Interesting commentary on Bloomberg, especially considering the source.

Interesting indeed. The part about how he's trying to outspend the NRA was interesting. I hope the campaigning politicians realize that: A) His donations represent the ideals of one person while the donations of the NRA represent the ideals of millions of paid members and likely millions of additional supporters and B) The NRA has been around for a long time and will continue to be around for a long time, but when Bloomberg is gone, so are his donations.
 
Interesting indeed. The part about how he's trying to outspend the NRA was interesting. I hope the campaigning politicians realize that: A) His donations represent the ideals of one person while the donations of the NRA represent the ideals of millions of paid members and likely millions of additional supporters and B) The NRA has been around for a long time and will continue to be around for a long time, but when Bloomberg is gone, so are his donations.

Bloomberg donations and support is toxic in all but the must liberal areas. The money pent in CO was used as an argument against the gun controllers. He is seen (correctly) as a rich liberal elitest who is a arrogant nanny on everything. He eats salt by the bucket but lectures you, he wants guns banned but he lives in uber rich areas, have high tech security and armed guards. The dems told him to butt out last year because he was hurting so much.

When bloomberg is gone, his money will still flow. He has the anti gun center at johns hopkins already and he'll leave a foundation to dole out money to liberals causes like gates, buffett, etc.
 
Good point. I do remember some Ds trying to distance themselves from him. So I wonder if we have to worry more about him after he's gone; when people don't connect the name to the money.
 
Interesting indeed. The part about how he's trying to outspend the NRA was interesting. I hope the campaigning politicians realize that: A) His donations represent the ideals of one person while the donations of the NRA represent the ideals of millions of paid members and likely millions of additional supporters and B) The NRA has been around for a long time and will continue to be around for a long time, but when Bloomberg is gone, so are his donations.

Since we're talking money, which is fine, you ought to look into the Joyce Foundation and how much they spend on gun control efforts. I think it was Permanent Waves who pointed this out to me and it's pretty astounding. They're probably a bigger problem than Bloomberg, partly because they fly under the radar.
 
Since we're talking money, which is fine, you ought to look into the Joyce Foundation and how much they spend on gun control efforts. I think it was Permanent Waves who pointed this out to me and it's pretty astounding. They're probably a bigger problem than Bloomberg, partly because they fly under the radar.

It's too early in the day to get angry. I'll look into it later so I can be mad while I try to sleep.

Okay off the money subject, I also found it interesting that the NYPD has a 35% higher shooting death rate than Chicago at its worst (46 per 100k vs 34).
 
It's too early in the day to get angry. I'll look into it later so I can be mad while I try to sleep.

Okay off the money subject, I also found it interesting that the NYPD has a 35% higher shooting death rate than Chicago at its worst (46 per 100k vs 34).

I'd like to see a good breakdown of how many were truly justified (a civilian wouldn't face charges if they were in the cop's place), vs. how many weren't. The statistic doesn't mean anything until that is accounted for.
 
I'd like to see a good breakdown of how many were truly justified (a civilian wouldn't face charges if they were in the cop's place), vs. how many weren't. The statistic doesn't mean anything until that is accounted for.

Yes, some of those 16 probably were actually justified. Would also be useful to see what the shooting death rate of other police departments was.

The standing army comparison was still pretty good though.
 
Here is some of that bloomberg money in action through the grass routes [rofl] group, moms need action.



Why do people join liberal protests? Apparently they pay better; here's a letter to the editor in the Des Moines Register: http://news.nationalreview.com/?FFI...ocrats-audacity-attack-ernsts-money/13755081/

I was recently contacted by the Joni Ernst campaign asking me to come out and support her at the State Fair on Aug. 8. It was simply one Iowan asking another to come out in support, if they had the time.

The anti-gun special interest group Mothers Demand Action is also making calls about seeing Joni Ernst on Aug. 8. They are offering to pay for parking, admission, food and giving you a free T-shirt to protest Joni Ernst.

Yet the Democrats have the audacity to run attack ads about Joni Ernst's money from special interests groups. There will be two groups there to see Joni Ernst speak. Only one has been paid to be there.

There are a million problems with the nags effort, as far as effectiveness, tastics, etc. In case they ever come here for info, research, etc, I'll limit my critique to one biggy. They don't have people who believe, they are hired guns from their career PR flack and dem staffer shannon watts, all the way down. They can never win even if they were right on the issues (they're not).
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom