Thursday :: Jun 29, 2006

Squawking The Noo Yawk Party


by pessimist

We all know that Rupert Murdoch is getting very actively involved in politics. His efforts are currently based in New York, most particularly in fund raising for Hillary. I keep expecting it to be revealed that he will be involved in Lieberman's 'independent' campaign, and I also expect overtures to be made to the so-called Northeast moderates - Snowe and Collins of Maine, Sununu of New Hampshire, Chaffee of Rhode Island , and maybe George Voinovich of Ohio - to join the new 'centrist' third party predicted recently by Alan Greenspan.

If Murdoch was able to gain the support of all of these 'moderates' he would hold the balance of power in the Senate. But could he afford to lose one of these votes to the job of occupying the White House?

At least one prominent New Yorker thinks he might be the solution to that particular problem:

Mike's Prez hints: A third-party plan & 500M

[New York Mayor Michael] Bloomberg's main political adviser, Kevin Sheekey, indicated that the mayor would be unlikely to challenge Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) - a friend who has been successful with the same category of independent voters to whom Bloomberg would appeal.

But Sheekey told The New Republic - in an interview with this columnist [author Ben Smith]- that Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) would not be an obstacle, and could even be an ideal adversary.

"If John McCain gets beaten to the right - which is possible in a conservative Republican primary - and if Democrats elect someone through a primary who Democrats generally view as unelectable, there's a large segment of the American electorate that is looking for something different," Sheekey said.
That disaffected segment could translate into
"36% of the vote in enough states to give you an electoral win,"
he added.
Bloomberg has started to cast himself as an antidote to the nation's partisan divide. "Both ends of the political spectrum share the blame" for the partisan paralysis, he said at the University of Chicago commencement this year. "And both seem unwilling to change."

I doubt that Rupert the Opportunist wouldn't decide that Bloomberg wouldn't be a better dark horse to back after flirting with both McCain and Hillary over the last year and a half. While Bloomberg doesn't test squeeky clean, he does drag less baggage behind him than either of the other two does. The fact that he isn't very well known by most Americans isn't going to hurt him, especially when a February 3, 2006 a Quinnipiac University poll rates Bloomberg at a total average of 70% in 'handling the war on terror' [Question 16].

You KNOW KKKarl wished George was polling at that level! [See the poll question following!]

But I digress.

Any such 'knowledge deficit' in the American people concerning Michael Bloomberg could easily be overcome utilizing the vast Corporate-Capitalist media empire at Murdoch's disposal.

But that wouldn't be the only advantage enjoyed by His Honor, the Mayor. Bloomberg also is well-liked by New York Democratic voters, easily winning a second term as Republican mayor in New York City's Democratic stronghold.

So Rupert - whom no one would accuse of being George W. Bush intellectually - may well decide that Bloomberg is the key to achieving his national political aspirations.

At least that's what the former Democrat (and likely soon, the former Republican) Mikey B. may well be hoping!

Personally, while I applaud a politician thinking outside the two-party box, I have serious reservations about this specific possibility. Bloomberg's party affiliation changes over the years smack of opportunism, and such opportunism smacks of pending corrupt croyism. In other words, more of the same play with a new cast of players. As a result, I have to cast Bloomberg into the same pit in Dante's Hell that I have put McCain and Hillary. Bloomberg wouldn't get my support if my projections about his ambitions (and Murdoch's) were to become reality.

There is nothing in Bloomberg's offer of himself as a change from the status quo that warrants any support. He doesn't say anything about what he stands for or against. As a result, his advisor's floating of this political balloon has to be seen for what it is - a test of the way the political winds are blowing. To paraphrase a certain Gotham denizen, "There is no 'there' there."

What say you?

Copyrighted [©] source material contained in this article is presented under the provisions of Fair Use.


FAIR USE NOTICE


This article contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. I am making such material available in my efforts to advance understanding of democracy, economic, environmental, human rights, political, scientific, and social justice issues, among others. I believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material in this article is distributed without profit for research and educational purposes.

pessimist :: 6:21 PM :: Comments (6) :: TrackBack (0) :: Spotlight :: Digg It!