Michael Bloomberg is back in the 2008 presidential picture, and one thing is for sure: There is a statesman-size hole to fill in the center of American politics.
It would fit a figure who is strong on national security, unlike all the Democratic candidates, yet fiscally responsible and socially moderate to liberal, unlike the Republicans.
It?s a Franklin Roosevelt-, Harry Truman-, Dwight Eisenhower-, John F. Kennedy-size hole that?s currently occupied by no one except perhaps Sen. Joe Lieberman, I-Conn., a man without a party.
The problem with American politics now is that Democrats have driven themselves, once again, to the left end of the political spectrum on foreign policy ? as was demonstrated once again recently on the floors of Congress and in the Las Vegas presidential debate.
Not one candidate in the debate, nor any Democratic leader in Congress, would acknowledge that important progress has been made in Iraq since Gen. David Petraeus launched his counterinsurgency strategy.
To the contrary, Democrats are playing a dangerous game of “chicken” with the country?s armed services, threatening to cut off funding for the military to force President Bush to accept a goal of full withdrawal from Iraq in 2008 ? despite the chance Petraeus has created for a successful outcome.
It?s hard to disagree with what Lieberman has said in the past two weeks ? that Democrats are “emotionally invested in a narrative of defeat and retreat in Iraq” and that “it is deeply irresponsible for anti-war forces in Congress to hold hostage the funds our men and women in uniform need to continue their successful efforts.”
Democrats are following the same pattern in requiring a court order for electronic intercepts of terrorists overseas because they might contact someone in the United States. Democrats act as though Bush presents a greater danger to this country than Osama bin Laden.
Meanwhile, Republicans have driven themselves to the right edge of the economic and social spectrum, as demonstrated by Bush?s vetoes of spending and children?s health bills, by Republicans? penchant for borrowing to pay for their outsized tax cuts, and by the presidential candidates? hardline positions on abortion and immigration.
Except for Sen. John McCain, Ariz., the leading Republican candidates are pandering to a loud anti-immigrant claque in the party and, except for Rudy Giuliani, all are vying to appeal to the right-to-life movement as ardently as Democrats appeal to the abortion-rights movement.
There?s a huge gap in the middle that could be filled by a candidate who calls for perseverance in Iraq and tough diplomacy toward Iran, yet also favors adequate funding for education and health care and is moderate on abortion and immigration.
New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg arguably could fit well intothe space, although he has to begin speaking out on national and international issues if he hopes to be successful as an independent candidate.
He is clearly pro-choice on abortion, pro-gun control, pro-gay rights and favors merit pay for teachers and controls on climate change. His view on Iraq, as expressed in Newsweek, is that “the current situation is intolerable” because “the public doesn?t understand why we are there, and part of leadership is explaining, bringing people along.”
That could mean explaining why America has to see the task through to success, if it can be attained, but Bloomberg didn?t say. It is encouraging that in 2006, he campaigned for Lieberman?s re-election.
On the other hand, he sounds like a Democrat on Iran, virtually ruling out military action and promising negotiations. That doesn?t necessarily make him a hopeless dove, but he didn?t mention the word “sanctions,” either. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, D-N.Y., did.
Bloomberg aides say he won?t run unless he thinks he can win. A Newsweek poll indicated that, right now, he garners only 11 percent of the vote, to Clinton?s 44 percent and Giuliani?s 38 percent, and pulls more support from Giuliani than Clinton.
But that?s all theoretical because Bloomberg is hardly known outside of New York and its environs. He has to stop teasing and start talking in order for the public to determine whether he is what America desperately needs ? a centrist choice dedicated to keeping America safe, solving its problems and building consensus.
Morton Kondracke is executive editor of Roll Call, the newspaper of Capitol Hill.
