'Why We Had the Revolution in 1776,' According to Our Megalomaniacal Rulers

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare

Recently
by Becky Akers: Yet
Again, What's Sauce for the Goosed Isn't for the TSA

 

 
 

Anyone who
has ever driven — sic for "sat in traffic" — in
New York City would agree that speed is not a problem here. Quite
the opposite, in fact: thanks to Our Rulers' incompetence when it
comes to building and managing roads, the Big Apple's big jams are
as legendary as Charley
Rangel's corruption
.

That would
explain why New York's potentates are slowing the flow even further.
Yes! Idling at the intersection while the light changes from red
to green 14 times is insufficient torture for serfs: Mayor Mike
"the Nanny" Bloomberg and his execrable "Transportation
Commissioner," Janette Sadik-Khan, want us waiting as those
demented Christmas trees flash 25 or 30 times so we all know who's
boss. This while the leeches glide about town in the limos we buy
them after "police escorts" clear the streets of mere
taxpayers.

No matter:
our dictatorial dimwits are foisting "slow zones" on a
City that is one gigantic "slow zone." Or, as the
mainstream media puts it
, "The city is expanding its campaign
to stop speeding drivers cruising through the streets of the five
boroughs." Oh, right: as if we could speed. Ergo, the
limit of 30 mph — yep, you read that right: 30 measly miles
per hour. Politicians run for re-election faster than that. Tell
me, does 30 mph meet anyone's definition of speeding other than
Nanny's? — will shrink to 20 mph. Ha! Drivers caught in the endless
snarl that is New York City wish they could zoom along at
20 mph. Meanwhile, lest the serfs rebel against their betters' stupidity,
the risibly misnamed "speed bump" will also bedevil these
zones.

"Slow
zones send a strong message to drivers that our neighborhoods are
not shortcuts and speeding on our streets is really a matter of
life and death," Saddam Hussein-sorry, Sadik-Khan opined. Saddam
has targeted 13 localities for her "strong message"; does
she maintain a home in all of them, or is she merely a reflexive
socialist when she speaks of them as "ours"? By which,
of course, she really means they're "hers." But don't
take my word on her power-lust. Instead, listen to an expert on
the topic, one whose own hunger for authority has him trying to
decree what movies we watch
while his
cameras watch us
: "Dov
Hikind, a New York State assemblyman
… said of Sadik-Khan[,]
u2018Listen, the commissioner enjoys having the freedom [sic]
she has. At night she dreams of these things, and the next day she
does them'…" No wonder New York's avenues are a nightmare.

Our Rulers
force us to waste more time behind the wheel with the same excuse
they cite whenever they impose their whims: to protect us. Saddam
steadfastly repeats that mantra even as her
subjects denounce her department for distorting and exaggerating
statistics
. She alleges that "a
pedestrian hit by a car going 40 m.p.h.
had only a 30 percent
chance to survive. Those struck by a car at 30 m.p.h., she said,
survive 80 percent of the time. At 20 m.p.h., the figure climbs
to about 95 percent." I am unable to confirm these "facts"
anywhere: as far as Google is concerned, Saddam pulled them out
of the air. ("Transportation for America" supposedly
posts a chart showing "Pedestrian survival rate by vehicle
speed
," but its figures differ considerably from Saddam's.
In any event, I failed to find said chart on T4A's
website
. And even if I had unearthed it, T4A is hardly an unbiased,
scholarly source: it lobbies for "housing,
business, environmental, public health
, transportation, equitable
development and other" special interests; its "vision"
encompasses "less need to drive."
) No matter: advertisements
of Saddam's claims sprinkle the City on our dime, indoctrinating
victims to shrug at her tyranny.

The "slow
zones" come atop another of Saddam's preferences: bike lanes.
About
six years ago,
her department began reconfiguring streets, swiping
an entire lane of scarce asphalt from drivers and awarding it to
cyclists — though there are far fewer of the latter and they're
far less taxed, too. In a City where neighborliness is as rare as
competent bureaucrats, this further segregates citizens into the
groups Progressives adore, then pits them against each other: bikers
vs. drivers vs. pedestrians. Or, as a writer for New York Magazine
explains, "…in
crowded New York, space, and convenience
, is finite. Any alteration
is an exercise in redistributionu2014to give to Column A, you have to
take away from Column B." Actually, when Leviathan controls
the resource under "alteration," that's true everywhere,
not just in "crowded New York." You'll never read of a
shortage of restaurants or cars or computers because the private
(albeit regulated) market supplies them — so far. But New York
Magazine emphasizes the moral behind every move Saddam, Bloomberg,
and Our other Rulers make: "We
are going to have to learn to accept
a decrease, however minuscule,
in our individual freedoms." Oh, indeed. And it ain't so minuscule.

Bike lanes
and slow zones may content Saddam but not her führer.
Mayor "Nanny" Bloomberg also craves "speed
cameras…" And "he's furious
that the state Legislature
won't give him the green light" — so furious he's plumbed new
depths of hypocrisy and double standards. Quoth the totalitarian
who considers it his business how
much soda we drink
, the quantity
and quality of the fat we eat, and where we smoke
, "The
first argument is it's not [the state's] business, it should be
the business of the city." Yo, Nanny: you listening to yourself?

Apparently
not, for he obliviously continued, "The city should be in charge
of its own destiny." Yeah, Nanny, we empathize. We want to
be in charge of our own destinies, too, rather than ceding them
to you. But when we suggested last month that in one such tiny area,
the amount of soda we imbibe, we should decide for ourselves, you
responded, "[I]f
government’s purpose isn’t to
improve the health and longevity
of its citizens, I don’t know what its purpose is." Call me
crazily consistent, but that implies you ought to kowtow to Albany's
orders as obediently as you expect us to kowtow to yours.

Then came
the clincher. Here Nanny exceeded even his own record for illogic,
profound distortion, mendacity and incoherence: "That's why
we had the revolution in 1776," he
pontificated
. "There's no difference why should the city
not be in charge of its own destiny…"

Now you know
the reason farmers died at Lexington and Concord, Nathan Hale hanged,
the Signers pledged their "lives, fortunes, and sacred honor,"
militiamen risked everything to defy the government at Saratoga,
and Continental volunteers starved at Valley Forge: so that Nanny
Bloomberg could rob drivers more outrageously than he already does.

July
13, 2012

Becky
Akers [send her mail] writes
primarily about the American Revolution. Her novel set during the
war will be published this summer.

The
Best of Becky Akers

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare
  • LRC Blog

  • LRC Podcasts