Your assertions about Bloomberg’s motives are pure speculation, as are my theories about his motives. It’s highly doubtful he, or any other “one percenter,” would ever confess their desires to disarm the masses so that they (and their cronies) could more easily engage in their quest to amass more power and wealth.
To be sure, if there is any person who best represents the interests of Wall Street, leading corporations, and “the rich,” Bloomberg would have to be at the top of the list.
Also, while I understand that Bloomberg is not the AG, he is certainly capable of putting a lot more pressure on the right people in govt to get some indictments rolling, wouldn’t you agree?
How about George Soros?
Here, you have two heavy-hitters from the 1% club and they both have strong ties to the world of finance and corporatism. Both are rabidly in favor of gun control, and are using their own money and connections to (very effectively) fund and push anti-gun legislation. That the legislation has not made it all the way through (yet) is only because there is so much public pressure to protect our right to bear arms.
One must wonder, though, if their own security teams are armed. Somehow, I get the feeling that they think being unarmed and defenseless is for “the little people.”[/quote]
I think it’s funny that every time an example is needed of a 1% with a leftward lean, George Soros is rolled out. I’m not sure how you figure that Bloomberg and Soros, two rich guys out of hundreds of really rich rich guys or a couple million 1%ers, gets twisted into “rich guys want gun control”. How about the other few hundred who have never uttered a peep? Is that really all there is? The “they” in “they are trying to take our guns” is Michael Bloomberg and George Soros?
How’s all that hard work going for them? No new gun laws at the federal level in a decade, not even watered down background checks that even most gun owners support.
