Governor David Paterson will announce his choice to succeed Hilary Clinton in the junior U.S. senate seat in New York State, tomorrow, Friday, at 10 AM. Eastern Standard Time.
As anyone who has noticed the news in the last twenty-four hours, the choice will not be Caroline Kennedy. A Paterson administration source has revealed that Paterson had never seriously considered her.
Showing posts with label David Paterson. Show all posts
Showing posts with label David Paterson. Show all posts
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Lady Kennedy answers questions from the NY Times
Lady Kennedy, duchess of Hyannis, of the dynasty of Kennedy, aspirant to receive her duly endowed legacy position of Senator from Gov. David Paterson, has answered (generally, brief) questions, from the NY Times, so as to appear to be speaking to we, the commoners:
Q. Does she support state or federal legislation that would legalize same-sex marriage?
A. Caroline supports full equality and marriage rights for gay and lesbian couples.
Q. Would she oppose legislation that would require minors to notify a parent before obtaining an abortion?
A. Caroline believes that young women facing unwanted pregnancies should have the advice of caring adults, but this should not be required by law.
Q. Does she support any state or federal restrictions on late-term abortions?
A. Caroline supports Roe v. Wade, which prohibits third-trimester abortions except when the life or health of the mother is at risk.
Q. Do you support amnesty for undocumented workers?
A. Caroline believes all undocumented workers should be required to legalize their presence in the United States and that we must create a way for them to do so. Undocumented workers should pay a fine, learn English and go to the back of the line behind those who came here legally.
Q. Has the North American Free Trade Agreement worked?
A. Caroline believes that Nafta has had unintended, negative consequences in some regions of New York, and that is why she agrees with President-elect Obama that we need to take a careful look at the agreement and pay particular attention to its impact on jobs and wages in American manufacturing communities. She also believes that we must ensure that American communities and workers benefit as we craft new trade agreements.
Q. Do you support any federal or state restrictions on gun ownership? If so, which ones?
A. Caroline Kennedy is a strong supporter of gun control. She supports New York City’s and New York State’s gun control laws. On the federal level, she support the Brady Law, and other measures to keep guns out of the hands of minors and criminals.
Q. Do you believe that an undivided Jerusalem must be the national capital of the State of Israel?
A. Yes, Caroline believes that an undivided Jerusalem must be the national capital of the State of Israel.
Q. Do you support the auto industry bailout package passed by the House of Representatives earlier this month?
A. Yes, Caroline supports the auto industry bailout package passed by the House of Representatives earlier this month.
Q. Should there be a cap on local property taxes in New York State?
A. Caroline believes that is an issue for the legislature and the governor to decide.
Q. The president-elect proposes higher taxes on the wealthy to help pay for government programs. Governor Paterson is opposed to increase the state income tax on the wealthiest New Yorkers. Who is right?
A. Both President-elect Obama and Governor Paterson are showing tremendous leadership during these tough times. David Paterson has led the fight in Washington to increase aid to the States. If his efforts are successful it may change the tough choices that he currently has to make in terms of budget cuts and revenue increases. In terms of specifics of the Governor’s budget, it was just released last week and Caroline believes it is up to the Governor and the legislature to work out the details.
Q. Do you support a two-state peace solution for Israel?
A. Caroline supports a two-state peace solution for Israel, so long as there is a true partner for peace in the Palestinians, and so long as Israel’s security is assured.
Q. Do you support the federal Employee Free Choice Act, otherwise known as the "card-check" bill?
A. Yes, Caroline supports the federal Employee Free Choice Act.
Q. Do you believe that school vouchers should be offered to parents of children in New York City public schools?
A. Caroline’s priority is to help the public schools improve so that all children have the opportunity to attain an excellent education. She does not support private school vouchers.
Q. Do you want to maintain mayoral control of New York City schools as currently practiced, or do you favor modifying it? If the latter, how?
A. Caroline supports maintaining mayoral control and believes the mayor should be held accountable for the education that our children receive. She is always open to new ideas on how to make the law better so long as they don’t prevent the Mayor from taking the actions he thinks are appropriate and for which he will be held accountable.
Q. Do you support closing the Indian Point nuclear power plant?
A. Caroline supports the state’s efforts to close Indian Point, while recognizing the need to develop alternative sources for the critical energy it currently supplies to New York City and the Metropolitan area.
Monday, December 15, 2008
Denounce the SNL skit on Paterson
The criticisms surrounding the "Saturday Night Live" skit on Gov. David Paterson (NY) do not concern the notion of whether or not it is fair game to lampoon a governor. The issue is that the dubious comedy was centered around mocking Paterson's eye movements and issues of blindness in general.
(Satirizing political figures with topical humor can be done without offending classes of people. Witness the same night's opening sketch that ridiculed the vulgarity and egocentric nature of Gov. Rod Blagojevich (Ill.). Here, the sketch did not offend Serbian-Americans.)
Apparently, we need to explain the situation to the writers of "SNL." When you can see, your eyes fixate on objects. Hence, the eyes remain with a fixed gaze upon one thing. When the seeing person shifts his/her attention to another object, the eyes pan to another location.
Now, when a person cannot see, the blind person has lost the connection with fixing eyes upon objects. Thus, the eyes appear to dart about. This is simply how things are for sight-deprived people.
This is not a laughing matter. So, why is it that "Saturday Night Live" needs to step into the gutter and have Fred Armesen mimic this aspect of Gov. Paterson?
Adding insult to the matter, Armisen held a chart upside down. In the sketch performance, the "news anchor" character guided Armesen's arms so that he was facing in the proper direction. Worst of all, a major part of the sketch was after Armesen finished his lines. Armisen blocked the camera view of the "Weekend Update" news-desk. And this poor taste joke was repeated and repeated.
Clearly, foibles of blindness were the focal point of the "humor" in the sketch.
This is sickening. Let's go back to when we were say three, four or five years of age. Remember that our mothers, fathers or schoolteachers told us that it was impolite to make fun of people's disabilities? If this argument itself was insufficient, the older, model adults explained to us that it would hurt the feelings of people with such a disability.
I presume that network censors do not hold the place in networks that they did, say forty years ago. (We do not hear of them as much as we would have in past decades.) But they serve a necessary function. If writers and performers cannot exercise the golden rule and consider the effect of their words upon the potentially offended minority group, then network censors can enforce good manners, good judgment.
Such a skit was cold-hearted on the part of Saturday Night Live. The writers and actors do not know the frustration that sightless people feel, not being able to see for the practical purposes of sight or for the aesthetic purposes (of enjoying physical beauty).
Alas, this is not too surprising. The casting department of Saturday Night Live has not given us a representative cross-section of the diversity of society. The cast is heavily male, nearly entirely white. To my recollection, they have never had a regular member that is of Asian background. Generally, the number of African-Americans on the cast has been a token number. The fact that SNL has felt it necessary to resort to using Armisen in blackface to play President-elect Barack Obama is reflective of their negligence to have a greater number of African-American actors.
Comment too should be made on the quality of the roles that African-American cast members are given on the show. To be sure, there are inane roles given to European-American performers, but overwhelmingly the nature of the role that the typical African-American cast member is the role of the buffoon, a role perpetuating the tradition of black American as a supposedly clownish character, by her/his very nature.
Lastly, we should note that lately the show has ridiculed the gay orientation of Rep. Barney Frank. Armisen (hmm, how is that he is all of the most offensive roles??? hmmmm) a couple of weeks ago, playing Frank, told actors playing Detroit Big 3 auto executives that American cars should be "more gay." Yes, the latest offense, in the matter of Armisen/Paterson sketch, follows a defiant Seth Myers response to outcry over SNL's treatment of Frank. When faced with criticism that the sketches were insensitive toward Frank in a gay perspective, Myers replied that he would not be cowed to criticism.
We should remember not only that free speech allows us to offend anyone to any degree we wish. We should exercise self-restraint against offensive free speech, not because we are afraid of any governmental power, but because we are concerned with the feelings of potentially offended people.
Please join me in writing a protest letter to the National Broadcasting Corporation (NBC).
Here is the contact information for NBC:
Mr. Jeff Zucker, President
NBC Entertainment
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY 10112
(818) 840-4444
Click here to E-Mail NBC.
The NBC website.
(Satirizing political figures with topical humor can be done without offending classes of people. Witness the same night's opening sketch that ridiculed the vulgarity and egocentric nature of Gov. Rod Blagojevich (Ill.). Here, the sketch did not offend Serbian-Americans.)
Apparently, we need to explain the situation to the writers of "SNL." When you can see, your eyes fixate on objects. Hence, the eyes remain with a fixed gaze upon one thing. When the seeing person shifts his/her attention to another object, the eyes pan to another location.
Now, when a person cannot see, the blind person has lost the connection with fixing eyes upon objects. Thus, the eyes appear to dart about. This is simply how things are for sight-deprived people.
This is not a laughing matter. So, why is it that "Saturday Night Live" needs to step into the gutter and have Fred Armesen mimic this aspect of Gov. Paterson?
Adding insult to the matter, Armisen held a chart upside down. In the sketch performance, the "news anchor" character guided Armesen's arms so that he was facing in the proper direction. Worst of all, a major part of the sketch was after Armesen finished his lines. Armisen blocked the camera view of the "Weekend Update" news-desk. And this poor taste joke was repeated and repeated.
Clearly, foibles of blindness were the focal point of the "humor" in the sketch.
This is sickening. Let's go back to when we were say three, four or five years of age. Remember that our mothers, fathers or schoolteachers told us that it was impolite to make fun of people's disabilities? If this argument itself was insufficient, the older, model adults explained to us that it would hurt the feelings of people with such a disability.
I presume that network censors do not hold the place in networks that they did, say forty years ago. (We do not hear of them as much as we would have in past decades.) But they serve a necessary function. If writers and performers cannot exercise the golden rule and consider the effect of their words upon the potentially offended minority group, then network censors can enforce good manners, good judgment.
Such a skit was cold-hearted on the part of Saturday Night Live. The writers and actors do not know the frustration that sightless people feel, not being able to see for the practical purposes of sight or for the aesthetic purposes (of enjoying physical beauty).
Alas, this is not too surprising. The casting department of Saturday Night Live has not given us a representative cross-section of the diversity of society. The cast is heavily male, nearly entirely white. To my recollection, they have never had a regular member that is of Asian background. Generally, the number of African-Americans on the cast has been a token number. The fact that SNL has felt it necessary to resort to using Armisen in blackface to play President-elect Barack Obama is reflective of their negligence to have a greater number of African-American actors.
Comment too should be made on the quality of the roles that African-American cast members are given on the show. To be sure, there are inane roles given to European-American performers, but overwhelmingly the nature of the role that the typical African-American cast member is the role of the buffoon, a role perpetuating the tradition of black American as a supposedly clownish character, by her/his very nature.
Lastly, we should note that lately the show has ridiculed the gay orientation of Rep. Barney Frank. Armisen (hmm, how is that he is all of the most offensive roles??? hmmmm) a couple of weeks ago, playing Frank, told actors playing Detroit Big 3 auto executives that American cars should be "more gay." Yes, the latest offense, in the matter of Armisen/Paterson sketch, follows a defiant Seth Myers response to outcry over SNL's treatment of Frank. When faced with criticism that the sketches were insensitive toward Frank in a gay perspective, Myers replied that he would not be cowed to criticism.
We should remember not only that free speech allows us to offend anyone to any degree we wish. We should exercise self-restraint against offensive free speech, not because we are afraid of any governmental power, but because we are concerned with the feelings of potentially offended people.
Please join me in writing a protest letter to the National Broadcasting Corporation (NBC).
Here is the contact information for NBC:
Mr. Jeff Zucker, President
NBC Entertainment
30 Rockefeller Plaza
New York, NY 10112
(818) 840-4444
Click here to E-Mail NBC.
The NBC website.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Cong. Ackerman on Lady Kennedy's quest for senate
As I pointed out earlier, Caroline Kennedy is an inappropriate choice for senator, to replace Hillary Clinton, who is expected to vacate her seat, to become Obama's Secretary of State. She has no record in public service, no paper or tape trail on issue positions of the day.
She is merely a legacy candidate of the Kennedy clan, an American counterpart to the British House of Lords, a peer.
Bravo to Rep. Gary Ackerman, Democrat, representing part of Queens Borough, compared her "star power" to that of singer Jennifer Lopez. He is more qualified to fill the seat. As I noted before, veteran New York politicians must be envious and insulted to see Gov. David Paterson give serious consideration of Lady Kennedy as the new New York senator. (And kudos to WWRL radio host Errol Louis for giving attention to the debate over appointing Lady Kennedy.)
(The original article in "The New York Post," December 11, 2008)
She is merely a legacy candidate of the Kennedy clan, an American counterpart to the British House of Lords, a peer.
Bravo to Rep. Gary Ackerman, Democrat, representing part of Queens Borough, compared her "star power" to that of singer Jennifer Lopez. He is more qualified to fill the seat. As I noted before, veteran New York politicians must be envious and insulted to see Gov. David Paterson give serious consideration of Lady Kennedy as the new New York senator. (And kudos to WWRL radio host Errol Louis for giving attention to the debate over appointing Lady Kennedy.)
(The original article in "The New York Post," December 11, 2008)
CAROLINE 'EQUALS J.LO': DEM REP. TAKES SWIPE AT CAMELOT CELEB POWER
By FREDRIC U. DICKER, STATE EDITOR
Jennifer Lopez
ALBANY - A prominent New York Democratic congressman publicly questioned Caroline Kennedy's credentials to replace Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, saying she's no more qualified to hold office than Jennifer Lopez.
Rep. Gary Ackerman of Queens, a 25-year veteran of Congress, declared in a radio interview: "I don't know what Caroline Kennedy's qualifications are."
"Except that she has name recognition, but so does J.Lo," Ackerman continued on Steve Malzberg's radio show on WOR. "I wouldn't make J.Lo the senator unless she proved she had great qualifications, but we haven't seen them yet."
Ackerman's interview was posted on the Web by Malzberg yesterday after being broadcast Monday.
Ackerman is the first prominent New York Democrat to question Kennedy's credentials at a time when Gov. Paterson is considering John F. Kennedy's daughter as one of a dozen potential replacements for Clinton, President-elect Barack Obama's choice for secretary of state.
Some Democratic activists have publicly questioned the fitness of Kennedy, a lawyer and mother of three who has never sought public office, for the Senate. But no prominent elected Democrat had been willing to take on a member of the powerful Kennedy clan until now.
Ackerman also joked that he had taken himself out of the running for the Senate in a way that appeared to highlight Kennedy's lack of statewide experience. He said he wouldn't want to replace Clinton "because I don't do Utica, and that's a qualification for the job."
A Marist College poll Tuesday showed that Kennedy, who lives in Manhattan, has her weakest support for a potential Senate race among upstate voters.
Ackerman's eyebrow-raising comments came as Paterson signaled his unhappiness with efforts by several prominent people, including members of Kennedy family, to lobby him on behalf of their favored candidates.
"It's important for the candidates to focus all of their activities on trying to establish that they are the best candidate, and not on trying to assert any undue influence," said Paterson.
"It's important for me to concentrate only on how the candidates will help New York if they are chosen to serve in the Senate."
Some members of the Kennedy family - including Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the son of former New York Sen. Robert F. Kennedy - have been lobbying for Caroline to get Clinton's job.
Additional reporting by Carl Campanile
Sunday, December 7, 2008
Carolyn or Nydia, not Caroline
The idea of Caroline Kennedy as Senator should rankle some veteran politicians that have put in their time in public service.
The high office of U.S. senator should be a reward to someone with a demonstrated record of committed service, hard work and a record of positions.
Both Nydia Velazquez of Brooklyn and Carolyn Maloney of Manhattan have put in a decade of service in the House of Representatives.
Velazquez has a very solid, very liberal voting record in the House. She should be the first person on Gov. David Paterson's short list of Senate appointment candidates to replace Hillary Clinton.
The "Lost in the Ozone" blog adds:
The author at the blog site, "The Confluence," made several good points, specifically pointing out that our political offices should not be political sinecures, handed down, in legacy fashion within one family clan or political dynasty. It is obvious, if Caroline's last name were not Kennedy, she would not be commanding such attention as a potential U.S. senator.
{For disclosure, this post is from the PUMA movement. Remember that this was the tasteless group of bitter losers that threatened to support John McCain. Their motto was "Principle Before Party;" but they conveniently ignore that there are deep differences of principles and values between the major parties. It is very interesting that they have ignored Nydia Velazquez from their recommendations. Could it be that she is a Latina? They stressed how voters elected Maloney eight times; actually, Vela}
Key points from the Confluence post:
But the bottom line, what are Kennedy's positions? votesmart.org gives us Velazquez's and Maloney's positions.
The high office of U.S. senator should be a reward to someone with a demonstrated record of committed service, hard work and a record of positions.
Both Nydia Velazquez of Brooklyn and Carolyn Maloney of Manhattan have put in a decade of service in the House of Representatives.
Velazquez has a very solid, very liberal voting record in the House. She should be the first person on Gov. David Paterson's short list of Senate appointment candidates to replace Hillary Clinton.
The "Lost in the Ozone" blog adds:
Velazquez offers the tantalizing possibility of killing two political birds with one stone by appealing to Hispanics and women - both critical voting blocs.
"They think she's a twofer," said the source close to Paterson, who would get to pick Clinton's replacement. "She's a woman and a Latina and therefore a home run. He's feeling tremendous pressure in western New York, which he has to win to win the general election. But the closer pressure he's feeling right now is from the Hispanic community."
Picking Velazquez might help Paterson win favor with two members of the so-called Gang of Three who are withholding support from current state Senate Minority Leader Malcolm Smith and preventing him from becoming the majority leader.
The author at the blog site, "The Confluence," made several good points, specifically pointing out that our political offices should not be political sinecures, handed down, in legacy fashion within one family clan or political dynasty. It is obvious, if Caroline's last name were not Kennedy, she would not be commanding such attention as a potential U.S. senator.
{For disclosure, this post is from the PUMA movement. Remember that this was the tasteless group of bitter losers that threatened to support John McCain. Their motto was "Principle Before Party;" but they conveniently ignore that there are deep differences of principles and values between the major parties. It is very interesting that they have ignored Nydia Velazquez from their recommendations. Could it be that she is a Latina? They stressed how voters elected Maloney eight times; actually, Vela}
Key points from the Confluence post:
1. She’s not a politician. Never has been. She’s never run for political office, never advocated for legislation (that I know of), never even expressed an interest. If Hillary were close to an election cycle, one might justify appointing Caroline as a symbolic gesture. But Hillary has four years left in her term. That would make Kennedy a rather strong incumbent. She hasn’t earned it.
2. The Senate is not the House of Lords. I know the argument against dynasties has also been made against Hillary’s run for president. But in Hillary’s case, she did the whole campaigning thing. She’s worked on health care throughout her tenure as first lady. She went into the senate having *earned* her seat through a legitimate election and her own accomplishments. We saw her on the campaign trail for president. She is smart, tough, assertive, unflagging, eternally optimistic. We *like* her. Just because her husband was a president doesn’t mean we had to deprive ourselves of the best presidential candidate in the past 15 years. But in Caroline Kennedy’s case, the name is everything. She is the closest thing we have to an American princess. She’s an aristocrat and nothing more. Oh, sure, she’s a lawyer and she’s published books. But for her, it almost like finishing school. She chose to lead a more private life. Good! Let her enjoy it.
3. There are other women who would be passed over who would be legitimately and righteously indignant. Kirsten Gillibrand and Carolyn Maloney are perfect examples. For the upstate vote, Kirsten is the way to go. She’s young, intelligent, well liked. She’s very much in the Hillary model. For experience, go to Carolyn Maloney, who has been elected from her Manhattan district *eight* times. She has a track record of championing women’s issues. For either of these true politicians who have earned their way to be queue jumped by Caroline Kennedy is a real slap to the face.
But the bottom line, what are Kennedy's positions? votesmart.org gives us Velazquez's and Maloney's positions.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
