It is not exactly a new tax but it is one that has not been enforced in the past. A New York bagel shop franchise has been told by the politicians that it has not been paying its bagel tax. A tax that has not been enforced requires bagel shops to charge a tax for any bagel that it slices or is consumed on its property.

The state sent a tax bill for what it figured the shop owed and then told it to start charging the tax. This new tax has outraged bagel consumers who thought the shop was squeezing customers. The shop had to post signs to explain the tax and what had happened.

I bet a lot of people will get bagels to go from now on.

I am not sure of the law but if the shop is required to charge if it cuts the bagels maybe it could put one of those safety bagel cutters on a counter an let people cut their own. A lot of risk involved with that since people could get hurt and sue.

I think I would offer little containers of cream cheese and sell the bagels uncut to go. This would allow people to protest the tax and still get their bagels.

This is not about the 8 cents it costs per bagel. This is about the continual tax burden placed on people. New York taxes everything it can so much so that people are leaving for other states. If this state (and indeed all states particularly those run by Democrats) could manage their budgets effectively it would not need to keep adding taxes upon taxes to make ends meet.

It boils down to the fact that states (and the federal government) spend more than they receive and they spend much more than they should. They need to cut spending and eliminate all these nuisance taxes.

It comes down to fiscal responsibility.

No matter how you slice it.
Source:
NBC New York

Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.

The evidence is mounting that the person who left a van with a poorly constructed bomb in Times Square had ties to the Middle East but that has not stopped people from trying to point the finger at TEA Party types who are fed up with big government. Mayor Bloomberg of New York City believes that the person who did this acted alone, one of the McVeigh types Bill Clinton discussed when he was painting the TEA Party movement as violent. In an interview with Perky Katie Couric, Moronic Mayor Bloomberg had this exchange:

Bloomberg later told CBS Evening News Anchor Katie Couric that the suspect behind the bombing attempt could be a domestic terrorist angry at the government who acted alone.

“If I had to guess 25 cents, this would be exactly that. Homegrown, or maybe a mentally deranged person, or somebody with a political agenda that doesn’t like the health care bill or something. It could be anything,” he said. WCBSTV

Admittedly, he did say it could be anything but he specifically mentioned the types disgruntled with government and conveniently left out the possibility that it could be an act of terror from one of our enemies.

The left always tries to portray the TEA Party movement and the right wing as radical people who are prone to violence despite the fact that none of these people have participated in any violence. All of the violence has come from the left particularly by the thugs at SEIU and other unions.

This weekend the violence came from left wing Communist wanna be morons and those opposed to a crackdown on ILLEGAL immigration (all caps to differentiate from LEGAL immigration). The left wing loons broke windows and attacked the police. Anyone see this on the state run media news programs?

Perhaps we can help Bloomberg and point him in the right direction:

The News learned from sources that forensic evidence found in the Pathfinder points to the possibility that whoever prepared the car bomb has links to foreign terrorists. NY Daily News

An FBI-led terrorism task force has taken over the investigation of the failed car bombing in Times Square because of indications it was connected to international terrorism, a senior law enforcement source said Monday. Washington Post

I think anybody that has the type of material that they had in a car in Times Square, I would say that that was intended to terrorize, absolutely. Breitbart (video of Robert Gibbs who uttered the T word. Did he mean man made disaster?)

Sources tell CBS News the last registered owner of the 1993 Nissan Pathfinder – found in Times Square Saturday night – told authorities he recently sold the vehicle to a “Middle Eastern” or “Hispanic” looking man for $1,300 cash in $100 bills on Craigslist. CBS Evening News

Evidence is mounting that this was an attempt by one of our enemies with ties to the Middle East but that has not stopped the state run media from looking at the “homegrown” TEA Party “terror” group. This is how the left, in true Alinsky style, works to isolate the target.

These are the same morons who could not call Nadal Hasan a terrorist after he shouted Allah Akbar and went on a shooting spree that resulted in the deaths of more than a dozen people at Fort Hood. Obama called that isolated as they did with the underwear bomber.

But find a bomb in New York and the first people they look at are the peaceful patriots in this country.

The members of the TEA Party and those on the right are not going to set up bombs that would end up killing innocent people. This is the group of people who said that this was evil when the Middle Eastern terrorists did it on 9/11 unlike those on the left who tried to find excuses while discussing blow back and blaming America.

If the liberals spent as much time going after the real enemies of this country as they do going after those with whom they disagree politically then we would not have to worry about such attacks.

How is that diplomacy working out for you Barack?

How is that hope and change working for you liberals? Still think they hated us because Bush was president?

Never surrender, never submit.

“We will kill bin Laden. We will crush al Qaeda. That has to be our biggest national security priority,”–Barack Obama presidential debate on October 7.

Like him or not one thing can be said for George W. Bush and that is the terrorists feared him. Osama bin Laden, as has been recently discovered, underestimated the response from Bush when planning the attacks of 9/11. Bush unleashed pure hell and bin Laden was not prepared for that. After years of Clinton lobbing Cruise Missiles in response to any act against the US, bin Laden was convinced that America would do nothing more than that after 9/11.

That was a very costly mistake on his part.

There can be no doubt that 9/11 was the result of inaction during the Clinton Administration. Bin Laden has told us as much and his refusal to believe that the response to 9/11 would be brutal shows that the impression he formed during the Clinton years was that we would not respond in any meaningful way.

When George Bush unleashed the hounds of war the terrorists were taken aback and many of them died. Bin Laden went into hiding and we were not able to find him. Barack Obama told us he would find and kill bin Laden but he has not done so and he probably never will.

During Bush’s years there were no attacks on us though many efforts were thwarted. Obama came into office with promises that he would extend his open hand and that the world would love us. We would not be targets because Barry is a man of the world. He understands the Muslim world, we were told, because he spent so much time there.

Unfortunately, reality has reared its ugly head and that head shows us that the terrorists do not fear Obama.

We suffered two terrorists attacks in the US involving our soldiers. One was in Little Rock and the other at Fort Hood. Obama refused to see Fort Hood as a terrorist event and has refused to release the study of the incident. Luck and only luck prevented a disaster on Christmas Day when a terrorist was unable to detonate the explosives in his underwear. The inept Obama regime got very lucky that day. If the underwear bomber had been successful a lot of people would have been killed. Only dumb luck prevented that from happening.

Dumb luck was again responsible for preventing disaster. A vehicle rigged to explode was left in Times Square New York and the only thing that prevented disaster was a vendor who noticed smoke coming from the vehicle and alerted police. Pakistani Taliban have taken credit for the bomb (of course, it could have been a TEA Party member or McVeigh wanna be) and a New York station reported that a 911 call around 4 am informed of the bomb and indicated that it was a diversion for a larger explosion.

This is how the terrorists respond to his weakness. This is how the terrorists to whom Obama would extend that open hand answer his offer of an olive branch.

Terrorists do not respect weakness and they will exploit it. The enemy feared George Bush because he said we would attack them and we did and we did it by raining hell down upon them.

Barack Obama, on the other hand is not feared. He is looked at as a weak man who does not have the courage to engage our enemies in battle. His waffling with regard to Iran has emboldened those who wondered how he would respond to adversity. They now know he sets deadlines but allows them to lapse and they also know that he might talk tough but does not back it up.

And to think Hillary said Bush was all hat and no cattle…

The US has had some dumb luck in recent events but that luck cannot hold out. Luck is not proper mission planning but it has been Obama’s best friend thus far. This will not continue and eventually the terrorists will be successful.

I pray that day never comes but the rational part of me says it is only a matter of time before we get hit again.

The Obama regime practically guarantees it.

Others:
History News Network
KDKA News
WCBSTV

Never surrender, never submit.

The state of New York has notified a number of taxpayers that refunds they were expecting will be delayed for at least a month. The state is in a cash crunch and does not have the money to give back to its rightful owners.

New York is not the only state delaying refunds by issuing an IOU.

When a person receives a refund of taxes from the government it is not government money. It is money that people overpaid, it belongs to them and the states have no right to hold up that money.

Part of the problem lies with people who think a tax refund is free money from the government. Too many people do not grasp the concept that this is their money and that they paid too much. They do not understand that this money represents a free loan to the government.

The best thing people can do is to work out their deductions so that they do not owe or get a refund. This is nearly impossible and I am satisfied if I am plus or minus $200. I do not want them using my money for free especially when I can be investing it and getting interest.

If more people did this they would be able to actually save.

People should also keep in mind that this is a one way street. If taxpayers owe the government money the government expects it to be paid when it is due and if it is not then interest and penalties will accrue (unless you are a member of Obama’s administration). The government does not really care how poor your financial situation is, you are expected to pay what you owe and to pay it on time.

Funny, government works to help people who can’t pay their mortgages, can’t pay their car payments, can’t pay their other bills (tough economic times you know) and even allows itself to delay payments of your money back to you.

God forbid you should have trouble paying the taxes you owe.

They will send a hit squad for you even if you only owe 4 cents (an amount you are not obligated to pay).

The Obama Justice Department wants to try some of the terrorists in America and have chosen New York as the site. This was done with Obama’s consent but without the advice of Congress or the people of New York. There are a lot of concerns with this plan especially security, gridlock and the possibility that they will be found not guilty and released here in America. Some members of Congress are balking at the idea and there are calls to move the trial.

I say that it should be moved but it should remain in America.

The people who are in favor of having the trial here tell us that it is important to do it here to show we are a nation of laws and that holding the tirals in New York will put the accused in the vicinity of the Trade Center Towers. A nice idea but it does not display us as a nation based on justice.

I think in order to do this right we need to move the trials to Washington DC. That is the seat of power in this country and it is where our national laws originate. It is where our military leaders are located and the Pentagon, which was also attacked, is not far away. Surely there is a federal court in Washington DC.

This would absolutely demonstrate to the terrorists that they are in a place where the rule of law is important. It will also allow those who imposed the debacle on New York to be affected more intimately, like they wanted for New York.

This is a great idea. There is already a ton of security in DC and access to it is more easily controlled. It is a win, win because Eric Holder gets to reap what he has sown and the people of New York will be spared the circus.

The only rules are that Holder and all his people plus all the people in the Obama administration must continue to work there each day. They must not move their families out of the area and Obama’s kids must still go to school each and every day. In addition, either Obama or Biden must be in town while the trial is in progress.

Let’s propose this alternative and see if they still think it is a great idea.

Those of you who support the idea of having the trials in New York, how do you feel about them being in DC?

Pat Buchanan has an interesting article out today that asks if America is at war. Then he goes on to say that if we are at war then why are we bringing terrorists who committed war crimes into our country to be tried in a court of law. He asks why we are granting Constitutional rights to people who are not entitled to them and who should be tried in military courts.

Buchanan’s opinion is that if things go badly with this trial it will be the end of Obama’s occupation of the White House.

I agree with this perspective. I have wondered why it is that these people are taking such a huge gamble. What happens if, for some reason, they are found not guilty or if the case is dismissed for some technical procedure?

It is not beyond imagination that some such thing could happen and some of the terrorists could walk out free men just like Obama’s pal Bill Ayers.

The other thing I wonder is, if they are found anything but guilty where will we send them? Will they be released into the general public? What else can we do with them? If we have had such a difficult time getting homes for those detained at Gitmo then what will change to make countries suddenly willing to take them? It is possible that the monsters who killed our fellow citizens could walk for one reason or another.

And if they walk, Obama can pack his bags because he will not get a second stint.

This is a huge gamble for Obama and if things work out he will look like a hero but if they don’t then things are going to get very ugly for him.

Treating acts of war as a crime issue is one of the things that led to the attack on 9/11.

Treating these terrorists as regular criminals is a big mistake that could have serious consequences both for Obama and for the country as well.

RINO in New York quits race

Republican (In Name Only) Dede Scozzafava in New York’s 23^rd Congressional District decided to drop out of the race after Conservative Party member Doug Hoffman took a lead in the polls and Scozzafava ran low on money and could not continue her campaign. Hoffman should win the contest but anything can happen (his opponent is backed by ACORN) and this will be a blow to Obama who selected the former Republican Congressman to be Secretary of the Army in hopes of getting a Democrat in the seat.

Scozzafava was an appealing choice to Democrats as well because she held all of their positions. She was pro-choice, endorsed by ACORN, supported Cap and Trade, supported the stimulus and has taken a number of positions that align her with the liberals. If a Republican had to win this then she was the one Obama could live with. Unfortunately for Obama, a conservative entered the race. Hoffman is also a concern for a Republican establishment that has not learned that acting like liberals does not lead to success at the polls.

Hoffman received endorsements from establishment yes men like Newt Gingrich and Michael Steele along with the RNC but Hoffman received endorsements from true conservatives like Sarah Palin, Tim Pawlenty and Fred Thompson, people who were not willing to support someone just because an R was next to her name. If Hoffman wins there will be a message for Obama in it but also one for the Republican establishment.

Valerie Jarrett, an Obama adviser, said this:

“It’s rather telling when the Republican Party forces out a moderate Republican and it says, I think, a great deal about where the Republican Party is right now,” she said. Fox

What is rather telling is that Jarrett thinks someone with Scozzafava’s positions is moderate. This just goes to show how out of touch she is because she believes that the radical positions of the administration are moderate.

How much of a Republican is Scozzafava?

She endorsed the Democrat in the race, a move that Jarrett welcomed.

Ever wonder why it is that people like Jarrett will make statements like she did about Republicans rejecting a “moderate” candidate when her party is eviscerating its own moderates because they will not support the health care takeover?

What a difference an administration makes

Attorney General Eric Holder says a lawsuit in San Francisco over warrantless wiretapping threatens to expose ongoing intelligence work and must be thrown out.

In making the argument, the Obama administration agreed with the Bush administration’s position on the case but insists it came to the decision differently. A civil liberties group criticized the move Friday as a retreat from promises President Barack Obama made as a candidate. AP

After all the campaigning Obama did and all the carping he did about Bush and wiretaps his AG wants the lawsuits dismissed because of national security. I applaud the decision but wonder why an apology to Bush was not rendered at the same time.

The claim here is that Obama’s folks came to the same conclusion by different means. While I doubt this, who cares? If Bush said it was bad for national security and Obama says the same thing, who cares about how they arrived at that conclusion? The important thing is both of them state their goals as protecting national security.

Some people are unhappy with ObaMao because they claim he is breaking his campaign promise.

Here is a newsflash for them. He has broken a whole bunch of them. All of his promises come with an expiration date so get use to it.

I agree with Hillary Clinton 100%

I do not often agree with Hillary Clinton. She is another Socialist but just not as far out there as her boss. But when she gets something correct I have to give her credit. During her visit to Pakistan she noted that [in Pakistan] “…the percentage of taxes on GDP is among the lowest in the world”.

She then made a statement that I agree with:

We (the United States) tax everything that moves and doesn’t move, and that’s not what we see in Pakistan,” she said. Daily Times

Hillary is correct that we tax everything and if the morons in government get their way with cap and tax they will tax us for breathing (since we produce CO2). This is about as far as I go with Clinton because while she was astute enough to observe our tax situation she is also one of the people responsible for those taxes. She is a tax and spend liberal who thinks nothing of increasing taxes or adding a new tax in order to get more money flowing into government.

Yes Hillary, we tax everything and you are one of the reasons.

I guess I should feel good for her. They say that recognizing the problem is the first step to recovery.

Four people were arrested today for attempting to reign terror in New York. The media described them as a home grown terrorist group but, in reality, the group of men were Muslim converts who wanted to bomb Jewish synagogues and shoot at military aircraft. They might have been here but their terror was not home grown. It was grown from the seeds of hatred sewn in the Middle East.

While this news was fresh, Obama was giving a speech defending his decision to close Gitmo. In that speech he did not rule out bringing some of the terrorists at Gitmo to the United States. The Won stated that he would not bring those who were a danger to us into the country which tells me he means those who would not be in jail. How could the ones in jail be a danger?

Obama said that some of them would be brought here and placed in Super Max prisons while they awaited trial. That might work out well if they are convicted of crimes but what happens if they are found not guilty? Other countries are not willing to take them and we will not be able to put them back in jail so what will we do with them? Just because they are found not guilty does not mean they are not a threat.

If we are forced to let these people loose in America then they should be placed in the neighborhoods of the Democrats who want them released. Obama should be required to take a few of them in at the White House and let them around his daughters with no Secret Service protection. That is what he is proposing happen to the rest of us because if they are released they will certainly be living near our children and we don’t have law enforcement guarding us.

Obama has no plan. He did not think through this process and he figured that all he had to do was smile and say “hope and change” and other countries would take these people. He, as stated by his Press Secretary, made a hasty decision and now he is trying to figure out how to make it happen. He is finding out that it is not very easy to get rid of the people at Gitmo or Bush would have done so.

It was interesting listening to him because he blamed everything on George Bush and then said that Gitmo was used as a recruiting tool for the terrorists and that we are less safe because of the place.

Right, and the fact that we have not been attacked since 9/11 is proof that we are less safe.

The terrorists captured today by the FBI claim they were motivated by our actions in Afghanistan. Obama has increased the number of troops in that country so it is safe to say his actions made them want to wage jihad.

Is it safe to say that Obama is a recruiting tool for the terrorists?

America became less safe when Obama took office. The events in New York show that the threat is still out there and we will be attacked again. It is only a matter of time.

Keep this in mind folks because when it happens Obama will not be able to claim it was Bush’s fault though I have no doubt he will try.

The best news of the day is that Dick Cheney gave a speech at the same time Obama did (Obama evidently changed his to coincide with Cheney’s – probably and effort to take the spotlight from Cheney) and Cheney laid it all on the line and schooled the youngster.

Sources:
WCBSTV
New York Daily News
NBC New York
Daily Mail UK
Al-Reuters

New York is one of those liberal states that is broke, much like California and Maryland (though Maryland does well because of its proximity to DC). Politicians in New York have been trying to raise taxes to ease their deficit but they have done little to curb spending.

Now New York has a plan to raise 100 million dollars a year. The politicians want to add a one cent tax on each can of non diet soda. Once again the politicians are slipping a tax in on people. But Big Dog, it is only a penny and that means it is less than a quarter for a case of soda. Besides, this will get people to stop drinking sugary drinks and improve their health.

Right. The idea here is that New York needs money so it will add a tax on a product in hopes that people will use less of the product. Let’s suppose that a number of people stop drinking sugary soda, how will that help the deficit? This is like the inane argument that an increase in tobacco tax is needed to fund children’s health care and will make more smokers quit. If they quit, who will fund the children’s health care?

No society ever taxed itself into prosperity and raising taxes during an economic downturn is foolish. People will react with their feet. Those who live near other states will shop in them. I shop in Delaware for some things because there is no state tax there. It only makes sense to stop at the store when I am up there for business and get what I need because I will pay less.

New Yorkers are hosed with taxes in every aspect of their lives just as those in California are and it is obvious that this tactic does not work. Taxing soda or anything else will do nothing to help the situation and will change people’s habits with regard to shopping.

Those habit changes will be detrimental to the state’s budget.

Cut spending and cut taxes. It works every time it is tried.

Source:
Daily News

The Obama White House needed some publicity photos of Air Force One so they decided to send the plane out on a secret mission. That mission was to fly low around New York with a fighter jet in pursuit and get some nice Kodak moments near the Statue of Liberty. Some police agencies were notified of the stunt but everyone was sworn to secrecy under threat from the feds. Unsuspecting New Yorkers saw the events unfold and had flashbacks of 9/11. Anxieties ran deep as buildings were evacuated of people who thought they were under attack once again.

This whole episode is wrong on many levels. We will get to the terror inflicted by Obama in a minute. Let’s look at a few other issues first.

How much money did it cost to pull off this little stunt? US aircraft were flying around for no good reason and costing tens of thousands of dollars per hour. The taxpayer footed the bill for this publicity stunt and that is unacceptable. The Obama people are not good stewards of our money. They are supposed to be tech savvy though. Do they expect us to believe that they have never heard of Photo Shop? All they had to do was get a few pictures of Air Force One and Photo Shop it to look any way they wanted. That would have cost a heck of a lot less and it would have prevented a terrorist attack on New York. They could have gone from Photo Op to Photo Shop and saved a major headache. Total cost of the stunt is reported to be $328,000 and they could buy a lot of copies of Photo Shop for that kind of money.

How about the carbon footprint that this episode left behind? Obama wants us all to drive wind up cars, keep our tires inflated, and keep our thermostats down so that we can conserve and get off the nasty oil those Arabs sell us. His little stunt burned a whole lot of fuel (probably more than 50 cars will use in a year) and for no good purpose. Photo Shop could have saved all that fuel and the associated carbon footprint.

Normally I could care less about the carbon issue or burning fuel but our tax dollars pay for the fuel and Obama is the one telling people they have to conserve. He is kind of like Al Gore. Conserve while I use all I want.

The FAA warned that such a flight would cause panic but the government forced New York officials to keep the photo op secret and there were threats of federal sanctions if the story leaked out. This has to be one of the more disturbing issues. If they had just been boneheaded and neglected to think of the anxiety the flight would cause we could just say they were incompetent but they were warned by the adults that this could cause a real problem and they still did it. What harm could come from telling people that planes would be flying low for an exercise?

Obama claims to be furious about this. It is his plane and it was his White House that did this so he is responsible for it because it happened under his watch and it happened right under his nose. It is not like I am blaming him for things people did in an Iraqi prison that is thousands of miles away; he is right where the decisions were made. Furious or not, this is all on him.

The people of New York were terrorized by the Obama Administration. It is probably a good thing he renamed it from the War on Terror or he might be guilty of terrorism.

The people of New York are not happy because they were not warned about the event. New York City went overwhelmingly blue in the presidential election but I wonder how they feel about their messiah now considering what he did to them.

Obama repays their support by strafing their city and terrorizing them.

He has been in office 100 days and made 100 mistakes (at least). Was this act of terror one of them?

Maybe that is why his terrorist buddies admire him.