Pro, con and somewhere in-between. Love the piece by Lebowitz.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/08/18/nyregion/bloomberg-voices.html?_r=0
And, seriously, anyone who is running for office who sided with Bloomberg on overturning the citzens' votes on term limits should not be elected. Like Quinn. And that includes smooth and sly politicians like Garodnick who voted on the City Council against overturning the will of the people, but who has no qualms about running for a third term himself. Hypocrite.
15 comments:
Go, Fran! Gary Shteyngart was pretty good too.
My own thought on term limits: two terms for the top spot is plenty, but I don't feel the same way about lower positions. We have representatives and senators who serve as long as they can get elected, so why not the same for city council? An argument could be made that all positions should be term-limited, but I haven't heard anyone suggest that. Nevertheless, Dan did come out in favor of term limits--maybe just for the mayor?
On another topic: both the NY Times and the Post endorsed Scott Stringer.
I don't see why Garodnick shouldn't run for another term if he is allowed to. After all, he did vote against the overturning of term limits. Keep in mind that Robert Jackson, running for Borough Prez, voted to overturn term limits. Scott Stringer was against term limits too and I will not be voting for him. I'll vote for Spitzer because if so many people in power hate him (i.e., fear him) he must be doing something right.
The people voted twice for term limits, and not just for mayor, for members of the city council too. Garodnick is certainly a hypocrite for being against the extension and then utilizing the extension to run for a third term. Where is the principle here?
Garodnick, back then:
http://www.garodnick.com/press-release/garodnick-votes-no-mayors-bill-extend-term-limits
“Although a third term could serve the City well — particularly when it comes to long-term issues like the City’s infrastructure needs, capital budget and its growing debt burden — New Yorkers have already spoken clearly that they want to limit officials to two terms." And he voted against the extension.
Note he said "officials" and not just the mayor.
I see the Daily News even slammed him for his hypocrisy:
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/garodnick-hypocrite-article-1.1209753
Of course, he's going to win a third term, too. Easily. One wonders why he even needs to accept donations that now amount to close to a million dollars.
I LOVE YOU FRAN!!!!!
So, who is running against Garodnick? I haven't heard of anybody.
Garodnick is running unopposed.
If Garodnick is running in opposed, what would happen if no one voted for him? That seat would be empty? If there's no one to oppose him, why does he even have to run? Forgive my ignorance, please, I am a newly-minted voter.
I can't wait for that demonic little twerp to leave office. His illegal third term has been a disaster. Won't be waiting for his chief enabler, Quinn, either. Quinn is as dirty as the sewer rats that prowl New York City.
I'm moving to Chicago. At least they don't pretend to run a clean machine...
I am so looking forward to the day when I won't see that pickled prune kisser and his lapdog with the face of a sow. Please go away Bloomberg and Quinn. Go away and stay away.
ps My apologies to real sows - you are much lovelier than she.
I can't believe the Daily New endorsed Quinn. Bloomberg has so much control over the media.
I will vote for anybody who will ban bicycles in Manhattan and get rid of those ridiculous bike lanes.
I will vote for anybody except Quinn who is as corrupt as Bloomberg if she is the dem candidate, I will just not vote.
Post a Comment