Bloom'burg Spanked Again: Federal Judge Appoints Master Due to NY Mayor Overreach

[The Donkey]

Am I the only one who believes we may have an infiltration of agents provocateur in OCDO lately? Pax...:uhoh:

P.S. Back the the OP... it's about time somebody "spanked Bloomputz"!

Looking back, I guess I am partially responsible for the diversion by calling Bloomburg's ideology "conservative, communitarian, paternalism."

We then went off on a sidetrack with arguments about whether "progressive" was a better way to describe him.

I don't think "progressive" a is better word. I just read the Wiki and it is pretty good on this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism A word which is used to describe Kant, Marx, Theodore Roosevelt, Disraeli, and the left wing democratic congressional caucus has gone a bit plastic in popular use. If all that unites these people is the idea that progress in thinking and science can make society more civilized, I agree, and probably so does Bloomburg. But so what? It does not capture what I find disagreeable about what Bloomburg has been doing.

I think Bloomburg probably thinks of himself as "conservative" in that he tries to promote what he sees as traditional values: health, civility, fitness, order, and deference to authority. One of his big ideas is the "broken window" theory -- which means you overreact to the little stuff that might threaten social order to stop their corrosive influence -- and prevent the big stuff from going wrong. I see "broken window" frequently used as a theoretical excuse for government to make a big fuss over little things in ways that interfere with personal liberty.

He is "communitarian" in that he believes that community values trump individual ones. I see "communitarianism" as a right wing movement that competes with libertarianism within the Republican party, asserting the right for the "community" to impose its will in matters that I feel are "nobodies business but my own."

He is "paternalistic" or "statist" in that he believes that government often knows best, and generally wants to strenghten it to act in the public interest. He likes imposing "one size fits all" solutions on vast numbers of people in diverse situations if these impositions relate to, and conceivably positively effect much narrower segments of society.

Although they talk a good game, sometimes I get the feeling that Romney, Christie, and that idiot from Wisconsin are also of this bent. Not consistently: they also all seem to want "economic" freedom -- which often ends up translating into more freedom for monied interests. All of them are anti-union -- they see little problem with monopoly control over labor, wages and workplace conditions. They usually seem to take up the side of the mandarins against the little guys.

I like seeing these guys spanked.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Looking back, I guess I am partially responsible for the diversion by calling Bloomburg's ideology "conservative, communitarian, paternalism."

We then went off on a sidetrack with arguments about whether "progressive" was a better way to describe him.

I don't think "progressive" a is better word. I just read the Wiki and it is pretty good on this. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressivism A word which is used to describe Kant, Marx, Theodore Roosevelt, Disraeli, and the left wing democratic congressional caucus has gone a bit plastic in popular use. If all that unites these people is the idea that progress in thinking and science can make society more civilized, I agree, and probably so does Bloomburg. But so what? It does not capture what I find disagreeable about what Bloomburg has been doing.

I think Bloomburg probably thinks of himself as "conservative" in that he tries to promote what he sees as traditional values: health, civility, fitness, order, and deference to authority. One of his big ideas is the "broken window" theory -- which means you overreact to the little stuff that might threaten social order to stop their corrosive influence -- and prevent the big stuff from going wrong. I see "broken window" frequently used as a theoretical excuse for government to make a big fuss over little things in ways that interfere with personal liberty.

He is "communitarian" in that he believes that community values trump individual ones. I see "communitarianism" as a right wing movement that competes with libertarianism within the Republican party, asserting the right for the "community" to impose its will in matters that I feel are "nobodies business but my own."

He is "paternalistic" or "statist" in that he believes that government often knows best, and generally wants to strenghten it to act in the public interest. He likes imposing "one size fits all" solutions on vast numbers of people in diverse situations if these impositions relate to, and conceivably positively effect much narrower segments of society.

Although they talk a good game, sometimes I get the feeling that Romney, Christie, and that idiot from Wisconsin are also of this bent. Not consistently: they also all seem to want "economic" freedom -- which often ends up translating into more freedom for monied interests. All of them are anti-union -- they see little problem with monopoly control over labor, wages and workplace conditions. They usually seem to take up the side of the mandarins against the little guys.

I like seeing these guys spanked.

Good post well written, disagree with some but a big +1 on the Bolded. I would ad I enjoy seeing the D's get spanked just as much. :lol:

P.S. It should be broken window fallacy not theory that fallacy has been destroyed by many, such as Bastiat's work That which is seen and that which is unseen.

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Bastiat wrote in the Ninteenth Century, while Kelling and Wilson's popular article was written in 1982, so I doubt Bastiat addressed their sociological/criminological theory any more than Kelling and Wilson worried about the coincidence of Bastiat's economic parable. You are SWATting a philosophical gnat with a Thomas A. Swift's Electric Rifle.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1982/03/broken-windows/304465/?single_page=true

Correct. I read way to much into it. I stand corrected.

 

[marshaul]

Correct. I read way to much into it. I stand corrected.

I made the same mistake initially.

 

[The Donkey]

"As anticipated, New York's new mayor just nailed the lid down on the coffin of its discriminatory and unconstitutional "stop and frisk" policy -- under which they were supposedly "randomly" searching people on suspicion of going outside. . . "

https://www.facebook.com/GreidingerLegalWorks