Blog Archives

Barack Obama as Michael Bloomberg

Michael Bloomberg is notorious for wanting to protect us… from ourselves… at any cost (to us, of course, not to him). It’s for your own good, is Bloomberg’s sometimes hidden message that he passively-aggressively bleats to us, often with profound exasperation.

Barack Obama is basically a better spoken, bi-racial version of the same man and more and more people are starting to understand this. And they don’t like it.

On Friday, President Obama spoke to us about surveillance as though we were precocious children. He proceeded as if widespread objections to his policies can be dispatched like a parent answers an eight-year-old who has formally protested her bedtime. He is so proud that we’ve matured enough to take an interest in our civil liberties! Why, he used to think just like us when he was younger, and promises to consider our arguments. But some decisions just have to be made by the grownups. Do we know how much he loves us? Can we even imagine how awful he would feel if anything bad ever happened while it was still his job to ensure our safety? *

Ignore the questionable use of “precocious” in the block quote above and concentrate on the main point: like Bloomberg, Obama lives inside a profoundly thick bubble which protects him from the daily toils and troubles of living in the real world. And from within their respective bubbles, both men are able to promulgate decisions that their true minions tend to describe as wise, necessary, mature, thoughtful, compassionate, and the likes. The law of the land? Meh… it means what the ruling class wants it to mean.

$13,000 copper bathtubs? Sorry; for me and not for thee. Rides on military-air for my dog? Come on… you know such things aren’t for ordinary citizens. Why? Because, Mike and Barry said so, that’s why. After all, You people aren’t ready to decide such things for yourselves.

Meanwhile, pro-freedom is not one of the terms commonly used to describe the myriad Bloomberg and/or Obama initiatives.

(It’s a sobering thought to ponder we might actually get the government we deserve.)

And what about that asterisk is the first block quote?

*Alas, Obama-as-daddy-figure isn’t even wise and measured with his heavy-handedness, like Cliff Huxtable. Instead, America is stuck with one of those control-freak dads. It’s as if, instead of the girl in the No Doubt song not being allowed to drive late at night, she can cruise as needed, but with a location tracker. Plus her dad hacking into the email of every boy in her social circle — not that he has time to read most of their private communications, but who knows what might one day come in handy? Did I mention she’s now 31, and tried to get a restraining order, only to have a judge throw out the case because she couldn’t prove dad was still listening?

We used to frequently say, “It’s a free country.” Now, it’s become a Mike Bloomberg/Barry Obama “Do as I say and not as I do” world.



Bloomberg requests additional federal drone support

(New York, PMNS)

Michael Bloomberg, mayor of New York City, today requested additional drone support from the Department of Homeland Security. His rationale is that more surveillance, along with air strike capabilities, might be needed to enforce his ban on large, sugary drinks.

“The issue of obesity in the city has reached epidemic proportions and we need help with food policing resources we can’t ourselves afford,” Bloomberg said at a press conference Monday morning. “People need to understand this is for their own good and that portion size is not some sort of Constitutionally protected right.”

After Bloomberg finished, mayoral spokesman and Wall Street veteran Henry Brinks-Sachs addressed reporters and said that Bloomberg would need an additional seven drones with upgraded sensors (synthetic aperture radar, infrared, and full-motion video) and that at least four of the drones would require a full weapons load. “The mayor knows that people need help in meeting our goals for portion sizes,” Brinks-Sachs said, “and that massive retaliation is a proven obesity deterrent. Once we have enough drones for 24-hour ops, we can expand into neighboring areas, to help those who cant, or won’t help themselves against these beelzebubish Big Gulps.”

Critics of Bloomberg’s new policy quickly voiced their displeasure. Michael Spinks, a member of Citizens Against Drone Death said, “Bloomberg’s overreach and arrogance on this is typical. You’d think after he inadvertently destroyed Al Sharpton’s headquarters last week with that drone-delivered Hellfire missile, he would have learned his lesson.” Sharpton has remained silent on the issue pending a settlement and a possible run for mayor himself. He is said to be in mourning following the death of seven staff workers at his Harlem headquarters including confidant Tawana Brawley.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano is expected to approve Bloomberg’s request sometime this week.

(Joy Acton-Carnish and Philip Xerxes of the PMNS Newark translation enclave helped cut and paste this article.)

The left: legalized pot & homosexual marriage; no Big Gulps, cars, or guns

keeperThe left has a phrase it often falls back on. They fall back on it so often they have an ongoing contract with an important national-level printing company that specializes in protest signs, bumper stickers, and t-shirts. The phrase is “keep your laws off my body.”

The fundamental issue of the slogan is one of consent and the desire for governmental non-regulation, that is, personal freedom.

The phrase “keep your laws off my body” is thought to have its origins in the left’s desire for unfettered abortion, but it also has implications for the homosexual community, the use of recreational drugs, and more. However, some have postulated that abortion is bad for the child (and for the mother); that a homosexual lifestyle is less safe and healthy than an otherwise equivalent heterosexual lifestyle; that drugs make people do dangerous and foolish things.

On the other hand the left has no problem—it’s always for your own good—in keeping you from buying a 20 ounce Coke, or a weapon (for self-defense or recreation) or in making life so impossible to drive a car that there’s no practical choice but to opt for “public transportation” (unless you’re a high-ranking state official: then your time is more valuable and it’s state troopers driving your limo, taxpayer-provided helicopters, or even Air Force One).

Seat belts? Click-it-or-ticket (even in states that don’t require motorcyclists to wear helmets; go figure). “Junk food” vending machines in our schools? The left is outraged. One of Michelle Obama’s main goals in life is to impose joyless eating on our children and eventually, everyone else (except for an approved and particular state-approved “elite” which is somehow more equal than others).

And regarding that issue of consent and personal freedom, think about taxes. Whose money is it to begin with?

It could be a while before the left extends their thinking to its logical conclusion: “Keep your laws off my wallet, my car, my gun, my free speech, my religion, my children and family, and my Big Gulp.”

What’s worse, obesity, smoking, or starvation?

Americans used to smoke more. Americans used to be slimmer. Americans now smoke less and are fatter. Correlation or causation?

When the economy was humming along, more people worried about global warming climate change. Now, in addition to having little credible science to support it, there’s also little appetite (so to speak) for the corrective action to global warming climate change, that is, growth-starving economic suicide.

So maybe we can somehow use our non-appetite for global warming’s climate change’s corrective actions as an anti-obesity tool?

Today, movies earn a PG-13 rating for smoking. Tomorrow, perhaps the actor consuming a 32 ounce Slurpee will drive such parental alarms.