You said: “What happens when gas goes to $200.00’s a barrow?”

First of all, its a “barrel”, a barrow is something else.

Second, you do not understand aggressive capitalism——its a form of social Darwinism, where the object to to put more and more money into the pockets of fewer and fewer——in other words “survival of the richest.”  It only works for a relatively short time, but in that time many people accrue vast wealth!

“...to divide liberals and moderates in the general election, risking another four years of failed right-wing government, partisan stasis and national decline…”

who says “failed?” since Conason won’t talk about oil, I will: the Bushitters went to Iraq to steal oil, and they SUCCEEDED. Stealing may be sinful, but when you consider the alternative, i.e. starving babies and old people and stronger youthful people fighting over the food left in dumpsters by the wealthy who can spend $1000 for a loaf of bread.

I cannot say whether Bloomberg is a good enough Jew to make war on Iran just because it is good Jewish policy, but I can say that no Israeli Jews want Iraq to be free to use their oil revenues for making big trouble for Israel, and that will be the ultimate result of the USA (and Israel via AIPAC) letting go of control of Iraq and its oil.

I’d like to hear how Bloomberg feels about the USA demanding that Israel divest itself of its “illegal” nuclear threats to its neighbors before I judge the man; Carl Levin manages to be intelligent, fair, and Jewish all in the same package, so I won’t say it is impossible, but people like Feinstein, Wexler, and Schumer cannot say or be the same. Neither can Hillary Clinton who coddles AIPAC whether she is sincere or not.

Cyrena

RUN FOR YOUR LIFE THE JEWS ARE COMMING

but rest easy the guys with a straight jacket are coming and will take you to a place where you will be safe from Israelis.

JEWS RULE

While Bloomberg is a popular jewish billionaire businessman in and around New York City (where there is a greater population of jews than Israel) and has half the Vanity Fair 100 he can count on for support, his positions over regulate numerous issues which would not resound well in the other 49 states where folks are already angry at the loss of personal liberties.

I’m sure he will get great press and campaign contributions from a small but well off minority.

As I see it, a Bloomberg run for the presidency would be a vain attempt by the Establishment to forestall a Ron Paul presidency, because if Dr. Paul wins, the days may be numbered for the comfortable American Status Quo (large, coercive government at home and intervention overseas).

Let’s make this election a last call for the big parties. There’s a glimmer of hope for political activity, although improbable. After Super Tuesday, February 8, activists left and right might break gridlock by urging mass voter deregistration from both major parties, unless the parties come up with explicit, numerically precise, bipartisan consensus agreements to slow globalization and limit our military crusade for secular “democracies” in the Middle East. There will be only a couple probable nominees and many more “losers” who will have some campaign organizations and money left. A new Independent or one of these “losers” might emerge to run with others who accept such a consensus running write-in campaigns for Congress.

  9/11 was like a painful insect bite. The invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq have been like swinging a sledgehammer at insects. Bin Laden’s bleeding us dry over there, so he doesn’t have to fight us here. If you feared more dangerous bites, you’d put on protective clothes;  maybe drain a swamp. Want to see real swamps of Islamofacism?- Look at U.S.- allied Islamic kingdoms in Saudi Arabia,  Kuwait and the UAE.

  Puppet secular regimes are like flashy, expensive lemons. And look who’s been elected: Hamas and Hezbollah. “Iraq Violence Down” press releases, and “security” are a joke: the Sadr militia is on truce, and Islamists have shifted troops to the Afghan and Pakistan fronts. “Boom”goes poor Bhutto, the instant she speaks against Islamists.
       
  Want to really defend America? Drive 55, and conserve otherwise! Stop buying imports.  “Slowbolization” by renewed tariffs must replace globalization.  Improve preventive health care for the poor, where bioterrorists could start plagues. Expand the National Guard. Have it actually guard our borders. Deploy nuclear and other screening in all foreign ports we get cargo from. Expand the Coast Guard. Post them on every ship coming to us. It’s less nukes than the delivery means that counts.

  This won’t happen while paying $800 billion or more upkeep on the Iraq lemon. Bush supporters: false pride is a sin in both Testaments and Koran. It blocks admission of error. Democrats: think your party more worth saving? Free trade’s great expansion of resource consumption is probably what pushed the earth over the tipping point to the worst global warming scenario.  This cannot be forgiven, neither in Earth nor in Ozone. And free trade was totally bipartisan. It’s an inconvenient truth: Al Gore broke the Senate tie that passed NAFTA. Beyond job and manufacturing loss, now we can be peons of Asian and Arab billionaires as well as American ones.

  Now, while national Democrats slither over spilled blood to another turn on the “Bribes R’ US”  throne, “staying the course” serves only so that national Republicans can claim Democrats “lost” the Middle East. News: It ain’t ours to lose! In states like Pennsylvania the parties have closed primaries where independents can’t even vote. These major parties are now nothing more than two inconsistent gangs of false-promising bagmen. It’s high time for political evolution into a progressive pro-environment, pro-worker party and a conservative pro-American business opposition.

  To Hell with Lesser Evilism. Last Call: agree on precise plans acceptable to the large majority of Americans, and carry them out or we should Crash the Parties!

Joe, you ask this:

•  Even harder to imagine is why he would spend billions to divide liberals and moderates in the general election, risking another four years of failed right-wing government, partisan stasis and national decline. Exactly what is it about him that makes such a risk worth taking?

And my own answer/opinion has to be considered in temporary disregard for the information you’ve provided here, on his taking foreign policy ‘tutorials’ from Henry Kissenger. Since I had no way to know that prior to now, we’ll have to put that aside for my response here.

The primary reason for any average American to consider such a ‘risk’ has everything to do with the choices currently available, and the dire and desperate straits that most Americans are feeling. We’re ‘shocked and awed’ pretty much out of our minds, not to mention our homes and our jobs, and feeling overwhelmingly desperate on stuff as basic as our continued survival.

AND…desperate people do desperate things.

So, when somebody like Bloomberg comes along, and makes noises about some sort of ‘unity’ party solution, ‘we the people’ are likely to consider just about anything…out of desperation. We see that the phony caucuses in Iowa and elsewhere, have brought us no closer to eliminating the plague of partisanship and overall ignorance about the real agenda’s behind most of the current candidates. And, we can’t even trust each other, to make sound and reasonable assessments, considering the good with the bad, (among what we have to choose from) and prioritizing those things accordingly. For instance, can we live with Obama’s alleged ‘lack of experience’ if we know that he’s smart enough to pick the best advisors?

This polarization, and the lack of ability on the part of the general populace, to look at the ‘big picture’ rather than what addresses their own particular ‘brand’ of desperation; like the followers of the magic cure of ‘God’, or those who’ve chosen to blame all of their current woes on those damn ‘immigrants’, or the WRONG ‘terrorists’ has us basically paralyzed.

So, along comes Bloomberg, and like you said, he’s mostly been a Democrat, and most reasonable people don’t much give a damn about his ‘living in sin’ status, or the fact that he’s short. (I mean – REALLY, what’s that have to do with whether or not we can put food on the counter tomorrow, or get a kid to the doctor?) And, he SAYS (at least now) that he knows this war stuff is a bad idea. (of course we didn’t know about the Kissinger tutorials). AND, to top it all off, he can finance this whole thing himself, because we’re pretty sick of being faced with all of the money that our current candidates are zipping though, when we think there are better things that it can be spent on. On the other hand, if Bloomberg wants to use his OWN billions, to get through the charade, then that alone, is reason enough for some folks. (especially since we know that he isn’t likely to use it –instead- to send every American a nice rebate check).

So…THOSE are the reasons that I suspect people have been willing to take such a risk, especially prior to the ‘closer examination’ that you’ve suggested here. But indeed, that closer examination IS warranted, (always, with ANY candidate) and in the end, if there’s this risk of dividing the moderate and the liberal among us, (and I can see where that could and probably would happen) then you’re right…it’s NOT worth the risk.

It’s worth adding that because the ISRAELIS have put him currently in 3rd place, as THEIR selection for OUR president, that’s another reason for not rolling this pair of dice.

I think we can jack things up well enough ourselves, without looking for help from the Israelis.