While he’s right, I wish he’d leave the rats to eat their own on this.
Yup.
That should be the single most important consideration here.
We went through the same thing with Rudy Giuliani when he launched his comical bid for the White House in 2008. His similar claim to fame was NYC’s initiative to seize vehicles from drivers in DUI cases before the defendants had gone to trial.
We need to use their Alinsky tactics against them:
4: “Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.”
So, continue to point out their own hypocrisy, even on the occasions that they accidentally did the right thing.
Until our side learns to play by the rules of the DEMOCRATS, we will never be able to crush the Left.
In this case, I could less whether Bloomberg’s stop-and-frisk was a good idea or not (it certainly worked), what should matter to us, ONLY, is that the black community HATED the policy, and that gives us leverage (huge leverage) to weaken Bloomberg.
After Bloomberg is no longer a political threat to the country, then I have no issue in defending him or his policies. That’s how the Dems do it - when Bush Sr. died, they had nothing but great words for him. When he was in office, though, THEY DESPISED HIM, as much as they despise Trump, and they nearly drove Bush Sr. out of office over Iran-Contra.
The ‘moral high ground’ nearly cost us the country...we can, and should, go back to that, but only after DEFEATING the Democrats once and for all...and we are not there yet.
This is Bloomberg’s weak point. Trump’s instinct is to go for the kill.
Just because a policy is effective in reducing crime doesn’t mean it’s right. And more importantly doesn’t mean it’s constitutional. Imagine how much more crime could be reduced with warrantless searches.
Two more facts:
The sharp drop off in crime in New York was the work of Bill Bratton who Giuliani installed as police chief and who basically invented modern data driven policing. Yes he also used stop and frisk but it was one of many policies he implemented and the crime rate kept falling after stop and frisk was ended.
On top of that even if stop and frisk was good policy speaking in such a dismissive manner of the people negatively impacted by policies that restrict our freedom is the province of nanny state totalitarians like Bloomberg.
We’re not criticizing MiniMike on Stop and Frisk.
We’re criticizing him on disavowing it in order to pander to ‘Rat voters.
I read that, what was it, 5 years of aggressive “stop & frisk” saved 1600+ black lives. The “law-abiding community” in the black neighborhoods were for it. Mamas, too.
I want to add that it’s no excuse for police crime. (Am I contradicting myself?) It has to be a measured policy, not arbitrary and unlimited -— and the community has to see that.
The right does not criticize Bloomberg for his former policy, but for his present cowardly hypocrisy.
Whoa there Mr. Morefield, pump the straw man brakes.
Nobody is criticizing the policy. They are criticizing Big Gulp’s insincere disavowal of it in a pathetic attempt at pandering. Anytime a tape or video arises of this former Fakepublicam vehemently defending it, you betcha we are going to hop on it. We are especially going to do that when he makes statements that, if made by a GOP candidate, would lead to screams of “white nationalist.”
Oh no, just cause Big Gulp changes jerseys does not mean he gets a pass. And if they left won’t beat him over the head with the tool they always misuse on us, then we will.
He’s running for a party that does not believe in it, and now he’s trying to pander.
Not our damn jobs to come to his aid.
Wouldn’t carrying a Big Gulp be reasonable suspicion to stop and search in Mike’s world? That’d be a lovely question to ask him directly.
If a rat tells something close to the truth, they are done. The dem party will eat them alive. He will still be a player because of his money, but I think he will keep falling just short of the 15% required to get delegates.
When he first instituted it, I thought it was completely unconstitutional. Still do.
I’m all for aggressive policing but at least have reasonable cause or an outstanding warrant.
Agree that Blowme’s cowardice to defend his gestapo tactics is what is doing him in. Mr. “throw them against the wall” Toughguy is now Mr. “I’m sorry. I’ve evolved” Mary Poppins.
We have libertarians greatly exaggerating the problems with stop and frisk. As if small inconvenience and bruised egos were the equivalent of blacks being lynched, conservative students suffering outright censorship, or Republicans being denied equal protection of the police. NYC cops haven’t been a significant source of civil liberty problems since the days of Tammany Hall.
I think the criticism has to do with the way he expressed the frisk, not the frisk itself.
I’d be more concerned with the goa or the nra for not coming to the defense of new yorkers. Did they simply turn a blind eye to this overreach?
I agree with this premise.