>Dear List:
>
>Doug writes:
>
>> Aside from same-sex marriage, I doubt a
>Dem administration would have behaved
>much differently on your top (or bottom) ten
>list.
>
>And aside from chattel slavery, the antebellum
>South wasn't very different from the antebellum
>North. But at least there was some resistance to
>the huge human rights issue of the time.
As you know, I take sexual freedom issues really seriously, but this comparison just doesn't hold. Holding people in slavery is a whole lot more serious than denying same-sexers the right to marry.
> > And Ferrer holds great potential to be a
>profound embarrassment - he seems confused,
>dissembling, and not very bright.
>
>And businessman Bloomberg is an even more
>profound embarrassment. His whole way of
>thinking makes me deeply ashamed.
He's bourgeois, yes. Are we going to elect anyone mayor of NYC who challenges bourgeois modes of thought? Certainly Freddy F doesn't do that.
> > Could you imagine this guy trying to take on
>Wall Street or the Real Estate Board of New
>York?
>
>At least he might have people in his administration
>that would at least try to take on these monsters.
No he won't. Remember the Dinkins administration? An absolute disaster. Remember what Dinkins told the Wall Streeters who questioned his ability to deliver budget cuts? "They'll take it from me." And they did. NYC's ruling class is very powerful, much of it an important subset of the global ruling class, and no mayor could ever challenge it without a serious mass movement behind him. And we don't have one of those.
Doug