• Forest Hills
• Politics
• Rego Park

• Log in
• Register
• RSS for this post's comments

Comments

• Hey, it’s a less stupid name than “AQUA”.

  Anyway, you’re allowed to take whatever notes and papers you’d like into the voting booth. Why would you think otherwise?

  Posted by peterd
  on September 20th, 2007 at 11:08 am

• Electioneering. It’s advertising material explicitly promoting specific candidates.

  Posted by Steve
  on September 20th, 2007 at 11:12 am

• More importantly, AQUA is a great name, Shlabotnick.

  Posted by Forest Hills 72
  on September 20th, 2007 at 11:14 am

• For the record, I concur.

  Posted by Steve
  on September 20th, 2007 at 11:15 am

• It’d be illegal if they were handing it out to people within 100 feet of the polling place on the day of the election. Anything you keep to yourself is allowed. Direct from the Office of the Attorney General, it’s #2 on the list:

  http://www.oag.state.ny.us/civ.....rights.pdf

  And “AQUA” sounds like a condo development in Miami. If you’re going to push a name for the area, at least try to bring back something that fits, like Kew Forest!

  Posted by peterd
  on September 20th, 2007 at 3:18 pm

• Will take it under advisement. The good news is I think we’re the only three people who care.

  Posted by Forest Hills 72
  on September 20th, 2007 at 4:50 pm

• Its legal so long as they’re not distributing it within 100 ft of a polling place. I also wouldn’t be so smug that illegal behavior is something to be expected from Republicans. The other party wrote the book on election fraud. Take a good look at who gets indicted in this town for that stuff. The Democrats have had a very long history of political corruption around here. Politics is a very dirty racket and even the most honest can have a tough time staying straight. Nobody is pristine but the GOPs are choirboys next to these guys.

  Posted by TALBOTRESIDENT
  on September 21st, 2007 at 12:12 pm

• Yes, yes, I know, but I was being smug in light of things currently happening on the national political scene. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The party with more power is going to be the party getting caught abusing it. When do Queens Republicans even have the opportunity to get involved in scandals? Though of course, the only New York City Council member currently under indictment for a felony crime is one of the only three Republicans.

  Posted by Steve
  on September 21st, 2007 at 12:22 pm

• Like most good liberals, you express outrage over legal tecniques the other side uses, with that smug sense of entitlement that all of your ilk exhibits. Cost you the last 2 elections, will cost you the next one too. Keep up the good work!

  Posted by Joe Dakar
  on September 21st, 2007 at 10:18 pm

• “Cost you the last 2 elections, will cost you the next one too.”

  Joe, nice try, but the only way there will be a Republican victory in 2008 is if they succeed in using dirty tricks again. Are you aware of what the Republicans are trying to do in California right now? They are trying to change state law regarding electoral votes so that it is not winner take all but instead the electoral votes will be divided according to the percentage of votes won by each candidate. This is a transparent attempt to take electoral votes away from the Democratic candidate (who will definitely win a majority of votes in California) and give them to the Republican candidate. In a close election, this one change could make the difference in who wins. And, of course, all of this is being done under the guise of “fairness”. Notice how the Republicans don’t care about “fairness” in solidly Republican states like Texas that also have winner-take-all rules. The fact that the Republicans are even trying this shows that they know they will lose unless they change the rules in the middle of the game.

  Posted by FHGuy
  on September 22nd, 2007 at 12:05 pm

• I 100% agree with FHGuy. There are huge costs at stake. The attempt to dismantle the electoral college state by state goes along with the redistricting done in Texas (which prior to 1996 was essentially a democratic stronghold), as well as the push for Diebold voting machines that have been clearly demonstrated to be easily corruptible. Look at what happened in OH in 2004, people voted for one slate a different was registered. This is not conspiracy paranoia, this has been borne out in investigations done after the election. Unfortunately, for whatever reason, the dems chose not to follow-up. I will never understand that.

  Anyway, we all must be vigilant and understand what is at stake. While the 2008 election is the dems to lose, there will be an attempt to steal the election. What do you think the Attorney General scandal was all about? This was an attempt to stack the deck with AG’s who would be in line with the republicans, such as the former AG of OH. No one should be naive, in many ways when it comes to voting, we are no better than any third world country.

  Posted by KHResident
  on September 22nd, 2007 at 2:00 pm

• […] Queens Central » New neighborhood discovered!: “It’s “Rego Hills,” according to Republican mailer I found in the vestibule of my building. The oversized postcard comes from the Forest Park PAC on Dartmouth Street and encourages recipients to vote for a slate of candidates in this coming Tuesday’s Republican primary. […]

  Posted by Mike’s Notes » Blog Archive » Queens Central » New neighborhood discovered!
  on September 22nd, 2007 at 2:37 pm

• Yadda yadda yadda, I love you liberal dems. Allow me to translate: “We’re really smart, so any election we don’t win had to be stolen from us. And that other side…oooooooh they make me mad! We never pull any stunts and they keep doing it….and winning. gosh darn it!” Meanwhile, in the real world, the rest of America knows that the Dems have zero electable candidates. Whether you run the novice ex-muslim, the ornery lesbian or the oily trial lawyer, you’re gonna lose. The only person who stands a chance (and would - SURPRISE! - probably get my vote) is Mr. Gore. But your own peeps are playing their own tricks to keep him out of it so no worries there.

  Posted by Joe Dakar
  on September 24th, 2007 at 11:18 pm

• Wow, you managed to be simultaneously racist, sexist, homophobic and completely inaccurate (Obama was never a Muslim; nobody has ever tagged Hillary as a lesbian except for marginalized white men who are terrified of powerful women). Nice job! By the way, conservative Republicans hate all their candidates, whereas Democrats are largely satisfied with their choices. I used to think that Hillary was unelectable, too, but those Republicans are all really unappealing, so I’ve been re-evaluating that.

  I follow politics very, very closely and this is the first I’ve heard of any conspiracy to keep Al Gore out of the race. So tell me: paranoid fantasy, or just too much freerepublic.com?

  Posted by Steve
  on September 25th, 2007 at 1:15 am

• Steve: The above comment is the typical attack the messenger, not the message. Smear who you can, and that way you keep the discussion away from the issues: health care, depressed incomes, losing jobs to overseas, need I go on? Instead link Max Cleland with Osama Bin Laden, in fact link Barack Obama with Osama as well, that was a neat little slur.

  As a country we must all stay on message and understand what is at stake, no matter what party you are affiliated with. This country, all of us, will be paying for the catastrophe of the last eight years for at least two generations to come. So why don’t we finally elect who is most qualified and will help us climb out of this gulley we’re in.

  Posted by KGResident
  on September 25th, 2007 at 2:33 pm

• Joe, if your statement is representative of the current Republican party, then the “liberal dems” have nothing to worry about in 2008. Trying to divide the country based on hatred and fear never works in the long run. Maybe you will wake up soon and realize that, by using these tactics, the current president has destroyed the Republican party for at least the next 20 years.

  Posted by FHGuy
  on September 25th, 2007 at 9:49 pm

• I’m voting for Hillary.

  Repiglicans can’t stand her and I can’t stand repiglicans.

  As W.C. Fields once said:

  “I don’t for I vote against”

  Posted by Tue78
  on September 29th, 2007 at 10:36 am

• Hmmm…I guess then we have Democraps, Repiglicans, Pigerals and constupitives. Sorry, I just have this urge to give equal justice to ALL political points of view, as in my opinion, they ALL have become greedy, selfish and power hungry. The name calling is part of the problem. We need solutions and open minds.

  Posted by bobbyrab
  on September 29th, 2007 at 10:43 am

• Yer right Bobbyray, we do need solutions and open minds and we ain’t gettin that from the republicans.
  Let me think of one expample: I have a few gay relatives that are getting treated like complete crap by this current administration.

  Posted by Tue78
  on September 29th, 2007 at 1:12 pm

• Bobbyrab, your argument is basically that there is no difference between Republicans and Democrats. The mainstream media says this a lot and there are a lot of people that believe it. While on certain issues this may be true, it is totally incorrect with respect to many important issues. To name a few:

  The Iraq war - The majority of Democrats realize that we need to end this debacle. The majority of Republicans still try to mislead the public into believing that Iraq is part of the “War on Terror” and that we should stay there until we achieve “victory” (i.e., forever).

  Minority Issues - The top four Republican presidential candidates just skipped a Republican debate at Morgan State University that focused on issues important to African Americans and Hispanics. There was also a Republican debate scheduled by Univision that was cancelled because only John McCain agreed to participate. All the leading Democratic candidates have already appeared at a Univision debate and a debate at Howard University focusing on minority issues. What does this tell you about how important minority issues and voters are to the Republicans?

  Health Care - The president is poised to veto a bill that would expand the State Children’s Health Insurance Program by providing health insurance to 4 million children that are currently uninsured. The president’s reason for the veto? He says it costs too much. The cost of the bill would be $35 billion over 5 years and would be fully covered by an increase in tobacco taxes. Somehow we can afford the $450 billion that the Iraq war has cost so far but a fraction of that for children’s health insurance is too costly.

  Posted by FHGuy
  on September 29th, 2007 at 3:01 pm

• Number of the administration’s offspring fighting in the Iraq war - ZERO.

  Posted by Tue78
  on September 29th, 2007 at 3:05 pm

• Some people posting on this blog are so childish. “Repiglicans?” What are we in second grade?

  Posted by Anonymous
  on October 1st, 2007 at 8:34 am

• FHGuy, I know what you are saying but look beyond the rhetoric to the results. Who controls the pursestrings in Congress? The Dems might TALK more humanely but they take the same money from the same lobbyists as the Republicans. All these years of throwing money at problems and all we have are more problems.

  My argument is that the RESULTS of the two parties are basically the same; I agree the rhetoric is different though.

  Posted by bobbyrab
  on October 1st, 2007 at 10:30 am

• Bobbyrab, two out of three items I talked about are all about “results”, not “rhetoric”. The differing positions of the parties on the Iraq war have real consequences every single day. And the president’s veto may deny health coverage to millions of children that currently have no coverage. These are the tangible “results” of the Republicans’ actions on these two issues. The Republicans’ not participating in the two debates is closer to what you call “rhetoric”. But it still sends a very strong message about whether Republicans care about issues that matter to minorities in this country.

  Posted by FHGuy
  on October 9th, 2007 at 9:32 pm

• Where are the RESULTS of the Democrats controlling Congress? You are offering negative consequences of some Republican positions but where are the RESULTS of Democratic power?

  I agree with you about a couple of Republicans not participating in those Tavis Smiley debates. That certainly does NOT send out a message of inclusiveness. Don’t get me wrong, I am NOT a registered Republican or a registered Democrat; I am just tired of a system that is just not responsive anymore to the country’s interests. As it is said, we get the government that we deserve.

  Posted by bobbyrab
  on October 10th, 2007 at 11:01 am

• Hey, I started a national-politics thread in the forums. Go have at it!

  http://www.queenscentral.com/f.....#post-2316

  Posted by Steve
  on October 10th, 2007 at 11:07 am

• Great Steve! Now I won’t have to watch “Hardball with Chris Mathews”; I can just come here. Thanks for providing a forum; it is what democracy is about!

  Posted by bobbyrab
  on October 10th, 2007 at 11:11 am

• Anything I can do to prevent people from watching Hardball, I guess.

  Posted by Steve
  on October 10th, 2007 at 11:13 am

Post a Comment