21 October 2008

Lip Service From the Boss

A regular reader of Lost City took the write City Hall about the term limits brouhaha. In response, she was e-mailed a form letter from Boss Bloomberg himself (not that he actually wrote it or anything) which is interesting in its mealy-mouthed disingenuousness. Here it is. See if you can find any section where it seems like Bloomberg actually believes what he is saying. (Boldfaces are particularly egregious examples of bullshit. My comments are in CAPS and brackets.)

Thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts about term limits.

In recent weeks and months, I've listened to many different New Yorkers with lots of different opinions on the issue of term limits. But as Wall Street has entered its worst crisis since the Great Depression, and our economic situation has become increasingly unstable and worrisome, the question for me has become far less about the theoretical and much more about the practical. And that means asking a very basic question: Is it in the best interests of the City to give voters more choices in next year's election? [BLOOMBERG WELL KNOWS THAT HIS INSERTION INTO THE ELECTION WILL RESULT IN NO CHOICE WHATEVER FOR THE ELECTORATE. HIS VAST WAR CHEST WILL SEE TO THAT.]

I understand that people voted for a two-term limit, and altering their verdict is not something that should be done lightly. [ONLY WHEN HE RAN OUT OF OTHER WAYS TO STAY IN POWER, HE MEANS.] The City Council - a democratically elected representative body - has the legal authority to change the law, and if it does so [THE COUNCIL WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERING THE QUESTION IS BLOOMBERG HADN'T FORCED THE ISSUE. AND WHAT'S MORE DEMOCRATIC: THE ELECTED COUNCIL, WHICH REPRESENTS CITIZENS, OR A REFERENDUM WHICH TALLIES THE VOTES OF EVERY SINGLE CITIZEN], the final verdict would remain with the City's voters. On Election Day, it will be up to the people to decide which candidates have earned [READ: "BOUGHT"] their vote, and which have not.

I've always supported term limits, and I continue to do so. [WTF? I MEAN, SERIOUSLY: WTF!!!!!] But I also don't want to walk away from a city I feel I can help lead through these tough times. [SO DON'T WALK AWAY, JERK! SERVE IT IN OTHER WAYS! DO YOU HAVE TO BE MAYOR TO SERVE YOUR CITY?] If the Council passes an extension of the term limits law from two to three terms, I plan to ask New Yorkers [WHOM YOU JUST DEFIED BY OVERTURNING THE TERM LIMITS LAW] to look at my [LOUSY] record of independent [OR DEMOCRAT. OR REPUBLICAN. WHICH IS HE NOW?] leadership - and then to decide if I have earned a final term. [YOU MEAN "ADDITIONAL TERM." THIS IS YOUR FINAL TERM, GENIUS.] Whatever the Council decides, I'll remain focused on doing my job [I.E.-PULLING STRINGS AND TWISTING ARMS TO OVERTURN TERM LIMITS] and finishing this term as I began it: by working day and night for New Yorkers [THE ONES WHO TOLD YOU TO GET OUT AFTER TWO TERMS, YOU MEAN?] and the City I love [TO RULE].

Thanks again for taking the time to write.

Michael R. Bloomberg

No comments: