I respect Michael Bloomberg. Why? Because he’s an honest liberal. Here’s what he recently said:
“I do think there are certain times we should infringe on your freedom.”
Liberals are very anti-freedom these days, with their high taxes, the regulations, the wanting to keep you from having guns — but they never frame it that way. They always frame it as being pro-freedom. “I’m freeing you from worry by taking away your choices about health care!” It would just be nice for some liberals to finally be honest and come out and say, “Yeah, I’m not really feeling this whole ‘freedom’ thing; it’s kind of in the way of all the plans we have. And people spending their own money on things they want instead of me spending their money on things I say they should want — that just annoys me.”
But Bloomberg is basically coming out as the anti-freedom politician. Then maybe we can finally have a real, honest debate with liberals of freedom versus all their ideas they think are so much better than freedom. Because that’s where the debate actually is, but the left just does everything they can to keep it from being framed that honestly.
Here is what Bloomy said about the necessity of DRONES:
“We’re going into a different world, unchartered.”
Really? How is it unchartered? Or did he mean uncharted like an Uncharted Territory? There is a difference.
“And, like it or not, what people can do or governments can do is different, and you can to some extent control, but you can’t keep the tides from coming in.“
You can’t keep the tides from coming in? Wow that was brilliant. Have anymore empty cliches to throw at the Mob?
And what governments can do is different? How? According to who? Was the Constitution re-written without my approval? Who gave you this power to decide what governments can do?
“We’re going to have more visibility and less privacy. I don’t see how you stop that.“
OK. I’ll concede that point but that’s because of technology and the Internet it has nothing to do with DRONE strikes on Americans.
“And it’s not a question of whether I think it’s good or bad.“
No its a question of ‘HOW’ you think!! Its a question of WHY you think the way you do.
“I just don’t see
how you could stop that because we’re going to have them.”
Of course you don’t see you have been blinded by the same form of Leftism that infected Russia in the early 1900’s. Bloomberg you are a frakin’ Stalinist and so is Hillary, Obama, and the rest of the DemonKrats. You want a Neo-Bolshevik Revolution to take place in America so you get to wipe out your enemies.
This guy is just as empty headed as Ron Paul
Sorry – no respect from me.
Everyone should be honest. You get no points for doing what you’re supposed to do. Not lying is merely baseline decent behavior. The fact that every other liberal lies about their intentions is beside the point. I don’t grade on a curve.
Hey, Top Cat! Good to see you.
Bloomberg et al are smart enough never to try to infringe on the only freedom liberals really care about–the freedom to shove the external components of the reproductive system wherever they want without consequences. Bloomberg whines that fat people cost us all a lot of money in health care (which still doesn’t make it his business anyway), but despite the large herds of us lardoes waddling around, I’d be about willing to bet that the consequences of unwise–eh, flagrante-ing–are even more expensive, both in terms of dollars and in the disintegration of moral fiber.
/rant
Yay! Did not get moderated!
I think you’re mistaking arrogance for honesty. This little twerp is so used to getting his way, he just doesn’t care what anyone thinks – so he’s “honest” about what he’s going to cram down everyone’s throat only because he doesn’t think anyone can stop him.
“anyone” won’t stop them. “everyone should. Alas, I think we might be too late.
We’re going into a different world, unchartered.
Bloomterd, with this Freudian slip, may have provided an insight to his perspective.
Running to my well-thumbed copy of Black’s Law, I find that a charter is ” an instrument emanating from the sovreign power, in the nature of a grant, either to the whole nation, or to a class or portion of the people, and assuring to them certain rights, liberties or powers.”
Towit: the good ol’ U.S. constitution.
Thus, Bloomterd’s “different, unchartered world” is an extra-constitutional one where the political class is unchecked, untethered, and unanswerable to the people.
Hence his candor: I do think there are certain times we should infringe on your freedom.
The slouch to Gomorrah by the uninformed, misinformed proletariat will continue, unfueled by 32 oz. soda pop, double bacon-burgs, or salty fries, and unprotected by anything more threatening than a prophylactic.
Bloombergsux is one word.
I would amend that to say that what they really care about is freedom from the consequences of all of their lifestyle choices: They want to buy houses with mortgages they can’t afford, then get bailed out (and get a fat settlement from the mortgage company for making the “predatory” loan in the first place); take out massive student loans to finance an education that will never result in a paying job, then have the loans forgiven (or repaid by others); refuse to take difficult, low-paying or “unfulfilling” jobs and yet have their unemployment benefits extended indefinitely; take recreational drugs and have their subsequent addictions defined (and recompensed) as disabilities; etc., ad nauseam. Although it might appear they are willing to give up freedom when it comes to dietary choices and smoking, their insistence on free health care for all means that libs who overeat (we’re looking at you, Michael Moore, Rosie O’Donnell, Roseanne and Oprah) or smoke (Obama, every Hollywood actor ever) despite liberal disapproval of these activities will nevertheless have payment for the health consequences of these choices borne by others. And even the salt, sugar and smoking taxes and restrictions are just their way of saying “I’m not responsible for what I do – save me from the evil capitalists who would force me to consume their deadly wares!”
Well, COB, I think you’re on the money, but the sex thing is a “right” that involves penumbras and emanations and things from the Constitution. Everything else is an “entitlement,” which means it’s not guaranteed but they are “entitled” to it. Practically speaking, though, it’s the same.
The sex thing is a “right” because it’s what they want to grant us at the moment. When their whim changes, so will our “rights”.
The problem with Bloomberg’s statement is “we” and “your”. He thinks “we” are somehow inherently in charge of “you”; so that anything the peons have has been benevolently conferred by their betters. So that infringing on people’s freedom is something he inherently has the power to do, should he happen to choose to, and it’s only his own niceness, playing along with our quaint little notions, that prevents him doing it more thoroughly.
The Constitution is an anachronistic time-capsule written by bigoted, greedy, slave-owning, oppressive, hypocritical white men and may safely be ignored, unless liberals want to do something that makes the majority of rational people recoil in horror. Then, it is a “living document” that can be interpreted to give the libs the absolute, unarguable, unassailable, unrestricted right to do exactly as they d@mn well please, with no restrictions whatsoever – in fact, it gives them the right to demand that society openly embrace, approve of, pay for and encourage their conduct, with disapproving members forced to accede or be prosecuted for a hate crime.
Sometimes it is difficult to carry on. The press is on their side, and they are winning.