Respite From Mike: The Myths Of Bi-Partisanship

Bloomberg Quote Of The Day

from Retire Mike Bloomberg

Bloomberg Quote Of The Day
November 23rd, 2005
Mayor Bloomberg told a New Jersey couple who want to reclaim WTC ashes from a city dump that he had difficulty supporting their cause because I intend to leave my body to science. His new comments have angered families of 9/11 victims, who describe them as “cold,” “heartless” and “dismissive” of their grief.
In explaining his resistance to their plea for a “proper burial of the dead,” the couple told The Post that Bloomberg said, “I’ve only visited my father’s grave once.”
Then, when a stunned Kurt Horning asked Bloomberg if he “would want his father buried in a dump,” the mayor replied: “I intend to leave my body to science, so that doesn’t really worry me.”
“I was shocked at his responses. I think his response to our request was dismissive of our feelings,” Horning said.

THANKSGIVING APPEAL TO MAYOR BLOOMBERG: 9/11 FAMILIES DESERVE PROPER BURIAL
November 23rd, 2005
Catholic League president Bill Donohue commented today as follows:
“I am asking Roman Catholics all over the nation to make a Thanksgiving Day appeal to New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg regarding the request of those families who lost their loved ones in the World Trade Center (WTC) attack of September 11, 2001: please accede to the plea of ‘WTC Families for Proper Burial’ so that this group can disband.
Since 9/11, these families have yet to be afforded a respectful burial for their kin. It is only fitting that this unconscionable condition come to an end this Thanksgiving.
“It is hard to believe that more than four years after this national tragedy, these families are still being denied a proper burial for their loved ones. The remains of more than 1,200 victims of 9/11 who could not be identified are deposited in the Fresh Kills garbage dump on Staten Island. The families of 9/11 have been told that the remains—including identifiable body parts and personal effects—could be retrieved for a proper burial. But to date, nothing has been done to satisfy their request.

Bloomberg Quote Of The Day
November 22nd, 2005
Mayor Bloomberg rushed to Bush’s defense when the Environmental Protection Agency’s inspector general blasted the White House for doctoring press releases after 9-11 to portray “hazardous” air quality findings as safe, a distortion that’s led to lung damage for thousands of firefighters and others at ground zero. “I know the president,” Bloomberg said when confronted with the shocking findings. “I think he’s a very honest guy. It would never occur to me not to trust him.”
Village Voice
October 18th, 2005

Bloomberg Quote Of The Day
November 17th, 2005
MICHAEL BLOOMBERG BILLS himself in his autobiography as a women-friendly employer. Not so, says former saleswoman Sekiko Sakai Garrison, who filed a sexual harassment and discrimination suit against the media baron and his company in U.S. District Court in Manhattan on June 18. Her suit, which seeks $ 15 million, contends Bloomberg subjected her and other women employees to ‘’repeated and unwelcome sexual comments… sexual overtures…and overt sexual gestures, including unauthorized touching and inappropriate acts.'’
She also charges saleswomen had to wear sexy clothes. Her suit recounts an incident in April, 1995, when she told him she was pregnant. His response: ‘’Kill it.'’ She felt that meant she had to have an abortion to keep her job, which left her too distraught to work and led to her departure two months later. Garrison filed much the same complaint with the New York Human Rights Div. in 1995 but got the agency to issue a right-to-sue letter so she could file the federal suit. Bloomberg told the state body the case was without merit and denied the ‘’kill it'’ remark. But Bloomberg did not respond to requests for comment on the new lawsuit.
Business Week
June 30, 1997

Where Have All the Fighters Gone?
November 17th, 2005
By Juan Gonzalez
Thursday, November 3rd, 2005
As a journalist who has chronicled big city politics in this country for decades, as a Puerto Rican with long experience in movements for racial and ethnic equality, and as a labor activist who has consistently fought to revive the American trade union movement, I learned long ago that outward appearances are often deceiving, that the surface manifestations of any political process often mask powerful currents swirling below.
Yet I have been amazed at the virtual absence of dispassionate and comprehensive analysis about this election; an analysis grounded in facts, one that places the conflict in the context of broader historical patterns, that consistently asks: what is in the best interest of working people and the marginalized or oppressed groups of New York City? Once you begin to look at the mayoral race from that deeper perspective, you begin to realize that there have been few times in recent memory when an urban electorate faced such a clear class choice – in the personalities of the candidates, their stands on the issues, and the forces they represent.
You have only to look at the traditional ruling circles of the city – the banking, corporate, real estate and media barons – to see how much they understand what’s at stake. Rarely have they been so unified in their determination to defeat a candidate who comes from the “Other New York,” who speaks openly about economic inequality and claims to represent the working class and racial minorities.
My experience more than 25 years of covering big city politics has convinced me that Michael Bloomberg, more than any New York mayor in memory, is systematically consolidating a velvet-glove takeover of city government on behalf of Wall Street financiers and the city’s real estate barons. In my columns in the Daily News over the past four years, and I have repeatedly chronicled many of the most flagrant examples of his policies.
If there is any shame in this race, it belongs to New York’s progressive movement, many of whose members failed to properly analyze the stakes of the conflict from the start, while others, succumbing to their class and racial biases, failed to rally behind one of the more progressive working class mayoral candidates in our city’s modern history. Hopefully, we will all learn well the lessons of this conflict, because the working class and the new majorities of our cities are inevitably ones who most suffer when progressive leaders desert the very principles they espouse.

Bloomberg Quote Of The Day
November 16th, 2005
When a young girl complained to Michael Bloomberg about the quality of food at her public school, Mr. Bloomberg told her not to worry because “all girls tend to be vegetarians” after a while.

Bloomberg Quote Of The Day
November 15th, 2005
When Bloomberg first proposed running for office, many of his friends and associates advised him against it, but he apparently was unfazed. At a meeting last year, he summed up his attitude toward electoral politics, and risktaking in general, by telling an off-color joke. “I get slapped a lot, but I get laid a lot, too” was the punch line.
The New Yorker
September 3, 2001

Thursday, January 31, 2008

The Myths Of Bi-Partisanship

What "bipartisanship" in Washington means. from Glen Greenwald
Description of above video that emphasizes Greenwald's brilliant analysis to follow:
UPDATE: This superb ad, from Martin Heinrich, a Democratic candidate for Congress in the 1st District of New Mexico, makes the point about as well as a political advertisement can make a point -- is it really that difficult for other Democrats to convey this message?

Whenever the mavens of "bipartisanship" attempt to do more than spout pretty platitudes, they invariably reveal just how vapid and bereft of substance are their slogans. Former Sen. Bob Graham -- who recently joined David Boren, Sam Nunn and others in threatening the country with a plutocratic Michael Bloomberg candidacy if the presidential candidates failed to become more "bipartisan" -- has an Op-Ed in today's Washington Post which is a classic entry in this genre.
Graham purports to list a slew of problems suffering from a lack of bipartisanship -- "huge gaps in national and homeland security"; "Nearly 50 million Americans still have no health insurance"; crumbling infrastructure; high gas prices; and a lack of a brighter future for the next generation -- and then proposes a litany of shallow process "solutions" such as a bipartisan cabinet, changes to the format for presidential debates, and regional primaries. Those "solutions" are total nonsequiturs. How would they resolve any of the intense differences over those policies? They manifestly wouldn't.
But more importantly, "bipartisanship" is already rampant in Washington, not rare. And, in almost every significant case, what "bipartisanship" means in Washington is that enough Democrats join with all of the Republicans to endorse and enact into law Republican policies, with which most Democratic voters disagree. That's how so-called "bipartisanship" manifests in almost every case.
Many people, especially partisans, always believe that their own side is compromising too much and that the other side is always winning, so it's best to consult objective facts in order to know how "bipartisanship" works. Here are the vote breakdowns by party over the last couple years on the most significant and contentious pieces of legislation, particularly (though not only) in the area of national security. In almost every case, the proposals that are enacted are ones favored by the White House and supported by all GOP lawmakers, and then Democrats split and enough of them join with Republicans to ensure that the GOP gets what it wants. That's "bipartisanhip" in Washington:
To support the new Bush-supported FISA law:
GOP - 48-0
Dems - 12-36
To compel redeployment of troops from Iraq:
GOP - 0-49
Dems - 24-21
To confirm Michael Mukasey as Attorney General:
GOP - 46-0
Dems - 7-40
To confirm Leslie Southwick as Circuit Court Judge:
GOP - 49-0
Dems - 8-38
Kyl-Lieberman Resolution on Iran:
GOP - 46-2
Dems - 30-20
To condemn MoveOn.org:
GOP - 49-0
Dems - 23-25
The Protect America Act:
GOP - 44-0
Dems - 20-28
Declaring English to be the Government's official language:
GOP - 48-1
Dems - 16-33
The Military Commissions Act:
GOP - 53-0
Dems - 12-34
To renew the Patriot Act:
GOP - 54-0
Dems - 34-10
Cloture Vote on Sam Alito's confirmation to the Supreme Court:
GOP - 54-0
Dems - 18-25
Authorization to Use Military Force in Iraq:
GOP - 48-1
Dems - 29-22
On virtually every major controversial issue -- particularly, though not only, ones involving national security and terrorism -- the Republicans (including their vaunted mythical moderates and mavericks) vote in almost complete lockstep in favor of the President, the Democratic caucus splits, and the Republicans then get their way on every issue thanks to "bipartisan" support. That's what "bipartisanship" in Washington means.
Leaving aside how shallow and, shall we say, unserious is this endless chirping for more "bipartisanship" -- as though it's a magic feel-good formula for resolving actual policy differences -- it's hard to imagine how there could possibly be any more "bipartisanship" in Washington even if that were the only goal. Other than formally disbanding as a party -- or granting a permanent proxy of their collective vote to Mitch McConnell -- how could Congressional Democrats possibly be more accommodating than they already are?

Michael Bloomberg: The Common Man

In 2005, Freakingnews sponsored a PhotoShop contest to

"create images of New York Mayor doing things normally associated with the "common man" or the everyday New Yorker. This contest is fueled by the following news:
Many New Yorkers are not convinced that their Mayor, billionaire Michael Bloomberg, can understand their needs. They question whether a mayor with a private plane, a sprawling Manhattan townhouse, ritzy vacation homes and a personal fortune worth billions can even begin to understand the wants and needs of average people. Despite the fact that Mayor Bloomberg's approval ratings have ballooned and his poll margins are steadily widening over his re-election challengers, his image with voters is not perfect. There remains a perception that he's an out-of-touch billionaire when it comes to ordinary residents of the Big Apple. As he heads towards the November 8th election, this remains his biggest political handicap. When pollsters interview people, they are evenly split over whether or not the Mayor understands the needs and problems of everyday citizens."

Below are some of the entries

Glen Greenwald On Bloomberg

from Greenwald's Salon site 12/31/07
Here's Bloomberg's record of Independence, Judgment, Competence, and Trans-partisan Wisdom. Consider how sterling his judgment is and how able he would be to make the world respect us again:
NYT, May 11, 2004:
Laura Bush and Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg stood shoulder to shoulder yesterday in an appearance that may well dispel any lingering doubt as to the mayor's feelings about the president, or of the mayor's own political identity. . . [T]here he was yesterday, throwing in his words of support for the president's decision to invade Iraq -- promoting one of the notions that is central to the rationale for the attack, that the conflict was justified by what happened on Sept. 11.
"Let me add something to that," Mr. Bloomberg said after Mrs. Bush gave her defense of her husband and his decision to go to war. "Don't forget that the war started not very many blocks from here."
Joe Conason, Salon, June 22, 2007:
Dating back to his infatuation with Bush, the mayor has always been an enthusiastic supporter of the war in Iraq. He marched lockstep in the Bush drive toward invasion when he addressed the United Nations General Assembly in September 2002: "Freedom comes at a price, and tragically, sometimes that price is the commitment to defend freedom by arms. America has been, is, and always will be willing to do its duty -- to sacrifice even its own blood, so that people everywhere can live as individuals responsible for their own destinies." (As Wayne Barrett once pointed out in the Village Voice, the man spouting this brave talk got out of the Vietnam draft because his feet are flat.)
Bloomberg's pro-war rhetoric dutifully echoed the White House line connecting Saddam Hussein with al-Qaida and 9/11, almost as if Karl Rove had programmed his brain. "I'm voting for George W. Bush and it's mainly because I think we have to strike back at terrorists," he said in September 2004. "To argue that Saddam Hussein wasn't a terrorist is ridiculous. He used mustard gas, or some kind of gas, against his own people."
Bloomberg's speech at the 2004 Republican National Convention:
I want to thank President Bush for supporting New York City and changing the homeland security funding formula and for leading the global war on terrorism.
(APPLAUSE)
The president deserves our support.
(APPLAUSE)
We are here to support him.
(APPLAUSE)
And I am here to support him.
(APPLAUSE)
NYT, January 29, 2004:
We are going to get George W. Bush re-elected as president of the United States! We are going to carry New York City and New York State. Everybody thinks I'm crazy, but I think we can do it.
Wayne Barrett, Village Voice, October 18, 2005:
Even though the City Council passed a resolution opposing the war, Bloomberg called an old friend, Paul Wolfowitz, to express his desire to host a ticker tape parade "to say thank you," apparently as unaware as the "Mission Accomplished" president that the troops would not be coming home for years. Bloomberg actually contributed $5 million to the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Affairs in the late '90s, when war architect Wolfowitz was dean. . . .
Even before the war, Bloomberg brought his mother and daughter to the United Nations, where he addressed the General Assembly a day after Bush did in September 2002. Echoing Bush's warnings that the U.S. would go it alone if the U.N. didn't act, Bloomberg "praised" Bush's war on terror "and offered support for an attack on Iraq," according to the Daily News.

Respite From Mike

Bloomberg Quote Of The Day

Thursday, January 31, 2008

The Myths Of Bi-Partisanship

0 Comments:

Who Would You Like As Our Next President?

Michael Bloomberg: The Common Man

Cool Friends Of Mike

Even Cooler Friends Of Mike

Blog Archive

Glen Greenwald On Bloomberg