Bloomberg's Elitism Comments
This morning, I saw, and heard, the video of Bloomberg's comments regarding farmers, et al. One of the e-mails received (apparently by Fox News) opined farmers can survive with Bloomberg but Bloomberg cannot survive without farmers. The sender missed the corollary to his statement: When the socialist state takes over, the farmers, and other so-called low skill workers, would become serfs and forced to work the land. Bloomberg, and others of the "elites", would survive by the efforts of unpaid slaves. I think we fought a civil war to correct that inequity not too long ago. Do they really want to go there again?
The "civil war" was declared by Lincoln on behalf of manufacturers and mercantilists to oppose confederate free trade that was threatening their profits. Southern slave owners were also at fault for trying to impose free trade when it should have been obvious that the only recourse of the "union" would be war. It was a protectionist tax war.
Charles Adams wrote an interesting book on the subject, When In The Course Of Human Events.
To quarrel and nitpick about tariffs while ignoring the fundamental issue of Slavery or Freedom seems irresponsible and contemptible to me.
The conditions that the GOP forced on the South after war were equally criminal, by the law of that time and the law today. That also caused conditions for blacks in the south to continue to be very bad for nearly a century.
Slavery was wiped out in every other country in the world without war and it would have been the same in both the union and the Confederate states because it was economically unsupportable. The problems we still have today and the manipulation of people using the accusation of racism are an indirect result of the war crimes of Lincoln, Grant, Sherman, and Sheridan.
Wow, me dino didn't know cops can rescue me from home invaders in five seconds should I not have time to even dial 911.
Hey, at least we don't have to worry about the safety of that dullard for a narcisstic Daddy Warbucks.
Plenty of armed security are being paid to protect him inside his little bubble as he uses some of his billions to buy gobs and gobs of campaign ad face time in an attempt to buy the presidency.
He spent an enormous amount of money so far on commercials. People will see him "live" first, after the image he created of himself on the net.
The two are not the same. His shine will fade soon.
Competing against a rabid authoritarian like Mike Bloomberg adds so much insult to injury. Let’s recall some of his more notable offenses:
This is the mayor who used his time in office to oversee more arrests on possession of marijuana charges than the three previous mayors combined.
Like a true authoritarian he cracked down on drug laws even while admitting to using marijuana and enjoying it earlier in life.
Many thousands of these arrests came as a result of Bloomberg’s notorious Stop and Frisk policy that was every bit as racist and bigoted as the rhetoric behind President Trump’s Muslim Ban and immigration policies. (Interestingly, Trump accurately painted Stop and Frisk as racist in a tweet last week which has since been deleted after the internet reminded him that only four years ago he praised that very policy in a debate.)
Mr. Bloomberg is claiming to have “evolved” on these positions, as well as his admitted attack on poor people with special taxes on sugary sodas and trans fats.
On one issue he has certainly not evolved: he is still the leading sponsor of gun-control advocacy in America. This support has gotten him rightfully called a hypocrite as he is a frequent employer of armed-security.
He certainly fits the profile of other political egomaniacs who demand, “liberty for me, but not for thee.”
The Libertarian nominee is guaranteed to be the only candidate who supports real liberty for all people. The Libertarian nominee is not going to support different rules for different socio-economic demographics. The Libertarian nominee will never offer support to policies that punish people for possessing a plant.