This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

To Mike Bloomberg A Vote For Obama, Whom He Just Endorsed, Is A Vote For Climate Change

Tyler Durden's picture





 

First, The Economist, now the man who owns the terminal that global finance uses each day to chat with one another, and occasionally to check the real time price of ESZ2 (if certainly not quite as much this year, and last, as desired). Mike Bloomberg's driving catalyst to chose the way he did? Climate change. Because to some it is the economy, to others: the number of cloudless sunny days in St Barts. The question for employees of Bain now: do they immediately disconnect their BBG terminals, or wait until next Wednesday.

Bloomberg's Op-Ed (posted first in BBG):

A Vote for a President to Lead on Climate Change

The devastation that Hurricane Sandy brought to New York City and much of the Northeast -- in lost lives, lost homes and lost business -- brought the stakes of Tuesday’s presidential election into sharp relief.

The floods and fires that swept through our city left a path of destruction that will require years of recovery and rebuilding work. And in the short term, our subway system remains partially shut down, and many city residents and businesses still have no power. In just 14 months, two hurricanes have forced us to evacuate neighborhoods -- something our city government had never done before. If this is a trend, it is simply not sustainable.

Our climate is changing. And while the increase in extreme weather we have experienced in New York City and around the world may or may not be the result of it, the risk that it might be -- given this week’s devastation -- should compel all elected leaders to take immediate action.

Here in New York, our comprehensive sustainability plan -- PlaNYC -- has helped allow us to cut our carbon footprint by 16 percent in just five years, which is the equivalent of eliminating the carbon footprint of a city twice the size of Seattle. Through the C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group -- a partnership among many of the world’s largest cities -- local governments are taking action where national governments are not.

Leadership Needed

But we can’t do it alone. We need leadership from the White House -- and over the past four years, President Barack Obama has taken major steps to reduce our carbon consumption, including setting higher fuel-efficiency standards for cars and trucks. His administration also has adopted tighter controls on mercury emissions, which will help to close the dirtiest coal power plants (an effort I have supported through my philanthropy), which are estimated to kill 13,000 Americans a year.

Mitt Romney, too, has a history of tackling climate change. As governor of Massachusetts, he signed on to a regional cap- and-trade plan designed to reduce carbon emissions 10 percent below 1990 levels. “The benefits (of that plan) will be long- lasting and enormous -- benefits to our health, our economy, our quality of life, our very landscape. These are actions we can and must take now, if we are to have ‘no regrets’ when we transfer our temporary stewardship of this Earth to the next generation,” he wrote at the time.

He couldn’t have been more right. But since then, he has reversed course, abandoning the very cap-and-trade program he once supported. This issue is too important. We need determined leadership at the national level to move the nation and the world forward.

I believe Mitt Romney is a good and decent man, and he would bring valuable business experience to the Oval Office. He understands that America was built on the promise of equal opportunity, not equal results. In the past he has also taken sensible positions on immigration, illegal guns, abortion rights and health care. But he has reversed course on all of them, and is even running against the health-care model he signed into law in Massachusetts.

If the 1994 or 2003 version of Mitt Romney were running for president, I may well have voted for him because, like so many other independents, I have found the past four years to be, in a word, disappointing.

In 2008, Obama ran as a pragmatic problem-solver and consensus-builder. But as president, he devoted little time and effort to developing and sustaining a coalition of centrists, which doomed hope for any real progress on illegal guns, immigration, tax reform, job creation and deficit reduction. And rather than uniting the country around a message of shared sacrifice, he engaged in partisan attacks and has embraced a divisive populist agenda focused more on redistributing income than creating it.

Important Victories

Nevertheless, the president has achieved some important victories on issues that will help define our future. His Race to the Top education program -- much of which was opposed by the teachers’ unions, a traditional Democratic Party constituency -- has helped drive badly needed reform across the country, giving local districts leverage to strengthen accountability in the classroom and expand charter schools. His health-care law -- for all its flaws -- will provide insurance coverage to people who need it most and save lives.

When I step into the voting booth, I think about the world I want to leave my two daughters, and the values that are required to guide us there. The two parties’ nominees for president offer different visions of where they want to lead America.

One believes a woman’s right to choose should be protected for future generations; one does not. That difference, given the likelihood of Supreme Court vacancies, weighs heavily on my decision.

One recognizes marriage equality as consistent with America’s march of freedom; one does not. I want our president to be on the right side of history.

One sees climate change as an urgent problem that threatens our planet; one does not. I want our president to place scientific evidence and risk management above electoral politics.

Of course, neither candidate has specified what hard decisions he will make to get our economy back on track while also balancing the budget. But in the end, what matters most isn’t the shape of any particular proposal; it’s the work that must be done to bring members of Congress together to achieve bipartisan solutions.

Presidents Bill Clinton and Ronald Reagan both found success while their parties were out of power in Congress -- and President Obama can, too. If he listens to people on both sides of the aisle, and builds the trust of moderates, he can fulfill the hope he inspired four years ago and lead our country toward a better future for my children and yours. And that’s why I will be voting for him.

 


- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:32 | Link to Comment francis_sawyer
francis_sawyer's picture

Hope & [Climate] Change bitchez...

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:38 | Link to Comment Kitler
Kitler's picture

We need a change in the Economic Climate even more.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:41 | Link to Comment Colombian Gringo
Colombian Gringo's picture

We also need political climate change if the economy is to improve. The scum Bloomberg will not miss any opportunity to push fraudulent AGW science as an excuse to tax your right to breathe. As a good politician, he will never miss an opportunity to exploit a crisis, other peoples misery, for his shabby gain. Fuck you Bloomberg.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:43 | Link to Comment Zer0head
Zer0head's picture

one day Bloomberg will be America's last president

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:47 | Link to Comment kaiserhoff
kaiserhoff's picture

Bloomberg, kiss my grits.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:51 | Link to Comment Colombian Gringo
Colombian Gringo's picture

Until Billlionaire Bloomberg leads by example and gets rid of his jet and helicopter, anything he has to say is nothing more than the words of an oppportunistic hypocrity, exploiting the misfortunes of others for his political gain.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:03 | Link to Comment Zer0head
Zer0head's picture

Mikes Carbon Neutral Bermuda Weekend Cottage

http://maps.google.com/maps?q=Mikes+Carbon+Neutral+Weekend+Getway+Cottag...

An American technology wizard and frequent visitor to Bermuda with a vast home overlooking the ocean in Tucker's Town, he founded a global financial company - Bloomberg - in his own name, more than 75% of which he still owns. 69 years old (in November 2010) he is the wealthiest divorced man, with 2 daughters in New York City, with an estimated US$18.1 billion in assets in  February 2011. His Bermuda home was recently extensively re-worked at a reported cost of $10.5 million. His neighbors there include Hugh Lowenstein, billionaire Ross Perot and Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi. His other homes are two in New York's Westchester County, Armonk, a townhouse at 17 E. 79th Street in Manhattan, a 20-acre farm in North Salem, a London apartment in Cadogan Square and a condominium in Vail, Colorado. His financial information and news services are widely used locally. He was a 2001 Republican mayoral candidate for New York City, won the election and became Mayor after November 6, 2001 (still in office in 2011). He has a fleet of aircraft at his disposal. A licensed pilot, he owns a high-performance single-engine plane for quick jaunts. It is a Mooney Bravo M20M, seats four, flies high and goes fast. On February 21, 2006 the New York Daily News reported that Mayor Bloomberg's presence in Bermuda was about to get a whole lot bigger. His daughters, Emma and Georgina, filed an application with the Bermuda Minister of Home Affairs to buy The Jungle, a 1.7-acre property next to their dad's $10.5 million mansion. The ultra-exclusive property is owned by Hugh Lowenstein, one of Bloomberg's oldest friends and a member of his company's board of directors. A Bermuda real estate agency described The Jungle as an "exquisite property" and "magnificent house" with a large galleried living room, replete with a cedar railing balcony leading to the bedrooms. There's an outdoor pool in a beautiful garden setting with a sloping lawn heading to a large dock. The house has four bedrooms, five bathrooms and a fireplace in the living room.

http://www.bermuda-online.org/intexecs.htm

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:05 | Link to Comment macholatte
macholatte's picture

 

 

 

whoever has the best hackers will win !!!!!
 
 

It only takes $26 to hack a voting machine

 
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/44706301/ns/technology_and_science-security/t/it-only-takes-hack-voting-machine/

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:17 | Link to Comment Kitler
Kitler's picture

Researchers from the Argonne National Laboratory in Illinois have developed a hack that, for about $26 and an 8th-grade science education, can remotely manipulate the electronic voting machines used by millions of voters all across the U.S.

 

The researchers, Salon reported, performed their proof-of-concept hack on a Diebold Accuvote TS electronic voting machine, a type of touchscreen Direct Recording Electronic (DRE) voting system that is widely used for government elections.

 

The electronic hacking tool consists of a $1.29 microprocessor and a circuit board that costs about $8. Together with the $15 remote control, which enabled the researchers to modify votes from up to a half-mile away, the whole hack runs about $26.

Time to stop teaching the kids science after grade 7.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:21 | Link to Comment Precious
Precious's picture

A vote for Obama is a vote for a camera in your backyard.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57542510-38/court-oks-warrantless-use-...

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 20:47 | Link to Comment pods
pods's picture

That is not shocking in the least bit, it is the normal progression of a police state.

And I would say that this is not soley a function of who is in the White House.

pods

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:22 | Link to Comment Uber Vandal
Uber Vandal's picture

No wonder why an 8th grade education was so important in the past...

 

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 18:08 | Link to Comment CrockettAlmanac.com
CrockettAlmanac.com's picture

Martin Hoerling, a meteorologist with the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, said Sandy wasn’t boosted by global warming -- the storm merely revealed natural forces at work. “Great events can have little causes,” he told the New York Times. “In this case, the immediate cause is most likely little more that the coincidental alignment of a tropical storm with an extratropical storm.”

 

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/31/dems-try-to-push-climate-chan...

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 18:30 | Link to Comment nmewn
nmewn's picture

And the 1938 hurricane was a little before all the "manmade global warming" horseshit and it scored a direct hit on NYC...as a Cat 3.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_England_Hurricane_of_1938

Probably related to all the horse methane being released up there by Bloombergs great-grandfather...lol.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 21:28 | Link to Comment Lumberjack
Lumberjack's picture

Now that is quite a catch... +1000 and thank you.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:06 | Link to Comment MiguelitoRaton
MiguelitoRaton's picture

The earth has gone through at least 5 ice ages and therefore 5 melts...what caused those "climate changes"? Could man even have any impact? And if so, at what expense? And isn't warming good for food supply? Oh and BTW, what has Obama done to stop climate change? 1o or so bankrupt solar investments???

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 17:09 | Link to Comment bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

Yeah, that's right. You sound like you've done some serious research on global warming. Care to tell us where?

97% of the world's actual climate scientists think we have a serious man made problem with global warming. What do you know that they don't?

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 18:11 | Link to Comment MiguelitoRaton
MiguelitoRaton's picture

Bonoxy, (a) your 97% is a false claim; (b) consensus is for politics, not science. When Hitler trotted out 100 scientists who claimed Einstein was wrong, Einstein replied "It doesn't take 100 scientists to tell me I'm wrong, it only takes 1 to prove it; (c) 99% of economists said that housing wasn't a bubble...and yet it was; (d) you didn't answer one of my questions; (e) you are a bomb-throwing fool with talking points and no facts. Don't make me go all scientific on your dumb ass because I'll throw around things like katabatic winds, pacific decadal oscillator, antlantic conveyor, ice core samples, greenland glacier history, middle age warm period, pre-historic CO2 levels and much more.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 20:45 | Link to Comment Precious
Precious's picture

Bonoxious.  Go look up Ignaz Semmelweis and Barry Marshall you stupid liberal dipshit fuck.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 18:23 | Link to Comment Poor Grogman
Poor Grogman's picture

"97% of the world's actual climate scientists think we have a serious man made problem with global warming. What do you know that they don't?"

Most of the worlds actual economists tell us that Keynesian economics works.

Give me one credible voice over 100 "qualified" voices anytime.

Enough said.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 20:56 | Link to Comment nmewn
nmewn's picture

They're still trying to refine their theories...lol.

But in the mean time, theory is acted on as fact by morons and psychophants...with the resultant consequences for all.

Consensus can be illustrated simply as 51-49 and the 51 being completely wrong. It means less than nothing.

Fri, 11/02/2012 - 07:10 | Link to Comment Arnold
Arnold's picture

Funding. The right attitude on climate change gets you money. Just as a high job creation number gets you tax breaks and consideration as a small business.

 

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 18:14 | Link to Comment Matt
Matt's picture

I don't know, you tell me, is acid rain good for the food supply? 

Has the climate gone through hot and cold cycles in the past? Sure. Is that what is happening now? Probably.

The bigger concerns I have are: A) are the changes happening faster due to human activity? B) will the change be more extreme than previously?

As for Obama, I doubt the primary concern with any of the big-wigs is climate change; many of them, as I see it, see this as an opportunity for more control, concentration of wealth, etc.

Even the ones with altruistic goals are misguided: Cap and Trade is a wealth re-distribution scheme to take money from a developed area that produces greenhouse gases, and transfer that money for industrial developement in developing/underdeveloped nations. 

EDIT: and for brokers to make money trading the credits back and forth on an exchange.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 18:18 | Link to Comment MiguelitoRaton
MiguelitoRaton's picture

Wow more scientific ignorance Matt: Acid rain is caused by sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, NOT CO2. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of a good story. You are correct that Climate change is a mechanism for exerting more central statist control and redistributing wealth. But it also stiffles the developing countries, unless, like China you say: "Yeah let's stop global climate change, US crack down on that so we can move all manufacturing to China where we pollute more and don't care about these silly ideas."

Fri, 11/02/2012 - 12:55 | Link to Comment Matt
Matt's picture

You are certain that increased carbon dioxide in the air will not result in lower pH of rainwater? I admit, I was wrong in that rain being acidic does not make it "Acid Rain", which you correctly stated is a term to refer to acidic rain from sulfer or nitrogen oxides. What I meant was that the average pH of rainfall may decrease due to increased carbon dioxide in the air, similar to how the oceans are becoming more acidic.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 18:23 | Link to Comment Lore
Lore's picture

People are sick of Al Qaeda and financial terrorism, and the seasonal virus scare seems to have fizzled, so the War on Global Warming is a handy alternate pre-electoral distraction that sounds better than "We continue to betray the American people by serving the long term interests of the great global-tax United Nations AGENDA 21 SCAM."

http://www.postsustainabilityinstitute.org/what-is-un-agenda-21.html

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:05 | Link to Comment Innocent Bystander
Innocent Bystander's picture

BBG & Christie - clearing all hurdles to for their own run in 2016.. RomneyRyan being the biggest ..

concerns about global warming.. hmmm

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:20 | Link to Comment El Oregonian
El Oregonian's picture

"one day Bloomberg will be America's last president"

"One day that bastard will die" There, fixed it for you...

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 20:10 | Link to Comment The Gooch
The Gooch's picture

One day, Bloombergs private plane will be stuck on the tarmac without fuel- his minions and private army long gone to look after their own...

 

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 17:21 | Link to Comment piceridu
piceridu's picture

Prosecuting Bankers that pulled off the greatest heist in the history of the world is not his concern, but getting rid of the Second Amendment, 32 ounce sodas and instituting gay marriage are top priorities...Blooberg creates a Super-Pac:  http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/mayor-bloomberg-creates-own-super-pac-185609766.html

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:55 | Link to Comment LMAOLORI
LMAOLORI's picture

 

 

Indeed and look who they want to pay for the damage everyone including those who don't live there

New York state asks Washington to cover all storm costs

http://news.yahoo.com/york-governor-ask-federal-government-cover-sandy-storm-200420294.html;_ylt=A2KJ3CaGXJJQjHEAdIbQtDMD

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 20:29 | Link to Comment DosZap
DosZap's picture

Climate change is a way to enrich the 1%.

The earths patterns are cyclical.

The average temperatures for the last 10 yrs, have no deviation.

Just because you have two major weather events where there usually are none, is NOT even remotely due to change,it's cyclical.

Compare the events of the 50's to that area, and the last two years off the Libtard Eastern seaboards is child's play.It was FAR worse then........

The Antarctic ice cap is larger than at anytime in recorded history.

These people cannot get used to the fact that our earth, is fully capable of self regulation, and changing to meet conditions, and repeating cycles and patterns.

It's just a way to FEED the Uber  wealthy more.

Al Gore has made himself a MULTI millionaire of the backs of the  earths natural cycles.The EPA wants to tax carbon, the US wants a Global Climate Tax, it just keeps on keeping on.

These morons think that what is happening now,has NEVER ever happened before.The Atlantic was warmer than the Pacific in the 50's cycles, and vice versa,with the Pacific.

The ozone issue has been worn out...........so it's on to something new.

HiLARIOUS,if it weren't so stupid.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:35 | Link to Comment LongSoupLine
LongSoupLine's picture

none of this would have happened if we just stuck with 12 oz. drinks!

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:50 | Link to Comment Zer0head
Zer0head's picture

exactly, the carbon emitted from just one Big Gulp is the equivalent of 10 cow farts or the fuel from Mike's G550 as it taxis just 2 inches en route to his Bermuda weekend hideaway

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:36 | Link to Comment not fat not stupid
not fat not stupid's picture

I can't say climate change is real but I'd be as stupid as a rock to insist it isnt real.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:46 | Link to Comment Colombian Gringo
Colombian Gringo's picture

Climate change exists, its called spring, summer, fall and winter. Further, we have had at least 6 ice ages, no doubt caused by too many cavemen riding their dinosaurs. If you want to pay carbon taxes, go ahead and knock yourself out. The notion that we will stop climate change by paying money to bloomberg, al gore and the UN is laughable. I suggest buying yourself an african rain maker rattle and dancing outside will be just as effective, and cost much less.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:48 | Link to Comment Water Is Wet
Water Is Wet's picture

"Further, we have had at least 6 ice ages, no doubt caused by too many cavemen riding their dinosaurs."

+7 billion, lol

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:54 | Link to Comment Kitler
Kitler's picture

Please don't forget that the worst hurricane storm surges in the NYC area took place in the 1630's.

Of course why bother with science when religion will suffice...

http://www.geo.brown.edu/georesearch/esh/QE/Publications/GSAB2001/JDonne...

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:16 | Link to Comment jcaz
jcaz's picture

Shush-  actual facts like that will kill these Chicken Littles.....

They're so happy on their own little clouds.....

Fri, 11/02/2012 - 01:49 | Link to Comment John_Coltrane
John_Coltrane's picture

And speaking of clouds, that's what determines average global surface temperatures due to scattering of incoming radiation or trapping of outgoing radiation.  So, you'd think climate "scientists" would focus on H2O not CO2 since that's what makes up cloudsl.  But that's much too hard a problem as our current inability to predict next weeks average temperature (much less next centuries) demonstrates week after week.  Modeling cloud formation as a function of time of day, latitude and longitude is the only thing that matters in net radiation forcing and thus surface T. 

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 18:24 | Link to Comment Matt
Matt's picture

Where did those hurricanes in the 1630s make landfall? Half a meter is not a huge difference, give it some time, that record will probably get broken soon enough.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:55 | Link to Comment SmallerGovNow2
SmallerGovNow2's picture

Go to amazon and buy the book "watermelon".  it will tell you all you need to know about man made climate change or global warming hoax.  climate changers use junk science.  they have been caught in their lies yet they still continue the bullshit story.  all they want is to tax and control your ass.  they don't like "people" because it is all about their precious "planet".

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:25 | Link to Comment blu
blu's picture

+1 lol

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 17:31 | Link to Comment GCT
GCT's picture

This storm is the result of the Atlantic ocean being warmer then the Pacific. This happened before in the 1950's.  But then the elitist jerks want to sell the people the air they breathe now. 

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:27 | Link to Comment blu
blu's picture

nigga you cray

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 17:11 | Link to Comment bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

This subject aways brings out the biggest dopes in here. And there you are, leading the pack. And your climate science credentials are what? Or are you just talking out of your ass like the rest of the deniers? There's your global warming source right there.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 18:31 | Link to Comment Poor Grogman
Poor Grogman's picture

"And your climate science credentials are what"

Answer:

Common sense and the ability to smell bullshit from a safe distance.

Question:

What are yours?

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 19:18 | Link to Comment Hobbleknee
Hobbleknee's picture
Global Climate Warming Stopped 15 Years Ago, UK Met Office Admits

http://www.thenewamerican.com/tech/environment/item/13212-global-climate...

Fri, 11/02/2012 - 01:57 | Link to Comment John_Coltrane
John_Coltrane's picture

As a real research scientist let me say that "denier" is a term only used in religion where faith plays a major role.  Religion, or as I call it, organized superstition, has no business in any models of physcial reality.  It plays a huge role in so-called climate science because of economic considerations and the lack of the most basic controls on measurements and calibration.  Skeptisicm is the most important characteristic of all good scientists.  Theories can never be proved only falsified.    This is the essence of the scientific method. 

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 17:40 | Link to Comment Bansters-in-my-...
Bansters-in-my- feces's picture

Hello "stupid rock"

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:36 | Link to Comment Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

<--- Bloomberg is a cunty douchebag

<--- Bloomberg is a narcissistic fascist fuckhead

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:37 | Link to Comment Robslob
Robslob's picture

It won't let me vote both?

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:41 | Link to Comment francis_sawyer
francis_sawyer's picture

If you want, you can interMITTENtly 'change' your vote from up to down & vice versa... It's good practice if you ever decide to get into politics...

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:50 | Link to Comment Manthong
Manthong's picture

>>> Typical narcissist politician

>>> Narcissistic megalomaniac psychopath not content with financial success but must act out to impose his will on others through politics.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:18 | Link to Comment jcaz
jcaz's picture

Good job- you just summed up every President since Washington.....

Kinda the premise of the job, dude....

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 17:56 | Link to Comment Steaming_Wookie_Doo
Steaming_Wookie_Doo's picture

For your poll, both are right, depending on the time of day.

Who else is surprised that another Repub is gives Bammy the thumbs up? Is this only to avoid looking chauvinistically petty? Self interest in another election for themselves? But climate chg seems like a really dumb reason--seeing as how even making massive chgs wouldn't necessarily be visible for [possibly] decades. At which point, some other putz will claim victory. I suppose this is a politicians dream, ascribing causation re something you didn't have to do anything about-- much akin to taking credit for rising employment numbers (but ignoring any losses).

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:36 | Link to Comment JailBank
JailBank's picture

Will Obama allow JP Morgan to continue to manipulate the PM market in his second term? I am for the guy that will let us BTFDs until it blows.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:36 | Link to Comment CunnyFunt
CunnyFunt's picture

NYC=beta test for the model police state

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:52 | Link to Comment francis_sawyer
francis_sawyer's picture

Snake Plissken doesn't give a fuck about your model police state or your President...

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 17:31 | Link to Comment CunnyFunt
CunnyFunt's picture

That's right, Cabbie.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:38 | Link to Comment Mad Max
Mad Max's picture

From Bloomberg, one of the few politicians who can make Obama and Romney look like decent guys in comparison.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:57 | Link to Comment SmallerGovNow2
SmallerGovNow2's picture

nice one max...

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:39 | Link to Comment Lost Wages
Lost Wages's picture

Hopefully Chris Christie will endorse Obama now too, so I can watch all Republicans crap their pants.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:43 | Link to Comment Dr. Richard Head
Dr. Richard Head's picture

You think die hard republicans use logic?  They will just say that Christie had to adapt, like Mitt, to his liberal base.  He was just listening to the people you know and THAT, my friend, is true leadership.  At least, that is what they tell me when I bring up Mitt's liberal MA past.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:19 | Link to Comment Dr. Richard Head
Dr. Richard Head's picture

There are more partisan hacks on this site than I remember.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:45 | Link to Comment insanelysane
insanelysane's picture

Hope O wins because there should be a Dem at the helm when this whole thing melts down, fukishima style.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:15 | Link to Comment CommunityStandard
CommunityStandard's picture

Thanks for contributing to the two-party myth.  - signed, the govt

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 17:50 | Link to Comment bobnoxy
bobnoxy's picture

Like it did during Bush's second term?

Now that Romney has almost all of Bush's economic advisors working for him, what could possibly go wrong?

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:46 | Link to Comment Mad Mohel
Mad Mohel's picture

Chris Christie is not endorsing anything unless it contains the phrase, "Super Size It."

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:00 | Link to Comment Ham-bone
Ham-bone's picture

Dude is going to blow... his staff and family need to hold an intervention before he explodes

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:46 | Link to Comment Shizzmoney
Shizzmoney's picture

First of all, Christie is doing a good PR job of looking like he's "bi-partisan".  He doesn't like Romney, so it's super easy to just chuck him aside as he knows the guy is gonna lose, anyways......and it sets up as a PR plus for Christie's POTUS run (BTW, I predict, unless he steps on his dick...Christie is our next president in 2016.  #book it).

On the topic of climate change: OK, we've idenitifed a problem.  But it's not like we can reverse the gases already put into the air!  On top of that, where were the climate change people (especially in the establishment) when BP was dumping oil into the Gulf of Mexico? How about nuclear plant health? Where is the talk about water health? 

Corporations will skate around regulations......just the way it is.  Instead, the establishment want to find reason to tax people more to look like they are "doing something".  Higher taxes aren't going to stop the Koch Brothers dumping toxic shit into the river.  Government spending won't do it, either.

It's such a trite, vague issue.  The world is fucked.

 

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:53 | Link to Comment kaiserhoff
kaiserhoff's picture

Hillary has quietly built up the best resume for the Presidency since George Herbert Walker U.A.W.I.O.U. Bush..., ah shit #41.

She will be rested and ready, and in 2016..., only 142 years old.

 

Damn it Kaiser, you could have talked all day and not said that.    

  BITE ME!

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:48 | Link to Comment Id fight Gandhi
Id fight Gandhi's picture

What party is he now anyway? He keeps changing. How did he even get a 3rd term?

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 17:03 | Link to Comment Clowns on Acid
Clowns on Acid's picture

Gandhi - D-bag Bloomberg paid off the City Council to change the consecutive term limit law. Do you think that Bloomberg is looking to get the full 6B from Obama?

You bet yer arse !

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:52 | Link to Comment Ham-bone
Ham-bone's picture

Obama is the best for reducing climate change ---> his policies (his little hand in the Fed's big hand) help slow global growth, slow demand, and thus ultimately cause demand destruction all while reducing supply while increasing the price of energy.  Less demand, less use of commodities, less travel, less maunufacturing, less global trade, less carbon footprint.  Solved (plus he suggested more air pressure for better mileage in folks tires <brilliant>...Mitts hasn't had anything nearly that brilliant).

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:49 | Link to Comment monopoly
monopoly's picture

I think I am going to be sick.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:50 | Link to Comment FishHockers
FishHockers's picture

Bloomberg is a DOUCHE BAG, stops the big sodas but you can order 54oz Steaks and a quart of Vodka. A real fucking douche bag.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:01 | Link to Comment SmallerGovNow2
SmallerGovNow2's picture

+1,000 for you fish.

Let me repeat, Bloomberg is a dictator fascist douche bag...

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:21 | Link to Comment blu
blu's picture

Forget Bloomberg. Just order four 16oz sodas. See all better.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:50 | Link to Comment Sockeye
Sockeye's picture

Maybe Agenda 21 isn't a wing nut conspiracy theory. Was sandy even that big of a storm or was it just unfortunate timing - coming in at the high tide? Why are we so actively encouraging everyone to pack themselves into densely populated cities?

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:51 | Link to Comment Stanley Lord
Stanley Lord's picture

Lets make a bet, I say Romney wins and by more than 300 electoral votes?

What do you say?

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:02 | Link to Comment SmallerGovNow2
SmallerGovNow2's picture

that would be one hell of a trick as there are only 538 total electoral votes...

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 19:56 | Link to Comment smiler03
smiler03's picture

Use intrade.com. Currently:

Presidential Election Winner  BO 65.3%  MR 34.2%

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:52 | Link to Comment pods
pods's picture

Oh look, another money changer who wants to get in on the carbon credit skim.

I am Jack's complete lack of surprise.

pods

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:52 | Link to Comment JR
JR's picture

The two party system may be corrupt and broken, but it’s a mistake to suggest that there is little difference between Romney and Obama, and the next four years would be somewhat the same with either of them.

Romney, for example, says he will work to end the inheritance tax, repeal the alternative minimum tax and retain the Bush-era tax cuts on all incomes. He would work for fewer income tax deductions, primarily on the wealthy, but reduce rates in all categories: 35% down to 28%, 10% down to 8%, etc.

Romney opposes cap & trade legislation, would be less restrictive on energy development: oil drilling, natural gas, coal, and nuclear.  He would work to repeal the health care legislation; would cap federal spending at 20% of GDP.  He opposes the Fed’s current bond buying program and has said he would replace Fed Chairman Bernanke.

Romney would push back stronger against illegal immigration: with the border fence, no benefits for illegal students in college and punishment for employers who hire illegals after a verification program is in place. 

On social issues, Romney’s positions differ sharply from Obama’s.  He favors a constitutional amendment banning same sex marriage, opposes civil union benefits if they are the same as marriage benefits, favors repeal of Roe versus Wade, would allow states to ban abortions, and favors a ban federal funds being given to Planned Parenthood.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:59 | Link to Comment pods
pods's picture

Not to jump in the mud puddle which is amerikan politics, but that amendment to ban something is reason enough to stay the fuck away from him.

The constitution is the set of rules which we the people have set up for the government.

To favor an amendment which turns that around 180 degrees is enough to show he is just another bastard that wants to use the power of the state to benefit those who support him.

pods

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:19 | Link to Comment JR
JR's picture

We’re not talking about a constitutional convention; that is only one way. We’re talking about an amendment that requires a two-thirds vote from the House and the Senate followed by a ratification of three-fourths of the various state legislatures (38 states).

 A constitutional amendment requires the participation of the people and most importantly, separate decisions by the states. This procedure is the only way that the Constitution has been amended to date. The procedure is the same as was used for women’s suffrage and other amendments.

The 180 degree turn that you have suggested has been turned not by the people - they have consistently voted to protect the traditional view of marriage - but by the left’s concentrated campaigns in Democrat legislatures and then supported by selected liberal courts.

Your "180 degree turn" turned back centuries of traditional marriage practices and law.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 17:26 | Link to Comment pods
pods's picture

Ummm, the 180 degree turn was meant to mean that document in question is the framework by which the GOVERNMENT operates.

Amendments were added to ALLOW the GOVERNMENT to do more things not originally in the rules.

Your AMENDMENT would be used to limit what the people can do, not the government.

The whole reason why the GOVERNMENT shoved its nose (unconstitutionally I might add) into marriage to begin with was that you cannot have blacks marrying whites.  
Government has no reason at all to be involved in marriage to begin with.

So don't give me shit about centuries of tradional marriage and law.

Now if you want to have your argument in my church, fine, that is where this belongs.

And dont give me that shit about the process of amending the constitution.  You can do it your way, or you can have one declared passed by Philander Knox as the easy way.

pods 

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 18:02 | Link to Comment JR
JR's picture

First of all, this is not my amendment but my understanding is that Romney believes the subject is so important that it should be dealt with in a process involving a major commitment by the American people and not by isolated courts and legislatures and powerful politicians such as Bloomberg.

To say the government shouldn’t be “involved in marriage” is to say that now that the radical left is using government courts to change the definition of marriage (to which tax laws and social mores apply), the rest of us should stay away. In short, it seems to me that the government already is “sticking its nose” into marriage.

Let me ask you a question. If two homosexuals marry and receive marriage tax breaks, should two non homosexuals living as renters in the same house get marriage tax breaks? Should both also be able to adopt children? Or, how about adult brothers and sisters living in the same household; or a mother and son, et cetera?

The primary reason I am against same sex marriage, animal marriage, et cetera, is that it is destructive to an institution that has built the American system through strong families, cared for children, responsible requirements for fathers - all almost indispensible ingredients in American social life.

A number of the tenets of International Communism already have been achieved in our socialized system. Homosexual marriage can be added to the list, i.e., Encouraging the breakdown of the family.

One of the main ideas of the Frankfurt School started at the University of Frankfurt in 1923 by Communist-oriented sociologists was to exploit Freud’s idea of ‘pansexualism’ - "the search for pleasure, the exploitation of the differences between the sexes, the overthrowing of traditional relationships between men and women. To further their aims they would:

• attack the authority of the father, deny the specific roles of father and mother, and wrest away from families their rights as primary educators of their children.
• abolish differences in the education of boys and girls
• abolish all forms of male dominance - hence the presence of women in the armed forces
• declare women to be an ‘oppressed class’ and men as ‘oppressors.’"


Willi Munzenberg summed up the Frankfurt School’s long-term operation thus: ‘We will make the West so corrupt that it stinks.

Immorality is a companion of corruption.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 21:03 | Link to Comment pods
pods's picture

You got to think bigger if you ever want to free your mind.

Why is labor taxed to begin with?  It matters little if you may save a bit by being married.  When someone else determines what they take and you have no say, you are a slave.

Labor=time.  My time is mine. Someone else has determined that they are entitled to a percentage of my time, my life.  I gave no permission (aside from the whole voluntary scam) for them to take the proceeds of my labor.

It is slavery. Certainly not the same as before, but when someone has first rights to your labor without your consent, you are not free.  A newer, gentler slavery.  With a bigger plot for our family.  Only the new plantation owner is vastly more powerful than before.  Namely the bankers that bankrupted the government and now wield it to do their bidding.

As for a strong american system, almost every single thing this government does is in direct contradiction to the "values" ascribed in the founding of the nation.

I am well aware of the destruction of the family, etc.  But merely electing those who would wield government in your favor is not exactly following in the footsteps of the "rugged individualists" of long ago.

And do not try to put words in my mouth, especially false left-right paradigm words.  

"To say the government shouldn’t be “involved in marriage” is to say that now that the radical left is using government courts to change the definition of marriage (to which tax laws and social mores apply), the rest of us should stay away."

To say that the government should not be involved in marriage is to say that the government should not be involved in marriage. Period.

pods

 

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:20 | Link to Comment Panafrican Funk...
Panafrican Funktron Robot's picture

"The two party system may be corrupt and broken"

Ironic that this was your first statement, and then you proceeded to list a bunch of stuff in favor of continuing with the system.  

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 17:12 | Link to Comment JR
JR's picture

In their ignorance, Republican Primary voters did not nominate Ron Paul who would now be sweeping Obama out of office and on his way to reforming the American political system.

The corruption of the two-party system is the very reason a man like Obama could be elected. This corruption doesn’t mean that Obama does not now need to be removed.

BUT, Obama still looms large and voting is already underway. A quick read of Mayor Bloomberg’s endorsement and his reasons suggest a vote for Obama is a vote for Bloomberg, for cap and trade with its sycophant beneficiaries such as Al Gore and Goldman ready to tax the air and limit the movement of citizens and the liquids people drink.

My main complaint is the statement that it doesn’t matter which one is elected. It does. If you like the way things are going and support America’s acceleration into Third World socialism, vote Obama.

More simply, if you like Bloomberg and all he stands for, vote for Obama.

As for cap and trade and its profiteers such as Bloomberg, Goldman and Gore, a global warming treaty is the weapon to be used by the cap and trade profiteers and global controllers to render the American people pliant enough to carry the yoke of global governance without complaint; "global warming," where carbon-debt forms a core component of international trade,” is a clarion warning in the global governance debate.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 18:58 | Link to Comment Matt
Matt's picture

Did they actually vote, or was the result pre-ordained and put on the teleprompter?

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 18:34 | Link to Comment JR
JR's picture

By the way, P. Funk, that quote “bunch of stuff” that you apparently object to includes lower taxes, opposition to cap and trade, repeal of Obama healthcare legislation, replacement of Bernanke and strong opposition to illegal immigration.

You may be a clever wordsmith, but so far you and your supporters have just declared for reelection of Obama.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:24 | Link to Comment Bay of Pigs
Bay of Pigs's picture

I was going to show you the Ulimate Flip Flop Collection from Mitt Romney (20 minutes long), on LiveLeak but it has been removed.

You are dead wrong on him, but who gives a fuck anyway? Keep believing the lies you're told.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 20:04 | Link to Comment smiler03
smiler03's picture

I'm completely neutral on this but there is a youtube link which is called the Ultimate Mitt Romney Flip Flop Collection:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wTjBSpf8tM 

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 22:31 | Link to Comment Bay of Pigs
Bay of Pigs's picture

Thanks smiler, thats the one.

Watch it and try to learn something about a lying psychopath JR.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 15:53 | Link to Comment disabledvet
disabledvet's picture

I'm long a rigged election...

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:05 | Link to Comment LiesAreTheOnlyTruth
LiesAreTheOnlyTruth's picture

Oh shit ... that's ALL we need.  "This could have been avoided if we just had 100% carbon taxes on everyone for the government to collect and redistribute!" 

"Elect Obama and we'll get it!  We'll never have this happen again!  This isn't random acts of nature, it's all because of carbon output and global warming!"

"OK OK ... we know we were screaming about Global Cooling in the 70's, but you forgot all about that plus we can't tax that now.  So just trust us, it's global warming and pay all kinds of new taxes so we can buy more planes and have bigger parties in far away countries and increase GDP for you guys while we print money!"

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:11 | Link to Comment Dre4dwolf
Dre4dwolf's picture

NewsFlash : Politics does not have any effect on mother nature, you can't vote for a change in climate.

 

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:26 | Link to Comment Haole
Haole's picture

AGW is the most insidious, scientifically abhorrant, propaganda-riddled, anti-prosperity (for all but the elite), anti-human corporatist/religious agenda ever to be inflicted on mankind. 

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 21:06 | Link to Comment pods
pods's picture

I disagree. It may be the most centralized in a global sense, but it is certainly not the worst.

That one would be state-sanctioned fractional reserve lending, more commonly called banking nowadays.

pods

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:45 | Link to Comment LouisDega
LouisDega's picture

William Shattner approves. PCLN has a woody

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:17 | Link to Comment moroots
moroots's picture

fuck you bernanke

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 17:28 | Link to Comment Bansters-in-my-...
Bansters-in-my- feces's picture

Watch out moroots Tyler(s) will spank ya.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:27 | Link to Comment earleflorida
earleflorida's picture

"Planetary Pole Reversals"

http://www.nasa.gov/topics/earth/features/2012-poleReversal.html

Note:  as the north pole is melting the south pole is making up the difference.

Ps. by the time we implement green-technologies into our energy program [sometime in 2035?]... the genius of mankind's innovation/ entrepreneurship  will have long since found an permanent vis-a-vis alternate solution.  granted, we will still need hydro-carbons [oil] for a litany of necessary and useful ancillary industrial procurement supplements, and,  of course... not withstanding a substantial, but somewhat? quasi-limited supply of oil [note the word 'Fossil Fuel'?], one hopes.  

thankyou tyler

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:36 | Link to Comment LongOfTooth
LongOfTooth's picture

North pole melting and South pole making up for it.

 

Perhaps the preamble to a crustal displacement (aka physical pole shift)?  

 

Why not.  Everything else is like a bad dream, why not this too?

 

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 17:13 | Link to Comment blu
blu's picture

Why not? Let's see maybe because ... that would violate several important laws of physics?

Angular momentum FTW.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 19:08 | Link to Comment Matt
Matt's picture

"as the north pole is melting the south pole is making up the difference."

No.

Magnetic poles switching has nothing to do with temperature change. And no, Antarctica is not getting colder and larger.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 21:07 | Link to Comment DosZap
DosZap's picture

Yes it is getting larger..............check out the stats.

Fri, 11/02/2012 - 13:12 | Link to Comment Matt
Matt's picture

Whose stats? The ones I see show Antartica as a whole is smaller. Yes, the Eastern Antartic is growing, but slower than the Western Antartic is shrinking.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:18 | Link to Comment Zer0head
Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:19 | Link to Comment blu
blu's picture

Oh boy a climate change post. Should be good for some lulz.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:20 | Link to Comment icanhasbailout
icanhasbailout's picture

Bloomy endorses Obama, said hurricane changed his mind, while simultaneously demanding $6B from the federal treasury to pay for all NYC hurricane damage.

 

Quid, meet pro quo

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:20 | Link to Comment SaveTheGreenback
SaveTheGreenback's picture

Mike Bloomberg is more concerned about his own legacy than the legacy of America.  

He knows damn well that Obama is an incompetent executive.  This is cronyism...

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:32 | Link to Comment RiotActing
RiotActing's picture

And all you dummies thought Romney was going to win... bahahhahah!

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 16:34 | Link to Comment Zer0head
Zer0head's picture

June 18, 2012, 3:02 pm 

At Party, Bloomberg Tips Hand on Endorsement

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/18/at-party-bloomberg-tips-ha...

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 17:01 | Link to Comment MFLTucson
MFLTucson's picture

Fuck you Bloomberg.  We have this asshole now telling us that this hurricane has to do with climate change when in fact the hurricanes in the 50's along the east coast were far more severe. 

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 17:07 | Link to Comment Bansters-in-my-...
Bansters-in-my- feces's picture

So is "climate change" kinda like "Aerosol Geoengineering..?

Cause if so there is a whole lot of climate change around here everyday..

Being sprayed heavily ......HAARP is all fired up too...

So who is the big seller of Barium and aluminum particulate matter...

Follow the trail.....Chemtrail that is.....

....................STOP CHEMTRAIL spraying me...!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 17:15 | Link to Comment blu
blu's picture

No! I will not stop! Dammit I've got to do something with the stuff otherwise it piles up in the garage and my wife gets on my case.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 17:56 | Link to Comment Smiddywesson
Smiddywesson's picture

Dear Peasants,

Now that I and my fellow elites have betrayed your trust in us ruling over the banking and financial system, we would like to further rule your lives and money by regulating carbon. 

You see, even though we have beaten this tired drum for 40 years, Global Warming, which we now call Climate Change because there's been no warming for the last 16 years, is a reality, and boy is it scary.  Sure, the South Pole is getting colder and encased in ice, but nothing to see here, move along, it's all about the North Pole.  Hey, they're nowhere near each other, so how does that undermine our Climate Change models, right?

There's been 3/4 of a single degree farentheight of warming since 1880, which means at this rate, the Earth's temperature will rise 200 degrees in the next 35,466 years, and then boy, you'll see, because Global Warming, dammit I mean Climate Change, is real, and it is irrreversible.  It has to be irreversible, the same people who told us the climate was about to spin out of control 40 years ago, and were wrong, couldn't have been wrong about that too, could they?

So why won't you idiots let us salt the skies with reflective dust and tax you, don't you care about our children?

Sincerely,

The Beautiful People who matter.

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 18:27 | Link to Comment JR
JR's picture

“And, now, it seems that decisive moment has arrived," as Project Mayhem wrote on The Week in Mayhem on Zero Hedge regarding the Cophenhagen global warming treaty. PM’s statement now can be applied to the reelection of Obama:

“Global planners with their distain of western-style capitalism set out to find, or invent if necessary, an enemy that threatened the entire world--a global enemy so frightening the American people would accept the price of a global power--a falling standard of living, increased taxes, bureaucratic intervention, loss of liberty and the American flag--and acquiesce to put trillions in tribute into the cap and trade jackpot for freebooting Goldman Sachs and the world bankers.  Because a threat of such necessary magnitude could not be found, a threat had to be invented; one with legitimate concerns and visible, such as smog or pollution, to make it plausible, i.e., global warming. Accuracy was never important.

“Now, of course, that 'threat' is to be hammered out into world socialism into by a “politically binding” treaty in Copenhagen where “rich countries must provide finance to poor countries to help them achieve their goals and cope with the effects of climate change”  and  “governance structures” outlined.

“A web site that reveals The Green Agenda has nearly a hundred quotes by these global planners with their manipulative end-of-the-world scenarios, all referenced and sourced.

“Says the author of The Green Agenda: ‘One of the first targets of the green movement was the nuclear power industry.  Even though nuclear energy offers enormous energy potential with no C02 emissions they still revile it….’”

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 19:05 | Link to Comment noushina
noushina's picture

Even if it was possible to change the climate by the meager efforts of the U.S., money would be better spent burying the cables in the hurricane zones so that storms don't shut everything down. It would probably have cost less to bury the cables than what this storm has cost. See http://www.businessinsider.com/bury-the-power-phone-cable-lines-2012-11

Thu, 11/01/2012 - 21:13 | Link to Comment DosZap
DosZap's picture

MULTI BILLIONAIRES should not tell people how much soda they can drink,or eat,or anything else............ or make inane laws because he's a Mayor w/tons of coin............he's an  Uber rich IDIOT.

Fri, 11/02/2012 - 06:14 | Link to Comment Sathington Willougby
Sathington Willougby's picture

 

Which candidate is stronger on ManBearPig???

Gary Johnson 2012, he's iron tough on ManBearPig, not exactly like Ron Paul but his MBP policy is much the same.

Fri, 11/02/2012 - 07:10 | Link to Comment Lumberjack
Lumberjack's picture

I discovered in the comments that the Mayor had a really nice compound in the Bahamas. One of his neighbors is former Italian PM Berlusconi. (circumstantial I know but...).

I have pointed out the ties between the Mafia in Italy regarding seized wind projects and that these projects have direct ties to Boston based First Wind. Another Bahama mansion owner would be Angus King, former governor, senate candidate and wind speculator from Maine who has really good deals going on with First Wind (His son is a VP there), King also sat on the board of a Bahamas' based bank. Bloomberg has been contributing huge money for King re-election.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!