Monday, January 08, 2007

ELIOT'S 'ONE NEW YORK' ERROR

New York Post Adam Brodsky

Adam is not thrilled with Spitzer using the "One New York Theme"..."The gov says his goal is one state for all. Which implies that right now we've got two New Yorks (or more) - pretty much the Ferrer idea.
Spitzer used the phrase at least 20 times - including in 15 straight paragraphs near the end. "Change," he said, will bring "one New York, with a vibrant education system. One New York, with a health-care system that puts patients first . . . One New York, with a government that responds to the public interest . . ." you get the idea he doesn't like Ferrer??? .....this guy must have been up all night counting words.......Adam goes on......"The Governor defined his term early on: "One New York . . . the idea that our common interest serves our individual interests, that we rise and fall together as one people."
In other words, he was asserting a collective responsibility: I'm responsible for your welfare, and you for mine. " what a radical concept that is huh??? "united we stand...divided we fall" pure nonsense right??? "The notion certainly has a place in a compassionate society - up to a point. Beyond that, it's perverse - antithetical to the American tradition and downright destructive.
Why? Because it undermines self-responsibility. And the desire for individual excellence. " yikes everybody helping each other out is downright perverse I say...destructive to the "Me First" or "My way or the highway Bush type thinking".....yikes....if you dare to read the rest of this...
click here....make sure you have the "pink stuff" nearby for stomach upsetment and a lot of gas............andy

Comments: Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link



<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?