Well, I guess that’s supposed to be comforting.
But Bloomberg apparently has his limits. During his weekly radio show on Friday, a caller asked the mayor if he would go so far as to enact mandatory gym memberships or other forms of exercise for New Yorkers. While he said the government could “force” people to do some things, Bloomberg admitted requiring people to exercise would “probably” be taking it too far.
Allow me to translate:
He’s not a dictatorial liberal that’s totally against the idea, but was unprepared to spin his liberal tyranny at that time.
This is liberalism in true display. Total nanny state. No choice. No freedom. No liberty. Only state intereests reign, irregardless of individual choice. In essence, North Korea.
Bloomberg is the personification of why liberalism is repugnant to the very essence an founding ideals of this country.
(Just “stoking” here…I’ve noticed liberals have been afraid to defend the liberal Bloomberg tyranny…or repudiate it.)
Kevin, don’t forget that New Yorkers elected this guy, what, two or three times? They deserve him. If they choose to put up with it, who are we to gainsay them? What’s the old saying? Ah, yes. “You get the government you deserve.” New York city deserves Bloomberg.
So long as an entity provides services and benefits, said entity will have an interest in ensuring that those funds are spent intelligently. Government provides food assistance to individuals through programs like SNAP and WIC; recipients aren’t free to use those benefits to buy anything they can ingest. Employers and health insurance providers (including local, state and federal governments) have financial motivations to steer beneficiaries into behaviors that improve their health outcomes and reduce the need for health-related services. The examples are infinite.
Government interests in a democracy are simply the collective interests of citizens as manifested through a representative government. To that end, Billiam is absolutely right.
Governments excepting South Dakota, RS. You forgot to exclude South Dakota.
It’s gotten pretty deep in here. The commentors may need hip waders.
Kevin, don’t forget that New Yorkers elected this guy, what, two or three times? They deserve him. If they choose to put up with it, who are we to gainsay them? What’s the old saying? Ah, yes. “You get the government you deserve.” New York city deserves Bloomberg
1.) I doubt, seriously, Bloomberg ran on his tyrannical platform
2.) You get the government you deserve? Is this what we say to the socialist worker slave camps in N. Korea? No one deserves this kind of tyrannical, liberty robbing government…even if one did vote for Bloomberg, as an intellectually challenged liberal.
3.) Bloomberg has no problem with pot consumption when it comes to government funding his health care! This makes him a tyrannical hypocrite of the worst kind. Pot is OK and holy, but sugar is evil? I happen to have little issue on either one when it comes to individual choice. Why is sugar a worse Satan than pot now? Last I checked, sugar was legal everywhere.
4.) This idea we have no right to criticize tyrannical liberals drives me nuts. Throughout history we have every right to point out destructive, anti-freedom, anti-liberty, socialist tyranny and pesuade people it is destructive to human rights and the human condition.
If we all took your attitude, liberty is truly dead…and so is our democracy.
Government interests in a democracy are simply the collective interests of citizens as manifested through a representative government. To that end, Billiam is absolutely right
Oh RS, you poor, idealistic, soul.
Federal and state government is largely run by bureaucratic rules promulgation from unelected representatives.
Even on a simple large soda ban, how will this be carried out? Will the health department raid, with guns, the poor, ovwertaxed, small business that ignore the ban? Will they handcuff (or shoot, if situation gets heated) the barrista just following the bosses orders? Will they shutter the business, throwing people out of work?
What about the consumer that buys? Will they be cited, handcuffed, jailed and/or fined for carrying any container on street larger than 16 oz on the street? Will police have to inspect every container over this size for illegal sugar content?
(I suspect just being searched for that is a search and seizure rights violation, if not, it seems, Recess, you have Ok’d destroying the constitution in this instance.)
The “sausage” rules of tyranny is rarely Ok’d, or written, by the representative body. Many of these rules are promulgated by unelected bureaucrats, trying to expand their power base “interpreting” the vagueness of legislation passed in the most tyrannical way possible.
Get educated. Maybe you will come off your idealism that the representative government body has as much control as you think (wish).
Government provides food assistance to individuals through programs like SNAP and WIC; recipients aren’t free to use those benefits to buy anything they can ingest.
Last I checked, you can buy 2 liter bottles of soda with food stamps.
So Bloomberg is making something illegal that the Federal government overtly subsidizes is not a tyrannical liberal twilight zone of mixed messages?
What if the store refuses to accept food stamps if customer purchases more than 16 oz. of soda? (following the NYC ban, but ignoring Federal SNAP law? what if the customer is African American? you don’t think the business wouldn’t be slapped with a discrimination suit?)
Try owning a retail business sometime and weeding through the vast Federal, State, an local tyranny of taxes, regulation, and subsidy. It’s a pile of steaming guano from beginning to end.
Yet you shrug and lean back at this kind of big government abuse. I guess if government abuses you some day, I would hope others would not take your attitude toward your abuse.
Kevin, chill. You totally missed my point. Though it is hard to put through snarky sarcasm in a comment. Your attitude chases guys like me, who love Liberty away from guys like you. There’s more to life than attack, attack! If that’s all you can do, I won’t bother you again with my opinion. Or my snark.
My snarky sarcasm detector is turned off on crazy abusive liberal issues like this.
I read back your comment and see the snark now. However, I question whether Recess took it that way as well.
It would probably go the same route as his super-sized sugary drink.