"Moderate" Michael Bloomberg Is An Authoritarian Nightmare
Advertise with us Click for Rates
Results 1 to 8 of 8
Like Tree9Likes
  • 2 Post By Stevejet
  • 1 Post By KILTED COWBOY
  • 2 Post By john9001
  • 3 Post By square target2
  • 1 Post By Stevejet

Thread: "Moderate" Michael Bloomberg Is An Authoritarian Nightmare

  1. #1
    Senior Member NGF Addict!
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    17,712

    Default "Moderate" Michael Bloomberg Is An Authoritarian Nightmare

    National Review

    While discussing the Texas church shooting last week, Democratic presidential candidate Mike Bloomberg said that we “just do not want the average citizen carrying a gun in a crowded place.”

    “It may be true – I wasn’t there; I don’t know the facts – that somebody in the congregation had their own gun and killed the person who murdered two other people, but it’s the job of law enforcement to have guns and to decide when to shoot,” Bloomberg said in Montgomery, Ala., on December 30, as reported by [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]. “You just do not want the average citizen carrying a gun in a crowded place.”

    Bloomberg is, of course, correct. Although the shooting at the West Freeway Church of Christ in White Settlement [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] two lives, it could have been much worse had an armed, trained volunteer security guard not been there to shoot the gunman dead before he could do even greater damage.

    This incident was about as clear an example as you could get for how maintaining our Second Amendment rights can save lives – and, therefore, it might seem like a pretty odd thing to reference when you’re arguing against gun rights. The Second Amendment, after all, worked in this case; people are alive because of it, and Bloomberg is going to say that he wished the situation had been different?

    It’s truly shocking in terms of stupidity – but it’s also par for the Michael Bloomberg course. It’s hardly surprising for Bloomberg to have expressed such an unyielding stance on gun rights; he’s [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] so for years.

    What’s more, the right to self-defense is far from the only individual right that Bloomberg has a history of disrespecting. In fact, despite the fact that he’s somehow managed to brand himself as a moderate choice, Michael Bloomberg’s record is actually that of an authoritarian nightmare.

    Throughout his career, Bloomberg has repeatedly shown blatant disrespect for individual rights and civil liberties. The first thing that comes to mind is probably the way he tried to micromanage New Yorkers’ food choices during his time as mayor. His most famous effort in this area, of course, was his failed attempt to [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] from drinking too much soda – but it wasn’t the only one. During his time as mayor, he also [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] a campaign called the “National Salt Reduction Initiative,” reportedly even going so far as to [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] the common ingredient to “asbestos.”

    Bloomberg also has a pretty dismal record when it comes to allowing Americans the freedom to make their own decisions about marijuana use. In fact, [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] to CNN’s DJ Judd, Bloomberg referred just last year to marijuana legalization as “perhaps the stupidest thing we’ve ever done.” Now, to be fair, Bloomberg has (only) recently “evolved” on this issue: Last month, a campaign [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] said that Bloomberg now “believes in decriminalization and doesn’t believe the federal government should interfere with states that have already legalized” and that “no one should have their life ruined by getting arrested for possession.” But this is, quite simply, too little too late. The conversation, after all, has progressed – with one of Bloomberg’s primary opponents, Pete Buttigieg, openly professing a truly pro-freedom, pro-individual rights stance: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] them all.

    What’s more, I actually find it astounding that Bloomberg’s campaign spokesman would even have the balls to complain about people having their lives “ruined by getting arrested for possession.” Bloomberg was, after all, a long-standing supporter of “stop and frisk” – which directly led to [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] being arrested for marijuana possession – and he remained one even as the truly totalitarian impacts of the policy were [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]. In fact, at the beginning of [Only registered and activated users can see links. ], he was still defending it. Of course, much like his stance on marijuana, his position on this issue has also conveniently “evolved” with his pursuit of the presidency; he [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] for the practice a couple of months ago.

    This is also, frankly, too little too late. For one thing, you’d have to be pretty stupid not to notice how his stances on these issues have conveniently just happened to “change” just in time for his presidential run. What’s more, his “apology” does nothing to change the damage that stop-and-frisk has already done: People who got roughed up by police for no reason still live with [Only registered and activated users can see links. ], and people who were arrested for victimless crimes still had to live with those consequences.

    Worse, Bloomberg’s support of stop-and-frisk isn’t the only example of him demonstrating a complete disregard for the Fourth Amendment. No – he’s also supported the secret surveillance of U.S. citizens. Under his mayorship, the NYPD was [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] on Muslim Americans, and Bloomberg [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] it as being necessary to “keep this country safe.” The truth? The NYPD has [Only registered and activated users can see links. ] that the program did not lead to discovering even a single terrorism plot. For this one, Bloomberg has yet to apologize.

    With several members of the Democratic party (including multiple Democratic candidates) openly promoting socialist policies, a businessman like Bloomberg might seem like a nice choice. But as bad as a socialist president would be for the country (and it would be bad), I can’t say that I see an established authoritarian as a great choice, either – our individual rights and civil liberties are too important.

    [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]
    Last edited by Stevejet; 01-14-2020 at 11:43 PM.
    Popeye and Wag like this.

  2. #2
    Senior Member NGF Addict!
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    TEXAS
    Posts
    1,673

    Default

    The only reason Doomberg is dangerous is because he is filthy rich.
    If he did not have all that money he would just be a small little man looking to get his ass kicked
    friendof2nd likes this.

  3. #3
    Senior Member NGF Addict!
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    western PA
    Posts
    1,268

    Default

    Bloomburg has said he is willing to spend one billion dollars to be elected and help the democrats win both the House and Senate.

    Is our government for sale?
    Stevejet and Russ D like this.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    NationalGunForum.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Senior Member NGF Addict! square target2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2019
    Location
    Plattsburgh, N.Y.
    Posts
    1,836

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by john9001 View Post

    Is our government for sale?


    has been for a long time.
    And armed man is a free man, a disarmed man is a slave.

    Epstein didn't kill himself.

  6. #5
    Senior Member NGF Addict! friendof2nd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    4,050

    Default

    It is apparent that the DemocRATS have a choice of people for the presidency were two scenarios are available.

    They can vote for a extreme left leaning candidate and if he/she wins, the country will become a Socialist state and promptly will go to hell, or they can vote for a dictator in the making that, if elected, will become another Stalin or Mussolini, or even another Hitler.
    They really have their work cut out for them.

    Me, I think I will stick with Trump..........
    Progressive = The new Political Correct name for a Communist

    A gun on your hip is like the insurance you pay every month that you hope never have to use.

    You can vote yourself into Socialism, but you will have to fight your way out of it! - Bearing Arms. com

  7. #6
    Senior Member Skolnick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Posts
    133

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by KILTED COWBOY View Post
    The only reason Doomberg is dangerous is because he is filthy rich.

    Quote Originally Posted by john9001 View Post
    Is our government for sale?


    Ross Perot proved that all the money in the world won't buy one (1) electoral vote.

    In the year 2000, in the Illinois Republican primary to replace the retiring 10th Congressional District Representative, Shawn Margaret Donnelley (heiress to the R.R. Donnelley & Sons fortune) spent at least 2.3 million dollars of her family's money to win 9,585 votes. Another candidate, Andrew Hochberg, spent $1 million of his own money for a solid 7,480 votes.

    Mark Kirk moved into the district less than 6 months before the March 2000 primary, and won with 19,717 votes. He spent way less than half a million dollars. Half a million dollars on a congressional primary is big money to be sure, but it is proof enough that there is a limit to what 2.3 million dollars can buy.

    You've got to have a decent product. If money was all that that it takes, we'd be driving our Edsels to Sambos restaurants to buy servings of New Coke with Susan B. Anthony dollars, after which, we'd go home to watch Waterworld on our BetaMax.

    PS: Bloomberg is NOT a decent product outside of New York.
    Last edited by Skolnick; 01-15-2020 at 10:18 AM.

  8. #7
    Senior Member NGF Addict!
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Minnesota
    Posts
    17,712

    Default

    "Is our government for sale?"

    What do you think the Clinton's and our elected representatives, and their cronies, have been selling for decades?

    We have the finest elected, representative government that money can buy, unfortunately.
    square target2 likes this.

  9. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2019
    Posts
    472

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stevejet View Post
    "Is our government for sale?"

    What do you think the Clinton's and our elected representatives, and their cronies, have been selling for decades?

    We have the finest elected, representative government that money can buy, unfortunately.
    More like the crappiest money can buy.

    Bloomberg, isn't he the one, who with the stroke of a pen, could eliminate all the gloppy garbage his companies put INTO prepared foods ? The high fructose
    corn syrup, the processed sugar, the salt, the saturated fat, the cholesterol all is PUT INTO the food his companies sell, then he's got the amazingly huge brass marbles
    to state that poor people should be taxed extra, for buying and eating his food, because it's bad for them ?

    Is this the SAME Bloomberg, with that asininely moronic crap eating grin, smugly confident in his moral and ethical superiority; as he's guarded, day and night, inside walls, by dogs,
    and, yes, men using auto fire military assault rifles? Well, my heavens, which Ivory Tower has he decided to recline his gold-plated ASS upon today ?

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)