JUST PERFECT: Cuomo and his Statist Oath-Breakers Don't Even Know Which Guns They've Banned

Bob Owens explains:

In 30 pictures describing “pistols that are not assault weapons,” the NY SAFE web site incorrectly identifies 6 of 30 handguns presented by name, and 16 of 30 by type.

...NY SAFE serially confuses a rifle’s caliber with its model, and worse, can’t tell the basic difference between a rifle and a shotgun...

...or tell the difference between a weapons that are legal, yet function identically as “evil assault weapons”...

...… and we’re supposed to take them seriously? It would be laughable, other than the fact that if you mistake the NY SAFE Act web site a being a competent guide, you could end up in prison for violating the NY SAFE Act since the Web site and the actual law have very little in common...

And these are the masterminds who think they can prevent psychopaths from committing violent acts through unconstitutional restrictions on law-abiding citizens?

No wonder New Yorkers -- in huge numbers -- say they will defy this flatly unlawful idiocy.

Perhaps Mayor Bloomberg and the rest of the elites should disarm first, just to show the citizens how it's done.


Hat tip: BadBlue Guns.

NEW YORKERS TO ANDREW CUOMO: Molon Labe

It would appear that many New Yorkers -- including some law enforcement officials -- are prepared to tell Governor Andrew Cuomo and his merry band of Statists to stuff their unconstitutional gun ban.

After Democrats in New York rammed a sweeping assault on the right to keep and bear arms through the legislature that failed to exempt police officers from the draconian restrictions, gun owners and even some lawmakers are planning what has been dubbed potentially the largest act of civil disobedience in state history. According to news reports, gun rights activists are urging everyone to defy far-left Governor Andrew Cuomo’s new registration mandate while daring authorities to “come and take it.”...

...Preparations are already being made for mass resistance. “I’ve heard from hundreds of people that they’re prepared to defy the law, and that number will be magnified by the thousands, by the tens of thousands, when the registration deadline comes,’’ said President Brian Olesen with American Shooters Supply, among the biggest gun dealers in the state, in an interview with the New York Post."

Lawlessness, after all, begets lawlessness.

[The Post] quotes a Cuomo administration official admitting, "Many of these assault-rifle owners aren’t going to register; we realize that." Which means that state officials were merely posturing rather than entirely ignorant of history when they penned the law and jammed it through. As I've written before, gun laws traditionally breed massive levels of non-compliance — even in places where you might think people have no strong history of personal arms, or of resistance to the state, When Germany imposed gun registration in 1972, the country's officials managed to get paperwork on all of 3.2 million firearms out of an estimated 17-20 million guns in civilian hands. Californians may have registered as many as ten percent of the "assault weapons" they owned when that state imposed registration in 1990 (though the New York Times put the figure rather lower, at about 7,000 out of an estimated 300,000 guns covered by the law).

The reason for such reticence isn't hard to fathom. When gun owners charge that politicians can't be trusted to resist using registration lists for future confiscation, they're not being paranoid — New York City and California have both done just that.

Political officials might want to consider those experiences, as well as a recent poll finding two-thirds of Americans willing to defy tighter gun restrictions, before setting themselves up for public demonstrations of their impotence in the face of mass defiance.

The Left's hatred of the Bill of Rights -- represented in this case by Andrew Cuomo -- is one reason why iOwnTheWorld's Molon Labe T-shirts are selling like hotcakes on a cold winter morning. And why AR-15 mags have a year's worth of back-orders.


Hat tip: BadBlue News.

INFOGRAPHIC: Gun facts you'll never see in laughingstock media

Via TheGunMag:

NY STATE ASSEMBLYMAN SOUNDS THE ALARM: Democrats' First Gun Bill Ordered Confiscation of Firearms!

I wonder how many Ruby Ridge incidents this blatant attack on the Constitution would have touched off? New York State Assemblyman Steve McLaughlin explains:

Here it is. This is the video where I was asked to keep the Democrat proposals for the NY SAFE Act away from the public. This list was given to me by a colleague and it is not confidential.

This bill was an attack on the 2nd amendment and the Democrats clearly wanted to dismantle the work of the Founding Fathers. None of these amendments were included in the final bill thanks to us fighting back. I will not stand silent while these unpatriotic proposals are pathetically thrown at us a 11 o’clock at night:

1. Confiscation of "assault weapons"
2. Confiscation [of] ten round clips
3. Statewide database for ALL Guns
4. Continue to allow pistol permit holder's information to be [revealed] to the public
5. Label semiautomatic shotguns with more than 5 rounds or pistol grips as "assault weapons”
6. Limit the number of rounds in a magazine to 5 and confiscation and forfeiture of banned magazines
7. Limit possession to no more than two (2) magazines
8. Limit purchase of guns to one gun per person per month
9. Require re-licensing of all pistol permit owners
10. Require renewal of all pistol permits every five years
11. State issued pistol permits
12. Micro-stamping of all guns in New York State
13. Require licensing of all gun ammo dealers
14. Mandatory locking of guns at home
15. Fee for licensing, registering weapons

We know precisely what Democrats want: they seek to confiscate all firearms from law-abiding citizens, leaving only the state (and criminals) with a monopoly on force. These people are precisely the would-be tyrants our Founders feared, and on whom they placed explicit constraints as they designed the Constitution.

These Democrats are your prototypical, power-hungry elitists who despise the very citizenry they purport to serve.

They want to label certain things "assault weapons"?

Well, here it is: I'm labeling every current member of the Democrat Party an assault weapon on the Constitution.


Hat tips: The Mental Recession and BadBlue News Service.

BEHOLD THE WISDOM OF DEMOCRATS: Gun Control Explained!

Sooper Mexican reveals all.

Don't know about you, but I feel much safer now.

YEA, GOVERNOR CUOMO! GUN CONTROL IS WORKING! Tourist, 24, brutally beaten with tire irons, bats in NYC

Thank goodness concealed carry is forbidden in New York City! Otherwise, law-abiding citizens could have come to the aid of a tourist who was being beaten within an inch of his life. And golly gee, isn't it great that a tourist licensed in another state can't be trusted to safely carry in New York?

And thank heavens for the governor's creation of a human hunting preserve in New York, where innocents are easy prey for criminals.

A tourist from Massachusetts was recovering at a New York City hospital after being brutally beaten by a gang of seven young men armed with a tire iron and a baseball bat, police today revealed.

Kevin McCarron, 24, from Andover, was battered and stomped unconscious by the men after an argument in the trendy Greenwich Village neighborhood of Manhattan early Sunday... An onlooker captured horrific cell phone video of the attack, showing several young men kicking the victim on the ground.

...McCarron is seen struggling to stand as the group of thugs pummel hims with kicks and punches. At least one of the men is armed with an aluminum baseball bat, which he raises to batter the helpless victim.

Hatem Farsakh, 24, is charged with gang assault, assault and attempted murder.
Police also arrested Sherif Rizk, 22, also of Brooklyn, in connection with the case.

Militant Quakers are to blame, no doubt.

Yea, Governor Cuomo! I feel safer already!


Hat tip: I Hate the Media.

AN OPEN LETTER TO MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS IN NEW YORK LAW ENFORCEMENT: An Unconstitutional Law Ain't a Law

Norton v. Shelby County - 118 U.S. 425 (1886):

"An unconstitutional act is not a law; it confers no rights; it imposes no duties; it affords no protection; it creates no office; it is in legal contemplation as inoperative as though it had never been passed."

To my brothers and sisters serving in New York law enforcement:

Without public input from stakeholders, without any review from voters, and without discussion in a single public forum, the governor of New York and the state legislature slammed into place one of the nation's most restrictive gun laws yesterday.

The new laws classify more semiautomatic rifles as so-called assault weapons [thereby banning them], requires many gun owners to renew their licenses every five years, increases the regularity of background checks and makes it illegal to own ammunition magazines with more than seven rounds... Some gun-control advocates said the legislation gave New York the nation's most stringent firearms laws.

In fact, this law not only violates the Constitution's Second Amendment, the Supreme Court confirmed that fact just a handful of years ago when it ruled the District of Columbia's gun ban was unlawful.

In 2007, a panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ruled that the city's gun ban was unconstitutional. Senior Judge Laurence H. Silberman wrote in the majority opinion that "the black market for handguns in the District is so strong that handguns are readily available (probably at little premium) to criminals. It is asserted, therefore that the D.C. gun control laws irrationally prevent only law abiding citizens from owning handguns."

The ruling was affirmed the following year by the Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller. Justice Antonin Scalia's majority opinion said that citizens were guaranteed a right to keep firearms that were in common use in their homes for self-defense, but that the government could pass reasonable regulations concerning firearms and ammunition.

...Since the gun ban was struck down, murders in the District have steadily gone down, from 186 in 2008 to 88 in 2012, the lowest number since the law was enacted in 1976. The decline resulted from a variety of factors, but losing the gun ban certainly did not produce the rise in murders that many might have expected.

New York's new law bans guns that are "in common use" and passes unreasonable restrictions on magazines (try to find a seven-round magazine just for grins).

The plain language of the Heller decision renders New York's restrictions unconstitutional.

In Oregon, for instance, multiple sheriffs have told the federal government that any unconstitutional restrictions on guns will not be enforced:

Another Oregon sheriff says he would refuse to enforce any new federal gun law he believes is unconstitutional... Crook County Sheriff Jim Hensley said Tuesday he sent the same letter to Vice President Joe Biden that was sent Monday by Linn County Sheriff Tim Mueller.

The letter says politicians are attempting to exploit the deaths of innocent victims in the Connecticut school shooting by supporting laws that would harm law-abiding Americans.

Hensley told KTVZ he believes in the Second Amendment, and he says officials should consider other factors that may have a role in mass shootings, such as violent video games.

Cuomo has violated his oath of office. He took an oath to uphold the Constitution and he lied. His flatly unconstitutional gun ban law is proof that he has violated his oath of office.

I encourage you to listen to Cuomo's "State of the State" speech, if only for a minute or two.

The speech was praised as groundbreaking and landmark by progressives who fretted for two years that they were fooled by the son of liberal icon Mario Cuomo. Andrew Cuomo, they thought, had fashioned himself a new kind of Democrat focused on holding the line on spending and taxes.

"We are a community based on progressive principles," Cuomo said in Wednesday's often fiery speech. "We must remain that progressive capital of the nation."

Go ahead and listen. Don't worry, I'll wait here.

At the risk of violating Godwin's law, I want you to close your eyes and transport yourself back to Germany in 1933 and imagine this same speech.

The hysterical rhetoric, the shrieking dialect, the fomenting of panic, the over-the-top lies, and the demonization of a large, law-abiding segment of the population.

The progressive movement is at war with the Constitution.

No self-described "progressive" can honestly take an oath of office to uphold the Constitution. The two philosophies are oil and water.

Cuomo's unconstitutional gun control laws hold no weight and should therefore be given all of the regard they deserve. Which is to say, none.

PURE, UNVARNISHED IDIOCY: In Rush to Ban Guns, Andrew Cuomo Forgets to Exempt Law Enforcement

Yep, this is what you call Presidential Front-runner Material™ for the Democrat Party!

I guess they had to read the legislation eventually to find out what was in it.

These people are dangerously stupid. Not a single person stopped to think about whether any of these meaningless laws would affect the police? F***ing idiots.

It appears someone forgot to exempt police officers from the ban of ammunition clips with more than 7 bullets in New York State’s new gun control law...

...It’s a big oversight that apparently happened in the haste by the Cuomo Administration to get a tough package of gun-control measures signed into law...

A big oversight, huh? Yeah, well, stuff happens when you’re busy trampling the rights of the law-abiding.

On Tuesday, Governor Andrew Cuomo signed the sweeping gun measure, the nation’s toughest. It includes a ban on the possession of high-capacity magazines... magazines with more than 7 rounds will be illegal under the new law.

The problem as the statute is currently written does NOT exempt law enforcement officers... The NYPD, the State Police and virtually every law enforcement agency in the state carry 9-milli-meter guns, which have a 15-round capacity.

Unless an exemption is added by the time the law takes effect in March, police would technically be in violation of the new gun measure

.
Abject stupidity, but entirely predictable. We surmise if anyone actually asked Cuomo he’d have no idea what the police carry. And don’t forget, this is the same guy who said he could “overpower the extremists” with “intelligence and with reason and with common sense.”

What else would you expect from Andrew "the Architect of Ruin" Cuomo, the man who touched off the mortgage meltdown?


Hat tip: BadBlue News.

GUN-GRABBER ANDREW CUOMO: Architect of Ruin

Andrew Cuomo, governor of the bankrupt state of New York, has been in the news of late. Among his many bizarre proclamations are assertions that he could "confiscate" firearms and enact other unconstitutional, anti-gun statutes.

But who is Andrew Cuomo? What you may not know about him is that he was one of key architects of the 2008 housing crisis.

Curiously, not only is this man not a laughingstock (or, better yet, serving in federal lockup), he's ostensibly a front-runner for the Democrat presidential nomination in 2016.

Flashback to 1997, when President Bill Clinton named Andrew Cuomo, a man without any significant real estate or financial experience, the youngest head of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in history.

...Read more...

One Chart to Rule Them All

Before you click to enbiggen the chart (below), please consider this Los Angeles Times article by Ronald Brownstein, which appeared in print on page A-5 of the May 31st, 1999 morning edition.

"It’s one of the hidden success stories of the Clinton era. In the great housing boom of the 1990s, black and Latino homeownership has surged to the highest level ever recorded. The number of African Americans owning their own home is now increasing nearly three times as fast as the number of whites; the number of Latino homeowners is growing nearly five times as fast as that of whites.

These numbers are dramatic enough to deserve more detail. When President Clinton took office in 1993, 42% of African Americans and 39% of Latinos owned their own home. By this spring, those figures had jumped to 46.9% of blacks and 46.2% of Latinos.

That’s a lot of new picket fences. Since 1994, when the numbers really took off, the number of black and Latino homeowners has increased by 2 million. In all, the minority homeownership rate is on track to increase more in the 1990s than in any decade this century except the 1940s, when minorities joined in the wartime surge out of the Depression.

This trend is good news on many fronts. Homeownership stabilizes neighborhoods and even families. Housing scholar William C. Apgar, now an assistant secretary of Housing and Urban Development, says that research shows homeowners are more likely than renters to participate in their community. The children of homeowners even tend to perform better in school. Most significantly, increased homeownership allows minority families, who have accumulated far less wealth than whites, to amass assets and transmit them to future generations.

What explains the surge? The answer starts with the economy. Historically low rates of minority unemployment have created a larger pool of qualified buyers. And the lowest interest rates in years have made homes more affordable for white and minority buyers alike.

But the economy isn’t the whole story. As HUD Secretary Andrew Cuomo says: “There have been points in the past when the economy has done well but minority homeownership has not increased proportionally.” Case in point: Despite generally good times in the 1980s, homeownership among blacks and Latinos actually declined slightly, while rising slightly among whites.

All of this suggests that Clinton’s efforts to increase minority access to loans and capital also have spurred this decade’s gains. Under Clinton, bank regulators have breathed the first real life into enforcement of the Community Reinvestment Act, a 20-year-old statute meant to combat “redlining” by requiring banks to serve their low-income communities. The administration also has sent a clear message by stiffening enforcement of the fair housing and fair lending laws. The bottom line: Between 1993 and 1997, home loans grew by 72% to blacks and by 45% to Latinos, far faster than the total growth rate.

Lenders also have opened the door wider to minorities because of new initiatives at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac–the giant federally chartered corporations that play critical, if obscure, roles in the home finance system. Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac buy mortgages from lenders and bundle them into securities; that provides lenders the funds to lend more.

In 1992, Congress mandated that Fannie and Freddie increase their purchases of mortgages for low-income and medium-income borrowers. Operating under that requirement, Fannie Mae, in particular, has been aggressive and creative in stimulating minority gains. It has aimed extensive advertising campaigns at minorities that explain how to buy a home and opened three dozen local offices to encourage lenders to serve these markets. Most importantly, Fannie Mae has agreed to buy more loans with very low down payments–or with mortgage payments that represent an unusually high percentage of a buyer’s income. That’s made banks willing to lend to lower-income families they once might have rejected.

But for all that progress, the black and Latino homeownership rates, at about 46%, still significantly trail the white rate, which is nearing 73%. Much of that difference represents structural social disparities–in education levels, wealth and the percentage of single-parent families–that will only change slowly. Still, Apgar says, HUD’s analysis suggests there are enough qualified buyers to move the minority homeownership rate into the mid-50% range. [Ed: brilliant.]

...But with discrimination in the banking system not yet eradicated, maintaining the momentum of the 1990s will also require a continuing nudge from Washington. One key is to defend the Community Reinvestment Act, which the Senate shortsightedly voted to retrench recently. Clinton has threatened a veto if the House concurs.

The top priority may be to ask more of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The two companies are now required to devote 42% of their portfolios to loans for low- and moderate-income borrowers; HUD, which has the authority to set the targets, is poised to propose an increase this summer... Barry Zigas, who heads Fannie Mae’s low-income efforts, is undoubtedly correct when he argues, “There is obviously a limit beyond which [we] can’t push [the banks] to produce.” But with the housing market still sizzling, minority unemployment down and Fannie Mae enjoying record profits (over $3.4 billion last year), it doesn’t appear that the limit has been reached.

The breathless mainstream media and the race-obsessed Democrat Party hyped the kind of no-documentation, loosely underwritten loan that formed the core of the housing crisis.

In July of 2009, according to The New York Times, Andrew Cuomo's Department of Housing and Urban Development mandated that half of all loans purchased by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were to have originated with low- and moderate-income borrowers. In 1998, 44% of all Fannie loans had already met those criteria.

Consider the chart in that context.

On the way: more central planning, more social engineering, more Democrat-inspired disasters, but this time with your health care, not just your home.

Smoking Gun: Document Found That Touched Off the Mortgage Meltdown

The entire Democrat Party hardest hit:

[In 1994] the federal government declared war on an enemy — the racist lender — who officials claimed was to blame for differences in homeownership rate, and launched what would prove the costliest social crusade in U.S. history.

At President Clinton's direction, no fewer than 10 federal agencies issued a chilling ultimatum to banks and mortgage lenders to ease credit for lower-income minorities or face investigations for lending discrimination and suffer the related adverse publicity. They also were threatened with denial of access to the all-important secondary mortgage market and stiff fines, along with other penalties.

The threat was codified in a 20-page "Policy Statement on Discrimination in Lending" and entered into the Federal Register on April 15, 1994, by the Interagency Task Force on Fair Lending. Clinton set up the little-known body to coordinate an unprecedented crackdown on alleged bank redlining.

The edict — completely overlooked by the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission and the mainstream media — was signed by then-HUD Secretary Henry Cisneros, Attorney General Janet Reno, Comptroller of the Currency Eugene Ludwig and Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, along with the heads of six other financial regulatory agencies...

...The unusual full-court press was predicated on a Boston Fed study showing mortgage lenders rejecting blacks and Hispanics in greater proportion than whites. The author of the 1992 study, hired by the Clinton White House, claimed it was racial "discrimination." But it was simply good underwriting.

It took private analysts, as well as at least one FDIC economist, little time to determine the Boston Fed study was terminally flawed. In addition to finding embarrassing mistakes in the data, they concluded that more relevant measures of a borrower's credit history — such as past delinquencies and whether the borrower met lenders credit standards — explained the gap in lending between whites and blacks, who on average had poorer credit and higher defaults...

Lenders -- faced with ten federal regulatory bodies, the Attorney General, the President and the HUD Secretary -- quickly fell into line.

[They] threw such a scare into the industry that the American Bankers Association issued a "fair-lending tool kit" to every member. The Mortgage Bankers Association of America signed a "fair-lending" contract with HUD. So did Countrywide.

HUD also pushed Fannie and Freddie, which in effect set industry underwriting standards, to buy subprime mortgages, freeing lenders to originate even more high-risk loans.

And the rest, as they say, is history.

Barack Obama can blame George W. Bush, Herman Cain, Rick Perry, and Carmen Electra for the housing crisis. But the real culprits were the social engineers, criminals and cronies in the Clinton administration.

Please read the rest -- and pass it on.

Breaking: President Calls for Section 8 Housing on Martha's Vineyard

By Biff Spackle:



Citing a concern with diversity on the posh resort island of Martha's Vineyard, a vacationing President Barack Obama today called for a massive local buildup of Section 8 Housing.



"To paraphrase a famous movie," the President joked, "'I see white people.' In all seriousness, our national mandate for diversity demands that we integrate Martha's Vineyard, which today is a haven for millionaires and billionaires, as well as corporate jet- and yacht-owners, almost all of whom have pasty white complexions. And just think of all of the thousands of construction jobs we'll save or create!"



The President's auto-pen in Washington signed an Executive Order commanding the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to build "not less than three thousand low-income housing units on the north side of the island near Lambert's Cove."



In a prepared statement, former HUD Secretary and current Governor of New York, Andrew Cuomo praised the move. "It's high time the pampered wealthy on the Vineyard experienced some of the pain all of the rich people have inflicted upon society. The residents of the Vineyard need to see what it's like to deal with high unemployment, flash mobs, high unemployment, flash mobs, and crappy schools run by iron-fisted teachers' unions.



Continued on Page D-17

Can you guess what's different about Andrew Cuomo? [R.B.]

R.B. writes:

Andrew Cuomo took on the public employee unions -- and forced concessions from them -- in order to balance the New York State budget with spending cuts and without tax increases. Chris Christie (New Jersey), Scott Walker (Wisconsin), and John Kasich (Ohio) did pretty much the same thing in their states

But only Cuomo emerged from his battles with the unions lauded by media for his actions. Can you guess what made Cuomo different from the others?

Party Affiliation Determined Coverage of State-Union Battles

Jonathan S. Tobin 07.19.2011 - 12:59 PM

During the last several months, the governors of three states have gone toe-to-toe with powerful state unions in order to undo the harm done by their predecessors’ capitulations to state workers on wages and benefits. In Wisconsin and New Jersey, Republicans Scott Walker and Chris Christie were subjected to unprecedented abuse by the unions and their supporters. Yet in New York, Andrew Cuomo not only overcame union resistance, he managed to do so without much negative press, let alone the deluge of insults and demonization his colleagues suffered...

...Lacking the same political leverage their colleagues in Wisconsin and New Jersey possessed, the New York unions were forced to meekly bow to Cuomo’s dictates and accept drastic changes in compensation and benefits. Instead of being branded as a polarizing figure as was the case with Walker and Christie, Cuomo gets to play the state’s fiscal hero.

...as much as he deserves the praise for taking on a tough situation, the main lesson of this story is to show just how biased is the coverage of the not dissimilar confrontations elsewhere. As much as the collective bargaining issue helped generate sympathy for Wisconsin unions which refused to accept responsibility for the state’s parlous financial health, Walker’s goals were very similar to those of Cuomo. It should also be noted that like Cuomo, Christie didn’t touch the collective bargaining issue. Yet, he was branded a “Nazi” by rabble-rousing union thugs just like Walker, a slur never aimed once at the governor of New York.

The moral of the story is that unions and their cheering section in the liberal mainstream media can call a fiscally responsible Republican any name in the book and make it stick. But Democrats with the same intent get to play by different rules of engagement that can allow them to get tough with unions without being smeared...

This theme aligns perfectly with the spectacular new book Left Turn, which quantitatively measures the liberal lens through which Americans are forced to view events.

Graphic: gas taxes by state -- take a wild guess which states are the worst for gas taxes?

You don't have to be Kreskin to figure it out: the failed blue states of Illinois, New York and California take the prize.

The oppressive tax burdens of these destructive, Democrat-controlled states help explain why people and businesses are fleeing for greener pastures.

Democrat Governors Turn Teabagger

Isn't it curious how -- after all of their social engineering programs and union payoffs have collapsed into bankruptcy -- Democrats at the state level have begun to wake up, sounding a lot like members of the Tea Party? Exhibit A: New York Governor Andrew Cuomo:

This is a time of crisis for our state... We have the worst business tax climate in the nation, period. Our taxes are 66% higher than the national average... The State of New York spends too much money, it is that blunt and it is that simple...

...most damaging, our expenses in this state far exceed revenue [and this year we face a] very large deficit about $10 billion ... Next year, the problem goes to $14 billion. The year after, the deficit goes to $17 billion...

...We spend more money on education than any state in the nation and we are number 34 in terms of results. We spend more money on Medicaid than any other state in the nation and we are number 21 in results. We spend about $1.6 billion per year in economic development and we are number 50 in terms of results... We now have more than 600 Executive branch agencies.

...We have to hold the line on taxes for now and reduce taxes in the future. New York has no future as the tax capital of the nation. Our young people will not stay. Our business will not come...

Andrew Cuomo is a true far Left progressive. Yet even he has given up on the progressive agenda. California's Jerry Brown, himself such a radical progressive that his nickname is 'Moonbeam', is now recommending $12.5 billion in spending cuts next year (hint: it's not nearly enough).

Yet still Barack Obama refuses to cut. He organized a deficit commission and then promptly ignored its recommendations. The country is monetizing its own debt at a frightening clip, yet Obama's spending agenda persists. Republicans proposed a return to 2006 spending levels -- and Obama can't find anything to cut, despite adding $5.2 trillion in new deficits since Democrats took control of the purse-strings.

Even the hard-core Leftists in power -- like Cuomo and Brown -- have given up on their failed and unsustainable social engineering programs. All of them are cutting spending, enacting austerity measures, and trying to wrestle deficits to the ground.

All of them that is, except for President Obama, who seems bound and determined to Cloward-Pivenize the United States.