"Informed Sources": What Really Happened When Rush Limbaugh and Sarah Palin Got Into Upstate New York Politics
As New York residents know, ever since Governor Spitzer got caught in the wrong hotel room, Albany has been in turmoil. The latest tempest involved the 23rd Congressional district where, to the astonishment of the political establishment, the Republican candidate was forced out of the race because of her positions on gay and abortion rights. Her departure left the field wide open for the Conservative Party nominee.
Who forced her out--Sarah Palin, Rush Limbaugh and the other far-right Conservatives, who argued that a woman who supported abortion rights and gay marriage should not run be on the Republican ticket. (The Democratic candidate won, but that's beside the point.) The question is why did the Republican Party drop its own nominees and abandon out the race?
The answer (according to "informed sources"): former NY Governor George Pataki brokered a deal in an attempt to sew up his nomination on the Conservative line if he runs for the Senate in 2012. After the deal was announced Pataki made a statement in support of the Conservative candidate and campaigned for him. Pataki had been backed by the New York Conservative Party when he ran for Governor, but he was perceived as relatively "moderate" during his three terms in office. According to my sources, Pataki's political ambitions are centered on a Senate run for the seat formerly held by Hillary Clinton and now, thanks to Spitzer's successor as Governor David Paterson, occupied by Kirsten Gillibrand, a former upstate Democratic Congresswoman.
How did she get the nod from Paterson? My sources suggest that former Republican Senator Al D'Amato, a close Pataki political ally, and now an equally close advisor to Democratic Governor Paterson, persuaded him to choose the little known Gillibrand over Caroline Kennedy (JFK's daughter). who had been expected to gain the appointment. Paterson's decision seemed abrupt and strange, and was certainly badly handled. The appointment brought upon him the wrath of many in the Democratic Party, and according to polls, has reduced his popularity with Democrats in the state to a mere 17%.
Who has it helped? Certainly George Pataki, Al D'Amato's close pal. Gillibrand, who has done a pretty good job as Senator, is a far less formidable opponent than Caroline Kennedy would've been if Pataki decides to run in 2012.
But still, why did Pataki broker the deal in the first place? The answer: he wants to ensure the support of the Limbaugh-Palin wing of the Republican Party; he doesn't want a challenge for the Senate spot on the Conservative Party line either. So according to my upstate New York "informed sources", the biggest winner in last Tuesday's New York election is George Pataki. Republicans may have lost a seat in the House of Representatives, but that's a small price to pay if they gain a Senate seat in 2012.
As for pro-tem Governor David Paterson, New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo is favored to win the Democratic nomination for Governor in 2010 and Patterson may be consigned to the dustbin of Albany history. It cannot come too soon.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Mr Reese,another conspirancy theory ,spinning the ball?
District 23 was a heavy loss for Republicans,nothing you said or they could do
on 2012 to recoup.
What really happens when Rush and Palin get involved on politic=Implosion.
District 23!
How very Hegelian.
It sounds like junior high school intrigue or a movie script.
Sorry. Too many anonymous "informed sources" for my tastes.
And what exactly was in it for Paterson to help Pataki run for Senate?
It's more likely that he was suckered into that decision by the "advice" of his "advisor" and Pataki ally, D'Amato......rather than being aware of the scheme and looking to get something out of it.
Sounds very Paterson like, naive and not the brightest bulb.
I'm not from NY, so excuse me if this is a dumb questions, but why exactly would a democrat like Patterson be taking advice from a republican like D'Amato?
When it's all said and done, no matter what kind of deal was made, the Gop do what it always do, kick a women to the curb for a white guy. I don't ever have a clue who was involved in this deal, but you can bet no women was involved.
weird. plus, he couldn't even spell Paterson's name. kinda loses any validity.
Pataki will never make it to the senate now that New Yorkers know this. If he loves Rush Limbaugh and Sarah who?, then he don't have a snowball's chance in hades to get that senate bid. New Yorkers are not stupid.
I said it before and now I will shout it loud. . . NEW YORKERS ARE NOT STUPID NOR DUMB.
Wow. It's so convoluted.
Maybe so, but it's Paterson, Governor David Alexander Paterson.
I'm sorry but I can't make any sense out of this. George Pataki brokered a deal between whom? The Conservative Party and Limbaugh and/or Palin? What influence would Pataki have with them? Back in 2002, Pataki's last run for governor, Rush urged his ditto-heads to contribute to Carl McCall, the Democrat who was running against him. Why would it be an advantage to Pataki, who has championed choice and gay rights, to have a Republican forced out of the campaign because of her similar views on these issues?
Al D'Amato is backing Pataki for the Senate seat? D'Amato and Peter King have been allies since they first served together on the Town of Hempstead Board of Supervisors in 1978. King's son is a partner in D'Amato's lobbying firm. His daughter runs a PAC which has made large contributions to Governor Patterson.
Just to keep things clear Killibrand represented the 20th District, not the 23rd. Her successor, Scott Murphy, was elected back on March 31 although the race was close enough he did not take his seat until the end of April. Although he has not joined the Blue Dog Coalition, like Killibrand, Rep. Murphy was one of the 39 Democrats who voted against the Health Care bill on Saturday night. BIll Owens, who won the election in the 23rd last Tuesday, voted for the bill.
You must remember that in politics, all is fair. Every politicians who claims party sentiments do not necessarily have to believe in those sentiments. There are Judas's everywhere in politics, more so in any other business entity. It's all about a dollar! Politicians are a bunch of sick puppies if you ask me!
And people go all shock and awe about Chicago politics....hell - and this isn't even New Jersey for goodness sakes...
The story reads like a dime novel. Pataki was interested in the Conservative line is to deny Peter King that endorsement.
The desire by the Republicans to deny another Congressional seat to the Democrats back fired. Strong Conservative star endorsements resulted in the loss of a seat that has been in the GOP fold for over 145 years. Rush and Palin my sell down south or in a couple of Western States, but not where people know how to read and write.
The Gillibrand saga is much more complicated. The ploy to position Kennedy was done with a heavy hand that made the Governor look foolish. Caroline was at best washy with the press and public were not charmed. Senator Schummer who is hugely popular was likely not thrilled with having to deal with another star junior senator. Caroline also had some New York City baggage with the New York TImes.
Gillibrand does have a history Senator D'Amato bu alsa rich history in NY Democratic politics and was a proven fund raising machine. Her DNA is also diverse enough to be acceptable to moderate Republicans, not true with Kennedy.
Does George Pataki have a good chance of winning a NY Senate seat in 2010, I don't think so. Did the National Republicans do themselves more harm than good by meddling in the NY 23rd, very clearly yes. Will the Republicans learn anything or change anytime soon, Nope.
Mike 182, this is not about health care and your ranting is abusive. Stay on issue.
I was relatively certain from other things that I had read that the results of all this bore some connection to the incredibly inept manner in which Patterson had handled the Senatorial issue, and this speculation may well be correct. Patterson is blind, and I mean no pun, if he thinks that he can trust and rely upon D'Amato.
I'm all for health care reform but it's very eye brow raising when it comes with a mandate that you have to be insured with stiff penalties if you are not. Clearly shows that our government panders to and makes concessions to an industry that for decades has abused Americans by placing profits over people. All the rhetoric we have heard. Politicians in public on video railing against the insurance industry evils are the same faces behind closed doors ensuring that we owe the health insurance industry money for the rest of our lives with nothing to slow premium and deductible hikes . I want reform but I doubt we will ever see true reform. The health insurers are too big, too wealthy and too powerful for our politicians not to be swayed to fall in line with them over us.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
