Schumer Apparently Backing Spitzer's Opponent Tom Suozzi for Governor of New York

Some remarkable news out of New York from the excellent blog The Politicker.  The New York Post has an article on the move, which one of my friends in New York politics confirmed.

Sen. Charles Schumer is secretly encouraging Nassau County Executive Tom Suozzi to challenge Attorney General Eliot Spitzer for the Democratic nomination for governor, insiders have told The Post.

Schumer's backing of the just-re-elected Suozzi -- which includes informal advice on strategy and fund-raising -- results from a long-standing rivalry with, and a deep personal dislike for, the high-profile Spitzer, Democratic Party insiders say.

Spitzer's political advisers are aware of Schumer's apparent actions.

"It seems pretty clear to us that Schumer is playing 'footsie' with Suozzi," a source close to Spitzer told The Post.

Evidence of Schumer's support includes a decision by his top Long Island fund-raiser, lawyer Howard Fensterman, to begin preparations for an all-out fund-raising effort on Suozzi's behalf.

Fensterman confirmed he was gearing up to help Suozzi but said Schumer wasn't involved.

Meanwhile, Suozzi -- who has told friends he's likely to announce his candidacy early next year -- has hired Christopher Hahn, Schumer's former Long Island regional director, as his new chief deputy.

Schumer and Suozzi are similar politicians - hyperambitious middle class white ethnic males.  They are both immensely hard-working, and just vicious competitors.  Schumer is known as one of the worst bosses in DC because he's so demanding, and he is so aggressive that it is said in DC that the most dangerous place to be in Washington is between Chuck Schumer and a TV camera.  

Schumer is old-school in every way.  He is unbelievably proud that he was able to lure anti-choice Bob Casey into the Senate race in Pennsylvania, and he told us on a conference call that every campaign manager, communications director, and finance director for Senate campaigns has to be approved by him and the DSCC. A party strategist tells me that a great fundraising idea would be to put press hound Sheila Jackson Lee in a room with Chuck Schumer and one TV camera and ask people to pay to watch them fight over it.  But he backs it up - Schumer has raised huge amounts of money for the DSCC, erasing the party committee's $4 million debt entirely.

Schumer also doesn't take well to rivals, and Eliot Spitzer is a clear rival in every way.  The Post continues:

A prominent Democratic political operative said Schumer's support for Suozzi was "rooted in a personal rivalry over who is going to be the first Jewish president, over who is a more significant political figure from New York, in Chuck's perception that he was insulted by Spitzer, and in what could be called class rivalry."

He said Schumer was furious when Spitzer announced his campaign for governor while Schumer was still weighing entering the race.

Party insiders also said Schumer, who has strong ties to many leading Wall Street bankers, has also objected to some of Spitzer's aggressive prosecution of investment-banking firms and insurance-industry executives.

Party insiders, meanwhile, contended that Schumer, who has recently emerged as one of the most important Democrats in the Senate, harbors presidential ambitions and feels that Spitzer, who has achieved national recognition for his investigations, could overshadow him and emerge as a competitor -- much as Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton already has.

And they said Schumer, 55, of a middle-class Brooklyn background, doesn't like what one called the "rich brat" Spitzer, 46, who came from a super-rich Manhattan family and attended private schools.

The class issue is a hugely interesting subtext here, as is Spitzer echoing FDR as a 'traitor to his class'.  Spitzer is widely hated among business managers for what he did on Wall Street, and right-wingers (who have also given to Schumer, as Scott notes in the comments) will in turn provide $30 million or more to Tom Suozzi.  Spitzer is a rock star with an amazing presence, but he isn't a political mind.  Suozzi by contrast is a very good candidate who has governed Nassau County quite well - Suozzi also has great political abilities.  Don't just take my word for it, though - Schumer doesn't back losers.

I'm frankly not surprised by Schumer's behavior in backing Suozzi, even though the campaign is going to be about the right-wing sliming fellow Democrat Spitzer.  He has a history of knocking at fellow Democrats, and this will clearly tarnish Spitzer and take the sheen off the guy.  Schumer was after all just in New Jersey interviewing candidates for the DSCC, and tried to show that he and not Corzine is in command by leaking the meetings to the AP. Schumer is widely known to create intraparty tensions over what he perceives as fundraising lapses and poor spending priorities. For you blog triumphalists out there, it's clear Schumer ain't such a fan of the internet - his Senate web page still questions Yasser Arafat's judgment.  And he's immensely hawkish on the war, refusing to meet with Cindy Sheehan and continuing to say that he "thinks this war is good for America." I don't actually think Schumer really cares one way or the other, as he believes that all politics is local and it's just easier to be patriotic than not on TV.

At any rate, get ready for a vicious primary in New York State.  I hope Spitzer is prepared and not as overconfident as I fear he might be.

Tags: Governor 2005-6 (all tags)



Doing Ken Langone's Bidding
This is absolutely disgusting. I posted something about Suozzi challenging Spitzer in a primary last month. Never did I expect Schumer to jump in and back up this stealth effort to derail Spitzer. Then again, I guess I should have known, considering the financial support Spitzer's gotten from Langone.
by Scott Shields 2005-11-21 04:13PM | 0 recs
Re: Doing Ken Langone's Bidding
Wow, I didn't see that.  (By the way, you mean Schumer not Spitzer.)
by Matt Stoller 2005-11-21 04:17PM | 0 recs
Re: Doing Ken Langone's Bidding
Crap. Yes. I mean Schumer. I'm relatively certain Langone wouldn't give Spitzer bus fare. Why do all of these guys have last names that start with S?
by Scott Shields 2005-11-21 04:21PM | 0 recs
Re: Doing Ken Langone's Bidding
I dunno Scott. How's your pitching career going with the Angels? Wanna sign with the White Sox?
by Andrew C White 2005-11-22 09:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Doing Ken Langone's Bidding
According to that site, Langone has contributed very little to Schumer and appears to be a large Republican contributor.  While I no doubt believe this involves money, the site you linked doesn't seem to indicate this.  

BTW, nobody should be dumbfounded by this.  I cannot tell you how many Democrats who work on Wall Street want Spitzer to go down in a ball of flames.  The Street hates him.  And I mean hates him.  Partisanship be damned.  

by Eric11 2005-11-21 07:30PM | 0 recs
Re: Doing Ken Langone's Bidding
The point is that Langone's behind Suozzi and Schumer is one of the few Democrats Langone's supported. We might not be talking about tons of money, but the connection is too obvious to be overlooked.
by Scott Shields 2005-11-21 07:32PM | 0 recs
Re: Doing Ken Langone's Bidding
The sell side must hate him, but what about the mutual funds?  (I'm sure that Ned Johnson of Fidelity would hate him.  The pension funds?
by Abby 2005-11-22 02:17AM | 0 recs
Re: Doing Ken Langone's Bidding
The buy side may hate him even more.  He wants to regulate hedge funds, who are the fastest growing industry on Wall Street and the only ones making money.  The traders hate him because he has taken away all of their perks, and to be honest, the traders have a valid gripe.  

Prohibiting guys from getting meaningless free concert tickets does nothing to "clean up" anything.  It's tacky and just pisses people off.  If you want to take on the Wall Street behemoth, you have to know when to pick your fights.  Spitzer wants to fight everyone all the time, and its just not a sucessful formula.


by Eric11 2005-11-22 05:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Doing Ken Langone's Bidding
the traders have a valid gripe

Are you kidding? Are you really attempting to argue that Spitzer has not been successful?

by Gary Boatwright 2005-11-22 06:25AM | 0 recs
Re: Doing Ken Langone's Bidding
He has been successful thus far.  That's not my point.  In fact, I'm not sure where you get this from.  What I'm saying is he needs to focus on the important things.  Preventing someone from getting a free dinner won't solve anything.  He needs to concentrate on the important issues and the suits he can win.  If he did, he would avoid a lot of headaches, most notably this one.  
by Eric11 2005-11-22 06:40AM | 0 recs
This is a real dick move by Schumer.
by blogswarm 2005-11-21 04:20PM | 0 recs
First Penn, than NJ, now NY?
by kydem 2005-11-21 04:27PM | 0 recs
If anybody could shoot a golden goose...

presumably getting a Democrat to be Governor and establishing a hold over the New York State Senate doesn't sound important to Schumer. If that's achieved in 2006, then that puts the Dems in a good position to keep power until redistricting in 2011.

by RBH 2005-11-21 04:35PM | 0 recs
Re: Figures
Don't worry, a Democrat will be governor in NY come 2007, it's just a matter who.  

This is New York politics for you.  It's first class warfare at the highest level.  

by Eric11 2005-11-21 07:37PM | 0 recs
Re: Figures
Don't be so sure.  Everyone said that a Dem would win the 2001 Mayoral election but the combination of a nasty primary and credible Repub made it possible for the Repubs to win.

I am all for primaries but if it gets nasty and personal with lingering hard feelings the Rs could get the opening they need.

If Suozzi and Schumer cause Gov Weld or Gov Golisano, I, along with many other Dems, will never forgive them.

by John Mills 2005-11-22 06:58AM | 0 recs
Re: Figures
Disagree.  Bloomberg was the favorite from almost the very start.  He was credible, as you just mentioned.  He was viewed as Guilani II, which after September 11, is what the city wanted. d This is simply not the case this time.  It's a very different dynamic.  Neither Weld or Golisano have the support Bloomberg had going into his race in 2001.  

Money is also a big hurdle for both.  Whoever gets the nomination will be greatly outspent by Spitzer or Suozzi.    

by Eric11 2005-11-22 07:20AM | 0 recs
Re: Figures
And let's not forget that a) Democrats have made great roads in Upstate NY apparently so that it makes winning state wide more likely and b) that after Pataki the voters seem ready for a change of party (which is the reverse of the Guialiani Bloomberg dynamic) and oh c) Spitzer has a major advantage because most voters seem to like him already
by bruh21 2005-11-22 07:57AM | 0 recs
Re: Figures
Are you talking 2001 or 2005?  Bloomberg was never the favorite in 2001 - he was an upset win.  Prior to 9/11, Ferrer and Green led him by double  digits and Green was ahead in every poll right up to the weekend before the election at which point people really sensed he could lose the race.  Even then people thought Green would squeak in.

With regards to money, Golisano is a billionaire who spent over $50 million of his own money in 2002 to run on the Independence line.  He could do the same thing on the Repub line.

With Weld, money could be an issue.

It is dangerous to be overconfident and I think assuming the Dems are a lock is a big mistake.

by John Mills 2005-11-22 09:22AM | 0 recs
Re: Figures
Actually, it was a tight race in 2001 for quite some time prior to the general election.  Had Ferrer won the nomination, he likely would have become mayor in 2001.  Bloomberg was viewed as an outsider and it was largely known that he was a RINO.  He simply became a Republican to get an easy primary since the Dem field was very crowded.  The 2001 vote was really a dismissal of Mark Green who is likely one of the least favorite democrats in NYC.  Very few who vote for Bloomberg in 2001 were really casting Bloomberg votes, rather they were casting anti-Green votes in hopes that Ferrer would return as a viable candidate in 2005.  Then 2 things happened.  Bloomberg turned out to be a fairly decent mayor who had proven to be independent and Ferrer imploded by making stupid statments about the Dialo case.

Bloomberg was in the right place at the right time.

by datorres 2005-11-22 10:40AM | 0 recs
For F's Sake!
I think we really ought to consider running primary opponents against these kinds of Dems and/or not voting for them when they run for re-election.

Yes, so we get a Republican Senator.  However, it will send a powerful message. The Conservatives are willing to take those risks (Toomey vs. Specter) because it sends shockwaves through the party.  

Fuck Schumer.  Let's just not vote and then any other Dem thinking of playing those kind of antics will definitely think twice.

That fucking muther fucker... I'm so pissed off right now.

by dayspring 2005-11-21 04:44PM | 0 recs
backing losers
"Schumer . . . is unbelievably proud that he was able to lure anti-choice Bob Casey into the Senate race in Pennsylvania..."


"Don't just take my word for it, though - Schumer doesn't back losers."

I guess it depends on what the definition of "loser" is.  I think that a Democrat who will vote to restrict abortion rights pretty much fits the bill.

by TatteredCoat 2005-11-21 05:17PM | 0 recs
Re: backing losers
I disagree with Casey on choice on too, but he is right on a lot of other issues, like most other issues.

Santorum is wrong on everything. Casey will fight like hell for poor people.

by jschiffer3 2005-11-21 05:28PM | 0 recs
Re: backing losers
Santorum is wrong on everything

As opposed to Casey who is wrong on damned near everything.

Casey will fight like hell for poor people.

Unless Schumer tells him not to. If he wins the PA primary, Casey will owe his seat to Schumer. Casey will be Schumer's tool.

by Gary Boatwright 2005-11-21 06:12PM | 0 recs
Re: backing losers
Better than Santorum being Bush's tool.. right?!?!?!
by wintersnowman 2005-11-22 03:33AM | 0 recs
Re: backing losers
Yes, and Casey does have a real record of helping people. He is wrong on choice and guns, but those are not the only issues. He is right on a lot of other stuff.
by jschiffer3 2005-11-22 03:59AM | 0 recs
Re: backing losers
I'd also add that Casey Jr. is also wrong on the issues of universal single payer healthcare and troop withdrawal with a timetable from Iraq. Chuck Pennacchio is the non-Schumer/Reid/Rendell annointed Democratic, Progressive candidate here in PA. Take a look at his stance on the issues.
by Albert 2005-11-22 04:06AM | 0 recs
Re: backing losers
Speaking of losers: ladies and gentlemen, Chuck Pennachio, Pennsylvania's answer to Harold Stassen.
by lonemorriscodem 2005-11-22 04:25AM | 0 recs
Re: backing losers
I guess it depends on what the definition of "loser" is.  I think that a Democrat who will vote to restrict abortion rights pretty much fits the bill.
Ugg- take off the blinders Matt!!!

Life doesn't begin or end during pregnancy and there are a LOT of more important issues facing working men and women EVERY DAY!

And Senators don't, in general, vote on abortion rights, which is a judicial and not legislative issue.

by Alex Urevick 2005-11-22 06:18AM | 0 recs
Re: backing losers
You quoted someone else, not me, Alex.
by Matt Stoller 2005-11-22 09:49AM | 0 recs
sorry for the confusion
I was referring to Matt from A Tattered Coat (and Philly DL)...
by Alex Urevick 2005-11-22 07:36PM | 0 recs
A prominent Democratic political operative said Schumer's support for Suozzi was "rooted in a personal rivalry over who is going to be the first Jewish president

why that's silly, everyone knows that the first Jewish president is going to be Feingold, duh!

by KainIIIC 2005-11-21 05:40PM | 0 recs
Re: Interesting
I thought it was Golda Meir.
by Andrew C White 2005-11-22 09:02AM | 0 recs
she was Prime Minister, technically.
by johnny longtorso 2005-11-22 09:53AM | 0 recs
Re: she was Prime Minister, technically.
And not the first Jewish Prime Minister, either; ever heard of Benjamin Disraeli?
by Alex 2005-11-22 02:33PM | 0 recs
They're ALL losers
Schumer and Suozzi are similar politicians - hyperambitious middle class white ethnic males.

Yeah, and so is Spitzer: nothing but a DINO. Spitzer's only priority as AG has been defending super-rich corporate investors against super-super-rich corporate insiders. Wow, what a hero. To hell with all of them, let's get a real progressive in the race.

If you give the voters a choice between a corporatist and a corporatist, they'll choose the corporatist every time.

by rhealdeal 2005-11-21 05:41PM | 0 recs
Re: They're ALL losers
Schumer and Suozzie are 'white ethnics'; Spitzer is more the white liberal.  It was a class distinction.
by Matt Stoller 2005-11-21 05:45PM | 0 recs
Re: They're ALL losers
No, Spitzer is totally not a DINO. Where are you getting this from?

He took on Wall St and has been a great AG.  He wasn't defending any super-rich corporate investors.

Where's your evidence?  Links?

by dayspring 2005-11-21 06:39PM | 0 recs
Re: They're ALL losers
Sure: how about this ass-kissing article from that bastion of progressivism, The New Republican? Let's take a look at just a few of the quotes, shall we?

Like other Democrats, Spitzer advocated reform. But, unlike other Democrats, Spitzer's reforms weren't designed to punish or rein in inherently corrupt executives.

Spitzer's reluctance to demonize business follows from his biography. The youngest child of a New York City real estate magnate, Spitzer--after Harvard Law School and a stint in the Manhattan District Attorney's office--spent two years working on mergers and acquisitions at the corporate behemoth Skadden Arps. In many ways, he resembles the young, Harvard-trained corporate lawyers who wrote many of the federal statutes that govern the financial markets today.

Spitzer, likewise, is a reformer with a large personal stake in preserving "the system." He is fond of joking that "[h]alf his friends are investment bankers, and the other half are lawyers who represent investment bankers," as Fortune magazine recently put it. Spitzer's friend, the hedge-fund manager and financial commentator Jim Cramer, points out that "he's really one of them. He could have been general counsel of Merrill."

Spitzer's centrist approach earned him the affection of conservative editorial pages around the country. The Orange County Register even held him up as an example to California Attorney General  Bill Lockyer, who, it complained, was "continuing his quixotic antitrust attack on Microsoft Corp., with taxpayers picking up the legal tab."

Page 2.

And, while Spitzer's $100 million settlement with Merrill seems large, it is mostly symbolic, little more than a pinprick for a company that earned $2.4 billion in profits last year and will have no trouble withstanding even the $4 billion some estimate it will have to shell out in arbitration claims and class-action suits over the next couple of years. "I think $100 million is chump change for Merrill Lynch, and it's almost a sign that the attorney general of the state of New York is settling this much too easily," Boston University economist Allen J. Michel told The Boston Globe in May.

Spitzer even wrote an article of his own for The New Republican where he actually admitted, "we did not investigate Wall Street because we were troubled by large institutions making a lot of money." Sorry, but a real progressive would be troubled by the fact that the rich are continuing to get richer at the expense of working Americans. There's nothing more embarrassing than seeing so-called progressives prostrating themselves in front of this centrist corporate elitist tool just because he has a high approval rating and nothing else. Does anyone seriously think this guy will stand up for the interests of workers and people of color? It's perfectly obvious that he'll sell every one of us out the second he gets into office. All he wants to do is enforce the current system, he couldn't care less about changing it.

by rhealdeal 2005-11-22 07:12PM | 0 recs
Re: They're ALL losers
Oh, I see. You want a candidate who comes out against corporations making profits! In other words, you want a candidate who wouldn't even get a majority on DailyKos.
by flyoverperson 2005-11-23 03:22AM | 0 recs
Re: They're ALL losers
Wow... you couldn't be more off base... "to hell with all of them."  Yikes.
by wintersnowman 2005-11-22 03:30AM | 0 recs
Re: They're ALL losers
I was on a radio show once with a guy that denigrated Bernie Sanders as being too right wing for him. "Bomber Bernie" he called him.


by Andrew C White 2005-11-22 08:59AM | 0 recs
Re: They're ALL losers
Well I'm perfectly fine with Bernie Sanders. I can't see why any true progressive wouldn't want a deep blue state like New York to elect someone just as good like Jose Serrano instead of a centrist DINO sellout.
by rhealdeal 2005-11-22 07:22PM | 0 recs
I'm reminded of bonddad's
sig line, which is a quote from Spitzer:

"You think you can intimidate me? Screw you. Choose your Weapon."

BTW, anyone know how is Spitzer's fundraising going?? All the talk out of NY is about the record pace that Hillary is on, but Spitzer's been up and runnign it seems since like January. Schumer was enticed out of challenging Spitzer himself, I wonder if he can be enticed into not backing Suozzi. I hope Hillary and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver(who I heard is veyr powerful, and a Spitzer supporter) do something about this. As far as Chuck Schumer for president, um, no.  

by jj32 2005-11-21 05:55PM | 0 recs
Re: Jewish President
Looking at the record, we probably are
more likely to have a Jewish President
than one who was a Senator before moving
directly into the White House. That is sooo rare.
by Woody 2005-11-21 06:16PM | 0 recs
Re: I'm reminded of bonddad's
Last I heard, Spitzer had approximately a kajillion dollars.
by Steve M 2005-11-22 06:42AM | 0 recs
Re: I'm reminded of bonddad's
Yes Shelly Silver is one of the most powerful men in state politics.

Think about it though. It is very typical of star power politics.

Hillary Clinton
Chuck Schumer
Shelly Silver
Tom Suozzi
Eliot Spitzer

And there are many others but for purposes of this conversation this crew of 5 will do.

Ambition. Personal ambition. And power. Each has ambition. Each has power. Each wants more and damn sure doesn't want to lose any.

Silver damn sure doesn't want Suozzi and is probably working deals with Spitzer to ensure that he doesn't cost Shelly any of his total control over the Assembly and his one third of state government. Silver doesn't want true government reform in Albany anymore than Pataki or Bruno.

Clinton wants to be President.
Schumer wants to be President.
Spitzer probably wants to be President.

There are 9 democratic candidates lining up to replace Spitzer as Attorney General. Any guesses why? Because they want the national press that Spitzer got so that they too can then move on to Governor or Senator or President.

Power politics at it's most obvious.

Schumer got the DSCC spot in trade for not running for Governor. Spitzer runs for Gov. Schumer backs Suozzi for Gov against Spitzer so that he (Schumer) can have his cake and eat it too. Pure power politics.

Deals will be made and alliances formed and candidates backed based on power politics.. and nothing but.

by Andrew C White 2005-11-22 09:11AM | 0 recs
A black-and-white view of polticians
This thread reflects a widespread naivete, the all-black or all-white view of politicians.  

People here are ripping Schumer a new one because he may be indulging personal animosity by supporting a candidate against Spitzer.  

Elsewhere he is being lauded from the job he's doing for the DSCC, kicking the butt of Republicans in general and Elizabeth Dole (chair of the RSCC) in particular, both in terms of fundraising and candidate recruitment, as the Democrats are setting up to have a nice run at taking back the Senate next year.

So which is it, is Schumer a hero or a schmuck?  The answer is both or neither, but not one or the other.  He's a politician and he's doing some good things and some things I don't agree with.

The whiners in this thread need to crawl back into their collective playpens until they grow out of their diapers.  Their effectiveness in politics will equal a thimble of warm spit and if they take to any sort of political stage outside their own particular echo chamber their career's half-life will be measured in hours.

Fwiw, I'm strongly pro-Spitzer.

by InigoMontoya 2005-11-21 06:21PM | 0 recs
Re: A black-and-white view of polticians
I think your read is right on.

And I'm Pro-Spitzer too.

by jschiffer3 2005-11-21 06:25PM | 0 recs
Re: A black-and-white view of polticians
It's an interesting problem.  Schumer can raise money like nobodies business, though the environment probably has a lot to do with the recruiting success.
by Matt Stoller 2005-11-21 06:32PM | 0 recs
Re: A black-and-white view of polticians
I vote schmuck.  I don't laud him because he can raise money.  So what?  Yes, it's important, but I'd rather have a senator that actually represents me and most of New York and supports Murtha's resolution.  

Schumer is just cowtowing to AIPAC by supporting this BS war.  

I also think he happens to be in the right place at the right time so to speak.  No strong Repub candidates are running so that money he's been raising definitely has something to do with that and current Republican woes.  

Screw Schumer and his DLC bullshit.  We'll never take our party back if we dont stand up to these assholes.

by dayspring 2005-11-21 06:48PM | 0 recs
Re: A black-and-white view of polticians
Inigo's point even more prevelant.

While there are many instances where you can respect Schumer for many issues and his work, he's like most people, a dirty politician: he still supports the Iraq war and he supports someone against Spitzer. Well sorry, that's what you get. Most Politicians have political motives so they support/oppose things based on how much they or the public wants it, unless their name is Feingold.

by KainIIIC 2005-11-21 08:28PM | 0 recs
Right. Let's just be sophisticated
We should pretend that Schumer is endowed with the divine right of kings and stop complaining. When the DSCC comes along with their ATM machine we should all pitch in like the happy little campers that we are and let the grown ups take care of the dirty business of politics.

If the Republicans support DeLay, then we should  support Schumer.

by Gary Boatwright 2005-11-22 04:22AM | 0 recs
Back in the 1930s
When economics were in trouble, war was in the offing and society was falling to pieces it took the Traitor to His Class, FDR to save us.

Will it take another Traitor to bring us out of the hell that is the Bush years? I'll go up against Schumer for someone like Spitzer anyday.

by MNPundit 2005-11-21 06:41PM | 0 recs
Eliot Spitzer is my idol
Well, no, actually Howard Dean is, but I appreciate them both for their sense of fairness and devotion to accountability.  I think that anyone interested in investor and consumer protections should be eternally grateful for what Eliot Spitzer has done.
I hope this story of Schumer backing Suozzi is inaccurate, but I sent the following e-mail to the Senator anyway:

I would like to ask that you, as a senator who supports accountability and transparency in banking, recognize the accomplishments and endorse the approach of Eliot Spitzer.
Mr. Spitzer, almost single-handedly, eliminated the common practice of securities firms both rating and selling offerings.  It was the ultimate insider trading and absolutely corrupt.
Having worked in investment banking, I was very much relieved by Mr. Spitzer's spotlight on this, and many other, abuses of the investment process.
I would hope that you would continue this investigative approach in the Senate and support Mr. Spitzer's efforts in New York.

by ChgoSteve 2005-11-21 06:47PM | 0 recs
Re: Eliot Spitzer is my idol
Sorry to introduce a little cognitive dissonance here, ChgoSteve, but the AP ran this story back in June, 2003 when some of us were trying to get the Dean campaign off the ground in NY and Spitzer was playing footsie with Joe Lieberman:

PLATTSBURGH, N.Y. -- Former Vermont Gov. Howard Dean cannot win the presidential election because he opposed the war in Iraq, New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer said Thursday."The American people will not elect somebody who opposed a war that they supported," Spitzer told the Press-Republican of Plattsburgh. Spitzer also said Dean won't win the Democratic nomination.

by David Bender 2005-11-22 04:25AM | 0 recs
Re: Nothing wrong with that-
Nothing wrong with that. That's why we have primaries.

Some Dem politicians supported Dean, many supported Kerry, some Clark, some Edwards.

Just because Spitzer did not support Howard Dean in the 04 primary has nothing to do with Spitzers record or accomplishments.

If he did not support Dean as the Dem nominee against a Republican, then, that's a different story.

But for him to pick a different horse during the primary does not make him less a Democrat than any other Democrat.

by labanman 2005-11-22 07:00AM | 0 recs
Re: Eliot Spitzer is my idol
In my eyes, Spitzer is the anti-Lieberman, but that quote is a bit bothersome.
But that was then.  A lot of opinions on Iraq have changed since 2003.
In hindsight, Howard was clearly right on Iraq, but back then I didn't even realize it.  I supported Dean despite his position on Iraq.  I assumed that the administration would never take us to war on flimsy evidence and that they knew more than they were able to tell us.  In a sense, they did.  Unfortunately what they knew contradicted what they were telling us.
by ChgoSteve 2005-11-22 10:15AM | 0 recs
WHOAH NELLY!!! Lets walk this back a little . . .
Matt, I am a little surprised that you would run with this RUMOR without taking a quick gander at where it was originally written and by whom.  The original article is written by known GOP shill and Dem antagonist Fred Dicker.  In fact, from the tone of the exceprts of the article you cited, and the type of the rumor contained therein, I was almost positive it would be that GOP whore Dicker before I looked at the article - and lo and behold it was.  Consider the source, and his past body of work before you get caught up in knocking Schumer around so much.  He may be an egotistical horse's a$$ - but boy is he doing a great job as head of the DSCC, no?!
by kelvinchapman 2005-11-21 07:00PM | 0 recs
Re: WHOAH NELLY!!! Lets walk this back a little .

If you're referring to the new york post, that's not the only source.  There's also the politicker, which is the new york observer's blog and quite well respected.  And I ALSO got it confirmed by a friend in NY politics.

by Matt Stoller 2005-11-21 07:08PM | 0 recs
Full speed ahead!
Chuck Schumer is a horse's ass and he is not "our" horse's ass. Schumer is doing a horrible job as head of the DSCC and as a Senator. He may not be as bad as Leiberman or Biden, but he's damned close.
by Gary Boatwright 2005-11-21 07:23PM | 0 recs
Why do you say this? Just curious, I'm not that familiar with Schumer, but my general feeling has been positive.
by LiberalFromPA 2005-11-22 02:21AM | 0 recs
Re: Why?
He says it because he hate everyone and everything that does not agree with him 100% of the time.  
by Eric11 2005-11-22 05:49AM | 0 recs
Re: Why?
Says the man who has never written a diary.
by Gary Boatwright 2005-11-22 06:12AM | 0 recs
Re: Why?
Schumer is a DLC hack who will oppose any and all progressive reforms in the Democratic Party. Schumer, Reid, Biden, Pelosi and virtually all of the Democratic Leadership have refused to back Jack Murtha's plan to immediately begin a gradual, phased withdrawal from Iraq. The DLC warmonger wing of the Democratic Party, that Schumer is a part of, worships at the throne of moral ambiguity on every issue.

I am a strong supporter of Chuck Pennacchio who Schumer has tried to shut out of the PA primary.

Schumer is your typical back room political broker who is an essential part of The Democratic Politburo who doesn't give a damn about the voters.

by Gary Boatwright 2005-11-22 06:22AM | 0 recs
While the Post certainly needs to be taken with a grain of salt Dicker has extensive connections and always gets good dirt on R's AND D's.
by epv72 2005-11-22 06:22AM | 0 recs
Doesn't Want To Be #3
Schumer has a huge ego, but he doesn't have any realistic chance of being President. However, I doubt he's pleased about the prospect of being his state's senior Senator but #3 officeholder behind Hilary and a Gov. Spitzer newly elected by a large margin. I don't think Schumer's endorsement or fund raising prowess will have much effect, and I expect Spitzer's camp will have a long memory.
by SLinVA 2005-11-21 07:18PM | 0 recs
There is the possibility...
A lot of pols in the Southern Tier and Westchester are concerned that Spitzer has never really taken a hit. Ever. They don't know how he'll handle a campaign against Weld.

The perception among lots of state party guys is that Spitzer has a glass jaw. That he needs fewer yes-men around him telling him he's a celebrity; fewer interviews with New York Magazine and more with Hannity - spar a little.

I know the State county seats (Nassau goes without saying) wanted to test Eliot as to whether he can take a hit. Even some winners from '05 are stalling on inauguration invites to he and Suozzi, etc.

Could this be the beginning of a concerted effort to test him? Long shot, yes. But if so, might be wise.

by dereau 2005-11-21 07:34PM | 0 recs
Re: There is the possibility...
I don't understand the logic. The theory being that they would rather go with a candidate who has taken a hit, but less likely to win, than with a candidate who has sky high ratings, a persona of being a tough fighter in his job and someone who has strong public performance skills. Can you explain how it is logical to assume that he has a glass jaw based on the fact that he hasn't taken a hit. Maybe the reason he hasn't is because he is smart and capable. And if it is the case, then this is a bizzare way to react to smart Democrat who can win without appearing weak- or maybe that is the issue
by bruh21 2005-11-22 08:01AM | 0 recs
Send a Humbling Message to Schumer
Chuck Schumer has been a very good senator for New York, the man loves the spotlight and is on the local news every other night. He's one of the state's biggest chearleader. I dont think his ego can handle sharing the spotlight with Hillary or Spitzer. Btw, Fortune has an excellent profile of Spitzer in the current issue, I believe he has the balls to streamline the very inept and very inefficient New York State Government and deal with machine bosses in the legislature. Schumer is good, but he can't play kingmaker. I'll be encouraging all my NY friends to support the Attorney General in the primary (most of them are). Hell I'll even volunteer, unless of course the NJ Senate seat(Corzine's Seat) becomes competitive.
by NJDEM1 2005-11-21 07:50PM | 0 recs
It won't matter if the rumor is true or not
by bruh21 2005-11-21 08:17PM | 0 recs
Despite this
Schumer is doing a great job at DSCC on this he screwed up though.
by Liberal 2005-11-21 08:39PM | 0 recs
Re: Despite this
Yesterday's ally is today's opponent is tomorrow's ally again.  And that's for the folks on your side.

I damn the Republicans, from Lee Atwater to Karl Rove, for bringing a rule-or-ruin atmosphere into national politics.

I hope that when Mordor falls and after some requisite paybacks are inflicted that we can settle down and govern in a better spirit.  If you read the polls closely, certainly a broad swath of voters are looking for a different attitude.

The perceptive reader will note the optimism implicit in this post.  Mordor will fall.

by InigoMontoya 2005-11-21 08:54PM | 0 recs
Re: Despite this
I agree with your analysis as being the most level headed and correct. Also, I don't think it will matter. I think Spitzer will win. I think this because he seems to have th eright combination of money, electability, progressive appeal and character.
by bruh21 2005-11-22 07:27PM | 0 recs
Suozzi beat a Republican machine that ran Nassau for decades, and brought one of the wealthiest counties in the nation to the edge of financial ruin.  His election vicotry was easier than shooting whales in a teacup.

But he has a poor track record in the selection of his staff and has been plagued by scandal.  Suozzi also has a penchant for blind adherence to simplistic solutions to complex problems (sound familiar?). The more complex the issues, the worse his performance.  To his misfortune, he has not been able to scale up his management experience from that of a small city (Glen Cove) to a large county.

Running this guy against Spitzer is a disaster for both the Dems and the people of New York.

by AlphaHydroxy 2005-11-21 09:42PM | 0 recs
If this is true...
...then it'll be a big waste of money.
by LiberalFromPA 2005-11-22 02:27AM | 0 recs
Calm the fuck down
Shit. Wahhh!! Boo HOO!! Schumer likes Suozzi over Spitzer. Get over it. He's such a traitor to the Democrats.. whatever.

Not like Suozzi is gonna win now based on Schumers endorsement or whatever... This means nothing.

We have a guy in Casey who is kickin Santorums ass in the polls.. but most of you support Pennacchio. Now Spitzer is kickin everyones ass on the GOP side, one guy supports Suozzi and he's a "dick" Sherrod Brown is a "dick" for running for Senate against Golden Boy, Paul Hackett.

Let the fuckin voters decide!!! The more choices a voter has, the more the issues get debated.

by falcon4e 2005-11-22 04:13AM | 0 recs
Spitzer Negative Article in is a website started by Jim Cramer and Martin Peretz at the end of the 1990's. It has a wide readership on Wall Street and is fairly influential. Although most of it's readers are affluent it has done a fair job of not being political and concentrating on investing. Occasionally however the political opinions of it's wealthy contributors make their way into print.

Today, which is the subscription-only sister site of had a hit piece on Eliot Spitzer. As other commenters have mentioned Spitzer is hated by many on Wall Street.

From "Spitzer Fumbles in Red Zone" by Matthew Goldstein (requires subscription)

All of the sudden, Eliot Spitzer, Wall Street's dragon slayer, doesn't look so scary.

Over the past five months, the New York attorney general has suffered a series of courtroom defeats that have tarnished his well-crafted image as protector of the small investor. No longer does Spitzer carry the aura of untouchability that marked the first six years of his administration.

The losing streak began this summer when a New York court tossed out most of the criminal case Spitzer's office had filed against former Bank of America (BAC:NYSE - news - research - Cramer's Take) broker Theodore Sihpol in the mutual fund trading scandal. Close on the heels of that, a federal judge said Spitzer had overstepped his authority in investigating the home-lending practices of the nation's big banks.

Spitzer's latest setback occurred Monday when he dismissed criminal charges against Paul Flynn, the lone investment banker charged in the mutual fund trading scandal. The case against the former Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce (BCM:NYSE - news - research - Cramer's Take) financier came to a quiet end during a brief two-minute hearing before New York Supreme Court Justice James Yates.

Flynn's walk plays into the hands of Spitzer's critics, who say he is an ambitious politician who brings cases solely to raise his public profile. Clearly, it's not kind of publicity the New York Democrat wants as he begins his campaign for governor of the Empire State.

It goes on to make other points all of which work against Spitzer.

I always wonder about the timing of coincidences such as this so it's hard not to notice that Schumer's actions occur at the same time as a hit piece in a prominent financial media outlet.

Regardless of the feelings of the uber-rich financial community, as a small investor who has been ripped off by some of the very same companies that Spitzer has investigated I have nothing but warm feelings and good wishes for Spitzer. The more corporations he gives a spanking to for lying to consumers and defrauding them behind their backs the better.

by Curt Matlock 2005-11-22 05:24AM | 0 recs
Spitzer is Very Political
Good post for the most part but a couple of comments.

1 - Spitzer is getting what those in the NY Cong delegation referred to as being Schummed - screwed by Chuck.  It happens to everyone b/c Chuck is greedy and will not be happy until he rules the world.  While respected for his ability, Chuck is despised by his colleagues.

2 - You say "Spitzer is a rock star with an amazing presence, but he isn't a political mind."  Huh???  

The guy is very political and has great instincts.  He won the AGs office by beating an incumbent the same year Pataki won re-election in a landslide.  He won re-election in 2002 in a landslide and has 65% name recognition.

Going after Wall Street was good policy but also great politics.  

Announcing yesterday he supports non-partisan redistricting was a shot across the bow to Suozzi's fix Albany campaign.

I do not underestimate Suozzi but I don't worry that Eliot Spitzer will be out politicked.  I worry that a nasty, divisive primary will open up the possibility of a Republican winning the Governorship in 2006.

by John Mills 2005-11-22 05:40AM | 0 recs
Re: Spitzer is Very Political
Instincts, yes.  He's not a political strategist, though, and Suozzi is.  Suozzi has plotted bringing lower ticket candidates through.  In Nassau County his whole slate just won, and that's because of Suozzi.  Who has won office because of Spitzer's coattails?
by Matt Stoller 2005-11-22 05:52AM | 0 recs
Re: Spitzer is Very Political
Instincs v. strategy is a distinction that could be debated but regardless of that discussion, he has a top tier campaign and fundraising operation.  These are experienced people who know what they're doing!

He WILL win!

by epv72 2005-11-22 06:25AM | 0 recs
Re: Spitzer is Very Political
It is not really a fair comparison b/c Suozzi is the head of his county and runs in an off election year at the top of his ballot line in Nassau County while Spitzer as AG has run as the third ballot position in a Gubernatorial year.  It's an apples to oranges comparison.

As someone who is very active in NYC politics I can tell you that Spitzer is very helpful to local candidates for City Council and State Legislature by endorsing them, campaigning with them and raising money for them.  Do any of them credit Spitzer alone as the reason they won?  You'd have to ask them but candidates actively seek his endorsement b/c it comes with more than a name on a piece of literature.

This is Spitzer's year to show he has Suozzi's "political skills" by helping the Dems win the State Senate should he be the Democratic nominee.

by John Mills 2005-11-22 06:28AM | 0 recs
Re: Spitzer is Very Political
Schumer's support or not, and strategy or not, won't be a factor next year. Spitzer has a strong advantage and name brand based on what he has done in the state. They are going to have to do a lot more than complain in business magazines that the upper echelon (in this case one guy) doesn't like him. The only thing that can be said for this, if it is true, is that it is wasted resources that could be spent on down races for Congressional offices.
by bruh21 2005-11-22 07:54AM | 0 recs
Re: Spitzer is Very Political
Suozzi's rhetoric over the years has also created a few enemies. His Fix Albany campaign has merit but it has also always been clearly understood to be self-serving and his call to challenge and oust all incumbents in Albany didn't make him any friends.

While Schumer potentially getting involved makes this a serious issue Suozzi... and anyone else... has a lot of ground to make up before they can even think of being a serious challenge to Spitzer.

But as one of my county co-chairs reminded me before we endorsed Eliot Spitzer earlier this year... years ago Ed Koch was a lock to be the Democratic nominee for Governor but it was Mario Cuomo that served the next three terms.

by Andrew C White 2005-11-22 08:54AM | 0 recs
Let's put this into perspective
All I see in this diary is a lot of Schumer and Suozzi bashing.  With the exception of a couple of posters who identified themselves as Nassau County residents, I doubt that many people know much about Suozzi.

I live in Nassau County and have volunteered for many Suozzi backed candidates.  In addition, I ran as the sacrificial lamb for State Assmebly last year in the 14th AD.  I have had many different opinions about Suozzi.  He is far from a perfect person.  He is brash at times and can even be considered to be a little obnoxious.  But he is also an effective problem solver.  He did turn Nassau County finances around.  I know many people will offer different views as to who is really responsible for this the same way GOoPers refuse to give Clinton credit for the 90's boom.  But the reality is that he said he would come in and fix and he did.

Suozzi is very aggresive.  At every function I have ever attended where he was, you would always hear him spout his two favortie quotes: "You gotta have teamwork to make the dream work!", followed by "Either get on board, or get out of our way!".  Two very different sentiments in the same speech give a good insight to this individual.  He is driven to fix problems and does not mind stirring the pot, even if he won't win.

I for one would not mind seeing Suozzi as governor.  I think that a state that hasn't passed a budget on time in 21 years and has been falling deeper into the red because of a dysfunctional legislature could benefit from a "trouble maker" like Suozzi coming in to stir the pot.  He brought Nassau back from the brink of bankruptcy and after one one county tax increase we had 4 years that included 10 bond upgrades and $100 million in debt paid off early.  He consolidate many social services offices and streamline processes so those needing assistence could get what they needed at a lower cost.  He did this by bringing all social service offices into one building because he realized that some one who collected food stamps would also require healthcare for their children and educational assistence.  It made it easier for those who needed help to get help and it reduced the cost of getting them the help they needed.

Was there magic here?  Of course not.  Just aggressive problem solving that rooted out obvious and some not so obvious in-efficiencies in a system long corrupted by 12 years of GOP rule.

I would like to see Suozzi do the same for NYS, and if he beats Spitzer in a primary, I for one will not be disappointed.

NYS has two good candidates running this year.  I don't care what anyone says, this is good for Dems.  Either way, we get a Dem that has a profile for getting results.

by datorres 2005-11-22 05:42AM | 0 recs
Re: Let's put this into perspective
I like Suozzi, for the reasons you mention.  He is good at governing, and his Fix Albany campaign shows that he is a powerful mover.

And Nassau County has 2 million people, so it's not like Suozzi has no base or no experience at politics.  

by Matt Stoller 2005-11-22 05:51AM | 0 recs
Re: Let's put this into perspective
My complaint, and I believe the complaint of others, is with Schumer playing games with the choices the voters have. I don't have any problem with an open primary. I'm sure Spitzer had no expectations of getting a free ride and NY will have a spirited primary race and I hope like hell NY gets a Democratic Governor.

The question is why Schumer is stiring up shit instead of focusing resources and attention someplace where it would do some good. If Suozzi wanted to run against Spitzer I assume he is a full grown adult and capable of making up his own mind.

Schumer is now on record in opposition to Chuck Pennaccio, Jack Murtha and now Elliot Spitzer. It looks like Schumer has a big problem with reform Democrats who want to clean up the system.

by Gary Boatwright 2005-11-22 06:35AM | 0 recs
Re: Its not a question of him being good
Its not a question of Suozzie being good. I support both Schumer & Suozzie. But its the premise of WHY Suozzie has decided to run.

Some of us have been following this development for months. Mr. Langone & Mr. Suozzie have been getting together since last year & planning this out.

It is a known fact that Mr. Langone despises Spitzer for the numerous successful prosecutions & investigations of Wall Street firms. In fact, Langone NEVER hid his anger towards Spitzer.

Langone has reportedly assembled hundreds of Top Executives, mostly Republican from NASDAQ & NYSE firms in order to prepare the BIGGEST Fundraising Wall Street has ever done for a Non-Presidential Candidate.

First of all, Do you think these Millionaire Executives who are mostly Republicans are SUPPORTING a Democrat Suozzie because they saw the Light ?

The problem with Suozzie is not whether he's good. We already know that. The guy is a rising Star in NY Democratic circles.

It's the WHY that gives you an idea of WHAT kind of person he may really be! I guess a Politician!

  1. Why in the world would a rising Democrat who just won in a landslide align himself with  Major Republican Player who has supported both BushSr & Jr. for  President, Bob Dole's campaign, Guiliani & Pataki's campaign. WHY ? No Need for me to give you the answer on that. You should know that.

  2. If Suozzie should beat Spitzer in the primary, DO YOU THINK Wall Street's & Langone's support of $40-$50 MILLION Dollars for his campaign was for FREE??? NO STRINGS ATTACHED????

3)The majority of Wall Street executives are strong Republican supporters. In fact, Bush outraised Al Gore & John Kerry in Wall Street by huge margins.


These are the issues on Suozzie. NOT if he is good or not.

HOW IN THE WORLD CAN HE make Independent Decisions if he became Governor when he is already Bought & Paid for!

Suozzi has nothing to lose except his conscience. He's getting a FREE CAMPAIGN with a $30-50K War Chest & a chance to Governor. He obviously does not care how or who helps him to get there.

by labanman 2005-11-22 06:50AM | 0 recs
Big mistake by Schumer.  Spitzer is going to win the nomination, so why would Schumer do this?  I like Schumer a lot, but he doesn't need to let his personal rivalries get in the way of the party.
by alhill 2005-11-22 05:49AM | 0 recs
Langone is BIG Republican-So Angry at Schumer
I was in Wall Street for 10 years!

Langone is a Major Player & a Big Republican supporter in Wall Street for many years!

He is SO PISSED OFF & VINDICTIVE towards AG Spitzer for going Hard against Corruption in Wall Street.

Now he has found his "PUPPET" in Suozzi to RUN AGAINST Spitzer with the strong promise of Millions of Dollars from Wall Street Co.s!


I never ever imagined that I would see a Politician like Elliot Spitzer who would have the COURAGE & STRENGTH to go after the POWERFUL WALL STREET co.'s !!!

Now they are about to retaliate by using a rising NY Democrat in Suozzi as their "puppet" to unseat Spitzer!
FUCKING OUTRAGEOUS! They are SO SCARED of  Spitzer being Governor. And Spitzer's has the HIGHEST APPROVAL RATING out of ALL NY POLITICIANS. Even higher than Hillary.

I am so disappointed that Suozzi has allowed himself to be USED by a Strong & Long time  Republican Donor in Langone.

After Suozzi's impressed landslide win in Nassau County, Long Island ( former Republican bastion), instead of being thankful for All the Democrats who supported him- HE GOES OUT & CHALLENGES Spitzer because of NOTHING MORE than PERSONAL AMBITION. Langone has committed millions of dollars to Suozzi AS LONG as he Challenges Spitzer.

I'm sure that in return, Suozzi promises to look the other way or get Wall Street back to its Status quo.

If Schumer is really involved in this, I hope everyone concerned SHOULD LET HIM KNOW that his Loyalty is with the people, NOT corporations! SHAME on SCHUMER! And I always thought he was a straight shooter!

My God, Spitzer has been named by Time & New Yorker Magazine as the Possible "First Jewish President of the United States". That's how Impressive he is.

by labanman 2005-11-22 06:30AM | 0 recs
We'd Cut Off Our Noses, If Just To Spite...
Ladies, gentlemen, whiners and chicken littles; I introduce you to the presidential election of 1924.  (,_1924)

Now, what is so important about the Presidential election of 1924 you ask?  It's simple enough, The Republicans looked like they were knocked down and out with a mute President and some of the largest scandals in American history.  To greet this windfall Democrats proceeded to tear each other apart in a power struggle which left Democrats out of power for another 8 years, and arguably without the intervention of the Great Depression, Democrats would have never returned to power.

Stop this fucking ignorant sniping and learn to work together or we will lose yet again!  And this time it won't just be our Presidential candidate who gets embarassed, it will be local candidates, Senate candidates  


by SeanBroom 2005-11-22 06:48AM | 0 recs
Re: We'd Cut Off Our Noses, If Just To Spite...
in order for your grand plan to work- all sides would have to come to the table - not just one or the other
by bruh21 2005-11-22 08:03AM | 0 recs
Re: We'd Cut Off Our Noses, If Just To Spite...
Actually, it's no grand plan, its more like a warning that dipshits have done all this before, and it sucked that time as well.

And, in reality what needs to happen is the members of the Democratic party need to stop this "I lost, so I am gonna take my ball and go home." attitude.  Really, any time that you all look at someone an casually deride them as a "DINO" and that we should run someone who is really liberal against them, kick yourself in the sack, because that is about how much good you are doing yourself and the party.


by SeanBroom 2005-11-22 09:57AM | 0 recs
Re: We'd Cut Off Our Noses, If Just To Spite...
the funny thing about your argument is that in actuality the reverse is true at least for most of the leadership. that's why i said what i said. the idea that this is a debate in which the most liberal side of the party is controlling the debate, and it's the centrists (i don't say moderate because I am moderate) is just the sort of double speak, orwellian logic of modern politics. regardless of what happens in the bubble that are blogs, the reality in public- in the msm and in bills and campaign is that it's the centrists running from the moderates and the liberals in the party- not the reverse. point to me where int he leadership we have a far left (whatever that means at this point in US history) simultaneously in control of the party and running against other democrats? I can point easily to centrists who are running that way.
by bruh21 2005-11-22 11:23AM | 0 recs
Re: We'd Cut Off Our Noses, If Just To Spite...
That was patently unintelligible.


by SeanBroom 2005-11-22 06:13PM | 0 recs
Re: We'd Cut Off Our Noses, If Just To Spite...
And, now we get the third approach. let's see so far you have: a) used the orwellian approach- my flaw is your flaw, up is down, down is up language- ("it's the liberals who are causing all the problems" and but-for people like "you"  there wouldn't be any problems although such language flies in the face of where power is concentrated in both the government and actual party- under this approach, the people out of power are to blame for what the people in power do); b) played the victim approach(by saying I am "condescending" and that I am putting you down by pointing out what centrist tactics towards liberals and moderates have been, and in turn, made my comments about centrists about you and my arguments about tactics a put down of centrists); and, now, we get c) the I don't understand your intelligible rabble approach- ie, question the other guy's intelligence when he analyzes why we find so much infighting in the present party. The thing is I have seen all of these approaches a lot so I can cite examples of each that I have seen over the last few years.  

Which one will you use next and will any of them actually answer my thesis about centrists being the primary force behind why there are divides in the party? Somehow after three posts from you, I doubt it.

by bruh21 2005-11-22 07:21PM | 0 recs
Re: We'd Cut Off Our Noses, If Just To Spite...
I didn't question your intelligence... and for all I know it may be the beer, but your post was unintelligible.  I have no idea what it had ot do with mine.  


by SeanBroom 2005-11-22 07:31PM | 0 recs
Re: We'd Cut Off Our Noses, If Just To Spite...
okay if you are drunk then i can see why you dont understand how my post has anything to do with your comment
by bruh21 2005-11-22 07:37PM | 0 recs
Re: We'd Cut Off Our Noses, If Just To Spite...
Holmes... there is a big difference between being drunk and having a few beers.  If you'll note, my posts are clear coherant and while I comma splice I usually use proper punctuation.  And now in the harsh light of a painfully sober morning... yeah... your shit is still unintelligible.


by SeanBroom 2005-11-23 04:26AM | 0 recs
Re: We'd Cut Off Our Noses, If Just To Spite...
okay if you say so man- good luck with real life
by bruh21 2005-11-23 09:27AM | 0 recs
Re: We'd Cut Off Our Noses, If Just To Spite...
one other add on point. this false equivalency is also part of modern politics. the democrats lie a little, and the republicans lie alot, and therefore, they are the same. here, the centrists constantly attack the party for idealogical, strategic, and sometimes just personal views and anytime someone points this out, then the two are eqivalent even though the power and effect is not.
by bruh21 2005-11-22 11:25AM | 0 recs
Re: We'd Cut Off Our Noses, If Just To Spite...
This was as well.  

So what hasn't been established is my political philosophy.  For all you know I could be a socialist.  Yet you assume as much.  I'm not, I'm actually one of those centrists you snarl at condescendingly, but thats neither here nor there.  

What does matter is that this isn't some inter-party partisanship, rather its a much more general statement.  Look around you!  Have you seen the bullshit spread on here and in the blog-o-sphere by the competing Ohio Senate camps?!?!  What good does it do to get in a pissing match with one another?  The name calling of Chuck Schumer/Eliot Spitzer is another example.  And here in Minnesota we're besieged by people proclaiming the ONLY ANNOUNCED DFL CANDIDATE FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL isn't liberal enough!  It is over and over again a culture of my-way or the highway, of if I don't get what I want I am going to kick and scream and take my ball home.  

I am fed up with many in the Democratic Party and their lack of unity and discipline.  Don't you understand, the Republicans are coming to burn our house down.  They are coming to destroy everything even 'centrist' Democrats want.  And if there isn't unity from here on up, if there isn't discipline from here on up then we might as well throw our hands up, run screaming from the battle and give up!  Do you think that Republicans look at Lincoln Chaffee and say "Well... I sure wish we had a more conservative guy there.  Lets go fuck with him."  No!  They say "Fuck yeah!  He's voting for Bill Frist for Majority Leader and thats all that counts!"  

The Republicans are hurting they are in a position where we could take advantage of them.  Are we gonna do that sitting here (in a more general sense) bitching and moaning about how some people don't fall lock step with the liberal ideology?  Do you think we're going to take advantage of them if we're too busy punching one another in the face?  

Now, whether or not I am overreacting to the threat posed by the Republican party (which, given historical precedence, I don't think I am) thats the way we have to work, and if we don't?

Well... here's to being a lifelong holder of minority opinions.


by SeanBroom 2005-11-22 06:28PM | 0 recs
Re: We'd Cut Off Our Noses, If Just To Spite...
all i have to say is that my post has nothing to do what you are or are not. and as for condescention- please point out where i am being conscending- i am analyzing the strategies of centrists which is triangulation. that's not conscendention thats what they do. also what they do online at least is what you are doing- whether you are a centrist or not. ie, play the role fo the victim once someone calls them on the tactics.
by bruh21 2005-11-22 07:08PM | 0 recs


Advertise Blogads