I first brought up his squashing the Moreland Commission here .
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/curren...ml#post3648873

Well the NY Slimes has finally gotten around to reporting it .

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/23/ny...sion.html?_r=0
The full investigation is here :
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/23/ny...ommission.html
To make a long story short . He empaneled the commission to investigate corruption in Albany. He was hoping no doubt to catch a bunch of the NYS Senate Repubics . But as the commission was conducting it's business ,it became clear that the people they were investigating were some of Cuomo's gumbas .

The Slimes takes it from here :

But a three-month examination by The New York Times found that the governor’s office deeply compromised the panel’s work, objecting whenever the commission focused on groups with ties to Mr. Cuomo or on issues that might reflect poorly on him.
Ultimately, Mr. Cuomo abruptly disbanded the commission halfway through what he had indicated would be an 18-month life. And now, as the Democratic governor seeks a second term in November, federal prosecutors are investigating the roles of Mr. Cuomo and his aides in the panel’s shutdown and are pursuing its unfinished business.
Before its demise, Mr. Cuomo’s aides repeatedly pressured the commission, many of whose members and staff thought they had been given a once-in-a-career chance at cleaning up Albany. As a result, the panel’s brief existence — and the writing and editing of its sole creation, a report of its preliminary findings — was marred by infighting, arguments and accusations. Things got so bad that investigators believed a Cuomo appointee was monitoring their communications without their knowledge. Resignations further crippled the commission. In the end, the governor got the Legislature to agree to a package of ethics reforms far less ambitious than those the commission had recommended — a result Mr. Cuomo hailed as proof of the panel’s success.

Cuomo still defends his actions by saying that since he created the commission he has the power to end the commissions work . That is hardly a convining defense of his actions if you ask me . Only an arrogant dictator would have the onions to use that defense.....Only someone with a 30 point poll lead. His opponent ,[SIZE=2]Rob Astorino says Cuomo's action is a criminal obstruction of justice ,and is calling for an investigation.[/SIZE]

It is unclear if this story will have an impact on his reelection chances (NY being a state populated by brainwashed Democrat zombies ) . However ,there was talk of him throwing his hat in the Presidential ring. I think the chances are slim now that he will take the plunge.

well Tom my response is in my signature

Quote:

---

''Let us sit upon the ground and tell sad stories of the deaths of kings.'' William Shakespeare

---

By the way does anyone know why our signatures have disappeared?

Jon Stewart is a genius who explains the scandal better than I can.

CSI: Cuomo Scandal Investigation - The Daily Show - Video Clip | Comedy Central

il Duce now hiding, cancelling appearances, after the Slimes exposed his role in corruption scandal.

Where's Andrew? | New York Post

so a victory for the little guy then

doubt it ; Cuomo has a 30 point lead against Rob Astorino (who is a very effective County Executive ) . The only positive I see in this is that the Feds have taken an interest . Albany (the State capital of NY ) is a sewer , and the only difference between here and Illinois is that their Governors go to jail when they are caught .

Tom have you ever thought there must be something wrong with the system if you consistently elect criminals to high office

only in that if there is only one party then you are living in a soviet system. What we have in common with Illinois is that there is no real opposition to the Democrat machine. It has been that way since the days of Tammany Hall.
Tammany Hall - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The NY Repubic party is the lamest local party in the nation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

only in that if there is only one party then you are living in a soviet system. What we have in common with Illinois is that there is no real opposition to the Democrat machine. It has been that way since the days of Tammany Hall.
Tammany Hall - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The NY Repubic party is the lamest local party in the nation.

---

Spoiled for choice, perhaps you should swap that "two party" system for one that offers choice

Its just the same, Tom, in red conservative governed states of the south and plains, so are they too, bastions of soviet style governments?

I though Mc carthyism was dead Tal apparently not so

There will always be people who make anyone different than them the enemy, and that's in every society and culture. It's always been that way. It's just recycled, repackaged, remarketed HATE.

Yes tal beyond all reason

oh isn't that hilarious . Now Cuomo is the victim.

Never said that Tom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

oh isn't that hilarious . Now Cuomo is the victim.

---

The victums here are those who have to swallow this load of "rhetoric"

There are as many republican governors across the land who are just as bad as the democrats the right dumps on. Some want to be president, some may not even get re elected.

What does that mean Tal? All you are saying is you have bad government, democracy as you have implemented it has failed

Tal I don't get it , government after so long should not be a work in progress, both our nations have had plenty of time to iron out the bugs in democracy, there is no excuse for the crap we have to endure except that the politicians we have needd to be stood against the wall and shot. this is not revolution but evolution

By the way moderator this spellchecker is absolute crap

The concept works Clete, some of the people are flawed. Just like everywhere else. Even in your Island Paradise.

Both our governments and institutions are a works in progress and have room for growth and improvements.

Its just the same, Tom,

Quote:

---

in red conservative governed states of the south and plains, so are they too, bastions of soviet style governments?

---

to answer your question ;it's obviously no . Whereas the "progressives believe in expansive government control; the conservatives would like to reduce the size of government and it's power over the individual.

I wish it were that simple Tom big government v small government, both sides produce volumenous legislation and regulations so the only way to avoid this is to abolish the form of government that promotes the idea that there needs to be government. Government by the people, for the people, does that have a familiar ring to it. What you have now is government by the government, for the government, whilst the people are an inconvenient adjunct who must be consulted about who sits in the seats of power now and again

That sounds like your government Clete where the people are required to vote for a government. And you get some loonies too, by the people.

People are not required to vote for a government Tal, unlike yourselves they vote for candidates who form a government, but we lack this contention where there is this third wing, so to speak, who thinks it is capable of acting on its own. So the truth is, you vote for a government and are governed by that government. It is an exact reflection of yourselves whereas we vote to provide a Parliament and such government as there is is at the whim of that Parliament. In our system the government cannot exist without the confidence of the House

Yes we get some fringe dwellers, we all do, fortunately they don't get to form government even if they influence outcomes. You see our leaders are called to account everyday in the Parliament whereas as yours are called to account by the media. We have many more independent and minor party members than you do

no it's not a matter of eliminating the form of government . It's requiring the government to adhere to the constitution......not some distorted interpretation of it .

Well you see for some strange reason we don't encounter that problem, only rarely is the constitution mentioned and when it is the issue is quickly resolved. You see our politicians try to stay within the limitations of constitutional power, unlike yourselves we don't have numerous additions to the constitution, the document has proven to be extraordinarily difficult to alter

You haven't encountered the problem because you have yet to grow enough people of differing opinions/cultures and my friend Tom's opinions and interpretation are very different to many here and that's the challenge moving forward. Generations and progress have changed things enough to take a deeper at look at policy and situations and we differ as to the adjustments that need to be made.

A government, state or federal has to be big enough to provide the basics to it citizens or the citizens will take their own devices to get what they need/want. Tom thinks the thinking of the founders is perfect and needs no further examination, no changes, and of course I disagree.

There is falsehood that goes around that says nobody outside the two main parties is allowed to run in the USA.

That couldn't be further from the truth. Anyone that can get sufficient petitions in each state can get themselves of the ballots of each state.

Now keep in mind, getting on the ballot doesn't mean you will get enough votes to win. The problem is most democrats would vote for Stalin if he suddenly arrose from the dead, because their party told them to do so. Few of them are capable of independent thought...

Every so often another party arises and displaces one of the other parties that then falls out of favor, and its been quite a while since that last happened.

You have had enough trouble dealing with our living candidates on the democratic side let alone speculating about dead ones. Worry about the republican candidates before you jump on ours. Ours have been winning.

Sounds like I'm correct... the Democrats are upset they never got a chance to vote for Stain and Lennin who apparently are the mentors of today's Democrat party.. and would without hesitation if they ever got the chance.

If John F Kennedy was alive today..he wouldn't be a Democrat. THe democrats woudl be attacking him for not being a good socialist.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!! Passing the loony juice rather early today huh?

Quote:

---

Tom thinks the thinking of the founders is perfect and needs no further examination, no changes, and of course I disagree.

---

wrong again. When change is needed ,the founders provided an appropriate instrument in the constitution for it . The probem is your side thinks that judicial ,executive ,or bureaucratic fiat is the proper way .

So the legal process isn't good enough? Then who is the arbiter and what's the process and who decides constitutionality? Last I looked you can challenge and appeal. Not good enough for you?

Tal, it wasn't US that voted Obama, the man with no experience at anything into office not just once but twice. After the world knew what a worthless lump of human flesh he was.

He didn't just fool the left once... but he fooled them twice, and what's that old saying, "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me "? The left got fooled twice.

Quote:

---

By the way does anyone know why our signatures have disappeared?

---

don't know and don't like it .

I have changed mine to read :

Throughout history, poverty is the normal condition of man. Advances which permit this norm to be exceeded — here and there, now and then — are the work of an extremely small minority, frequently despised, often condemned, and almost always opposed by all 'right-thinking 'people. Whenever this tiny minority is kept from creating, or (as sometimes happens) is driven out of a society, the people then slip back into abject poverty. This is known as “bad luck.” (Robert A. Heinlein)

Quote:

---

By the way does anyone know why our signatures have disappeared?

---

That change was put into effect by one of the site admins as part of an upcoming change. There was a thread announcing it before it happened, I don't feel like looking for it right now, besides I've got some other stuff I need to attend to right now.. Tal would know where it is. The signatures were moved to what is called a bio or something to that effect.

That change was put int

Quote:

---

o effect by one of the site admins as part of an upcoming change. There was a thread announcing it before it happened, I don't feel like looking for it right now, besides I've got some other stuff I need to attend to right now.. Tal would know where it is. The signatures were moved to what is called a bio or something to that effect.

---

lame

Quote:

---

So the legal process isn't good enough? Then who is the arbiter and what's the process and who decides constitutionality? Last I looked you can challenge and appeal. Not good enough for you?

---

yeah I guess in a post-constitutional America that's probably the best we can expect. Several courts have ruled against various subsidies and mandates that the emperor decided were needed .But it's still full steam ahead for the emperor's implementation .He hasn't even gone to Congress to ask for remedies to bring his decisions into compliance.

The final arbiter is the people ;not the courts. The oligarchs in the courts seized the power of judicial review ;and no one ever challenged the premise .

We can wait to see what the next election brings. May as well.

Yes be hopeful an election will bring change, for Tom and smoothy release from the dreaded democrats, for Tal release from the deadly grip of the republicans in the house

elections don't bring change. the leviathan ever grows larger because with the exception of a few conservatives ,the Repubic party also believes in a large government to manage .