Here's a riddle:
Q: Since when do presidents decide who can and who can't run for governor?
A: Since Obama became president.
O.k., it's not a funny riddle, especially to New York Governor David Paterson. The only thing slightly funny is Obama's fixation with being a mob boss.
No one at the White House has ordered Paterson not to run, said a White House official, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Well, that's a comforting statement considering, constitutionally, they don't have the power to order such things anyway. (Like that's a deterrant to Obama...)
The administration shares the concerns of party leaders in New York that Paterson’s low standing in polls may hurt other Democrats in the 2010 election, the official said.
Using this logic, there is no way in hell they should let Obama run for a second term. But kudos to The Party for blaming America's growing disdain for all things Democrat on Paterson's low poll numbers. How convenient is that?
“I think people are aware of the tough situation that the governor of New York is in,” Gibbs said aboard Air Force One. The decision about whether to run is up to Paterson, he said.
It’s not unusual for a president to get involved in state and local politics, he said. “I would not subscribe to the notion that this is new,” Gibbs said.
First of all, Obama and his men have made it clear that the only thing left up to Paterson is whether he wants to wear cement boots or loafers in 2010. Secondly, that presidents getting involved in state and local politics isn't new is hardly the point. Tax evasion and prostitution aren't new, but that's hardly grounds for justifying them. (ACORN not withstanding of course.)
The parties of Communism, Socialism, Fascism, and Nazism, when they were seizing power, all made a mockery of the election process by wrecking havoc and then placing their own people in power. Obama, like the mealy-mouthed dictator he wants to be, is employing this modus operandi by putting a hit out on Paterson to his party then sitting back while his lackey's do his bidding. The mob has been using this tried and true tactic rather successfully in a little town called Chicago, Obama's training ground.
“It’s not just the governorship that’s at stake,” Lee Miringoff, director of the Marist Institute for Public Opinion said in a blog. “Paterson’s pick to replace Hillary Clinton in the U.S. Senate, Kirsten Gillibrand, also has very shaky numbers” with an approval rating of 26 percent, he said. She faces election in November 2010.
This translates into one thing: The Democrats know they are getting the stink-eye from the American people. Who they run is pretty much a non-issue at this point. If there is a (D) anywhere near their credentials, it spells doom. They know this, and that is why they are resorting to mob-style politics. It's not about who they want to run in an election, it's all about who they want to have in place when they steal the election. If this seems too conspiratorial, think Minnesota and Al Franken.
We Conservatives must walk that thin line between letting the Democrats hang themselves with their antics, and us protecting and taking back the very positions they are jockeying for. Fortunately for our side, the more they finagle, manipulate, and coerce the more they show how reprehensible they really are.
I'm afraid we are only just beginning to see the circus that will be the 2010 elections. Conservatives need to stay the course. It's going to be a long year.