News Copy, New York

Most Republican Governors Back Billion Dollar Bailout: What's Palin Doing Lobbying For Federal Monies?

MSNBC reported most Republican governors backing the near-billion dollar bailout package.

Alaska Governor Sarah Palin is pressing for monies and even Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal -- who said he wouldn't have voted for the bailout -- admitted he would accept bailout dollars.

So far, the only apparent holdouts are Mississippi Governor Haley Barbour and South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford

"It's incumbent on me as one of the nation's governors to speak out against what I believe is ultimately incredibly harmful to the economy, to taxpayers and to the worth of the U.S. dollar," Sanford said in an interview. "This plan is a huge mistake and is going to prolong and deepen this recession."

Watch him take the money.

Barbour was less idealistic.

"Yes, we need some help and we appreciate the help," Barbour said in an interview. "But I don't know about the details and the strings attached to tell you if I'll take all of it or not."

The bipartisan National Governors Association recently called on Congress to quickly pass the plan.

"States are facing fiscal conditions not seen since the Great Depression — anticipated budget shortfalls are expected in excess of $200 billion," the NGA statement said. "Governors ... support several key elements of the bill critical to states-increased federal support for Medicaid and K-12 and higher education; investment in the nation's infrastructure; and tax provisions to spur investment."

One wonders how newly elected RNC chairman Michael Steele responds to governors with their fiscal hands out, especially with the Los Angeles Times reported that he is getting a friendly reception from all 22 Republican governors.

Palin's first measurable political mistake, with Jindal about to make as big a mistake, and many of the other GOP governors risking their fiscally conservatives credentials for 2012. 

RNC Chairman Michael Steele: Can Republicans Be Saved From Themselves?

Political talking heads carry the argument that the religious right and the "Old South" cost Republicans the White House.

It's God's fault now.

Being conservative on social issues is rumored to have cost the Grand ol' Party control of the U.S. Senate, the House of Representatives, multiple gubernatorial races and control of state houses throughout the country.

Blame the Bible.  Everyone else does, since anyone resistant to social liberal ideas is the bad guy. 

Now the failure to support gay marriage and advocate abortion apparently cost the GOP control of American politics.  It had nothing to do with Iraq or the economy, eh?

I guess all those referendums, over 30 in all, had nothing to do with the sentiments of Americans?

This is called the Ugly Republican game, like the Ugly American syndrome, where we all play apologists for the God awful Republican establishment.

Hopefully, Mr. Steele won't be asking Republican candidates to put on that politically correct costume.

I wonder how all of the above thinking applies to GOP losses in states like New York, old industrial states that certainly couldn't be called carbon copies of the "Old South" or religious right bastions.  Explain Ohio.  Explain most of the rust belt.  Explain large portions of the liberal Northeast.

After September 15th, Americans wanted "change" because Wall Street pushed them to the edge -- not George Bush -- not the RNC platform -- not social issues -- not even Iraq.  Republican candidates couldn't articulate themselves out of this perfect storm that had included abandonning (and, in some instances, ridiculing) its true conservative base.

Enter Chairman Steele -- who has to figure all this out while simultaneously playing lion tamer to sides of the Republican establishment who hate each other.

Congressional Quarterly offered this analysis of the first black Republican Party chairman:

Republicans are hurting, sure. They went from the success of the “Moral Majority” of 1984 to the “Permanent Majority” of 1994 to now being the minority party that doesn’t know when to cooperate and when to resist the will of the governing majority.

“It’s time for something completely different and we are going to bring it to them,” Steele said after his victory.

Different?

David Bositis, Senior Research Associate with The Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies says the Republicans have to project change.

Change?  That word again.  Change.  Different.  Yeah .. Let's chuck Western Civilization out the window while we're at it, especially since Democrats are so good at it.  Let's be Democrats!!!

Are the Republican really stuck in the South or are they lost somewhere in the Northeast?

“Right now not enough Republicans are saying, We need to become a different party. They’re saying, We weren’t true to our values. Well, with Sarah Palin the GOP was true to their values and they failed,” Bositis said. “The old rules no longer apply because the country has turned a corner. In order for the Republicans to get back into the game, they’ve got to stop being a regional party.”

Did Sarah Palin really fail?

Or is it that Republicans are mired in a self-hatred of Republican conservative principles, out of fear and frustration that such ideals are not winning at the moment?

What happened to leadership?

Newsweek asked Newt Gingrich about Steele's prospects -- but talked more about campaign mechanics.

"Anybody that wants to build a serious political movement has to start with Google and YouTube and Facebook. You have to go on cable and you have to go mobile. We learned that in the last election. But once you get to the issues of protecting the right to vote, the Republicans will be ahead. Once you speak with people who favor the rights of workers to get organized, the GOP is going to be able to build much bigger e-mail lists than the Democrats. Look at talk radio. That's a great example of what I'm talking about here. You have no successful liberal talk radio in this entire country. That's because this is not a liberal country. In the end, this is a moderate to conservative country. And Steele will help our government get back to that."

Worth repeating ... "This is not a liberal country."

Worth noting again ... the politics fundamentals aren't be taken for granted.

Steele's Catholicism won't be ignored by the media either.

This backgrounder on the Maryland Republican's understanding of religious/political issues tells another tale about the new RNC chairman that's bound to catch some heat from the talking heads.

".... When push comes to shove, Steele will be viewed by the press exactly as he is portrayed here — a solid anti-abortion conservative. There is some chance, after all, that Steele may actually hold rather strong views on right-to-life issues — the while spectrum of them — due to his religious background."

Again, here it comes.  It's God's fault.  Abortion.  Abortion.  Abortion.  Pro-lifers cost Republicans control of Congress too?

CNN reported that some social conservatives were concerned that Steele would not champion social issues as the RNC chair, with those fears eased by Ken Blackwell's decision to drop out from consideration and endorse him.

"He decided to withdraw after several rounds of balloting and back Steele because "Michael looked at me in the eye" and committed to stay true to the party's political platform of "primacy of life, limited government and the rule of law."

It's not about the "Old South" at all.  It's about abortion.

But the words "pro-life" in the same sentence with change?  Never.

The emphasis on race could almost be viewed as demeaning, since it's unfair to Michael Steele as a person to claim he was chosen due to the color of his skin.

I don't agree with with Jay Bookman of the Atlanta Journal-Constitution (who made this sound as if the Republicans have been a racist good ol' boys club prior to Steele's election as chair) who focused first on Steele being "a black man" and also on the new RNC leader being "more moderate than many in his party’s base" -- as if the GOP was guilty of marginalizing itself to the far right.

"The GOP has basically rendered itself uncompetitive, and that’s not good for anybody in the long term — not for the Republicans; not for the Democrats, who need the competition to keep them straight; and not for the country as a whole."

The vote was close, 91-77, saying more about how conflicted Republicans remain with the issues and themselves.

Change won't be easy for either side of the political compass.

Republicans Have New National Chairman: Michael Steele Targets New York

James Tedisco's bid to reclaim New York's 20th Congressional District as a GOP stronghold gained a new advocate today.

Newly elected Republican National Committee Chairman Michael Steele has painted the bulls-eye on the seat that had been held for one term by New York's newly appointed junior U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, according to FOX News.

Steele said he will be in New York next week for a meeting with Republican state leadership to "map out the strategy to take that seat."

"That win will send a powerful signal to the rest of the country and especially those folks in the elite media who think they know so much more than the rest of us," he said.

"Our game is not up ... our message still rings true with countless Americans, specifically with those in the 20th congressional district," he added.

Good sign BUT a deeper question is who will call the shots with Tedisco's congressional run.

If it's the usual suspects who have lost too many races in recent years, Chairman Steele better be prepared for some tough talk.

Meanwhile, Capitol Confidential reported that the Democrats have ... a lot of candidates who want to run for this seat ... 35 to be exact, 35 that has been narrowed to six.

New York's Two-Headed Fiscal Monster: New York City And Westchester

The report from sleepy suburbia is not good but you wouldn't know that from the way the politicians ruling the Westchester County Government are posturing themselves.

At least King Michael is laying the bad news out for the world to see.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg was talking the tough talk yesterday, reported by the New York Daily News, painting a dire fiscal picture that finally moves all the spin to reality.

Yet we're hearing very little of the talk in the suburbs, where the real fiscal battle is being felt by homeowners.  A population of commuters resides here and also on Long Island and in New Jersey and Connecticut.  The two-headed monster of layoffs and higher taxes is being felt more in the suburbs of New York City than perhaps any other spot in the United States.

The best Westchester County Executive Andrew Spano could do was crow about his political fundraising.

We may have been the last to feel the hard hit of the real estate market's downward spiral but the commuter population is on the frontline of this economic war.  They work on Wall Street, publishing, Madison Avenue and media machine that is Manhattan.  Some may feel no empathy for New York's woes, already close to worst municipally in terms of State Government taxation and public debt, but a painful barometer is on display amid the suburban middle class and upper-middle class throughout the towns and villages and smaller cities in lower New York State.

If it all caves in here, the ripple effect ain't gonna be pretty in other parts of the United States.

So Mayor Bloomberg's own characterization of a city in economic crisis is a sorely needed jolt of reality for the tri-state region.

The New York Times did not react kindly to Bloomberg's call for higher taxes.

Would they react any better to mass layoffs of teachers and police?

Municipal officials like Mike Bloomberg have to open this conversation with the bad news.  It's no different from what Yonkers Mayor Phil Amicone started in December.  Amicone re-negotiated contracts with two municipal unions, as did Bloomberg earlier this month.  Will the teachers take less as taxpayers have less to give?

New York City's five boroughs encompass a thin fiscal paradigm being played out in the public and private sectors of a dozen urban sections of the United States -- and probably 20-40 other urban/suburban mid-sized cities nationwide.  What happens locally in the Town Halls and local school districts will be as important as what transpires on the floor of Congress.

Yet Westchester remains seemingly asleep to the fiscal crisis about to ratchet down its standard of living ... or it is just not being verbalized enough in the newspapers and broadcast media.

The New York Times also reported on what Bloomberg wants to cut.  It's not just salaries.  It's benefits.  It's a long-term reduction in repeating costs.  Pensions will be next.

As employees in the private sector see their pensions dribble to ... sometimes nothing ... or far less than what they spent years expecting ... how can the public sector unions expects iron-clad guarantees on pension amounts?

This is brutal news for the public sector culture but is it anywhere near as bad as those who will be paid off in the coming months; loss of homes and at least a standard of living that was assumed to be a sure thing since the mythical Clinton economy.

Message to the municipal unions, all the municipal unions in every form of government anywhere:  It's the economy, stupid, and it's not the taxpayer's job to subsidize an inflated standard of living for public employees when so many others have the banks or the reciever of taxes at their door.

Meanwhile, the cost to commute is rising again and Westchester residents don't want to be taxed indirectly to pay for New York City's subways.  They are already seeing a portion of their property tax bill flow from their pocketbooks to New York State and back down to New York City.

Westchester is already the highest taxed county in the United States, according U.S. Census Bureau surveys.  Homeowners on Long Island and throughout the Hudson Valley foot a bill to pay for services in the state's larger cities that they won't see the benefit.  Meanwhile, if New York City's private economy and public sector operation crashes -- the demands on the suburban taxpayer can only go up.

But suburban New York's sleepy two-headed monster keeps pretending they are immune to a nation's fiscal collapse.  I have a hunch that's about to change, like a light switch, and the downsizing is bound to change a lot more than the standard of living in those bedroom communities around New York City.

Something's gotta give.

Catching Up On The End Of Capitalism: First Posturing ... Then Panic?

Ben Stein identified the problem with the $820 billion stimulus package as reading comprehension.

"This bill is sent to Congress after President Obama has been in office for seven days. It is 680 pages long. According to my calculations, not one member of Congress read the entire bill before this vote. Obviously, it would have been impossible, given his schedule, for the president to have read the whole thing."

The New York Post carried Stein's acute breakdown of the numbers ... entitled a pork barrel "Politics of Payoff" ...

The Financial Times carried this commentary by Christopher Caldwell.

Republicans held firm and didn't join in the fiscal madness, which Caldwell characterized as Obama's Iraq.

"Like Iraq, it is a long-standing partisan project that is being marketed as an ad hoc response to a national emergency. It reflects the pre-existing wishes of the party’s most powerful interest groups more than the pre-existing wishes of the country. Democrats are now liable to be judged by the standard they created when they abandoned the Bush administration over the Iraq war: you break it, you own it."

But we'll own it, every taxpayer in America, and it's about time that the public sector ceased leveraging so much debt on the shoulders of the stockholders/taxpayers.

The Economist had other sobering numbers.

"Consumer spending sank at a 3.5% annual rate, similar to its third-quarter drop, despite a big rise in real after-tax income, thanks to the huge drop in petrol prices. Spending and incomes went in opposite directions because once-profligate consumers are now trying to save more. They put aside 2.9% of their income (after tax) in the fourth quarter, the highest rate since the beginning of 2002. They are doing so either by choice, because retirement savings have been devastated and they fear losing their jobs, or by necessity, because it has become so difficult to borrow."

Larry Kudlow reported on Real Clear Politics that President Obama would like to spend $2 trillion million.

"Government spending, deficits, and debt creation of this magnitude is simply unheard of. So the added TARP money will surely imperil the entire stimulus package as taxpayers around the country begin to digest the enormity of these proposed government actions. Financing of this type would not only destroy the U.S. fiscal position for years to come, it could destroy the dollar in the process. What's more, the likelihood of massive tax increases -- which at some point will become front and center in this gargantuan funding operation -- would doom the economy for decades."

Meanwhile, the finances on the ground -- close to home locally (schools, villages, towns, cities) are on a fiscal precipice.  County and state governments, along with the larger cities, are already worse ... with words like default and austerity being spoken openly in some places.

Well ... some places.  Other spots in New York, for example, are still in denial.

Iran's Ahmadinejad Says President Obama Must Apologize For Bush: As If We Care?

Iran's dictator would like the United States to apologize for George W. Bush, a cheap play to political correctness.

Ball's in your court, Barack and Hillary, if you two are playing doubles.

The Times Online out of the United Kingdom had the headline this morning:

Ahmadinejad says Obama must apologise to the Iranian people for Bush

Ahmadinejad Demands Apology for U.S. 'Crimes':  FOX News

Iranian Leader Demands U.S. Apology:  New York Times

Mr. Obama, in his first television interview at the White House since taking office, said that it was important to be willing to talk to the Iranians, both to express differences and to explore “where there are potential avenues for progress.”

“And as I said during my inauguration speech, if countries like Iran are willing to unclench their fist, they will find an extended hand from us,” Mr. Obama said in the interview with Al Arabiya television that was broadcast on Tuesday.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton also said Tuesday that Iran had a “clear opportunity” to engage with the international community.

The games begin ...

Mr. Ahmadinejad said on Wednesday that the “slogan of change was good, but it could be of two kinds — a fundamental change or a tactical one,” the official IRNA news agency said. It would soon become clear, IRNA quoted the Iranian leader as saying, whether Mr. Obama’s comments were “just a change in tone.”

“Change means that they should apologize to the Iranian nation and try to make up for their dark background and the crimes they have committed against the Iranian nation,” he said in the speech broadcast live on Iranian television.

Tactical?

Does Iran really want something tactical?

Mr. Obama's 100 Hours Are Up: The Fying Pan Has Entered The Building

President Barack Obama has this job as Chief Executive of the United States but he's not God.

Rather than get cooked alive in the White House, the new occupant walked over to Congress.

The San Francisco Chronicle reported him "working" the Republicans:

"One of his great strengths is, he's very comfortable with himself, and therefore others are comfortable with him," said Senate Republican conference chair Lamar Alexander of Tennessee. "I think he has a certain ease about him. He did as a senator, and I think he's made an easy transition to the presidency. After all, as he did remind us, he's only been there five days."

The Associated Press noted that he may have gotten his compromise.

"Debate began late in the day on the measure, which includes about $550 billion in spending and roughly $275 billion in tax cuts ... In the Senate, traditionally more bipartisan than the House, a companion bill grew to roughly $900 billion. That included a new tax break for upper middle-income taxpayers ... "

But will it work?

Obama had one hundred hours to muse against torture of terrorists, play with some social agenda and placate the liberals in his party.

Now the real work begins.  He was already scheduled for the frying pan by pundits if he didn't get his oval ass in gear.  It seems he carried the utensils with him to the House and Senate, where he pretended to be Harry Truman ... for at least a day.

Welcome to the White House, President Obama.

New York's Politics Strays To Hyperbole: State Leaders Facing Heat

As America's youngest U.S. Senator was sworn in, it remains a political circus in New York.

The New York Post's Fred Dicker has become relentless in tearing down Governor David Paterson, detailing a dishonest pattern of leaks and dishonest denials.

Kirsten Gillibrand has been upstaged; Al D'Amato, her own father, Joe Bruno, David Paterson and Caroline Kennedy.

Perhaps Andrew Cuomo had the right idea staying away?

The New York Daily News reported that Paterson is pointing fingers at unknown staffers (but it's all sounding too much like Bart Simpson, at the moment).

Politics is not fun anymore in New York, I must confess, particularly covering it.  The days of wine and roses were over long before I stepped into any newsroom.   But what's happening now is soap opera-ish, dishonest, disloyal and drawn more from hyperbole than any issues of substance.  It's become something lacking integrity, as if Albany's political set ever had any integrity, but it's also lacking stability.

Factor in the current national calamities, Wall Street's continued bust and the corruption scandals popping up all over the United States, it's hard to read the newspaper without losing faith in our public servants.

This is a crisis of perception.  It must be fixed, somehow, but I don't see any governmental operation in New York State or anywhere else capable of patching the damage of the past month.

A few days ago on NY1, a roundtable discussion of journalists started doing an autopsy on the remains of the day.

It's hard to write about the Empire State without feeling some sadness, since there is no healthy focus on policy or practical problem solving.

... Everyone seems to have an agenda ...

New York's New Political Player Vaults To National Stage: U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand

Gillibrand ...

...   The New York Times had this profile of the Empire State's newest powerbroker.

Hers is a rise that most astute political observers saw coming, including what will now be openly forecast as a potential national ascension.

".... Kirsten Gillibrand, a 42-year-old lawyer, is to politics born and bred, a relentless campaigner and fund-raiser, a competitive woman whose friends, unprompted, suggest she might someday soon seek the presidency."

It's not hyperbole either.

The Times also called Andrew Cuomo a "willing bridesmaid" and "ebullient in his praise" -- but noted how he didn't show up in Albany for her introduction.

Democrat Gillibrand Leaves Behind Lame Duck Republican Congressional Seat

It's true that Kirsten Gillibrand's departure from the House of Representatives to the U.S. Senate leaves the GOP with a Republican-heavy congressional seat to grab back from the Democrats -- but re-districting will make such a special election near-futile.

The Albany Times Union blog Capitol Confidential noted that the 20th Congressional District will be the most likely victim of the U.S. Census changing the number of seats in New York.

The state will lose at least one House seat.  Democrats will go after a Republican seat, obviously, but there is a subtle drawback to that scenario -- whether the 20th is sacrificed or not.

As Capitol Confidential explained, these remaining congressional seats have a LOT of excess Republicans who would be dispersed into other Democrat-heavy districts -- and the 20th is the biggest GOP bastion:

"20th District: Gillibrand’s district (125,486 Democrats, 196,118 Republicans) has the largest GOP advantages in the state and was gerrymandered to be that way. Just take a look at the district, which twists and winds from the Hudson Valley all the way up to Lake Placid. The district is bordered by the 19th, 21st, 22nd, 23rd, and 24th districts."

• 19th: 153,634 Democrats, 155,577 Republicans. Democrat John Hall won the seat in 2006.
• 21st: 184,198 Democrats, 121,205 Republicans. Held by Democrat Paul Tonko.
• 22nd: 170,367 Democrats, 133,200 Republicans. Held by Democrat Maurice Hinchey.
• 23rd: 123,299 Democrats, 174,221 Republicans. Held by Republican John McHugh.
• 24th: 134,929 Democrats, 163,012 Republicans. Democrat Michael Arcuri won seat in 2006.

"In short: There’s a 70,000+ GOP surplus that would need to be absorbed by adjacent districts, but there are a number of disticts that could take a few - the already heavily Republican 23rd, and the heavily Democratic 21st and 22nd."

So maybe the ever-artful political bosses like D'Amato and others have schemed to gain more than one House seat here ... a deal, of course ... bleeding GOP support from one politician to another.

Meanwhile, the line-up of Democrats and Republicans waiting to dive into a special election was already anxiously panting at the gate before Gillibrand was formerly chosen ...

... John Faso, Jim Tedisco, Sandy Treadwell, Betty Little ... among Republicans ... and Democrats have Tracey Brooks ... and probably more names coming soon ... over a district that may not exist in three years.

Perhaps the real winners don't reside in the 20th, at least not yet.

Who Is Kirsten Gillibrand's Father? <--- Pataki, Bruno And D'Amato Lobbyist

So maybe the Republican Party had one of their own appointed New York's U.S. Senator after all?

The New York Times and most news outlets couldn't miss the proximity of former U.S. Senator Alfonse D'Amato right next to newly appointed U.S. Senator KIrsten Gillibrand.

This is called sleeping in your enemy's bed, political cuckholding at its worst, a cold dish of intrigue and bedfellows too close for comfort.

Maybe the Long Island boss should change his political registration or create a new shadow political party.

Times Headline: Who Is That Republican Beside Mrs. Clinton's Successor?

There really is a man behind the curtain but this isn't The Wizard of Oz.

His name is Doug Rutnick.  He is U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand's father.

The Village Voice Albany described Rutnick  as an "Albany lobbyist and power broker" with close ties to Joe Bruno, George Pataki and ... of course ... Al D'Amato.

So, basically, Al D'Amato is running New York -- or perhaps the man behind the curtain goes beyond Pataki, Bruno and Rutnik.

But who goes beyond former New York State Governor George Pataki, former State Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno and Albany's incestual lobbying culture?

Let's just have an orgy and let them all be cast naked for the media to see as they adulterate each other.

Then there is that Federal indictment that coincidently drops into the news cycle this week, the one naming Bruno and an entangled web of fraud to the tune $3,198,185 -- But a man is innocent until proven guilty .. even if both parties have been guilty of such unabated influence peddling for generations.

There are no political virgins in Albany.  If Mr. Bruno is getting accused of such legislative prostitution, the whorehouse is going to weigh down any paddy wagon that is sent to arrest anyone else.

They won't get away with it this time.  Short of killing the witnesses to all the criminal actvity and silencing any journalist who can break other stories of corruption, either by intimidation or blacklisting, Democrats are dancing with the devil right now -- and a man named Andrew Cuomo has just been handed a permission slip as Attorney General to clean house.

The New York Post's Fred Dicker painted another scenario, describing a New York State Governor Andrew Cuomo, and the growing consensus is that Mario Cuomo's son will not be the father when it comes to making decisions.

Who Is Kirsten Gillibrand? <--- New York's Next U.S. Senator

This just in from a high level source in the Democratic Party close to Governor Paterson's office ...

New York Governor David Paterson will appoint upstate Congresswoman Kirsten Gillibrand to be New York's next U.S. Senator.

The Daily News had a schematic of the minefield Gillibrand will step into ... from the right and the left.

The Republicans should be careful that they don't turn her into a national news story.

The Albany Times Union had this "primer" on their local Congresswoman.

She's the GOP's worst nightmare -- even if it gives them a shot at getting a Congressional seat back.

The Village Voice wants to speculate that Gillibrand is "too Republican" to replace Hillary Clinton.

That's precisely why 2010 just become an even more daunting challenge for any Republican candidate ... though I would think it better that Rudy Giuliani indicates he's not running in two years.

Time for a reality check at State GOP. 

The Day After The Inauguration: The Good, The Bad And The Reality

It was a good speech but Mr. Obama will need more than a 20 minute monologue to get the job done.

Probably too much of America is infatuated with Barack Obama right now, as if changing the channel will make all our worries go away ... with a hangover yet to come.  We're allowed to wish on a star, to hold onto hope, to believe in our heroes and Americans want to believe the 44th President of the United States is a hero.

It was just another day for me and many Republican stalwarts who don't agree that liberal-speak Democrats are true populist Democrats (lest anyone doubts our capacity to fall happily for a blue-dog Reagan Democrat like Tom Suozzi, for example).

I was in New York City Tuesday as the oaths were taken by both Barack Obama and Joseph Biden.  It didn't feel different.  As one older wiser Democrat warned me two weeks ago, no one's sure if this is 1932 or 1928.  For now, conservatives are the bad guys.  That will change in about three months, as the income tax is paid, and Wall Street has not stabilized and the bailouts become selective and even the liberals are pouting about how President Obama is trying to change the country.

I wish him well.  He's enigmatic enough to make a difference.  His youth could be an advantage.  Barack Obama has a lot less than 100 days.  Some say he has about 100 hours.  By Sunday, the talking heads will either arrange a homage or truly take aim at the problems.  Every word counts now.

President Barack Obama's inaugural speech cautioned about a quick fix but had no detail or endgame solutions; great poetry, inspiring rhetoric but he seems to still be campaigning.  That's not a bad posture for a politician.  President George W. Bush could have used a bit more polished spin but the reality isn't in the rhetoric.  Some would claim the reality wasn't in the Bush White House either.  It was certainly confusing.  The good, the bad and the reality making us cringe.

It's been that way since ... Watergate ... The malaise even returned halfway through Reagan's second term.  Bush's father had magic in a bottle after Desert Storm and then a tax increase sobered his poll numbers.  It only took Bill Clinton two years and Newt Gingrich's Congress to remind voters that Mr. Clinton was all too human (it took his wife fourteen more years to realize the value on the campaign trail of being human/vulnerable).  Bush waltzed in as people were changing the channel, again, and quickly wanted to change back to someone else ... anyone else.

So the same revolution that hoisted President Obama may carry him away, since that seems to be what happens to our leaders.

Obama admitted, "our nation is at war" -- but he didn't say it was against terrorism or terrorists, as if he can sugar coat the enemy and play the soft diplomatic card of appeasement as anarchists abroad have designs on blowing us up.  He didn't mention an enemy, neither a country or a specific crisis overseas.

Most compelling were Obama's words about "the risk takers, the doers, the maker of things" and he nearly had it right when he stated how our country's "capacity remains undiminished" -- if we are to believe that "capacity" is defined as our private economy and not taxpayer-funded bureaucracy,

"We most pick ourselves up, dust ourselves off and begin again the work of re-making America"

It sounds good to say that the economic turnaround must be "bold and swift" but what's the plan?  Obama talks about fixing the roads and bridges, implementing more electronic grids and digital lines that "feed our commerce" but will this be the second trillion he spends?

Sun power and wind power sounds nice.  But it's not reality.  Calling out "stale political arguments" marks him as a reformer but how selective will President Barack Obama be as certain federal departments need to be shutdown under his own paradigm.  The truth is that he didn't once say the word "union" in his speech or the word "liberal" and his political party is as beholden to unproductive special interests as the Republicans were beholden to failed corporate cultures.

Obama wants to say that it's not about government being too big or too small but let's see what programs actually end on his watch ... and why.  The liberals will pile on all their extra special programs, adding agenda upon agenda, catering less to sensible economic problem solving and looking more to deconstruct the private sector apparatus over the public sector socialism.

Not one mention of how he will take control of U.S. banking and basically turn the private banking system into an additional U.S. Treasury, shiver the thought all that private debt becoming an additional fiscal obligation upon future generations of taxpayers.

It doesn't make sense.  It's economically flawed.  No one has proven it can work.  Frankly, it's not reality.  U.S. corporations and Wall Street failed because the work ethic and character of those running those operations failed miserably -- But has anyone discussed that such breakdowns in standards and practices were due to an overtly socially liberal culture throwing all caution and character to the wind?

Nah ... no one wants to look at it that way, dare we admit that the fault lies in ourselves, not in the stars. 

No one questions the scale of liberal ambitions.  Conservatives question the cost.  No one questions the need for change.  Conservatives question the apparatus.  No one wants to be the bad guys but can we please quit pretending that Barack Obama is the second coming just because he is an alternative to two political autocracies?  Either a Bush or a Clinton has been in the White House since 1980.

It was time for a change.  That doesn't mean we throw capitalism out the window with free market economics and it doesn't mean we tear down all the walls in Washington, D.C. as if Republicans were fascists.  There was that inference of GOP blame in Obama's speech, as if all the greed and irresponsibility is the fault of Republicans, as if all of a sudden a new occupant in the White House can change what is ostensibly a systemic problem in our country that is not limited to our elected officials.

Franklin Raines and the Congressional committees that ran roughshod over watching the mortgage crisis were spawned from the Democrats and the administration of Bill Clinton.  People forget that George W. Bush inherited this flawed economy.  He didn't create it.  Bush ultimately failed to address the flaws of de-regulation but these political donors who rule Washington, D.C. change their allegiance like the Vichy French.

Obama fed and will continue feeding off the same fiscal monsters (masters) of the universe who should have been washed out of our economy after the 1987 Wall Street crash.  If he's "bold and swift" in the coming days (yes, days), he will clean house accordingly.  Despite his income tax fiasco, Tim Geithner's guts to stop the madness and leave Lehman hanging demonstrated reality.  Of course, he goes down in history as the fall guy for the next depression but Obama's problem-solving with his new Treasury Secretary will test his mettle soon enough.

One personal sore point ... Obama's patchwork culture includes Jews and Christians.  Hindus and Muslims.  And "non-believers" ... Since he is trying to be everything to everybody, for a day, at least, but that's not realistic either.  To correct the U.S. Senator from Illinois, the reason he was elected remains that people want to believe ... in someone or something, Thank God.

I suppose that's another reasons Republicans found themselves out on their asses last November.  We said all the things people didn't want to hear.

Now it's Obama's turn.

Caroline Kennedy Out: New York Post Reports Governor Would Have Appointed Her

Fred Dicker of The New York Post reported this evening that Caroline Kennedy has withdrawn her name from consideration for the U.S. Senate seat previously held by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Dicker also reported that New York State Governor David Paterson had intended to appoint her to the now-vacant seat today.

Hat tip to Ben Smith at Politico (via Facebook).

Now the clock is ticking for David Paterson, who I imagine could surprise us all by picking himself (and turn Malcolm Smith into New York's next governor) -- but I jest.

It will be Congresswoman Kirsten Gillibrand, I'd bet, and the Republican Party better gird themselves for a shooting match in 2010.  Gillibrand can raise money and has big "D" Democrat reach, as in David Boies of the Florida 2000 electorial legal battle -- who she worked as an attorney before her first Congressional run in 2006.

Speaking of shooting matches, the second amendment crowd is already taking aim at the upstate Democrat, reported by the New York Daily News and the Post.

 

Reuters reported Hillary Clinton being confirmed Secretary of State.

... It's a blood sport.

About That U.S. Senate Seat: New York Could Be Surprised By Governor's Pick

The vetting alone is a blood sport.

Given the way New York's prospective U.S. Senate appointees have been autopsied by the media and political spinmeisters, who would want the job?

Caroline Kennedy wasn't even imagined as a U.S. Senator and she went from being America's favorite to an American Idol contestant ... painful to watch and the poll numbers portend worse.

New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo seemed to be the politically expedient pick -- and has survived the onslaught of head-to-head polling against Kennedy -- but one wonders how brutal a vetting has already been prepared for him.

Let's face another political reality.  Anyone can be found with scandal, I'm convinced, but that's only because people are human. 

My sources believe that Cuomo won't accept an appointment to the U.S. Senate for personal reasons having more to do with being a father than any political agenda.  If one believes that well-intended sentiment, the media show was worth much holiday conversation but neither Andrew Cuomo nor Caroline Kennedy will be appointed to the U.S. Senate.

Then there are those who feel a "caretaker" should play nanny over the U.S. Senate seat (with some reasonable candidates) but Governor Paterson insists that Hillary Clinton's replacement won't just play surrogate over New York's representation in the U.S. Senate as some lame duck.  Those suggested have included Bill Clinton, Mario Cuoco and Judith Kaye, all laudable picks for a two-year temporary appointment.

But this isn't a temp job.

Also, David Paterson has removed himself from consideration.

Who's left?

Congresswoman Kirsten Gillibrand from upstate New York and Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi; Buffalo Mayor Byron Brown, Manhattan Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney and Long Island Congressman Steve Israel.

There are more and probably more surprises coming next week.

Does Paterson appease upstate or Manhattan?  Does he play to the women's vote or minorities?  Is his priority politics or principle?  Will being liberal or conservative play a role in his choice?

Enter Tom Suozzi.  This "blue dog" Democrat is pro-life, suburban, downstate and decidedly an exile in his own party.  Partisan liberal Democrats want to stop the Nassau County Executive's political rise yet he is the purest populist Democrat New York State has seen in a generation or more.  Critics will warn that a non-liberal won't play among political operatives but strategists view Suozzi's ascension as a natural play to millions of disgruntled Republicans.

... And there are millions of independents and traditional Democrats, the Reagan Democrats, who would return to the Democratic Party if candidates like Tom Suozzi were allowed a bigger stage.

The contest isn't between Andrew Cuomo and Caroline Kennedy.  It's between Mario Cuomo and Hugh Carey. 

Andrew Cuomo's competition isn't the daughter of Camelot.  Cuomo's true foe is right out of central casting, right on Long Island -- and Mr. Suozzi is probably what former Governor High Carey envisioned the Democrats in New York could become.

Then again, Suozzi was soundly defeated in a gubernatorial primary in 2006 (as Cuomo had been in 2002) but Cuomo has won statewide.  Only Congresswoman Kirsten Gillibrand from upstate -- whose fundraising was Ruthian -- has a shot of eclipsing Cuomo's popularity.  It's my belief that Gillibrand is the only sensible alternative for the liberals in New York State, if Cuomo doesn't accept the appointment, but her poll numbers were awful statewide.

Paterson has indicated his appointment won't be anyone who fared well in the polls.  It won't be the popularity contest or any cult of personality.  Many say that he has to pick Andrew Cuomo, as much to remove a potential gubernatorial challenger in 2010, and the politically correct pressure to choose Caroline Kennedy likely comes from President-Elect Barack Obama (but no one wants to say it TOO loudly since the debacle over the Illinois U.S. Senate appointment).

Finally, there is the option of a special election but such a process would draw out the drama.  New York needs a U.S. Senator now.  New York needed a U.S. Senator two months ago.  Anyone chosen has to hit the ground running.  The election in 2010 won't mean much if our state is still flailing economically.  Paterson's appointment could become a political "whipping boy" for two years, the scapegoat for New York's problems -- and Paterson will share as New York's Governor responsibility for any flawed results.

... or maybe Paterson will just pick Caroline Kennedy after all ...

Flight 1549's Miracle On The Hudson: For A Change, A Happy Ending

With all the bad news, tragedy, death, destruction, scandal and corruption confronting us on a daily/hourly basis, everyone surviving US Airways Flight 1549's crash into the Hudson River is a relief.

For a change, it's nice to see a happy ending.

First time in 46 years, apparently, since someone landed on water like that and everyone survived.

 

The plane only missed the George Washington Bridge by 900 feet.

The Associated Press reported that the men in the cockpit, pilot Chesley B. "Sully" Sullenberger III and co-pilot Jeff Skiles, have become instant heroes for guiding the plane to safety.

"The pilot guided the hobbled US Airways jetliner over New York City and into the frigid river, with an impact one passenger described as little worse than a rear-end collision. All 155 on board were pulled to safety as the plane slowly sank."

The ferries, the Coast Guard, New York City firemen and police, were joined by emergency responders with at least fourteen or more boats who immediately rushed to rescue all 155 passengers and crew.

Amazing.

Wishing On Albany: Westchester County Government Wants More State Help

In a year where New York State officials will deliver less to local government, Westchester County lawmakers continue to promote the delusion that they can get more from Governor David Paterson and the New York State Legislature.

To read their latest spin to The Journal News, it's as if a sense of political entitlement still exists in the County Building.

Sewer treatment upgrades, tax exemptions for volunteer firefighters and ambulance corps, $20 county surcharges on traffic tickets, boating and firearm fees and electrical license fees all have the same taxing agenda.

No discussion of layoffs, freezing salaries and defering raises though.

The big ticket item is carefully hidden -- Increase or maintain state aid to Westchester Medical Center -- which is a nice way to say the debt service for this facility is about to become daunting.  Westchester County's taxpayers may not suffer the costs of this facility directly but they hold the obligation on its multi-million dollar debts.

Also within that item will obviously be a request for more Medicaid funding but it's sugar-coated to hide the entitlement spiral this suburban county is caught in.

New York City's Six-Figure Civil Servants: $106,000 Average

The Citizens Budget Commission out of New York City has released a report showing that the average compensation cost of full-time employees of the City of New York (pay and fringe benefits combined) is $106,743.

The New York Post this morning outlined the fiscal realities.

Rolling back the head count to the level of eight years ago would mean nearly 7,000 fewer staffers. At $107,000 a head, that translates to savings of more than $700 million a year.

Here's the bottom line: Public employees live in the same world as everyone else - a world in which pricey pay packages increasingly mean layoffs and workers must sacrifice to save jobs.

Unless city unions step up and offer dramatic givebacks (i.e., unless hell freezes over), pink slips are inevitable.

Yonkers Mayor Amicone negotiated a delay in some salary increases (Teamsters and 1199) but County officals are yet to open that conversation with the CSEA.

 

Ignorance Is Not Bliss When The Media Is Involved: Ziegler Poll On News Coverage

This Wilson Research Strategies poll of 1,000 voters had a demographic breakdown that was an exact replica of the total voting population in a comparable Zogby poll:

• McCain voters knew which party controls congress by a 63-27 margin.
  Obama voters got the “congressional control” question wrong by 43-41.
• Those that got “congressional control” correct voted 56-43 for McCain.
• Those that got “congressional control” wrong voted 65-35 for Obama.
• Those “exposed” to FOX News got “congressional control” correct 64-25 (+39)
• Those ‘exposed” to CNN got “Congressional control” correct 48-38 (+10)
• Those “exposed” to network news got “Congressional control” correct 48-39 (+9)
• Those “exposed” to print media got “Congressional control” correct 52-37 (+15)
• Those “exposed” to MSNBC got “Congressional control” correct 55-35 (+20)
• Those “exposed” to talk radio got “Congressional control” correct 61-29 (+32)
• Voters in the South had the best response rate on “Congressional control” (+22)
• Voters in the Northeast had the worst response rate on “Congressional control” (+9)

Is it about how the news is covered?

• Those “exposed” to FOX News voted 70-29 for McCain.
• Those “exposed” to CNN voted 63-37 for Obama.
• Those “exposed” to MSNBC voted 73-26 for Obama.
• Those “exposed” to network newscasts voted 62-37 for Obama.
• Those “exposed” to national newspapers voted 64-36 for Obama
• Those “exposed” to talk radio voted 61-38 for McCain.

It's a learning curve, obviously, but the point of John Ziegler's commentary on media coverage is that the damage/bias to public perception is often drawn by what is not covered.

Sarah Palin Speaks Her Mind: Exclusive Interview With "Media Malpractice"

Alaska Governor Sarah Palin bared her "inner grizzly" in this taped interview with John Ziegler for an upcoming documentary entitled "Media Malpractice" that is already getting some pushback from the talking heads.

Recent Republican Autopsy: Flawed Principles Or Partisan Incompetence?

I get a healthy dose of the GOP's parallel universe when in Manhattan with the Urban Elephants.  I'm happy to report that Republicanism is not dead in the five boroughs.  Post-Giuliani and Bloomberg-syndromed, these are partisans well beyond grasping for either celebrity or billionaires.

To hear New York County Republican Committee executive director Jason Weingartner speak, one would imagine te GOP is about to take the political fight to the streets against the Democrats.

... And they had more in attendence at their Young Republican gathering than one might find in Westchester County these days (not to fault the County GOP, which is about to fashion a revitalization of sorts).

New York Post columnist Ryan Sager addressed these earthy Republicans Thursday night on rebuilding the Grand Ol' Party -- and it had an aura of expectation.

I'd be the first to call for a Republican autopsy but there were too many body parts left on the table to imagine this Frankenstein ever walking again.  Perhaps the problem lies (lays?) in how much of the patient can be saved -- or should be saved -- but Ryan Sager sort of butchered what little was left of the Republican Party as if he had been cast as the mad doctor in a horror movie.

Sager's arguments against "extremo-philes" and the "me too" GOP gamers aren't new, as he expressed before Election Day in Reason magazine.  But he's replaced the word "liberal with libertarian a bit too much for my taste, as if "frontier conservatives" like Ronald Reagan were not social conservatives -- as if the entire nature of the common sense conservative movement put forth by the late William Buckley had some love of social issue liberals -- and as if just changing the label changes the "big tent" that made sense 20 of the last 28 years in the White House.

"Tax cuts or no tax cuts, a party that can be roused in time of deep crisis only by fear and tribalism—a party that a supposed moderate is now deeding to its most extreme elements—can scarcely serve as a safe home to liberty or the voters who cherish it."

Sager admits to voting for Barack Obama.  He's missed the point, I believe, in assigning blame to John McCain for the fear and loathing associated the Republican Party under President George W. Bush.

Sager is worried that the Republican Party has become the "regional party of the South" -- and I had two questions for him that Republicans do have to answer to win.

First, is the New York State GOP and state parties like this fascimile the regional party of the South?

Second, are the losses in such states throughout the United States due to ideology or a lack of competence?

Obviously, New York is not the deep evangelical south.  Our Conservative Party borrows directly from the Republican National Committee's platform for its principles and there has never been anything "far right" about conservative Republicans in this state ... as much as liberals groan that we have cost them election after election.

McCain's reticence to be conservative cost him this election.  He came late to that party, ate too fast and never had the trust of those voters who were tipped over the edge by the economy's deflation after September 15th.

The economy cost the GOP the national election; not Sarah Palin, not abortion, not gay marriage, not the N.R.A., not John McCain either (as much as he will be made the fall guy, much like Barry Goldwater was blamed for GOP woes).

I learned something last night.  Politically active women in New York City's Republican Party like Sarah Palin, a lot, and there was a surge of resistance in that room to the Post columnist scapegoating McCain's failures on the Alaska governor.  It was palpable and resolute.

The mantra of what is "bad" now for Republicans includes any discussion about "God, guns and gays" -- and now it's alright to tear down George W. Bush for playing the "let's try to be an economic liberal" game -- while Barack Obama's sleight of hand as a populist and a moderate is supposed to be embraced as the reality?

The statistics on self-identified "libertarians" doesn't take into consideration the misunderstanding about the label.

My personal hunch is that all the fuss is over abortion and gay marriage, little else.  The principle of getting the government off one's back and out of the bedroom is reasonable enough.  Now explain why most politicians ran and hid from these issues all last summer, in both major parties.  Also, explain why such an overwhelming number of Hispanic voters still vote pro-life and why a consistent majority of Black evangelical voters resist gay marriage entirely.  For that matter, explain why even Barack Obama expressed opposition to gay marriage.

Is the issue being libertarian or finding a convenient label or excuse to justify a stubborn stand on issues running counter to the will of the people?  The politicians might be more confused than the voters on these two issues and what exactly "frontier conservatives" want the government away from ... (their pocketbooks and free will).

Ask people if they are "liberal" or a "frontier conservative" or perhaps even a Reagan and/or Goldwater conservative and I have to wonder what would have happened to the Cato Institute's polling on this trend.

To be fair, Sager pointed to former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee as an economic populist whose social conservatism might go over well with voters.  However, I am not sure how fawning over a minister with farther right wing views than any other candidate fits into the "extremo-phile" hypothesis.  Sager simultaneously contrasted and faulted Sarah Palin for  bringing forth "cultural resentment" onto the campaign trail.

The actual problem for candidates on conservative issues is strategically far more simple than many want to admit publicly (though it's discussed enough by political analysts to be taken seriously).

It's about trust and communicating a message to voters, one that educates and takes the undecided off the political fence.  If you pretend to be a conservative, as McCain found himself striving, you lose credibility.  Libertarians are a skeptical and critical bunch, as are evangelical Christians and "frontier conservatives" -- so trust is hard-earned.

Reagan was out early on these issues, so he could afford a softer more diplomatic touch with liberals and conservatives.  Nixon applied the same approach in the 1960s.  Both honed a message early, stuck with it consistently, never having to sell out or pretend to be anything to any voters.

I suppose Mitt Romney's lengthily speech appealing to conservatives was the classic example of a late play for these independent-minded voters.  He failed miserably.  He was about 4-8 years too late.  He may do better next time.  Huckabee has stayed consistent.  McCain always had this Bob Jones University phobia, I suspect, and he never shook off the conflicting shadows.  Giuliani played to a provincial urbane vote and never had a chance outside New York City (and one wonders if he would have a fair chance throughout New York State).

The carnage upon the GOP in the far west and interior west was mapped out by Sager right after Election Day.  The numbers don't lie (neither did the unpopularity of the Iraqi occupation for six years nor the natural anti-incumbency that followed the implosion of Lehman Brothers six weeks before the votes were cast).

I know Ryan Sager means well.  I also know some of his concerns about the far religious right can be at times well-founded, particularly for example when one examines the political prejudice against Catholics among the same groups espousing to be faith-based organizations.  It's when politicians are confronted with those stark realities about some zealouts and separatists that the "big tent" shrinks and/or collapses on itself.  We don't need political intolerance or any cultural divides.

Of course, the intolerance among liberals against conservative rivals any of that prejudice ... particularly the anti-religious zeal and near-invasive social-engineering that liberal Democrats sell better than soap.

Patience ...

It's a bar of soap the Republicans should not want, nor should they white-wash it with libertarian labels, since the bigger "D" Democrats are bound to slip and fall soon enough.

State Of The State: A Non-Blogging Perspective

Just my luck, the laptop (nicknamed "Surfaholic") crashed (and nearly burned) earlier this week.  My computer's motherboard, fan, heat sink and cpu literally experienced a meltdown.  Last time I was laptop-less was six years ago during a blackout, so it's been a healthy study in new media withdrawal.

Do people care that New York State has a capitol or a State Legislature that the Brennan Center has still deemed dysfunctional?

People don't notice.  Many don't care.  The State of the State was a 3-5 minute or less segmenton the 5:00 pm or eleven o'clock news shows out of New York City.

Your taxes are going up.  THAT is what people care about.

Blogging about film animation, celebrities or professional athletes has more interest these days -- with the fighting in the Middle East more on everyone's minds than our dysfunctional lawmakers.

I'm a news hound, so I learn the night before or a week before what is a news story breaking first on blogs a day before anyone reads about it in the newspapers.  But now New York's news cycle seems redundantly spun these days.  It's more obvious when you step outside the bubble and miss a few days of breaking stories.

Liz Benjamin of the New York Daily News reported Republicans admitting that it could "months" before anyone trades offices in Albany, as Democrats now assume full control of the State Senate.

Can't they all just have a moving day, like dormitories in college?

Capitol Confidential reports that lobbying is continuing as swiftly as it had been under Republican control, with Democrats capitalizing accordingly.

I don't know what's more entertaining in Albany, the whoring or the real whoring.

The Journal News blog, Politics On The Hudson, noted that Governor David Paterson is still interviewing people for Hillary Clinton's soon-to-be-vacated U.S. Senate seat.

“No one has consistently been at the top of my list,” he said in an interview with Gannett News Service in his office at the state Capitol. “I don’t even know if I have a list, in other words, who is number one."

A 28 page questionaire has been sent to 8-10 prospective "candidates" for the job.

It's tempting but I won't mention anything about a woman who Governor Paterson described as "a rather de, almost shy, rather reserved personality" -- since I suppose that could apply to any number of people who have never run for elected office in New York, who are non-political and who naturally could be a bit intimidated by the fourth estate in interviews.

The Politicker reported that New York City Michael Bloomberg is continuing his push for cities to sidestep states in appropriating proposed federal bailout monies.

King Michael might be right this time.  States?  We don't need no stinkin' states.

Though there was a State of the State address delivered yesterday by the Governor of New York State.  Democrats finally chose a State Senate Majority Leader, Malcolm Smith, and Republicans are still behaving like the gang who can't shoot straight.

Mr. Burris Goes To Washington -- And Gets Shown The Door

Frank Capra had the right idea.

They have no shame in Congress.

We're a nation of laws, last time I looked.  Maybe they will suspend the Constitution while they're at it.

There stands Barack Obama, a man who shall now ascend to the White House as U.S. President on the spirit of the law -- yet he forgot the rights of his home state in the process.

Now how would Mr. Obama respond to being denied access to the White House, on a technicality?

The Secretary of the Senate should be arrested for breaking the law ... or will the excuse be like a good Nazi ...

... Just following orders?

Business As Usual In Albany: Negotiating With The Enemy

Albany's usual suspects are still negotiating for control of the State Senate.

Elizabeth Benjamin of the New York Daily News had the details in her column.

I find it awful that Democrats and Republicans are relying on the whim of three legislative malcontents who so far have taken both major parties for a self-serving ride.  Ruben Diaz, Pedro Espada and Carl Kruger were elected State Senators as Democrats.  Democrats control the State Senate or at least that's what the voters wanted.

Politically speaking, this is like negotiating with terrorists.

Benjamin reported that Republicans are bringing 1199 to the table.

Meanwhile, Republican leader Dean Skelos, who is desperately trying to finagle a way to hold on to the majority leader's post, is getting help.

The Senate GOP's deep-pocketed allies in organized labor have taken up Skelos' cause.

He has asked leaders of the health care powerhouse 1199 SEIU and the AFL-CIO to meet today with the Gang of Three in hopes the union bigs will persuade the Democratic lawmakers to cast their lot with the Republicans.

If it's true that Skelos is willing to apply a fallback strategy, taking a deputy position behind the self-empowered and over-entitled Espada, I can see Republicans fashioning this deal.

It's not without problems.  Espada is not leadership material but maybe Skelos banks on him self-destructing (will that self-destruct any deal too?).  Ruben Diaz will demand no action on gay marriage by the State Senate, generating steam in the pot for Democrats and turning every Republican into a political whipping boy on that issue.  Finally, such a deal would be Joe Bruno-esque and Pataki-esque in handing 1199 such a prominent seat at the table ... again.

It gives the unions too much power and influence.

It might give the wrong Republicans control of that legislative body.

It's business as usual in Albany.

New York State Politics Will Get Humbled In 2009, Without Prejudice Or Power

On Monday Wednesday, the New York State Senate elects a new State Senate Majority Leader. 

Democrats as an elected majority are rapidly learning how hard it must have been for Republicans to remain in control for so many decades.  Meanwhile, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver must find it humorous -- since he's still in absolute control of a tilted majority showing no signs of weakening.

Politics is just that ... politics ... that stuff between the marble that keeps the steps to the palace together.  It's necessary but it's not the actual palace that's necessary.  Also, some might argue that New York's true civic plague is its desire for autocratic power or celebrity influence (monetarily or media driven).  Where's the participatory government?  Where's the initiative and referenda?  Where's the grass-roots?  Where's anyone bothering to vote any of the "bums" out of office?

I have my own theory about New York's politics.  The state abdicated it's potential in 1958 to newly elected Governor Nelson Rockefeller and has never recovered.  It wasn't just that Rockefeller and then Cuomo (prior to Cuomo, Governor Hugh Carey tried to warn us 35 years ago that "the days of wine and roses" were over) and then Pataki and now Paterson spent and taxed too much.

It's that New Yorkers didn't get involved.  It's that an entire generation of residents neither had the time nor the inclination to pursue public service, drawn much so from bad memories of corrupt political machines running (and ruining) our cities.  It's also that politics -- without those big bad machine bosses -- got expensive.

Back to the vote on Monday, the one to decide who may or may not control New York's State Senate.

It's been a "Ponzi scheme" in municipal finance since the post World War Two building boom tailed off sometime between the mid-1960s and the post-Watergate seventies.  At that point in U.S. history, the steady revenue stream of property taxes had leveled off.  It crested, reduced and brought forth the need for new taxes or higher property/income taxes.  Also, this high taxation coupled with municipal unions fashioning their own Ponzi debacle with pensions further doomed manufacturing -- as salaries didn't crest and the accompanying inflation locked states like New York in the status of debtor nations.

By the way, the Federal government is worse.

And the next State Senate Majority Leader, whether Democrat or Republican, must address this muncipal inflation -- and must do so without prejudice to patronage or race or creed or color or agenda or the delusion of power that the same old way of doing political business will save New York State.

The special interests are not "special' anymore.  The taxpapers are more important, since any inclination on their part to rebel could trigger tax revolts nationwide.  Those paying government's bills are "special" and powerful, not the politicians.  This anti-incumbency fervor is not uncommon during a recession but many political observers miss that Hugh Carey was acutely prophetic in the early 1970s comparing the New York State bureaucracy to an alcoholic.

Who would want the job of being the last word on every piece of taxation supported by the State Legislature in 2009?

A contemporary in lower Westchester County described to me a municipal official excitedly declaring her hiring by Malcolm Smith in the State Senate Majority Leader's offices.  Is he already decorating his office too?  What hubris and presumption rules over anyone involved with electing him or anyone else?

Another political leader explained to me that a lot could happen between Friday night and Monday, with big players manipulating the chess pieces in the State Senate.

He or she can't be like former State Senate Majority Leader Joe Bruno -- and all those who worked under any political leader in Albany can't be like they were before.  In addition to the "three men in a room' (that has been supplanted temporarily by three rogue lawmakers holding the leadership vote hostage with selfish right-wing and left-wing demands), our State Capitol has been held hostage to a generation or more of career civil servants.  It's the fault of unions partially but it's also the fault of political appointees whose greed has held taxpayers hostage for too long.

As one chair elequently reminded me, they all serve at the mercy and the wishes of those who appointed them.

Fire them all.  Please.  Or, at least, demand that they each submit their letters of resignation.

Humble the over-paid and the over-empowered.  Start from scratch or perhaps don't re-start the madness at all.  If New Yorkers have to choose between their own fiscal heads and the fools who have been running the chopping blocks for generations, is it so difficult a premise to imagine who the voters will send to the guillotine first?

You cannot tell a union to renegotiate a contract or temper pensions when there is a fat layer of bureaucracy -- existing not to serve the people of New York but to serve the bureaucracy's self-preservation.

That vote on Monday is nothing.  The Democrats may now have that brass ring (and they have it in Washington, D.C. too).  Now let's see whether they are masters or slaves to it.

New York's GOP And Dems Desperately Barter For State Senate: Too Close To Call

Sources close to Pedro Espada and those negotiating for GOP control of the New York State Senate still insist that Republicans will retain the majority -- with Dean Skelos as Deputy State Senate Majority Leader under Pedro Espada.

Part of the deal would still include keeping any vote for gay mariage legislation off the floor of the State Senate, to satisfy the demands of State Senator Ruben Diaz.

The Three Amigos, who incude Sen. Carl Kruger, Espada and Diaz, have been fairly quiet since their apparent deal with the Democrats fell apart amid protests against the opposition to gay marriage by Diaz -- and Espada's demands for more power.   State Senator Malcolm Smith didn't have the votes to swing a clear majority behind him -- even with Democrats gaining a 32-30 control of that legislative body on Election Day.

Enter Jeff Klein. 

Though sources explained that Espada and Diaz have different agenda, Bronx-Westchester State Senator Jeff Klein was expected to capitalize following his own behind the scenes machinations to help Carl Heastie gain contol of the Democratic Party in that borough/county.

Not surprisingly, newly elected Bronx Chairman Heastie met with two of "the three" for dinner recently -- as reported by the New York Daily News.

The two "renegades" have not revealed what really came of that meeting but someone close to Jeff Klein couldn't have been too far away.

As for the Republicans, their additional pipeline to Espada could stem from his campain finance court case -- since sources also described his legal counsel, Dan Pagano (a local leader in Westchester's Independence Party), as negotiating the deal to make Espada Majority Leader. 

The key to swinging these two is Diaz, whose staunch opposition to gay marriage leaves him more likely to work with Republicans, but Espada doesn't play well with others either.

The Politicker reported that Bronx Democrats are extending the olive branch to Diaz and Espada.

It's a good bet that Republicans are extending a lot more than an olive branch.

Next Wednesday is not too far away.

Across The Empire State: 2009 Will Be Decidedly LOCAL

You get to learn how to spell Schenectady when you cover New York State (and Poughkeepsie, and Binghamton).

The Daily Gazette printed this Op-Ed from David Childs in Johnstown that suggested selling Jones Beach, taxing beer and encouraging dumpster diving.

"Why, we could even declare bankruptcy like some bleeding auto company and have the judge rip up all of those excruciating civil service/teachers union contracts."

The Daily Star in Oneonta noted that Central New York's mix of hospitals, health-care providers and colleges, plus locally owned and operated businesses, help insulate the area from high and low tides of economic activity.

When there isn't much of an economy to start with, there isn't much of a tide left to go high or low.

Lest anyone believes that problems over the cost of firemen is isolated to Yonkers or New York City (or even my hometown of Eastchester), consider this story in The Ithaca Journal about rethinking how fire protection is financed in that neck of the woods.

The town and city of Ithaca share fire protection, though there seems to be some debate over duplication of services and tapping volunteers -- a story that could probably be applied to every municipality in New York State.

The mayor of Oriskany Falls, Douglas R. Smorol, penned this guest column on the value of small rural communities in the The Observer-Dispatch out of Utica.

"Small villages and towns with less population and low-to-middle income residents are used to doing more with less. While we may well feel the pinch, our smaller work force is already as streamlined as possible.  We are not dependent on very many county services — if any — and we are on the verge of major shared services agreements with other surrounding communities. We are generally separated by several miles, so consolidation is not very practical beyond shared services."

The contrast with suburban New York is stark -- though even Westchester County has many rural spots that can relate to the upstate demographics.

The Poughkeepsie Journal is worried about obesity but would prefer that Governor Paterson not use taxation to influence how people eat or drink.

"Paterson's efforts - and similar suggestions by other government officials - are a nutritionist's dream and a libertarian's nightmare."

The Press and Sun Bulletin out of Binghamton reported on the rights to buy natural gas holdings under 1,300 properties in the Southerm Tier costing a Norwegian company $283 million.

It's part of a larger deal for $3.4 billion to tap natural gas deposits throughout the Appalachian Basin.

Who says no one is making money upstate?

In Rochester, the Democrat and Chronicle reported on businesses in that city hurt by Wall Street's decline:

"There's nothing that indicates Rochester companies have done any worse than similar type companies in other geographies," said Lawrence R. Creatura, an analyst and portfolio manager with Clover Capital Management in Brighton. "The Rochester companies are the same trees in the forest, just like all the other trees that got burned down in the forest fire."

Eastman Kodak Co. lost close to 66 percent of its value, closing Wednesday at $6.58.  Xerox Corp. lost roughly 50 percent of its value, ending at $7.97.

The Albany Times Union suggests that New York State should consider a Japanese technique called kaizen, or continuous improvement.(not to be confused with New York's abject neglect).

That newspaper's editorial puts forth "50 Ways To Cut Your Budget" -- and "to look at a process and challenge why it is the way it is."

"Participants — employees and users of the system — set aside a week or so to dissect a task, mapping out all its steps and considering and questioning the role of each one. Some states have been employing the process for several years."

The Times Union noted that at least 43 states are forecast to face combined shortfalls of more than $100 billion, and they are looking to the federal government for a bailout.  Congress will come up with somehing, maybe even something substantial but the editorial rightfully notes that it won't be enough.

It won't even be close.  Memo to State and local lawmakers:  Just cut spending, dammit.

Russian Academic Forecasts End Of Western Civilization: But Don't Panic

From the Wall Street Journal: 

As if Things Weren't Bad Enough, Russian Professor Predicts End of U.S.
In Moscow, Igor Panarin's Forecasts Are All the Rage; America 'Disintegrates' in 2010

You can't make this stuff up ...

California will form the nucleus of what he calls "The Californian Republic," and will be part of China or under Chinese influence. Texas will be the heart of "The Texas Republic," a cluster of states that will go to Mexico or fall under Mexican influence. Washington, D.C., and New York will be part of an "Atlantic America" that may join the European Union. Canada will grab a group of Northern states Prof. Panarin calls "The Central North American Republic." Hawaii, he suggests, will be a protectorate of Japan or China, and Alaska will be subsumed into Russia.

Maybe Sarah Palin will come in handy after all, though Panarin expects Alaska to be Russian territory again:

"It would be reasonable for Russia to lay claim to Alaska; it was part of the Russian Empire for a long time." A framed satellite image of the Bering Strait that separates Alaska from Russia like a thread hangs from his office wall. "It's not there for no reason," he says with a sly grin.

Stuff like this feels like a bad episode of Get Smart or a James Bond movie.