Michael Bloomberg

Surprise, Surprise! Top 2014 political donors gave overwhelmingly to… Democrats

Obama, Reid, and Pelosi

Democrats took a thumping in the 2014 midterm elections. And though Harry Reid and many of his colleagues actually campaigned against the influence of money in politics, a POLITICO report reveals (not surprisingly) that Democrats were the recipients of millions in campaign contributions from wealthy businessmen.

Kenneth Vogel writes:

POLITICO’s analysis of top 2014 donors suggests that liberals have gotten over their big-money qualms.

Donors who gave exclusively or primarily to Democratic candidates and groups held down 52 of the top 100 spots — including by far the biggest donor of disclosed 2014 cash: retired San Francisco hedge fund billionaire Tom Steyer.

He donated more than $74 million to Democratic candidates and supportive committees, but it was the way he gave that highlighted both the potential impact and the limitations of the new breed of mega-donor to shape elections.

Awesome: Bloomberg-backed anti-Second Amendment group gets called out by CNN for lying about school shooting statistics

Since the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, theoretically there have been 74 school shootings. This statistic had been willingly used by the media, until CNN decided to dig a little deeper. According to CNN, only 15 actually are school shootings, similar to the recent shooting in Oregon.

The higher statistic was provided by Everytown For Gun Safety — former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s pet project. Numbers matter, and so do circumstances. The problem with the inflated figures is that they include domestic and drug violence in the vicinity of schools. It’s disingenuous at best, and if anything adds ammunition to something pro-gun advocates have been saying.

Schools are made more dangerous because they are “gun-free” zones. Other than searching for clientele, of course drug dealers would gravitate toward schools because they are aware that they can do business without worrying about law-abiding citizens being armed there.

Bloomberg’s organization is not for gun safety, of course. And it isn’t about making anyone safer either. It must be repeated that these organizations are about control, period.

As for the situation with CNN pointing out the questionable nature of the statistics being promoted by Everytown For Gun Safety, there might still be hope out there. We’ve been seeing the mainstream media slowly wake up from their daze, and start questioning politicians and liberal organizations.

Philip Seymour Hoffman – A Life Wasted

Philip Seymour Hoffman

A few days ago, Americans were shocked to find out that Philip Seymour Hoffman died of a heroin overdose. Hoffman was an incredible, versatile actor – a massive talent, whose repertoire included the roles of Plutarch Heavensbee in the second and third installments of The Hunger Games films, as well as Truman Capote in Capote and Freddy Lounds in the disturbing and frightening Red Dragon. Hoffman’s immense gift for acting – for becoming these complicated characters, requiring a complete abandonment of self and the occupation of others’ minds and souls – shall be missed.

The man that he was… not so much.

I know about drug abuse and addiction. Someone very close to me chose to destroy his life with heroin and alcohol. He and his wife abandoned everything, including their children, just so they could continue shooting poison into their bodies. They were offered the opportunity to get clean – all expenses paid – and to get their children back at the end of their journey. They declined. They chose heroin. They chose alcohol. They chose to destroy their bodies, and at the end, they caused their own demise.

I have no sympathy for these people, because they made their choices. They destroyed lives, and not just their own lives, but the lives of their children and their parents. His father spent his retirement income bailing him and his wife out of jail, buying him treatment, purchasing the clothing and food they would not purchase for their children, because what little money they had was usually injected into their veins.

I take no joy at their demise, but I certainly have no sympathy for them.

Moms Demand Action seeks to make more Americans victims of gun violence

Every once in a while, America experiences a tragedy that is so heinous and agonizing, that the sheer unimaginable horror of it sends the nation into a tailspin of shock and tears on a mass scale. The September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on America were just such an event – an event where every one of us watched our televisions in horror, as planes filled with innocent people flew into buildings filled with innocent people, killing thousands.

The mass murder of innocent children at Sandy Hook Elementary School on December 14, 2012 was another such event. We watched in horror as the details of the mass murder by Adam Lanza filled our television screens. America held its collective breath as the body count mounted. Little children… how could this happen?

Almost immediately, the calls for gun control began.

The media screeched about a gun violence epidemic.

Sports retailers buckled under gun control pressure and began to “re-examine” their gun sales policies.

CNN’s Piers Morgan beat an obnoxiously loud drum to destroy the Second Amendment of a nation for whose Constitution he has nothing but disdain.

Nanny Staters Should Mind Their Own Business

Nanny State

In the midst of the debates about banning firearms with certain features, Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s failed attempt to ban New Yorkers from drinking soft drinks he felt were too large, and the debate over whether or not same sex couples should have the ability to enter into a legal contract to have the same legal rights and responsibilities as married heterosexual couples, a thought occurred to me: “Gee there are a lot of people out there who just want to ban things!”

Why is this impulse so prevalent in our society? It seems that nearly everyone wants to be free to live their lives as they see fit. I haven’t met too many people who favor any notion of limiting their freedom because elected officials passed a law or majority of fellow citizens took a vote. When it comes to one’s own personal liberties, everyone is a libertarian! Consider that the Gadsen flag underneath the coiled rattlesnake reads: “Don’t Tread on Me.”

But far too many of these same people who jealously defend their own liberties are more than eager to limit someone else’s when that someone else engages in an activity that, for whatever reason, offends them. No, when it comes to other people, these people who don’t want their liberties tread on are not libertarian but majoritarian (i.e. political might makes right).

Stupidity Abounds (and is apparently contagious)

Post image for Stupidity Abounds (and is Apparently Contagious)

Back when I first heard about the proposed New York soda ban, I couldn’t believe anyone would suggest something that ridiculous. Seriously? A city putting limits to sizes on sugary drinks? They couldn’t be serious.

But they were serious. Then it was approved by New York’s Board of Health. Seriously. You can’t buy a 20-ounce Coke in New York City.

Now people in Washington D.C. are trying to get the soda ban in place there, as well. Apparently stupidity is contagious.

The issue came up at a debate for council seat candidates. Two current council members said they would support a ban like New York put in place. That got councilwoman Mary Cheh giddy with excitement. It was Cheh who tried unsuccessfully to put a larger tax on sugary drinks, so the thought that she could control what you drink in Washington – or at least how much of it you drink – is music to her ears.

And Cheh even knows that her position on this issue is going to bring criticism from, you know, people who have a brain. She said, “I know ‘nanny state’ and all that, but it’s appropriate for government to intervene at times to make sure that the choices that are presented are healthy for us.”


Her statement isn’t even kind of correct. It’s not ever appropriate for government to intervene to save you from yourself.

NYC Soda Ban Will Have Unintended Consequences

Soda Ban

The Board of Health in New York has approved Bloomberg’s suggested soda ban. This weekend while working in the yard, I remembered my high school science teacher teaching that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. What would be the reaction to this soda ban?

The Action: These are the details of the plan, as reported here.

Under the plan, all restaurants, fast-food joints, delis, movie theaters, sports stadiums and even food carts will be barred from selling sugar-sweetened drinks in cups larger than 16 ounces.

The limits will not apply to drinks sold in grocery stores, diet sodas, drinks that are more than 70-percent fruit juice, or that contain alcohol.

Dairy drinks containing more than 50 percent milk will also be allowed thanks to their redeeming nutritional qualities — though that’s little solace for Frappuccino lovers since the Starbucks treats contain far less milk than that.

The Reaction: Here are some things we might expect to see as a result of the soda ban.

1. Marketing Gimmicks

While working in the yard this weekend, I tried to think of ways I would handle the ban if I owned a restaurant in New York City. Maybe a restaurant sells a large diet soda but lets the customer get it himself; he could just get a sugary option instead. Maybe the large size on the menu would become two separate 16-ounce cups.

Bloomberg: Cops should strike until guns are gone

Nanny Bloomberg

New York Mayor Michael “Ban the Big Gulp” Bloomberg is at it again.  This time, he’s voicing some ideas that are, quite frankly, beyond the idiocy he routinely spouts off.  This time, he told CNN’s Piers Morgan that he thinks police officers should go on strike until guns are outlawed.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg told CNN’s Piers Morgan last night that he doesn’t “understand why police officers across this country don’t stand up collectively and say we’re going to go on strike, we’re not going to protect you unless you, the public, through your legislature, do what’s required to keep us safe.”

First, Bloomberg is actually asking law enforcement officers - you know, the people who can actually arrest criminals, take them to jail, and all that - to go on strike to affect political change in this country?  Really? That’s just downright terrifying…if any police officers were willing to actually do it.

The reason that it’s scary is that many people obey laws simply because of a fear of going to prison.  If there are no police due to a strike, then that deterent is no longer there.  Welcome to downright anarchy.  Bloomberg isn’t a complete idiot, despite his comments.  He knows this.  What he’s basically asking is that police use extortion techniques on the American people to affect change in gun laws.  Extortion happens to be a crime that police arrest people for!

But I’m sure Mayor Bloomberg won’t let that stop him.

Prostrate at the Feet of Our Nanny-State Masters

“Find out just what people will submit to and you have found out the exact amount of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them…The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress.” ~ Fredrick Douglass, Freed Slave and leader of the abolitionist movement

Having already made a name for himself nationwide with a crackdown on crime in the nation’s largest city, New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani made his place in history permanent just over a decade ago with his inspiring and firm handling of the Muslim terrorist attacks of 9/11. In the aftermath of that attack, Giuliani brought a city and a nation together, refusing to allow bloodthirsty madmen the satisfaction ofour surrender. True, they dealt a devastating blow, but it was a sneak attack in a long war, and like Pearl Harbor, it would be answered with overwhelming force.

A decade later, third-term NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg has taken up the mantle of leadership from the retired Giuliani, and also works diligently to protect the citizens of New York City. Admittedly, I have been highly critical of Bloomberg in the past, as when he accused the Times Square Bomber of being a disgruntled TEA Party member angry at the ObamaCare bill (as it turned out, it was an angry practitioner of Islam, the Pakistani-born Faisal Shahzad…but in Bloomberg’s defense, what were the odds that the bomber would turn out to be an angry Muslim? I’d say the odds were no more than 9.95 out of ten at best).

Michael Bloomberg’s gun-grabbing agenda is this Election’s Biggest Loser

Come and Take It

At the ballot box and in the courtroom, it has been a good year for the Second Amendment. In some states, citizens took to the polls to make it known that their Second Amendment rights were not to be undermined. In others, it was the courts that solidified our right to bear arms.

Take a look at some of the highlights from this past year, and check out who really lost big in November:


In this past election, the voters of Alabama went to the polls and overwhelmingly supported a constitutional amendment that further secured their Second Amendment rights. Amendment 3, as it was called on the ballot, made firearm ownership a fundamental right and added extra security against any international treaties that might seek to undermine the Second Amendment.

The language of the Bill reads as follows:

(a) Every citizen has a fundamental right to bear arms in defense of himself or herself and the state. Any restriction on this right shall be subject to strict scrutiny.

The views and opinions expressed by individual authors are not necessarily those of other authors, advertisers, developers or editors at United Liberty.