The accidental governor of New York ended his relentless daily display of incompetence in choosing a successor to Senator Hillary Clinton by offering this praise for his choice, Congresswoman Kirsten Gillibrand: "She also introduced legislation that would require that our federal budget be balanced annually. Our state budget is balanced annually, our federal budget is not."
The governor obviously has no idea that this means he has just delivered a Democratic senator who is committed to voting against the first Obama bill to come her way--the stimulus package that will push the federal budget at least 800 billion dollars farther away from balance. Indeed, the Gillibrand simple-minded devotion to balancing the federal budget above all else means that she must oppose everything on the Obama agenda. Everything President Obama wants to do costs money, money that the federal government doesn't have. Obama, as he made crystal clear in the campaign, plans to do it with deficit spending, something that Congresswoman Gillibrand opposes and something we now discover the governor of New York opposes even though New York state will be one of the biggest beneficiaries of that spending.
Introducing "legislation that would require that our federal budget be balanced annually" is as childish as Congressional behavior can get. If Gillibrand had her way, Obama would have no tools to use to get us out of this recession/depression. Nor would we be able to continue paying soldiers in Iraq or buy the jet fuel to fly them home or enact any version of health care reform.
All the adults in Congress agree that we need a deficit-financed stimulus package--the Democrat v. Republican disagreements are only over the precise size and shape of the package. How long will it take Kirsten Gillibrand to grow up?
|
Kennedy's Bid Derailed By Housekeeper And Tax Problems: NY Times
Problems involving taxes and a household employee surfaced during the vetting of Caroline Kennedy and derailed her candidacy for the Senate, a person close to...
|
|
Paterson: I Made Choice Before Inauguration, Will Announce Tomorrow
Gov. David Paterson offered a bit of insight Thursday evening into how the removal of Caroline Kennedy's name from the list of possible New York...
|
|
Kirsten Gillibrand: New York's Next Senator
UPDATE: 12:20pm: Gov. David Paterson appointed Democratic U.S. Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand on Friday to fill New York's vacant Senate seat, finally settling on a woman...
|
|
Kirsten Gillibrand Is NY's Next Senator
ALBANY, N.Y. — Instantly opening a rift among New York Democrats, Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand _ a little-known, pro-gun Democrat from a rural Republican district _...
|
|
Kirsten Gillibrand Reached Out To Gay Rights Group
One of the first acts that Kirsten Gillibrand took upon learning that she would succeed Hillary Clinton as New York Senator was to reach out...
|
|
Gillibrand: 'I Realize You Don't Know Much About Me'
ALBANY, N.Y. — Instantly opening a rift among New York Democrats, Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand _ a little-known, pro-gun Democrat from a rural Republican district _...
|
|
Kirsten Gillibrand Pick Praised By Obama: "Wonderful Choice"
President Obama released a statement praising New York Gov. Paterson's choice of Kirsten Gillibrand to fill the state's vacant Senate seat: "Governor Paterson made a...
|
|
The Success of Kirsten Gillibrand and the Trashing of Caroline Kennedy
Caroline Kennedy deserved serious consideration. She may have made mistakes in the way she rolled out her candidacy, but the constant refrain that "she wasn't qualified" does not compute.
|
|
Obama and Ted Kennedy See Plans Foiled as Caroline Withdraws?
Caroline Kennedy may yet be a factor in American politics. Obama would love it for his own reasons -- and so would the powerful political franchise that Ted Kennedy helped build.
|
|
Gillibrand Needs to Change Her Stance on Immigration
Gillibrand needs to change her position on immigration now that she is representing not only the 20th district of upstate New York, but the whole state.
|
|
Sarah Palin and Caroline Kennedy Aren't Victims of Glass Ceilings, There is Something Wrong with the Floor.
Both Palin and Kennedy were obviously unprepared for the offices each sought. Had a ceiling not stopped them, we would have more serious social issues to deal with.
|
|
Kennedy Out, Gillibrand In
Gillibrand is a pro-gun, fiscally conservative Blue Dog Democrat, which is the name moderate Democrats gave themselves so people stopped confusing them with Republicans.
|
|
Our Own Sarah Palin
The old New Yorker in me believes Gillibrand would best serve the people by shooting Canadian geese over airports than repairing our Bush broken nation.
|
|
I Ran for Office with Kirsten Gillibrand
I applaud the Governor's choice, and I think as you get to know Senator Gillibrand, you will come to admire and support her as I have.
|
Chris Smith on Paterson’s One New Friend and Many New Enemies - 1/29/09
...Politically, Paterson has made himself a new best friend in former senator Al D’Amato. (Kirsten Gillibrand was a summer intern in D’Amato’s office and her father is one of D’Amato’s closest friends.) D’Amato has already been shaking the money tree on Paterson’s behalf; on the negative side, he’s an ethically dubious Republican lobbyist in an overwhelmingly Democratic state. A handful of women's groups have also praised Paterson.
Paterson wanted to appoint a new senator in the worst way,
and he did.
I'm serious. And the Netroots would for-sure have your back.
From "blue dogs" to Gillibrand, the Democratic Party has more moles than a golf course abandoned due to the economy.
I'm certainly no fan of Hillary Clinton, and don't agree with all of Gillabrand's positions, but she is LIGHT YEARS ahead of CK in terms of readiness for the job.
Unlike CK, who never held a real, full time job in her entire life, Gillabrand has been a hardworking and successful lawyer (advocating for the disenfranchised) and has run two very successful campaigns for congress, dislodging a long-serving repub in a traditionally repub district - and then keeping the seat.
Contrary to what O'Donnell preaches to anyone who'll listen, CK has no one to blame but herself for blowing what was almost a sure thing. If only she had made her request privately.
If voters don't like Gillabrand, or CK is dead set on becoming NY's junior senator, there's a primary coming up very soon. Now let's get over it, and move on.
And no - I am absolutely NOT a Hillary partisan - so I don't have a dog in this fight.
Perhaps you're making a big mistake equating NY Republicans with their far-right brethren who control the national party.
"One of her immediate priorities, she said, is making sure the state benefited from President Obama’s $825 billion stimulus plan that is due to come before Congress this week."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28845454/
There is no downstate.
There is one New York state.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090126/ap_on_re_us/ny_senate_seat
This should go over big outside of The Waldorf Astoria in the neighborhoods of NYC, surrounded by PR flacks and their complement of DLC/Neocons, otherwise known as Clinton, Paterson and Schumer (wasn't Lieberman available for brunch today?).
As matter of fact, her Republican opponents tried to paint her as an interloper from Manhattan into upstate politics.
I do have a feeling that Gillibrand will change many of her positions now that she is out of her conservative district. I doubt she will buck Obama on the stimulus plan, and if she does, she won’t be around long. Supporting a balanced budget at the Federal level is as dumb as privatizing Social Security. But I have a feeling it was a “gimmick” position.
If she does not change her tune, I really admire Carolyn McCarthy but she may not run if younger Dems step up. Gillibrand is going to have to do some very graceful dancing to move more left without the appearance of expediency, but I think she will find a way to do that and their may be no primary challenge at all in 2 years.
Among Paterson's offenses was a request that Caroline lie about her unexpected withdrawal for "personal" reasons, according to NY magazine.
"You can't withdraw. You've got to stay in this thing, and I'll just not pick you," Paterson reportedly told her over the phone late Wednesday.
Then a torrent of ugly rumors spilled from Paterson's office about Caroline's taxes, about her nanny, even about the state of her marriage - and Camelot's seeking payback, confidants said.
"I'm sure the family is going to protect her," one source said. "What did Caroline do to deserve getting dragged through the mud?"
And take it from One Who Knows, Murdoch reporters sometimes use the person sitting at the next desk as a "source."
I'm not kidding about this.
After reading dozens of posts on this thread, I think that you should use the Soapbox that your notariety gives you with more care and discretion. This is a time when we need to get together behind our leaders and save the intra-party sniping and broadsides for an elecoral cycle. I think that your piece runs in the face of the spirit of what President Obama asked for in his Inaugural adddress.
As a highly visible supporter of Ms. Kennedy's candidacy, you have stirred up a lot of hostility against a person who managed a remarkable political feat in her home district (twice) and who has garnered Union and ACLU support, despite some positions that are out of the Progressive Mainstream, but which she will now have an ample opportunity to discuss with and defend to voters. The "fact base" of your piece is a Bill that Gillibrand helped introduce 20 months ago and which I doubt she would propose today.
Respectfully.
Some of us agree with Mr. O'Donnell and believe that the PROCESS is as important as the decision. We voted for CHANGE at the national level to usher in an era of transparency and accountability by our elected officials. Lawrence O'Donnell isn't responsible for this zeitgeist. President Barack Obama is responsible.
This PROCESS was/is tainted. The result is the opposite of what New Yorkers would have voted for, since we are not a Conservative State -- and this choice represents the opposite of President Obama's agenda of purging the undue influence of lobbyists on our Government.
Americans of every stripe are focused and active. I have an ankle sprain and some time this week. While the NYT and PR spun PRESS were duped, I was not. Neither was Lawrence. Now they have realized they were part of this toxic process and manipulated by a cunning, wiley accidental gossiping-at-parties Governor - not ready for primetime, himself.
I do not challenge anyone's opinions -- or the right to express them in any way they choose. I question those who try to do so - and their reasons at this time in our history.
Secondly, I didn't criticize his evaluation of Paterson, which was fair, but rather his piling on Gillibrand about a piece of legislation that she introduced 20 months ago, before the climate changed dramatically and issues were seriously refocused. My only point has been that she should have a chance to answer questions about that legislation and indicate whether she still thinks it is prudent.
Third, I feel strongly that people like Mr. O'Donnell, who have held positions of privilege by working for a giant like Daniel Patrick Moynihan (whom I am proud to have known) should be held to a higher standard when it comes to uniting behind the common and daunting task which lies before us. His heritage suggests that he should know better than to play to raw passion as he did in that post.
Sorry.
The NY PRESS propaganda machine got it dead wrong and are now self-correcting w/a little investigative reporting they should have done all along - rather than let PR HACKS (high priced) from competitors and the Governors Press Office and AG's spin them. Lawrence and others could smell a rat. If you don't share our views, fine. Ignore them. The truth will out. It isn't taking long.
Those would include Gillibrand's credentials as a lawyer, as an experienced politician whose constituents think she's wonderful, her educational credentials, her ability at public speaking, and her obvious willingness to be out there with the people whose voice she is in Washington.
http://www.nypost.com/seven/01242009/news/regionalnews/gov_says_caroline_turned_nasty_151614.htm
Gov. Paterson rapped Caroline Kennedy at a private event the night before he tapped Kirsten Gillibrand for the Senate, telling guests Kennedy had been "nasty" to him and shown "disrespect" with how she bowed out, attendees told The Post.
The governor's attack came just hours after his office issued a statement wishing her well and disavowing quotes from a source close to him who had told The Post Kennedy had never been in true contention for the seat and was "mired" in personal issues.
What about the larger issues? Was Caroline Kennedy the best choice? I supported her until she stepped in it with the media and voters, dropping dramatically in the polls in a matter of weeks. After her introduction, I concluded she was fully qualified to run for Senate but not to be appointed. I hope she does run next year so we can form a fair opinion of her.
My choice was my Congressperson, Carolyn Maloney. I thought she would bring a tough, seasoned voice to the table. She has represented us well both on the City Council and in Washington.
I thought Andrew Cuomo was the logical choice; here I will speculate. I think a deal was brokered between Paterson and the Kennedys. She withdrew and saved him the problem of going against the President. In return, he promised to appoint ABC (Anybody But Cuomo) to Robert Kennedy's seat. The rest, including the reports you cite, are atmospherics and will be forgotten in a few weeks.
As for Gillibrand. Despite my defense of her, I am surprised at the pick. I am only arguing that we should give her a chance. She didn't get her Union Support and 100% ACLU rating by being a raving Dittohead. Let's see what she does in the next few months.
This former Bois Schiller lobbyist has already been at work. Two Bois Schiller partners --donated $25K each to Paterson's Campaign since late December 2008. Wonder how much Al D'Amato and Joe Bruno kicked in?
And so it goes...
Nothing personal. Quite simple. No more lobbyists. CHANGE.
http://nymag.com/news/politics/53618/