R.I.P. Bob

 
Bob Barry Sr., the longtime voice of Oklahoma football and basketball and a Norman resident, has pass away, OU officials confirmed today.

No details were available and neither the University of Oklahoma nor his family have released a statement.

 

Jack Ogle and Bob Barry Sr.

at KNOR

Bob, 80, began his career in broadcasting in 1956 at Norman radio station KNOR as a salesman, disc jockey and sportscaster calling Norman High games. In 1961, OU football coach Bud Wilkinson selected Barry to call football and basketball games.

Bob left Oklahoma in 1973 when he went to work at Tulsa University and Oklahoma State calling games. He was also a sports anchor and sports director at KFOR until 1997.

Bob returned to OU in 1991 doing play-by-play for the Sooners. He held onto the position until he retired after last year’s basketball season.

Bob has been awarded Oklahoma's Sportscaster of the Year by the Oklahoma Association of Broadcasters, and was inducted into the Oklahoma Journalism Hall of Fame, the Oklahoma Association of Broadcasters Hall of Fame, and the Oklahoma Sports Hall of Fame. In 2008, he was recognized as a distinguished alumni by the Gaylord College of Journalism and Mass Communication at the University of Oklahoma.

OU recognized him as a distinguished alumni in 2010.

Bob graduated Classen High School in 1946, and studied journalism at the University of Oklahoma before joining the U.S. Air Force in 1951. He and his late wife, Joan, had two sons. Frank Barry is a teacher in the Norman public school system and Bob Barry Jr. is sports director at KFOR TV in Oklahoma City.

Is this just the tip? OU Foundation may face possible ethics probe for unreported gifts

From Today OU Daily 

OU Foundation may face possible ethics 

probe for unreported gifts

Nicholas Harrison/The Daily

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

The OU Foundation may be under investigation by the Oklahoma State Ethics Commission for failing to report gifts to university officers and employees.

The Daily submitted a complaint to the commission Dec. 13 stemming from the OU Foundation’s denial of an open records request first reported Dec. 7.

Although the foundation invoked a statute that allows them to keep donor information confidential, the state attorney general’s office had issued an opinion in 2002 that indicated it must still comply with all applicable state ethics laws.

In his 2002 opinion, Attorney General Drew Edmondson wrote, “The authority of a public body to keep donors’ identities confidential is tempered by the rules of the commission.”

Edmondson noted state officials and employees are required to be independent and impartial and to exercise their powers and prerogatives without prejudice or favoritism.

Anyone who does business with a state entity is required to report any gift to a state officer or employee with a cost of more than $50, according to state statutes.

 

On its official website, the foundation’s audit report indicates it has several contracts with the university and provided $21,644,682 in salary supplements in 2010 and $28,824,589 in 2009. However, when The Daily contacted the commission, no reports were filed by the foundation.

At its regular meeting Dec. 21, the commission acted on two complaints, voting unanimously “there was a reasonable basis to believe that a violation of constitutional ethics rules had occurred.”

Immediately after the meeting, Marilyn Hughes, executive director for the commission, confirmed an investigation had been opened on the OU Foundation. 

 However, when contacted by The Daily on Tuesday, Hughes said she could neither confirm nor deny the investigation.

All information regarding ongoing investigations is kept confidential in accordance with state law. After a complaint is submitted it is presented to the commission by the executive director during a closed executive session, said Rebecca Adams, general counsel to the commission.

If the commission determines rules have been violated, there is no guarantee the findings will be available to the public.

At its discretion, the commission may resolve a possible rules violation by issuing a private reprimand which remains confidential. They may also issue a public reprimand, reach a settlement or bring a lawsuit to court, Adams said.

A the time this story was written, OU Foundation President Guy Patton and OU Press Secretary Chris Shilling said they had not been contacted by the commission. They were not aware the foundation was the subject of an investigation and could provide no comments.

Hoo-ah X-OU Bball player headed to Afghanistan

Former Oklahoma women's basketball star Captain Caton Hill says that while "there is some anxiety" about heading to Afghanistan for combat duty with the U.S. Army, she's confident she's prepared.

She spoke with bloggers and reporters on a conference call on Today, two days before she's scheduled to depart.

Captain Hill has spent the past year in Georgia training for the assignment.

After finishing her basketball career in 2004, Captain Hill went to OU Med School and decided to enlist in the Army's Medical Corps. It would pay her medical school bills in exchange for her military service.

She started her residency in family medicine last year, but after a year, she decided that she wanted to do something different.

Captain Hill, an Army flight surgeon, will be the primary care physician for the 4th Battalion, 3rd Aviation Regiment, the 3rd Infantry Division Combat Aviation Brigade. She says she'll primarily be working with pilots during her one-year tour of duty.

Captain Hill knew becoming a flight surgeon could land her on the front line. "Taking care of the people that are fighting for you is one of the most honorable things you can do," she said.

Captain Hill played for the Sooners from 1999 to 2004 and is sixth on Oklahoma's career scoring list with 1,653 points. She started for Oklahoma's 2002 national runner-up squad.

U2 to play Norman on October 19

U2 announced today they will to play in Norman on Monday, October 19 at the Oklahoma Memorial Stadium.

The band released a schedule of their 360 tour dates on their website through September 24 and also included Norman on October 19. The tour will include 14 European cities followed by a North American tour.

There will be about 10,000 tickets for each show being priced at only $30, according to a press release.

According to the site: “Long-time U2 Show Director Willie Williams has worked again with architect Mark Fisher (ZooTV, PopMart, Elevation and Vertigo), to create an innovative 360˚ design which affords an unobstructed view for the audience. U2 360° also marks the first time a band has toured in stadiums with such a unique and original structure.”

2009 Oklahoma Football Schedule

2009 Oklahoma Football Schedule

Sept. 5: Brigham Young
at Arlington, Texas
Sept. 12: Idaho State
Sept. 19: Tulsa
Oct. 3: at Miami (Fla.)
Oct. 10: Baylor
Oct. 17: Texas at Dallas, Texas
Oct. 24: at Kansas
Oct. 31: Kansas State
Nov. 7: at Nebraska
Nov. 14: Texas A&M
Nov 21: at Texas Tech
Nov. 28: Oklahoma State
* Dec. 5: Big 12 Championship
at Arlington, Texas
* If Sooners win Big 12 South Division

Boren found $13M for expansion of OU art museum ?

University of Oklahoma regents this week will consider approving a $13 million budget for a proposed expansion of the Fred Jones Jr. Museum of Art.

According to the agenda for Tuesday's meeting in Norman, posted on the university's Web site, OU President David Boren has recommended approval of the design development phase for a gallery addition to the museum, along with the budget for the project.

Regents approved the project during a meeting in May as part of the comprehensive master plan of capital projects for OU's main campus in Norman.

According to the agenda, as part of the project, space will created for what will be known as the Eugene B. Adkins Gallery, as well as an archive storage area to display, store and curate works of art included in the Adkins Collection.

The collection includes Southwest- and American Indian-themed items.

The museum's current rooftop sculpture garden will be enclosed to create a new third-floor gallery and a staircase from the lower galleries to the third-floor gallery will be built.

The agenda item notes the university also plans "to pursue the acquisition of another important collection of art works," so the new addition will be sized to include a new mezzanine level with 4,000 square feet of space "to display newly acquired art." The item does not mention what the potential art acquisition might be.

Of the project's $13 million budget, the agenda item notes that $6 million will come from the university's discretionary reserves and $7 million will come from private sources. Construction should begin early in 2009.

Boren Try to KICK Dr. David Deming out of OU

He is a geophysicist and an associate professor of arts and sciences at the University of Oklahoma who has published numerous peer-reviewed research articles.

Dr. Deming’s Senate December 6, 2006 testimony is available here. University President Boren is a “staunch supporter of Obama”. One Fascist supports another, I guess...


Press release from Dr. David Deming [profdeming@earthlink.net] below.

For ten years or more, professor David Deming has taught a course in environmental geology at the University of Oklahoma. In October 2008, he was informed that the “general education” certification for his course was being revoked. Under the University of Oklahoma system, this means that student enrollment in the course is likely to drop by two-thirds.

This is a course which receives outstanding student evaluations. Professor Deming is well-known to be a global-warming skeptic. In 2006, he testified before the US Senate that media coverage of global warming had descended into “irrational hysteria.”
See here

Professor Deming is unaware of any other case in the history of the University of Oklahoma where the “gen ed” certification for a course has been revoked. It would appear possible that professor Deming’s position on global warming was a motivating factor. But in this case, the tragedy is that the people being punished are the students, not the professor. Those who wish to express their concern can do so by writing or calling University of Oklahoma President David Boren.

David Boren, President
University of Oklahoma
110 Evans Hall
Norman, OK 73019
telephone: 405-325-3916
email: dboren@ou.edu

David Boren to hike Tuition 10%

Tuition hikes of nearly 10% will be considered this week for students at the University of Oklahoma, Rogers State University in Claremore and Cameron University in Lawton.

OU regents govern all three schools and will begin their annual retreat in Ardmore tomorrow. They will consider business items from Rogers State and Cameron tomorrow, with OU business set for Wednesday.

Regents will consider raising rates for OU's tuition and mandatory fees by 9.9%. Rogers State students also could face a 9.9% hike, while Cameron officials have requested a 9.4% tuition and fee increase.

Other items on the agenda include potential raises for OU athletic director Joe Castiglione, football coach Bob Stoops, men's basketball coach Jeff Capel, women's basketball coach Sherri Coale, baseball coach Sunny Golloway and softball coach Patty Gasso.

OU President David Boren also is set to receive his annual performance review, during which he could be offered a raise.

ABC announces times for two Oklahoma football games it will air

ABC television network has announced it will broadcast two Sooner football games.

ABC will televise the Oklahoma-Cincinnati contest at 2:30 p.m. Central time Sept 6 from Owen Field. The game will be the first time the two teams play each other; in 2010, the Oklahoma team will play the Bearcats at Paul Brown Stadium in Ohio.

The 102nd Oklahoma-Texas football game will be televised at 11 a.m., ABC said. ABC has aired the last nine games between the two schools.

Earlier, ESPN announced it will air the Oklahoma-Washington game Sept. at 6:45 p.m. Sept. 13. The game will be played in Seattle.

I’m Not Running for President, but ...

Opinion

OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR

I’m Not Running for President, but ...
By MICHAEL R. BLOOMBERG
Published: February 28, 2008

WATCHING the 2008 presidential campaign, you sometimes get the feeling that the candidates — smart, all of them — must know better. They must know we can’t fix our economy and create jobs by isolating America from global trade. They must know that we can’t fix our immigration problems with border security alone. They must know that we can’t fix our schools without holding teachers, principals and parents accountable for results. They must know that fighting global warming is not a costless challenge. And they must know that we can’t keep illegal guns out of the hands of criminals unless we crack down on the black market for them.

The vast majority of Americans know that all of this is true, but — politics being what it is — the candidates seem afraid to level with them.

Over the past year, I have been working to raise issues that are important to New Yorkers and all Americans — and to speak plainly about common sense solutions. Some of these solutions have traditionally been seen as Republican, while others have been seen as Democratic. As a businessman, I never believed that either party had all the answers and, as mayor, I have seen just how true that is.

In every city I have visited — from Baltimore to New Orleans to Seattle — the message of an independent approach has resonated strongly, and so has the need for a new urban agenda. More than 65 percent of Americans now live in urban areas — our nation’s economic engines. But you would never know that listening to the presidential candidates. At a time when our national economy is sputtering, to say the least, what are we doing to fuel job growth in our cities, and to revive cities that have never fully recovered from the manufacturing losses of recent decades?

More of the same won’t do, on the economy or any other issue. We need innovative ideas, bold action and courageous leadership. That’s not just empty rhetoric, and the idea that we have the ability to solve our toughest problems isn’t some pie-in-the-sky dream. In New York, working with leaders from both parties and mayors and governors from across the country, we’ve demonstrated that an independent approach really can produce progress on the most critical issues, including the economy, education, the environment, energy, infrastructure and crime.

I believe that an independent approach to these issues is essential to governing our nation — and that an independent can win the presidency. I listened carefully to those who encouraged me to run, but I am not — and will not be — a candidate for president. I have watched this campaign unfold, and I am hopeful that the current campaigns can rise to the challenge by offering truly independent leadership. The most productive role that I can serve is to push them forward, by using the means at my disposal to promote a real and honest debate.

In the weeks and months ahead, I will continue to work to steer the national conversation away from partisanship and toward unity; away from ideology and toward common sense; away from sound bites and toward substance. And while I have always said I am not running for president, the race is too important to sit on the sidelines, and so I have changed my mind in one area. If a candidate takes an independent, nonpartisan approach — and embraces practical solutions that challenge party orthodoxy — I’ll join others in helping that candidate win the White House.

The changes needed in this country are straightforward enough, but there are always partisan reasons to take an easy way out. There are always special interests that will fight against any challenge to the status quo. And there are always those who will worry more about their next election than the health of our country.

These forces that prevent meaningful progress are powerful, and they exist in both parties. I believe that the candidate who recognizes that the party is over — and begins enlisting all of us to clean up the mess — will be the winner this November, and will lead our country to a great and boundless future.

Michael R. Bloomberg is the mayor of New York.

Bloomberg-Hagel ticket increasingly unlikely

Bloomberg-Hagel ticket increasingly unlikely
By SARA KUGLER

NEW YORK - The possibility of Sen. Chuck Hagel joining Mayor Michael Bloomberg on an independent presidential ticket seems to be dimming, with Bloomberg distancing himself on Monday from the Nebraska Republican.

The New York Times reported Saturday about a conversation one of its reporters had last week with Hagel, during which Hagel confirmed he had spoken with Bloomberg in the past about possibly being the billionaire's running mate.

The story contained no direct quotes but paraphrased Hagel as saying the rise of John McCain as the GOP nominee essentially closes Bloomberg's window of opportunity to jump in the race because of McCain's appeal to independents and moderates.

Asked Monday about Hagel's claim that the two have discussed running together, Bloomberg flatly denied that any conversation about those topics ever took place, and portrayed his relationship with Hagel as a distant one.

"I have met him a couple of times ... and I never talked to him once about being the candidate, and certainly not about who, if I were to run, which I'm not, who you would pick," Bloomberg said. "We just never had that conversation."

Hagel's chief of staff, Mike Buttry, said later Monday that the senator's conversation with Times contributor John Harwood had been "overplayed."

Buttry said Hagel did not tell the Times that he had been asked to run with Bloomberg _ he only said the two had had "general conversations."

Times spokeswoman Diane McNulty said "we stand by what John Harwood reported Chuck Hagel told him."

The Bloomberg-Hagel speculation began last May when Bloomberg and Hagel shared a not-so-secret dinner in Washington. Then, Hagel said in a television interview that it was time for a third-party candidacy to shake things up. He also mused about the idea of him and Bloomberg running together.

"It's a great country to think about _ a New York boy and a Nebraska boy to be teamed up leading this nation," Hagel said last spring.

The pair met up again for dinner last November in Manhattan, have spoken occasionally by phone, and were together for a bipartisan summit last month in Oklahoma.

Bloomberg backers not giving up

Bloomberg backers
not giving up
Posted by Foon Rhee, deputy national political editor

The Republicans have a presumptive presidential nominee, the Democrats are down to the final two, but fans of New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg are still hoping he jumps in as an independent alternative.

A draft Bloomberg committee urged supporters today to sign an online petition urging him to run. Bloomberg, however, has sounded less interested in getting in the race and spending some of his billions, particulary after former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani endorsed John McCain.

"Bloomberg has about ten days left to make a decision whether to run or not – the people have about ten days left to encourage him to run," said Doug Bailey, a committee leader and Republican.

Deadlines are fast approaching to get on the ballot in key states.

"Mike Bloomberg represents an option outside of the broken two-party system in Washington. That option may be more important than ever -- but time might be running out. The American public needs to ask themselves if they want a candidate who has proven he understands both how the economy works and how a government can be run successfully. Bloomberg alone meets both tests," said Gerald Rafshoon, a Democrat and the other committee leader.

Draft Bloomberg Issues Ultimatum: 10 Days to Decide

Draft Bloomberg Issues Ultimatum:
10 Days to Decide
February 8, 2008

As the GOP appears close to settling on a candidate and the window of opportunity seems to be closing for Mayor Bloomberg's potential independent presidential bid, one effort to draft him into the race is turning up the heat in hopes of pushing him to a decision.

The Draft Bloomberg committee started by Unity08 co-founders Doug Bailey and Gerald Rafshoon has posted a new Web video warning Bloomberg that it's "crunch time" and noting he has 10 days left to pull the trigger on a third party candidacy.

"With ballot access laws in several states requiring early action, time is running out, the committee's press release states. "Virtually any effort to qualify for the Texas ballot, for example, must begin the day after the Texas primary on March 4."

UPDATE: Bailey said there's "nothing magic" that happens in 10 days, it's sort of an arbitray date, assuming that it would take about a week for a candidate to gear up to make a formal announcement. In Bailey's mind, the decision has to be made in this time frame to get out in front of the Lone Star State primary, which is expected to generate a huge turnout and potentially decide the Democratic contest.

Texas has rather onerous ballot access requirements for independent candidates: Roughly 74,000 signatures must be collected and filed by May 8, and I believe if you're cast a ballot for another major party candidate, you're signature isn't valid.

Bloomberg pollster/advisor Doug Schoen recently said the mayor might wait until as late as May to make up his mind, and a ballot-access effort will go forward with the name of a placeholder candidate on the petitions.

UPDATE#2: A ballot access expert tells me that Texas election law prohibts using placeholders for independent presidential candidate, BUT a third party like, say, the Reform Party, could do so, and also has a lower signature requirement - around 46,000.

Rafshoon said Bloomberg "represents an option outside the broken two-party system in Washington," and urged voters to ask themselves whether they want a candidate who has both "proven he understands both how the economy works and how a government can be run successfully," adding: "Bloomberg alone meets both tests."

The video features a digital clock running down, the ticking of a time bomb and footage of an explosion, presumably a terrorist attack. It urges people to sign the petition at DraftBloomberg.com, adding:

"Let him hear from us. So we can hear from him, and have a chance to choose. Time is short. Michael Bloomberg. For America. For all of us. Act now."



SCRIPT: "The Time Is Now"

You hear it when unemployment numbers go up.

Every time another terrorist bomb goes off.

Every day they continue to bicker in Washington.

time is running out. Decisions made now will shape the future of our country, not just decisions by the voters.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has about ten days to decide if he'll take the first steps to be on the November ballot.

Are you satisfied with the choices you have, or do you want a third choice, an independent voice?

Our very best. You can still make it happen.

But 10 days and counting to make sure we have a choice.

Will we have a president who understands the economy because he's built an enormously successful business from scratch?

Will we have a president who really knows how to run a government because he's alrady done it, and done it well.

Can we have a president who owes absolutely nothing to the lobbyists the special interests or the party extremists?

There is still time to have that choice. Come to DraftBloomberg.com and sign the petition asking him to run.

Let him hear from us. So we can hear from him, and have a chance to choose.
Time is short. Michael Bloomberg. For America. For all of us.
Act now.

A real choice for president. Just imagine the possibilities for America.

Michael Bloomberg really not running

Michael Bloomberg
really not running
Sunday, February 3rd 2008

Last week was a gloomy one for Bloomberg boosters:

California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who has called Bloomberg his "soulmate" in pragmatic, bipartisan governing, endorsed Republican Arizona Sen. John McCain.

Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman, another close Bloomberg ally who has backed McCain, said a McCain candidacy would likely keep the mayor out of the race because the two men would tap into the same independent-minded base.

Bloomberg himself tacked on an unusual ending to his usual "I am not a candidate" response, adding, "and I'll stay that way" at a Thursday appearance at Google's New York offices.

Even Karen Gallet, an original organizer of a local draft Bloomberg effort, is giving up the fight. "All those indicators that we thought would lead up to his considering it seriously don't seem to be happening," she said. "The clincher for me was McCain. He's about 70% of everything Bloomberg stands for."

All this would seem to point to an end to a much-hinted but never-declared Bloomberg 2008 candidacy.

Bloomberg supporters would prefer a race between New York Sen. Hillary Clinton and former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who are more politically divisive and less personally appealing than Sen. Barack Obama and McCain, a friend of Bloomberg's.

The developments, however, have not derailed the behind-the-scenes work of Deputy Mayor Kevin Sheekey, the mayor's top political aide, sources said.

"Nothing's changed. These guys are full-speed ahead," said one source close to the effort.

The sort-of campaign, including former Bloomberg aide Patrick Brennan and Independence Party of America Chairman Frank MacKay, is still working on getting Bloomberg on the ballot in every state, sources said. Venture capitalist James Robinson 4th told the New York Sun last week that his Symposia Group has collected and analyzed mounds of data on behalf of Bloomberg that show he could win.

The furious effort could be read as one last push by Sheekey to convince his boss that he has a shot at winning in a field that's no longer as clear-cut as it once was.

Bloomberg backers think there could be room for him in the middle as the economy slows and the candidates have to run to the left or right to appeal to party stalwarts.

"He's as close now [to deciding to run] as he ever has been," the source said.

Asked directly on Friday whether the results from Super Tuesday would lead him to "reevaluate" his "personal situation," Bloomberg instead launched into an analysis of the nomination process.

"Both parties have wide-open races at the moment. There are more than one viable candidate in both parties," he said. "And that's good for the country."

kdanis@nydailynews.com

McCain's Success May Be Upsetting N.Y. Mayor's Plans

McCain's Success May Be Upsetting
N.Y. Mayor's Plans
By Keith B. Richburg
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, February 3, 2008; Page A15

NEW YORK -- When the polls close on Tuesday, few will be analyzing the results more closely than Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, whose own thinly disguised presidential ambitions are likely to hinge on the outcome.

Since his reelection in 2005, Bloomberg, a billionaire businessman, has been flirting with a White House run, while publicly denying any such intentions. He has spent millions of dollars on nationwide polling. He left the Republican Party and became an independent. He has traveled widely across the United States and overseas. He has begun speaking out about national issues. Last month, he met with a ballot access expert in Texas.

One current and one former aide compared it to the typical research a businessman does before making a major decision -- collect data, study contingencies and keep options open. They both said Bloomberg has not made up his mind about a run.

But all the research, the positioning and the careful planning seem to have been upended last week by events on the campaign trail that few predicted a few months ago. Sen. John McCain, written off over the summer as an also-ran, won the Florida primary and became the clear Republican front-runner.

Veterans of past Bloomberg campaigns said McCain's unexpected ascendancy -- and the likelihood that the senator from Arizona could emerge from Tuesday's voting as the presumptive GOP nominee -- may have severely complicated Bloomberg's plans. McCain appeals to some moderate Democrats and, more important, to independents -- precisely the group Bloomberg would be targeting.

McCain also has a reputation in Washington for working with Democrats on issues such as immigration and campaign finance reform, somewhat undercutting Bloomberg's main argument for running: that he would offer a pragmatic, post-partisan kind of leadership.

On Thursday, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a moderate Republican who has formed working coalitions with Democrats in recent years, endorsed McCain. It was during a June visit to see Schwarzenegger in California that Bloomberg dropped his Republican Party affiliation. At the time, Schwarzenegger said Bloomberg "would be a great candidate," and the two, who have forged a close relationship, have been mentioned as possible running mates.

"I kind of sense that there are some in the Bloomberg for President camp who thought the balloon lost a little air . . . with Schwarzenegger's endorsement of McCain," said Jonathan Greenspun, who worked in Bloomberg's administration for 4 1/2 years and now is with a public affairs firm in New York.

"Schwarzenegger and Bloomberg had been interconnected in this independent-candidacy rationale," Greenspun said. "Now that McCain is the presumptive nominee, some think that removes the Bloomberg rationale."

Fred Siegel, contributing editor of the City Journal and a professor at the Cooper Union college, offered much the same analysis. "McCain appeals to the independents that Bloomberg would have to appeal to," he said.

"Does he desperately want to run? Yes. But I'm skeptical," Siegel said. "He has to find an opening. What he lacks now is a rationale."

Douglas E. Schoen, a pollster and strategist who did polling for Bloomberg's two mayoral campaigns, disagreed. "I think it's too early to say," said Schoen, whose new book, "Declaring Independence," is about major voting trends that could pave the way for an independent candidacy.

Schoen said it is too soon to determine whether McCain and the Democratic nominee would be able to unite their parties, or whether large blocs of voters would remain alienated. McCain, he said, is already attracting the ire of the Republican Party's right wing.

There is less of a consensus on how the outcome of the Democratic race will affect Bloomberg's decision. Some said he would be less likely to run if Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton became the nominee, because they are both New Yorkers. With Sen. Barack Obama (Ill.), the problem is that the senator has exactly the kind of post-partisan appeal that Bloomberg would make central to his campaign, and Obama, in the primaries so far, also has been backed by independent voters.

Those who still envision Bloomberg running said he is now looking to March 5, the day that Texas will begin allowing independent candidates to start collecting the signatures necessary to get on the state's presidential ballot. Between now and then, some analysts and others said, Bloomberg will be watching to see whether the two parties begin to coalesce around their presumptive nominees or whether lingering rancor from the primary battles leaves an opening for him.

But many are skeptical. "If it's McCain as the Republican nominee, and a historic choice on the Democratic side, I'm not sure what [Bloomberg] would offer," said Rhodes Cook, a political analyst who publishes a newsletter on politics. "He would need a burning issue -- and nothing seems to be burning."

Bloomberg continues to deny that he plans to run. But Thursday, the day Schwarzenegger endorsed McCain, the mayor offered a slightly different formulation that raised eyebrows in the political world.

"I've said repeatedly I'm not a candidate," he told reporters, and then added, cryptically, "And I'll stay that way."

Draft Bloomberg campaign hits the road

Draft Bloomberg campaign hits the road

February 1, 2008

If Mayor Michael Bloomberg is looking for a sign that he should get into the presidential race, he may want to peek out of his window on Monday.

A mobile billboard company will be cruising Manhattan next week, most likely starting at the mayor's Upper East Side home, with an truck-sized sign intended to push the billionaire independent into launching a third-party bid.

"Support Mike Bloomberg for president," it reads, under a photograph of the White House juxtaposed with a headshot of the mayor. "The only presidential candidate that can't be bought."

Lenny Sobel, the owner of the Long Island-based company, Mobile Ads, said he is covering the production costs of about $2,000, plus the additional expense of driving the truck.

The launch comes the day before Super Tuesday, when New York and 23 other states hold their primaries and caucuses, and Sobel says it's the perfect time to parade a Bloomberg billboard through the streets.

Sobel believes Bloomberg's wealth makes him unique in that he is not beholden to special interests.

"He seems to be a true person who can make change without anybody in his back pocket," Sobel said.

"All politicians sound wonderful but Bloomberg has proved himself in the years of being mayor and I think he has a good possibility of becoming president."

Bloomberg spokesman Stu Loeser declined comment on the ad campaign.

For his part, Bloomberg _ who is quietly studying what it would take to get on the ballot and mount a third-party campaign _ said again Friday that he is "not a candidate."

This time Bloomberg really denies presidential run

This time Bloomberg
really denies presidential run
BY KARLA SCHUSTER | karla.schuster@newsday.com
January 31, 2008

Mayor Michael Bloomberg once again denied any presidential aspirations Thursday, but with some new language that suggests he might really mean it this time.

"I've said repeatedly I'm not a candidate ... and I'll stay that way," the mayor said in response to a reporter's question during an appearance at Google's New York headquarters in Chelsea.

The mayor has said he's "not a candidate" before, but his choice of words Thursday went further and was somewhat more definitive than previous denials.

Bloomberg has been flirting with a possible independent White House bid for months, with aides conducting national polling to gauge his chances while he coyly denied any knowledge of their activities.

Just two weeks ago, he met with Ross Perot's former campaign manager in Texas and with California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in Los Angeles.

On Thursday, Schwarzenegger threw his support behind John McCain, which could be seen as a blow to a fledgling Bloomberg bid. None of this seemed to faze the mayor Thursday. In fact, when asked by a Google employee if he was "going to run for the presidency of the United States," the mayor joked: "No. Next question."

Then again, the Democrat-turned-Republican-turned-independent mayor has been known to change his mind.

Michael Bloomberg: Is He Hollywood's Man For White House?

Michael Bloomberg:
Is He Hollywood's Man For
White House?
Posted By:Julia Boorstin

As we lead up to Super Tuesday I've been reporting on the intersection of Hollywood and politics. Hollywood plays a key role raising awareness about issues, and candidates. (Though I wouldn't say that a Hollywood endorsement is necessarily a good thing).

Hollywood has the kind of power and money to make it the perfect place to feel out a candidacy, which is exactly what Michael Bloomberg is doing. He's been making the rounds, schmoozing with the biggest names in the biz, and feeling out a potential presidential candidacy.

Lions Gate vice-Chairman Michael Burns told me about his hopes that Bloomberg will run for president at Sundance film festival in an exclusive interview. Burns, a self-described moderate Republican, and his partner, John Feltheimer, the CEO of Lions Gate, a liberal Democrat co-hosted a dinner for Bloomberg at Feltheimer's home, with a handful of select A-list Hollywood execs. Burns, who's also a John McCain supporter, said "it's time for common sense", saying he hopes that Bloomberg can, as an Independent candidate draw support from both sides of the aisle, bridging the Blue State/Red State divide.

Lions Gate leadership isn't the only Hollywood brass supporting the New York Mayor. The night after Burns and Feltheimer's dinner, Bob Iger hosted another dinner for him, with more high-powered Hollywood guests. And CBS CEO Les Moonves played golf with Bloomberg. And Bloomberg is said to be best buds with Arnold Schwarzenegger, whose aides and former aides, have reportedly been meeting with Bloomberg's folks.

Hollywood has some outspoken supporters of Barack Obama--from DreamWorks' David Geffen to Scarlett Johansson. Despite a historic affinity to the Clinton dynasty, more big Hollywood names seem to support Obama than Hillary Clinton. So if Clinton gets the nomination, that could spur a move by Bloomberg, to capture some of the vote of those that don't like Hillary. In fact, the rumor is that Bloomberg would only run against Hillary, not Obama, so it all comes together.

Will Bloomberg run? Too soon to say, but if he does, support from Hollywood will surely play a role.

Questions? Comments? MediaMoney@cnbc.com

How to End the Gridlock

How to End the Gridlock
By Bob Graham
Wednesday, January 30, 2008; Page A15

For much of the past two decades, Americans have watched in frustration as presidents and members of Congress have repeatedly achieved deadlock rather than consensus on issues that are critical to our nation. The results of this partisan traffic jam are frightening. For example:

Almost seven years after the Sept. 11 attacks, we still have huge gaps in national and homeland security. Our military is stretched thin and our nation remains vulnerable to catastrophic terrorism.

Nearly 50 million Americans still have no health insurance, and the number of the uninsured rises every year.

As evidenced by the bridge collapse in Minneapolis last August and the crumbling levees in New Orleans, we have recklessly neglected our infrastructure.

Gas prices remain high, but we still have no real energy policy.

Worst of all, we are betraying the fundamental American aspiration that future generations achieve more than those that came before. Seven of 10 Americans now believe that our children will be less well off than their parents.

Many factors have contributed to these ills, but the chief cause is the rampant partisanship that has paralyzed Washington. Early this month, I joined with former senator David Boren and 15 other experienced public officials from both parties to discuss prescriptions for overcoming the stalemate. Our primary focus was the presidential election. The next president will have a clean slate and the burst of enthusiasm that accompanies any new occupant of the White House. He or she has an opportunity -- and an obligation -- to attack the disease of partisan hostility and to set the tone during this election.

We suggested a few initial steps. Each presidential nominee should commit to appointing a truly bipartisan Cabinet that would include the most qualified people available, regardless of their party affiliation. Presidential candidates should be pressured to clearly describe how they would establish a government of national unity. Since results matter more than words, we would also press both major-party nominees to lay out specific strategies for reducing polarization and reaching bipartisan consensus on our agenda of national challenges.

The next president can't do it alone. If we are to break the cycle of partisan gridlock, others who have contributed to the disease must also help with the cure. To this end:

Congress must restore and modernize the campaign finance reforms enacted after Watergate. Today, a presidential candidate accepts public financing at the risk of being discounted as weak and irrelevant.

The media must insist that future presidential debates each focus on a single issue. Candidates can hide behind sound bites when a debate covers every and all subjects. But when candidates must spend a full 90 minutes discussing health care or national defense, voters will learn who is for real and who isn't.

Political parties must fundamentally reform the dysfunctional presidential primary system. We need a better process in 2012 -- one that empowers all Americans. My preference would be four regional primaries, held at three- to four-week intervals from January to April.

Our citizens must be educated to use their powers for effective participation in the political process. Democracy was never intended to be a spectator sport.

History tells us that bipartisanship is possible. In the 40 years after World War II, nine presidents -- four Democrats and five Republicans -- worked side by side with Congresses of both parties to contain the Soviet Union and strengthen the free world. We can resurrect that healthy condition, but it starts with cutting out the cancer of hostile partisanship. It's time to use the knife not to injure political opponents but to cure.

Bob Graham, a Democrat, was a U.S. senator from Florida from 1987 to 2005. He is an associate of the Belfer Center at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government and leads the Bob Graham Center for Public Service at the University of Florida and the University of Miami.

Unity isn't all it's cracked up to be

Unity isn't all it's cracked up to be

Even a consensus-building, problem-solving president
can't solve political gridlock.

By Ezra Klein
January 27, 2008

It's been a tough-fought campaign, with lots of strong candidates and piles of good ideas. But I think I've made my decision. I'm supporting the candidate of division. Frankly, I've got unity fatigue.

That seems to be one of the chief buzzwords of this election. Unity. Barack Obama invokes it more frequently than John Edwards mentions "mills." My in-box, meanwhile, has only recently recovered from the torrent of messages sent by "Unity '08," a collection of political has-beens and never-weres who kept promising that if I would only click right here, I could use the power of the Internet to create a bipartisan presidential ticket that would solve problems ranging from the healthcare crisis to global warming.

How exactly would they solve them? Single-payer healthcare? A carbon tax? They never said. But they promised that whatever they chose, it would be bipartisan, and I'm not a partisan, am I?

Unity '08 has, thankfully, dissolved. But the dream lives on. Two of its founders have wandered off to create a "Draft Michael Bloomberg" movement because, if you don't count Hillary Clinton and Rudy Giuliani, this presidential cycle suffers from a dearth of rich technocrats from New York. To be fair though, it's not just the ZIP Code that qualifies him for the job. "He's not an ideologue," enthuses Gerald Rafshoon, a former Jimmy Carter aide who's running the We Like Mike movement. "He's a problem solver. He has also run things."

Ah, yes, "a problem solver," the close cousin of the unifier. Mitt Romney's a problem solver too, or so he tells me. Clinton says she's in "the solutions business." Who could be against that? An end to problems. It's a vision we could, dare I say it, unite around.

What accounts for all this talk of unity and bipartisanship and non-ideological problem solving? Speechwriters have no end of hoary terms of uplift to choose from. There's "individualism" and "family," "values" and "faith." So why are unity and competence so crucial to this year's message?

The short answer is that the candidates have no other choice. Washington these days is rived by partisanship, but that's not necessarily anything new or even particularly worrisome. In Washington, partisanship is like the San Francisco fog; it rolls in, hangs out for a while, and everyone goes about their business. The problem is, in this case, it's created total, impenetrable gridlock.

So, though elections are usually about what is to be done, this campaign has been unusually focused on whether it is in fact possible to get anything done. That's why you have Clinton touting her governmental experience and legislative skill, Obama emphasizing his unifying presence and talent for achieving consensus, Romney reminding voters that he once rendered the Olympics profitable, Unity '08 swearing that all we need is a bipartisan ticket, Bloomberg promising to be as good at governing as he was at getting rich, and so on and so on.

The problem is that hearing all these presidential hopefuls pledge to end gridlock is a bit like having a friend promise to fix my toilet by checking under the hood of my car. Analytically, it's misguided. Now, fish have to swim, and candidates have to over-promise, so let's grant that they may not believe all their own hype. But at the same time, we shouldn't ignore the essential incoherence at the heart of these arguments:

Gridlock is not something the president of the United States can solve. Political gridlock begins in the U.S. Senate, but we keep trying to end it in the White House. There is no potential executive in either party who would not like to manifest his or her agenda by sheer force of will. But in reality, President Mike Bloomberg would be as stymied as President Hillary Clinton or President Mitt Romney, because you don't get a doctor's note exempting you from the legislative process just because you ran, or even govern, as an independent. If you don't believe me, ask Arnold Schwarzenegger, the classic post-partisan unifier who couldn't attract a single Republican vote for his centrist health plan when it went before the Assembly.

Gridlock isn't a mystery. It's not some sort of untraceable crime. It happens live on C-SPAN every day of the week. It's a function of the rules of the Senate, where 40 senators can refuse to end debate on legislation and thus doom its chances of passage. Because of the undemocratic nature of the Senate, which gives Montana as many senators as California, those 40 senators can represent as little as 11.2% of the population.

This is the power of the filibuster, and it used to be a rarely invoked power, as the culture of the Senate prized compromise and consensus. In the 1977-78 congressional term, for instance, there were only 13 filibusters. Ten years later, there were 43. Ten years after that, there were 53. The Democrats used the tactic plenty when they were in the opposition a couple of years ago, but now that they're in power, it is the Republicans who are having a filibuster party. If they maintain their current pace, they'll have filibustered a full 134 times this term, more than doubling any other year on record. It's obstructionism on a truly historic scale.

Add to that obstructionist minority a divided government (the White House controlled by one party, Congress by another), the tensions of an ongoing war and a lame-duck president with no chosen successor and thus little concern for his plummeting popularity, and you have a moment that laughs at legislative progress. That's why the presidential campaign has become so focused on "getting things done."

But it's not up to the president. There are a variety of fixes for a filibuster-happy minority. The media, for example, could start accurately reporting the cause of the gridlock, shaming the relevant senators and increasing political pressure to compromise. The voters could eject politicians who refuse to compromise, laying down an electorally enforced preference for a functioning government. The Senate majority could change the rules, essentially eliminating the filibuster. Groups such as Unity '08 could arise and, rather than wasting everyone's time with idle fantasies of ever more dreamy executives, could campaign against Senate rules that are undemocratic and hostile to progress.

But the president can't do this, not on his or her own. Unity means nothing in the face of obstructionism, and problems can't be solved if legislators refuse to solve them.

Ezra Klein is a staff writer at the American Prospect. His blog can be found at EzraKlein.com.