Search This Blog

Loading...

Wednesday, December 21, 2011

Timothy Stampfler to Challange Matt Doheny for NY-23 Republican Primary

Another bumpy ride ahead in NY-23? Watertown Daily Times reports that Timothy Stampfler will be challenging Matt Doheny for the Republican nomination in 2012.

Timothy Stampfler is a corrections officer in Dannemora, the paper reports.

Mr. Stampfler has not responded to my requests for comment, but I spoke with Don Lee, the Clinton County GOP chair, two days ago. Mr. Lee told me that Mr. Stampfler had previously spoken to him about a run, but at the time, Mr. Stampfler had not made up his mind.


This complicates much for Matt Doheny, who is already looking at another possible two challengers in Doug Hoffman and possibly Kellie Greene. I'll have more on Stampfler in follow up posts, once I have a change to look more into his candidacy.

Of course, redistricting may drastically change the map for NY-23.One thing is for sure, the more the committee chairmen in NY-23 like a candidate, the more resistance that candidate seems to attract from the party's base. Republicans may want to take notice.

Wednesday, December 14, 2011

Will NY-25's Brianne Murphy be Against Wall Street After She was for It?

Generally speaking, Democrat politicians are a walking contradiction. Wall Street is the latest example. Where many progressives and liberals have taken to deriding Wall Street and fat cat bankers, most congressional Democrats are counting on money from wealthy Wall Street donors.

This bring me to Brianne Murphy, Democrat hopeful for NY-25. Where Democrat Dan Maffei's campaign strategy is to claim he's moderate and hope voters forget that he voted down the line for health care (public option included), cap and trade and the stimulus, Brianne Murphy hopes to occupy the extreme left.

So, with OWS and other anti-business rhetoric becoming the norm for far left politicians I'm wondering if it is only a matter of time before Murphy flip flops. Until she started running for congress, she was for Wall Street. Her Linked In profile says so:

The Murphy Group LLC is a full-service legislative and legal consulting firm with offices in Washington, DC and New York, NY, providing domestic and international clients with distinct perspective and creative counsel.

Our diverse team of outstanding government affairs and legal professionals provide clients with comprehensive solutions for their legal, government and public affairs needs. Each of our consultants brings a unique subject matter expertise coupled with broad legal, legislative or media affairs experience. This comprehensive approach – strategically addressing the political, legal, and media implications of each client objective – distinguishes Murphy Group. The firm’s advocacy skills are unrivaled, providing clients invaluable assistance on Capitol Hill and in the courtroom.

Whether you are a Wall Street Firm looking for a finger on the pulse of Capitol Hill or an attorney representing a party to an agency accident investigation seeking advice on the process, Murphy Group is well positioned to meet your needs. Our team brings a wealth of substantive knowledge on cutting edge legislative developments as well as a deep understanding of the litigation, regulatory and investigative processes. Our blend of experience and extensive network make us an essential resource for anyone seeking the most up-to-date information and analysis regarding developments impacting their clients.
Specialties

Legislative & Legal Consulting, issue areas include transportation, energy & the environment, labor & employment, and education.


I have yet to see an article reporting an anti-Wall Street positions as of yet, but it's only a matter of time. After all, her entire party is planning on running against Wall Street. It's only a matter of time before Murphy was for Wall Street before she was against it.

Sunday, August 14, 2011

Bob Turner's Stance on Medicare Posses a Problem in Run for NY-9?

Democrat David Weprin's campaign has signaled that it is going to begin a strategy of mediscare. Today, his campaign released the following statement against Bob Turner's views on Medicare:

A news release out last night was titled, “Does Bob Turner plan to cut Medicare for the next generation or is he lying to voters?” and describes a group of seniors approaching Turner at a fundraiser last night and asking if he supported Paul Ryan’s plan to end Medicare.

“Nothing will change for people over 55,” Turner is said to have responded.

Per the release: ”He purposefully neglected any comment about the security of Medicare for the next generation.”

“Bob Turner continues to try to hedge his position on Medicare, but he can’t have it both ways,” said Elizabeth Kerr, Weprin’s spokeswoman. “Bob Turner either has to support asking millionaires and Big Oil to pay their fair share, or he has to admit he plans to cut Medicare.”


Will it work? We'll see. However, it has signaled two very important nuances to the race.

First of all, David Weprin is now elevating Bob Turner and recognizing him as a threat to his race. That's a significant development and a recognition on Weprin's part, that he is vulnerable in the race.

Second, Weprin's response means that we are going to get a full vetting of the messages the Parties hoped to run in 2012. Since NY-26, Democrats have hung their hats on the idea that Mediscare is going to be effective in retaking the House in 2012. Weprin hopes to right his sinking ship on this message. If it proves unfruitful, in a highly liberal district and fails to eclipse Bob Turner's message of "NY-9 as a referendum on Obama foreign policy", you can be sure that Mediscare won't work in 2012.

If not mediscare, if not the deficit, it is a real mystery as to what Democrats will run on; certainly not on any accomplishments.

Friday, August 12, 2011

Obama NY Fundraiser: the day the messiah compared himself to Cuomo and King

Obama's numbers are in the red in NY, but that's not half as interesting as how desperate and lost the President appeared at his own fundraiser.

Today, Obama flew out to NY for yet another fundraiser. Despite being amongst the most liberal of supporters, Obama tried hard to lift his own image in parity with others:

Standing in Weinstein’s basement, Obama said his troubles are like the ones facing Cuomo.

“When I ran in 2008, I think that a lot of folks believed we elect Obama and suddenly we’re going to fix politics in Washington,” Obama said. “And Andrew is familiar with this, because everybody figures, well, we’re going to fix politics in Albany.”

“And then it turns out that there are a lot of bad habits that have been built up over time, and we’re also a big, diverse country and not everybody agrees with me; not everybody agrees with the folks who live in Manhattan,” he said, drawing laughter from the rich celebrities that filled the room. “West of here,” he said. “You guys may not be familiar with it.”

The comparison was something of a stretch. Obama is struggling to recharge the national economy amid an increasingly deadlocked capitol split along party lines, while Cuomo, for his part, isn’t struggling much.

He passed a budget without raising taxes or destroying social service programs, and passed a landmark bill legalizing same-sex marriage, turning the state government in Albany from “dysfunctional” to hyperactive, in under seven months. (Cuomo attended the fundraiser as an invited guest, and did not pay, according to a source.)

Before leaving, Obama likened himself to one more figure. Martin Luther King, Jr.

“I think that we forget when he was alive there was nobody who was more vilified, nobody who was more controversial, nobody who was more despairing at times,” he said.

http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif
In 2008, Obama was stopping the rising tides and healing the planet. Hehttp://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gif basked in messiah comparisons. Flash forward to 2011 and Obama is hoping people mistake him for Martin Luther King Jr. or even just Cuomo. Unable to sell himself as himself, he's trying to sell himself as other people and doing a bad job of it if the tone of the Observer is any indication.

Completely gone is the once seemingly impenetrable brand and image of the Obama of 2008. Now the President of the United States highest aims are to somehow elevate himself to the level of a freshman governor.

Update:

A memeorandum thread!

Welcome Legal Insurrection readers and thanks for linking Professor!

Wednesday, April 6, 2011

Chucky Schumer and “foot in mouth disease”

by Bill Claydon

Originally posted to Liberty Ink Journal and RedState


Chucky has an easy — and most importantly, GUARANTEED — job. As of 2009, he fully became the Senior US Senator from New York. Oh yes, he had that title since 2001, but let’s face it, it was in name only. He was lost in Hillary’s shadow after she parachuted in from Arkansas by way of DC. In 2009 she finally stopped pretending to represent New York (a mere intended stepping stone to the presidency) and moved over to the State Department. Her political future has been utterly ruined by being part of the Obama Regime. But, she was replaced by someone who can stand in Chucky’s shadow and serve as his “extra vote” 95% of the time. (On the rare occasions when Chucky’s rubber stamp wants to show “independence,” she gets into that very narrow place on the ideological spectrum —- to the left of him.)

Chucky is still learning the ropes of what it’s like to be a Senior Senator. So, don’t blame him when his mouth, uh, gets the better of him. Afterall, with all of the money Obama is wasting, the United States can evidently only afford ONE teleprompter — and that goes to the empty suit at the top. (Hmm, maybe a non-government grant could be found to buy Chucky a teleprompter to keep him out of trouble? I mean, this USUALLY works for Obama, so we’ve got some data to justify the feasibility.) Anyway, Chucky hardly needs a teleprompter. His constituents are in ultra leftist New York. He just won by a landslide in 2010 so he doesn’t have to worry about another election until 2016. But even so, he’s got that magic “D” after his name. He’d win again no matter what. A majority in New York would vote for a cartoon character if it had a “D” after its name. (And considering how overhyped Obama was…)

So, anyway, after a couple of humorous paragraphs, let’s get to the main point of this post. First, Chucky ran his foul mouth on a plane, rudely insulting a flight attendant because she asked an elitist such as him to abide by the rules. These rules should only apply to the American commoners who are beneath him. Then, on national television, he flubbed up the three branches of government. But now he admits he lets others do his thinking for him. Rather than have little snafus like this, can’t the Democrats buy him a teleprompter? Look, as one who doesn’t exactly agree with the Democrats’ plans, far be it for me to give advice here to help them. But really, Democrats at least ought to make sure the reporters aren’t on the line when they say stuff like that! Just a word of advice here.

One of my favorite lines in the article is: “After apparently realizing his mistake, Schumer fell silent.” Um, what? Schumer fell silent? That’s utterly amazing. I’ve never heard of anything that could quiet Chucky!

Chucky and his big government buddies want to continue spending like there is no tomorrow. Any attempt to put the brakes on runaway government waste is called “extreme” (though remember, if a conservative uses that word to describe what Chucky and his ilk do, it’s apparently “wrong”). They have no concern about enslaving several generations into the future with debt. As the article notes, the other Democrat Senators on the call marched to Chucky’s orders (like leftist zombies).

At some point, it’s going to be time to pay the piper. We cannot continue to spend money and mortgage future generations for the unsaitiable appetites of the present generation. We hear all about how the answer is merely to “tax the rich” while Obama hangs out with all the globalist corporate elite and hands out appointments to the likes of GE’s Jeffrey Immelt. Ah, but Chucky has no need to concern himself with what will happen to future generations. He gets elected in New York…..a state addicted to big government, despite having accidentally elected a Democrat governor who seems to “see the light” about runaway spending. (Or, he at least realizes that if he cleans up New York, he would be formidable in any future presidential election.) Basically, if Chucky is going to call the Republicans extreme for trying to clean up DC, he’s also calling Andrew Cuomo “extreme” for cleaning up the disgusting mess that is New York State.

But I digress. Chucky is useful for something. As one who is guaranteed reelection because he is an incumbent in a state that will vote for anything with a “D” after its name, he gives us a window into the elitist politician’s mindset. Whether it is true contempt for working people like flight attendants, or lack of interest in knowing what is in the Constitution, or considering fiscal responsibility to be “extreme,” at least we have someone like Schumer to use as a barometer of where the elite are coming from.

Weiner Wants a Waiver for the Woefully Worthless ObamaCare

by Bill Claydon

Originally posted to Liberty Ink Journal and RedState

Agree or disagree with her views, you must admit Michelle Malkin has a way with words. And her column about the obnoxious and extreme liberal Anthony Weiner and his desire for an ObamaCare waiver is a good example.

First, Obama exempted his big union fatcats and their thugs who do things like damage public property funded by taxpayers in places like, oh, I don’t know, Madison, Wisconsin. Then he started exempting the supposed enemies of the unions, selected big corporations. Well, why not? Like union fatcats, big CEOs such as GE’s Jeffrey Immelt are Obama’s buddies too. (Shh, don’t tell the left. They claim the Democrat Party is here to “protect” us from all those big corporate CEOs. Heck, it’s not like the top elected official in the Democrat Party isn’t buddy buddy with them.) Then Maine insurers get exemptions from certain provisions of this massive boondoggle. Nevada and Kentucky line up behind Maine, along with a bunch of other states.

But now Anthony Weiner, ObamaCare champion, wants a waiver for his beloved New York City. New York City is a heavy voting bloc for Democrats. This would be the LAST place that should want or deserves to get any kind of waiver from ObamaCare. They made their bed and all that.

Look, we heard impassioned speeches on the House floor about how wonderful this thing is, and villifying anyone (Republican politician or ordinary American) who dared speak against the Democrat will. The speechifying finished with the now shellacked EX Speaker Nancy Pelosi saying “Vote my darlings, vote.” The Democrats chose to ram this mess through on a party line vote without taking the time to hash it out and make sure the provisions were right for people. It seems like a show of lack of confidence in their work to be handing out waivers like candy at a parade (and what would Michelle Obama, self-appointed czar of “healthy eating” while simultaneously being a fan of barbecue and ribs, think of that??).

The leftist leaning Media Matters tried to do damage control for the Democrats by claiming Weiner merely said the ability to grant waivers shows it’s “flexibility.” Actually, it just proves further that this is indeed government control over our health care. Bottom line is that it is an opportunity for the powerful to scratch the backs of their powerful. What is the process for getting a waiver? Who must one know to get a waiver? How much campaign cash must be given to Democrat politicians to get a waiver? How can I get a waiver? How can you get a waiver? Can’t we all just get waivers if we want them? Should the law have any meaning or can various well connected groups get a “get out of jail free” card like in the game of Monopoly (Obama edition, of course)? Do we get to collect $200 as we pass “Go” and have the government take it all away from us? Oh wait, the system Obama is pushing on us is like all of us being perpetually stuck on Boardwalk with a government owned hotel on it.

The Democrats wanted a one size fits all “solution.” THE LAW IS THE LAW. There should be no exemptions, PERIOD. If this inconveniences unions or causes big corporations to shed more employees, so be it. This is what the Democrats wanted, this is what they wasted so much energy, time, and money cheerleading for, not to mention destroyed their political careers for in some cases, and they should deal with the consequences like responsible people. (Wait, I’m talking about entrenched elitist politicians. Responsibility doesn’t enter into the equation there.) There should be NO backroom deals to cover up the disastrous effects of ObamaCare. If jobs are lost or union workers have to pay more as a result of ObamaCare, well, that’s “change we can believe in,” just in time for Obama’s hopefully failing bid for a second term.

By the time this thing is done, it will look like virtual swiss cheese. We’ve heard the “You might be a if…” jokes. Well, let’s hear everyone’s ideas for “You might get an ObamaCare waiver if…” Oh and just to clear it up, no government funding for this. All responses must be the work of the writer’s own mind. No outsourcing of thinking to some government commission or committee (and heck, one probably already exists for this sort of thing), please…

But I digress. On another note, couldn’t Weiner have wanted a waiver in Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming, or better yet, in Walla Walla, Washington? Certainly, conservative bloggers could have had even more fun with blog titles for that!

Monday, February 28, 2011

Albany's Rally for Collectivism

by Bill Claydon


In the Capital Region of New York, one of the biggest “industries” is government of one form or another. The state is in a fiscal crisis due to decades of nearly limitless spending with no concern for the future. This is a state that would likely give a majority vote to a cartoon character for any statewide office if it had a “D” after its name.

As then candidate Andrew Cuomo said, during the 2010 New York Gubernatorial Candidate Comedy Variety Act Starring Jimmy McMillan and Friends, aka the 2010 New York State Gubernatorial “Debate,” young people leave New York because there is no opportunity. A bloated government which wastes money like it’s going out of style will do that kind of thing. Young people who have nothing holding them to New York leave (they can always visit relatives who are “stuck” here because nobody wants to buy their home on a postage stamp sized lot with $4,000+ in taxes to fund the never satisfied appetite of government). The same is true of the “evil rich” who are in a position to easily get out even if it means taking a substantial loss on their property. Big government supporters never seem to quite get this. There aren’t enough private sector jobs and let’s face it, the government can’t just hire everyone. Despite the easy availability of welfare in New York, some people actually want something more meaningful than that kind of big government enforced hopelessness.

So, when Van Jones had an “emergency” rally (great marketing for everything Van Jones) bringing all the various ultra leftwing groups together doing the best they could do short of building a time machine and taking everyone back to Woodstock, OF COURSE Albany, NY would have a large showing. Liberals cheered as if this is some sort of show of “strength” for collectivist unions. Look, the Capital District is home to gargantuan government that is deep in debt due to decades of wreckless spending. Is it any surprise there would be a huge turnout for this? Some have also pointed out that unionized college professors are getting students interested in supporting unions. If you stand outside in a rain storm, you get wet. And Obama is an “eloquent speaker” if it’s all laid out for him on his teleprompter. He’ll read whatever is there, complete with the dramatic pauses he has perfected oh so well. Do we celebrate the obvious? OF COURSE leftist college professors would promote collectivist unions to students when they’re typically fed all sorts of propaganda about other causes that run the gamut of leftwing activism. Par for the course. This is status quo, hardly anything surprising. Of course, as unions and their collectivist bargaining basically reward mediocrity and status quo the same way they do hard workers (with piddling and pathetic raises spread across the board for everyone), I suppose it’s no surprise that union supporters cheer the obvious.

So, while there may have been a decent number in a state with one of the largest state governments in the country, the numbers were limited elsewhere, according to reports.

I understand that in changing times, liberals want their outdated causes to continue to seem relevant. Unfortunately for them, we are starting to realize the tremendous costs of their whims. People are deciding they do not feel like continuing on this unsustainable path and subjecting themselves and their great grandchildren (the ones not brutally aborted, that is) to unending debt. People do not have the money to support big six figure salary union fatcats who forcibly take money from workers and use it to create multimillion dollar commercials or send it to the Democrat party. Likewise, people will have to closely examine the high costs of other liberal boondoggles.

We are in the midst of a shifting of historical eras. The failed policies of the past simply won’t be able to be sustained, now matter how many teeth are gnashed. The big UAW union got its bailout courtesy the taxpayers. Government employees were “stimulated” for a time, but that (failed) “stimulus” was not going to last forever. People cannot continue to pay for even more public debt. The gravy train is coming to an end.

Ultimately, the more the unions keep this in the news, the more opportunity they give conservative groups to educate people on the many problems associated with collectivist unions, and their ties to the Democrat party. We have needed this conversation for decades. May the next big “sacred cow” liberal institution shine a spotlight on itself as much as the big unions have done. We’ll need a national conversation about that one too.