Andrew Cuomo is one of the scariest politicians in America. He has advocated disarming people and taking their guns via confiscation. After the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting, Andrew Cuomo implemented stringent gun control in NY. Here is his speech on this issue. Notice his anger, hate and rage.
This should scare any freedom loving American. Andrew Cuomo’s angry words could easily have been said by another progressive leader 80 years ago.
Leftists never change!
Tags: Andrew Cuomo, gun control
Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.
Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.
Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.
We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.
Play nice!
The Diary of Daedalus
website design was Built By David
This guy scares the hell out of me.
What a loon. He fits right in with much of the rest of the Democratic Party.
mfhorn wrote:
I think they’re finally overplaying their hand.
@ mfhorn:
He fits right in the 3rd Reich.
Rodan wrote:
He’d like to, anyway.
You do need ten bullets—at least—to bring down a zombie politico.
And it’s the ability to hunt zombie politicos that the Second Amendment protects.
@ lobo91:
He really is an evil man.
@ buzzsawmonkey:
I wonder how many rounds his protection detail carries?
They’re NY State Police, which means their standard sidearms are Glock 37 pistols, each of which holds 10 rounds of .45 GAP
I’m pretty sure there’s at least one H&K MP-5 submachinegun on hand, as well. Those typically use 30 round magazines.
@ lobo91:
Those guys are ready to take down a whole herd of deer.
//
SUBJECTS of new york:
go and fuck yourselves.
pppppppbbbbbtttt.
best regards, Franklin’s own
buzzsawmonkey wrote:
you dont
lobo91 wrote:
One of our talk show hosts made a good point today. When a liberal airhead makes the derisive comment, “So, you think you can go up against tanks and machine guns?” The answer should be, “So you are admitting that the restrictions on firearms ownership is already too restrictive such that the government has a monopoly on power in contravention of the second amendment”.
coldwarrior wrote:
PA sez: enjoy being subjects of the crown of albany. you make me sick.
@ AZfederalist:
My usual question is “What would the government hope to accomplish by using that kind of equipment against its own citizens?”
Hmm…it took an hour and 15 minutes for the snow to completely cover Leia’s tracks on the deck.
Highly respected politicians want the police to search your house.
darkwords wrote:
Respected by whom?
Big technical error in tonight’s CSI: The bad guy tried to kill Sarah by firing 3 shots at her from a semi-auto, without realizing that his ammo had been switched for blanks.
Blanks won’t cycle the action on a semi-auto without modifying the gun. The first shot would have fired, but that’s it.
Oops.
@ lobo91:The people that voted them into office. We have 3 here in seattle, that if you look at their news history the media lauds all over them. They presented the gun bill to make police searches of homes ok. Then when caught. Just said “oops” No fallout from anyone.
@ darkwords:
You live in a city with a statue of Lenin in a public park.
They’ve mostly taken down the statues of Lenin in Russia.
That should tell you something.
@ lobo91: They look to control the conversation and limit the speech of those opposed. Til they have the population cowed. We do have a lot of marxist thought here being indoctrinated into the kids via social justice curriculums.
darkwords wrote:
Sounds like pretty standard NEA procedure.
Hmm…might be time to go on polar bear watch up on the roof.
@ 22 lobo91: I literally see it everyday at my work. a program. A plan. a film. a meeting. All forms of outreach to teach people that the story is all about the oppressed versus the oppressed. And colored in terms of race. It never stops.
@ darkwords:
Yeah, yeah…evil white oppressors…white privilege…whatever.
That explains why I have a graduate degree, spent 34 years in the military, and have no job, no medical insurance (despite a federal law that says I’m guaranteed treatment by the VA), and won’t get a dime of my pension until 2020, assuming the government even still exists then.
The actual word “privilege” means “private law”, as in something the king has and you don’t.
But in the leftist dictionary, “privilege” applies to all forms of property and capital that are passed down from one person to the next. They add the “white” in there to rile up their base.
Welcome to Zimbabwe!
@ Zimriel:
And of course those behind it are white, themselves.
Tonight’s episode of The Americans is interesting. It deals with the Reagan assassination attempt.
Our guys are afraid the KGB was behind it. The KGB people are convinced it’s some sort of coup, with Al Haig behind it.
I never really thought about what the Soviets must have thought.
@ lobo91:
Too bad they never set up a contingency plan for a crazed nutjob who thought Jody Foster would like him if he killed Reagan.
lobo91 wrote:
Saw that and started laughing! Blond Lady looked at me and said, “Like you say to me when I scream ‘Take the Gun Stupid’, it’s in the script it doesn’t have to make sense!”
Thought about it and damn if she ain’t right! It don’t have to make sense in Hollywierd if it’s DRAMATIC!
The Honor Roll…
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/02/20/have-any-more-gun-makers-stopped-selling-to-anti-2nd-amendment-states-oh-yeah-lots-more/
They need to update that list to include Barrett, the first big-name (if smallish volume) manufacturer to step up, but outstanding anyway.
Armalite might want to re-think it’s position, and Cheaper Than Dirt is still on probation…
Dr. K comes up with a great one…
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2013/02/20/krauthammer-sequester-most-ridiculously-hyped-armageddon-mayan-calend
MSNBC treats its viewers to a game of “Name That Party“.
Maybe they can claim Jesse Jackson Jr. is a Republican? It worked with Weiner:
http://blogs.reuters.com/gbu/2011/06/20/hes-still-not-a-republican/
Reuters claims they only made the mistake once (sending it out to hundreds of clients). The second time their clients altered the corrected headline to make Weiner a Republican.
calling all cars!
calling all cars!
there is snow in Kansas,
I repeat, there is snow in Kansas
@ Fritz Katz:
For some reason, when I was reading the story about Jackson the thing that has stuck in my mind ever since is the $43,000 Rolex. Who the hell buys a $43,000 Rolex but a friggin gangster?. I’d wager that Steve Jobs would never have bought something like that, and Bill Gates wouldn’t even consider such a thing!
I know I’m preaching to the choir here, but NONE of these guys personally do anything constructive regarding the hideous condition of the black family and culture; all they do is whine and moan and extort money from others via white guilt…….then piss it away like Capone. Blacks should be so outraged they’d want to tear him limb from limb, but it’ll nary even register because his constituency sees this as “business as usual”. And the cycle continues as yet another generation sinks into the abyss as hucksters like Jackson, his father, and the President profit from their discontent and misery.
@ MacDuff:
For $ 43 K, you can do better than a Rolex.
I dig some smokin hot ZZ Top in the morning…
helps loosens my bowels
Mike C. wrote:
We both know it’s not about quality or taste, it’s about “bling”. The only difference between him and a street thug is his income level, he’s most definitely his father’s son.
@ MacDuff:
Oh, it’s definitely about ‘bling.’ Rolex makes very few movements, and they’re available in watches costing a lot less than $ 43 K. The add-on is to make cases out of gold and stick gems all over them. I am a bit of a mechanical watch afficianado myself. But I prefer mechanical elegance and a bit of taste. Gemstones on a watch looks tacky to me, and always has. No objection to a gold case on a dress watch.
Full Disclosure -- I’ve been wearing a Rolex for over 30 years. Cost $ 700, retail when I bought it, which was a hell of a lot of money then. The current version of the same watch is about $ 5000. Stainless steel, no complications.
$43k to see what time it is …insane
@ heysoos:
It’s not about what time it is. It is about in-your-face conspicuous consumption and demonstrating how wealthy they are. I thought rich folks like this were the enemy of the Democrats. They seem to have made JJ Jr. feel right at home. Of course, he stole his wealth. It’s not like he built a small business or anything yuckie like that…
@ heysoos:
Well, not necessarily. Mechanical watch afficianados are largely people who appreciate old-fashioned mechanical ingenuity and craftsmanship. IWC made a DaVinci model back in the late 90s that told the hours, minutes, seconds, phases of the moon,and the day of the week and the date in day, month and year to all four digits. If kept wound and maintaned, it didn’t need to be reset for almost 400 years. It knew which months had 30 days, which had 31, and which years February had 28 days and which years February had 29 days. If you got one before January 1, 2000, you got to see the first digit in the year turn over. All done with gears in a not overly-large wrist watch. Around 1995/96, it was $ 65 K in a gold case. The price of the gold was trivial. What you were paying for was the 13-14 months of highly-skilled labor it took to build such a thing.
I have no objections to people who can afford to spend their money on such things. A Mossberg will kill a grouse just as readily as a bespoke H&H double will, but the H&H is a work of art. Personally, I’m glad some folks can afford these sorts of works of art, because at least I get to read about them, see pictures, and maybe even see one in person, even if it is something I’ll never be able to afford myself. I got to see Rembrandt’s “The Picnic of the Boating Party” once, so thanks to the Phillips Collection (of Phiilps Oil) for paying a vast sum of money for that and displaying it where I could see it myself. Thanks to those folks who can afford to buy and restore fabulous old cars, panes and such so that I can maybe see them.
Besides, the craftsmen that produce the really top-notch luxury items (watches, Aston-Matins, H&H guns, etc.) not only need to make a living, but are preserving skills that would have long ago vanished otherwise.
Mike C. wrote:
Yeah, Ive come to have a deep appreciation for quiet, understated elegance. I like nice things; clothes, jewelry, and various sundry luxuries, but I like to enjoy them quietly. The “bling” thing is tacky and tasteless. That may sound snooty, but that’s the way I was raised- and I come from a very, very modest background.
When I was overseas in the Navy you could pick those up pretty cheap….for a Rolex. I was 19 and, not knowing what I know now, I opted for a nice Seiko because I felt the Rolex was a bit out of my league. I bought one of these (the one with the yellow face). Funny this should come up because I just found that watch in a dresser drawer and I’ve planned on getting it fixed….it’s frozen at 7:10. I understand that it’s something of a minor collector’s item now as it’s an example of “the golden age of Seiko”. I don’t know what I paid for it, but I’m sure it’s worth considerable more now than then, particularly adjusted for inflation. No matter, I doubt if I’d ever sell that watch.
@ MacDuff:
My grandson will get my Rolex. Kept properly maintained, there’s no reason his grandson couldn’t get it in working condition.
BTW, I remember the first time I saw a Bulova Accutron (early 70s ?) -- it was $ 4000, back when my Rolex probably went for no more than $ 300 new in a retail store.
Question:
Do affirmative action students pay the same tuition fees like non-affirmative action students ?
Mike C. wrote:
Man oh man, if we knew then what we know now we’d be discussing this over an exquisite breakfast wine and an omelet made with imported cheese and truffles on a balcony overlooking the Mediterranean.
@ Guggi:
Generally I would say yes, but with qualifications. Many colleges have programs that allow students to get out of things like out-of-state tuition. When I went to Florida State, part of my National Merit Scholorship was a waiver of out-of-state fees. That can be more significant than the in-state tuition that is covered. At least it was when I went to FSU. I doubt that you can find accurate figures for how many affirmative action students get such waivers, hough. I don’t even know if you can get accurate figures on how many students qualify as Affirmative Action students.
Iron Fist wrote:
Thank you, IF. I stumbled about this sentence here:
@ Guggi:
One problem I can see with that statement is that it conflates all minority students with affirmative action students. That is one of the most pernicious things about Affirmative Action. If one is a minority, it is simply assumed that you got where you are through Affirmative Action and not merit.
@ Iron Fist:
btw. IF: affirmative action does no longer apply only to “minority” students but to others as well. Affirmative action has changed over the years. Interesting point is, that one third of affirmative action students (law school ?) are children of former affirmative action students. Kind of inheritance law.
@ MacDuff:
Unfortunately, Mr. Peabody never loans out the Wayback Machine…
Iron Fist wrote:
but only few make it. The drop out rate is very high up to 75 percent and from the rest about 50 percent cluster at the bottom/end of the grades. Only few of (black students) meet the academic qualifications for academic studies (there is a study from 1990′s out from Berkley where only 0.8 percent of the 9.8 percent black affirmative action students met the qualifications).
@ Guggi:
Yeah, and as I understand it the failure rate for Ivy League Affirmative Action students is worse. They let students who aren’t qualified into the schools where they are almost predestined to fail. Part of that problem is in the Public School System. I was in no way prepared for college when I graduated high school, and I had a good GPA in a “College Prep” course of work.