He’s finally done it. Joe Lhota barely got a rise out of Democrats for months, but now he stands condemned by the enforcers of the liberal uber-class. The charge against him — firing-squad drum roll, please — is that he’s “divisive.”
Lhota’s offense was to remind New Yorkers that Dollar Bill de Blasio’s political mentor, other than Fidel Castro, was David Dinkins. That would be the same David Dinkins who presided over disastrous decline until voters had the sense to fire him.
Those voters had courage, too, because critics of Dinkins were labeled “divisive.” The race card also was played routinely, and is resurrected in a new Dinkins memoir.
Such is the fate of any who dare throw off the smothering blanket of leftist conformity. The thought police, having learned well the wrong lessons from George Orwell, insist that the only truth is the one they approve. The only standards they endorse are double standards.
And so dissent was patriotic when George Bush was president, but treasonous under Barack Obama.
Those same demagogues denounce Lhota for his ad showing the social collapse that coincided with the Dinkins mayoralty. Crime surged — an average of 2,000 murders a year — and walking the streets was risky. Anti-Semitism was in the air.
The symbol of Dinkins’ New York was the squeegee man, whose business model was intimidation. Trapped motorists paid for dirty water on their windshields, or else. It was a stickup, $1 at a time.
Which is precisely why the man who defeated Dinkins, Rudy Giuliani, made getting rid of squeegee men a focus of his quality-of-life tenure. He didn’t only aim to cut serious crime. He wanted people to feel safer, too.
How fitting then that, 20 years later, the mayoral race features a loyalist from each camp. For that reason alone, Lhota is right to sound the alarm about a Mayor de Blasio, who is actually far more radical than Dinkins ever was.
The attacks from the Dem goon squad are predictable, but more troubling is the silence of many people who know better. Terrified of de Blasio in City Hall, they are terrified to say so. They act as if they live in a police state, which is what they’ll deserve if they forfeit their right to pick a side.
Put it this way: If Lhota’s truth-telling is “divisive,” let’s have more of it. Lots more.
Let’s also talk about welfare. When Giuliani took office in 1994, there were 1.1 million people on the dole, including many full-time college students, and Dinkins’ team assumed the total would hit 1.5 million. They saw welfare as compassion and didn’t have a clue about its corrosive effects on families and the work ethic.
Giuliani knew better, and pushed for workfare and anti-fraud reforms that became part of the historic legislation President Bill Clinton signed. Mayor Bloomberg continues the approach, and now there are fewer than 400,000 city people getting welfare grants.
Those changes prompt good questions for de Blasio: Does he think the city would be better off if there were 1.5 million people on welfare? Does he think the city would be better off with 2,000 murders instead of the 419 of last year?
But getting Dollar Bill to answer tough questions isn’t easy. He’s playing it safe, and his campaign consists of name-dropping endorsements and using his family in ads.
Meanwhile, his “vision” turns out to be a pipe dream. His harping on the abuses of stop-and-frisk is not a strategy for stemming the murder tide in minority neighborhoods. Does he have a plan?
His talk of universal pre-kindergarten depends on an income-tax hike that Gov. Cuomo says won’t happen. As for an education policy beyond squashing charters, he’s waiting for dictation from the teachers union. Even advocates know his pledge of “affordable housing” is a slogan, not a policy.
And don’t forget taxes. When Lhota warned in the first debate that property taxes would go up, Dollar Bill said the only tax hike he’s mentioned was on top incomes. That’s a tacit admission there are others he hasn’t talked about.
Gotham has experienced many ups and downs in the last two decades, but the unmistakable trend is one of progress. Despite its flaws, today’s city is an urban miracle that features vastly improved public safety and attracts private investment from around the globe.
Only a fool would turn back the clock.
Double talk by Obama
Dr. Jekyll, meet Mr. Hyde.
President Obama’s pious lecture to Congress after the shutdown ended was full of bizarre passages, especially his demand for civility.
“When we disagree, we don’t have to suggest that the other side doesn’t love this country or believe in free enterprise or all the other rhetoric that seems to get worse every single year,” he declared.
Rumor has it he was serious, but that’s hard to believe if you remember way back to, oh, nine days earlier. Then, Obama demonized Republicans in the harshest language possible.
As I noted then, he accused the GOP seven times of demanding a “ransom,” and of “extortion,” of threatening to “blow the whole thing up” and “burn down your house.” He called them “ideological extremists,” knocked the “Tea Party’s extremist agenda” and said they were prepared to “cause a recession.”
He also demanded they compromise — while refusing to negotiate.
His my-way-or-the-highway approach is so routine that it rarely draws attention anymore. Yet that doesn’t mean there are no consequences.
The history of ObamaCare makes the point. The signature “achievement” of his first two years came when Democrats controlled Congress and marked the first time major social legislation became law with one-party support.
The blowback came in 2010, when Republicans picked up 63 seats in the House — largely because of public opposition to ObamaCare. Fast forward to 2013, when the shutdown began as a kamikaze mission to defund it.
The law has never enjoyed majority public support, and its regulations are blamed for layoffs and the explosion of part-time jobs. The rollout of the state exchanges is a debacle that goes well beyond computer glitches. Even union allies concede it is destructive.
Someday, books will be written and classes taught showing ObamaCare as a cautionary tale on the hubris of one-party rule. But for now, we endure lectures about civility and compromise from its namesake, a man who practices neither.
Prove it, Snowden
Fugitive Edward Snowden insists he gave no secret surveillance files to Russia and China. If true, he should be eager to come home and prove it to a jury.
Bratton takes his shot
Bill Bratton apparently sees blasting Ray Kelly and the NYPD as part of his audition for getting the top job again. Should he succeed, I’m sure he won’t complain when the favor is returned.
Our shiftless gov’t
A New York Times headline after the shutdown: “Long Idle, Government Gets Back in Gear.”
But wait, “idle” is the government gear.