Did Bloomberg really say this?

[Quackers]

ETA: Yes, he really did. I found video of the Katie Couric interview here. The statement about homeless people flying first class into the city just so New York will take care of them starts around the 18:15 mark. The comments this guy has made about homeless people, not supporting minimum wage, and so many others has me scratching my head how people can actually support this DINO.

https://news.yahoo.com/exclusive-katie-couric-interviews-mike-115224839.html

I was doing some research earlier on Bloomberg’s comments about not supporting minimum wage when I found this comment he made during an interview in regard to too many homeless people in New York.

“You can literally come, fly first class to Kennedy Airport and say to the taxi driver, ‘Take me the shelter system.”

The only source I found for this is observer.com. I’m not sure if they’re trustworthy or not, so I’m asking for help. Obviously, if he did in fact say it, I think it’s a problem. If not, please let me know and I’ll delete. Thanks!

Here’s the article where I found it.
https://observer.com/2014/03/bloomberg-slams-minimum-wage-hike-says-he-doesnt-miss-old-gig-a-bit/

[applegrove]

1. I still want him to spend 30 million on liberal ads. He's not going to be in the debates.

Let him spend the money that may move a few independants back to reality and liberal democracy.

[Hortensis]

16. I'm hoping his messages about what he would do will benefit

all Democrats, and specifically our existing solidly liberal candidates. They're already all over the place and well done, a counter to the flood of RW/Russian messages that we're all socialist extremists out to destroy the nation.

[applegrove]

21. Exactly. We need to flood.

[Hortensis]

22. :) We're flooding. Turned on the TV and, again, an ad,

speaking about positive solutions to a bunch of our liberal issues and goals. Radicals will reject, not a thing about how awful everything we have is, but it's going to sound good to the large majority of Dems, Dem-leaners, and wobbly cons, and of course nonvoters, who've lived their whole lives with progressive government and want to keep it.

Fingers crossed for raising all liberal Democratic boats.

[applegrove]

23. That is heartening to know it's on everywhere.

[Hortensis]

25. Hoping so. I don't want the 14th or so wealthiest man

on the planet to become president because he wants to be.

His newsroom will continue “our tradition” of not investigating Bloomberg, his family and his wealth, “and we will extend the same policy to his rivals in the Democratic primaries.” All of which is hugely unethical.

On the plus side, he's planning on spending up to $20M on registering new voters. Didn't see what demographics he'll pinpoint, but he's running against Biden specifically, so that could help the party more than him, depending on how well or poorly he sells.

[hedda_foil]

66. He's going to be in the debates. The DNC made an exception last week.

Where ya been anyway?

[applegrove]

67. I know now.

[ritapria]

2. Unlike Joe Biden

Bloomberg really is running in the wrong primary …...I wonder how many dupes will be taken in by his slick TV ads ? ..They're running in Super Tuesday States once every 20 minutes …… Ponderous

[applegrove]

3. I've seen his ad. It is not republican. Liberals in New York seem to like him.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1287&pid=359680

[wiley]

7. I want to vote for Blomberg

Because of him my three sons are alive today. Look at what he does, not what he said in the past. Watch Rachel Maddow much?

[applegrove]

8. How did he save your sons?

[wiley]

33. Thanks for asking!

No one ever looks at what happened to the other 13 or so percent of people that were stopped and frisked. Some did have guns. Some had knives, machetes, chemicals and other things meant for only one purpose. One of those people had specifically called out my two sons as a target because as young men of color they refused to be dragged into a life of violence, abuse and crime. I keep hearing how that could have easily happened by chance. Yes, men of color were specifically targeted, specifically in certain neighborhoods. In my family's case, that was a good thing.

[applegrove]

35. Tough going. Glad they are okay.

[wiley]

41. Thank You

They're good people

[JonLP24]

36. Stop & frisk is unconstitutional

and counterproductive. Whites use drugs at the same rate but you don't see stop & frisk in wealthy suburban neighborhoods.

[wiley]

39. That's a really suoperficial take

You seem incapable of understanding the rates are irrelevant. If a person of color or poor or working class person goes into a wealthy suburban neighborhood they are definitely tailed, stopped and often frisked. I couldn't give a shit about wealthy suburban neighborhoods. I care about poor, working class and middle class white, black and mixed race neighborhoods where drug and crime rates are the same if not worse than in all black neighborhoods, but we don't get anywhere near the help or resources devoted to substance abuse, mental health or PTSD counseling or treatment. We don't even have access to the same quality drugs! And we get arrested for doing them whereas wealthy people rarely do. Wealthy people can pay for their own college, and they can pay for their own addiction treatment. They can often pay for their own security. And abortions as well. So fuck the comparison of rates. They are irrelevant. Your anti-wealth memes are very tiresome.

[applegrove]

42. Read somewhere that stop and frisk is based on stats. That the way to cut

Last edited Fri Nov 29, 2019, 03:19 AM - Edit history (1)

down on crime is to go the the blocks with the worst crime and stop them for traffic reasons and then get the actual criminals on guns and drugs. I guess stopping pedestrians is the same statistical reasoning. But you dragnet up so many more people who are just minding their business and you do it to them again and again. And innocent people are traumatized and racially profiled. The answer is that you cannot police your way out of this sort of gang crime. Policing has its limits.That is what the Toronto poloice chief says and he is right. You need mixed market housing, good schools and good healthcare for all, somehow. Many places around the US and the world accomplish it. I liked when Killer Mike talked about the Georgia or Atlanta government, i can't remember which, gave a certain percentage of contracts to the african americans there. If black architectural firms don't exist then you give a black company of pavers the contract to pave the airports instead of a % of architectual contracts. It is about the spirit of life in cities. And metropolitan consolidation is important too. Adequate taxes. Running stings in white nrighbourhoods to catch white mid and low level drug dealers. You set a goal and fight for the country you want. And it is catchy working together like that. Like when we used to do barn building bees or whatever else we used to do. Winnipeg has a Bear Clan Patrol where indigenous vounteers walk the streets at night in a group of 15 and talk to locals and diffuse things in ways that they can and then call the police if it becomes criminal. They don't target drug (that is the police's job) dealers but walk people to safety and do things like that. They take a photo of the goup before they go out every night in their yellow vests and post it online on twitter. And you know what? they feel vital. And they are. Which is all anyone wants to feel really. Even people who were once addicted to drugs. Probably what the drug user feels in the euphoria is vitality. Probably what the hedge fund manager who chases efficiencies and money like a drug would do well to join the Bear Clan too. Stop and frisk was meant to break the back of drug dealers. It breaks the bond between the police and the community. Bear Clan is the glue... at least in Winnipeg.

Link to tweet

[wiley]

44. Bear Clan!

Thank You. Your response makes me happy. Before Bloomberg we used to call it Giuliani time. Could you imagine how people would react to a group of African Americans doin patrols in NYC? It was okay at first when The Guardian Angels did it and Sliwa identified himself as an anti-crack leader, because everyone was getting messed up everywhere but desperate drug addicted people. Unfortunately the group started targeting all AA youth in the area (EV primarily), and their racism became evident. Also, the leadership structure was set up only to glorify Sliwa when his wife was also running it. So the sexist, one man as supreme leader thing happened like it always does, and the AA community started fighting against Latinox in general. Then some pretty violent AA dealers started using guns to correct the situation with regards to their profits. It was an awful time during the 70s, 80s and 90s in NYC and most people really wanted the crime and fighting to just end. But absolutely everything you stated about addressing economic inequality and housing and job opportunities is absolutely correct. The way it was instituted by the cops was amazingly fuct up. But Bloomberg actually tried. And poured hundreds of millions of dollars into resolving a lot of the issues you mention amongst young African American men and I just don't care what he actually said in the past. I care what he did. If you actually look at the stats and dismiss that one Columbia researcher that stated that crime dropping could easily have been attributable to chance is a disingenuous interpretation of selected data. Scientists call that bullshit. There are lots of AAs out there that are still hurting about how stop and frisk was rolled out and how the cops played it.I know quite a few of them. But consider this. Our current Mayor DeBlasio, long after stop and frisk was stopped, occasionally publicly opines about how he has had to discuss with his son what could happen to him just because he is black. Does this have anything to do with stop and frisk? Or Bloomberg? No. I talk about this with my grandkids now. And every other AA family I know does the same. So angry people looking for some kind of catharsis is not the same thing as people advocating for social justice. They need to redirect their time and energy to the real enemy. Because if they think that making the rest of the country feel their pain and atone for their collective sins will get anyone elected or any of their issues solved they are very sorely mkstaken. Black Twitter can only accomplish just so much.

[applegrove]

46. I did not mean to imply stop and frisk is good. After being harrassed and worse in recent history,

in the 20th Century and before, by the police and institutions and laws, african americans being harassed by the police by stop and frisk is not a solution. It just fills the jails with people and then some other poor sucker from the neighbourhood steps into his shoes and makes a little cash and gets some false cred and then he goes to jail. That does not solving anything. That is just moving players around. I have no idea if Bloomberg was good or bad. I've not been on black twitter but something is going right in the AA community these days. And the more they have power and voices to build the world they want to live in the better we all will be. We are all vital to the discussion. And if that hurts Bloomberg... well then the people have spoken. I wonder where you are coming from if you are against people forming a walking neighbourhood watch in their own neighbourhoods.

[wiley]

56. Why would you think I am against that?

Walking neighborhood watches are a great idea. A group of AA young men would need a security detail if they tried it, however.

Why is people being searched then sent to prison if they have broken a law a bad thing again?

[dware]

59. Because, unless the police have witnessed a person commiting a crime,

are about to commit a crime or know that they have already committed a crime, then Bloomie's stop and frisk was blatantly unconstitutional.

It's that whole 4th Amendment to the Constitution and all thing.

Also, during the Occupy movements in NYC, he turned his NYPD thugs against peaceful protesters, that, in my book, is unescusable.

AFAIC, Bloomie can take a flying leap off the GWB and I wouldn't shed a tear.

[wiley]

61. Was I speaking at you?

So ignorant. Stop and Frisk started in 1968 and has never stopped. Grow up. Learn some history. The word is inexcusable, BTW. Shoo, already!

[dware]

63. You do know this is a discussion board right?

Anyone can speak to anyone else here, one doesn't have to be invited to speak.

And I don't give a rat's ass when it started, it's still unconstitutional.

And you failed to address Bloomie setting his NYPD thugs on the Occupy Movement protesters, any comment?

[JonLP24]

50. I'm with the ACLU when it comes to stop & frisk

Again you won't see stop & frisk in wealthy white neighborhoods only in poor neighborhoods with concentrated poverty.

Anti wealth memes. You won't see me saying homeless people are taking first class trips to New York.

Rates are not irrelevant to me. In Arizona Latinx are stopped more often but have lower rates of possession than white people. They may be irrelevant to you but not to me.

[dware]

60. Right there with you JonLP24.

Bloomberg is not qualified to be President, he seems to despise the Constitution as far as the 4th Amendment is concerned.

Also the 1st Amendment after what his NYPD thugs did to the Occupy Movement protesters.

[wellst0nev0ter]

58. Only 6% of stops led to arrests

Only 3% of stops led to convictions, only 0.2% of stops led to convictions for violent crimes.

If you can't get the numbers right, why should I believe your story?

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/nov/14/stop-and-frisk-new-york-conviction-rate

[wiley]

62. Oh please dear

If one person was prevented from killing someone it was worth it. You kids don't understand anything. Your feelings are hurt? You are traumatized? Why don't you ask an older person of color was it was like?

[dware]

64. So we should trash the Constitution?

Because that's what it sounds like you favor when it comes to the 4th Amendment against unreasonable search and seizures.

[wellst0nev0ter]

65. Learn the word "Proportionality"

Also, too, you support a racist measure. Good day.

[BannonsLiver]

24. So vote for him then?

better You than me.

[BigmanPigman]

4. On another thread it was mentioned that he did say that.

Also, it said that he supported Bush/Cheney in 2004. That is two strikes agaist him so far (in my book anyway).

[rpannier]

5. I have third if you want one

When asked about stop-and-frisk and how only 9% of those stopped were white, he said that number was too high. He figured 7% was about right

[Hortensis]

18. I won't be voting for him, but isn't honesty in a different category?

[rpannier]

28. It's an honest answer

One that assures I won't vote for him in the primaries
Kind of like if someone said they came from the' George Wallace wing of the Democratic Party.'
I'd appreciate the honesty only because it would tell me to not vote for that person

[wiley]

6. Waren used to be a Republican. Bernie used to write rape fantasies.

Ask his campaign what he believes and proposes if interested. Funny how Pete has never said anything you have, eh?

[Quackers]

10. Warren isn't currently championing Republican ideas, I'm not voting for Bernie

Why should I ask Bloomberg’s campaign what he believes when I can hear him clearly state his own opinions?

Why is it funny Pete has never said anything I have? We’re two different people. I’m not required to be lock stop with my candidate of choice. He’s also a nicer guy than me. But if it makes you feel better, the day Mayor Pete says that homeless people are using his city to get free stuff and he disavows minimum wage as stupid, I’ll tell him to fuck off too. Sound fair?

I think I’ve addressed all of your concerns. Good day.

[Hortensis]

17. Should Quackers be limited to MayorB's stances?

Some people commit to leaders and as part of that adopt and provide loyal support to what they say. Others agree with what they agree with and otherwise stick to thinking and deciding for themselves. Two different ways of political being.

[wiley]

34. What

is a Quacker?

[JonLP24]

37. It was a really old column on gender roles

Rape fantasies is another way to spin it.

Also Bloomberg was a more recent Republican than Warren.

[Eric J in MN]

38. One sentence in a 1972 essay

...referred to a character with rape fantasies.

[TreasonousBastard]

9. So what if he said it? How did he actually manage his three terms as NYC Mayor? And...

not just Stop & Frisk.

And how does he manage his business? Is he the rapacious, irresponsible crook we see in Trump? Or is it one where employees, customers, and the greater community benefits? The concept of owning a business is neutral-- it's how you run the business that counts.

There are legitimate macroeconomic arguments about social experiments such as minimum wage. I have no idea which of them might be worthwhile, but some make sense. What does make more sense is the argument that having a nation of people who can't pay their bills is obviously a problem. I have not seen Mayor Mike have a "Let them eat cake" attitude, but I am unsure what his solution may be. Although Jewish, he may have come across Jesus' comment that the poor will always be with us. My limited understanding of Jewish views on poverty lead me to think he would be concerned, but not look to the state for a cure. So, I discount throwaway comments like his, if he even made them.

Overall, I think Bloomberg is another flawed human, but with few, if any, harmful flaws. He is not my first choice, but I would certainly be agreeable to giving him a shot at the job. He is the kind of billionaire we could use more of.

BTW, he was a registered Democrat until 2001 when there was no room at the inn, so he ran as a Republican. And won.

[Quackers]

11. That's the argument now? Yeah he said it, get over it?

Wow

[TreasonousBastard]

12. It took me 15 minutes to write that post, and that's all you got from it?

Wow!

[Hortensis]

19. :) I got a lot more and agree we all should look at the

whole person. Hostility fostered by deliberate ignorance is...unwise. For any candidate.

Without his billions, though, if he'd entered the race normally, doesn't history suggest he'd have been a discard along with the governors who never caught fire? Some have even better records, or at least without the actions that have reactionaries reacting in their characteristic way.

[TreasonousBastard]

27. Yeah-- there are a lot of good people out there, and having a few billion gets you in the door...

but not necessarily to the table. Seems about half of us can't do a good job choosing a husband, or wife. And that's with people we actually met!

Romney's another one-- if he moves up in the R dance line, no doubt there will be a vast amount of complaining about who he is, not what he will do.

[rpannier]

29. I don't necessarily disagree with what you wrote

But given his anti-Union stances (esp public unions), his support and fawning over charter schools (which I do not support), Bloomberg supported Bush over Kerry (he even spoke at the Republican convention in 2004), Bloomberg claimed that the bankers and wall street was not responsible for the financial meltdown in 2008, and as was pointed quite well by Anand Giriharadas over at MSNBC, Bloomberg supports and defends the economic system we have now where the wealthiest now pay less in taxes than any other social class. Bloomberg is not Roosevelt by any measure.

Anand Giriahradas on MSNBC (part of the transcript)

Even if you have given a bunch away, you have benefitted from a system of 30, 40 years in this country. If you look at the data, the 1% of the .1%, it's too much. If you look at the 1% holding the wealth of America, the 1% getting 49% of the income, the data that you and I both know, the issue is unless you are showing as a very wealthy person that you're breaking down that system, you are, in a sense, complicit in that system. And Michael Bloomberg has shown zero appetite to fundamentally alter that system. So say that to my America is not an America in which most people who work 40 hours a week at the bottom half of the country do not anymore feel like they can move ahead, get education, get health care. That's not my America. My America is not a country in which, you know, the 400 wealthiest families play a lower effective tax rate than any other social class in this country. We can talk about what America is, but the way it's working for a lot of people at this table anymore doesn't work anymore.

[TreasonousBastard]

31. Bloomberg is certainly not perfect, and not blaming 2008 on the banks at least a little...

is ghastly, but try not to bring FDR into this. The earlier income taxes, in 1916 and 1920, "attaxed" only higher earners, maybe the top 10%. By 1944, 90% of of the population filed income tax returns.

Now, we had the Depression and another smaller recession, and WWII during that time, so conditions obviously aren't the same. However, it is obvious that under FDR "middle class" tax burdens rose dramatically.

FDR was a champion of collective bargaining and signed the Wagner Act, so we'll give him a huge thumbs up on that. How he felt about government employees specifically I haven't found much (although I haven't looked that hard) but no doubt the demands of war had at least some effect on his thinking.

Bloomberg's siding with Reagan on federal unions is not good, but not nearly as bad as Trump's and we might be able to find some common ground. Same with Charter Schools-- it's become an issue around here and I've seen some compromises with some promise.

[wiley]

45. Yes

A little reason always helps a conversation.

[louseb]

13. Obama said it best

"“I’m always suspicious of purity tests during elections,” Obama said, according to the New York Times. “Because you know what? The country’s complicated.”

[ritapria]

14. He supported Senator Pat Toomey

Bloomberg helped him win big in 2016 ..If he wins the Presidency , perhaps he will campaign for him in 2022

[rpannier]

30. So is it purity to point out

He ran for Mayor of NYC as a Republican
That he spoke at the 2004 Republican convention
That he defended stop and frisk, even going to the point of claiming the police needed to stop fewer whites
That wall street and the financial sector were not responsible for the melt down in 2008
That he supports the present economic system we have now where we have the top 0.1% paying fewer in tax dollars than any other economic class
That he voted for Bush-Cheney

Because if that's purity test, then yes, I have a purity test and its based on twenty years of BS from this guy

[aikoaiko]

15. That's deplorable.

[Hortensis]

20. Thanks for the interview. Yes, he DID say it, and big deal?

In context of a larger discussion about NY's homeless and his record, he's merely using that extreme to make a point that good homeless programs attract homeless people (homeless does not equal stupid or mentally ill, of course) and that the city is required by law to shelter them. Even though state and federal funds were cut even as demand grew.

I'm glad Katie asked if people really do this, btw, because his answer was "a handful" have. Fun fact, but easy to believe for NYC, and for people with knowledge about how to manipulate and abuse systems. A homeless shelter would keep from having to rent a hotel room.

[cwydro]

32. Thank you.

It’s so obvious he was simply making a point with an extreme statement.

Politicians, and the rest of us, do that pretty regularly.

[thesquanderer]

26. re: "people can actually support this DINO."

That was 2014. So he was not a DINO when he said it, because he was not a Dem at the time.

[brooklynite]

40. Pro choice...

Pro gun control
Pro environmental reform
Pro progressive taxation
Pro affordable healthcare

When will the madness end???

[myohmy2]

43. Bloomberg?

" The comments this guy has made about homeless people, not supporting minimum wage, and so many others has me scratching my head how people can actually support this DINO. "


...wasn't he the billionaire Republican, turned billionaire Independent, turned billionaire Democrat?

...Bloomberg...

[TreasonousBastard]

47. Actually, he was a Democrat for most of his life, but turned Republican to...

run for Mayor when the Democratic line was occupied by Mark Green. After his stint as Mayor, he became an Independent.

Generally, he supports Democratic policies, but not all of them.

If this is good enough for Bernie, why not Mike?

[myohmy2]

51. so...

...what are you saying, Bloomberg's a good Democrat?

...generally speaking...

[TreasonousBastard]

53. I'm saying he's an independent who agrees with most registered Democrats on most things...

Isn't that how you would define your guy?

[myohmy2]

54. I'm...

...not sure Bloomberg agrees with most Democrats on most things...I see him as to the Right of center leaning in a negative retrograde direction...

...whereas Bernie is Left of center leaning in a positive Progressive direction...and I feel the majority of the Party wants to go in Bernie's direction not billionaire Bloomberg's...

...huge difference...

[TreasonousBastard]

55. You are free to feel anything you like but Bernie is dropping in the polls of...

Democrats, indicating he's not all that popular. Nor are his positions.

The bigger difference is that Bloomberg built his business entirely on his own with no serious complaints from customers or authorities. Quite a bit of praise, actually.

And managed to win three terms as Mayor in NYC, bastion of liberalism. The East Coast San Francisco a/k/a Bernie Country.

Don't make the mistake of equating the infinite energy of Gasbags for Bernie to real support in the real world, where his actual support has rarely been over 50%. Even among Democrats.

[Renew Deal]

49. He was a Democrat before switching to republican to run for mayor.

He has supported liberal causes and republican electoral prospects.

[myohmy2]

52. I'm...

...not sure what you mean,

"He has supported liberal causes and republican electoral prospects."

...but is he a good billionaire Democrat?

...or is that an oxymoron?

...

[Renew Deal]

57. I'm saying that he acted like a republican when he was a republican

And donated significant money to republicans when he was mayor.

[Renew Deal]

48. It's probably a true statement, but it's also not something that happens.

There is no means testing for NYC homeless shelters. But you can’t make thousands of people suffer for a handful of dishonest people. This is a typical RW edge case argument.

[RestoreAmerica2020]

68. "it's the reverse" wtf! Just when I think-- yes he can win, perhaps support him; then

Last edited Thu Feb 6, 2020, 12:39 PM - Edit history (1)

..s#@#t like this surfaces. Thanks for providing additional information.

Of course if he wins primary, I'll vote for him.