Update: NYC Councilman Confirms Union Strike During Strike, Investigation Lauched

This is a follow-up on a story from yesterday, regarding the supposed sanitation strike in the middle of a blizzard. It seems that a city councilman has confirmed the story but limited it to Queens only. (Video here) Also, it seems that an investigation is being launched by the governor's office to see what really happened:

City Councilman Dan Halloran told the New York Post he was visited by sanitation workers and supervisors from the Department of Transportation (DOT). These workers confessed to intentionally undermining cleanup efforts after they "were told to make the mayor pay for the layoffs, the reductions in rank for the supervisors, shrinking the rolls of the rank and file."

The sources told Halloran they skipped streets on their routes to extend the process and collect overtime, according to the Post.

At a press conference on Dec. 30, both Mayor Bloomberg and Sanitation Commissioner John Doherty said an investigation would be launched.

"It would be an outrage if it took place," said Bloomberg. He neither denied nor confirmed the allegations, but promised an investigation. He also noted that the budget cuts the city is in the process of making haven't been implemented yet.

So, was it government incompetence, or was it more union greed? Hopefully, an investigation is done, and we find out the truth. Because we need to make sure that this level of ineptitude doesn't happen again.

NYC Sanitation Union Bosses Tell Workers to NOT Help Clean-Up Blizzard/Should We Be Skeptical?

New York City and Mayor Michael Bloomberg have enough to deal with just cleaning up the blizzard, in the first place. Now, the unions are intentionally making things much worse by telling sanitation workers not to help out with the blizzard clean-up. Now, that is making the Big Apple a Rotten Apple for New Yorkers, especially first-responders:

These garbage men really stink.

Selfish Sanitation Department bosses from the snow-slammed outer boroughs ordered their drivers to snarl the blizzard cleanup to protest budget cuts -- a disastrous move that turned streets into a minefield for emergency-services vehicles, The Post has learned.

Miles of roads stretching from as north as Whitestone, Queens, to the south shore of Staten Island still remained treacherously unplowed last night because of the shameless job action, several sources and a city lawmaker said, which was over a raft of demotions, attrition and budget cuts.

This is a thug-style tactic, just like we've come to expect from union bosses. They are trying to put all New Yorkers at risk by making it hazardous for police, fire trucks, and ambulances to get to the people that are in need, and they are impeding the city's ability to clean the streets of all of the extra snow because of all of the extra trash on the roads.

Why are they doing this? Because they are upset over the fact that the city has had to trim some of the fat from their overstuffed wallets. New York City is in deep financial debt and needs to get their ship back in order. They don't need unions bullying them and holding New York hostage and endangering everyone's lives just to get a few extra bucks.

Unions need to come to terms with the fact that cuts must be made and deal with it. We all are having to deal with it. They should have to, as well. They can't be allowed to throw these temper tantrums, and we shouldn't give in to them at every turn.

Update: HotAir's Ed Morrissey makes a good point as to why we might want to be skeptical of this report:

I’m a little skeptical, but mainly because the primary source for the conspiracy theory is an elected official who can expect to be held accountable for the poor performance thus far in the Big Apple. Also, the Twin Cities had the same level of snowfall a few weeks ago, and snow removal was a problem for us, too. Minneapolis/St Paul and the first-ring suburbs have a large amount of infrastructure to deal with heavy snowfalls and about a fifth of the population, and we still have huge piles of snow blocking sidewalks downtown. Heck, we can’t even get the Metrodome fixed; now, the estimate for repair and reinflation is the end of March. I’m not sure that NYC could have done better, with its relatively smaller snow-removal infrastructure, lack of places to put the snow, and population density.

Is it possible that this was a coordinated slowdown effort by public-sector unions to make Bloomberg and city officials look incompetent? Sure, but the simpler answers are usually closer to the truth. The simpler answers here are that this was freakishly heavy snowfall in a city not used to such things, and, well, it has a mayor more interested in salt use in restaurants than on the roads.

We should know what is really to blame for this slow response to the blizzard. Is it an indifferent mayor, unusually bad weather, or union bullies? If it is true, could at least one charge of negligent homicide be in order?

Video: NYC Mayor, NY Democratic Senators Flop & Don't Want Terror Trials In NYC Anymore, Claim Danger, Cost Is Too High...Um Duh!

Mayor Bloomberg of New York City and the Democratic New York Senators all echoed the same sudden concern in this video for having the terror trials in New York City. Where was all this concern for the safety, cost, and economic disruption a few months ago, when Obama first tabled the idea? There was not one peep out any of those three. Where did did this revelation come from? Ed Morrissey thinks that he knows:

Until the attempted bombing of Northwest 253 on Christmas Day, Obama appeared to have some momentum on the law-enforcement approach.  However, the outrage over reading a terrorist his rights and providing him an attorney rather than a lengthy interrogation to discover what we could about any impending attacks has seriously derailed both the trial process and the closure of Gitmo.  After all, if the terrorists can’t get tried in federal court, they will have to be both tried and held in military custody — which means Gitmo, at least for the foreseeable future.

Now, they remember that there are those out there that want to kill us. I swear that I've heard that from someone else. I can't remember where. Oh yeah!

It seems that Obama might be finally caving into bipartisan pressure to keep KSM out of NYC:

White House officials have told the Justice Department to consider other venues for the 9/11 terror trial that was to be held in lower Manhattan, the Daily News has learned.

The decision came after Mayor Bloomberg and other politicians across the state railed against President Obama's plan to try Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in Manhattan Federal Court.

Attorney General Eric Holder now has to think of other places where the trial could take place, officials said.

It was not immediately clear if the reassessment means the trial will definitely be moved out of the city.

Where can we move them? Maybe (this may be a crazy thought)...Gitmo?

Well, that is probably wishful thinking but not entirely out of the realm of possibility. If New York City doesn't want them there, I'd be hard-pressed to think of a city that would want to take on that albatross.

It's good to see that Obama and some of the Democrats have come to their senses a bit. Hopefully, they'll do their trials in Gitmo where they belong.

Obama Gives Stone Cold Salute to 9/11 Survivors, Families

The Obama Administration has outdone themselves. According to HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, the federal government will stop paying the doctor bills for 9/11 survivors that are suffering from complications resulting from the terrorist attack:

The state's two senators and 14 House members met with Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius just hours before President Obama implored in his speech to the nation for Congress to come together and deliver a government that delivers on its promises to the American people.

So the legislators were floored to learn the Democratic administration does not want to deliver for the tens of thousands of people who sacrificed after 9/11, and the untold numbers now getting sick.

"I was stunned — and very disappointed," said Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who like most of the other legislators had expected more of a discussion on how to more forward.

"To say the least, I was flabbergasted," said Staten Island Rep. Mike McMahon.

The 9/11 bill would spend about $11 billion over 30 years to care for the growing numbers of people getting sick from their service at Ground Zero, and to compensate families for their losses.

The bill is only $11B over 30 years. That is only about $367M per year. Yes, that is still a lot of money, but is a far cry that Obama wants to spend on Obamacare. The health bills will be over $1T over a much shorter amount of time. It's more than likely that Obamacare will cost over $11B per year, instead of over the course of thirty.

Normally, I don't think that the government should be paying for people's health care, but this is for the victims from a terrorist attack and an act of war. The circumstances are much different.

Why would Obama do this? This could only hurt him politically with everyone not just one side or the other. I know that his proposal of a spending freeze shows that he is trying to pivot and position himself as more of a deficit hawk and not a free-spender, but this is the wrong thing to cut. This will be a PR nightmare for him, if it ever gets into the consciousness of Americans. Of course, the mainstream media seems to be ignoring this story, but it may be too big to hide. If it does, he'll regret it.