Blogs

By all accounts, Mayor Bloomberg's ice-breaker sit-down yesterday with the city's five Republican county leaders didn't yield the deal he seeks to run on the party's ballot line this fall.  But it did produce a nugget of truth-telling that has long escaped us: In last year's presidential contest, Adam Lisberg of the Daily News reports, Bloomberg was a McCain man.

When Bloomberg emerged alone from the meeting at the party's East Side headquarters, he  spoke in generalities to reporters waiting outside: "We just talked about national politics and how we all hope that President Obama will be a good President," said the mayor.

As Lisberg writes: "That surprised several of the GOPers, who said later that Bloomberg barely mentioned Obama but said he had supported Sen. John McCain."

Bloomy never endorsed a candidate last year. His aides insisted that the mayor "never came close to backing either" McCain or Obama because he wanted to keep channels open to whoever won the White House. But Bloomberg -- who strongly backed George W. in 2004 -- told staff that he preferred McCain, something he never had the courage to tell his constituents. Until yesterday that is, in a closed room with five Republicans.

Click to enlarge. From Patrick Moberg, the subway guy

You might be seeing this a lot over the next few days, but maybe we'll show you first?

(click image for slideshow)

This past Sunday night, photographer Deidre Schoo attended a birthday party for Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama at St. Joe Nick's Pub. Despite a cake that never arrived, Obama supporters danced, sang and drank in celebration of the now 47 year old candidate. '47' was the theme: the door donation was $4.70, and attendees performed for either four minutes and seven seconds or delivered a 47-second birthday wish. The party also featured home-made birthday greetings from Barack fans. Photos over here.

[Editor's note: After penning the popular "The Official Village Voice Election-Season Guide to the Right-Wing Blogosphere," Roy Edroso has made dissecting those blogs into a weekly feature that appears here usually on Mondays.]

Rightbloggers Find McCain's Chocolate Sandwich Tasty

The current conventional wisdom seems to be that Barack Obama is a racist. At least, a Rassmussen poll shows that's how 53 percent of Americans judged Obama's prediction that Republicans would use racist tactics against him ("You know, he doesn't look like all those other presidents on the dollar bills"). Also, a Gallup Poll has the Obama-McCain race as a dead heat.

While it's never a good idea to assume that the national conversation follows that of rightbloggers, these polls do suggest that their endless assault on Obama's "character" (portrayed by them mainly as a stew of vices and vacuity) has at least been attended to good effect by the McCain campaign and the press outlets they seek to stimulate.

As hordes awaited the speech from Senator Rodham Hillary Clinton on Tuesday night, the scene outside Baruch College looked and felt like a graduation. People wrapped around two blocks sounded edgy with anticipation and even slightly wistful at times, but most of all they seemed to express some version of an upbeat note. Many celebrated the chance to welcome their candidate home and rally her onward, while others acknowledged relief that her address might bring concession, and finally end a presidential primary of unprecedented length.

Although Clinton ultimately committed to neither position in her remarks, at least everyone could recognize the historic nature of the evening.

Are we entering an era of ubuntu?

Barry Obama's apparent victory over Hillary Clinton helps loosen a painful 16-year headlock on Americans.

Practically all that's standing in his way is John McCain. At least McCain is wiser than George W. Bush. But then, who isn't? McCain, however, is a supporter of contining the disastrous Iraq War. But then, who is?

Eight years of the Clintons (horndog/closet conservative Bill and schnorrer/closet conservative Hillary), followed by eight years of momzers (Bush-Cheney). Oy friggin' gevalt!

"Enough already!," the New York Jew part of me says. "Git your goldurn hands offa my neck!," the Oklahoma born-and-raised part of me says.

If you didn’t catch Bill Maher’s political diatribes at the New Jersey Performing Arts Center last Friday night, here are a few memorable lines:

On whichever of the three candidates—Obama, Clinton, McCain—becomes president:

“Either way, it’ll be a victory for the minority—either for blacks, women, or the undead.”

On Hillary’s refusal to step down in the primary race:

“She is just that birthday candle that just won’t blow out.”

On the two presumptive presidential contenders—Obama and McCain:

“Well, at least you’ll have a clear choice—bi-racial [or] bi-centennial. Hip hop [or] hip pops.”

On Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney’s scathing exchanges during the Republican primary debates:

“It’s like a Halloween costume talking to a mannequin.”

As Hillary Clinton clings to the almost mathematically impossible dream that she can be the Democratic nominee, it's becoming increasingly clear that November’s general election match-up will pit Barack Obama against John McCain.

While Democrats worry that Ralph Nader could, yet again, take votes from their nominee, Republicans might also be concerned about former Georgia Rep. Bob Barr, the front-runner to be Libertarian Party’s nominee. A real right-wing stalwart, could Barr play McCain’s spoiler?

Village Voice: The Libertarian Party is supportive of legalizing same-sex marriage, legalizing currently illegal drugs and keeping abortion legal. You were a sponsor of the “Defense of Marriage Act” and you had a 100 percent rating from the Christian Coalition when you served as a congressman. How do you square those positions with your current involvement in the Libertarian Party?

Sometimes, it pays to bring up the rear. As Pennsylvania Democrats finally vote in their long-hyped presidential primary today, the results could affect the opinions of uncommitted superdelegates more than they impact the numbers of pledged delegates actually won through the primary.

Last night, on the eve of today’s potentially decisive contest, two uncommitted supderdelegates spoke at a panel in Midtown moderated by NBC News’ political director, Chuck Todd, and sponsored by the organization, Democratic Leadership for the 21st Century.

Although Ralph Dawson, a Democratic National Committee member from New York, and Andy Tobias, the DNC treasurer, did not betray their preferences, they depicted a tortured process in which undecided superdelegates have been grappling with their sense of what’s best for the party, the elusive will of the people, and the swiftly approaching reality of the general election scheduled for November 4.

Though a bill that would bind New York’s votes in the Electoral College to the winner of the presidential popular vote has not moved in Albany, Illinois is the latest state to embrace an idea that has the potential to reshape the way we choose our president.

Illinois Governor Rod Blagojevich signed a law earlier this week that will require Illinois to elect the president using the National Popular Vote. The move, which has won approval in New Jersey and Maryland, would prevent a repeat of the 2000 presidential election should it be approved in all 50 states.