a 2am post on Mike Bloomberg

Why am I up researching the drawbacks of Mike Bloomberg at 2:30 in the morning? Well, I'll tell you why. It's because he's a great... no, actually it's because I'm a great idiot who should be getting her 8 hours of beauty sleep, but instead I insist of wasting my time and throwing wrenches into the fine cogs of my REM cycles. And now to Mike.
I've been trying to research what kind of things he's done or said that I may disagree with. It seems that the only public controversy he's faced has been the sexual harassment suits in the early 90s. The following article does a really good job of trying to pry into his head and find out what his stance is on women in the workplace.
http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/08/bloomberg-on-bloomberg-and-women/#more-1067
From that and other sources, the conclusion that I come to is this. Mike Bloomberg is fine with women in the workplace. Not only fine, I'd go as far as to say that he encourages gender equality in the workplace. It's not really about gender for him, it's about people working ridiculously hard and non-stop. I can't say that I personally agree with that. I don't think that working non-stop is healthy, I don't like that Americans have such short vacation time and sick leave, I don't like that Sarkozy is trying to cut time-off in France. I like Google and their work ethic, I would prefer if the whole world worked that way, but the fact of the matter is that none of that is about gender. He doesn't want a pregnant woman in the boardroom any more than he wants a worried expectant father in that boardroom, and to be honest, neither do I. He measures his employees to the same standards that he measures himself and as he writes in his book, during the steepest part of his corporate climb he was the first one to come in, the last one to leave and he absolutely was not married and didn't have children. Neither women nor men can do it all, if by all they mean getting to the top of one of the toughest corporate ladders out there. Solomon Brothers was not a place for maternity or paternity leave, and neither is Bloomberg LP, though I'm sure they provide plenty of both to workers on the lower stress, lower responsibility levels of the company. Just the fact that one of the women that filed a lawsuit reported that she personally walked into Bloomberg's office and told him the happy news of her pregnancy tells me that she must have been pretty vital to the company and probably didn't realistically have time for a baby, so why have it? Of course no one should tell her to "kill it" (as he is rumored to have done... say it, not actually kill it) but I can also imagine the stress that it would put on a growing company. There is a place and a time for children in the modern world, and perhaps the time wasn't then and the place wasn't Bloomberg's company. Am I a feminist? You bet. What I want to see is more men getting fired for the same reasons from places like that and then hired by places like Google.
Now it is time for sleep, but soon I plan on taking on his property tax hikes in NYC and that tax break for Goldman Sachs...
If anyone else is as intrigued by Mike Bloomberg as I am, please tell me what you think of him! Does he suck? Does he rule? Do you know something I don't? There's a high chance of that, you know.