Doolittle has since resigned from the House Appropriations Committee and his wife is being looked at for possible connections to lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

FLASHBACK: Anti-environment extraordinare J. Steven Griles pleads guilty to connections with Abramoff

Others have also been swept up in the Abramoff scandal, which is still affecting D.C. politics.

The “Big Comedy” joke is a shot to Coleman, who accepts money from “Big Oil”, among others.

Coleman’s campaign showed why they’re vulnerable to a challenge with this statement about Franken: “Many people respect the leadership the senator provides on issues important to Minnesota like health care, agriculture, rural development and transportation. Unlike the issues Al Franken will be pushing for his liberal friends.”

His liberal friends? Interesting. And Coleman is what, pushing an agenda for his conservative friends?

The Senecas argue that it’s only a land issue, which is hard to believe considering how strong Spitzer and his allies in NYS are trying to apply taxes on cigarettes sold on Indian lands to non-Indians.

I wrote the following column for the Journal-Register on March 23 about this standoff. It’s a key issue in local and state politics.

Open To The Public

Title: New York vs. the Seneca Indians

Eliot Spitzer is making this some type of tradition. His predecessor tried unsuccessfully to do it, and now, he’s trying to follow down the same path. Spitzer wants to tax cigarettes sold on Indian reservations. The Indians are ready to fight against this proposed plan— again.

As a supporter of Spitzer in the November elections, I will defend him when he’s right and criticize him when he’s wrong. In this case, he’s wrong.

I’ve heard a few different sides to this debate. One side argues that taxing goods on Indian lands would be in violation of treaties and the sovereignty of Indian territory. Others argue that Indians selling cigarettes and gas tax free are hurting other businesses in the area. Another argument is from the state government. If they were to collect taxes off cigarettes sold on the reservations, they would be able to collect millions of dollars more to help government projects.

For one, I don’t support the state being able to collect anymore money from any source. We’re taxed at the store, on the Thruway, and for pumping gas into our automobiles. Our state is collecting enough money from taxes that we shouldn’t be worrying about taxing goods sold on Indian lands.

I also disagree with Spitzer’s aggressive pursuit for this cause. The last time this debate was had, Senecas angrily protested the attempts at taxation by burning tires and picketing along the Thruway. According to some reports, something similar will happen again if the state continues its attempt to tax cigarettes on Indian territories.

I’m behind the Indians on this one, and not Spitzer. They are a sovereign nation. By taxing cigarettes sold on their land to non-Indians would be in direct violation of their sovereignty. Not only that, but it would be disrespectful for our state to ignore the sovereignty and treaties we’ve made with our Indian neighbors who held this land before the influx of Europeans made them outcasts.

Then, there’s the whole issue of money. Why do we need MORE taxes? I’m not a smoker, and I don’t frequent the reservations for gas, but I do know people who do for one reason: They can avoid the absurd taxes they face at regular gas stations or smoke shops. If the state feels they need more money, how about more fiscal responsibility? Then, they won’t have to look to the Indians for extra money.

Spitzer must realize that he’s fighting a losing battle. I think in an area like WNY where we have a rather large Indian population, he will have little support with this measure. He might get support from the downstate urban crowd, but he won’t get support from the upstate rural crowd.

It’s time for New York to end its tax addiction and leave the Indians alone. I hope this pursuit for taxation of a sovereign nation is the last. It’s a ridiculous and unnecessary proposition. You’re wrong on this one, Eliot. Take this one and file it away — for good.

No wonder why they’re preparing for the Gordon Brown takeover.

This is a great move and one of the goals of the group is to “repeal of a federal law that restricts local law enforcement agencies’ access to gun tracing data.”

See the Mayors Against Illegal Guns website.

According to what I’ve been hearing in the media, there’s nothing that can be done unless a person is a threat to other people. In 2005, Cho was taken to a mental health facility but he was deemed to only be a threat to himself, not others. That assessment, as it turned out, was completely wrong.

In the case of Cho, he had serious forms of mental health. He expressed suicidal thoughts and his writings, which were released by a former classmate of Cho’s, show someone who was very troubled, violent, and sexually disturbed.

We must take a serious look at the mental health policies of our country and states. New York State has Kendra’s Law, which is named for a woman who was pushed in front of a New York City subway train by a mentally ill individual. We must reform them to make sure that if someone is a threat to themself, they’re a threat to everyone as well.

New policies enacted must make sure that people with mental illnesses shouldn’t be allowed to buy or possess guns. If you’re suicidal, we shouldn’t be allowing you to go buy a gun to kill yourself. If you have a strong hatred for those around you, as Cho did, we shouldn’t be allowing you to go buy a gun to “solve your problems”, which doesn’t provide any solution to the matter, but rather a much bigger problem, like we have now.

This shouldn’t be considered a punishment to people with mental health problems. It should be considered protecting not the people around them, but themselves. It all starts with the mental health issues and how they’re handled. We need to take them more seriously and deal with them stronger.

Speaking of combating poverty, here’s a great book the World Bank should read about fighting poverty and capital.

“On the face of it, he should have been blocked under federal law,” said Denis Henigan, legal director of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence.

Very interesting. The reason he should have been blocked is due to a judge’s ruling on his mental health.

I can’t imagine why any law would allow him to possess a gun of any sort with such mental health problems. But somehow, he was allowed to purchase not one, but two guns within the last few months. The same guns were used in the massacre that killed 32 students at Virginia Tech on Monday.