West Va. Governor Earl Ray Tomblin and New York Mayor Bill de Blasio: Symbols of Division

http://www.wvva.com/story/24400444/2014/01/08/transcript-of-gov-tomblins-state-of-the-state-address

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/02/nyregion/complete-text-of-bill-de-blasios-inauguration-speech.html?_r=0

Above are links to the State of the State Address of Governor Earl Ray Tomblin of West Virginia and Mayor Bill de Blasio of New York City.  Read the two addresses.  They seem to come from men of different countries, cultures, and traditions.  Hard to believe that these come from men of the same political party in similar roles, in the same country.

Governor Tomblin proudly touted a record of avoiding tax increases, holding the line on spending, and building up a near $1 billion rainy day fund.  He noted the soon to be developed factories in the state that would create coal and natural gas by products.  Tomblin promised to hold schools accountable and promised modest raises for teachers.  Shout outs to veterans and the Boy Scouts of America punctuated his relatively short talk that was built around gardening metaphors.

Bill de Blasio comes from the wing of the Democratic Party that thinks the EPA had better monitor one's gardening.  He praises Sandinistas, not fiscal conservatism.  He fights to gobble up more wealth from the most heavily taxed producers in the nation.  He picks fights with horse drawn carriages instead of teacher unions wary of school ratings.

Governor Tomblin is a relic.  He is a Democrat, there is no doubt of that.  Tomblin approved the federally encouraged expansion of Medicaid. This is expected to hit the budget hard, but his administration plans to make cuts in other areas to face the shortfall. Regulations and tort problems still bedevil development, but Tomblin's wing of the state party understands that social programs need a productive private sector to function.

He also comes from the old school. The Mingo County politics of his youth functioned a lot like the old Tammany and Daley metropolitan machines.  They directly rewarded those who supported them, usually illegally.  But they also understood the common man.  They knew he needed cheap food, cheap energy, decent housing, and a decent job.  And that a good economy could make that happen. Old time Democrats had a lot of flaws, but they believed in their country and in many institutions, like the Boy Scouts, that helped to make it great.  Tomblin is not corrupt, but he does still embrace a pragmatic approach. Cato in 2011 gave him the same rating as the GOP governor of Virginia for fiscal responsibility.

Contrasts between Tomblin and de Blasio illustrate how much the national Democratic Party has changed.  It moved in the direction of federal control over not only state and business, but also individual life decisions. They rely on bureaucrats, lawyers, and businesses that benefit from the Byzantine system of regulations and controls.  They have an idea of the way it ought to be, and that way leads to the regimentation of the daily lives of everyone along certain lines.  To keep us from self-inflicted wounds, or what they would perceive to be wounds.

Has the Republican Party changed? Certainly.  It abandoned unquestioning support of big business.  It now has a robust discussion within its ranks about pot legalization and gay marriage.  It has embraced more tightly than so-called liberals the basic philosophy of the Earl Warren Court that it once hated and feared (conservative publications have made a cottage industry out of reporting police abuses.) The party of small government in the past seven years has worked to make itself more consistent.  And on almost every issue it has moved more toward the freedom of the individual rather than diminishing liberty.

Looking at the addresses of the two Democrats, considering the drift of both parties, it is clear that a broad divide exists in the United States.  We are a house divided again between liberty and control.  We have two cultures that have no common foundation, and, at risk of being overly repetitive, these divides even exist within the Democratic Party itself!

Even in West Virginia, Democrats like Tomblin are a dying breed.  Moderate and pragmatic Democratic voters abandon the party for independence or the GOP.  Tearing oneself away from family and community traditions is hard, but so is stomaching what national Democrats have done to jobs and industry in the state.  Eventually a left wing rump will remain after the defections are over.  It will be more loud and shrill, but less effective in influencing the state.

Perhaps the disastrous Obamacare rollout will enable what is left of the Democratic moderates to regain control. Or it may drive them to more extreme dreams of control. Only time will tell

Mosque? Sure! Greek Orthodox Church? Nope.

Various elements of the government of the City of New York have in recent weeks expressed support, or at least neutrality, when it comes to the building of a gigantic mosque near Ground Zero. Defenses of the building from the president on down have centered on religious and property rights. Even though the building is certainly meant to be an insult, if you believe in these rights, you have to let it go forward.

Then comes the story about the small St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church. This was the only Christian structure destroyed by the 9/11 attacks.

New York's Port Authority, according to Fox News, has ended the congregation's eight year odyssey to rebuild their church. This comes despite community support and the active assistance of former New York Governor George Pataki.

Why is New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg so enthusiastic about this mosque while his administration has blocked the reconstruction of a church?

Dumb and Dumber

I have said it before and I will say it again. Professional athletes and nightclubs do not mix. Add someone carrying a gun who does not fully respect it and you have a bad combination indeed.

Former Giants wide receiver Plaxico Burress found this out the hard way. He jammed a gun into the waistband of his sweatpants and went out for a night on the town. It fell into his pants, went off, and injured him. It could have been a lot worse.

It was stupid and irresponsible in execution, but not necessarily logic. Professional athletes are targets for hateful threats or designs on their money. In other countries they have been killed over poor play. It is not dumb for an athlete to consider carrying a weapon. Carrying it in the waistband of his sweats is. Burress should have gone the legal route, gotten a conceal and carry permit, and worn it in a holster.

OK, so he was not acting brightly. Someone besides him could have gotten hurt. What should New York do with this character? Slapping two years in prison on this man went way over the top. He made a stupid mistake which was criminal. I cannot fathom this man spending two years in jail while some child molestors get less time.

This is apparently an anti-gun statement made by the authorities in New York. Make an example out of Burress. You have to wonder how many intentional criminals go free after doing much less time than this inept example of foolishness. It is not fair to Burress to be held up as an example. A better idea would be to have him star in a campaign explaining how to properly get yourself a permit and carry your weapon. Make him do some time in home confinement, then let him get back to work. Another NFL receiver got drunk and killed someone with their car. He did a lot less time than you might have expected or wanted.

Also, they obviously want him to be an example to other athletes and entertainers with more money than sense. The only thing they will see today is that Burress got shafted by the man. A better example would be an educational program starring Burress produced by the National Rifle Association and the State of New York explaining the legal process for conceal and carry as well as proper gun safety. The target audeince would be more receptive to that than an unfair sentence.

Burress got a bad deal. An appeals court needs to correct this injustice. Burress was dumb, but the justice system in this case was dumber.

Because He Obviously Has Nothing Else to Worry About

The politically weak Obama requested that New York Governor David Patterson (D) abandon his bid for re-election out of concern that he could lose the race. Obama considers the race too important for the Democrats to lose and Patterson must step aside. Thus spake Obama.

Does the arrogance of this administration know no bounds? How will New York Democrats react? Historically the governor's mansion is a powerful position that finds itself at odds with the New York City leadership. The US Representative from a district in Queensm Gregory Meeks, made the request. He has strong ties to the president.

Patterson is unpopular. His unpopularity comes from the fact that he follows the liberal Democratic playbook to a T. The state's economy deterorated and he has proposed a bizarre range of taxes instead of spending cuts. Yes, Patterson is less than effective. Still, according to tradition, the voters select the candidates, not the president.

This does come on the heels of New York reviewing its association with ACORN, one of the first Democratic states to do so. Patterson also did not select Obama's hand picked Kennedy to replace Hillary Clinton as US Senator.

The New York media and voting population should be outraged that Obama is trying to pick their governor for them.

New York City's Ninja Bandit Would Have a Short Career in West Virginia

Fox News reported September 25th on a crime wave striking fear into the lives of residents of Staten Island. Apparently a man enters homes dressed as a ninja, assaults residents with numchuks, and steals their property. Some have been slightly injured, but it is unknown whether the level of violence will escalate. The "Ninja Bandit" has struck seventeen separate homes.

Does anyone think that this man would strike seventeen different homes in West Virginia? Probably not. Bringing numchuks to a gunfight is not a prudent measure. As a matter of fact the ninja bandit would probably find some better way of spending his energy.

New York City for many years now, whether it be during Democratic or Republican administrations, has consistently discouraged law abiding citizens from owning firearms. The city government aggressively pushed for the legal right to sue gun manufacturers for the misuse of their product.

Has anyone ever suggested that automobile manufacturers be similarly treated if a driver is drunk, or uses the car for some illegal purpose? Absolutely not because it sounds ludicrous. However driving an automobile is considered a legal privilege, not a constitutional right. Despite the arguments of extremists, the Second Amendment exists so that armed citizens can protect themselves from dictatorial tyranny, their country from invasion, and their property from intruders. These rights extend back centuries in British and American law.

Gun rights' opponents have adopted what Stalin called "salami tactics," that is slicing away a little bit at a time. Gun rights groups such as the National Rifle Association are well aware of this and fight strongly any attempt to restrict our constitutional rights here. If we believe in freedom, we must all take a stand and support everyone's right to defend themselves with a handgun, if necessary.

After all, next time the ninja bandit strikes, it could be a vulnerable senior citizen. Without a handgun for protection, such a person would stand no chance against an intruder. If that happens, the victim's family can thank New York City leadership over the past few decades for aggressively tearing down their right to defend themselves