Above all... regulating the out of control fiance industry. Hmmm...... ;-)

The Wall Street fat cats will continue their fat ways. I am not holding my breath for any true reform.

Well I had tooooooooo many fiances and the problem was I never welshed. You know the Welsh. Gopn back on promises for a couple thousand years...but I digress.

It has become an industry. My last one demanded a seven thousand dollar ring when I had picked out one for four thousand.

Somebody has to regulate all this.

President Obama has offered sound advice. Here are two compelling reasons for Governor Paterson to withdraw,

http://www.thealbanyproject.com/diary/7303/nygov-president-obama-is-right-governor-paterson-should-not-run

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2010/governor/election_2010_governor_races.html

I had the same reaction, that I would rather the president not be playing a role as the head of the democrat party for some reason. The whole kingmaker energy of the Arlen Specter switch has me pulling for Sestak.

However, having said that, it's probably best that he has his eye on the ball as long as he keeps his eye on the other balls as well.

Apparently getting Arlen to switch was worth a lot to the president... and having a democrat governor in NY is clearly very important to him as well or he wouldn't have made the comments.

Oh I'd love to see Obama play a role as head of the Democratic party. I'd just prefer it was over the Blue Dogs of Congress. In that case he's all hands off, but he's not above kicking a guy when he's down even when it is way out of his zone of authority. No one wants Paterson to run for reelection. The difference is most folks have the discretion not to splash it on the front page of the NYT. This us unheard of interference for a president. And an unnecessary distraction for both Obama and Paterson. Grrr.

I can't fathom why the Admin wanted to
make this public, but apparently they did. Sounds like the heavy hammer of Rahm to me.

If Obama did step in, it seems to have backfired. I say "if", because I'm fed up with stories that are based on consultants who were "briefed" on something, and then go on to discuss that something. As in:

Last Monday, when Mr. Obama came to Wall Street to deliver a speech on the financial industry, his administration did not invite Mr. Paterson, a conspicuous snub of a fellow Democrat in his own state.

Instead, the White House political director, Patrick Gaspard, met with Mr. Paterson that day and told him that the president had lost confidence in his ability to win the 2010 election, and especially to hold off former Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who is weighing a run for governor, according to two Democratic operatives briefed on the conversation.

“It was very explicit,” said one of the operatives, who is based in New York and has close ties to the White House. “He said, ‘I am here at the direction of the president, and we have lost confidence in your ability to run for re-election and win, and we would strongly like you to reconsider. And if you decide to go ahead, you will not have our support.’ “

If this went down as just described, it does sound like Emanuel. And what has it gained? The media twittering over the meeting between Obama and Paterson, Pataki (blech) lecturing Obama, Michael Steele re-introducing race into the discussion, and so forth.

And Paterson, perhaps, obstinately deciding to do just the opposite. Heckuva job, Rahm and Barack!

Reminds me of "Mr. Science" - "He knows more than you do - he's got a Masters Degree...in Science".

It was just a couple of months ago he knew more about cars than Detroit. Why shouldn't he know more about New York - he even lived there a couple of years.

Yes, the Guiliani v. Paterson numbers were terrifying.

Still it doesn't seem to me Paterson could beat Cuomo in the primaries. Or maybe I'm wrong there. Cuomo's been doing penance and I know I've forgiven him, but his reputation as a hothead prick may be a little harder than that to live down.

Dunno. And I don't think any of us do. This has the scent of a rather more involved story than we're getting. Unless it's simply payback for Paterson sending Gilibrand on along to Congress after expressly promising that's not what he was going to do. She managed to carry a very Republican district and that's a Hoise seat that's probably going to be lost now.

Oh for God's sake, come off it. Paterson is a disaster. Bloomberg and his staff can't deal with him. There's nothing good to say about him. And all of a sudden, a sitting President cannot weigh in on significant state politics?? Where the fuck have you been, honey? I guarantee that Bloomberg wants Paterson out. There's more here than your sweet Hillary lovin' eyes can see. Funny, that you tell Obama to leave NY alone given that Hillary was the biggest carpet bagger of all time.

I'm Welch (not like those thievin' Welsh).

3...2...1...

OMG. We agree? My expression very closely resembles your avatar :)

Funny Desi :) I don't necessarily disagree with the message, just the messenger and the method of delivery.

That said, I see some parallels between the hyperventilating of the Obama admin about a primary for the Gov of NY and the calls for Hillary to exit the race before Obama won the nomination. Last time I checked this was a democracy and the voters should make their own choices for who represents them, not have those decisions made by the party machine.

Your answer doesn't make a whole lot of sense, frankly.

I was posting about the practice of "consultants" or "aides" or whatever finding something out second hand, and then blabbing about it. If you think Bloomberg was behind this, well, alrighty then.

As for the crack about the Hillary fan club? Saying that something was handled badly = member of the Hillary fan club?

Thanks for the illumination into your thought processes.