"A government big enough to give you everything you want, is big enough to take away everything you have"
Thomas Jefferson

Friday, November 13, 2009

For It, Before He Was Against It

e⋅piph⋅a⋅ny

Show Spelled Pronunciation [i-pif-uh-nee] Show IPA

A sudden, intuitive perception of or insight into the reality or essential meaning of something, usually initiated by some simple, homely, or commonplace occurrence or experience.

Ex: Senator Aubertine had an epiphany on New York State’s Plan requiring new license plates.

The following Senators have buckled under massive pressure:
Sen. Dave Valesky (D-49th Senate District),
Sen. Darrel Aubertine (D-Cape Vincent),
Neil Breslin (D-Albany),
Bill Stachowski (D-Buffalo),
Antoine Thompson (D-Niagara)

21 comments:

Anonymous said...

It's Darrel's John Kerry moment plus one: He was against it before he was for it, and now he's against it, like he always was.

Clear now?

Dan Francis said...

Speaking of being "for" something before one is "againt" it, or vice versa, what can we make of all those years our local NYS senators supported Joe Bruno in the NYS Senate?

Now this?

Judge Blast Bruno

Anonymous said...

Run Patty! Run!

Anonymous said...

Don't get your post Dan. Related to this post how? It sounds to me like we have an oversensitive Judge. We all know judges have big egos.

JJ

Anonymous said...

It doesn't matter, it's like theliquor tax, they voted for it, this is the second time he's voted for registration increase, once in the assembly, glad to see AJR handing out all the PORK, I thought NYS was going broke, Nice to see the "Teflon Joe" Bruno complaining he wants a fair trial.

Anonymous said...

Dannie's post is unrelated to the topic. Talking about the past and sticking to a party line thought is all he knows. He is desperate to change the subject. Thusly, we have Joe Bruno talk. Very strange. But very predictable.

Dan Francis said...

8:46 - are you thick or just acting like you are?

My point, which obviously flew right over your noggin was that our Senators supported Bruno, praised him many times in their reelection bid and now "are against him..." in his judgment day - so I guess he "was corrupt then" before "he isn't now?"

Bingo ... my analogies aren't hard to figure out ... are they?

Anonymous said...

Aubertine had to back the plate plan, it was the only way he could get the 3 million for the Donald.

Anonymous said...

If the plan was good enough to support the first time around - it's good enough to stand behind. Otherwise you are just a gutless politician. Thanks for the list IV. Why to heck do we keep sending these conviction less asses to Albany?

Anonymous said...

You sure do play a lot of Bingo, for a guy, Dannie.

I'm very glad you're here to explain your posts. It sure helps me.

Anonymous said...

Oh yes, please! Run Patty Run so we can kick your stupid butt a second time. She is Doug Hoffman in drag. Would't know a local issue if it bit her. And while you're at it, why don't you ask Dede about how much support you can count on from your county chairs and your party in general. You can forget about the Conservative line. LOL

Anonymous said...

Dan, I am not aware of many Republican Senators coming out against Bruno. I will admit that they are not flocking to him as they did before. The post is about flip flopping on policy when nothing in the policy changed. The article you link to is about Joe Bruno getting chastised by a Judge and then Joe giving it right back.


Your analogy falters because of an intervening act. That is the act of getting arrested. What Bruno was doing was known to all and is is only illegal if not disclosed by Bruno to the pension fund managers that he is an employee. Other Senators had no way of knowing what Bruno told the pension fund managers. In fact some of the testimony was that it was disclosed.

At any rate I understand your analogy though respectfully disagree with it.

JJ

Dan Francis said...

1:04 - okay fair enough... but the heart of the Bruno thing now unfolding is this: Corruption and local Pols right there with him ... not now, but then?

Russell C. Ball said his agreement to pay Bruno $270,000 -- roughly $20,000 a month -- for his advice on improving Ball's company and widening their customer base was outlined in a one-page deal they signed in March 2004. [Roadway Contracting, Inc.]

"We needed a cultural change. We were not getting work from Con Edison due to other factors. To get to the top people ... you needed somebody to open the door."

Read More Here

Politics as usual? You betcha' and it stinks.

Anonymous said...

Notice that you "respectfully disagree", while Dannie immediately resorts to "are you thick or just acting like it". I guess we should be grateful he didn't just jump to the prfanity.

Don't blame me for this one, Dannie. You act this way with everyone.

Anonymous said...

Every one of these senators should be thrown out of office. Any one of them could have stopped the license plate fee yet they declined to do so.

I also see that none of these rubber stamps has come up with one program they would cut to make up for the loss of revenue. The state budget is as bloated as Rush Limbaugh's face so there is a lot of places to cut.

Anonymous said...

Dannie is right. You appear to be very thick. Don't get that this is not caving in to massive pressure. Voting for it was part of the massive effort to dig this state out of the financial hole the Republicans left us in.
Darrel and the others mentioned are and have always been on the side of the people. Amazing how the GOP can paint themselves as fiscal conservatives. At the national level they took the biggest surplus ever in the nation (left at the end of Bill Clinton's last term) and somehow managed to turn that into the largest national deficit in our history (at the end of GW Bush's term.) Heaven protect us from these 'conservatives.'

Anonymous said...

You're right, Dannie got it.
The rest of it is pure bs.

Like I say, repeatedly. I don't mind screwin' your kids, as my government job will just go on and on. You can blame this on Harry Truman or Ronald Reagan for all I care. But the spending is going on NOW. Raising the state budget 10% was, in your view, an effort to "get the state out of the budget mess?" Yeah guy, you're right on it. Tell your kids how much I appreciate them.

Anonymous said...

9:48 - Bingo! Ding! Flash! Bong! or whatever - attention getters.

Anonymous said...

So everyone bitches and bitches to get it repealed, and then when the legislature finally listens and responds with your request you go ahead and bash them for changing their minds?? Damned if you do and damned if you dont with you people. To me, this is one great example of government responding to the peoples request, regardless of how politically damaging it may be. To me, this is a sign of hope and proof that our legislators are actually listening. The fact is, there were good things in those budget bills that had to be acted on in a timely fashion or our budget would be looking alot more grim today. Since we had to open the budget back up to cut more, it is a good opportunity to remove some of the less popular proposals. I commend Senator Aubertine and AJR for their actions.

Anonymous said...

You commend Darrel and Russell for their actions??? What planet are you living on?

They voted for this bloated budget and bankrupted the entire state and now are backtracking because its getting close to reelection time.

Government listening to the people this is not, this is two self-interested politians calculating on their own behalf.

WAKE UP NNY!!!

Anonymous said...

To commend someone on their inaction is a crime, to elect someone like the 2 clowns is a bigger crime, We are a state that likes to spend money, putting spending money ahead of common sense, I read that Syracuse got a $300,000.00 grant to enforce the cell phone law, trouble is it has to be used for OT. So here we are padding the retirementof the police.

Live Blogging

Loading...