A REAL Profile in Courage
As many of us could have predicted, the Obama media, this time it’s The New York Times, is doing his bidding by trashing both NY Gov. David Paterson and his choice to replace Hillary Clinton, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. I am so embarrassed by the state of the media in this country. Until these overcompensated children are run out of the business on a rail, nothing is going to change.
First they accuse him of damaging and dividing the party because he didn’t pick Obama’s chosen one, Caroline Kennedy
A process that they had hoped would elevate the governor, demonstrate his statesmanship and introduce him to the nation instead damaged his credibility and divided his party. Its final days were by turns intensely secretive and astoundingly public, culminating with personal attacks on Caroline Kennedy from the governor’s camp that astonished the state’s political establishment.
This is amazing. Poor little Caroline, don’t they know her father was killed? How DARE Paterson actually consider what the voters (all of them) of New York want. And how DARE he actually consider the depth of experience rather than celebrity profile of the candidate? And worst of all, how DARE he appoint someone who was not Obama’s choice? I mean he already lost his own seat for Jesse Jackson Jr. because one of his corrupt cronies wasn’t going to take the fall for him and let him get to pick his own replacement. But The Times isn’t going to waste time talking about it because that whole incident just reminded everyone of Obama’s corrupt Chicago ties. This is important because this choice actually shows Obama to be less than 100 percent in control of the party, and therefore must be denounced by Obama’s propaganda outlets. You see, The Times did get something right. This does signify a divide in the party. A divide between the cult of personality driven Obamacrats, and the Hillary contingent who have successfully retained control of their wing of the party in the most Democratic, progressively liberal state in the country.
But according to the Times this is about a bumbling governor who was just plain nasty to Caroline:
In the aftermath, many top Democrats and even friends of Mr. Paterson see his governorship as reeling and troublingly disorganized. They believed that this was to be his defining year, one in which he could move beyond the unusual circumstances of his ascension to high office and prove he could lead the state through a perilous fiscal crisis.
Some were unusually open in questioning the approach — and judgment — of the governor and the people around him.
“If we have royalty, it’s the Kennedys,” said Assemblyman Peter M. Rivera, a Bronx Democrat and chairman of the Assembly’s Puerto Rican/Hispanic Task Force. “The way she was treated, the backbiting and the attacks, it was insulting,” he said, adding that the extended selection process “was reflective of individuals who are not ready for prime time” and “demeaning to a lot of people.”
Quick, someone get a psychiatrist! I’m not sure, but I think that’s called projection. I don’t recall Paterson every saying anything but nice things about Kennedy. It was articles in the Times that kept rumors swirling, and it wasn’t until she “withdrew” that I ever read the first bad thing about her, and again it was only unsubstantiated rumors. In fact it was the media and Kennedy’s allies who continually trashed the Governor. Paterson never wavered from his pronouncement that he would deliberate and choose the most qualified candidate, which is his job. In fact the only quote directly attributed to Paterson was this one:
“Last night Caroline Kennedy informed the governor that she was withdrawing her name from consideration for an appointment to the United States Senate for personal reasons. This decision was hers alone.
“The Governor had a private conversation with Ms. Kennedy yesterday afternoon. Out of respect for her decision making process, the Governor’s Office did not respond to any inquiries in order to allow her time to deliberate. The Governor considers Caroline a friend and knows she will continue to serve New York well inside or outside of government. We wish her well in all her future endeavors.
“The Governor is now entering the final phase of his selection process. He has not informed any Senate candidates that they have not been selected, nor has any information gathered during this selection process created a necessity for any candidate to withdraw. Any speculation to the contrary is both inaccurate and inappropriate.”
But the propaganda hacks never let anything like reality stop them from smearing anyone who dares cross their Lord Obama. According to them Paterson is such a stupid oaf that he has managed to anger all factions of the party; the Kennedys (and by extension Obama), the Cuomos, and the Clintons. Even though Cuomo never even publicly pursued the post, and had worked closely with Gillibrand in the past. And the Clintons? Well it’s because Hillary is a vengeful old bitch, don’t you remember? She is pissed because Paterson even considered Caroline.
“He’s managed to anger, in one fell swoop, the Kennedys, the Cuomos and the Clintons,” the consultant said, arguing that Ms. Kennedy’s family would be furious at the governor over the leaks against her, Mr. Cuomo at being passed over for the job, and Mrs. Clinton at the governor’s willingness to consider Ms. Kennedy in the first place after she endorsed Barack Obama in the presidential race last year.
Never mind that there is absolutely no indication that no one is angered except for poor little Caroline, and the empty suit in Washington who wanted another puppet in the Senate. I guess to avoid lawsuits from these camps, the author decided to slip in the truth parenthetically after having trashed them.
“That’s a pretty good trifecta,” the consultant added. (Mr. Cuomo and Mrs. Clinton, it should be said, issued press releases on Friday effusively praising Ms. Gillibrand.)
So who are you going to believe? Cuomo and Clinton, or some hack quoting “sources” at an institution that has proven itself to be a true Obama loyalist, having spread lies about both Clinton and McCain during the election season?
But they aren’t done yet. They also trash Gillibrand as a “moderate” from upstate who doesn’t reflect the liberal Dem base in NY City. And who might be the person best reflective of those voters?
Before the governor had even announced that he had selected Ms. Gillibrand, the pick ignited turmoil within the party, especially among more liberal downstate Democrats. Representative Carolyn McCarthy, an ardent gun-control activist who was elected to Congress after her husband was killed in a gunman’s rampage on the Long Island Rail Road in 1993, said Friday that she would start raising money next week for a potential primary challenge to Ms. Gillibrand, a centrist Democrat endorsed by the National Rifle Association.
So Gillibrand is a centrist and McCarthy is a liberal? I saw this and about spit my drink all over the screen. They really don’t think we have any memory from before 2 days ago I guess. See, like so many other members of the new Obama coalition, Ms McCarthy was, until quite recently, a Republican.
On December 7, 1993, her husband, Dennis, was killed and her son, Kevin, severely injured, on a Long Island Rail Road commuter train at the Merillon Avenue station, when a mass murderer, Colin Ferguson, opened fire on random unarmed passengers.[4] Ferguson killed six and wounded 19 others.[5] McCarthy responded to the crime by launching a campaign for additional gun control measures that eventually propelled her to Congress in 1996 on the Democratic ticket.
In 1996, the district’s first-term Republican incumbent Dan Frisa was running for re-election while McCarthy testified against a Republican measure to repeal the federal Assault Weapons Ban in a congressional hearing, an attempt that was ultimately unsuccessful.[9][10]
After Frisa voted for the repeal, McCarthy, a lifelong Republican,[11] announced she would run against him in the primary. However, local Republican officials indicated disinterest.[2] So, with the support of the local and national Democratic parties, and the endorsement of Newsday, the local daily newspaper, McCarthy ran as a Democrat and defeated Frisa by seventeen points.[12] Afterwards, Republicans intimated that they would like her to run as a Republican in 1998 but that never occurred.[13]
The only reason she became a Democrat was because of the issue of gun control. And while I don’t wish her tragedy on anyone, I find it difficult to respect someone who has to have a personal tragedy before they come to jesus and see the light on an issue like gun control. From everything I know about her, it is her singular issue. I wonder, for example, if she is as liberal as Gillibrand on other issues, such as gay rights and the right to choose?
Gillibrand’s appointment won support from the state’s largest gay and abortion rights groups.
Alan Van Capelle, head of the Empire State Pride Agenda, the state’s largest gay rights group, said Gillibrand expressed support for gay marriage.
The other major voice of opposition was also a former Republican, NYC mayor Michael Bloomberg
Mayor Bloomberg expressed strong disagreement with Gillibrand on gun control, saying she co-sponsored legislation to deny cities and police data they need to track illegal guns.
“I look forward to working with her to help her gain a broader understanding of the problems affecting New York City,” he said.
Fuck you Bloomberg… But getting back to The Times story, it seems to be an explicit threat to Paterson and what could be the opening volley in the battle between the true Democratic party and Obama’s minions of brain dead cultists.
In light of his recent stumbles, the question for the governor now is how diminished he has been by the process, and whether his weakness will embolden rivals and potentially prevent him from winning election in his own right next year.
Clearly, if this was to be a pivotal year, it has not begun well for the governor. The first sign of trouble seemed to be in his State of the State speech Jan. 7, an annual address that opens the legislative session and sets the tone for the entire year.
And let’s not let the opportunity pass to take a pot shot at him for his disability…
Despite clocking in at more than an hour long — no easy task, given that the governor is legally blind and must memorize his speeches — Mr. Paterson offered few new ideas.
Yeah don’t forget how difficult it must be for him, he’s blind you know (wink, wink, nudge, nudge). That’s a pretty low blow. And a pretty bigoted, misguided one. I guess they didn’t know or remember that blind people can and do read. It seems likely that Paterson would be able to consult a Braille version of his speech, doesn’t it? But that wouldn’t make him look weak and hapless as The Times would like.
I hope that this is the beginning of a battle for the heart and soul of the party. It gives me hope that I may yet one day be proud of the fact that I’ve been a Democrat my whole life. Until then I intend to participate to help elect, and donate to every Democrat who bucks Obama’s status quo. It is time right now to fight to make sure that at least in NY, the Democratic Party remains a refuge for those of us who truly are liberal progressives.
Posted by garychapelhill 
