Comments by fjcjr
Posted on November 10 at 1:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
McCarthy doesn't need to explain anything. Grand imperial high exaulted mystic rulers never have to explain themselves. Of course, they are subject to recall, which would be fitting for this ruler.
Posted on October 18 at 7:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
"Thanks to political realities or a state-imposed cap". Neither of these things matter, because as our elected officials have shown, in a non-election year, they will vote whatever increase they want without listening to opinions of the electorate, and as long as a the legislature has a voting block majority, the tax cap is easy to override.
Posted on October 4 at 10:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Are vehicle and traffic laws primarily about safety or revenue generation? It can't be both - if the laws are really about safety, if you can get drivers to be safer you'd get no revenue. It's like taxing tobacco to "get people to stop smoking"', but when the tobacco tax revenue falls short of projections and the politicians complain, it becomes obvious that it is really about the money.
Posted on October 2 at 8:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)
During last year's election, McCarthy refused to signi n a timely manner the authorizations required for his potential opponents to collect petition signatures. To subvert the authority given to an elected official by the electorate to undermine the public's choice in an election is reprehensible. What else do you need to know about the mayor, and his ego?
Posted on October 2 at 7:10 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Amortizing current pension costs is simply kicking the can down the road, which doesn't fix the problem, it only makes it worse later. Carl Erickson is the only person elected to City government that seems to have any intelligence. The Mayor has proved himself to be either inept or a liar - and a vindictive one at that!
Posted on August 17 at 12:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)
It was only a matter of time. There's a natural order of retribution in everything.
Posted on July 27 at 6 p.m. (Suggest removal)
You argue that a madman like Holmes will not be deterred when he has decided to commit such a heinous act, and then you argue that the laws need to be changed to stop this type of crime. You can't reasonably argue both sides of this issue. People like Holmes have no respect for the law - existing ones or new ones, so while new gun laws may make it less convenient for him to get weapons, he will not be stopped. New gun laws will only have an effect on law abiding citizens, citizens that have constitutional right to bear arms.
Posted on April 1 at 3:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Of course, there's no connection between people's actions, and tax policy..... We need to impose more taxes of all sorts on people that live in NY. The best that will happen is that they will shop for clothes in a neighboring state, and the worst is that they will simply move. It's a good thing that hasn't happened in years past! Your Editorial Staff is clueless. Perhaps we need to impose a special "newspaper tax".
Posted on February 22 at 1:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
This isn't surprising. While most police agencies seem to believe that they need not follow the same laws as mere mortals ( like speed limits, cell phones, and seat belts), until Newton's laws of motion are repealed, accidents will continue to occur.
Posted on August 11 at 8:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I recall the President asking all politicians to tone down the incendiary name calling in the wake of the Giffords shooting, but apparently that request does not apply to the Vice President or others on the left. I agree completley with the other comment, The Gazette's view of Washington and what needs to happen is very distorted. You cannot tax your way to prosperity.