Jump to content

ANDY'S NEW ABORTION LAW


Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, Biz-R-OWorld said:

 


I’m not fine with it, but I’m not wasting time complaining about it. Shouldn’t have voted in Cuomo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

I didn't but unfortunately there are too many libs as your neighbors in downstate. I guess we just disagree what is a waste and what is important. Fair enough. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't but unfortunately there are too many libs as your neighbors in downstate. I guess we just disagree what is a waste and what is important. Fair enough. 


Unfortunately, I think Cuomo won many areas of NY


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/4/2019 at 7:52 PM, The_Field_Ager said:

Should we be able to retroactively abort unwanted forum members? You've got me thinking now.

man would that backfire on you

11 hours ago, Biz-R-OWorld said:

I haven’t read through all these pages. I’m not agreeing with the new law, But nobody is forcing you to do this. Further, if you hate the law so much just move to South Dakota or some state where you can’t do this if it makes you feel better. I voted against Cuomo, but we live in a state where he was voted in and this is a new state law.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's actually what is happening. A culmination of gun laws, abortion laws, liberal policies and taxes. Tack on the weather and many of the people only remain because of roots. And it's why his budget is in the shitter.

5 minutes ago, Culvercreek hunt club said:

Democrat controlled cities. and if you look at the blue down state results it was won there

Capture.PNG

You know where I stand politically, but people need to stop using maps like this. Both at a state level and federal level. Yes Montana is all red and the land mass is huge, but there are more people living in some major cities than the whole state. I understand the picture you're trying to paint and you're not wrong, but fact of the matter is it's probably something like 80% of the population live in those blue squares. If we were to change to a land mass based system, Fred from Herkimer counties vote would count the same as 2,000 votes from NYC and then how is that democratic? 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Biz-R-OWorld said:

I’m not fine with it, but I’m not wasting time complaining about it. Shouldn’t have voted in Cuomo.

Just like the celebs who complain about trump and said they’d move to Canada but never did, there’s a lot of forum members who have been complaining about NY for 10 years- just move elsewhere then

I convinced not as many people voted for Cuomo as the election claims.  I no longer trust the election results in the state of NY.  The corruption has exceeded the point of having any trouble manipulating the election results to favor a leftist Democrat.

The recent report on the dwindling tax revenues in NY, proves many NY residents really are leaving the state.  Many on here are planning to leave ASAP, including me.  That will serve to exacerbate the dwindling tax revenue problem, for which Cuomo will respond with even higher taxes on those who stayed, eventually forcing many more to leave and the state getting even less revenue.

Airline pilots coined a phrase for this situation.  It's a "death spiral".  That's what's at the end of this trip.

Edited by Rattler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Belo said:

You know where I stand politically, but people need to stop using maps like this. Both at a state level and federal level. Yes Montana is all red and the land mass is huge, but there are more people living in some major cities than the whole state. I understand the picture you're trying to paint and you're not wrong, but fact of the matter is it's probably something like 80% of the population live in those blue squares. If we were to change to a land mass based system, Fred from Herkimer counties vote would count the same as 2,000 votes from NYC and then how is that democratic? 

I get it. but it doesn't change the fact that the most population dense areas in NY (specifically down state) are very liberal becasue of the programs and handouts. SO they rule. I get that. We live in a Lib state. My point to Biz on the late term abortion is that it doesn't matter what the majority wants. It doesn't make it right and and his assertion that we should just quit belly aching and put up with it because it isn't important and the majority wanted it because they put Cuomo in power is one of the most asinine things I have heard on this site. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I convinced not as many people voted for Cuomo as the election claims.  I no longer trust the election results in the state of NY.  The corruption has exceeded the point of having any trouble manipulating the election results to favor a leftist Democrat.

The recent report on the dwindling tax revenues in NY, proves many NY residents really are leaving the state.  Many on here are planning to leave ASAP, including me.  That will serve to exacerbate the dwindling tax revenue problem, for which Cuomo will respond with even higher taxes on those who stayed, eventually forcing many more to leave and the state getting even less revenue.

Airline pilots coined a phrase for this situation.  It's a "death spiral".  That's what's at the end of this trip.

 

Where are you moving to?

 

I’ll be honest. Besides super high property/school taxes and limited big game species to hunt, I don’t really have any complaints about this state. I’ve never once felt restricted with respect to guns/ammo. NY has the greatest city in the world while also having amazing opportunities for outdoorsman. In under 6 hours driving you can be in NYC, the Catskills, Long Island, Finger Lakes, Adirondacks, Niagara Falls, even the Yelling Goat

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Biz-R-OWorld said:

I haven’t read through all these pages. I’m not agreeing with the new law, But nobody is forcing you to do this. Further, if you hate the law so much just move to South Dakota or some state where you can’t do this if it makes you feel better. I voted against Cuomo, but we live in a state where he was voted in and this is a new state law.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Biz, as far as what I know about you from reading this forum you don't have any children yet.  I think once you do, you hopefully will see the light on this.  All I ask is that you give this some contemplation.  I think anyone who gives this some real reflection will see the horror that this law now allows.  Eventhough it is now the law in our state, many of us are disturbed that ANY state in our nation would allow such a thing.

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow just look at that map crazy 


It means nothing. Belo made the point of above. It’s simply a way of portraying data. What if they portrayed it as each vote was a blue or red stick figure? It would all blue and barely any red


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Rattler said:

I convinced not as many people voted for Cuomo as the election claims.  I no longer trust the election results in the state of NY.  The corruption has exceeded the point of having any trouble manipulating the election results to favor a leftist Democrat.

The recent report on the dwindling tax revenues in NY, proves many NY residents really are leaving the state.  Many on here are planning to leave ASAP, including me.  That will serve to exacerbate the dwindling tax revenue problem, for which Cuomo will respond with even higher taxes on those who stayed, eventually forcing many more to leave and the state getting even less revenue.

Airline pilots coined a phrase for this situation.  It's a "death spiral".  That's what's at the end of this trip.

O it's easy to fix a election in places like NY and California 

When you have certain groups that vote 90% all the time one way  , 

It's a joke  most elections the probability should be very close to a 50 50 split so all you need is one  two  groups  to vote consistently one way and it's all over .  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Biz-R-OWorld said:

 


It means nothing. Belo made the point of above. It’s simply a way of portraying data. What if they portrayed it as each vote was a blue or red stick figure? It would all blue and barely any red


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

The Democrats  have been very good at brainwashing certain demographic groups  and all of the unions basically . Hard to overcome that .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rattler said:

I convinced not as many people voted for Cuomo as the election claims.  I no longer trust the election results in the state of NY.  The corruption has exceeded the point of having any trouble manipulating the election results to favor a leftist Democrat.

The recent report on the dwindling tax revenues in NY, proves many NY residents really are leaving the state.  Many on here are planning to leave ASAP, including me.  That will serve to exacerbate the dwindling tax revenue problem, for which Cuomo will respond with even higher taxes on those who stayed, eventually forcing many more to leave and the state getting even less revenue.

Airline pilots coined a phrase for this situation.  It's a "death spiral".  That's what's at the end of this trip.

Would you have trusted the election results if Cuomo had lost?

Edited by virgil
Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, Biz-R-OWorld said:

 


It means nothing. Belo made the point of above. It’s simply a way of portraying data. What if they portrayed it as each vote was a blue or red stick figure? It would all blue and barely any red


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

It's all demographics look at who dems overly kiss ass to

That's how they are winning there not winning because they actually have good ideas  , Or that  most of the  population even likes what they are doing . Cuomo said American was never great , now why would he say that,  see what I mean .

Edited by Storm914
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Biz-R-OWorld said:

 


It means nothing. Belo made the point of above. It’s simply a way of portraying data. What if they portrayed it as each vote was a blue or red stick figure? It would all blue and barely any red


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Let's look at it this way. Just looking at the votes for Cuomo from the down state counties in that blue blob of $hit. those were 2,636,961. ALL votes for Molinaro in the entire state 2,207,602.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, virgil said:

Would you have trusted the election results in Cuomo had lost?

No, I would just assume the corrupt didn't accomplish what they wanted to accomplish with the vote rigging.  It would also mean far more people voted for their opposition then they expected and they couldn't override it with illegal votes.  That's what happened to them when Trump was elected.  They didn't plan on the amount of support he got and weren't prepared for it.

We need to install a fool proof verification system at the voting booth.  How about a NICS check on everyone who wants to exercise their right to vote?  The left does the opposite.  They want to insure everyone can vote, vote often and continue to vote after they're dead.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's look at it this way. Just looking at the votes for Cuomo from the down state counties in that blue blob of $hit. those were 2,636,961. ALL votes for Molinaro in the entire state 2,207,602.


Sounds like not enough people voted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Biz-R-OWorld said:

 


Sounds like not enough people voted.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Well thank you Mr. Obvious...lol. I get it Biz. You have stated your position many times on the forum on many other topics. If it doesn't effect you personally or have any bearing on your banking accounts, you can care less and can't be bothered. I get it. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It sounds like a lot of upstate people didn't vote. Many have a defeatist attitude and have no fight in them at all.  Sheep.
 


Agree many of those “red counties” had very close votes to going blue


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Rattler said:

It sounds like a lot of upstate people didn't vote. Many have a defeatist attitude and have no fight in them at all.  Sheep.

 

 

1 hour ago, Belo said:

and btw, that kind of thinking is exactly what the lady from georgia and the guy from florida said when they lost...

Belo you could take anyplace you pick drop in certain groups or a union in that place  who always vote in a block and even if they  only make up 10% 15%  of the people there in  that state  town what ever,  it will go there way 9 out of 10 times .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Storm914 said:

O it's easy to fix a election in places like NY and California 

When you have certain groups that vote 90% all the time one way  , 

It's a joke  most elections the probability should be very close to a 50 50 split so all you need is one  two  groups  to vote consistently one way and it's all over .  

 

41 minutes ago, Storm914 said:

The Democrats  have been very good at brainwashing certain demographic groups  and all of the unions basically . Hard to overcome that .

You're talking about 2 totally different things. Fixing an election is the act of changing votes and data and straight up fraud. "brainwashing" isn't illegal and I'm not sure why you think this state should be 50-50. It's a liberal state and has been for some time now. As already mentioned, many who don't agree with the politics have left. Liberals breed children and try and teach them their values. Many red states have similar histories with the opposite party. What is more interesting is the recent trend in TX and CO as people leave the states they don't like and bring their politics with them.

This isn't confusing at all, you continue to amaze me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Storm914 said:

 

Belo you could take anyplace you pick drop in certain groups or a union in that place  who always vote in a block and even if they  only make up 10% 15%  of the people there in  that state  town what ever,  it will go there way 9 out of 10 times .

what in the sam hell are you talking about? I can't with you man. I just can't. 

Edited by Belo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Similar Content

    • By mike rossi
      http://www.buffalonews.com/city-region/politics/cuomo-finds-endorsement-decision-in-grisanti-panepinto-race-difficult-20140919
       
    • By NFA-ADK
      They can create all the Illegal laws they want, it has been proven that gun owners would rather become felons with guns than to be victims of a corrupt Government that want to take away our rights.  Facts do not lie and we will not comply! 
       
      http://townhall.com/tipsheet/townhallmagazine/2014/04/12/the-assault-weapon-rebellion-n1822409?utm_source=ArticleFeelingsWidget
       
      What is Cuomo going to do?  NOTHING!!!  He should stick to banning soda to save us.  So effective!  True savior of NY, LMAO.  Funny how abstract they get when power is at hand, like thinking you have a ticket to heaven on the fast track because you banned soda or guns.  That is a good one!
       
      Funny how he has guns to protect him at all times yet he feels it is OK to take away your guns.  Double standard?  You better believe it!
       
       
       
       
       
    • By mike rossi
      Obama endorses Chinese proposal for an exception to his own executive order to protect wildlife?
      Obama issues executive order to protect wildlife; then backs a proposal from China to make an exception????? If you read the following two articles both which surfaced today, that seems to be the case....
       
      News August 19, 2013
      Obama’s Executive Order to Protect Wildlife
       
      Will US Drones Fight Foreign Poachers?
      August 8, 2013 Sonia Horon
      (WILDLIFE CONSERVATION) President Obama is considering lending U.S. drones to Tanzania in an effort to combat the rapid growth of wildlife poaching. The population of elephants in Tanzania is declining at an alarming rate and wildlife groups estimate ten to twenty-five thousand elephants are killed in Tanzania every year for their ivory tusks. The areas in need of monitoring are too vast for rangers to properly monitor—leaving wildlife at further risk of being killed by greedy poachers. The news comes just weeks after Obama’s executive order to protect wildlife from illegal poaching. Read on to find out how the drones could help during this troublesome time. — Global Animal
      Approximately 10,000 to 25,000 elephants are killed in Tanzania each year. Photo credit: Stock photo
      Washington Times, Ashish Kumar Sen
      Tanzania’s storied wildlife reserves could soon get a watchful, winged inhabitant: U.S. drones.
      On his visit to the East African nation last month, President Obama discussed the possibility of using unarmed, unmanned aircraft to help overstretched park rangers combat the growing problem of elephant poaching in Tanzania’s vast wildlife reserves and national parks, Tanzanian Ambassador to the United States Liberata Mulamula told editors and reporters at The Washington Times this week.
      Wildlife groups estimate that 10,000 to 25,000 elephants are killed in Tanzania each year for their ivory tusks and the number of elephants in southern Tanzania has fallen by more than half. Much of the ivory is shipped illegally to Asian markets.
      “The extent of poaching is very, very, very high,” John Salehe, director of the African Wildlife Foundation’s Maasai Steppe, said in a phone interview from Tanzania.
      There has been sharp increase in elephant poaching over the past year, he said.
      Tanzanian officials say the area that needs to be monitored is vast with too few rangers.
      “There is trafficking, but also there is criminality, so we are fighting both,” said Mrs. Mulamula. “If we can work together, we can put an end to this.”
      That is where drones could play a crucial role.
      “The American administration is ready to put up funds to help us in areas where we think we can be able to work together and put an end to this trafficking and killings,” Mrs. Mulamula said.
      “One area, they said, was training [to] get more rangers. There was even suggestions that the U.S. government can help us with these drones.”
      Mrs. Mulamula said Mr. Obama did not make any commitment to provide drones to Tanzania.
      “But this was being said [in the discussions] that this was one of the possibilities,” she added.
      However, a senior Obama administration official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, later said the U.S. is not considering providing drones to Tanzania but declined to elaborate on a meeting between Mr. Obama and Tanzanian President Jakaya Kikwete in Tanzania on July 1.
      Right after that meeting, Mr. Obama acknowledged the threat posed by poaching and trafficking of animal parts. Mr. Obama issued an executive order to, in part, help foreign governments tackle the problem.
      “[T]his includes additional millions of dollars to help countries across the region build their capacity to meet this challenge, because the entire world has a stake in making sure that we preserve Africa’s beauty for future generations,” Mr. Obama said.
      An official of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service also will be assigned to the U.S. Embassy in Dar es Salaam to support the Tanzanian government’s efforts to develop a wildlife security strategy.
      A State Department official, speaking on background, said the United States is “concerned by the growing involvement of transnational organized crime and armed militias in poaching and the illegal wildlife trade.”
      “These activities negatively impact economic livelihoods, health, security and the rule of law across the African continent.”
      Tanzania is not the only African nation where drones have been considered to combat the menace of poaching.
      The Ol Pejeta wildlife conservancy in Kenya has teamed up with Airware, a California-based firm, to build drones to protect endangered wildlife, including the northern white rhino, which is hunted for its horn.
      “We see the drone’s uses in three parts: deterrence, observation and tracking,” said Elodie Sampere, a spokeswoman for the Ol Pejeta Conservancy in Nanyuki, Kenya.
      The drones at Ol Pejeta are still in the test phase, but “just the rumor of an eye in the sky and the noise of it flying overhead will serve to deter potential incidents,” Mrs. Sampere said.
      The drones also would allow the conservancy to check on the safety of endangered animals and send critical information to rangers about the number of poachers and whether they are armed, she said.
      Drones also can track radio-frequency tags on endangered species, allowing rangers to monitor their movements.
      Ol Pejeta is looking for “a drone designed for conservation and not just an off-the-shelf ex-military solution,” Mrs. Sampere said.
      Drones have been used to monitor poachers in other parts of Africa as well, including the Kruger National Park in South Africa.
      In December, the World Wildlife Fund received a $5 million grant from Google to develop technological solutions to combat poaching. The project combines the use of drones with animal-tagging technologies and ranger patrols guided by analytical software. The technology will be tested over the three-year grant period in Africa and Asia.
      The illegal trade in ivory and rhino horn is driven by markets in Asia, particularly in China and Japan. Large quantities of ivory originating in Tanzania have been seized in the Philippines, Vietnam, Thailand, Taiwan and Hong Kong.
      “The challenges are enormous, especially because they have that huge market in Asia,” Mrs. Mulamula said.
      Although international trade in ivory is banned, a one-time sale in 2008 perpetuated a legal market for ivory in China and Japan, according to the African Wildlife Foundation.
      The Chinese government has not been cooperative in African efforts to reduce the illegal trade in ivory, said Arend de Haas, of the London-based African Conservation Foundation.
      “China should increase law enforcement, coordinate with African governments and consider destroying confiscated ivory stocks to show their commitment to combat the ivory trade,” he said.
      However, Mrs. Mulamula said the Chinese government is sympathetic to Tanzania’s concerns.
      Khamis Kagasheki, Tanzania’s minister of natural resources and tourism, has been spearheading anti-poaching efforts in his country, but wildlife groups say much more needs to be done.
      “The Tanzanian government has not been alert enough [regarding] the rise in elephant poaching in the region and country,” Mr. de Haas said.
      Tanzanian officials announced in July that more than 1,200 poaching suspects were arrested over a 15-month period that ended in March. It was not clear how many were involved in elephant poaching. Two ivory traders were arrested in July.
      Mr. de Haas said official elephant-poaching statistics are lacking.
      “Slow political processes and corruption within local security and conservation institutes are major obstacles to quickly implement effective solutions,” he said
       
       
      Appeals courts considers shark fin ban
      Obama's staff backs challenge to California law
      Bob Egelko
      Published 5:10 pm, Wednesday, August 14, 2013
       
      With support from the Obama administration, organizations of Chinese American businesses and suppliers of shark fins asked a federal appeals court Wednesday to halt enforcement of a California law banning the possession and sale of the main ingredient of shark fin soup, a traditional Chinese delicacy.
      The law was passed in 2011, but the prohibition on selling and serving shark fin soup took effect only last month. It was sponsored by conservation and animal-protection groups whose stated goals are to stop the cutting of fins from live sharks - a practice already banned in federal waters - and to protect consumers from mercury in the fins.
      But opponents, led by Bay Area Chinese restaurants and their suppliers, argued Wednesday that the law is discriminatory and conflicts with federal management of ocean resources.
      Chinese Americans are "the only community affected," Joseph Breall, lawyer for the Chinatown Neighborhood Association and Asian Americans for Political Advancement, told the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.
      He said statements by some legislative supporters of the 2011 measure showed an intent to discriminate. For example, Breall said, one lawmaker observed that "we can't police the seas, but we can police Chinatown."
      But at least one member of the three-judge panel seemed unpersuaded. Judge Andrew Hurwitz noted that the trial judge, U.S. District Judge Phyllis Hamilton, who in a Jan. 2 ruling left the law in effect, found that it was deigned to promote conservation and public health, and there was no evidence of intentional discrimination.
      "Why isn't that a finding that we have to give deference to?" Hurwitz asked.
      The case took on a new cast July 22 when the Obama administration, in written arguments to the appeals court, said the California law interferes with the underlying purpose of the federal law - to allow commercial shark fishing to continue while prohibiting the "finning" of live sharks.
      By banning the sales of fins from sharks that were caught intact in federal waters, the state law "may effectively shut down shark fishing," Justice Department lawyers wrote. Although the federal law doesn't explicitly forbid such state regulation, they argued, it implicitly bars states from interfering with a healthy market for sharks that were legally caught.
      The National Marine Fisheries Service has proposed a regulation that could limit such laws in California and other states, including New York and Florida, a proposal protested by several dozen members of Congress including Democratic Reps. Jared Huffman of San Rafael and Sam Farr of Monterey.
      The state's lawyer, Deputy Attorney General Alexandra Gordon, said the Obama administration's argument was based on speculation that "something bad could happen in the future."
      "There's no reason to assume that our law will have any more impact on the market for sharks than the federal ban on finning," Gordon told the court.
      If California can't ban the sale of shark fins because of a possible impact on the fishery market, "states could never regulate the sale of wildlife parts," like ivory from elephants, said attorney Ralph Henry, whose clients include the Humane Society of the United States and the Asian Pacific American Ocean Harmony Alliance. He said the latter organization represents a substantial segment of Chinese Americans who support the California law.
    • By mike rossi
      http://www.politico.com/multimedia/video/2013/08/pipeline-incidents-since-1986.html
    • By mike rossi
      This video will supposedly be removed soon, so you should watch it soon.
       
      http://youtu.be/AdlVH1IjQu4
       
       
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...