"To limit the choices available to the people is disgraceful."
The peopel chose to "limit" their own choices. In fact, you could look at it as increasing their choices by limiting incumbency. If it's good enough for the President, it's good enough for the Mayor. Or maybe you'd like to see W. run for a third time?
Its even more telling that the blind upper crust in Manhattan dont get what hes doing and there in favor of it just because hes jewish and they are or theyre just not understanding what democracy is.By the way, leave the dumb bigot accusations to yourself because many people have said so much as so because theyre the same and it benefits them.
Italicized passages and many of the photos come from other websites. The links to these websites are provided within the posts.
Why your neighborhood is full of Queens Crap
"The difference between dishonest and honest graft: for dishonest graft one worked solely for one's own interests, while for honest graft one pursued the interests of one's party, one's state, and one's personal interests all together." - George Washington Plunkitt
The above organizations are recognized by Queens Crap as being beneficial to the city as a whole, by fighting to preserve the history and character of our neighborhoods. They are not connected to this website and the opinions presented here do not necessarily represent the positions of these organizations.
The comments left by posters to this site do not necessarily represent the views of the blogger or webmaster.
10 comments:
bloomberg is right, it is disgraceful and so is he.
If you dont like Bloomberg dont vote for him.
To limit the choices available to the people is disgraceful.
"To limit the choices available to the people is disgraceful."
The peopel chose to "limit" their own choices. In fact, you could look at it as increasing their choices by limiting incumbency. If it's good enough for the President, it's good enough for the Mayor. Or maybe you'd like to see W. run for a third time?
We deliberately chose not to vote for him again when we revoted for term limits in 1996.
What is it about
NO MORE THAN 2 TERMS do you not understand?
That's what the voters said
TWO TIMES! Count it....one....two!
This shoddy attempt at a coup is cowardly and treasonous!
It's an affront to democracy!
Its even more telling that the blind upper crust in Manhattan dont get what hes doing and there in favor of it just because hes jewish and they are or theyre just not understanding what democracy is.By the way, leave the dumb bigot accusations to yourself because many people have said so much as so because theyre the same and it benefits them.
It is a fact that whenever the public is faced with a generic question on term limits they reply in favor.
However when presented with specific candidates to run for additional terms they also reply favorably.
Your Bush analogy holds no water. He would NEVER be elected to a third term.
Now rephrase that to discuss the Reagan question in 1988 and you would get a resounding cry for a third term.
It's an affront to democracy
No, the affront to democracy is limiting terms on offices not covered in the U.S. constitution.
The constitution of the United States only limits the term of the presidency.
Except we are a federalist country...
Bloomberg will buy anyone to stay in power - Katz, Sharpton, 26 council members.
This year he wanted to be president, Treasury Secy, Governor so not that he was blocked from those he settles for Mayor
Post a Comment