Obama disses Paterson, in part for Gillibrand pick
September 20, 2009
by Amy Siskind
|Hat tip to John Horning for bringing this story to our attention.
In what The New York Times described as an an extraordinary intervention, President Obama has requested that Governor Paterson of New York drop his campaign for re-election.
One of the main reasons cited, was Gov Paterson’s selection of Sen Kirsten Gillibrand to take Secretary Hillary Clinton’s open seat:
In addition, the relationship between Mr. Obama and Mr. Paterson has been shaky, dating to the governor’s selection of a replacement for Hillary Rodham Clinton, who resigned from the Senate to become secretary of state. White House officials had
received assurances from Mr. Paterson that he would not pick Kirsten E. Gillibrand, then a little-known Democratic congresswoman from a heavily Republican district outside of Albany, according to a prominent Democrat who discussed the matter with a senior White House official.The White House and Democratic House leaders were concerned that her sudden departure from the House would give Republicans a prime opportunity to reclaim the seat.
Well, news flash – Gillibrand’s house seat did stay in Democratic hands – with help of course from Sen Gillibrand.
And by using the bold move by Gov Paterson as a ground to speak out about him, what is President Obama saying? That moving away from the status quo to pick a qualified woman is not acceptable? To give you a sense of how strong Sen Gillibrand was at home, she won her House seat with over 60% of the vote as a Democrat running in a heavily Republican district. Does this not speak volume about her popularity and job performance and hence qualification for the then open senate seat?
As John Horning beautifully stated in his comment on our blog:
He (Paterson) chose a woman for this Senate vacancy. Is this payback for choosing a woman? Was that choice so bad in their opinion that it invalidates his status as a black man?
Meanwhile, here in Colorado, Governor Ritter chose an untested man without giving consideration to the possibility that the state of Colorado might have a qualified woman. The Obama administration is fully supportive of the Governor in his bid for reelection. Well, Ritter’s choice of an untested man seems to fit well with the DNC’s philosophy.
In the mean time, this unwarranted intervention is also a pox on Sen Gillibrand. As if Gov Paterson’s selection of her is part of President Obama’s grounds for a dissing. How is that going to help Sen Gillibrand in HER re-election bid?
Apparently not a priority for our President, leader of the Democratic Party.
I guess it’s old fashioned to let Democratic Primary voters decide. Does the President think he has the nation running so smoothly that he can now start in on the states?
*****A
Just more Obama power politics Chicago style-
He is also going to use Clinton as the scapegoat if all s— hits the fan in iran vs israel. The whole thing there scares me…Barry is blatantly anti Israel- the problem is that as SoC HRC will take the fall if Iran gets the bomb, or Israel Attacks. Read to day that Brezenski as recommended Barry shoot down Israeli planes as they fly through Iraq.All this will I fear end HRC for good as she will be branded with this junk
Interesting. I was wondering what kind of hell Patterson would have to pay for ditching Caroline Kennedy in favor of Gillibrand.
Also interesting in the context of rumors (that I have no reason to believe) that Hillary may escape her position as Sec. of State in favor of running for Governor of NY. But that seems like a long shot. Still wish Obama would just let Hillary do her job, though.
But this is insane. Presidents do not choose a state’s governor! I think there are enough political voices in New York (as well as enough people!) to do that on there own. I’m really horrified about this. It’s just so…. Bush-like. Ugh.
This is not about Gillibrand;
This is not about gender;
This is not about race or color;
It’s about the Absolute Incompetence of the encumbent in question (DP)….
Otherwise the selection of Gillibrand would be a non-issue.
Yvonne,
That may be your POV, but it is NOT what the NYT article cites. NYT cites Gillibrand and racism claims.
Once again, my party of old has been nailed for it’s sexism and race baiting…. as Obama attempts to *S*elect and install his preferences for high office… up and down the Eastern Seaboard. NY, NJ, MA…. The way the White House will tamper with the law, and the Primary process has no bounds.
I am hopeful that PUMAs will join with the GOP for a while…. to put an end to this hijacking of the Dem party. It is our only hope… if we want to even have two parties to choose between in the future.
When Gov. Paterson chose Kristin “little Hillary” Gillibrand he was, in every sense of the word… *daring* the President to stop him. I HOPE that upstate NY’s Blue Dawgs will stand behind their embattled Governor. And put an end to this ridiculous ACORN-esque *S*election process.
Good post, Amy. Linked you to my blog.
It’s about the Absolute Incompetence of the encumbent in question (DP)….
Shouldn’t that be a decision for the voters of New York to make?
Yvonne,
Obama has been on good terms with another Governor with the same public approval ratings as Paterson. I do not believe this is about “incompetence”. Besides, it is very unusual for a POTUS to ask a Governor to step aside. It is the concern of the politicos in New York State and is quite a controlling move by our POTUS which I personally feel uncomfortable with. I’ll repeat myself. This level of control seems very BUSH to me.
I found John Horning’s comment about Colorado particularly interesting as Obama has endorsed the inexperienced, appointed Senator Bennett – any guesses of who one of the people running against him? Former Lt. Governor Jane Norton.
Alison,
I agree, obama’s efforts to control power in NYC is very disturbing and not part of his “pay grade”, if you ask me. This guy is so obvious with his overwhelming reach for centralized power, that people just can’t believe their eyes! Thank God for the tea parties and the awakening of the American people, because this guy is systematically destroying our country right before our very eyes.
Anothing point that is also disturbing (and should be so particularly to the AA commuinity) is that Jon Corzine has the same approval ratings as Paterson, but obama actively supports Corzine but not for one of the two only AA governors. Isn’t that a kick in the teeth? Surely, the AA community is concerned that the man they believed would do the most for them is again throwing another AA under the bus for political expediency. The question is, will they finally open their eyes and see this man for who he really is — a Chicago pol?
I had high hopes for Patterson, but the truth is he isn’t doing a very good job. He does, however, have every right to run for Governor if he wants to. The POTUS has no place telling anyone that they shouldn’t run. I wish Patterson was doing better but we will see what the NY Dems decide if there is a primary. I just wish that the Pubs would put forth a woman for the election. Upstate NY has some fine women leaders who would be great in that position. Maggie Brooks, Cheryl Dinolfo, to name a few. Of course they are in Rochester, so I am a tad biased.
It doesn’t look like Patterson will listen to Obama.
The Times cites the Gillibrand appointment as an aggravating factor, not the primary one which is the fear by the Democratic party of losing a Governor’s mansion. Your suggestion that this was somehow a gender issue doesn’t really work given that the Obama administration allegedly wanted Caroline Kennedy.
And there’s a very fundamental difference between New York and New Jersey. There are obvious people who could run in place of Patterson in New York (Andrew Cuomo and, allegedly, Hillary). There is no such politician in New Jersey.
This is politics, I don’t see why you find this sort of maneuvering so surprising. I think you’re all steadily losing your grip on reality, seeing conspiracies everywhere. I half expect to come here one day and find you’re supporting Orly Taitz.
SB – You miss the point in regard to gender. Caroline Kennedy was not favored by the Obama administration because she is female – she was favored because she is a Kennedy and spoke powerfully for the Obama campaign during the primaries. In other words, Kennedy was the woman who chose the (less qualified) man during the primaries. And this Senate appointment was seen by some as being her payoff. So yes, it was bold of Patterson to choose Gillibrand, a qualified New York State Congresswoman. And many of us at New appreciate that and believe that he chose a qualified Congresswoman (as opposed to a qualified Congressman) to keep a woman in the New York Senate. A woman with political experience, that is.
Whether the Gillibrand appointment is an aggravating factor or a leading factor is parsing words. Either way, it’s an annoyance to this former New Yorker!
Well Obama is a ruthless politician . You can like him yea but I like Patterson. He was the only governor to warn us about the financial heading our way.
Wow, this is a great post and quite an interesting new take on all of this–it is true that the President’s “diss” of Paterson will not only have this largely negative effect on him. It will also highly affect approval ratings for the women he chose to fill Hillary Clinton’s position, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand. Sadly, it seems the President was either not thinking about such consequences or he did not care enough to rephrase/restructure his handling of the Paterson affair.
There’s an interesting video on the Paterson controversy and different views on the matter at newsy.com. The video does a good job of showing quite a few perspectives from various news sources, and the video is worth watching/commenting on if you have just a couple of minutes:
http://www.newsy.com/videos/pressuring_paterson
Leave your Response Want an avatar? Get a gravatar!
Community Room
February 22, 2012 at 11:22 am
February 17, 2012 at 2:39 pm
February 6, 2012 at 4:25 pm
January 30, 2012 at 2:36 pm
January 26, 2012 at 4:38 pm
January 23, 2012 at 1:04 pm
January 15, 2012 at 11:37 am
January 9, 2012 at 6:36 pm
BUILD your NETWORK
Our Network of College Women
Protecting our Teenage Girls
We’re in the Media »
Click to see our latest stories in the media
More Stories »Recent Comments
The Latest from our Blog
Archives
Pioneer Mentors
Blogroll
Find us Online
Subscribe Entries (RSS) | Comments (RSS)
The New Agenda is a 501(c)(4) organization dedicated to improving the lives of women and girls by bringing about systemic change in the media, at the workplace, at school and at home. More...