NYC Mayor Bloomberg Opposes Roberts

By Last Night in Little Rock, Section Supreme Court
Posted on Fri Sep 16, 2005 at 03:35:09 PM EST
Tags: Bloombert (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

by Last Night in Little Rock

NYC Mayor Micheal Bloomberg has become the first [noted] Republican to oppose the confirmation of John Roberts to the Supreme Court, primarily over the right to choose under Roe v. Wade, not that it matters. [More...]

Bloomberg, a former Democrat seeking re-election in a heavily Democratic city, said Roberts had failed to show a commitment to upholding the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision establishing a right to abortion.

"I am unconvinced that Judge Roberts accepts the landmark Roe v. Wade ruling as settled law," Bloomberg said.

Roberts' answers to questions in Senate confirmation hearings "did not indicate a commitment to protect a woman's right to choose," he said. "For that reason I oppose the nomination of Judge Roberts as Chief Justice of the Supreme Court."

< Ten Members of the Bush Administration Needed to Change a Light Bulb | Jeb Bush's Son Arrested >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

NYC Mayor Bloomberg Opposes Roberts | 10 comments (10 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

Re: NYC Mayor Bloomberg Opposes Roberts (none / 0) (#1)
by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:56 PM EST

What a cheap PR stunt with nothing to loose. Lots to gain, like to good will of Dems in NYS. He is a slime. He would convince me otherwise if he starts spending a few million to lobby the Senate, and put his money where his mouth is.

Re: NYC Mayor Bloomberg Opposes Roberts (none / 0) (#2)
by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:57 PM EST

No, Squeak, I don't agree. While I don't know that much about his mayorship, the fact is that this is an honorable position. He's on the right side on that, and that's worthwhile. There must be a few Republican politicians who don't want to switch parties to the Racist Christian Corporate Whore party. Bloomberg gave us the WONDERFUL Sunday peace march in NYC of a quarter of a million people. That was a seriously great accomplishment, and I honor him for it. It totally scooped the RNC's planned police riot and toxic waste bus-station imprisonment police state op. Credit where credit is due.

Re: NYC Mayor Bloomberg Opposes Roberts (none / 0) (#3)
by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:57 PM EST

PILA-He also gave us the RNC where police arrested innocent people and threw them in cages. He fought the "wonderful sunday peace march all the way and in no way did he give us anything. The March, instead of abruptly ending at Waverly place, was planned to culminate in Central park with speeches and music. He banned that and the Marchers were forced to disperse at the end point of the March or face arrest. Any credit for the Wonderful Peace March goes to the tenacity of the organizers who had to fight for every inch. I guess I can understand that in a fascist leaning country any concession to the opposition may seem wonderful, I am not there yet. Bloomberg is up for re-election in Nov. and made this remark to woo back estranged dems. He tried to give away $600 mil to the Jets for a stadium that would destroy a low income section on manhattan, tie up traffic in an already gridlocked commuter tunnel hotspot. Average NYer would never be to get a ticket to one of the 8 yearly games; season tickets only with a ten year waiting list of the well to do. He is only interested in supporting his own empire with big giveaways for the rich. Kos has some good question for Bloomberg.

I would also add that I applaud Mayor Bloomberg for acknowledging the relevance of the policies of President Bush to the Mayoral election. I think he should also tell us his views on: (1) The Iraq Debacle; (2) Bush's performance before, during and after Katrina, and his view of the Bush Administration's emergency preparedness plans and personnel; (3) Bush's tax cuts, particularly the proposal to repeal the Estate Tax. (4) No Child Left Behind; (5) Bush's environmental policies; (6) Bush's energy policies and the price of gasoline; (7) The type of nominee Bush should select to replace Justice O'Connor. Let's hear what you think on that Mayor Bloomberg. After all, you did endorse Bush for reelection and raised over 7 million dollars for his reelection last year. Your record is one of support for Bush Administration policies. It is fair to assume you support them all.

Armando at dailykos

Re: NYC Mayor Bloomberg Opposes Roberts (none / 0) (#4)
by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:57 PM EST

Posted by Squeaky: "PILA-He also gave us the RNC where police arrested innocent people and threw them in cages." You cannot blame that on Bloomberg. He wasn't the cause. A mayor cannot stop the RNC-Bush coup. "He fought the "wonderful sunday peace march all the way and in no way did he give us anything." That is utterly false. He was instrumental in that march being able to take place. "The March, instead of abruptly ending at Waverly place, was planned to culminate in Central park with speeches and music. He banned that and the Marchers were forced to disperse at the end point of the March or face arrest." Which is MOOT to the fact that he allowed, open the doors to, a quarter of a million people marching nonviolently and then going home. That accomplishment is not nullified by the refusal of the powers that be to allow Central Park to be used. A mayor is not in total charge of any city. The rest of your screed is really beneath you. Attacking people for being on the RIGHT side of events is not productive. Attacking mayors for baseball stadiums, WHICH CANNOT POSSIBLY BE THE MAYOR'S SOLE INITIATIVE, is ridiculous. A mayor has to respond to development pressure -- they have no choice about that at all. The peaceful march was the largest in NYC history. He gets the credit for allowing and encouraging it by ordering the police and federal forces not to interfere. But even a mayor cannot stop a thug machine like the RNC-Bush-Blackwater-Bonanza. And then you want to do a patented Leftist PURITY TEST on him, so you can feel so holy. Really, sad. No wonder you have no representation in gov't.

Re: NYC Mayor Bloomberg Opposes Roberts (none / 0) (#5)
by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:58 PM EST

PILA-Hey I live in NYC and Bloomberg is not my friend whatever party he belongs to (he was a dem). He could not have stopped the energy of the anti-war movenment even if he wanted to and he has tried in the past as he did with the Aug march. link link link link The Mayor is one and the same as "development pressure."

Re: NYC Mayor Bloomberg Opposes Roberts (none / 0) (#6)
by Ernesto Del Mundo on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:58 PM EST

From the third link:

Asked what his position was on the war in Iraq, he said, "Let me duck that question. I don't think it's the function of the city to get involved in national policy. I focus on what's right for the people of the City of New York. I don't know whether it's right or wrong. I don't have the intelligence information they do."

Guess he feels that everyone from New York sent to die in Iraq needs a mayor who doesn't know whether their sacrifice is for right or wrong.

Re: NYC Mayor Bloomberg Opposes Roberts (none / 0) (#7)
by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:58 PM EST

My point, Squeaky, is that IF you want to be absolutely right, there is no political process in this country that will support you, not now, probably not a hundred years from now. IF we don't applaud Republicans (outside the Bush circle) who do the RIGHT thing, when they do, there is no incentive for them to possibly 'fool us again' with another right thing. We HAVE to leave room for Republicans to oppose Bush policies and nominations. Because I got news for you -- the Republicans in NYC and the country at large, aren't going away. We need to get rid of this coup, and that is a challenge for BOTH parties. We need Republicans of decency, and so far as I know, Bloomberg is decent. You want a mayor within the president's party to state an opinion on a foreign war? More likely he will sidestep the issue, as Bloomberg does in that quote. And that's not entirely wrong or unexpected. Other than that, you're a native, I'm not, so I'll leave off berating you your political feelings. I applaud Bloomberg for being able to get a handle on the NYPD for even just ONE day. And I applaud him for opposing Roberts, who is a deathknell to democracy, he is such an OBVIOUS co-conspirator.

Re: NYC Mayor Bloomberg Opposes Roberts (none / 0) (#8)
by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:58 PM EST

I wrote: "Attacking people for being on the RIGHT side of events is not productive." I then meant to say that the baseball stadium issue is a separate matter. " Attacking mayors for baseball stadiums," ...is fine. I don't know the details. But the issue of a prominent R opposing Roberts is not insignificant to the big picture. Is it a trick? Trick me MORE.

Re: NYC Mayor Bloomberg Opposes Roberts (none / 0) (#9)
by squeaky on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:58 PM EST

PILA-your point is well taken, and you are right about taking support when ever it comes from the right. Knowing how Bloomberg works it I believe that his announcement about Roberts was a free advertisement for his re-election in Dem land NYC. He has nothing to lose and much to gain from his remark, the context of his re-election campaign is key here. I wrote to him asking for an apology and for him to distance himself for remarks made at the RNC convention likening NYCers to traitors. He sent me a form letter back dodging the whole issue, and has not to this date repudiated those nasty remarks about his cityfolk.

Re: NYC Mayor Bloomberg Opposes Roberts (none / 0) (#10)
by Talkleft Visitor on Sat Dec 17, 2005 at 01:03:58 PM EST

Just curious, was there ever a GOOD mayor of NYC?