I see a TU citizen blogger thinks the continued illegality of Mixed Martial Arts in New York is "because of politicians like Reilly, who sell their votes to the highest bidder. Out-of-state interests trump our State’s financial situation, if the price is right." That's a reference to Assemblyman Bob Reilly, D-Colonie, who according to the MMA itself, "has, more or less singlehandedly, prevented MMA from being licensed in the Empire State," and "also receives campaign funds from a hotel union that operates in both New York and Las Vegas, and which happens to be at odds with the hotel owners Frank and Lorenzo Fertitta, who just happen to also own a little outfit called the UFC."
It is true that Reilly has played the major role in getting the Assembly to block MMA, which he regards as excessively violent and degrading. Last year Gov. Paterson included legalization in the executive budget but it didn't make it to the final enacted version, and Gov. Cuomo did not take up the issue this year.
The MMA argument that Reilly is motivated by a $2,000 union campaign donation from 2006 is highly unconvincing. It's hard to make corruption charges stick against a politician who every year donates his entire salary to local charities. Reilly is an obviously decent person, and his voting record in a Republican district should make him vulnerable. Yet contemporary political discourse is so wedded to negative attacks and distortions that his opponents are apparently incapable of acknowledging his decency -- which has distracted them from focusing on more promising issues.
Sorry, but MMA is not fundamentally different in the violence and degradation arena than boxing, which is perfectly legal in NYS.
Posted by: Brian | May 23, 2011 at 02:22 PM
I don't have a position on MMA, but think it's absurd and worse to assign corrupt motivation to Reilly's opposition.
Posted by: Bob Conner | May 24, 2011 at 01:43 PM
"I see a TU citizen blogger thinks..."
Bob, quit being a passive-aggressive wimp. If you're gonna call me out, call me out directly.
If you read the comments, you'll note I already apologized for the statements and deferred to better judgments of those folks more closely associated. So you're a bit late on this if you want to prop yourself up.
Talk about distortion as well: there was more to the argument than a single $2,000 campaign contribution. There's also repeated contributions made to Reilly and other campaigns both directly and indirectly through various Unions. Again, I acknowledged my error(s) where they applied, but the pot's calling the kettle black here.
Posted by: Kevin Marshall | May 24, 2011 at 02:40 PM
That should read "various incarnations of the Union," as the one in question re-integrated itself with the AFL/CIO in the last couple years. But that's neither here nor there.
Posted by: Kevin Marshall | May 24, 2011 at 02:44 PM
You toned down the headline, which I didn't quote, but did not alter the passage I did quote, so your apology and indignation do not amount to much.
Posted by: Bob Conner | May 24, 2011 at 07:38 PM
I didn't because doing so would be dishonest. Instead, I added two paragraphs, the second of which retracts the assertion. Go read it for yourself...unless you already did, which I would assume since it was added to the post on the 13th and you posted this the 19th. And now it's the 23rd.
But hey, you're welcome for the traffic.
Everyone else, again, here's the original post:
http://blog.timesunion.com/marshall/new-york-state-assemblyman-bob-reilly-sells-vote-on-mma-to-highest-bidder/5135/
There's also a comments section with some really good discussion going on there. Not like what you'll read here, unfortunately.
Posted by: Kevin Marshall | May 25, 2011 at 12:21 PM