Search
Term limits no, but space limits yes?
As I walked in to the hearing just before noon (over an hour before its scheduled start), I noticed about 50-60 people filling the first few rows on the right side of the aisle, and just behind the two "reserved" rows on the left. They were all holding preprinted signs, and were clearly an organized group. I asked several of them which group they were with -- they all answered that they were there on their own, except one, who didn't answer at all.
When I questioned whether they were ashamed to admit which group they were with, one woman who also falsely claimed not to be with the group (or any group) tried to take me to task for it.
Seriously, it's bad enough for the mayor to try to shove a power grabbing bill down our throats, but to fill a significant portion of the overcrowded hearing room with a bunch of paid, lying lackeys is beyond the pale. Whatever one may think of his record to-date as mayor, this in my opinion disqualifies him from ever holding public office.
Shame on you, Michael Bloomberg.
At least it didn't go unnoticed.
Clyde Haberman, in today's Times, makes unflattering reference to the "rent-a-crowd" (his words). Given their obvious lack of interest in doing anything besides holding their signs and taking up space (I saw a couple of them dozing), did the Mayor hope to fool anyone into thinking that they were there out of personal or professional interest?
I am sorry to confess that the snail-like pace of the proceedings defeated my best intentions. I had to go to work today, and I gave up and went home, after handing my printed testimony over to be included in the record. I hope you were able to testify.