Showing posts with label Andrew Cuomo. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Andrew Cuomo. Show all posts

Saturday, November 20, 2021

Miserable Response


It's a mixed up, muddled-up, shook up world....

-Lola, Ray Davies, 1970

 


Ray Davies was writing about someone who "walked like a woman and talked like a man." In the instant case, it's Will Bunch being wrong and Andrew Cuomo being right. Even saints make mistakes, and even a stopped clock is right twice a day. Also, this: when a politician is forced from office and read out of his party's politics, he may be freed to be blunt and honest.

President Biden stated "Look, I stand by what the jury has concluded, The jury system works, and we have to abide by it." It's unclear whether by "abide" the President meant "to bear patiently" or "to accept without objection."

We must hope it is Door A but, given the naive assertion "the jury system works," it's not likely. The jury system works if the accused a) has the time and money to go to trial; b) can afford a private attorney, given that the public defender system in this country is broken; and c) the jury is wise.

In Kyle Rittenhouse's case, the charges- and potential prison time- were sufficient for the accused to dedicate a month or two to his defense, for which substantial funds were raised.  And the jury fell for his crying jag when he was on the witness stand. The jury system worked for Kyle Rittenhouse. He is among the lucky few.

By contrast, Andrew Cuomo referred to the message sent by the verdict about our values, including an abhorrence of vigilantism. The former governor avoided two common, misguided reactions of liberals to the verdict: ascribing it completely to race or rationalizing it on legal grounds. 

Prior to the verdict, liberal pundits waxed grave concern about Rittenhouse's actions. Once the verdict was rendered, however, some became instant experts on the intricacies of criminal law and refused even to suggest the possibility that the jury might have gotten it wrong.

Such was the reaction of Kamala "the verdict really speaks for itself" Harris. Hers was either a defense of the verdict- or an effort to interject herself into the matter without saying anything of substance.

If the Vice President wanted to skirt the issue altogether, she could have with "no comment" or "I did not follow the trial closely enough to render an opinion."

But she did not. She claimed "As many of you know, I spent a majority of my career working to make the justice system more equitable.  "As you know" is patronizing and "spent a majority of my career working to make the justice system more equitable" is self-serving.

It's also inaccurate. Breitbart News argues

In 2008, Kamala Harris failed to prosecute an illegal alien MS-13 gang member who shot and killed an entire family three months later.

During the 2020 Democrat presidential primaries, Rep. Tulsi Gabbard (D-HI) called attention to the fact that Harris laughed about smoking marijuana after putting over 1,500 people in jail for marijuana violations. Gabbard also highlighted that Harris opposed DNA testing until ordered by the courts in a case that would have exonerated a man on death row.

As California Attorney General, Harris championed a law that could have given jail time to the parents of truant children.

Feel free not to buy that from the right-wing Breitbart or Tulsi Gabbard. Yet, consider that, as Harris was being considered as Joe Biden's running mate, the Prospect described in detail how as Attorney General of California she

repeatedly and openly defied U.S. Supreme Court orders to reduce overcrowding in California prisons while serving as the state’s attorney general, according to legal documents reviewed by the Prospect. Working in tandem with Gov. Jerry Brown, Harris and her legal team filed motions that were condemned by judges and legal experts as obstructionist, bad-faith, and nonsensical, at one point even suggesting that the Supreme Court lacked the jurisdiction to order a reduction in California’s prison population.

Kamala Harris strenuously resisted releasing from prison non-violent offenders because performing her job properly and serving the people of California were inconsequential to someone whose only interest was (is) ascending to higher office. When now asked about a controversial criminal charge(s) and verdict, her objective is to curry favor with the left by claiming to be dedicated to equity in the criminal justice system, while refusing to question even the possibility that the jury might have erred. Skepticism about the latter would not have been welcome on CNN or MSNBC, let alone Fox News.

In fairness, the Vice President added "clearly there is a lot more work to do." Intentionally vague, this statement means nothing. Nothing.

"In God we trust; all others pay cash,"  quipped the late Jean Shepherd some 55 years ago. If there is a God, there was a Jesus, a divinity or mere prophet. An updated, albeit less catchy, expression could be: "Only Jesus is perfect. Juries make mistakes." Andrew Cuomo appears to understand that juries are not infallible; Kamala Harris appears not to understand. If she is the heir apparent to President Biden, for Democrats, clearly there is a lot more work to do.



Tuesday, August 10, 2021

Staggering Contrast


I was going to say that, three days after Cori Bush was confronted on CBS about supporting defunding the police while enjoying private security, she had no answer on CNN's Reliable Sources. (Full transcript of this segment is below.)

Cori Bush was not confronted about being hypocritical Instead, Dana Bash merely diplomatically asked whether her comments the congresswoman made, the focus of attack ads against her fellow Democrats, might be harmful. A couple of minutes later, the congresswoman still had not addressed that concern.

Criticism against Democrats for being sanctimonious supporters of defunding the police (largely unjustified) are likely to be more effective, more determining, in swing districts than in Bush's own urban district in the St. Louis area.  Unconcerned with members of her own Party, she is selfish, hypocritical and consumed with herself.  "My job is to save lives," boasts Bush, equal parts police officer, firefighter, and heart surgeon.  

But then Andrew Cuomo resigned.   Immediately, his critics eased up, recognizing that, while investigations must continue, he is deserving at least of a little credit for realizing that it was in his own, and the state's, interests to go relatively promptly and quietly, maintaining a modicum of dignity.

Of course I'm kidding.  Within minutes, Cuomo was being castigated while denunciation of Cori Bush is abating.  She is still in the US Congress, grandstanding, with no Democrat willing to take her on for anything. Yet, Al Franken, Eliot Spritzer, Anthony Weiner, Katie Hill, and now Andrew Cuomo, all resigned, albeit the latter's transgressions clearly the worst. Their colleagues, some of them even supporters, fled like rats from a sinking ship.

Perhaps it's because those four committed sexual improprieties or (at least in the case of Franken) alleged sexual improprieties, while Cori Bush advocates leaving communities defenseless from violent crime. Still, it's stunning that they all fell on their sword and Cori Bush is unrepentant and openly defiant. There may be a lesson in that for Democrats.






BASH: Congresswoman, I want to ask about the criticism that you're facing about comments you made in an interview this past week.

I want our viewers to listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BUSH: I'm going to make sure I have security because I know I have had attempts on my life. And I have too much work to do, there are too many people that need help right now for me to allow that.

So, if I end up spending $200,000, if I spend 10 more dollars on it, you know what, I get to be here to do the work. So, suck it up. And defunding the police has to happen. We need to defund the police.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BASH: So, I know you have seen that Republicans are pointing to the fact that you said you have your own security, while, almost in the same breath, advocating for defunding the police.

Now, I do want to emphasize I understand you have security protection because you have received multiple death threats. But the clip that I displayed is being used in attack ads against not you, but -- not just you, but other Democrats.

So, could those comments end up being harmful to your fellow Democrats, politically speaking?

BUSH: I think what we have to look at is the fact that I made it to Congress in 2020, I was elected to Congress, and we are still fighting this same fight. We're still fighting to save black lives.

That was not -- that work was not done before I got here. This is the reason why I ran, was to save lives, to save my son's life. It was because Michael Brown, who we're fighting for, and still trying to get justice for. It's because he didn't get justice, and Vonderrit Myers didn't get justice, and Kajieme Powell didn't get justice, and so many others. That is why.

And because that was not -- that was not fixed before I got here, to then come at me and say you're the reason why we have these problems, no, the reason why we have these problems is because those that were in power and could have fixed this problem before now didn't and cost -- it cost lives.

And so now that I'm here, I -- we just -- we just introduced the People's Response Act to make sure that we are looking at the money that -- the money that should be going to social safety nets to make sure that our community members who are living with mental health issues are able to function and live in society... BASH: So...

BUSH: ... the way that anyone would ask to.

So, I don't believe -- as far as my -- as far as my colleagues, I absolutely empathize. I empathize. But you know what? The same thing that the Republicans will do, which is figure out how to work with this on the comms spaces, that's what we have to do.

My job is to save lives, the lives of my community, because, when we're when we're talking about every single year increasing the budget for police, and then the budget for, like, Health and Human Services continuing to shrink, and St. Louis being number one for police violence year after year after year, number one, number two for homicides year and year, after year...

BASH: Congresswoman...

BUSH: So, when we're adding more money to the police, but we're still dying.

BASH: Congresswoman, I...

BUSH: So, something has to change.

BASH: Congresswoman, I -- yes. And I hear what you're saying. But I also heard you say that you think it's a comms problem.

Is it that? Because...

BUSH: No, I'm saying that we can also -- that that's another way that you can tackle this.

You have to tackle it from more than one place. We have to work on what we want to say, what is our message, but then we also have to understand that we have to save lives too. St. Louis can't keep being put on the back burner. And I'm here to stand up for my community.

[09:40:12]

BASH: Congresswoman Cori Bush, thank you so much for joining me this morning.



Saturday, May 08, 2021

When Rules Are Suggestions


"Some states," the report below from CBS News on May 3 indicates, "are now lifting restrictions as infection rates decline."  More than 40% of adults now are fully vaccinated and infections are declining in twenty-three states.


With an increasing number of people vaccinated and the arrival of warm weather, infection rates( in the absence of new strains of the coronavirus spreading) will continue to decline.

But that will not be because of clear and decisive decisions by state executives. Nonethless, NJ.com reports that by order of New Jersey governor Phil Murphy

New Jersey will join New York and Connecticut in dropping many of its largest remaining coronavirus restrictions May 19, including removing fixed, percentage-based indoor capacity limits at restaurants, gyms, retail businesses, and churches — though mask and social distancing regulations will remain — while also ending all outdoor gathering caps....

The capacity change will affect restaurants, gyms, hair and nail salons, barber shops, retail shops, movie theaters, museums, places of worship, and amusement parks, all of which are currently limited to 50% capacity in New Jersey.

Under the change, there would be no limit based on a percentage of capacity, but businesses and venues will still be required to keep patrons or parties of patrons 6 feet apart, based on federal Centers for Disease Control guidelines. Restaurants can also build physical partitions to allow for closer seating.

Meanwhile, seating at indoor bars in New Jersey will be allowed to resume starting Friday, with the same restrictions on social distancing. Buffets will also be allowed to return that day.

But this is not quite a full reopening for New Jersey, nor does it mean restaurants and stores will look like they did pre-pandemic. People must still wear a mask for all indoor activities unless they are eating or drinking.

"People must still wear a mask for all indoor activities unless they are eating or drinking" represents not only the terrible reporting during this pandemic but also the dishonesty which has characterized the words and actions of public officials.

Not going to happen. People don't go to restaurants and bars to sit down, eat and drink, and leave. They go to relax, to talk to the other individuals at their table or at the bar, and often to socialize.

They will not do this while wearing masks.  They know it, the business owners and their staffs know it, and the governors of New Jersey, New York, and Connecticut know it.

Business owners can encourage patrons to abide by social distance regulations but their ability to enforce them is limited. Demanding that individual customers wear their masks- properly- would be even more risky.

At the same time that customers of bars and restaurants are shirking regulations- with the full knowledge of government officials- people throughout the region will be in supermarkets/grocery stores, and drugstores wearing masks. No one will resist the peer pressure to do so, though the risk of transmission in a solitary activity such as shopping is greater than in the social settings involving eating and drinking.

In practice, people will not be required, nor expected, to wear a mask for all indoor activities. However, it's not hard to determine why government officials would establish a regulation they know will be ignored. NJ.com notes

Republicans have pushed Murphy, a Democrat seeking re-election in November, to move more quickly or to at least release target dates. And on Friday, a fellow Democrat, state Sen. Dawn Addiego, D-Burlington, called on the governor to lift all capacity limits in the state by July 1.

In announcing what New York governor Andrew Cuomo terms "a major reopening of economic and social activity,” Democratic governors are able (they think) to shut up GOP politicians who have slammed Democratic state executives for keeping their "economy closed." Restaurant and bar patrons will enjoy their night. Yet chores, essential activities, wil be conducted with face coverings, thus satisfying that portion of the leftshaming people and politicians resisting masks.

It's a win-win in the short term for politicians, especially with the media ignoring the obvious dissonance. But somewhere, sometime down the road, hypocrisy will exact its price.



Thursday, March 04, 2021

Hit Piece Falls Short


There is no reason Democrats should eat their own when Republicans glorify theirs. Mike Allen of Axios may be auditioning for a stand-up gig when he writes

Gov. Andrew Cuomo should be facing explicit calls to resign from President Biden on down, if you apply the standard that Democrats set for similar allegations against Republicans. And it's not a close call.

I don't remember Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell asking for Donald Trump's resignation.  It's true that the all 26 women who have accused Donald Trump of sexual harassment or assault allege that the misconduct took place before Trump was elected President. It's also true that he ordered payment of hush money to Stormy Daniels/Stephanie Clifford shortly before that election so that he might become President Donald Trump.

Why it matters: The #MeToo moment saw men in power run out of town for exploiting young women. Democrats led the charge. So the silence of so many of them seems more strange — and unacceptable by their own standards — by the hour.

The most notable man "run out of town" for sexual impropriety was Al Franken after charges of sexual impropriety, behavior which would have taken place before he was a US Senator. He was run out of town by Democrats, because that's what Democrats do.

Their only plausible explanation would be to argue that three women are exaggerating or misremembering things. This is precisely what Democrats said was unacceptable in GOP cases.

Democrats didn't say the behavior was unacceptable because they were committed by Republicans. They said it was unacceptable regardless of party. And they were wrong- wrong because each case deserves to be considered on its own merits rather than a blanket "believe women."  Men don't always tell the truth.  Unless women are of a super gender, they, too, are capable of exaggerating, forgetting details, or- occasionally- lying. It's the human condition.

One top New York Democrat told me the reaction has been "disheartening" — an approach by both parties of believing women "except if they accuse a member of your party."

As pointed out by Axios Sneak Peek on Sunday: Democrats hammered Donald Trump after "Access Hollywood," pilloried Brett Kavanaugh over Christine Blasey Ford and defended Joe Biden when he was accused of inappropriate touching.

The reference to Brett Kavanaugh is the most telling in this hit piece. Were Andrew Cuomo to have a sense of humor, he would urge an investigation of the allegations against him similar to the one conducted by the Federal Bureau of Investigation of charges against Brett Kavanaugh.

Kavanaugh was not serving in an elected position, had never served in an elective position, and had been nominated for a lifetime appointment. It would be (is) a lifetime appointment to the United States Supreme Court, to serve alongside a mere eight other individuals to make rulings which are not reviewable.

If ever there needs to be a thorough review by law enforcement of a nominee for any position, it would not be of an individual who was elected to his position and could not continue in the position without again facing the voters.  It would be of someone tapped to serve on the High Court.

Nonetheless, the FBI "investigation" of accusations against Brett Kavanaugh took a mere five days in which neither of the two principals- Kavanaugh and Ford- was interviewed. . One of the accusers, Deborah Ramirez, had been at a drunken dormitory party at Yale when, according to the authors of "The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation,"

a freshman named Brett Kavanaugh pulled down his pants and thrust his penis at her, prompting her to swat it away and inadvertently touch it. Some of the onlookers, who had been passing around a fake penis earlier in the evening, laughed.

Therefore, Ms. Ramirez's legal team

gave the F.B.I. a list of at least 25 individuals who may have had corroborating evidence. But the bureau — in its supplemental background investigation — interviewed none of them, though we learned many of these potential witnesses tried in vain to reach the F.B.I. on their own.

Two F.B.I. agents interviewed Ms. Ramirez, telling her that they found her “credible.” But the Republican-controlled Senate had imposed strict limits on the investigation. “‘We have to wait to get authorization to do anything else,’” Bill Pittard, one of Ms. Ramirez’s lawyers, recalled the agents saying. “It was almost a little apologetic.”



Nonetheless, maybe Donald Trump is a victim, as Jonathan Allen seems to believe.

Trump was a victim who bragged about routinely sexually assaulting women. He then got elected President, tried to pressure a foreign government into investigating his political rival, then obstructed an investigation into his actions, and gained nearly nearly unanimous support from his party's members of Congress. On his way out the door, he incited an insurrection against the United States government, receiving the support of the vast majority of those members of Congress. He now is extended the privileges of all former Presidents:  office space and staffing allowances; travel expenses (up to $1 million in costs annually); health annuities, lifetime Secret Service protection, and the right to burial with full honors at Arlington National Cemetery, next to individuals he has called "losers" and "suckers."

Whatever the future may hold for him, Trump has enjoyed a charmed life- and charmed presidency, thanks to a party whose leaders have found no crime, no grift, and no contempt for Americans unacceptable as long as it's committed by Donald Trump. When the governor of New York gets 5% of the breaks the 45th President has, or 20% what Brett Kavanaugh has, Mike Allen can legitimately accuse Democrats of hypocrisy.



Monday, March 01, 2021

Andrew Cuomo Giuliani


Daily Beast reporter has an excellent analogy:


It was spring and summer of 2020 and Andrew Cuomo, presenting near-daily coronavirus news conferences and deftly showing compassion mixed with a high degree of deference for facts and the scientific method, was praised for his handling of the novel coronavirus.  He even wrote a book entitled "American Crisis: Leadership Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic."

Once thought by the media to be America's governor, he's now embroiled in twin controversies. His administration allegedly lied to state legislators about the number of elderly individuals who had died from Covid-19. Many of those had been returned, at his urging, from hospitals to nursing homes after testing positive for he coronavirus. Additionally, two women in his administration have accused the governor of sexual harassment. If the latter seems far less serious than the former, you haven't recently noticed the American media and contemporary political messaging.

Rudy Giuliani, following the terrorist attacks of 9/11/01, was commonly labeled "America's mayor," with frequent and glowing tributes.  Seven years after the two planes hit the World Trade Center, the New York Times (which should have known better) printed a story by Michael Powell (who, remarkably, is still at the paper), who wrote that the Mayor

was two blocks from the south tower, in an office on Barclay Street, trying to get the vice president on the phone, when his world went dark with smoke. Back at City Hall, Deputy Mayor Rudy Washington waited and wondered and dialed the governor.

“We really didn’t know what had become of the mayor,” he said. “I spoke to Governor Pataki, and we closed the schools and canceled the election.”

Then Mr. Giuliani was led through a basement and out onto Church Street, his head and shoulders dusted white with ash. He walked north into the surreal brightness of that day, comforting a police officer and dragooning reporters.

He would walk north two miles, pausing in the bay of a deserted fire station in Greenwich Village to call a television station and urge calm. Three hours later he stepped into a press conference with Gov. George E. Pataki.

“Today is obviously one of the most difficult days in the history of the city,” he said softly. “The tragedy that we are undergoing right now is something that we’ve had nightmares about. My heart goes out to all the innocent victims of this horrible and vicious act of terrorism. And our focus now has to be to save as many lives as possible.”

Inevitably the question arose: How many lost? The mayor looked up through his glasses, aware that among the viewers of this live broadcast were the mothers, fathers, spouses, lovers and children of those who labored in the smashed towers.

“The number of casualties,” he said, “will be more than any of us can bear ultimately.”

That walk north, the spareness of his words and his passion became the founding stones in the reconstruction of the mayor’s reputation, transforming him from a grouchy pol slip-sliding into irrelevancy to the Republican presidential candidate introduced as America’s mayor. The former mayor has made this day the centerpiece of his presidential campaign, aware that millions of Americans hold that heroic view in their collective mind’s eye.

He was "comforting a police officer and dragooning reporters" so he could "urge calm" with "the spareness of his words and his passion."

Worse, he would "walk two miles," which someone should have noticed was a centerpiece of the public relations spectacle being promoted, especially because the major criterion for placement of the center was that it be within walking distance of city hall.  Four months later, a different NYT reporter would explain

The New York Police Department produced a detailed analysis in 1998 opposing plans by the city to locate its emergency command center at the World Trade Center, but the Giuliani administration overrode those objections. The command center later collapsed from damage in the Sept. 11 terrorist attack.

“Seven World Trade Center is a poor choice for the site of a crucial command center for the top leadership of the City of New York,” a panel of police experts, which was aided by the Secret Service, concluded in a confidential Police Department memorandum.

Well, no, it was an excellent choice for a mayor whose image was invaluably enhanced by the enduring image of him walking around the city, seemingly sensitive yet strong, portrayed as having a love for his city second only to his love for these United States of America.  Giuliani was catapulted into a leading candidate for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination.

If the decision to place the emergency command center at arguably the most vulnerable site in New York City didn't directly cost lives, another Giuliani policy did.

The bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993 prompted New York city officials, spurred by first responders, to replace inadequate analog radios with new, digital radios.  They were developed after a no-bid deal with Motorola in which the city (according to its comptroller) "willfully violated" contracting rules.

They had not been properly tested and failed in an emergency situation in early 2001. The city returned to its insufficient analog radios, when  

at 9:32 am. on Sept. 11, an FDNY Chief ordered all members in the North Tower to the lobby. Even though he repeated the order, not a single company responded.

At 9:59 the WTC South Tower collapsed; and at 10 am the order to abandon the North Tower was repeated. Inside the North Tower were 121 firefighters who never heard that order. They perished when the North Tower collapsed at 10:28 am.

“On 9/11 firefighters went into the North Tower and started ascending the tower, yet they were being called back and they kept going,” said Richard Salem, an attorney who has been representing several of the firefighters’ families who lost loved ones when the North Tower collapsed. “Not one other uniform[ed] officer from any other department [who had functioning radios], perished in that tower other than the FDNY.”



So when various figures in cable news speculate as to where it all went wrong for Giuliani, when America's Mayor was magically transformed into a reactionary, lying hot mess for Donald Trump, recall that the man was in fact a bad mayor.

Opinions differ as to whether Giuliani functioned well or poorly aside from the 9/11/01 catastrophe, but his sterling reputation was founded on the grossly faulty perception of his handling of that crisis. Similarly, Andrew Cuomo was exalted because of the grossly faulty perception of his response to SARS-CoV-2.

Governor Cuomo, if as likely he still harbors a desire for higher office, would do well strategically to take a page from Giuliani's response to questions about 9/11/01. The ex-mayor has never taken any responsibility nor conceded any failure, even denying that a different site for the command center was recommended to him.

Consequently, Andrew Cuomo would be wise- albeit unethical- to deny, deny, deny.  It took nineteen years, abominable behavior followed by an effort to overturn a democratic election, to understand clearly that Rudolph Giuliani is indeed a sub-human creature.

 


Tuesday, March 24, 2020

Seeking Death(s)


We owe President Donald Trump; an apology- sort of. On October 1, 2017 Philadelphia Inquirer columnist Will Bunch spoke for many of us sentient Americans when he wrote

In the days before (Hurricane) Maria's landfall on Sept. 20, the anxiety was palpable — not just from the storm but over the question of whether Trump would marshal the massive response the hurricane would require, when the island's residents are primarily black and brown, and when they can't cast a single ballot in the 2020 election. It didn't seem possible, but the White House response — both logistically and morally — to the growing humanitarian crisis in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands has been even worse than many of us dared to imagine. And it's been fueled by something else that America saw coming from miles and miles away, from that day in June 2015 when the short-fingered vulgarian descended an escalator in Trump Tower to announce his divisive candidacy — and that is the racism of Donald Trump.

The attack on science, reason, and the American people continues as

President Donald Trump said Tuesday he wants to have the country getting back to business by the Easter holiday, April 12, even as the coronavirus pandemic continues to worsen.

“I would love to have the country opened up and raring to go by Easter,” Trump said during a Fox News interview.

Public health experts and local and state leaders have cautioned against easing restrictions too early, saying it could put an enormous strain on hospitals and lead to even more deaths and economic damage. But Trump said Tuesday that he believed the human toll would be greater should Americans continue to stay at home.

"This cure is worse than the problem," Trump said, adding that "in my opinion, more people are going to die if we allow this to continue."

That of course is absurd, as he is well aware.

In a tweet on Tuesday in which he pushed back on GOP suggestions that the death of a few elderly people is an acceptable price to pay for economic rejuvenation, New York governor Cuomo charged "no one should be talking about social darwinism for the sake of the stock market." At his briefing a little earlier, he asked "What is this, some modern Darwinian theory of natural selection? “If you can’t keep up, then you just fall be the wayside of life?

Yes. And it's refreshing that at least one politician has picked up on this. President Trump clearly knows that it isn't only "black and brown" people who have died or, if his hopes are fulfilled, will die. The casualties will be disproportionately elderly, those whose health already is compromised, and probably poor. 

We don't owe Trump an actual apology, for the ethnic animus is still there, lurking. But neither racism nor ethnic prejudice generally fully accounts for the President's approach to the coronavirus.  The deceased will be people, white and minority, whom he believes are unworthy and expendable. There are many things Donald Trump doesn't understand, but social Darwinism is not among them.








Share |

Sunday, August 19, 2018

If Trump And Cuomo Were Wrong, There Is Only One Choice Left


The options do not include (d), "none of the above," or "all of the above."

Chronologically as argued: a) Donald Trump; (b) Hillary Clinton; and (c) Andrew Cuomo.  The correct answer must be a, b, or c.

We can eliminate from consideration candidate Donald Trump's "make America great again" because, notwithstanding the view of  Mr. Trump and of most of his supporters, the USA was not great but became a train wreck once the black guy was elected. Since being elected, Trump has, by fits and spurts, begun transitioning into"keep America great" but only because he is now President.

We come now to Andrew Cuomo, who as suggested by David Sirota (here, here and here) deserves little defense or support and no encouragement to run for President. Nonetheless, it was interesting when he stated

We have not reached greatness. We will reach greatness when every American is fully engaged.  We will reach greatness when discrimination and stereotyping of women, 51% of our population, is gone, and every woman's full potential is realized and unleashed and every woman is making her full contribution.

So Andrew Cuomo, fueled by consideration of the wide scope of American history, contends (until he backtracked) that the USA never has been great. He is attacked by a guy who became President with a slogan, "Make America Great Again," in which "again" shouts "it isn't anymore.". The media, regularly slammed for allegedly being anti-Trump, then turns a blind eye to rank hypocrisy.

Friday evening on Real Time, Bill Maher, Charlie Sykes, and Jennifer Granholm noted that Cuomo had been politically foolish (discussion beginning at 25:42 of the video below). Axios' Jonathan Swan, who undoubtedly would agree, added

I was covering the Democratic convention in 2016. I remember they had all these stands selling merchandise. They had these t-shirts that had Hillary Clinton that said "America is already great." I thought "who the hell is going to vote for that?"





There are only three choices: Donald Trump's notion of 2015 and 2016 that the USA is a hellhole; Andrew Cuomo's perspective that the nation cannot be considered great because of enduring discrimination against minorities; and Hillary Clinton's view that despite these contradictions, the USA has been a great country.

Evidently, not enough people in Pennsylvania, Michigan, or Wisconsin viewed this as a great country to get Mrs. Clinton across the finish line. However, that is what presidential elections are all about (other than voter suppression, Russian subterfuge on behalf of the other candidate, and the FBI throwing its weight behind that same candidate).

Donald Trump increasingly will proclaim that he has made America great again. Andrew Cuomo pointed to our national tradition of bigotry and tradition. The limb he stepped upon was then sawed off behind him. The remaining option is (b), and for that Hillary Clinton should be given at least a little credit.



Share |

Monday, June 06, 2016

Andrew Cuomo, Sometimes Right





In a high-profile action, Bob Bryson soon will be arrested by New York State Police.

You probably don't know Bob Bryson, Moderator of the Presbytery of Northern New York (state). But soon you will, if the February prediction of Rahul Saksena, a staff attorney at non-profit advocacy organization Palestine Legal, is borne out. Saksena then quivered at the prospect of passage by the legislature in Albany of an anti-Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions bill.

Governor Cuomo has pre-empted the legislature by issuing an executive order. According to Salon anti-Israel obsessive Ben Norton, it "will not permit its own investment activity to further the BDS campaign in any way, shape or form, whether directly or indirectly” and adds that “the State of New York unequivocally rejects the BDS campaign and stands firmly with Israel.”








“It’s frightening to think there could be New York state employees scouring the internet for pro-BDS Facebook posts, tweets and news articles, and blacklisting individuals based on their political viewpoints,” Saksena now contends. “It’s 21st century McCarthyism.”

Saksena believes "It’s 21st century McCarthyism" because such governmental actions “are disturbing attempts to punish and chill constitutionally protected speech.”

And so Bryson should contact his criminal defense lawyer and arrange to turn himself in to authorities.  Two years ago to this month, the Presbyterian Church of the USA, the largest of the three Presbyterian denominations, announced it had "narrowly approved divestment from three United States companies doing business in Israel-Palestine."

It will surprise Mr. Bryson, whatever his personal view of the BDS movement (which the PCUSA says is separate from its action) or his church's relationship to it, that his speech has been endangered. It is unlikely that managers whose pension funds no longer will be favored by the state are feverisly contemplating prosecution on criminal charages.

And in a related matter, we forget that as of August, 2014

Jordan refuses entry to or forcibly deports Palestinian refugees escaping Syria, in clear breach of its international obligations, Human Rights Watch said in a report released today. Jordan has officially banned entry to Palestinians from Syria since January 2013 and has forcibly deported over 100 who managed to enter the country since mid-2012, including women and children.

The 44-page report, “Not Welcome: Jordan’s Treatment of Palestinians Escaping Syria,” is based on interviews with more than 30 people affected by the non-admission policy. Human Rights Watch also documented Jordan’s withdrawal of Jordanian citizenship from some Palestinians who had lived in Syria for many years and who have been detained or deported to Syria without identity documents. Jordan’s uncompromising treatment of Palestinians fleeing Syria contrasts with its treatment of Syrian nationals, at least 607,000 of whom have been accepted into the country since the beginning of the Syrian conflict. Before the March 2011 uprising began, Syria was home to at least 520,000 Palestinian refugees.

Jordan's lack of generosity is stunning and significant given that

According to Article 34 of the UN Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, "The Contracting States shall as far as possible facilitate the assimilation and naturalisation of refugees," and must "make every effort to expedite naturalisation proceedings" – the opposite of what happened to the Palestinians in every Arab country in which they settled, save Jordan. 

Now that Jordan is giving the back of the hand to Palestinians, the latter face similarly rough treatment throughout virtually the entire Arab Mideast. That means, of course, that if only we can pressure Israel through the BDS movement, a new age of freedom and prosperity awaits Palestinians.








Share |

Wednesday, September 10, 2014

And On The Other Side, Also Republicans






The New York Times reporter wrote a few days ago "One oddity of Rhode Island is that although it is heavily Democratic, its voters have elected only Republican governors over the last two decades."   In November, they will be electing another.

That might be Cranston mayor Allen Fung, who won the GOP primary on Tuesday.  Or it may be state treasurer Gina Raimondo, who won the Democratic gubernatorial primary and is known largely for getting  "the state’s Democratic political establishment to increase the retirement age, cut benefits and suspend annual cost-of-living adjustments for state employees."  The Democrat.

Under Raimondo, David Sirota explains,

Rhode Island has been placing growing slices of its pension funds into higher-risk investments, entrusting the money to Wall Street financial managers who capture hefty fees. Yet the state has rebuffed requests to disclose the details of the management contracts.

In this regard, Rhode Island is in crowded company, alongside California, Pennsylvania, North Carolina and Kentucky on the list of states that have been tight-lipped about their Wall Street investment deals. But as officials this month rejected a public records request from the state’s largest newspaper, they laid out a seemingly blunt justification for secrecy: If the public learns precisely how much Rhode Island’s Wall Street managers are earning, that might make those executives feel uncomfortable.

"Fund managers keep this information confidential to help preserve the productivity of their staff and to minimize attention around their own compensation," declared the office of Rhode Island Treasurer Gina Raimondo in a letter obtained by International Business Times that elaborated the "explanations supporting confidentiality." Raimondo is a Democrat who founded one of the financial firms that manages Rhode Island pension money.

Citing the case of Eddie Lampert, an investor who was abducted in 2003 by ransom-seeking kidnappers, the letter to Assistant Rhode Island Attorney General Michael Field from Raimondo’s office further argued that disclosing too much information about financial fees and compensation could endanger the lives of hedge fund managers.

That would be a Democrat who has been worked to make hedge fund managers comfortable while breaking promises to longtime workers, forcing them to delay retirement and blocking entry into the labor force of young people.

The Rhode Island Democratic Party, moreover, may not be an outlier.   Also on Tuesday, New York Democrats opted for incumbent governor Andrew Cuomo, the neo-liberal who is anti-gun, pro-gay, anti-union, and pro-corruption, over progressive/liberal Zephyr Teachout.   (Kathy Hochul, even more conservative than Cuomo, easily won her bid for nomination for lieutenant governor against net neutrality activist Tim Wu.)  Janos Marton, former special counsel to the Moreland Commission in New York State, recently wrote

The Executive Order under which the Commission operated directed us to investigate corrupt activity that was permissible under the New York's weak campaign finance and lobbying laws, not necessarily uncover crimes.  (This being Albany, the Commission could not help but discover potentially illegal activity along the way.) While U.S. Attorney Bharara is in possession of the Commission's files, he is unlikely to pursue non-criminal investigations, which comprised much of our work. ... 

For example, to most lay people, contributing hundreds of thousands of dollars to a candidate through various loopholes and accounts in exchange for favorable legislation or lack of regulation, as Governor Cuomo did, is tantamount to bribery. This is how the real estate, telecommunications and gaming industries have operated for years.   Legislative leaders rake in huge legal fees for unspecified work.  Large corporations bankroll dozens of bi-partisan lobbying firms.  Anonymous political spending by both parties continues to grow. As the Daily Newsreported, Cuomo donors have been awarded lucrative state contracts. Of course, as long as no campaign finance or lobbying laws are broken, all of this is legal,and Governor Cuomo has left the worst and weakest of these laws in place year after year....

Governor Cuomo's behavior during the Commission is emblematic of this cynical approach to governance. During the life and aftermath of the Commission, Governor Cuomo repeatedly made comments and pressured Commissioners to make comments that Commission staff knew to be blatantly untrue.  The Commission staff did not realize that Governor Cuomo viewed them as chips in a misplayed poker hand, a gambit to be discarded via press conference.  Only after being browbeaten for months did we acknowledge the farce of investigating any target that could even tangentially set off Cuomo or his senior staff.   I learned of the Commission's shutdown over Twitter, two days before the budget was due.  By then the Commission was a shell of itself anyway.

Cuomo is assumed to be deeply interested in the Democratic nomination for President which, in 2016, at least seems to be Hillary Clinton's for the asking.

Upon release in June of the former Secretary of State's "Hard Choices," The Guardian's Suzanne Goldenberg commented (photograph below from Jim Young/Reuters)

I've no doubt Clinton cares deeply about empowering girls and women. Her elevation of these issues (ignoring dismissive comments from the foreign policy old guard along the way) was relegated to the back of the book, but many activists have told me over the years how Clinton has stayed in close touch, and since leaving the State Department she has moved to re-purpose the Clinton Global Initiative to focus on girls and women once more.

But when it comes to another run for the White House, I'm hoping she has something to say about equality for women that goes beyond the scrunchie.






Such a statement would serve little purpose, except to highlight Clinton's insincerity.  Earlier this year, Mrs. Clinton could have supported for the Democratic nomination for governor of New York Ms. Teachot, a woman, a progressive, and- unlike Cuomo- someone who would not have covertly yet definitively undermined her own Party.  Instead

In a week spent rolling out endorsement after endorsement in advance of Tuesday's primaries, the Cuomo campaign announced that Clinton, the First Lady-turned US senator from New York-turned secretary of state,  has recorded a robocall in support of Gov. Cuomo and his lieutenant governor running mate, former Buffalo-area Rep. Kathy Hochul.

The call not only is interesting in terms of New York politics, but also has a national component. Clinton is strongly considered to be running for president in 2016. Cuomo is believed to have national ambitions, though those close to him say he'd never run if Clinton is in the race.

The call focuses on boosting the little-known Hochul among Democrats statewide, trying to counter arguments by some progressives that she has taken positions on some issues - such as gun control - that put her out of the party's mainstream. 

In the call, Hillary Clinton says that, "As a New Yorker, I'd be proud to have Kathy fighting for our state. When she was in Congress, Kathy showed she knows how to find common ground but also stand her ground for what's right. As our Lieutenant Governor, she'll never, ever give up on New York's families."

No one can know for sure whether as Lieutenant Governor Hochul would ever, ever give up on New York's families, but she did give up on Attorney General Eric Holder when she joined 16 other Democrats and all but two Republicans in their political stunt to hold in contempt the A.G. for the "fast and furious" operation.

No matter.  Let's not pine for Hillary Clinton who is, like Cuomo, Hochul and Raimondo reportedly a Democrat, to indulge in any more empty or self-serving rhetoric about breaking the "glass ceiling." She would be far more honest to quote Rick in Casablanca: "I'm the only cause I'm interested in."


Share |

Tuesday, August 12, 2014

Obama Thinks It's Real. Kilgore Called It The "Phony War."






If one is running for a Democratic nomination for governor, it is wise not to offend a large swath of potential primary voters by blasting the President of the United States of your own party.

And so Zephyr Teachout, running a righteous campaign against the legally endangered but politically powerful and popular governor, Andrew Cuomo, avoids picking a fight with President Barack Obama.

Of course, picking a fight with President Obama is not the danger; Obama is loathe to strike back at his enemies. But there are still many Democratic primary voters who believe he really, really is a Democrat, just as they believe in Bill Clinton and the tooth fairy.

Teachout aims to stop the anti-consumer, anti-worker acquisition by Comcast Cable of Time Warner, "at least in New York," and notes her opponent "takes a lot of money from large powerful interests and then hands out tax credits to them. It's a Reagonomics model of financial monopoly capitalism." But then she excludes Obama, probably wisely, from her list of co-conspirators when she remarks

But the problem here isn't just Cuomo, it's that people like Cuomo dominate the Democratic establishment. Rahm Emanuel, Tim Geithner, Larry Summers, Robert Rubin, and so on and so forth, these people believe in a world where powerful economic interests control our lives and fate through monopoly power,and their partners in government help structure those monopolies. Political corruption and economic monopoly are two sides of the same coin- too much concentrated power in too few hands.

The phrase "political corruption and economic monopoly" defines the Cuomo Administration about as well as does anything, and the Cuomo Administration as well as any other.  So, too, as Zephyr obviously understands, have Emanuel, Geithner, Summers, and Rubin damaged the lower and middle classes. And they all have connections to both Barack Obama and Bill Clinton, though more so to the latter. Nonetheless, President Obama is capable of recognizing, as he did in an interview early this month with the Economist, that when

corporate CEO's come and they have lunch with me—which they do more often than they probably care to admit (laughter)—and they’ll say, you know what, we really care about the environment, and we really care about education, and we really care about getting immigration reform done—then my challenge to them consistently is, is your lobbyist working as hard on those issues as he or she is on preserving that tax break that you’ve got? And if the answer is no, then you don’t care about it as much as you say.

But then he adds

Now, to their credit, I think on an issue like immigration reform, for example, companies did step up. And what they’re discovering is the problem is not the regulatory zealotry of the Obama administration; what they’re discovering is the dysfunction of a Republican Party that knows we need immigration reform, knows that it would actually be good for its long-term prospects, but is captive to the nativist elements in its party.

Undoubtedly, Barack Obama knows why corporate heads "step up" on immigration reform, and it's not because they have an Emma Lazarus-like vision of a multicultural nation. As Sam Ro of Business Insider (in a different context) notes

Ever since the financial crisis, corporations have managed to deliver robust profit growth by offsetting the drag of weak sales growth with widening profit margins. These fatter profit margins come from cutting costs, which usually means getting more productivity out of a fewer number of workers.

Income growth of these dwindling number of workers has stagnated as the labor pool has grown. It's really quite simple, for workers in a wide array of industries know there are others behind them waiting to pounce on any available job. The motive of (many corporations) in supporting immigration reform, is not merely academic because as Congress seeks compromise, business leaders, unlike the left, may urge legislation that provides legalization without citizenship.

The agenda of those corporations Obama enjoys doing lunch with is laid bare when the supportive President adds

And the same I think goes for a whole range of other issues like climate change, for example. There aren’t any corporate CEOs that you talk to at least outside of maybe—no, I will include CEOs of the fossil-fuel industries—who are still denying that climate change is a factor. What they want is some certainty around the regulations so that they can start planning.

Back in April, 2011 Paul Krugman took on the "economic uncertainty" myth when he explained

The reasons that business are not investing is that they have tons and tons of excess capacity. There is a very clear relationship historically between the amount of unemployment and the amount of business investment. When unemployment is high capacity is low, investment is low. There’s nothing. All of this stuff about uncertainty is just myth being made up to blame this on Obama. There’s nothing in there. It is exactly what you would expect.

It may seem a paradox that the charge of economic uncertainty is used to blame President Obama, who now de facto endorses the notion of regulatory uncertainty. But then the President also has promoted the myth that a lack of skills contributes more to the unemployment problem than does a lack of jobs.   And that a large federal workforce, and deficits in an economic downturn, are harmful.

Nevertheless, the larger message from Obama, who touts the acceptance of immigration reform and climate science among corporate chieftains, is that the latter are really a whole lot different than the populist base of the Republican Party, those pitchfork-wielding, uneducated masses. They don't even call him a Kenyan or a Muslim!   But Ed Kilgore (nearly two years ago) saw through this conceit, pointing out

Yes, years from now conservatives will sit around campfires and sing songs about the legendary internecine battles of late 2012, when father fought son and brother fought brother across a chasm of controversy as to whether 98% or 99% of abortions should be banned; whether undocumented workers should be branded and utilized as “guest workers,” loaded onto cattle cars and shipped home, or simply immiserated; whether the New Deal/Great Society programs should be abolished in order to cut upper-income taxes or abolished in order to boost Pentagon spending. There’s also a vicious, take-no-prisons fight over how quickly to return the role of the federal government in the economy to its pre-1930s role as handmaiden to industry. Blood will flow in the streets as Republicans battle over how to deal with health care after Obamacare is repealed and 50 million or people lose health insurance. Tax credits and risk pools or just “personal responsibility?”







Share |

Tuesday, July 22, 2014

And Helping You Helps Me- How?





The online edition of the Star-Ledger of Newark, NJ reports

Gov. Chris Christie was campaigning as chairman of the Republican Governors Association in Connecticut today, but don’t expect him to be making any similar upcoming trips to New York.

The governor, boasting about his ability to make a quick campaign trip for a Republican gubernatorial hopeful here because of its proximity to the Garden State, suggested it’s unlikely he’ll be supporting the Republican hoping to oust New York’s Democratic incumbent Gov. Andrew Cuomo anytime soon.

“I will spend time in places where we have a chance to win, I said that right from the beginning,” said Christie, who took the reins as chairman of the RGA in November.

“We don’t pay for landslides and we don’t invest in lost causes,” he said when asked about the possibility of campaign trips to the Empire State. “If the New York race becomes competitive, I’ll consider campaigning in the New York race, but right now, by the public polls, there’s a lot more competitive races like this one in Connecticut.”

According to a poll released Monday, Cuomo holds a 37 percentage-point lead among likely voters over his Republican challenger, Westchester County Executive Rob Astorino. Cuomo led Astorino 60 percent to 23 percent, the Sienna College survey found.

Astorino maintains if Christie

is unable to help a Republican candidate for governor, then maybe he should consider stepping down as chairman of the RGA. That’s his job....

I don’t know if there’s a connection between him and Andrew Cuomo on Bridgegate, or if Cuomo has something that he’s holding back, information that could be damaging to the governor.

Whatever Gov. Christie knew or didn’t know is probably the same for Gov. Cuomo. And if there’s anything being held back that Gov. Cuomo knows and if he’s holding that over Gov. Christie’s head, I don’t know.

Of course he should, certainly there is, and Mr. Astorino needn't be so reticent.  On December 12, The Wall Street Journal had reported (subscription required; this from Daily Kos)

Mr. Christie, a Republican, complained in a private phone call to Mr. Cuomo, a Democrat, that Patrick Foye, the executive director of the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, was pressing too hard to get to the bottom of why the number of toll lanes onto the bridge from Fort Lee, N.J., was cut from three to one in early September, according to this person. The lane closures occurred without notice to local authorities, officials have said, and snarled traffic for a week in the small borough on the Hudson River bluffs.

There is a blizzard's chance in Miami Beach that the Repub New Jersey governor and the ostensibly Democratic New York governor (photo below of them and Astorino from Getty/AP) don't have something going together.  But when Christie, who could have said something nondescript such as "we will apportion our resources in a manner which would be most effective," is taking his cue from his political ally.

Just after Memorial Day, 2013, when the Governor was gearing up for an election campaign against Democratic challenger Barbara Buono, he was granted the privilege (at that time, in New Jersey, a major gift) of appearing in public with President Obama while feigning interest in Hurricane Sandy victims.  The President's schedule was so completely filled that summer and autumn, he was unable to find the time even to endorse the Democratic nominee, thereby helping to boost Christie's victory margin as the Governor dreamt of the White House.

Barack Obama gave the back of the hand to his own party's gubernatorial nominee so he could come to the aid of Chris Christie.  Now Governor Opportunist is doing the same to Rob Astorino so he can boost Andrew Cuomo, who would jump into the Democratic presidential race yesterday if Hillary Clinton declines to run. (And if she does run, as expected, a Cuomo re-election landslide would boost his hopes in 2020 or 2024.) Whatever works for me is the guiding principle.

Sixty years ago in The Lone Ranger, it was "varmints." Now it's scoundrels. Either way, it's how they roll.










Share |

Friday, February 28, 2014




Cuomo On The Same Path As The Master

In his recent expose of the New Jersey governor (shown below, distastefully exposed), the New Republic's Alex MacGillis revealed Christie's fervent efforts to avoid being identified with any Republicans in the Democratic state, recognizing that it might reduce his upcoming winning margin to, say, 20 points.  He notes

As Election Day neared, you could be forgiven for mistaking Christie for a Democrat. State Republicans were frozen out; candidates were told not to include his name or picture on their literature. “We didn’t get the support,” says George Wagoner, a losing Assembly candidate. Meanwhile, the weight of the Democratic machine swung behind the Republican governor.

More than 50 Democratic elected officials endorsed Christie, including Brian Stack (who was hit with a $68,725 fine in July for failing to properly disclose campaign spending) and Joe D. (who also has a large fine looming). In photos and media appearances, Christie kept showing up smiling alongside Sweeney and other prominent Democrats. Norcross didn’t formally endorse Christie, but he made his approval clear. At one event, Norcross said he’d recently seen a man in a “Chris Christie: too big to fail” t-shirt. He told Christie: “You’re not too big to fail—you’re too good and too important to fail us.” 






Susanne Craig and Thomas Kaplan in The New York Times describe the similar tactics being employed by New York governor Andrew Cuomo, who

actually has a friendly working relationship with many Senate Republicans. He and those senators have been at odds on social issues, but he has relied on their backing for his fiscal agenda, which has focused on issues of great importance to Republicans, like restraining government spending and cutting taxes.

The governor’s private conversations, and other communications made through intermediaries, were described by senior officials in both parties who have heard from Mr. Cuomo recently. Nearly all insisted on anonymity to avoid antagonizing him.

A spokeswoman for the governor, Melissa DeRosa, said, “This story is nothing more than political gossip from people with obvious motives.” She declined to elaborate.

The Republicans now control the Senate in a coalition with a small group of breakaway Democrats. Mr. Cuomo has expressed concern before about the main caucus of Democratic senators, citing the “dysfunction” and chaos that defined their time in the majority in 2009 and 2010, and has conspicuously remained on the sidelines as the two parties have battled for control.

Any effort now by the governor to aid Republicans in their fight to retain control of the Senate would be fraught with the risk that he could antagonize politicians in his own party, whose support he will need for major initiatives, including his budget, which is now being hashed out in Albany.

“The governor prides himself in being the master triangulator,” a senior Democratic operative said. “This is not going to help his cause as we try and try to get the budget done.”

In Mr. Cuomo’s conversations with Republicans, officials say, the governor has specifically warned that he would campaign hard against Mr. Astorino, painting him as a hard-line conservative — by highlighting his opposition to same-sex marriage, abortion rights and strict gun laws approved last year.

That type of aggressive campaign, Mr. Cuomo has cautioned, would hurt all Republicans, causing collateral damage to the re-election campaigns of some Republican state senators, whose party is clinging to power and cannot afford to lose many seats.

“He’s told me that if Astorino runs, he is going to pound the hell out of him and talk about guns and gays, and it won’t be pretty and will hurt all of us,” said a Republican senator who asked not to be named.

With less than nine months until Election Day, Mr. Astorino is the only Republican officeholder who appears to be seriously considering a bid for governor, and causing second-guessing in the Republican ranks could enhance Mr. Cuomo’s advantage.

In addition to offering his commentary on Mr. Astorino, Mr. Cuomo has also tried to woo Republican donors and others who might be inclined to support a Republican. Last month, and on Monday, the governor talked up his record to business leaders at the Harvard Club in Manhattan. Kenneth G. Langone, co-founder of Home Depot, gave his imprimatur to the Monday event.

Kenneth G. Langone? Where have we heard about him? In 2011,

On November 1, more than 100 wealthy political donors, including former New York Stock Exchange CEO Dick Grasso, streamed into the luxurious Conrad Suite at the Waldorf-Astoria on Manhattan's Park Avenue for a lunchtime fundraiser. The event was a smashing success, raising six figures for Mitt Romney—three times what had been expected. Save for the candidate himself, no one could have been more pleased than Ken Langone, the legendary investment banker who had organized the fundraiser and who, armed with a fat Rolodex and the pugnacity of a by-the-bootstraps billionaire, wants nothing more than to defeat Barack Obama in 2012.

Annoyed that the New York governor now is trying to elect Republicans, Digby remarks

Andrew Cuomo is a shoo-in to win no matter who the Republicans nominate. And he has come right out and said that he doesn't want to have to run against a real social conservative because a campaign around gay rights or abortion might make Democrats vote for other Democrats than just him. And that would mean he wouldn't have all those nice Republicans to help him cut "deals" to screw Democrats.

This is nothing new for the ostensibly Democratic governor. Two years ago, Janell Ross of The Huffington Post had reported

In a deal done in the dead of night last week, New York became the latest state to drastically overhaul its pension plan against the wishes of its public employees. After months of political arm-twisting, the state legislature passed on Thursday a slate of measures expected to save the state $80 billion over 30 years while cutting retirement payments guaranteed to state workers.

Similarly, in 2011 Governor Christie- with support from Democratic Senate President Steve Sweeney, Democratic Assembly Speaker Sheila Oliver, and some other Democrats undercut contractual agreements by cutting the pension of public employees.  According to a union complaint, they were "suspending pension adjustments, increasing employees’ contributions, underfunding pensions and delegating to pension committees an 'unrestrained authority to reduce pension and change eligibility requirements.'"

In her piece, Ross had explained

Public pensions are taking the blame for a much larger set of financial decisions, said Brian McDonnell, legislative and political director for AFSCME-NY, a public sector workers union that represents about 420,000 workers in the state. The state legislature has put local governments in a difficult financial position that pension reforms will not address, he said.

Last year, the New York legislature limited property taxes -- a key source of revenue for cities and counties -- to increases of no more than 2 percent each year. New York, like many states, also slashed the money it sends to municipalities.

Cuomo then stood behind an income tax plan that will pull less money out of rich households this year, said McDonnell. 

Limiting annual local property tax increases to 2% and slashing municipal aid.  Where could Cuomo have gotten that idea?  In 2010

Gov. Chris Christie signed the 2 percent cap on local property tax hikes into law with overwhelming support from state Senate and Assembly Democrats. The measure — which allows exceptions for debt payments, health and pension costs for municipal employees and spending for emergencies — aims to suppress the state’s rapidly growing property tax increases.

Nevertheless, net property taxes have increased significantly under Governor Christie, in part because he slashed state aid to municipalities.

Cuomo and Christie both are determined to achieve conservative ends, enhancing the power of the wealthy, by aligning themselves with allies of the opposite party. It's a media- pleasing, self-serving strategy of earning bipartisan bonafides by working against your own party.

Craig and Kaplan write

One official said the governor had indicated he would refrain from such a polarizing campaign if the Republicans ran a candidate who in his view was more moderate. But no such moderate Republican has yet stepped forward as a serious alternative to Mr. Astorino.

Some Republicans say that in making a case against Mr. Astorino, Mr. Cuomo is also trying to undermine a potential challenger. Mr. Astorino, they say, has built a reputation for fiscal belt-tightening in wealthy Westchester, where Democratic voters outnumber Republicans two to one — roughly the same as the electorate statewide.

Democrats portrayed Mr. Astorino as a right-wing Tea Party extremist last year, but he campaigned on holding down taxes and easily defeated his Democratic opponent. “Andrew Cuomo is being a bully,” said Edward F. Cox, the state’s Republican Party chairman. “His attempts to derail Rob Astorino’s candidacy show just how worried he must be.”

Worried only that his strategy of the 1% might falter if too many members of his own party are elected.  Still, there is an ironic twist to Cox's statement.   The description of  Cuomo as a "bully" actually may be the main difference between the New York governor and Christopher J. Christie because the latter, MacGillis explains, isn't only

a bully. It's that his political career is built on a rotten foundation. Christie owes his rise to some of the most toxic forces in his state- powerful bosses who ensure that his vow to clean up New Jersey will never come to pass.he has allowed them to escape scrutiny, rewarded them for their support, and punished their enemies. All along, even as it looked like Christie was attacking the machine, he was really just mastering it.

Now only a novice, Andrew Cuomo has a long way to go to match the master of manipulation in New Jersey.





Share |

The New Pledge of Allegiance

Last month, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez infamously stated "I have a local city councilman that has this saying 'Woke 1...