Citing climate change, Bloomberg endorses Obama

Citing climate change, Bloomberg endores Obama

(CNN) – New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg wrote in a surprise endorsement Thursday he was voting for President Barack Obama in the upcoming presidential election, using Superstorm Sandy as a peg to highlight the president's stance on climate change.

Citing the storm, which left much of his city underwater and powerless, Bloomberg wrote in an op-ed on his website that "while the increase in extreme weather we have experienced in New York City and around the world may or may not be the result

(visit the link for the full news article)

So because of what happened to the East Coast and New York City, which was pretty bad, Bloomberg decides to back Obama..Seems kind of strange to me. All because Obama made a emergency response before Sandy hit and the evacuations were pretty well prompted for this type of mess.

It it's kind of funny I was talking to my Dad a couple weeks ago and said, "Watch some event will happen and it is exactly what Obama needs for his election. It allows him to show his readiness in stressful times." I guess that "even't was Sandy.

I am not a Obama supporter but I do have to give them a little bit of props on this one.

-SAP-
Source

reply to post by SloAnPainful

All because Obama made a emergency response before Sandy hit

Well not only that, but perhaps this as well swayed his decision (keeping in mind I am posting this strictly from an unbiased standpoint)...

Obama on the Environment

• Obama said, "So we have a choice to make. We can remain one of the world's leading importers of foreign oil, or we can make the investments that would allow us to become the world's leading exporter of renewable energy. We can let climate change continue to go unchecked, or we can help stop it. We can let the jobs of tomorrow be created abroad, or we can create those jobs right here in America and lay the foundation for lasting prosperity."

• Obama is working towards reducing the carbon pollution which he sees as a threat to our climate and will perpetuate the dependence on fossil fuels. Obama lists out his policies to close the carbon loophole and imposing stringent measures on carbon polluters.

• Obama believes that carbon pollution can be put at check through a market based cap. This is not only an environmentally friendly measure, but will address certain energy challenges too. The income that is generated in the process of closing the carbon loophole will be returned to the people, especially those families, communities and business which are vulnerable.

Romney on the Environment

• Romney is of the opinion wherein the solution to our environmental problem lies in adopting a market approach. While solving the environmental challenges, we should also be supporting growth.

• Rather than establishing mandates, the United States should harness its power of innovation to enhance the alternative energy sources and discover innovative technologies that will help use the energy more efficiently.

• Romney gives importance to achieving the target of energy independence so that it can free itself from its enslavement to oil rich countries at the same time becoming an economic and military superpower. This will require a series of measures that will include energy efficiency to be adopted and conservation.

I only posted the first 3 bullet points from each candidate, here is the website:

2012 Candidate Comparison - Environment

On the point that Obama and those under his command have made a pretty good fist of the reaction to the monsterous damage inflicted upon New York, I must agree that the initial response has been first rate. I hope that the continued efforts are as comprehensive and effective.

reply to post by UberL33t


I try to to stay unbiased when I am on ATS but it can prove difficult.

Bloomberg did openly state this,

The devastation that Hurricane Sandy brought to New York City and much of the Northeast – in lost lives, lost homes and lost business – brought the stakes of Tuesday’s presidential election into sharp relief.

The floods and fires that swept through our city left a path of destruction that will require years of recovery and rebuilding work. And in the short term, our subway system remains partially shut down, and many city residents and businesses still have no power. In just 14 months, two hurricanes have forced us to evacuate neighborhoods – something our city government had never done before. If this is a trend, it is simply not sustainable.

Our climate is changing. And while the increase in extreme weather we have experienced in New York City and around the world may or may not be the result of it, the risk that it might be – given this week’s devastation – should compel all elected leaders to take immediate action.

But we can’t do it alone. We need leadership from the White House – and over the past four years, President Barack Obama has taken major steps to reduce our carbon consumption, including setting higher fuel-efficiency standards for cars and trucks. His administration also has adopted tighter controls on mercury emissions, which will help to close the dirtiest coal power plants (an effort I have supported through my philanthropy), which are estimated to kill 13,000 Americans a year.

Source

I wonder if he would still vote for him if Sandy never happened?

-SAP-

Hurricane Sandy was named after Sandusky whose nickname was always Sandy.............they have a morbid sense about them................

He's kissing up for federal dollars post haste....plain and simple. Christie did the same thing when he praised the POTUS for his prompt response to NJ's devastation. Obama loves adoration and praise. I can see him delaying certain things if it's not forthcoming. Just my two cents.

reply to post by queenofswords


Could be. I wouldn't doubt it if he was kissing Obama's bum. One way or the other though, hes voting for him. Which may influence the votes of some of the other people in Bloomberg's cabinet. Just a thought.

-SAP-

The sad thing is, their solution to so-called climate change is simply to issue a carbon tax on so-called polluters.

Like everything else, big so-called polluters will simply pay the extortioner...uh, I mean, government or UN, and continue business as usual.

It's all a big ploy to add another tax so politicians and world leaders can enjoy the good life on some tropical island paradise (that's a metaphor).

Well, no surprise: Obama will be re-elected (those aggregated polls are not lying) and more flooding is expected in the next decade(s). FEMA was improved under Obama, for example by appointing an experienced crisismanager at FEMA (a difference from your former president, I still don't understand why half of the US-voters choose to re-elect him and his friends). This election is over.

They never let a crisis go to waste. They will use every opportunity to put more control on the population.

You think Bloomberg is going to lift the new car pool rule after the effects from Sandy are gone? Fat chance... It's now permanent... government doesn't retreat from gained ground.

The sad thing is, their solution to so-called climate change is simply to issue a carbon tax on so-called polluters.

Yeah, because everyone knows pollution is imaginary.

His plan is a lot better than the Republican plan of keep destroying the planet until it kills us.