Dueling Press Releases Defining the Moment

Here is some more for the hopper (4.00 / 5)

From an analysis over at the NY Times caucus blog:

If a new political breeze is blowing in the capital, perhaps the best evidence can be found here: A Democratic president selects a Republican senator to serve in the cabinet. The Democratic governor with the power to fill the Senate seat signals that he will leave it in Republican hands, depriving his party of a chance to reach 60 votes, the magic number when it comes to passing legislation.

When President Obama stands on Tuesday beside Senator Judd Gregg - a Republican from New Hampshire who until this point has not been particularly supportive of him - to announce his nomination as commerce secretary, it will be the latest evidence that Mr. Obama is willing at this early stage to take some risks and break some of the old rules of politics.

We elected President Obama in order to usher in a new era of politics. While I supported Hillary in the primaries, I think that President Obama's election has given us an opportunity to do just that. Why is there so much resistance to giving him a chance?



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 19:44:01 PM CST

Because this hints not of a new era of politics (4.00 / 2)

but of some Republicans playing hardball and some Democrats willing to roll over, an old pattern.

---

by: bdbd @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 19:56:43 PM CST

[ Parent ]

For me, (4.00 / 6)

because having a government with a lot of Republicans in it is not actually change. Having Democrats constantly bending over backwards to include Republicans while Republicans don't reciprocate one bit is not change. And I'd like my change to come with as many people genuinely on the left as genuinely on the right.

I've been pleasantly surprised by how Obama's doing so far, and I'm inclined to trust him more as a result. But this particular move would appear to tap into the part of Obama's M.O. I least like and trust, and obviously I've made my thoughts on this aspect of Lynch known.

If the appointee is a moderate Republican who'll be better than Gregg on even a few key votes and will stay out in 2010, I'll see a strong strategic upside. But no, continued unilateral disarmament on the part of Democrats is not change I can believe in.

---

by: Laura Clawson @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 19:57:10 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Excellent Point, Laura (0.00 / 0)

...bipartisanship means more than just naming Republicans to important positions like this.  What bothers me most is the dealmaking, and the fact that Democrats fell into it so quickly.  There had to be a better bench out there from which to choose.  

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 22:04:31 PM CST

[ Parent ]

RIGHT ON, KATHY SULLIVAN! (4.00 / 2)

It's interesting that the day the Gregg for Commerce Sect'y leaked, President Barack Obama signed multiple executive orders supporting LABOR UNIONS.  Not very Judd Gregg-ish of him, was it?  Having Gregg in at Commerce doesn't mean that President Obama repeals any of his views.

Remember the influence of Lincoln's TEAM OF RIVALS on President Obama? I know Kathy gets it.  How else would we have seen the new, fantastic Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sworn in today!  And that was also a fantastic choice by our fine President.

Don't forget that it's also about getting partisan politics out of the economic recovery!  As a working class kid at heart, knowing many family members and former neighbors struggling to get buy, I think that is what the majority in this country resoundingly want. This wasn't a political decision, it was a decision to include all Americans in the economic recovery.  And yes, Barack Obama didn't have to do that.  He could have done what many of us would have done - picked one of our own.  After all, we have the votes in the Senate and House, right?  But how long would that "same-'ole" tired politics worked for us, in the end?  Til things (ironically) heated up in the 2010 elections?

Remember how most of us learned about Barack Obama's existence?  That fantastic speech in 2004?  This isn't a red America, or a blue America, it's a United States of America!  And we all clapped!  

Just because we won a ton of races in 2008 doesn't mean we ignore Republicans.  Some of my best friends are Republicans.  But I'm just as pro-labor, pro-working family, pro-Lily Ledbetter, pro-choice, pro-removing-troops-from-Iraq as I was this time last week.... when I was alternating daydreams about creating some sort of 527 to start challenging Greg, with how I could best encourage a certain someone to run for U.S. Sen. on the Dem ticket....

I'll put back on my partisan hat on this matter when we start discussing who we want as our candidate for 2010.  But for now...

Bottom line:  Whatever you think of Judd Gregg, his voting record, philosophical bent, the impact in NH's political world, etc... JUDD GREGG'S NOT THE PRESIDENT.  President Barack Obama sets the agenda, and that's a very good thing for us all.


Be the Change you wish to see in the world (Gandhi)

---

by: KrisSchultz @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 22:47:57 PM CST

[ Parent ]

But Kris...There Was No One Better? (0.00 / 0)

But Kris -- there was no one better than Judd Gregg?  I mean, no one better?  No bench?  This isn't about bipartisanship, it's about what Judd Gregg brings, or doesn't bring, to the table.  There had to be better choices, Republican as well as Democrat.  We're not talking about some low-level assistant position here -- he's going to be a Cabinet Member, sitting in the White House Cabinet Room.  He's going to be running a 38,000-person department in charge of economics, energy matters, and some labor matters. What do we win with Judd Gregg?  Don't underestimate the partisanship of this man. Nothing to celebrate on this one.    

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 22:55:02 PM CST

[ Parent ]

A Puzzle Piece (0.00 / 0)

It would seem, this "bench" you repeatedly refer to does NOT have what POTUS is looking for.


Whack-a-mole, anyone?

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 23:09:07 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I appreciate your taking my comments seriously (0.00 / 0)

and giving me a thoughtful response and sincere question... proving why I respect you. You know far more about Judd Gregg than I do, so I can't speak to all of your point.  But I'll do my best anyhow, as I do know our President, and I trust his political judgment.  

It's my understanding that the President has developed a rapport with Judd Gregg over the past few years. I'll bet they spent some time talking during the first bailout bill that left some sort of an impression on him, no doubt that recently surfaced during the President's meetings on the Economic Recovery Bill.  And while I had major criticisms of Gregg's bailout bill, I know that the Republican Senators see him as a "quarterback" of sorts in the Senate on finance and commerce issues.  And given that not a one of those R Senators voted for President Obama's economic recovery package, I think it makes sense to pick Judd Gregg.  If Judd Gregg hurts workers, environment, or the economy in this new position, he won't remain in it, I suspect.  But I sincerely doubt he'd do that, given all the bending-over-backwards for him to get this job.

The President drives the agenda on all three of those topics, however, and Judd Gregg's appointment doesn't mean the President waivers a millimeter on his agenda whatsoever.  It does, however, mean that our country will have an economic recovery package that includes input from all points of view.... hearkening back to the TEAM OF RIVALS concepts I was throwing out earlier.

Rep. Splaine... you know Judd Gregg better than I do.  I know you'll keep us all posted here on any developments that meet your concern.  But it's my believe that while this won't be a perfect arrangement, having an all-Dem economic team is not what is best for the country right now in these tough times... So, yes, strangely, (and I have really evolved in my thinking to say this) It will be a better government with him than without him.

To crudely paraphrase LBJ: We'd rather him stand in our tent and pee out than stand outside our tent and pee in.


Be the Change you wish to see in the world (Gandhi)

---

by: KrisSchultz @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 23:40:48 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Thanks, Kris n/t (0.00 / 0)

"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 07:05:29 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Good point (0.00 / 0)

I disagree with it, for the moment, but it merits further thought.

---

by: JimC @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 08:30:56 AM CST

[ Parent ]

My Definition Of A "New Era Of Politics" (4.00 / 4)

IMHO, and I may be wrong, I'll offer my definition of a "New Era Of Politics:"  

1.  Show principle on those issues you ran on by sticking to your ideals in all actions you take.

2.  Put the very best people in positions of importance in government who share your ideals and idealism.  

3. Put the deal-making aside in favor of openness and honesty.  

There is nothing about having Judd Gregg as Commerce Secretary/Cabinet Member that fits that definition.  Others are welcome to write theirs.  Gregg is himself a perfect example of the failed politics of the past.  

It's interesting to remember the comments of our party leaders about Judd Gregg prior to this past Wednesday of last week.  Since then, he's become our best hope for bipartisanship and we're willing to make deals to get him to "accept" an office?  He's taking us to the cleaners.  

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 19:58:21 PM CST

Elwood wins. (4.00 / 1)

No matter what happens with the Senate appointment, assuming there is one, we should move to a special election system for next time.

--
Hope 2012

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 21:25:39 PM CST

Elections Let The People Decide... (0.00 / 0)

Otherwise the choice is by one, and the deal -- sorry, the "arrangement" -- is in.  What did Abraham Lincoln say?  You can fool some of the people all of the time, all of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time?  I like elections.  I thought we won the last one.  Guess I read the wrong memo.

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 21:31:41 PM CST

[ Parent ]

In their defense, (0.00 / 0)

I'll bet the Governors of New Hampshire, New York, Delaware, Colorado, and the former Governor of Illinois would rather not have been involved.

--
Hope 2012

@DougLindner

---

by: Douglas E. Lindner @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 21:49:52 PM CST

[ Parent ]

One caveat on special elections (4.00 / 2)

They give a large advantage to those who have a lot of campaign money already raised.

I support them but would be more comfortable if there were some limitations on the advantage given to those with money. It's bad enough in a regular election but the shortness of a special will enhance the advantage.

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

---

by: Paul Twomey @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 06:30:38 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Agreed, and not to minimize the point (4.00 / 1)

but I suspect it simply magnifies what is already a serious problem in regular campaigns.

---

by: elwood @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 06:32:21 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Absolutely (0.00 / 0)

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

---

by: Paul Twomey @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 11:57:24 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Kathy on NECN (4.00 / 1)

Loved the dig at Lieberman!

http://www.necn.com/Boston/Pol...

Whack-a-mole, anyone?

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 21:25:49 PM CST

It is time for Kathy Sullivan to resign as Democratic National Committewoman (2.00 / 2)

I am distressed and shocked to read on these pages that Kathy Sullivan, our DEMOCRATIC National Committeewoman is defending the indefensible - the appointment by Democratic Governor Lynch of a Republican, not a Democrat to replace Senator Gregg.

Kathy is supposed to be representing the members of the New Hampshire Democratic Party - she was elected to a partisan post. I cannot see how this advances our goals.

I have therefore sadly reached the conclusion that Kathy, who is supposed to be representing us, must resign.

---

by: Putney Swope @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 22:19:27 PM CST

Kathy's Doing What She Considers Is Her Job (0.00 / 0)

I've been a bit of a critic of her views the past few days, but the fact is Kathy is doing what she considers is her job, and her views should always be welcome.  Let's defend that.

Besides, her job on the DNC is varied and she's done some great things speaking out against the efforts by the national party or other states to try to ignore New Hampshire's First-In-The-Nation Presidential Primary Law, which guarantees our lead-off date will be "...7 days or more..." before any other similar election.  And during election time she's an incredible booster for everything and everyone Democratic.  

She's a treasure to us, and has been for years.  Now Ray is a different matter.  Just kidding.  He and I battle at times, but results are results and they've made a good team.  

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 22:31:14 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I welcome her views as a private citizen (0.00 / 0)

I expect more from my National Committeewoman.

---

by: Putney Swope @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 22:45:50 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Print your name, please. (4.00 / 3)

Those are big words. Put your name next to them.

Whack-a-mole, anyone?

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Mon Feb 02, 2009 at 23:10:55 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Blogging pseudonymity (4.00 / 1)

is a given on BH and most any politcal blogs, Sleeping Giant.

Agree or, as I do, disagree with the statement without discouraging free speech.

birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 06:55:08 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Time to chill out, me thinks. (0.00 / 0)

This really isnt an issue to go to war over. It's just not that important. And whether you agree with what KS has been saying or not, she has been expressing what she thinks is in the best interest of the party. If I had to rate the real pragmatic importance of Gregg at Commerce with Sullivan at DNC for the NHDP, it would be:

Gregg/Commerce:   3
Sullivan/DNC:     10

"But, in the unlikely story that is America, there has never been anything false about hope." Si se puede. Yes we can.  

---

by: Paul Twomey @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 06:38:36 AM CST

[ Parent ]

This is a very strong statement, (4.00 / 3)

one that I don't agree with, but it does not fit the category of a troll rating, imo.

This comment is on professional, not personal lines.

Again: I don't agree with the statement, but not troll rating worthy.

birch, finch, beech

---

by: Dean Barker @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 06:47:46 AM CST

[ Parent ]

What's Up Doc? (4.00 / 3)

We disagree. My DEMOCRATIC president wants Judd Gregg.  Barack Obama is the leader of our party.  

And no, Putney doesn't need to attach his name publicly, it is fine. If we did not have disagreements, we would not be Democrats, and he doesn't deserve to be troll rated. He is expressing a very passionate position, as do we all from time to time. Anonymous political commentary is a time honored tradition in our country.

And the RESIGN demand reminds me of Ben Affleck's Keith imitation, which makes me smile.  



"When you get to the end of your rope, tie a knot and hang on."  Franklin D. Roosevelt    

---

by: Kathy Sullivan 2 @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 07:04:28 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Change of tone (0.00 / 0)

I am pretty sure that over the course of our debates, that by the time it went from velvet shivs to flamethrowers, I had put my name and face next to my nome-de-blog.

Though you, apparently, and some of us know who Putney is, I think that if words like that are thrusted out, then one needs to stand next to them. Judge not, lest ye be judge. Or something like that.

PS. The Lieberman model is brilliant. You'll get double mileage out of that tact. Ya know, just in case. ;v)

Whack-a-mole, anyone?

---

by: Jack Mitchell @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 07:47:21 AM CST

[ Parent ]

MY PRESIDENT TOO (0.00 / 0)

MY President wants us to increase by double the American troop commitment to Afghanistan.  I respectfully disagree, and I'm a Democrat -- and many other Democrats disagree.  MY President wants Judd Gregg, and I greatly disagree.  Hopefully he won't be confirmed.  Hope springs eternal.  But those few of us who have seen through this IMHO wrong decision by Obama's advisors and whomever have the full right to disagree.  And MY Governor shouldn't have agreed to any "arrangement," or "courtesy," or whatever it might be called.  But I do understand.  It's just hard to understand why so many went into the Gregg Cheerleading League.  

---

by: Rep. Jim Splaine @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 17:17:51 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Well (0.00 / 0)

I have to say kudos for throwing it down like that.

But, I disagree. It seems to me all Kathy did was defend the governor.

Why aren't you calling for the governor to resign? Or the president?

---

by: JimC @ Tue Feb 03, 2009 at 08:43:43 AM CST

[ Parent ]