Mitchell Langbert rips into the N Sun’s idea that Bloomberg would win if he ran for President: New York’s UINO Bloomberg: Is the MSM on Drugs?
Tying all of these developments together, the Sun’s first page headline on Friday claimed that Mayor Bloomberg has a chance of winning the presidency, apparently based on the counter-factual claim that Mayor Bloomberg is “competent”. Yet, the article fails to mention reports of the Mayor’s incompetence in the Sun‘s own pages. As the Sun’s Alicia Colon points out, the Mayor has accomplished little save drive the middle class from New York:
“…many New Yorkers think he’s done a great job as mayor. They must all be real estate developers, because one thing I’ll give Bloomberg credit for is giving them the heart and soul of New York City while driving real New Yorkers to other states.”
Mayor Bloomberg has apparently driven the middle class out of New York competently, because none of the mainstream media reports that story. That story is the story of a real estate bubble. In the 1990s only millionaires could afford a city apartment. Since Mayor Bloomberg’s election, only deca-millionaires ($10 million and up net worth) can afford one. Studios go for over a million dollars. Such a modest price is understandable because recent grads just starting out with low incomes need somewhere to live. Rent control, housing regulation, subsidies for super-developments all spell “government-induced shortage”. All of this has proceeded on Mayor Bloomberg’s watch. Yet, New York’s MSM trumpets “competence”.
In August 2006 , I suggested that Mayor Bloomberg is an INO, independent in name only. Now, the consensus seems to be that he’s a UINO, unaffiliated in name only. In either case, Bloomberg’s positions are across the board left/liberal. He has done nothing to shrink government, eliminate waste or lower taxes. He has interfered in areas such as the reconstruction of the Twin Towers where he lacks competence. His urban planning exercises, such as the master plan and the football stadium, have been manifestly incompetent. He has implemented intrusive health regulations. He has harassed small business and provided private-use eminent domain support to billionaire developers.
Read it all – Langbert concludes with,
They all point to the importance of a renewed alliance between economic liberals and the religious right. If a conservative candidate can make a convincing case that satisfies these two groups, he or she will be unbeatable.
I agree – A few weeks ago I said that a Republican candidate can win, but it’d be a matter of running against the insiders. It can be done – Sarkozy just did in France.
James Joyner has more on Gotham’s megalomaniacs.
And now, about Hillary,
Investor’s Business Daily
Because even as the video spoofing the Sopranos was being flashed around the Internet, serious charges of political corruption were about to be leveled against Hillary Clinton in a California court. As it turns out, the Clintons-as-crime-family trope in Hillary’s campaign video might be a little too close for comfort.
The scandal involves allegations by movie producer Peter Paul that a 2000 senatorial fundraiser for Clinton in Hollywood violated campaign laws. Paul claims he spent $2 million to produce the fundraising event — a de facto campaign expenditure. Under campaign law then in effect, campaign gifts were limited to $2,000.
He further claims that Hillary Clinton knew of his behind-the-scenes illegal activity and approved of it.
This Friday, Paul’s attorney says he will file an appeals court brief seeking the admission of new evidence in the case: a video in which Hillary Clinton is heard, over a speakerphone, thanking Paul in advance for putting on the fundraiser. “I wanted to call and personally thank all of you,” she says on the tape. “It’s going to mean a lot to the president, too,” she adds.
That last part is crucial, since Paul maintains the only reason he put the fundraiser on was to get Bill Clinton to serve as a “rainmaker” for a now-defunct Internet company that Paul headed.
The Federal Elections Commission already found Clinton’s 2000 senatorial campaign failed to report all the money it raised during the event that Paul produced. This takes that a step further.
Doug Ross explains Hillary Clinton and “The Largest Election Law Fraud in History”. This is a must-read post. Doug clearly explains the latest Clinton scandal, which is of course bypassed by the MSM (which is too busy talking about Paris Hilton’s latest).
The post includes two videos:
Go to Doug Ross’s post and read it all.
You won’t find this at the WaPo, which is busy talking about hillarycare
In other political news, you know Dick Cheney’s the one in the bull’s eye when the WaPo starts running a long series of long articles on its front page. Expect the Libs to start crying for blood more loudly than they already are.