Bill de Blasio : Vision Zero on Dissent and Checks-and-Balances

No ranking city official can keep a check on New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio.

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio keeps repeating that he is a "progressive." It's as if the more times he says it, the more likely voters will believe him without demanding from him the fundamental reforms we voted for in the change election of last November.

Left to his own devices, the mayor will only answer to his small group of political insiders, as he demonstrated with the controversial appointment of William Bratton to succeed Ray Kelly as NYPD police commissioner. Meanwhile, voters have expectations that the mayor will fulfill on his campaign themes of being the anti-Bloomberg mayor. Three top areas where voters are still waiting to see reforms enacted are at the NYPD (such as ending controversial tactics, such as the use of excessive force) ; the provision of adequate funding that will save all of New York City's full-service hospitals ; and ending the corruptive role of money and lobbyists in local elections.

• RELATED : On Checks-And-Balances and the Disappearance Of Dissent in NYC Politics
• RELATED : Escalating Corruptive Influence of Money in NYC Politics, But No Public Advocacy (Updated)

Nobody is asking why, for example, does it seem that under the mayor's new traffic safety plan known as Vision Zero, the mayor seems to want to achieve lower traffic accidents by trading up for more police brutality. The city agencies charged with overseeing investigations into possible wrong-doing by lobbyists, including the lobbying firm The Advance Group, answer in part to the mayor and to City Council Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito -- two officials who have close political ties to The Advance Group. Because of this inherent conflicts of interest such as these, there's no way for the city to regulate lobbyists that do business with elected officials. City government must adopt realistic reforms to restore integrity to campaign finance and to elections. One way to do that, for example, would be for the city to legally challenge the application of Citizens United to local elections. On top of that, true separation of powers and checks-and-balances must exist in city government. Dissent, a form of political speech that is crucial to the full representation of all citizens, is discouraged by the de Blasio-Mark-Viverito administration. After Councilmember Rosie Mendez backed the wrong candidate in the Council speaker race, she was punished by a demotion that stripped her of a committee leadership post. Councilmember Mendez should not be penalized for speaking up for political convictions.

Just this week, the mayor announced that he will allow uniformed city employees to march in the discriminatory St. Patrick's Day parade, even though the parade organizers discriminate against LGBT participants. Allowing city employees to mark in their uniforms lends the city's approval to the anti-LGBT discrimination by the parade, and it allows city employees, notably firefighters and police offices, to propagandize the parade with official presence. Separately, LGBT groups have begun protesting against the controversial new police commissioner -- even though he serves a "progressive" mayor ! To LGBT New Yorkers, their experience of police attitudes remains today eerily similar to the harsh attitudes of the last police commissioner. Even on the day of his ceremonial inauguration, Mayor de Blasio was the subject of a protest by members of the AIDS advocacy group ACT UP over his refusal to meet with activists to create a city-wide AIDS agenda. And New York City community hospitals remain in dire straits, the same as they did under the previous mayor, conditions for which Mayor de Blasio previously faulted former Mayor Michael Bloomberg. There is no oversight or call for accountability for the new mayor to address the issues that he is neglecting.

• RELATED : Watching the Political Chess Pieces Move on the $10 billion New York State Medicaid Waiver

Everybody, including the federal prosecutor, is looking to the media for help to keep elected officials accountable. But one major reporter admitted that the media did not fully scrutinize the mayor during last year's campaign. Who can keep the mayor accountable ? Voters can.

Already, one group of activists have formed a protest group, New Yorkers Against Bratton. If you want to organize to increase political pressure on the mayor and the NYPD commissioner to adopt meaningful police reforms, this is a great group to join. Some police reforms that remain outstanding include recommendations made by the NYCLU following the massive 2003 anti-war protest and the 2004 Republic National Convention.

• RELATED : NYC Political Reporters Admit They Didn't Scrutinize Bill de Blasio, Still Give Themselves High Journalistic Marks
• RELATED : The Advance Group Federal Complaint Referred To Moreland Commission (NYC : News & Analysis)

Voters need to be proactive about getting informed on issues, staying involved with government, and demanding the reforms they thought that they were voting for in the last election. If no ranking city official will dissent from the mayor's blatant power grabs, then the voters must come forward and express their displeasure. Dissent is one way to keep a check on the new administration's power.

NYTimes Public Editor to People of Color : Drop Dead

Request to discuss concerns about the Bratton appointment to head the NYPD is denied.

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: nytimes, public
Date: Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 4:20 PM
Subject: Re: Bill de Blasio // How’s He Doing ?
To: Louis Flores

Dear Mr. Flores,

Thanks so much for taking the time to write. While we very much appreciate your concern, and are keeping a close eye on early coverage of Mr. De Blasio's days at the helm, the volume of requests of this nature that we receive is simply too great for the public editor to honor each one. Given the seriousness of the issues that you bring up, there is certainly a possibility that they could help illuminate themes and issues that may well make a good subject for a future column. Thanks again for writing, and for caring about what's published in The Times. Feedback from readers like yourself is essential and I'll keep your email in mind when reading evaluations of Mr. De Blasio's tenure.

Best,
Jonah Bromwich
Office of the Public Editor
The New York Times

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Louis Flores
Date: Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 4:07 PM
Subject: Bill de Blasio // How’s He Doing ?
To: public@nytimes.com

Dear Ms. Sullivan :

On the Web site today, The New York Times gave a brief assessment of Mayor de Blasio's administration, thus far :

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2014/01/13/new-york-today-hows-he-doing/

• Over all, Mr. Grynbaum said, things have gone relatively smoothly for the mayor – “with the notable exception of his pizza faux pas on Friday.” (Mr. de Blasio’s regular-guy image took a global hit when he ate pizza with a fork.)

How can this be a fair assessment ? Many activists have issues with the new mayor, not the least of which center around the appointment of William Bratton as NYPD commissioner ?

(I have my own serious questions regarding campaign finance and the role of lobbyists in the campaigns and transition, but I'm contacting you on behalf of some of my activist friends, who are more focused on police reform.)

Some of my activism friends have issues with the fact that their concerns are not being fairly represented in The NYTimes. Is it possible to have a phone call or to Skype with you, so we can share some of these concerns ?

In the past, I've protested outside The NYTimes when we thought there was a media bias in the paper. But this time now, I (personally) would like to see if we can have a more productive relationship if we started out with a discussion.

Please let me know if we could speak. If you agree, I'd like to invite a couple of activist friends to participate on my end, so that you can hear directly for the people.

Thank you kindly for your consideration.

Best regards,
-- Louis

Louis Flores
1 (646) 400-1168
lflores22@gmail.com

New Yorkers Continue To Be Deceived About Council Speaker Race

The NYTimes reports that the Council speaker race gets decided in "back rooms," but fails to report the back room deals.

After having been shut down last week-end, The NYTimes City Hall reporter Kate Taylor describes the Council speaker race with this one truth : the speakership "tends to be decided in back rooms." It's the process that is corrupt, and The NYTimes stops short of describing what back room deals are taking place, and that should be cause enough to once again sound the loud alarum bell to announce to the people the approach of corruption, but sadly the people have no say in the Council speaker race. Until the people demand a say, no alarum bell will ever be loud enough to drown out the backroom dealings. It doesn't matter who becomes speaker, because the winner can only win after brokering back room deals that only serve the winner. And the biggest loser in all this is not the speaker candidate who fails, but the public, who gets shut out of having any say -- and who gets deceived by media, like The NYTimes, who fail to report the true extent of the back room dealings.

How Obama Administration-Controlled Media Is Used to Avoid Scrutiny from the Press

How Obama Administration-Controlled Media Is Used to Avoid Scrutiny from the Press http://t.co/nLcTZy3Kzr via @commondreams

— Informed Voting (@informedvoting) October 14, 2013

Sen. Ruben Diaz doesn't want to start any trouble, but ...

Sen. Ruben Diaz, Sr., wrote a list of "Page Six" items about corrupt political reporters.

Given the culture of corruption in local and state government in New York, Sen. Ruben Diaz has decided to instead focus on corrupt political reporters by writing a round-up of riddles that allude to journalists who practise compromised media ethics.

His list is a form of pushback on how everybody assumes that only politicians are corrupt, but nobody considers the ethics of political reporters. Here are some of his "blind items" :

• Rumor has it that there are some folks in the media who do some pretty manipulative (and illegal) things behind the scenes, and I have to wonder, who investigates them.
• Rumor has it that there may be a radio personality in New York who uses his influence on the morning airwaves to push for his candidate for one of the 2013 Primary races, and that candidate may happen to be his partner. There’s no call to investigate if this is happening, or if the use of that in-kind-service-like air time for a family member is something the campaign financial board should take a close look at.
• Rumor has it that there may be a political reporter on TV who uses his evening air time for political maneuvering that may be right in line with the political will of his spouse, who might be found on the top of a list of the most politically influential New Yorkers. There’s no call to investigate those maneuverings.
• Rumor has it that there may be a Spanish language newspaper whose editorial board blocks the coverage of certain Hispanic elected officials who champion Hispanic New Yorkers, only because these elected officials will not cave in to the publication’s radical agendas. There’s no call to investigate if this is happening, and if the abuse of power by this type journalism is fraudulent or corrupt.
• Rumor has it that there may be a polling company that, more than one month before the Democratic Primary, decided to exclude in its poll the name of the only Latino candidate who is running for Mayor in New York City. There’s no call to investigate if such manipulative tactics to remove a candidate’s name from the race is, in fact, happening – and what consequences there may be if this is racist behavior.
• Rumor has it that there may be a political commentator who has freely and frequently used vulgarities and disparaging remarks on live television about Catholic Church leaders and about an elected official or two – and we all know that if any elected official used that language or attacked the Catholic Church, there would be serious consequences. There’s no call to evaluate the obvious mental instability of this type of commentator, and there is no investigation to find out if television sponsors who pay to air these types of broadcasts are comfortable sponsoring this kind of hate-speech.
• Rumor has it that there may be an editor in the print media who uses his power or influence even when he knows that he is lying to ruin the reputation of someone in elected office who may have offended the editor by holding a differing view. There’s no call to investigate the personal and professional damage that editor may have caused.
• Rumor has it that there may be a powerful political reporter who had once chummed up to a top elected official in New York State, using all of his resources to fawn over and sing the praises of that official, until the elected official took a differing position on a matter or two. There’s no call to investigate the abuse of journalism when these kinds of reporters use their columns and radio time to obviously attack elected officials when they turn a corner and personally disagree with them.
• Rumor has it that there may be a powerful political reporter from one of New York’s tabloids who accepts money and favors from elected officials when the elected officials want to get a bill passed in order to get covered. Rumor also has it that this same reporter goes out of his way to expose elected officials who take bribes. There’s no call to investigate this type of hypocrisy and bribery in the media.
• Rumor has it that some very powerful editorial boards in New York City that rightly condemn DWI cases, host Christmas parties where the hosts of the parties and even some of their ace reporters climb in behind the wheel to drive home after drinking too much at these events. There’s no call to investigate this type of hypocrisy or illegal behavior, even when they are putting people’s lives at risk.
• Rumor has it that there may be several journalists in New York who boast about what balanced and objective journalists they are, and even though they try to keep their writing balanced, they Tweet in professional capacity to spew their contempt for elected officials and issues they oppose. There’s no call for these journalists to stop lying to themselves or for anyone to investigate their apparent dual personalities.

Read more : Ruben Diaz’s Has Some Blind Items For The Press !

What Influence Does Carolyn Ryan Have Over Metropolitan Political Articles That Are Biased Against Joe Lhota ?

After having gone on a spree of Tweets ridiculing Joe Lhota's campaign for mayor, The New York Times metropolitan editor Carolyn Ryan's metropolitan desk then publishes a critical article of Mr. Lhota's campaign. Coïncidence ? Probably not.

Oh, Lordy ! I think @carolynryan ought to cut back on that #eggnog ! @joelhota @mattfleg @grynbaum twitter.com/carolynryan/st…

— Stop Christine Quinn (@stopchrisquinn) December 19, 2012

Ooo-wee ! I'll have some of them brownies that @carolynryan is eating !! @mattfleg @grynbaum twitter.com/carolynryan/st… @donnymossnyc

— Stop Christine Quinn (@stopchrisquinn) December 19, 2012

A movement has begun: RT @juliweiner: HILLARY CLINTON FOR MTA CHIEF

— carolynryan (@carolynryan) December 19, 2012

Well, maybe @joelhota has #statenisland strategy. But @chriscquinn has @nytimes strategy. @carolynryan twitter.com/stopchrisquinn…

— Stop Christine Quinn (@stopchrisquinn) December 19, 2012

Notice how The New York Times article of Mr. Lhota's campaign did not disclose that Kathryn S. Wylde, the president of the Partnership for New York City, was editorialised as the "city’s premier business association," and how it was not disclosed that Ms. Wylde is invested in the campaign of New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn.

Furthermore, the article allowed Josh Isay, Speaker Quinn's campaign consultant, to openly criticize Mr. Lhota over MTA fare hikes. “Joe Lhota announced his resignation the day before the Lhota fare hike gets voted on,” Mr. Isay, the told The New York Times. “He may think he’s pulled a fast one, but voters are too smart for that.”

But the article did not mention the litany of criticisms that Progressives have with Speaker Quinn's political ethics -- ranging from the change in term limits, the spree of hospital closings, including of St. Vincent's Hospital in Speaker Quinn's very own City Council district, the reckless approval of the expansion of New York University, and the disruptive zone-busting development plan for Chelsea Market. Meanwhile, The New York Times chose to portray Speaker Quinn as a "presumptive front-runner for the Democratic nomination," even though that editorial qualification was not attributed.

If you were not aware, an average voter would read this article and think that Mr. Lhota was not a viable candidate, instead of the fact that biased reportage was portraying Mr. Lhota as such, according to predetermined agendas of the people involved in this article.

Lhota Entry Into Mayoral Race Upsets Carolyn Ryan Over Quinn Tumble From Grace

Now that Joe Lhota is running for mayor, Twitterverse is in apoplexy over Carolyn Ryan's nervous breakdown. That's right, Ms. Ryan is worried that her favourite candidate, New York City Council Speaker Christine Quinn, now will not be such a shoe-in to become mayor. Ms. Ryan is concerned that the business community will abandon Speaker Quinn in favour of Mr. Lhota.

Ms. Ryan recently had lunch with former Mayor Ed Koch, to talk about Speaker Quinn's election strategy.

Wow wonder what @chriscquinn is doing now? RT @carolynryan: BREAKING: @joelhota to step down from MTA on Friday, preparing run for mayor.

— Emma Gilbey Keller (@emmagkeller) December 18, 2012

Indeed, Ms. Ryan has begun a schmear campaign against Mr. Lhota over Twitter. I wonder what her superior editorial bosses at The New York Times have to say about this ?

Lhota once called Mike Bloomberg an "idiot" and told an elderly Holocaust survivor to "be a man" in dispute at hearingnyti.ms/SESwj8

— carolynryan (@carolynryan) December 19, 2012

Whereas Ms. Ryan's reporting may be factual, it is not objective for an editor to be attacking a mayoral candidate over Twitter, when she must supervise and edit the reportage of objective reporters. How is that possible ?

Hunter Walker Responds To LGBTQ Critics ; Stays In Denial

Does Hunter Walker's response to LGBTQ critics reveals that he's a heterosexist in denial ?

@ddasilvacornell @jakebgoodman @lgbtcivilrights @maslowsneeds @gays4change @ljoywilliams @sarahrodeo @squarepeg_dem twitter.com/hunterw/status…

— Hunter Walker (@hunterw) December 6, 2012

Following a barrage of comments questioning the motivations and competency of Hunter Walker's article, Mr. Walker posted an inadequate response to his critics. Consider firstly how Mr. Walker claims that he wrote his story about Ms. McCray as a "political figure in her own right," but notice how Ms. McCray was subjugated as "Bill de Blasio's wife" in the original article's headline. Secondly, Mr. Walker avoids expressing any arguments as to why Ms. McCray's exploration of her sexual orientation should be political news in respect of the 2013 mayoral race. How did he intend to use "news" about Ms. McCray's sexual orientation ? What was his purpose to focus so much attention on Ms. McCray's marriage to Mr. de Blasio ? What do you think ?

Mr. Walker criticises the de Blasio-McCray marriage because of Ms. McCray's lesbian writings, but Mr. Walker never explains what kind of conforming wife a lesbian should be, to make her suitable for marriage ? Do you think that Mr. Walker comes across as a heterosexist in denial ?

From : "The Lesbian Past of Bill de Blasio's Wife" :

This article has generated many responses, including from some who have suggested it was inappropriate to cover this or that I have displayed a misunderstanding of human sexuality and the fluidity of sexual identity. One of the main issues raised by those who were not pleased with this story is that it is somehow not newsworthy and/or that family members of politicians should be "off limits."

There is no question in my mind that this story is news. Ms. McCray is a political figure in her own right. She is a top advisor on her husband's campaign, regularly speaks at his events, has taken a leading role on many political initiatives with him and writes regularly on the campaign site. Additionally, both Ms. McCray and Mr. de Blasio regularly write political columns together and have given several interviews about political aspects of their personal life. She has chosen to be a public, prominent figure on his campaign and in the New York City political world in general.

Furthermore, this story is not about digging into her private life. As outlined in this article Ms. McCray's past life as a lesbian involved being a fairly prominent lesbian activist. As this story notes, Combahee River Collective was a landmark group. It is incredibly interesting that Ms. McCray and her husband's campaign have (rather actively) omitted mentioning this aspect of her past including the characterization of the CRC as simply a "feminist" group. I do not think there is any question that identifying the past activism of a prominent political figure is news. It adds to her biography and raises interesting questions about why she and her husband's campaign have strenuously avoided noting this part of her past.

Critics of this story have cited the sentence where I said, "It is unclear how she transitioned from a self-described lesbian who was confident that she 'had always been more attracted to women, both emotionally and physically, than to men' to a political wife in a heterosexual marriage." It has been suggested that this displays some fundamental misunderstanding of the fact that people's sexual identities are often subject to change. That is not the case at all. Most people have evolving and individual concepts of their sexuality. I would have loved to discuss this with Ms. McCray and to have heard about how her identity evolved directly from her. I made many attempts to do this and would still be very interested in a conversation. Without speaking to Ms. McCray, making any definitive statements or assumptions about the evolution of her sexual identity would not have been respecting the fluid and changing nature of human sexuality. It would have been the exact opposite.

Lastly, and I debated whether to even dignify this with a response and give it further attention, some people have suggested this article is somehow "shaming" Ms. McCray and/or criticizing her and her husband. I defy anyone to point to any passages here that imply in any way that there is anything wrong about being homosexual. Those who would suggest that pointing her past activism and self-identification out is somehow "shaming" her are the ones implying being gay is something to be ashamed of, not me.

Many dissenting messages were also delivered to Mr. Walker via Twitter. Check out his @hunterw Twitter feed for the period of December 5-7, 2012.

Bangor, Maine News Anchors Cindy Michaels And Tony Consiglio Resign

During their 6 p.m. newscast last night, Bangor-based TV news anchors Cindy Michaels and Tony Consiglio resigned on air, citing, as the Bangor Daily News has described it, "a longstanding battle with upper management over journalistic practices at their Bangor TV stations."

In John Waters's Film, Female Trouble, Aunt Ida Plays With Her Breasts (Edith Massey), But Once Suzannah B. Troy Talks Politics, YouTube Drapes e-Burka Over Her Videos : Censorship ?

It is a shame to see how blogs and YouTube videos, which discuss critical news about SAIC and the billion-dollar high-tech deals that give birth to insider dealing and mega corruption, can be labeled with adult warnings, but I've seen clips of John Waters' movies on YouTube with nudity and self-gratification scenes, but that's deemed perfectly funny by our admittedly raunchy online standards.

But as soon as a blogger starts talking about RICO charges and triple damages and civil and criminal trials, then we focus our eyes and attention on boobs, and we find reasons to restrict access to information that no msm outlet is putting out there. I wonder what would happen if I shaved my chest and put on a pair of falsies under a bikini top ? Would you give me a free pass, like topless YouTube clips of Edith Massey ? Would I finally get some attention focused on my Kickstarter project ?

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/louisflores/roots-of-betrayal-the-ethics-of-christine-quinn

But then again, I'd probably get labeled as adult content by your same sick and twisted double standards, and I'd only succeed at getting warnings on my online content.

Just because all men stare at Suzannah's boobs don't mean we should drape a digital full-body cloaks (aka ''adult warnings'') on her YouTube videos -- against her will.

Did I miss something, or isn't this exactly what you are doing to her work ? She's too sexy even in clothes, so let's drape her videos in adult warnings like a quasi "e-burka."