• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Bloonberg Bans Food Donations To Homeless Because He Can't Count The Salt Content

Bronson

Bronson

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 13, 2012
Messages
3,195
Reaction score
1,192
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Being starving and homeless is no excuse for poor eating habits.
 
Bronson said:
Mayor Michael Bloomberg in March instituted a ban on food donations to homeless shelters. No, not because of food contamination, but because the city can’t properly assess salt, fat and fiber in donated food and thereby ensure starving people are getting the optimal levels of nutrition.
Click to expand...

Well that makes sense. I mean, clearly if we can't ensure optimal nutrition, it'd be better if they all just starve to death.
 
Maybe they would like that fat content because they are starving.....
 
I can't find a neutral source to this. It all cites back to a Fox News article by Jeff Stier and a CBS local editorial about it. Anyone have an actual source about this?
 
Yes, that is the CBS local editorial to which I was referring. How about a neutral source or link to the relevant legislation instead of these two unsourced and biased articles?
 
Yup, this is the mayor that can't remove the snow, but he has time to wage war on Super Slurpies. The same guy who flies to his second home in the Bahamas every weekend, and tells the great unwashed masses that they shouldn't drive cars or live in single-family homes.

That's not governance, it's animal husbandry. And the people who vote for him (or his ilk) deserve what they get.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
Yes, that is the CBS local editorial to which I was referring. How about a neutral source or link to the relevant legislation instead of these two unsourced and biased articles?
Click to expand...

CBS News NY is biased?

Hey man believe what you want. It's not my job to convince you of anything. You want to live in a different reality? That's your right.

The guy banned sodas bigger than 16oz and you question this? I'll stay on the side of reality. Ideology driven people do not operate in a box. Their perception of reality is the motivating factor in ALL decisions they make. Go ahead and give the man the benefit of the doubt because Obama and the Democrats told you Fox News lies to you and is evil. Good luck with that.
 
Bronson said:
CBS News NY is biased?
Click to expand...

An editorial that starts with "Bloomberg strikes again" is inherently biased, yes.

and you question this?
Click to expand...

I didn't question anything, I asked for a less biased source or link to relevant legislation. Can you provide it?

Perhaps you can; I certainly can't find anything on this other than the two articles and a million links to them. Isn't that strange?
 
Khayembii Communique said:
Yes, that is the CBS local editorial to which I was referring. How about a neutral source or link to the relevant legislation instead of these two unsourced and biased articles?
Click to expand...

There wouldn't be legislation.

What's a "neutral source?"

Also, it's not an editorial.
 
There wouldn't be legislation.

What's a "neutral source?"
Click to expand...

Then how is it law? How would it be enforced? What exactly is it that is being enforced? Can you link me to the primary document or a secondary source explaining it that isn't one of the two editorials already cited in this thread?
 
Bloomberg is the about the best example of a perfertly rotten super rich guy who in unlimited arrogance and narcissm sees his superior-human role as controlling all us pathetic stupid little people. He also is horrific bigot and manipulator. I count him as one of the worse people in the country.

Hey, Bloomberg, here's a clue. Your worrying about everyone else's health isn't going to cure your own fear of death.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
Then how is it law? How would it be enforced?
Click to expand...

It's not law, it's Bloomberg's choice. He has authority on the matter, he doesn't need legislation.

What exactly is it that is being enforced?
Click to expand...

The article states it's policy. This doesn't need legislation. It's the same reason Obama can just declare illegal immigrants won't be prosecuted.

Can you link me to the primary document or a secondary source explaining it that isn't one of the two editorials already cited in this thread?
Click to expand...

Let me see. It's difficult to find documentation for things like this because it doesn't need to go through the same processes as a legislative action.
 
Let me see. It's difficult to find documentation for things like this because it doesn't need to go through the same processes as a legislative action.
Click to expand...

I literally can't find anything else on this. I even found blogs on HuffPo whining about this but they all link back to these same two articles.

EDIT: This Daily Caller article:

http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/21/nyc-ban-on-unhealthy-food-at-homeless-shelters-irks-volunteers/

References a "document":

“When news of this broke this week, the mayor’s office back-peddled and said there had always been a ban on food donations to the shelters for ‘food safety’ reasons,” Stier said. “But the ban didn’t start until the document was circulated by the interagency task force — led by the mayor’s office — on food donations to shelters. What this is really about is that the government wants to replace charities. There’s a turf battle. The government has the force of law to prevent private charities from doing charitable works. “

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/03/21/n...eless-shelters-irks-volunteers/#ixzz2BkqbjhS7
Click to expand...

Any idea what that document is?
 
Last edited:
Bloomberg The Corrupt

Michael Bloomberg is the most corrupt politician New York has seen in our generation.”

Isn’t it about time that someone said that? Well, I just did.

Hyperbole?

In the past eight years Bloomberg has paid millions of dollars to the Republican Party and ended up with its ballot line three times. He did the same with the Independence Party, which also received sole source contracts from the Bloomberg administration. As far as I know, these contracts have never been questioned, let alone investigated. Is nobody interested? Taxpayer money aside, Bloomberg simply says:

It’s my money and I can spend it any way I want. And it’s all legal. And you’re a disgrace to even question it. I stand for progress, not politics.

Giving public officials cash in exchange for favorable government action is of course a crime. Granted, the real estate lobby, the hedge fund operators, the predatory equity crowd, and to be bipartisan about it, the trial lawyers do it all the time. If the exchange or the promise is explicit and can be proved, people go to jail. But the quid quo pro is rarely contemporaneous. Instead, the players carry around ledgers in their heads, political due bills. But it’s corrupt and everyone knows it. It’s just that the beneficiaries have made so much of it legal.
Click to expand...
Bloomberg Watch
 
Khayembii Communique said:
An editorial that starts with "Bloomberg strikes again" is inherently biased, yes.



I didn't question anything, I asked for a less biased source or link to relevant legislation. Can you provide it?

Perhaps you can; I certainly can't find anything on this other than the two articles and a million links to them. Isn't that strange?
Click to expand...

Perhaps you can issue a list of acceptable sources. It might make the "proper" disclosure a bit less complicated.:roll:
 
Perhaps you can issue a list of acceptable sources. It might make the "proper" disclosure a bit less complicated.
Click to expand...

Hang on, let me type something up and post it to my blog and link to it and when you ask for a more reliable source whine and moan about how I need a list of what sources are "acceptable" to you.
 
Republic Now! said:
It's not law, it's Bloomberg's choice. He has authority on the matter, he doesn't need legislation.



The article states it's policy. This doesn't need legislation. It's the same reason Obama can just declare illegal immigrants won't be prosecuted.



Let me see. It's difficult to find documentation for things like this because it doesn't need to go through the same processes as a legislative action.
Click to expand...

Perfect example. There is no basis for law by executive order - whether a mayor or president - but people accept it so it works.
 
Khayembii Communique said:
That's the exact video that was in the article...
Click to expand...

Alright, well, you're probably not going to get literal documentation because of the nature of policies like this. The best that can be done is a demonstration of Bloomberg addressing the issue. If its false Bloomberg should come forward and say so.
 
This can't be a serious story. Someone tell me it's not.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom