Malo periculosam, libertatem quam quietam servitutem.

Michael Bloomberg Archive



March 2013



Nanny Bloomberg’s Soda Ban Struck Down

Written by , Posted in Big Government, The Courts, Criminal Justice & Tort, The Nanny State & A Regulated Society

A day before it was set to go into effect, Nanny Bloomberg‘s ban on soda sales of 16oz. or more has been shot down by a state judge:

A state judge on Monday stopped Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s administration from banning the sale of large sugary drinks at New York City restaurants and other venues, a major defeat for a mayor who has made public-health initiatives a cornerstone of his tenure.

The city is “enjoined and permanently restrained from implementing or enforcing the new regulations,” New York Supreme Court Judge Milton Tingling decided Monday.

The regulations are “fraught with arbitrary and capricious consequences,” the judge wrote. “The simple reading of the rule leads to the earlier acknowledged uneven enforcement even within a particular city block, much less the city as a whole….the loopholes in this rule effectively defeat the state purpose of the rule.”

This is obviously a victory for liberty, and I don’t want to look a gift horse in the mouth, but I hope there is more to the reasoning than presented here (having not read the decision there may well be). Of course the law is arbitrary and capricious, prohibiting sales from certain businesses and not others, and allowing sale of 17oz. slurpees but not soda. But even if it were uniform and steadfast, or applied equally, it should still have been struck down. Unfortunately, given the record of the courts in defending liberty, I don’t have much faith that it would have been.



July 2012



Overgovernment: Nanny Knows Breast Edition

Written by , Posted in Big Government, Health Care, Welfare & Entitlements, The Nanny State & A Regulated Society

I could probably populate this blog entirely with the stupid things Nanny Bloomberg does if I so wanted. His latest outrageous policy is to hide baby formula from new mothers in an effort to force them to breast feed:

New York’s Mayor Michael Bloomberg is locking up the baby formula, because he wants newborns to drink breast milk instead.

He’s using his mayoral power to direct maternity-ward nurses to hide baby-milk formula after Sept. 2 so that new moms feel pressured to provide breast milk to their newborns.

Bloomberg’s mammary-mandate is supported by white-coated public-health officials, who say the scientific data shows that mothers’ milk aids infants’ digestive systems and shields them from some diseases.

His wishes are law because he controls much of the city’s health network in a city-wide version of Obamacare.

Thus illustrates a central problem with granting government control over health care, which is that it gives government the power to throw its weight around when it comes to the most intimate and personal of decisions.

As with most things, there are both pros and cons to breast-feeding, and no one but the individual mother should have any say in the matter. But as usual Nanny Bloomberg thinks he knows breast… er, best.



July 2012



The Gun Grabber Onslaught Continues

Written by , Posted in Culture & Society, Gun Rights, Liberty & Limited Government

I noted on Friday the incredible speed with which gun grabbers pounced on the Aurora shooting to advance their anti-gun rights agenda. The usual suspects have now piled on or, in Nanny Bloomberg’s case, doubled down.

Michael Bloomberg, who first falsely claimed that violence is getting worse in America, predictably responded to Piers Morgan’s anti-gun pestering by taking his initial stance a step further and declaring that cops should illegally go on strike until politicians are forced to seize guns from law-abiding Americans. Roger Ebert chastised America for being “one of few developed nations that accepts that notion of firearms in public hands.” Piers Morgan chimed in on twitter to note that “now is that time” for America to “do something about its gun laws.” And some guy at the Washington Post wants to require that another party co-sign for someone’s sanity before they can buy a gun, while is despicably pestering shooting victim relatives to endorse gun control.

But what exactly are the knee-jerkers proposing that could have prevented the Aurora shooting? Holmes had no criminal record nor documented evidence of mental illness. The one actual specific proposal offered above wouldn’t work either, as we’ve seen numerous people who knew Holmes state how they couldn’t have imagined him doing anything violent, so it’s no stretch to say one would have co-signed a hypothetical gun application.

The simple reality is that the only way to theoretically keep guns away from the likes of the Aurora shooter is by keeping guns away from everyone – in other words by eviscerating the Constitution and our Second Amendment rights. And I say “theoretically” because even if every gun was outlawed, we know criminals would still get them.

The lack of a practical and realistic solution isn’t the only problem with these reflexive, knee jerk calls to “do something.” The truth of the matter is there just may not be a problem here to solve. I know it’s tempting to react emotionally to any horrific incident, but when it comes to setting policy we need to be logical. Sadly, when it comes to risk management through public policy, logic is often lacking (see TSA).

The shooting in Aurora was horrible, to be sure, but for a little perspective, the equivalent of one Aurora massacre occurs every ten days in Chicago, otherwise known as the gun-control capital of the United States, according to Doug Ross. For even more perspective, 7,630 people died in traffic accidents in the first quarter of 2012, or approximately 7 Aurora massacres per day, or one every three and a half hours.

So we’re essentially talking about shredding our Constitutional rights to prevent another incident whose death toll is matched every three and a half hours on our roads, where nobody cares. Makes perfect sense. And never mind the number of additional crimes that would be occurring or made worse, like this one, once people lose the ability to protect themselves.

The truth is that sometimes bad things happen. It’s part of life, and that you might not always be able to prevent them from happening is part of the price of living in a free society. Sometimes it seems like a high price to pay, but it’s still much better than the alternative.



July 2012



Gun Grabbers Pounce on Tragedy as Excuse to Attack Your Freedoms

Written by , Posted in Gun Rights, The Courts, Criminal Justice & Tort

The gun-grabbers haven’t wasted any time in the wake of the Colorado theater shooting to begin plotting the curtailment of your basic rights. Nanny Bloomberg quickly came out with rhetorical guns blazing by hyping a national emergency and the need to seize guns:

“Soothing words are nice,” Bloomberg said during a regularly scheduled appearance on WOR 710 AM in New York. “But maybe it’s time the two people who want to be president of the United States stand up and tell us what they’re going to do about it, because this is obviously a problem across the country. And everybody always says, ‘Isn’t it tragic?’”

“I mean, there’s so many murders with guns every day,” Bloomberg continued. “It’s just gotta stop. And instead of these two people, President [Barack] Obama and Governor [Mitt] Romney talking in broad things about, they want to make the world a better place. OK, tell us how. And this is a problem. No matter where you stand on the Second Amendment, no matter where you stand on guns, we have a right to hear from both of them, concretely, not just in generalities, specifically, what are they going to do about guns?”

Bloomberg went on to suggest most of the nation’s governors should also make their stances clear, and said the problem wasn’t limited to major cities like New York.

“This is killing people every day,” he said. “And it’s growing. And it’s not just an inner city, East Coast, West Coast, big city phenomenon. Aurora is not a big city, it’s a suburb of Denver. … The murder rate in the rural areas is as just as bad, if not worse than the murder rate in the urban areas.”

But Bloomberg is either lying or doesn’t know what he is talking about. It’s not “growing.” Homicide rates are down considerably from where they were decades ago, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics.

The gun-grabbers at the Brady Campaign also demanded the seizure of guns from law-abiding citizens.

“We understand that President Obama has just spoken and so might Mitt Romney,” Brady Campaign president Dan Gross said in a statement. “As someone who has suffered the lasting impact of gun violence, and President of Brady, I can tell you that we don’t want sympathy. We want action.”

Gross noted that this past April 16 marked the anniversary of “the worst mass shooting in American history,” when 32 people were shot and killed by a gunman on the Virginia Tech campus in 2007.

Gross called on people to “demand Congress take action to stop arming dangerous people.” He said the Brady Campaign is meeting today with activists around the country to sign a petition against arming dangerous people.

“We are insistent that our elected leaders take action to prevent future tragedies. Political cowardice is not an excuse for evasion and inaction on this life-and-death issue,” said Gross.

The suspect in custody, James Eagan Holmes, had no criminal record. So the only way to comply with the demands of the Brady Campaign to “take action to stop arming dangerous people,” those like today’s shooter we are to understand, is to “stop arming” everyone.



June 2012



Overgovernment: Big Soda Edition

Written by , Posted in Big Government, The Nanny State & A Regulated Society

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is at it again. A frequent cause of overgovernment, the King of the Nanny Staters now wants to ban sugary sodas over 18 oz from restaurants and movie theaters:

If Mayor Bloomberg gets his way, and it looks like he will, large sodas and other sugary drinks will be a thing of the past, at least at restaurants, movie theaters, cafes, and stadiums across the five boroughs.

Under the mayor’s proposed plan, drinks at these locations would not be over 16 ounces. If businesses break the rule, they’ll be hit with a $200 fine.

Thomas Farley, the city’s health commissioner, said the measure is a new way to fight obesity. He estimates that over 60 percent of New Yorkers are overweight.

The backlash from businesses was swift and strong. McDonald’s said the ban is misguided. The New York City Beverage Association said the Department of Health has an unhealthy obsession with attacking soft drinks. Robert Bookman, an attorney for NYC Restaurants, predicted that a legal challenge is on its way.

“It is clearly outside the scope of the Department of Health’s legal authority to pass something like this,” Bookman said. “And I have no doubt that it will be found in violation of the commerce clause of the United States Constitution.”

He’s talking about you, Nanny Bloomberg

There are several issues one can take with this, with the obvious being the unconstitutional assault on individual liberty. But other issues include 1) the wrongful attempt to turn a personal and indivudual health issues into a “public health epidemic,” 2) the practical stupidity of limiting the size of containers as a way to reduce consumption when people can simply use two containers, and 3) the inconsistency of banning one sugary item, but ignoring and even celebrating the availability of countless other unhealthy foods (not that we should be giving His Nanniness any ideas on what to ban next).

George Scoville also makes a good point about the inherent gutlessness behind Bloomberg’s nannyism:

If Politicians Really Cared about Obesity…

…they would just outlaw being fat. …The quick and easy solution to the obesity epidemic would be to threaten people with imprisonment for being fat… BMI too high? Five years for you! Maybe we can throw people into the hole and put them on a bread and water diet until they slim down!

…Bloomberg doesn’t have the guts to be this kind of tyrant, so along with his campaigns against salt, trans-fats, and smoking, he’s taking incremental steps . . . to preserve his own job. People, after all, tend to notice a little less when the policy change isn’t so sweeping. Otherwise, Bloomberg would find himself unemployed and out of politics.

In the face of almost universal ridicule, Bloomberg doubled-down on totalitarianism and offered this gem:

“We’re not taking away anybody’s right to do things, we’re simply forcing you to understand that you have to make the conscious decision to go from one cup to another cup.”

Tyranny emphasized.



March 2012



Overgovernment: It’s Better To Be Hungry Than To Be Salty Edition

Written by , Posted in Big Government, The Nanny State & A Regulated Society

Nanny Bloomberg strikes again:

Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s food police have struck again!

Outlawed are food donations to homeless shelters because the city can’t assess their salt, fat and fiber content, reports CBS 2’s Marcia Kramer.

Glenn Richter arrived at a West Side synagogue on Monday to collect surplus bagels — fresh nutritious bagels — to donate to the poor. However, under a new edict from Bloomberg’s food police he can no longer donate the food to city homeless shelters.

Big government is a jealous government. You shall have no other providers before big government. You shall depend entirely upon big government for your sustenance, for you know not what you do.



February 2012



Gun-Grabbing Nannies Invade Super Bowl XLVI

Written by , Posted in Gun Rights

In case you weren’t watching the game, here’s the commercial in question:

The two mayoral gun-grabbers start off by claiming that both support the 2nd Amendment, proof once again that the easiest way to tell when a politician is lying is to notice when their lips are moving. But the idea that Bloomberg, perhaps the single biggest nanny in the country, is a supporter of the Second Amendment is laughably absurd.

Just recently I highlighted a story so egregious – a shop owner being fined $30,000 for stocking six obviously fake toy guns – that I simply declared the entire state to be hoplophobic. This might have been hyperbole, but it’s certainly true of Bloomberg and his city. New York City has a track record of gun hysterics, and recently threw the book at a marine and Iraq War veteran who attempted to check his legally owned gun at the Empire State Building . Nanny-in-Chief Bloomberg’s prosecutors think he deserves 3 years in jail for the horrible offense of bringing a legally purchased and owned gun into the People’s Republic of New York. The man has an irrational, nonsensical fear of guns, and will stop at nothing to eliminate our Constitutional right to posses them.

Update: According to DHS, this post makes me a “militia extremist.”



September 2011



Bloomberg Seizes on Weekend Crime to Attack Gun Rights

Written by , Posted in Gun Rights

New York had a bloody weekend. Over a span of roughly 48 hours, 31 people were shot. Mayor Bloomberg responded by whining to the Feds to do more gun confiscating.

The series of violence urged Mayor Michael Bloomberg to call the federal government to step up for stricter gun control laws.

Co-chair of Mayors Against Illegal Guns, Bloomberg has lobbied Washington repeatedly to tighten gun laws.

“It is just unconscionable. We cannot tolerate it,” said Mayor at the Christian Cultural Center in Brooklyn on Sunday.

This is typical anti-gun nonsense from the golden boy of the dishonestly non-ideological No Labels crowd in the muddled middle. Rather than condemning the actual criminals, he seeks to limit freedoms. Never mind that stricter gun control laws have never been tied to reduced crime (and typically the opposite is found). For instance, when Washington D.C. instituted the strictest gun control policy in the country in the 1970’s, the murder rate skyrocketed. And despite recently having their gun policy slapped down as unconstitutional in Heller, D.C. continues to have both very strict gun control laws and extremely high crime rates.