Behind the Headlines
Two-Cents Worth
Video of the Week
News Blurbs

Short Takes

Plain Talk

The Ryter Report


Bible Questions

Internet Articles (2015)
Internet Articles (2014)
Internet Articles (2013)
Internet Articles (2012)

Internet Articles (2011)
Internet Articles (2010)
Internet Articles (2009)
Internet Articles (2008)
Internet Articles (2007)
Internet Articles (2006)
Internet Articles (2005)
Internet Articles (2004)

Internet Articles (2003)
Internet Articles (2002)
Internet Articles (2001)

From The Mailbag

Order Books






Startlogic Windows Hosting

Adobe  Design Premium¨ CS5

20 years


Mike Bloomberg has become the Ross Perot of 2008

The speculation between Democrats and Republicans as to who would be hurt most by a Mike Bloomberg third party presidential bid will soon be answered. Logic suggests Bloomberg's entry into the 2008 presidential race negatively impacts Hillary Clinton and Rudy Guiliani more than any of the other presidential wanabees. The Election of 2008 is shaping up to be a real circus, with a ton of political clowns vying for star-status in the spotlight in the center ring of the Big Top.

On Tuesday, the billionaire mayor of New York City made it official. Six years as a Republican was about all the media mogul could take. Without any fanfare, the 65-year old mayor and principle shareholder of Bloomberg Television (and radio) switched his party affiliation from Republican to independent after reaching the conclusion that, even with more than enough money to finance a meaningful presidential campaign without financial any help from the Republican National Committee, he still could not win as a Republican because powerful people behind the seats of government pick the winners of every election—and his name was not on any of their lists. If he doesn't know it today, before the final votes are tallied in 2008, Bloomberg will realize he was on their lists after all—as a spoiler. Bloomberg will be one of at least two spoilers whose entry in the race as an independent under whatever name will serve to strip votes from the Republican Party in 2008. Bloomberg will prove to be the spoiler in 2008 that Ralph Nader was in 2000 and Ross Perot, the pint-sized Texan with a squeaky voice and a Texas-sized ego, was in 1992 and 1996.

Bloomberg, who will likely become the Unity08 candidate, will serve to drain the votes of the leftist Rockefeller Republicans from the GOP. Expect libertarian-minded GOP Congressman Ron Paul—urged to do so by key conservative grassroots activists who want to see political change in this country—to bolt from the GOP by the end of this year. If he does so, he will drain the votes from the Christian far right that threw its support behind Pat Buchanan in 2000. With the votes stripped from both ends of the party, only the GOP loyalists in the center will vote Republican in 2008. Although neither can win, Bloomberg and Dr. Paul possess the ability to sink the GOP and throw the election to the far left Democrats who will return us the double digit inflation we enjoyed under Jimmy Carter.

If he stays in the race as an independent, Congressman Ron Paul will pull between 3% and 5% of the vote nationwide. Bloomberg will pull from 10% to 15% of the vote nationwide. With 13% to 20% of the potential GOP votes lost, anything over 42% of the vote for the Democrats will give them a landslide not only for the White House, but in Congress as well. Without Bloomberg in the race, it is likely we will have a cliffhanger like we did in 2000. In 2008, the MoveOn.org 16- and 17-year old motor-voter absentee ballot voters—with a few thousand elderly dead people thrown in for spice—will bring in the vote for the Democrats just as they did during the mid-term election of 2006, literally stealing conservative seats in the House and widening the gap in the Senate to give the liberals a veto-proof Congress regardless who sits in the Oval Office.

Bloomberg, who was a lifetime Democrat, switched to the GOP only because the Democratic political machine in the State of New York would not back his run for mayor. His two runs for the mayor's office cost Bloomberg $155 million. Governors and US Congressmen—unless they are in a life and death struggle for political survival—don't even spend that much.

Clearly, Bloomberg's decision to switch party affiliations again is based on the same logic—the national GOP will not put their muscle behind him. In fact, the RNC does not want him in the race at all since, as a Republican, he does not share the values of rank and file GOP or conservative voters who generally vote Republican. Nor for that matter does Rudy Guiliani who, if by some strange quirk, should win the nomination will be offered up as 2008's sacrificial lamb to a Democratic victory by either John Edwards or Al Gore, Jr. although the 42% of the vote that Hillary will attract as the nominee would be sufficient to elect her—although the Constitution of the United States precludes a woman from being elected president.

Bloomberg, on the other hand, insists he has made no decisions about running for president saying only that his "...plans for the future haven't changed." Bloomberg's hopscotching across the country making speeches speculatively suggests he's already made up his mind. So do the texture of his speeches. In a speech at the University of Southern California, Bloomberg outlined the advantages of nonpartisan governing. (The last president to accomplish that task successfully was George Washington.) "The politics of partisanship, and the resulting inaction and excuses have paralyzed decision-making primarily at the federal level. The big issues of the day are being addressed, leaving our future in jeopardy."

Asked by members of the White House press corp if he was seriously contemplating a run for the roses in 2008, Bloomberg responsed that he would run only under certain circumstances, wryly adding, "...if everyone in the world was dead and I was the only one alive," adding quickly in the same breath, "Yeah, sure." Everyone needs to fix their minds on one immutable fact: Bloomberg is running. If you think back, Perot played the same charade. Today he was running, tomorrow he wasn't. Back and forth, back and forth. In reality, there was no doubt in Perot's mind from day one. He was running. There's no doubt in Bloomberg's mind either. He's running, too. He just doesn't know right now who he's running against—or who he's running for.

Clearly, while both parties are worried by the ramifications of a Bloomberg third party entrance in the Election of 2008, both parties believe—or at least want to believe—he will have a more detrimental impact on the other party. Former Democratic National Committee chairman Don Fowler acknowledged that while Bloomberg would be "...a disturbing factor on both parties," he believed Bloomberg would pull more votes from the GOP simply because "...the Republicans are absolutely in disarray." Greg Stimple, a Big Apple Republican strategist is convinced Bloomberg's entrance into the race will elect a Republican as the 44th President of the United States. Political pundits on the right of political divide claim Bloomberg's moderate views will drain votes from the Democratic candidate. But history has proven that the voters who jump ship are those on the far right and far left—not those who cling to the center post. Forty percent of the voters on the right and on the left are ideologues who are anchored to their parties.

The center-left moves to the right only when a social conservative with true Constitutional values competes against a liberal Democrat who wants to destroy America. To date, all of the Democratic candidates—particularly Hillary Clinton who is pandering to centrist social liberal Rockefeller Republicans—are antiwar leftists who will weaken America. That suggests, with the right GOP candidate, the Reagan Democrats will vote GOP. Introducing a moderate Bloomberg will take those crossover votes from the Republican candidate and give them to Bloomberg, throwing the presidential election to the Democratic candidate. Only a very charismatic, Ronald Reagan-type GOP candidate will hold the center-right votes and pull those from the center-left.

Of the GOP field of candidates, there are none. Coming the closest to Reagan's persona is former Tennessee US Senator and Law & Order star, Fred Thompson. Even though he is not yet an announced GOP candidate, Thompson is already the frontrunner in a race with no leaders. Thompson's paternal, gruff tell-it-like-it-is, no B.S. honesty is reminiscent of both Reagan and Teddy Roosevelt. What you see is what you get. Congressman Tom Tancredo is probably the most honest man on either side of the divide. He has Reagan's integrity but he lacks the spark that ignites the voters and wins elections. Sen. John McCain's race is imploding. Mayor Rudy Guiliani, the liberal media-ordained GOP front runner is using RNC muscle to hold that status. But, when voting begins in Iowa a relatively unknown California psychologist named Dr. Mark Klein will likely drum Guiliani If he does, the former New York mayor will become a former presidential candidate.

How a Bloomberg candidacy weighs, and which side benefits or loses from Bloomberg's third party status, depends entirely on who the nominees for each party are and whether Bloomberg—who has to know he can't win regardless who heads the tickets for the major parties—becomes a George Soros flunky or a David Rockefeller lackey.

In the equation of power, just as Ross Perot was in 1992 and 1996, Bloomberg is just another wild card ego with a pocketful of money and a personal agenda that is much different than the public rhetoric. Bloomberg, like Perot, will model himself as the candidate who can't be bought by special interest money. Like Perot, who was promised a no-bid contract to handle the IT business for Hillary Clinton's socialized medicine scheme Heath Security Act of 1993—reportedly worth some $2 billion per year—invested $45 million of his own money in 1992 to drain votes from Bush-41, Michael Bloomberg is chasing a carrot-on-a-stick as well. We just don't know what it is yet. In other words, in the graft capitol of the world, nobody does something for nothing. There is a quid pro quo for everything.

Bloomberg, like Perot in 1992 and 1996, is waiting for the handshake that seals the deal. When the deal is made, Bloomberg will launch a third party campaign orchestrated by his "handlers." Unknown at the moment is whether those handlers will be MoveOn.org globalists or Rockefeller globalists. If Bloomberg evolves into the Unity08 candidate, his candidacy will be orchestrated by George Soros. The objective will be to elect Hillary Clinton by positioning Bloomberg—who supports abortion rights, gay marriage, and stem cell research—as a fiscal conservative like Steve Forbes. If Bloomberg joins the Rockefeller forces, he will target the far left stronghold with a pledge to bring fiscal sanity back to the country, cut the national debt and get American troops out of what he will likely describe as the Islamic quagmire in the Mideast, draining votes from the Democratic nominee whether that person is Hillary, John Edwards or Al Gore, Jr.

But, just between you and me, you can bet Bloomberg will become the spoiler for the far left. The communist left—the Soros-Pelosi-Reid antiwar, anti-family values far left—needs open borders, the abolition of the 2nd Amendment by legislatively banning the private ownership of guns—because unarmed people cannot resist tyranny very long—and, finally, the complete an total abrogation of national sovereignty to prepare America for the social upheavals that are necessary to cure the ills of mankind and repair the planet the ecoalarmists claim was destroyed by us.



Just Say No
Copyright 2009 Jon Christian Ryter.
All rights reserved