10 days. America could close every coal mine in Kentucky and West Virginia and achieve absolutely nothing except devastating Appalachia and, in effect, shipping its economic lifeblood to China.
–Questions to ask: Does a problem actually exist that is backed with absolute scientific proof? What is the evidence? If one does, how does pact accomplish a solution?
–Former Obama Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel is known to have said “never let a crisis go to waste”. An accurate continuation would be “…and if one does not exist, create one”. The only purpose for this deal is to score headlines, political points with democrat base voters, and preserve an artificial crisis that benefits democrat politicians.

–On October 3, 1863, during the dark days of the Civil War, Abraham Lincoln declared that the 4th Thursday of November be set aside as a Federal holiday of thanksgiving and prayer. The idea behind this was that even in one of our nation’s darkest hours, we should stop, reflect, and be thankful to live in a republic that gives us so many advantages and privileges. Lincoln said these should be “solemnly, reverently and gratefully acknowledged as with one heart and one voice by the whole American People.” We should remember this every Thanksgiving and keep in mind the true spirit of the holiday.

Lincoln’s full Thanksgiving Proclamation can be found here:

Quote of the Week
“Government’s view of the economy could be summed up in a few short phrases: If it moves, tax it. If it keeps moving, regulate it. And if it stops moving, subsidize it” – Ronald Reagan

21 Nov
Posted in: Uncategorized
By    Comments Off

Old Hickory and Obama

During the NYYRC’s monthly meeting last night, Michael Warren of the Weekly Standard gave an insightful talk about the midterm elections (we won!), and then talk turned to what Congressional Republicans should do in response to President Obama’s announcement that he was suspending deportations. Suggestions ranged from opposing President Obama’s judicial nominees to passing a budget that narrowly eliminates funding for the executive branch offices responsible for carrying out the President’s immigration wishes.

What about censure as a possibility?

Bear with me for a little bit of history. In addition to being Secretary of State and a perennial presidential candidate, Senator Henry Clay led the Congressional opposition to President Andrew Jackson. Andrew Jackson didn’t like the Bank of the United States, the antebellum version of the Federal Reserve. In 1832, he vetoed an act to renew the bank’s charter, and in 1834 – after he’d been re-elected –  he pulled all federal funds from the bank. Henry Clay, with a Senate majority behind him, passed a resolution demanding that Jackson turn over a document he’d read to his Cabinet on the bank issue.

Jackson refused, and Henry Clay and the anti-Jacksonians passed a Senate resolution censuring the President, reading, “Resolved that the President in the late Executive proceedings in relation to the public revenue, has assumed upon himself authority and power not confer’d by the Constitution and laws but in derogation of both.” Censuring the president was a step short of impeachment, for which was the political capital and number of Senators did not exist, but it adequately conveyed the Senate’s distaste for the President’s usurpations.

It was the only time that the Senate had passed censure on the President, although several Democrats did submit a bill censuring Clinton in the wake of the Lewinsky scandal. The bill failed to pass.


Postscript- apparently I’m not alone in suggesting censure. Rep. Steven King of Iowa suggests the same thing: and as does the National Review’s John Fund: