First time visitor? Learn more.

Nanny Bloomberg: New York City might be the next Detroit

by Speranza ( 100 Comments › )
Filed under Bailouts, Crime, unemployment, Unions at August 8th, 2013 - 7:00 am

Let the  municipal unions call the shots along with the civil rights racketeers and sure, why not?

by David Shepardson

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg said every U.S. city needs to heed the lesson of Detroit’s recent bankruptcy filing and urged cities to diversify their economies.

“Avoiding the hard choices is how Detroit went bankrupt. And it’s the road to ruin for any city,” Bloomberg said in a speech Tuesday in New York.  [.........]

Detroit filed for Chapter 9 bankruptcy restructuring in July, citing more than $18.5 billion in debt, the largest American city to file for bankruptcy. About half of its debt is pension and retiree health care costs.

The Big Apple nearly went bankrupt in 1975 with $14 billion in debt with a deficit of about $2.2 billion, but won a reprieve when Congress and President Gerald Ford approved $2.3 billion in short-term loans and required dramatic fiscal restructuring to get the city’s books in order.

“Now, it would be easy to sit back and think that what happened in Detroit could not happen here in New York City. But the truth is it did almost happen here, back in 1975. [.........]

Bloomberg said “one of the major reasons that Detroit could not stop its downward spiral was that its labor costs — especially its retiree costs for pensions and health care — crowded out its ability to invest in the things that make a city an attractive place to live and visit.”

The mayor said New York City’s pension costs rose to $6.3 billion in fiscal year 2009 from $1.4 billion in fiscal year 2002

“The reality is,” Bloomberg said, “we may be a long way from Detroit, but we are only a short distance from relapsing into decline, if we allow healthcare and pension benefits to crowd out the investments that make New York City a place where people want to live, work, study, and visit.”

Bloomberg can’t seek re-election because of term limits. More than a dozen candidates are vying to replace him, and one of them took issue with Bloomberg’s Detroit speech.

City Councilman Bill de Blasio said Bloomberg’s speech didn’t note New York has serious problems as well.

[........]

In contrast with New York in 1975, the Obama administration has pointedly ruled out any bailout for the city, but said it is monitoring the situation.

This isn’t the first time Bloomberg has talked about Detroit. In May — touting New York’s record low murder rate — Bloomberg highlighted Detroit’s high murder rate.

New York has more than 11 times the Motor City population, but recorded only a few additional murders than Detroit.

“Last year, we had a record-low 419 murders. If instead we had Detroit’s murder rate, 4,500-plus New Yorkers would have been murdered last year,” the mayor’s office wrote on Twitter.

Detroit had its highest murder rate 2012 in more than two decades, and among the nation’s largest cities, it has the highest or nearly the highest murder rates.

Read the rest -  New York Mayor Bloomberg: NYC might be the next Detroit

From The Detroit News:

Tags: ,

Comments

Comments and respectful debate are both welcome and encouraged.

Comments are the sole opinion of the comment writer, just as each thread posted is the sole opinion or post idea of the administrator that posted it or of the readers that have written guest posts for the Blogmocracy.

Obscene, abusive, or annoying remarks may be deleted or moved to spam for admin review, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their content by any other commenter or the admins of this Blogmocracy.

We're not easily offended and don't want people to think they have to walk on eggshells around here (like at another place that shall remain nameless) but of course, there is a limit to everything.

Play nice!

100 Responses to “Nanny Bloomberg: New York City might be the next Detroit”
( jump to bottom )

  1. 1 | August 8, 2013 7:31 am

    The bankruptcy of any city will be the fault of Republicans.


  2. waldensianspirit
    2 | August 8, 2013 8:08 am

    He’s speaking against ObamaCostlyInsurance and healthcare and pension benefits going up?!?!?!?!!?


  3. 3 | August 8, 2013 8:11 am

    @ waldensianspirit:

    Not very “Progressive” of him, is it? Of course, Bloomberg is more of a Fascist than he is a doctrinaire Progressive. It wouldn’t surprise me to learn that he has an SS Uniform that he play s”Dress Up” in.


  4. 4 | August 8, 2013 8:52 am

    Buzzsawmonkey will probably like this on the state of marriage in America:

    I’ve written more than once that I don’t care about inequality. I care a lot about the absolute condition of the poor…but I don’t care whether Bill Gates is living in a house that cost 19 squintillion dollars. I care whether everyone else in the country has a warm, dry abode with indoor plumbing and all the other mod cons.

    That view changed while I was researching an article on late marriage. Marriage has basically followed the same path as income over the last 50 years. The college-educated have it better than ever — they are enjoying what Harvard researcher Kathryn Edin calls “superrelationships,” characterized by extremely high levels of rapport, cooperation and satisfaction. The bottom two thirds, on the other hand, are in unstable relationships that tend to break apart under stress. They typically have at least one child before they marry, experts told me, and when they do marry, it’s not to the father of their child. This is bad for the people in these relationships, and for the children they produce.

    I generally agree with the thesis of this piece. Upward mobility is not possible for a large percentage of the populace, but it is precisely because of the pathologies associated with being poor (i.e. illigitimate births, drug abuse) that keep a person from breakin gout of that mold. People aren’t poor because Bill Gates is a multibillionair. People stay poor because they get caught up in poor behavior. I’ve been poor in my lifetime, but I used everything I had to to get not one but two college degrees, and I have definately moved up from the place where I was a low-paid restaurant worked to the point that I am a successful software engineer. I did build that, though I had scholorships along the way that helped me to fund it. What I didn’t do was have a kid before I was 18 (or ever; I never had children). I didn’t get hooked on recreational chemicals. Most importantly, I had long-term plans that got me out of poverty. I did that mostly on my own. As I often say, I didn’t have any adult supervision when I was a kid. The public school system wasn’t interested in helping me go to college. I didn’t have a school guidance counselor that helpe dme apply for scholorships, any more that the poor kids do (maybe even less).


  5. Speranza
    5 | August 8, 2013 8:55 am

    waldensianspirit wrote:

    He’s speaking against ObamaCostlyInsurance and healthcare and pension benefits going up?!?!?!?!!?

    Yet the idiot endorsed Obama.


  6. 6 | August 8, 2013 8:58 am

    @ Speranza:

    Of course he did. Bloomberg is a doctrinaire Liberal. He couldn’t not endorse the FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT. Liberals demand that actions have the right feelings, not results, and it seems that the American people, at least in regards to Obama, feel the same way.


  7. 7 | August 8, 2013 9:03 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Did you get my text? I was out at Martini Bar last night and there were people in animal hats. This place is a trendy place where you have to dress up nice. But they let in the animal crew. I could not believe it.


  8. 8 | August 8, 2013 9:06 am

    @ Speranza:
    @ Iron Fist:

    Bloomberg admitted that Romney would be better fr the economy, but that abortion and global warming are the most important issues.


  9. 9 | August 8, 2013 9:08 am

    @ Rodan:

    It is on my phone. I didn’t think to check it when I got up this morning. Yeah, it is hard to be an up-scale place if you are allowing animal hats. I doubt they’d let me come in with a sleeveless shirt on, showing off my artwork.


  10. 10 | August 8, 2013 9:11 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    The animal hat thing is a plague.


  11. 11 | August 8, 2013 9:14 am

    @ Rodan:

    Yeah, this election put an end to the “It’s the Economy, stupid!” mentality. But Romney didn’t really hammer that point home the way Clinton did against GHW Bush. For the Left, abortion and the global warming hoax trump the economy. Of course, that’s an easy position for Bloomberg to take. He’s a billionaire. The bad economy isn’t hurting him significantly. I’d say that the bulk of the Obama Vote don’t get hit by the economy directly. They are government workers, union workers, and welfare recipients. Of course, the exception to that are blacks, because the black unemployment rate is well into the double-digits even after they’ve cooked the books by taking the long-term unemployed off the rolls. The Obama Administration has hit blacks far harder than it has whites, but skin color uber alles to most of those folks. If Obama had been white, he’d have never gotten his Senate Seat, let alone bein gelected and re-elected for President.


  12. 12 | August 8, 2013 9:15 am

    @ Rodan:

    They aren’t hats. They are brain parasites :P


  13. 13 | August 8, 2013 9:18 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    But Romney didn’t really hammer that point home the way Clinton did against GHW Bush.

    I regret voting for Romney. I should have stuck with my instinct and voted for Gary Johnson. But no everyone was telling me I HAVE TO Vote for Romney. No more, I will never vote for someone out of pressure again.


  14. 14 | August 8, 2013 9:29 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    I doubt they’d let me come in with a sleeveless shirt on, showing off my artwork.

    If it was a tailored silk shirt they probably would. Ink sleeves are in don’t you know.


  15. 15 | August 8, 2013 9:31 am

    @ Rodan:

    Romney was the best choice of a bad lot, really. He could have won it, but it would have required him to repudiate RomneyCare and really go on the offensive about ObamaCare. I think that was a winning issue, but Romney refused to touch it. I don’ tkno wthat Romney planned on losing the way I think McCain did, but he still didn’t give us a good showing. I am very disappointed, though. I think Romney would have probably made a good President, but to win he needed to go after Obama with everything he had. He needed to destroy the “Obama is Cool” myth. That’s nothing that you didn’t say before the election. You have to figure that if Romney hasd been taking advice from you and I rather than the highly paid consultants that he had, he wouldn’t have done any worse. Whether that say something good about us or is a damning critique of the consultant class, I don’t know.


  16. 16 | August 8, 2013 9:34 am

    @ PaladinPhil:

    I know tats are a lot more popular now than they were when I first started working on mine. The only downside to my current job is that I have to wear long sleeves to work. Technically that is only for manager meetings or customer meetings, but I just d it as a matter of course. I’m allowed to wear my earrings, so that’s good.


  17. 17 | August 8, 2013 9:37 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    I never understood why Romney did not make fun of Obama’s promise to lower the ocean levels and cool the temperatures. Obama claimed he was a god and Romney did not mock him.

    Maybe Romney could not bring himself to really go after the 1st Black President.

    As for beinga good President, the last 2 Republicans sucked. I don’t trust the GOP anymore honestly.


  18. 18 | August 8, 2013 9:44 am

    @ Rodan:

    You have to give that Bush was better than either of his opponents, though. Can you imagine Al Gore as President following 9-11? And Kerry would have been worse. Bush’s biggest problem was that he allowed the Left to frame the debate. He wouldn’t fight. If you won’t fight for your principles, then someone who will fight for theirs will overrun you. Which is pretty much what happened. In his second term Bush became a big spender, and the Republicans all went along with it trying to buy votes. That backfired and cost Bush the House and Senate. But Bush didn’t have any real scandals, though they tried to make Katrina a scandal. Obama did as poorly with Hurricane Sandy, but the lap-dog media aren’t pointing this out, just as they ignored the fact that the mayor of New Orleans and the governor of Louisiana were the real ones who dropped the ball there. Bush wouldn’t fight. He wouldn’t defend himself. Weakness breeds contempt, and Bush was all abou tweakness.


  19. 19 | August 8, 2013 9:53 am

    You have to give that Bush was better than either of his opponents, though. Can you imagine Al Gore as President following 9-11?

    What difference would it have made? Both Bush and Gore are Islamic stooges.


  20. 20 | August 8, 2013 9:59 am

    @ Rodan:
    It would have made a huge difference. I really don’t get your unremitting hostility to Bush. He wasn’t a great President, but he wasn’t that bad, either. The idea that Bush was as bad as Gore totally ignores how abyssmal Gore really is. There would have been no military response to 9-11. None. And Gore would have pursued destroying the economy in the name of Global Warming. You act as though since Bush wasn’t perfect, we might as well get the worst we can possibly have. That simply makes no sense.


  21. 21 | August 8, 2013 9:59 am

    @ Rodan:

    Nobody would go after the First! Black! President! They’ll try the same thing with the First! Woman! President! when the Hildebeest comes along to run for President. But there’s a great deal of baggage she has -- almost too much. I haven’t forgotten Eric Holder firing the pardon attorney at Justice to smooth the way for the FALN terrorists to be freed to pave the way for her election to the Senate.

    In truth, I think Obama doesn’t really want to see Clinton win the Presidency -- he doesn’t like the Clintons and never did. It would not surprise me in the least if a couple months before the general election the whole truth about Benghazi comes out, slanted to make Hillary look as bad as possible (not that that will take much effort) — just in time to destroy her candidacy.


  22. Speranza
    22 | August 8, 2013 10:02 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    Of course he did. Bloomberg is a doctrinaire Liberal. He couldn’t not endorse the FIRST BLACK PRESIDENT. Liberals demand that actions have the right feelings, not results, and it seems that the American people, at least in regards to Obama, feel the same way.

    For a billionaire he never impressed me as being particularly bright.


  23. Speranza
    23 | August 8, 2013 10:06 am

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    Nobody would go after the First! Black! President! They’ll try the same thing with the First! Woman! President! when the Hildebeest comes along to run for President. But there’s a great deal of baggage she has — almost too much.

    Last night on Laura Ingraham (filling in for the insufferable Bill O’Reilly), Laura asked Kirsten Powers and Kate Obenshain who would give Hillary the toughest time as the Republican nominee? Kirsten actually said “Jeb Bush” and right after she said “Jeb Bush” Laura and Kate made faces as if they just swallowed sour milk. Kate said (and I agree) that either Scott Walker or Susana Martinez would be the best Republican candidate.


  24. 24 | August 8, 2013 10:10 am

    @ Carolina Girl:

    2016 is Hilary’s to lose. No one in the GOP can beat her and the Democrats have an electoral and demographic advantage for now.


  25. 25 | August 8, 2013 10:11 am

    @ Speranza:

    Scott Walker or Susana Martinez would be the best Republican candidate.

    If the GOP had any brains, they would recruit Susana Martiniez to run. Sadly “the base” would probably reject her.


  26. Speranza
    26 | August 8, 2013 10:12 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    He wasn’t a great President, but he wasn’t that bad, either.

    For starters, amnesty and he paved the way for Obama. The 2006 and 2008 repudiation of Bush cost us the House and Senate which lead the way to the train wreck of Obamacare and the massive malignant stimulus. His pacifism in the face of unremitting attacks utterly demoralized the Republican Party and the base you revere, but outside of that he was terrific.


  27. 27 | August 8, 2013 10:13 am

    @ Speranza:
    Either of those would be acceptable to me. I don’t think we should exclude Nikki Haley from consideration as well. Jeb Bush is who the Democrats want to face, which means he is one of the least electable candidates out there. Nobody is pining for the halcyon days of the Bush Administration even if unemployment was good and GDP growth rates were acceptable.


  28. 28 | August 8, 2013 10:13 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    I call it as I see it. We should have nuked Afghanistan to send a message. Anything short of that is a waste. Bush sent Americans to their deaths because he had a soft spot for Muslims and thought he can civilize them. He was wrong.


  29. Speranza
    29 | August 8, 2013 10:13 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    Scott Walker or Susana Martinez would be the best Republican candidate.
    If the GOP had any brains, they would recruit Susana Martiniez to run. Sadly “the base” would probably reject her.

    They get their asses kissed repeatedly and I am tired of any one group having veto power. Why not let Rush Limbaugh just pick the nominee and be done with it?


  30. Speranza
    30 | August 8, 2013 10:14 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    Either of those would be acceptable to me. I don’t think we should exclude Nikki Haley from consideration as well. Jeb Bush is who the Democrats want to face, which means he is one of the least electable candidates out there. Nobody is pining for the halcyon days of the Bush Administration even if unemployment was good and GDP growth rates were acceptable.

    Jeb Bush was a good governor of Florida but it should have ended there.


  31. Speranza
    31 | August 8, 2013 10:15 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Carolina Girl:
    2016 is Hilary’s to lose. No one in the GOP can beat her and the Democrats have an electoral and demographic advantage for now.

    She is emingtnetlhy disliekd by at least 1/2 the country and most improatantly, Obama and the Chicago Machine do not like her or the ocutnry. Igt is possible gthey would prefer some milque gtoast Republican in q20.


  32. 32 | August 8, 2013 10:16 am

    @ Speranza:

    She has a 58% approval ratings and crushes all Republicans in the poll. We have to be realistic and realize it is her’s to lose.


  33. Speranza
    33 | August 8, 2013 10:17 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Carolina Girl:
    2016 is Hilary’s to lose. No one in the GOP can beat her and the Democrats have an electoral and demographic advantage for now.

    She is heartily disliked by at least 1/2 the country and most importantly, Obama and the Chicago Machine do not like her and her husband. It is possible that they would prefer some milque toast Republican in 2016 and then run a Deval Patrick in 2020.


  34. 34 | August 8, 2013 10:18 am

    @ Speranza:

    Why not let Rush Limbaugh just pick the nominee and be done with it?

    Like Boss Tweed in Tammany Hall. :lol:

    After one more loss, many in the base will wake up to reality. We just have to ride out during this period of GOP madness.


  35. 35 | August 8, 2013 10:20 am

    @ Speranza:
    I really don’t get you. I get it that you hate Bush, but do you really think that Gore would have been better? That is just crazy. Bush didn’t get Amnesty through, though he tried. Gore would have done the same, though he’d have probably taken a page from Obama’s book and done it through Executive Orders and orderin gthe Border Patrol to essentially let everyone through. What cost us the House and Senate was the House and Senate Republicans spending like they were Democrats. Rejection of Bush was tangential to that. Besides, you are the one that always says winning is everything. Bush Won hi sre-election. He didn’t push the agenda I’d have liked to have seen him pursue, bu tyou don’t seem to think that the agenda matters when it comes to RINOs like Lugar or Toomey being in the Senate. Could Bush have been better? Most crtainly. I was very disappointed in the way that the Republicans handled things wwhen they were in the majority. But it is a far cry from saying things could be better to saying it didn’t make a difference who won. I get it that you hate Bush, all thigs Bush, world without end, but youu and Rodan both take Bush hatered to a pathological end. There were a lot of worse things that could have happend to America than the Bush Administration, and Gore or Kerry Administration either one would be at the top of that list.


  36. Speranza
    36 | August 8, 2013 10:20 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    She has a 58% approval ratings and crushes all Republicans in the poll. We have to be realistic and realize it is her’s to lose.

    You know what? I am not intimidated by that. Those popularity ratings are based on the fact that of her name recognition in the country. Hell, George W. Bush’s popularity has gone up too since Obama. Also Hillary is removed from the more controversial domestic and economic policies going on. She is a hideously divisive person. She would be a tough candidate no doubt about it but she is not invincible.


  37. 37 | August 8, 2013 10:21 am

    Rand Paul: Stephanopoulos colluded with Democrats on birth control issue in 2012 election

    Kentucky Republican Sen. Rand Paul suggested Wednesday that ABC’s “This Week” host George Stephanopoulos was early in 2012 was part of a larger plot to make women’s issue, specifically birth control, part of the 2012 presidential election.

    Birth control did become part of the discussion in 2012, especially after radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh made his ill-advised remarks about then-Georgetown coed and so-called birth control activist Sandra Fluke a month later.


  38. 38 | August 8, 2013 10:23 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Bush Won his re-election

    He did it by forming a coalition and running ads in Spanish that would get a republican lynched today. Its funny how Conservatives forget what Bush did to get re-elected.


  39. 39 | August 8, 2013 10:26 am

    @ Speranza:

    Until someone can break the Democrat coalition I don’t see how Hillary loses. Romney got 58% of the White vote because some racist White Democrats voted for him, but that will not be the case with Hillary. Those White Democrats will go back home. This leaves the republicans in a deeper hole than Romney was in.

    If a Republican did try to appeal to some Democrat voters, the base will be up in arms. Republicans are damned if they do, damn if they don’t.


  40. 40 | August 8, 2013 10:26 am

    @ Speranza:
    @ Rodan:

    When have the Base had veto power over our nomination? Please tell me, because I’ve not seen that. It is the Establishment that has picked our last four Presidential contenders. Do you really think the Base wanted Dole? McCain? Or, for that matter Romney? You are just like the Establishment Republicans. You hate the base even though it is the base that wins State and Local elections. It was the Base that won in 2010, and the Establishment promptly told them to sit down and shut up. The exact same thing you’d like to see.


  41. 42 | August 8, 2013 10:31 am

    Rodan wrote:

    He did it by forming a coalition and running ads in Spanish that would get a republican lynched today.

    There’s nothing that would keep a Republican from doing that today. Indeed, even the people pushing for Amnesty have their supporters, or it wouldn’t have made it as far as it has. Hell, I’m willing to do a guest worker visa (no path to citizenship) if it is coupled with some real border enforcement. You read what False Flag operators like Kilgore Trout put up on Ace or Hot Air, and you paint the whole Republican Party with that broad brush. That makes their propaganda efforts successful.


  42. Speranza
    43 | August 8, 2013 10:33 am

    Iron Fist wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    I really don’t get you. I get it that you hate Bush, but do you really think that Gore would have been better? That is just crazy. Bush didn’t get Amnesty through, though he tried. Gore would have done the same, though he’d have probably taken a page from Obama’s book and done it through Executive Orders and orderin gthe Border Patrol to essentially let everyone through. What cost us the House and Senate was the House and Senate Republicans spending like they were Democrats. Rejection of Bush was tangential to that. Besides, you are the one that always says winning is everything. Bush Won hi sre-election. He didn’t push the agenda I’d have liked to have seen him pursue, bu tyou don’t seem to think that the agenda matters when it comes to RINOs like Lugar or Toomey being in the Senate. Could Bush have been better? Most crtainly. I was very disappointed in the way that the Republicans handled things wwhen they were in the majority. But it is a far cry from saying things could be better to saying it didn’t make a difference who won. I get it that you hate Bush, all thigs Bush, world without end, but youu and Rodan both take Bush hatered to a pathological end. There were a lot of worse things that could have happend to America than the Bush Administration, and Gore or Kerry Administration either one would be at the top of that list.

    Let me expand how you can get me Yes Bush is better than Gore and Kerry, and a hell of a lot better than Obama but he still sucked as President (and I voted for him and his father 4 times in total). I also recalled his “Islam is a religion of peace” bullshit that he spread right after 9/11. Bush was never interested in expanding the Republican majorities in the House and Senate (thank you for letting Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid along with Obama rule as the Triumvirate of Terror) and was (like McCain) “Mr. Reach Across the Aisle”. His refusal to fight back utterly demoralized conservatives and there is part of me which thinks he actually voted for Obama. A man who will not fight back (even occasionally ) is not a real man in my book. A lot of people on the Right love him because he fed them meaningless red meat rhetoric (his interference in the Schiavo case was just as wrong in my opinion as Obama’s interjecting himself in the Trayvon Martin-George Zimmerman case). Also he was not exactly a fiscal conservative himself. It is too bad, because as a person I actually liked Bush but he and his family’s legacy has changed the Republican Party and for the worse. Up until 1992 the GOP had an urban arm but now they are becoming an increasingly rural political party with diminishing influence in cities and suburbs. So many suburbs that used to vote Republican for President (Nassau and Suffolk counties for example) now vote Democrat. Yes Republican can win Governorships and Senate seats in Blue states every now and then but they run as fiscal conservatives who govern responsibly. So, yes I have no love for him and I am not ashamed of it. Just my opinion.


  43. 44 | August 8, 2013 10:35 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Hell, I’m willing to do a guest worker visa (no path to citizenship) if it is coupled with some real border enforcement.

    That’s my stance because THAT would solve the problem. Most of the illegals don’t care about citizenship. They just want to work here and go back and forth.

    The Democrats on the other want wants vote slaves hence their push for amnesty.


  44. 45 | August 8, 2013 10:36 am

    @ doriangrey:

    I’m doing that as a guest post!


  45. Speranza
    46 | August 8, 2013 10:36 am

    Rodan wrote:

    The Democrats on the other want wants vote slaves hence their push for amnesty.

    They want to fill up the ranks of the dying World war II generation that have voted Democratic ever since Franklin Delano Roosevelt.


  46. 47 | August 8, 2013 10:37 am

    @ Speranza:

    Well said and that i exactly my view.


  47. 48 | August 8, 2013 10:39 am

    @ Speranza:

    The Democrats have done this with many groups in the past. This is their MO.

    The sad part is the GOP has addressed this issue the wrong way and have fallen for the Democrat’s Party’s trap.


  48. taxfreekiller
    49 | August 8, 2013 10:41 am

    The RNC, aka the RINO’s aka the moderats aka Karl Rove are the problem total.

    They piss off the base who are all that keep the R’s in the deal at all.

    The “Tea Party” are just a bunch of wayward pissed off Goldwater/Reagan conservatives who left the game due to the “fix is in” RINO’s and RNC.

    Simple facts: 250,000,000 possible voters, only 120,000,000 voted in 2012.

    If the moderates aka Karl Rove, Bush’s, McCains, Romney’s would just raise money and help conservatives win elections the whole thing would be fixed.

    But that might slow the “pork” the “ear marks” so the RINO’s enable the commies and take payoffs for doing so.

    Only a 3% to 5% higher voter turn out is all it would take of the pissed off conservatives but the RINO’s pour cold water on that every chance the get.

    Example is how in fear they are of Ted Cruz and what we conservatives did here in Texas. We went around them over them and curushed them and they fear the gravey train may be in trouble.

    Vote them out, get more people to precicent conventions, get more out to vote, get more involved and 20 years from now all fixed.


  49. 50 | August 8, 2013 10:42 am

    I have to give Dorian kudos. He gets it on the Marxist infiltration in American political thought.


  50. taxfreekiller
    51 | August 8, 2013 10:46 am

    Worker visas will be full citizens and voting commie Democrat in 3 to 5 years if any path of any sort is passed.

    Even if all the illegals get to vote later , real Americans ,conservative Americans way out number them and if more voted the R’s and conservatives would still win.

    The RINO’s are the source of the evil. Traitors always are.


  51. 52 | August 8, 2013 10:49 am

    @ taxfreekiller:

    The RINO’s are the source of the evil.

    You see how they are pushing Chris Christie?


  52. 53 | August 8, 2013 10:50 am

    @ Iron Fist:
    @ Speranza:
    @ taxfreekiller:

    See my #37.


  53. taxfreekiller
    54 | August 8, 2013 10:50 am

    Woodrow Wilson converted all of Mexico to the commie way when he took over the last revolution and put in the liberal leftist to rule total over Mexico from 1911 to now.

    All they know is the dole and being servants or the 1% who rule.

    Only ones outside the elite grips are the terrorist in the drug cartels, and they now buy the elites off.

    Total crime in Mexico is being invited to plant its evil roots in your home towns.

    The kill by any means.


  54. 55 | August 8, 2013 10:50 am

    taxfreekiller wrote:

    Vote them out, get more people to precicent conventions, get more out to vote, get more involved and 20 years from now all fixed.

    I agree with everything that you’ve said, but I don’t thinke we have the twenty years to d it in. I think the wheels come off this wagon about 2025. That is the timeframe for when the costs of entitlements and interest on the debt eat up all the revenue that can be generated from the economy. We are already in deep trouble. Obama likes to point out that if we don’t raise the debt ceiling we’ll go into default and at the same time advocate for more spending. We are already so far in debt that we are having to borrow money to pay the interest on the debt that we already have. That is bankrupt economics. Continuing to borrow puts off the day of reckoning, but that day will come. Something that can’t go on forever won’t go on forever. The only thing that could save is would be a drastic austerity plan, and neither Party is willing to make the case for that. Paul Ryan’s budget was consiered “too radical” and it didn’t balance the budget for ten years (which as a practical matter meanse never). We’re already bankrupt, we just haven’t decared bankruptcy yet. But we will be over $21 trillion in debt by the end of Obama’s second term. That is a debt to GDP ratio in the neighborhood of that of Greece. There will be nobody to bail us out.


  55. Guggi
    56 | August 8, 2013 10:52 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:

    I never understood why Romney did not make fun of Obama’s promise to lower the ocean levels and cool the temperatures. Obama claimed he was a god and Romney did not mock him.

    Maybe Romney could not bring himself to really go after the 1st Black President.

    As for beinga good President, the last 2 Republicans sucked. I don’t trust the GOP anymore honestly.

    This is the worst president ever. Compared with him Carter was an enlightment.

    I can’t believe that this is true:

    Obama backs race-based school discipline policies

    President Barack Obama is backing a controversial campaign by progressives to regulate schools’ disciplinary actions so that members of major racial and ethnic groups are penalized at equal rates, regardless of individuals’ behavior.

    His July 26 executive order established a government panel to promote “a positive school climate that does not rely on methods that result in disparate use of disciplinary tools.”

    “African Americans lack equal access to highly effective teachers and principals, safe schools, and challenging college-preparatory classes, and they disproportionately experience school discipline,” said the order, titled “White House Initiative On Educational Excellence.”


  56. taxfreekiller
    57 | August 8, 2013 10:54 am

    Bad leaders will get you killed.

    Once you know the leader/leaders do not know shit.

    Go it on your own some how and work for other leaders as hard as possible.


  57. 58 | August 8, 2013 10:55 am

    @ taxfreekiller:

    Woodrow Wilson converted all of Mexico to the commie way when he took over the last revolution and put in the liberal leftist to rule total over Mexico from 1911 to now.

    Spot on 100%! It was Woodrow Wilson who planted the Progressive monster into Latin America. In 1916 he invaded the Dominican Republic and tried to instill a Progressive regime. He had many land owners farms and merchant warehouses seized to redistribute to the poor. It was Wilson who laid the seed for Castro and Chavez.

    BTW it was Republican Calvin Coolidge who pulled the US out of Latin America. apologized for Wilson’s actions and established the good neighbor policy. A shame Republican don’t mention this. Instead the GOP Establishment loves that KKK scum Woodrow Wilson.


  58. 59 | August 8, 2013 10:56 am

    @ Rodan:

    I saw that. Paul is just observing what we’ve all known to be the truth ever since it happened. Stephanopolis colluded with the Obama Administration to set the groundwork for the fall campaign. Stephanopolis has always been a Democrat operative with a by-line. That is all most of the MSM are, but Stephanopolis was a Clinton operative before he became a talking head on ABC. He was still a Clinton operative when they gave him his gig.


  59. taxfreekiller
    60 | August 8, 2013 10:57 am

    http://www.wattsupwiththat.com

    only thing is the commie Democrats will claim they fixed global warming with the EPA and leave the sun shine out of the deal.


  60. 61 | August 8, 2013 10:57 am

    @ Guggi:

    This is the worst president ever. Compared with him Carter was an enlightment.

    No question about that.

    As for your other article, I have to see more proof. The Daily Caller jumps the gun alot and prints rumors. Not saying it’s not true, just I have to see more.


  61. 62 | August 8, 2013 10:59 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Stephanopolous should never have been allowed to host any debate. He knew Santorum wants to ban condoms and asked that question to get Santorum on a rant.


  62. 63 | August 8, 2013 11:02 am

    @ Guggi:

    That certainly fits the pattern of this Administration, doesn’t it? Obama has to inject race into everything. He is continually stokingthe grievances of the blacks in order to make them angry against whites. That was the MO from day 1 in the Martin killing He really thinks blacks should have the right to assault whites, and the bulk of the black community agrees with that. That isn’t going to end well.


  63. 64 | August 8, 2013 11:05 am

    Rodan wrote:

    I have to give Dorian kudos. He gets it on the Marxist infiltration in American political thought.

    I am embarrassed by how late in life I came to this understanding, I spent far to much of my life trying to be a great musician instead of a great human being. Now I am trying to atone for that sin.


  64. 65 | August 8, 2013 11:06 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    It all stems from Obama’s insecurities into his racial identity. He is NOT Black. He is Mixed Race/Mulatto which there is nothing to be ashamed about that. However, he wants to be Black and is over compensating. Obama has mental issues.


  65. 66 | August 8, 2013 11:08 am

    @ doriangrey:

    You opened my eyes on the Marxist threat. This disease comes in many flavors and sometimes they even fight each other (Nazis vs. Communist). But at the end of the day, the Marxist agenda is on the march and many people are aiding it without realizing.


  66. 67 | August 8, 2013 11:09 am

    @ Rodan:

    Yeah, Stephanopolus should have never been allowed near a debate. He is too partisan. I guarantee you that the Democrat Primaries won’t have a debate where Sean Hannity is a moderator, or even Chris Wallace. Why should we put up with biased moderators?


  67. 68 | August 8, 2013 11:12 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    The funny part is that even Hannity would actually be a fair moderator to the Democrats. I bet you the Democrats will boycott any debate Fox offers to host.


  68. Speranza
    69 | August 8, 2013 11:14 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Iron Fist:
    The funny part is that even Hannity would actually be a fair moderator to the Democrats. I bet you the Democrats will boycott any debate Fox offers to host.

    Bret Baier or Chris Wallace would be great moderators. Even the late Tim Russert had he been alive would have been far preferable to Candy Crowley.


  69. Guggi
    70 | August 8, 2013 11:14 am

    Rodan wrote:

    As for your other article, I have to see more proof. The Daily Caller jumps the gun alot and prints rumors. Not saying it’s not true, just I have to see more.

    That’s why I wrote “I can*t believe that this is true” :-)


  70. 71 | August 8, 2013 11:15 am

    @ Speranza:

    Yup, those 2 are top notch.


  71. Speranza
    72 | August 8, 2013 11:16 am

    Stephanapolous spent the first 20 minutes of one GOP debate asking “social issues” questions which frankly were irrelevant but were designed for another “gotcha” moment.


  72. 73 | August 8, 2013 11:16 am

    @ Guggi:

    It could be true because Obama has racial insecurities, but I want to see more proof. If it is true, then basically, we are on the path back to segregation and all those people who sacrificed for equality will have done so in vain.


  73. Speranza
    74 | August 8, 2013 11:17 am

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    Yup, those 2 are top notch.

    Even Brit Hume would be good (and fair to all).


  74. 75 | August 8, 2013 11:17 am

    @ Speranza:

    He knew Santorum would jump on it.


  75. 76 | August 8, 2013 11:17 am

    @ Rodan:

    You are correct on both points. Hannity is too much the professional to pull a stunt like this. I’d love to see the Democrats quizzed on the Second Amendment, because there is no way they can appease their base without pissing off most of the independents in the country. Look at how Joe Biden has handled the issue, and realize that he’s probably doing better than Hillary would do on the issue. You’ll not see the Democrats asked about it, though. And a truly partisan moderator would ask them why they support the likes of Gosnell. It would have been interesting in 2008 for the moderator to have pointedly asked Obama about late-term abortion in light of his vote against an “Infants Born Alive” law.


  76. Speranza
    77 | August 8, 2013 11:19 am

    @ Guggi:
    Always try to wait for the 48 hour rule. If a story seems too good or too awful to be true, wait two days to see if the reporter did not jump the gun.


  77. 78 | August 8, 2013 11:20 am

    @ Iron Fist:

    Sadly we will never see Democrats asked hard questions. Instead it will be questions like, “Why are republicans evil?” or Why are you so awesome?”.

    This country is a soft dictatorship and the Democrats are the ruling Party.


  78. Speranza
    79 | August 8, 2013 11:22 am

    What the the hell is Fareed Zakaria doing on CNN?


  79. 80 | August 8, 2013 11:22 am

    @ Speranza:

    Yeah, that is kind of how I felt about the news yesterfay that Valerie Jarrett is the one who gave the “stand down” order on Benghazi. I can see her making the call to Obama, but Obama would have she one who had to sign off on it. Whomever got that order would have done well to demand it in writing. Here we are almost a year later, and we really know no more than we did the day after the attacks except for the fact that Obama seems to be willing to go to extreme lengths to keep the truth for that attack from coming to light.


  80. 81 | August 8, 2013 11:23 am

    @ Speranza:

    I have seen Conservatives jump the gun on too many stories. Obama is bad enough that nothing has to be made up about him.


  81. 82 | August 8, 2013 11:25 am

    @ Speranza:

    Why do Spain and Italy have to be Latin States or why Is the UK a Anglo-Celtic state?

    This guy really is stupid.


  82. 83 | August 8, 2013 11:28 am

    @ Rodan:

    Except that polling shows the Democrats really don’t want her either.


  83. 84 | August 8, 2013 11:30 am

    @ Carolina Girl:

    I know that hence why I was hoping Deval Patrick ran. Its very possible that some other Democrat may steal her thunder.


  84. Guggi
    85 | August 8, 2013 11:35 am

    What we face is not Marxism but postmodernism.

    The grand/metanarratives (like marxism, fascism but also democracy, science or human rights etc.) are dead, small narratives rule the world. The decentralization of politics, the relativization of any value rules. In their view consens doesn’nt exist -- opposition to everything is the only rule (Lyotard).

    In this sense Brennan’s thesis from 1980 is a perfect postmodern example.

    e.g. Iranian Islamism: it is the local/small narrative, it is a postmodern answer to (Western) modernity and that is why the (Western) democratic opposition can’t be supported because it would support a denounced metanarrative (Western democracy).

    Nice, isn’t it ?


  85. 86 | August 8, 2013 11:36 am

    @ Rodan:

    We like in California. It walks and talks on a daily basis here.


  86. 87 | August 8, 2013 11:37 am

    @ Carolina Girl:

    Should be “we LIVE in California.” We still “LIKE” it, DG and I, but it does often frustrate us.


  87. Guggi
    88 | August 8, 2013 11:42 am

    @ Guggi:

    If the Iranian opposition would call for canibalism as an authentic part of Iranian culture postmodernist movements would support them.


  88. 89 | August 8, 2013 11:43 am

    New thread.


  89. 90 | August 8, 2013 11:43 am

    @ Guggi:

    That is true.


  90. 91 | August 8, 2013 11:43 am

    @ Speranza:

    I remember at one point in the runup to 2008 when during a GOP debate some stupid moderator wanted people to raise your hand if you believe in global warming and Fred Thompson refused. Here’s the clip:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0cVS1bsK7Q

    Notice McLame couldn’t wait to be a global warming butt boy.


  91. 92 | August 8, 2013 12:55 pm

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    Notice McLame couldn’t wait to be a global warming butt boy.

    Global Warming is one of the Sacrements of the Secular Church of the Left. Just as abortion is. No matter what the evidence against it is, leftists believe in Global Warmingas an act of Faith, and they ask “Have you renounced Satan and all of his works belief in a Sun-centered paradigm of Global Climate?” Of course, people who pay attention to such things note that the planet has been both hotter than it is now and cooler than it is now in pre-human history, but to the Warmist these are specious assertions, because they feel that global warming is caused by human activity. It is, like transgenderism, a triumph of feelings over factual evidence.


  92. darkwords
    93 | August 8, 2013 1:11 pm

    @ 4 Iron Fist: One though we should ask is why we allow 2 year contracts for mobile phones when the population is basically living paycheck to paycheck. One bad choice and the mobile phone company ALWAYS dings the credit report and turns the bad choicer into a credit scofflaw for 10 years. It can be just a $35 payment the person couldn’t make and the mobile phone company will make them pay dearly. Bad credit record. Higher rates, less opportunity. The credit record is attached to a lot of human transactions now. Just negating the two year retail contracts by law will increase the upward mobility for a lot of people.


  93. Speranza
    94 | August 8, 2013 2:28 pm

    darkwords wrote:

    One though we should ask is why we allow 2 year contracts for mobile phones when the population is basically living paycheck to paycheck. One bad choice and the mobile phone company ALWAYS dings the credit report and turns the bad choicer into a credit scofflaw for 10 years.

    I’ve noticed that too.


  94. Speranza
    95 | August 8, 2013 2:28 pm

    Carolina Girl wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    I remember at one point in the runup to 2008 when during a GOP debate some stupid moderator wanted people to raise your hand if you believe in global warming and Fred Thompson refused. Here’s the clip:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0cVS1bsK7Q
    Notice McLame couldn’t wait to be a global warming butt boy.

    I am sure he was the first hand up.


  95. Speranza
    96 | August 8, 2013 2:29 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    He knew Santorum would jump on it.

    Santorum was figuratively chomping at the bit to get at it.


  96. Speranza
    97 | August 8, 2013 2:30 pm

    Jim Lehrer the moderator for the first debate was actually quite good.


  97. Speranza
    98 | August 8, 2013 2:30 pm

    I always liked Fred Thompson but I am a bit put off by those “Reverse Mortgages” ads he does on TV.


  98. Speranza
    99 | August 8, 2013 2:32 pm

    Rodan wrote:

    @ Speranza:
    I have seen Conservatives jump the gun on too many stories. Obama is bad enough that nothing has to be made up about him.

    I think that they allow their enthusiasm to “nail Obama” get in the way of their common sense.


  99. Speranza
    100 | August 8, 2013 2:34 pm

    At times even Weasel Zippers tends to jump the gun on reports that make Obama look bad at times.


Back to the Top

The Blogmocracy

website design was Built By David