Citation needed that there is any evidence that “we” are doing this. By all means…please show us any data, polls, primary results that show Bloomberg as a leader in the Dem primaries.
Please show me any evidence that I claimed that Bloomberg was a leader in the dem primaries.
I don’t trust billionaires in general, and him in particular. My mistrust is well founded on his past actions and statements. You are free to believe what you like.
From what I read, stop and frisk targeted both. And Bloomberg is now using Stop and Frisk as an example that is is tough on gun control.
But yes, in general, the whole point of the War on Drugs was to over-police the “dangerous minorities on marijuana”. IMO illicit drugs should all be legal, or at the very least decriminalized to the point of a small fine. Their application and enforcement is used as a racist tool even more so. Prohibition doesn’t work and all it has done is fund a multi-billion dollar industry that is surrounded by violence.
Drugs aren’t GOOD for you, but neither is the oppression the laws cause.
you can count on this - the DNC is. Bernie had to get 51% to prevent this. Or Bernie plus one ally.
I have sometimes felt that Trump was America’s Yeltsin. And it leads me to worry about who would follow as America’s Putin. Bloomberg gives off some authoritarian vibes.
Oh absolutely. T has made, from his standpoint, a smashing success of it just by being willing to break every law, rule or tradition he finds inconvenient. Other ambitious plutocrats no doubt look at him and think “Look what that asshole gets away with, and he’s so much dumber than me…”
I heard it on good authority from Brit Hume that it’s an unfounded conspiracy theory that billionaires exert undue influence in America, so it must be Bloomberg’s amazing charisma pulling him ahead.
/s in case it wasn’t obvious.
Yeah, but that’s because they don’t understand we built a society around promoting egotism. If they did understand that it would presumably lead to some kind of personal crisis.
It’s certainly unfounded as a conspiracy theory. As an obvious fact of reality that is happening in front of our eyes and is reported on in the mainstream news it holds up pretty well!
The establishment press’ choice after Old Joe Biden – not that they want or expect Trump to lose reelection.
from the position of this one speech he gave, it sounds like he’s not really for reasonable gun controls.
it’s more that he wants to get guns out of the hands of black men. ( in order to satisfy well heeled whites who have decided that people of color are the source of all problems in the world )
i would be happy to concede his kind of gun control will do nothing to curb gun violence. well regulated gun ownership is needed, but not the kind a man like him would offer
Drugs aren’t GOOD for you, but neither is the oppression the laws cause
100% agree with you. i think drug laws are needed. but not the criminalization of users. rehabilitation and services. not jails and prision.
To quote from an old thread:
Pretty much this. Optimistically, Bloomberg is only 75 (?) percent as bad as Trump, but a Democratic House and Senate would feel obligated to give him, the guy that beat Trump, 100 percent of that 75 percent.
And a GOP House and Senate would agree with Bloomberg’s policies anyway, and give him the same.
In Oz English, it’s roughly “woom’n” and “comm’n”. The second syllable is a short “in” for both.
The rhyme isn’t perfect, but it’s close enough for poetry.
This specific speech? No, you’re right.
He has several ads now focusing on gun control. They are much more sanitized than his off the cuff remarks he’s made. He has used his NYC crime numbers and gun laws as an example that he is tough on crime and guns. Some of his points I am sure sound reasonable to some.
Though one could argue keeping guns out of the “wrong hands” is coded language. (Towards the end of the 2nd video.)
Two examples of ads, I am sure there are more:
this talking point of his irks me so much, and i hope - if he ever buys his way into the debates - somebody calls him on it.
if you send police into any neighborhood, and you stop and frisk people at random, if you pull people over and do searches of their cars, if you arrest people for resisting arrest… you’re going to get a whole lot of people arrested. ( and, if you keep doing that to those same people, everyone arrested will have a prior “criminal” record. )
meanwhile, rates of drug use ( and even violence ) in groups of differently complected people don’t actually differ that much.
white collar crime - which affects large groups of people, sometimes multiple generations of families - he barely mentions
the real arguments for gun control aren’t about “bad” vs “good” people. they’re about the intrinsic nature of guns and their unique capability to inflict harm.
anybody who tries to sell gun control as keeping them out of the hands of “criminals” is trying to sell you a bridge ( re: racial profiling above, and what the word criminal even means. )
Exactly, it’s circular logic to say “we have to stop and frisk young men of color because they’re the ones committing all the crimes” because even if a large percentage of Wall Street bankers are carrying guns & cocaine that’s not going to be reflected in the crime stats if they aren’t the ones getting stopped and frisked.
It reminds me of a previous NYC mayor. What was his name? Huh. I wonder what he’s doing these d…OMG! [puke]
This topic was automatically closed after 5 days. New replies are no longer allowed.