Showing posts with label Michael Barbaro. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michael Barbaro. Show all posts

Sunday, March 25, 2012

NYPD Break Protester's Arm

Bloomberg To OWS: "You Want Broken Bones ? We'll Accommodate You."

NYPD-Break-16-Year-Old-Girls-Arm-OWS-Protest, NYPD-Break-16-Year-Old-Girls-Arm-OWS-Protest

Five days after Mayor Michael Bloomberg issued a threat against #OccupyWallStreet activists, activists went on a march from Liberty Square to Union Square. The dual purpose of the march was in opposition to police brutality and a call for the resignation of NYPD Commissioner Raymond Kelly.

Oddly enough, the peaceful protest resulted in even further police brutality, including physically violent tactics by the NYPD against the protesters, leading to one 16 year old peaceful activist suffering from a broken arm, as pictured above. No comment, yet, of course, from Christine Quinn, in regards to the NYPD's on-going campaign of police brutality against peaceful activists.

Monday, April 12, 2010

Charter revision, barter commission

Copied entirely from The New York Times :

Flashback to October 2008 : Groups See Ethics Violation In Mayor's Pledge to Lauder

By MICHAEL BARBARO
Published: October 10, 2008

Two civic groups said on Thursday that Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg violated the city's ethics laws when he pledged to put Ronald S. Lauder on a charter revision commission in exchange for his support for the mayor's third-term effort.

The groups, the New York Public Interest Research Group and Common Cause, made the charge in a complaint filed with the city's Conflicts of Interest Board.

Mr. Lauder, who underwrote the campaign in 1993 to create the city's two-term limit for elected officials, had posed a serious threat to Mr. Bloomberg's plans to legislatively allow a third term.

Mr. Lauder had vowed to oppose the mayor's plan to make a three-term limit permanent, until Wednesday, when Mr. Bloomberg promised to appoint him to a charter revision commission that could return the law to its original limit of two terms.

The civic groups contend that the deal violates a provision of the City Charter, which says that a mayor cannot ''use or attempt to use his or her position as a public servant to obtain any financial gain, contract, license, privilege or other private or personal advantage, direct or indirect, for the public servant.''

In their complaint, the groups said that ''we believe that Mayor Bloomberg has used his position in a prohibited manner to obtain personal advantage in a quid pro quo deal with Ronald Lauder.''

Mr. Lauder's support, they said, represents a ''a great gain, given Mr. Lauder's track record of spending millions to defend the current two-term limit.''

Jason Post, a spokesman for the mayor, said there was no conflict of interest. ''This is purely a publicity stunt by people who are distorting the intent of the conflicts law because they disagree with the mayor on a matter of public policy.'' He added: ''It's the first of what will likely be many headline-seeking activities to prevent the City Council from exercising its authority to change a local law.''

Gene Russianoff, a senior lawyer for the New York Public Interest Research Group, said that ''more and more, the mayor looks like just another politician desperate to do anything to save his government job.''

Two members of the City Council filed a separate complaint on Thursday with the Conflicts of Interest Board. The members, Bill de Blasio and Letitia James, contend that extending term limits would be self-dealing, since it would allow legislators to seek a third term in office.

Like the civic groups, the council members cited a city law that prohibits elected officials from using their positions for ''private or personal advantage.''

Wednesday, January 27, 2010

Indulgences and Paybacks, cub3d

Amid Budget Worries, Bloombo Dicto Finds Jobs for Campaign Staff

Ignoring the implicit vows he has now thricely made to democracy, Mayor Michael Bloomberg is using the city's treasury to bestow favors to members of his ill-fated third term campaign, so reports Michael Barbaro of The New York Times.

"...The hirings suggest that while Mr. Bloomberg is calling for a leaner government that reflects the economic downturn, he is finding money in the budget for those who engineered his unexpectedly close re-election.

"In addition, seven city employees who left their jobs to work on the campaign have returned, in many cases at higher salaries. Together, the appointments cost taxpayers more than $2 million in government wages...."

This is the problem when we allow a man to practise the idea that he can purchase elections the way politicians sometimes sell pardons or the way some preacher men get into the "business" of the church -- solely, for purpose of economic gain. Democracy, just like salvation, shouldn't be for sale.

Nothing good will ever come out of the bad karma now forever associated with the way Mayor Bloombrg ascended into his third term. We need a movement to reform this kind of shady government.

Saturday, October 3, 2009

NYT awakens to reality. Will Bloomberg ?

Anger Over Term Limits Dogs Mayor

By MICHAEL BARBARO
Published: October 3, 2009

Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s re-election campaign can generate reams of statistics on how quickly the city repaired potholes in each neighborhood. It can produce memos on climate change and public health, and even translate its campaign fliers into Creole.

Just don’t ask about term limits.

Rosemary DeStefano found that out on her doorstep in the Bronx the other day when a Bloomberg volunteer showed up, asking for her vote.

When she complained about how the mayor had the law changed to stay in office, the volunteer recited details of his economic plan. When she persisted, he extolled Mr. Bloomberg’s promise to create 400,000 jobs.

“They missed the whole point,” she said.

With five weeks remaining until Election Day, little seems uncertain in the contest between the colossally advantaged incumbent, Mr. Bloomberg, and his lesser-known rival, William C. Thompson Jr. But interviews with both campaigns and dozens of voters reveal that anger over a single issue still simmers, seemingly immune to a flood of television commercials and glossy brochures.

That bedevils Bloomberg advisers and gives hope to his underfunded challenger.

Disenchantment over the change in the law helped topple four veteran City Council members this fall, the greatest repudiation of incumbents in a generation, and has catapulted two local lawmakers who opposed the measure into citywide office.

“The Bloomberg campaign can’t convince voters to not be upset about this. It won’t work,” said John H. Mollenkopf, a professor of political science at City University who has informally advised the Bloomberg campaign.

“If you ask New Yorkers what they did not like over the last eight years,” he added, “term limits is the major negative.”

Mr. Thompson is building his entire campaign around the topic, adopting the slogan “Eight Is Enough,” accusing the mayor of breaking his word and preparing commercials that portray him as a power-hungry mogul who plays by his own rules.

He will make it a major line of attack during two candidate debates and turn it into a rallying cry in the days leading up to Election Day, the anniversary of the term limits change, which Mr. Bloomberg signed into law on Nov. 3, 2008. “It will be a big theme,” said Eduardo Castell, Mr. Thompson’s campaign manager.

The mayor’s political advisers privately acknowledge the public anger, but since they cannot reverse Mr. Bloomberg’s actions, they are looking for ways to deflect attention from it.

They have created a new round of commercials that play up Mr. Bloomberg’s middle-class roots, to soften his image as an imperious billionaire who defied the will of the voters.

They are leveling frequent attacks at Mr. Thompson’s record, as president of the Board of Education and comptroller, to send the message that, even if voters are still resentful about term limits, they would be foolhardy to entrust a complex city to an untested leader.

If voters insist on talking about term limits, volunteers are instructed to tell them the mayor “is not guaranteed” a third term and has given them “more choice” by changing the rules.

“Bill Thompson wants to make this election about one issue,” said the mayor’s campaign manager, Bradley Tusk. “And given his track record that’s understandable. But the performance of the mayor has an enormous impact on people’s lives, and because of that, voters choose their mayor based on very real tangible issues.”

No one is predicting that resentment over term limits will, by itself, be enough to cost the mayor the election. But in interviews, political analysts and pollsters said that unease over the issue helps account for a stubborn anomaly in New Yorkers’ feelings about the mayor. Polls consistently show that a large majority (roughly 70 percent) approve of his performance, but that a significantly smaller number (50 percent) plan to vote for him in November.

The 50 percent figure has not budged in months, even though the Bloomberg campaign has spent about $65 million to promote the mayor’s record. “Term limits has a lot to do with that,” said Geoff Garin, Mr. Thompson’s pollster. “It has put a ceiling on good will toward the mayor.”

Marilyn Arthold, 64, who lives in the Bensonhurst section of Brooklyn, said she “personally likes the mayor,” but is outraged by how he changed the term limits law, which she voted for in the 1990s, and she will consider voting against him because of it.

Those involved in the mayor’s campaign said the issue has unexpected staying power, a year after City Hall introduced the legislation allowing officials to serve three consecutive terms, not two.

“It comes up a lot with voters,” said one campaign staff member. Back in the fall of 2008, when Mr. Bloomberg and his aides fought to change the rule, they made two predictions: that voters would be distracted by a closely watched presidential election, and that any anger over the move would recede by Election Day 2009.

They may have been overoptimistic, pollsters and analysts said.

“The anger in the electorate remains an inconvenient truth for the Bloomberg campaign,” said Bruce N. Gyory, a political consultant.

New York voters approved a referendum limiting council members and officials elected citywide to two four-year terms in 1993, and then ratified that vote in a second referendum in 1996. Mr. Bloomberg, in overturning the law, rewrote it through legislation that was approved by the City Council; critics and good-government groups said any change should have gone before the voters.

Mr. Bloomberg had been outspoken in his opposition to changing term limits, saying any effort to do so would be a “disgrace.”

Just how much it will hurt him on Election Day remains an open question, however. Many voters who intensely opposed the change said they planned to vote for him, citing his skills as a manager and a weak opponent.

“If it were anyone else, I would probably be against him,” said Carlo Dioguardi, who lives in Battery Park City and voted in favor of term limits. “I don’t think anyone else can do the job he’s done.”

As for those who are less forgiving?

The campaign’s strategy of changing the topic occasionally backfires. A few days after Ms. DeStefano’s confrontation with a Bloomberg campaign volunteer in the Bronx, a handwritten letter arrived in her mailbox, ticking off the mayor’s plans to improve the economy in the borough. Ms. DeStefano, a 75-year-old Republican, tore it up.

“I didn’t ask about jobs,” she said. “I asked about term limits.”