I'm "all for Bloomberg"?

A commenter thinks that I'm "trash talking Mr.Fernando Ferrer" and basically being a shill for Mike Bloomberg.

I beg to differ.

The West Side Stadium: dead!

When conservatives become socialists
(I included Bloomberg in this, though he's a liberal)

Bloomberg's stupidity on "intolerance"

Mike Bloomberg: never cry defeat when it comes to spending tax dollars

NYPD to commence random searches of bags and backpacks

The failure of random searching

Not theirs to invest

And the most important one, where I thought I took apart one of Bloomberg's campaign ads:

The NYC mayoral race: how about "None of the above"?

Though I don't live in any of the five boroughs, I work in Manhattan and thus pay additional income taxes. Even before I worked in the city, part of my state taxes went to subsidize the city subway system and commuter railroads that I did not use daily. So I have a decided interest in who's mayor. I opposed Bloomberg's tax hikes, believing he should have cut spending, and I've disagreed with his policies like the subway/commuter train passenger searches. I think Bloomberg's just lucky that a rebounding economy (mainly Wall Street) boosted the city's tax revenues, but with all that,

Should I be fair? Well, I've criticized Bloomberg often enough, if not more than Ferrer. Even so, the Eidelblog is my opinion, not the news (and even so, mainstream news is hardly objective, and it was long before Rathergate). I happen to oppose an NYC mayoral candidate more than another, and I'll say so. While I would much prefer someone other than Bloomberg, the reality is that voters will pick him or Ferrer, and he's less dangerous than Ferrer. Ferrer will use the city government to pander to every union imaginable, treating taxpayers like a bottomless well.

I'd like to see Libertarian Party candidate Audrey Silk win. Here are her positions on the issues. Foremost is her desire to repeal the city's ban on smoking in public places. I've never smoked in my life, but I think this is a very important issue. Some bar and restaurant associations estimate have estimated it costs such establishments up to $2 billion annually in lost revenue, especially from Germans and Japanese (known to be heavy smokers, and thus more reluctant now to visit the city if they can't light up).

But, sadly, she has no chance. Almost all New Yorkers, both conservatives and liberals, believe in some sort of nanny government. So I won't support Bloomberg, but I'd choose him as the lesser of two evils.