"Gridlock in Washington" must only be a major problem for people who are so rich and powerful that they have to make-up problems in their lives. This is because, over the last five years, Democrats in Congress have only blocked the following pieces of legislation:

Three conservative judges (out of several dozen)

Privatization of Social Security

Retroactive immunity for telecom companies in the warrantless spying program.

Legislation to deport millions of illegal aliens

Given that these are the only conservative pieces of legislation that Democrats in Congress have blocked in the past five years, one must assume that a "government of national unity" means a government that will confirmation 100% of all conservative judges, the destruction of social security, retroactive immunity of telecom companies, and the mass deportation of twelve million people. If this third-party did not favor these things, then there would be absolutely no need to form "a government of national unity." Those four things are the sum total of what Democrats in Congress have prevented Republicans from passing, and thus are the entirety of what Democrats have contributed to "gridlock in Washington." Every other reform has been blocked by Republicans.

It would be nice, for once, if the constant drumbeat from Aging Wealthy White Men for National Unity Under Billionaire Media Moguls (AWWMNUUBM for short) decrying polarization, the lack of bi-partisanship and gridlock in Washington would actually provide specifics on what legislation their hated polarization, partisanship and gridlock is blocking. Of course, they won't actually do that, because blaming national problems on vague, undefined concepts like "polarization" and "gridlock" is much easier than actually analyzing the contemporary political scene in America.

http://openleft.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=2980

The Republican establishment is increasingly desperate. Joe Klein is very worried about the surging Edwards, who is not "Reasonable."

McClatchy/MSNBC polling is showing Edwards leading the Democrats in Iowa - at 24 percent.

Bloomberg does not have Rudy's Kerik-style corruption baggage, and at the moment anyway is not a lunatic with respect to Middle East policy.

He may not have Bernie Kerik, but he has made plenty of enemies and left numerous ethical disputes in his business wake. More to the point, what's "sane" about his Middle East policy exactly?

However, it's hard to imagine they would diverge on a (traditional GOP) pro-big business agenda, and I'm inclined to believe they see eye-to-eye on foreign policy because otherwise it's hard to understand why they should be drawn to one another.

What is this "inclination" of your based on? I just offered multiple quotes of Bloomberg's on foreign policy that gives a pretty clear sense of what he is. What makes you think he's something different?

But to put him in the same whackjob category as Rudy seems a bit of stretch.

When it comes to Middle East policy, what differences do you think you see?

The combination of a practical businessman with the ability to deal with flaming liberals is hard to beat. What most don't know about Bloomberg is his ability to frame issues in very practical ways that lead to a consensus. It's impressive.

...all the potential "Unity '08" tickets look like alternative, slightly less extremist (in tone if not content) Republican candidacies to me. Such an effort might shave off a few of the remaining moderate Republicans who might otherwise cross the aisle and vote for the Dems, but I have a hard time believing that the Unity '08 nonsense will attract disaffected independents. This effort has Establishment written all over it...there's not even Ross Perot-style folksiness to leaven things.

I was undecided on the candidates until last week. I chose Edwards.

Like many Johnny Ed supporters, I like Obama, but don't think he has the gutfire to make change. I think he has the drive to be president, and a very nice one he would make at that. But we don't need nice. We need someone who deliver actual change. Not just the appearance of change. (If only Dumbya had exacted the appearance of change on our world, how different things would be.)

Bloomberg is also a nice man. But his candidacy would simply be a tool to game Rudy McRomneby into the Oval Office.

I live in NYC. I've seen Bloomberg up close for a couple of years now. He seems like a very nice fellow and a very competent bureaucrat. But, as Glenn has quite clearly shown, he's a loyal Bushie. He would make a crappy president.

I've come up with name for these self-styled non-partisan warriors; spartisans. The "500", as it stands now. Willing to die for... what? For the democrats to capitulate once again? Please. Cover up your oily six-pack, Old Man, and go back to your Dewars.

If any one of these guys had any juice he'd run himself. But they don't have the juice. Not a drop. Collectively, they don't have enough juice to fill the tiny free juice glass that NYC diners serve with their eggs any style.

Do we need any more proof?

Bloomberg is basically just Rudy Giuliani with a billion or two dollars to spend to alter the election.

Today over at Front Page, Rudy lays out the steps that we need to take in order to become a “resilient society” including programs called Borderstat, Terrorstat, and Readystat, which have more than an Orwellian ring to them, as does the entire article. It might as well be called “learning to love Big Brother.”

He lays out a basis for our entire society to live in constant fear except for one sentence in the last paragraph where he says that we will declare “our right to live in freedom of fear.”

There is no mention of any other rights that Americans have. And sadly, it appears that the only way to get to the point where we don’t live in fear is to live in constant fear.

War is peace. Freedom is Slavery. Ignorance is Strength.

And now, Freedom of Fear is Fear of Freedom. Or something like that.

Is this the type of society that Bloomberg is on his way to promoting? If it is -- if it's just Rudy's views with a "softer tone" -- then it is a society that we definitely need to fear.

http://tinyurl.com/2rofur