David Paterson: Activist, Progressive...Governor

In 1999, when New York City activists organized civil disobedience to protest the police shooting of African-immigrant Amadou Diallo, one of New York state's most prominent legislators arrived at police headquarters in Manhattan to be arrested as part of the a remarkable civil rights protest.

The veteran state senator who was rising to a leadership role in Democratic circles took a place symbolically blocking an entrance to One Police Place and held his wrists out. Police officers attached plastic handcuffs and led the distinguished gentleman away to be charged with disorderly conduct.

The legislator's name was David Paterson.

On Monday, he will become the 55th governor of New York state.

Little known outside New York until now, Paterson becomes an instant political celebrity as he prepares to replace scandal-plagued Governor Eliot Spitzer, whose career was ruined by his association with a money-for-sex scandal.

Paterson is a radically different political player than Spitzer, a wealthy lawyer who grabbed headlines for battling Wall Street insiders but who always acted a little more like the bankers and brokers he challenged than the victims of corporate excess.

There was nothing grassroots, neighborhood-level or community-based about Eliot Spitzer's activism. As New York's Attorney General, he would as an outgrowth of the controversy surrounding Diallo's death, announce plans to conduct inquiries into police practices.

But Spitzer did not get his hands dirty in that fight or many others, and he did not hold them out to be handcuffed.

That's why, when Spitzer prepared to seek the governorship, he asked Paterson to run with him. Spitzer recognized that he needed the state senator's credibility with community activists and progressives, even if the gubernatorial candidate never quite embraced his running-mate as a full partner.

As is often the case with lieutenant governors, the No. 2 man in New York was not always treated fairly by the No. 1 man. They clashed a bit during the 2006 campaign, and no one was surprised when Spitzer grabbed all the headlines once the team took office.

But Paterson's decision to accept the second position on Spitzer's ticket in the first weeks of 2006, which many questioned at the time, has two years after the fact made him the man of the moment.

Paterson has been handed a remarkable opportunity to be not just a state officials but a national leader. And his long experience makes its likely that he will handle the spotlight and the job with aplomb.

Democrats like Paterson's ex-boss, former New York Mayor David Dinkins, say he will be a "superb governor," and even Republican partisans like New York Congressman Peter King describe the veteran pol as "a class act."

That will distinguish Paterson from Spitzer, and may well be the key to his success in a role that no one expected him to be taking at this point but that most serious observers of New York politics say Paterson is uniquely prepared to fill as an experienced and capable progressive leader.

Spitzer, egotistical in the extreme and never much of a team player, personally picked Paterson to run with him. The move was a political one, designed to strengthen Spitzer's hand as he grabbed for New York's top job after a brief but high-profile tenure as state Attorney General.

There were predictable turf wars between Paterson and Spitzer during the campaign and in its aftermath, particularly with regard to questions about staffing and the role Paterson would have in the new administration.

More significantly, there were policy differences, including one related to the Diallo case.

Paterson had sponsored legislatioin to establish reasonable restrictions on the use of deadly force by police officers, but Spitzer publicly disavowed the bill during the campaign.

Such incidents put distance between the candidates. But both men were smart about their circumstance; they didn't let things get too ugly or too public. And they won in November by a landslide.

Paterson--who, while his ambition may not rival that of Spitzer, has always kept a politician's eye on the ladder to higher positions--wanted the lieutenant governorship.

And Spitzer wanted Paterson on his team.

Paterson's strength was not so much that he was a prominent African-American official, although that certainly didn't hurt his prospects in a state with a large and politically-active African-American voting bloc. What really mattered was that, while Spitzer seemed like a man who was pushing everyone else aside in his rush to the governorship, Paterson was a Democrat with deep roots in the party, a long record of public service and a good measure of activist credibility.

David Paterson is a member of a great New York political family who grew up in and around the state's public life. His father, Basil, was New York's secretary of state, the Democratic nominee for lieutenant governor in 1970 and the first African-American vice chair of the Democratic National Committee. Basil Paterson, a long-time hero of urban liberals, remains a well-regarded labor lawyer and outspoken progressive -- as well as his son's closest counselor.

More than two decades ago, David Paterson won his father's old state senate seat and began a rise that would take him to the top post in the chamber's Democratic caucus, that of minority leader.

Paterson has always had better ties to progressives than Spitzer.

Paterson has, as well, a particularly strong track record of taking bold positions on civil rights issues--especially gay rights. "David Paterson is a terrific, progressive guy--extremely LGBT-friendly," says Ethan Geto, a Democratic strategist with a history of activism on behalf of New York's lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community. Indeed, Geto told The Advocate magazine that was thought Paterson would be a champion in the struggle for to advance same-sex marriage initiatives in the state.

Paterson will, as well, emerge as a national leader on issues of concern to people with disabilities--both as a passionate advocate and someone who can speak from experience.

Paterson is legally blind--he suffers from optic atrophy, a degeneration of the fibers of the optic nerve-–but the condition has rarely seemed too much of a burden for this graduate of Columbia University in 1977 and Hofstra Law School.

As it happens, Paterson will be the first legally blind governor and only the fourth African-American governor in the nation's history.

He will, as well, become Hillary Clinton's highest profile African-American backer.

Paterson has worked hard to elect Clinton, earning high marks for his campaigning on behalf of the senator's presidential run in Iowa and other states.

The speculation was that, if Clinton won the presidency, Paterson would be Spitzer's choice to succeed the senator. And Paterson would have been an able senator. Now, he will be an able governor.

Paterson has to handle the transition smartly, which will be tough because of the usually rapid decline in Spitzer's fortunes--and because the outgoing governor did not always keep his lieutenant governor in the loop.

But Paterson, because of his background as a senator, is likely to work better and smarter with the legislature than did his edgy -- often confrontational -- predecessor.

And in a year that is likely to see Democrats do very well in New York's fall elections for legislative seats -- whether Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama heads the national ticket, and especially if they are both on it -- Paterson is likely to go from strength to strength.

Comments (54)

1. Well, two points....

   1. "Spitzer, egotistical in the extreme and never much of a team player..."

   Which is the REAL reason Spitzer couldn't weather this scandal, even if he didn't do anything "really" illegal. Few liked him.

   2. "And in a year that is likely to see Democrats do very well in New York"...

   I'm sorry was this in some DOUBT?!?!?!? McCain putting NY into play???

   Posted by Mask at 03/12/2008 @ 11:55am

2. At least Spitzer did the right thing in the end. Pity Bill Clinton hadn't done the same in '99 & allowed Al Gore to run as an unencumbered incumbent in '00. Gore would have won, hands down. No Iraq invasion, for starters, and a Constitution in rather more robust condition than currently.

   IF ONLY, IF ONLY ... really, we don't need Billary back in the WH, and here's a good reminder of why.

   Obama in the White House & Paterson in the Guv's mansion could take us a long way towards healing the nation's racial wounds.

   Posted by sloper at 03/12/2008 @ 12:06pm

3. Posted by LVLIBERTY1 03/12/2008 @ 12:01pm

   Uh, LL, in 1934 the Governor of Nevada was Edward Carville....a Democrat!

   Posted by Mask at 03/12/2008 @ 1:00pm

4. It's not all about the Presidential election, Mask. The Dems are also likely to take control of the State Senate for only the second time in, like, 70 years, and have a legit shot at taking three or more of the remaining six GOP-held Congressional seats.

   Sloper, you should get down on your knees and, after giving thanks for Monica, thank God that Bill Clinton didn't resign. If Gore had stepped in and had a relatively quiet two years in office, the privatization of social security would have probably been put back on track with Gingrich ready and willing to deal.

   My main fear about both Obama and Patterson is that they will be better able to work "across the aisle" on behalf of the powers that be in screwing over the working class. At the federal level, that means tearing up the rest of the social safety net, passing more free trade pacts with toothless protections for workers and the environment, keeping Congress from seriously reforming labor law, and continuing the legislative and regulatory giveaways to big business. At the state level, I'd bet that Patterson will sooner or later go after the pensions and benefits of public workers, continue the contracting out scam (what an incredible waist of money!!!), and privatize public services and jobs when all else fails to satisfy the parasites on Wall Street.

   Posted by cka2nd at 03/12/2008 @ 1:03pm

5. The speculation was that, if Clinton won the presidency, Paterson would be Spitzer's choice to succeed the senator.

   I wonder if, absent this political arrangement, Patterson would be backing Hillary? Patterson's grassroots activism is more suited for an Obama presidency, so this is another example where Hillary is able to offer political favors to black leaders in exchange for their support.

   Posted by Metteyya at 03/12/2008 @ 1:16pm

6. Posted by LVLIBERTY1 03/12/2008 @ 1:13pm

   Culbert Olson, Pat Brown, Jerry Brown? Meanwhile NY had Dewey, Nelson Rockefeller, Pataki.

   Not sure exactly what you guys "escaped"?!?!?

   Posted by Mask at 03/12/2008 @ 1:41pm

7. Posted by METTEYYA 03/12/2008 @ 1:16pm

   Forget it, METTE.....Paterson is a Clinton loyalist. If she wins the nom, he'll probably get a speech in a prime TV spot during the Convention to "win back the black vote".

   Posted by Mask at 03/12/2008 @ 1:42pm

8. The best thing about New York is that it is a couple thousand miles away from the western US. Most of my family safely escaped from there back in 1934.

   Posted by LVLIBERTY1 03/12/2008 @ 12:01pm | ignore this person

   Speaking as a New York resident, that last part is TRULY the best thing about New York. Incidentally, the farther you go from New York, the closer you get to San Francisco.

   Posted by brunowe at 03/12/2008 @ 1:44pm

9. Why the hell is he supporting Hillary? If he is such a smart progressive I'd think he'd go for Obama. Just because she "adopted" your state doesn't mean she owns you! I really doubt he'd support her if they weren't in the same state.

   Posted by bridoc at 03/12/2008 @ 1:49pm

10. The best thing about New York is that it is a couple thousand miles away from the western US. Most of my family safely escaped from there back in 1934.

    Posted by LVLIBERTY1 03/12/2008 @ 12:01pm

    so you hate your countrymen?

    did you dance in the streets on 9/11 like those guys in the "mossad urban moving systems" van did?

    Posted by frosty zoom at 03/12/2008 @ 1:58pm

11. Why the hell is he supporting Hillary?

    This is a good question to ask about a lot of people on the left. RFK Jr. is the biggest head scratcher for me. The thing I look at is when they backed her. If they did so early in the campaign you could think they conceptualized the race as a three person race, where Edwards didn't have the money or institutional support to win, Obama was too young, and Clinton was going to get it anyway. Maybe the thought is you latch on early and try to get some influence with the machine. I don't know. Given Clinton's record as a Senator and her ties to the Penn and the DLC her inevitability always seemed a reason to fight harder, not go sycophant (rage against the dying of the light and all). And once you are in, changing your mind does no good at all. A second endorsement is worthless as far as advertising for the campaign you endorse, and afterwards no one quite trusts you and so you have no traction with anyone.

    Posted by dentedpat at 03/12/2008 @ 2:12pm

12. And are you another anti-semite conspiracist like Reese and Plunger? Spreading anti-Jewish myths is not hate?

    Posted by LVLIBERTY1 03/12/2008 @ 2:15pm

    just trying to rub you the wrong way.

    jews are cool. einstein, gershwin, frida kahlo..........

    the israeli government is horrible.

    two different things.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 03/12/2008 @ 2:38pm

13. I feel safe as a New Yorker with Paterson in charge. He's good people and always has been. He doesn't have the arrogance of Spitzer and has been a team player, capable of talking to people on both sides of the aisle without threatening to kneecap them.

    Posted by midnight04 at 03/12/2008 @ 2:41pm

14. I'm fortunate enough to live in a town and county that is still very conservative.----Posted by LVLIBERTY1 03/12/2008 @ 2:15pm

    I thought you lived in Las Vegas?!?!?

    Posted by Mask at 03/12/2008 @ 2:46pm

15. thought you lived in Las Vegas?!?!?

    Posted by MASK 03/12/2008 @ 2:46pm

    MASK, Let's just say that sometimes the "other half" of my personality gets carried away.

    Posted by LV-LIBERTY-2 at 03/12/2008 @ 2:51pm

16. So,Paterson is a "progressive" who endorses Hillary who endorsed McCain.Very "progressive".

    Posted by i'm nobody at 03/12/2008 @ 3:21pm

17. Posted by LVLIBERTY1 03/12/2008 @ 3:07pm

    So, your family "escaped left-wing New York"....

    to living "Left Coast" California and "Sin City"?

    Ahh....hah!

    Posted by Mask at 03/12/2008 @ 3:25pm

18. Posted by LV-LIBERTY-2 03/12/2008 @ 2:51pm |

    Nick stealing is a bit childish.

    Posted by Mask at 03/12/2008 @ 3:25pm

19. Hope someone will take the opportunity Mr. Spitzer and Sen. Craig have provided to really re-think these vice-oriented laws. Not even "hypocritical" politicians should be getting caught up in this stuff. Fine for Patterson, but I hate seeing a brilliant left-of-center politician's career being derailed like this.

    Posted by RLawrence at 03/12/2008 @ 3:29pm

20. Posted by RLAWRENCE 03/12/2008 @ 3:29pm

    Again, Spitzer may be in trouble for more than "just sex". At the least...hypocrisy, given he prosecuted several prostitution rings.

    But at the worst, suspicions that he was paying a Mob-run business AND setting himself up for potential blackmail by same, which could have resulted in him using his powers as governor to being forced to aid the criminal element that ran the escort service.

    Posted by Mask at 03/12/2008 @ 3:54pm

21. Nick stealing is a bit childish.

    Posted by MASK 03/12/2008 @ 3:25pm | ignore this person

    Damn...I see how it is

    BIZARRORIO

    Posted by BizarroRio at 03/12/2008 @ 4:32pm

22. So,Paterson is a "progressive" who endorses Hillary who endorsed McCain.Very "progressive". Posted by I'M NOBODY 03/12/2008 @ 3:21pm

    The litmus test.

    So how much does he need Billary (& their deep-pocketed Owners) vs. how much they need him.

    As the old civil rights song says, Keep your eyes on the prize from now on. Just watch 'em.

    Posted by sloper at 03/12/2008 @ 4:45pm

23. Flack HAPPY here.....

    OK, Patterson got his old man's state Senate seat.....cool, name-recognition is a time-honored way to power!

    But Spitzer picked Patterson as Lt. Gov., dare I say it even as Nichols tried hard to put on positive spins, cause he's NOT white! Come on, how would it otherwise look to have two whities running in the great, liberal state of NY?

    Posted by Happy at 03/12/2008 @ 4:50pm

24. Posted by MASK 03/12/2008 @ 3:54pm

    Or worse, his escort visits may have been bankrolled by campaign contributors who obviously want something in exchange for the high-priced piece of ass that they gave him!

    Posted by Metteyya at 03/12/2008 @ 4:53pm

25. But Spitzer picked Patterson as Lt. Gov., dare I say it even as Nichols tried hard to put on positive spins, cause he's NOT white! Come on, how would it otherwise look to have two whities running in the great, liberal state of NY?

    Posted by HAPPY 03/12/2008 @ 4:50pm

    HAPPY, you're off your meds again. Find the bottle and talk some sense. Your ethnophobia is still showing. (Sometimes a guy is black, well, er, because he is black. You know?)

    Posted by goyadad at 03/12/2008 @ 6:39pm

26. Posted by HAPPY 03/12/2008 @ 4:50pm

    That's exactly why Patterson was picked. That's what they do to woo black folks. Why do you think Bill Clinton bought set up his office in Harlem? The move was so transparent. I knew it was a precursor to Hillary's running for Senator as well as president. I still don't understand why folks can't see how the Clintons use people. It's so obvious.

    Posted by k330k at 03/12/2008 @ 7:00pm

27. Sorry. Was going to say "bought real estate" but forgot to delete "bought".

    And it's not ethnophobia, it's the truth. Plain and simple. Of course, you don't have to be black for them to fuck you over/ be used for their benefit. I think they do everyone like that.

    Posted by k330k at 03/12/2008 @ 7:05pm

28. What's up with the posts being posted out of sync. Webmaster, get on your job!

    Posted by k330k at 03/12/2008 @ 7:06pm

29. Looks to me like we got a better governor through dumb luck.

    Posted by JFHill at 03/12/2008 @ 8:04pm

30. Although i despise the immoral, seditious and flat out deviant scum on the left ( including the entire democratic party ), i'd like to say that i have a little respect for Spitzer. Today was the first time I have EVER seen a democrat actually take( prepare yourselves, liberals, for the 2 words you hate/fear most ) "PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY" for his actions. Although Spitzer obviously sees the hypocrisy of his actions, many lunatic liberals still don't. It's refreshing to hear a Democrat finally keep it real. This does not excuse the fact that ANY MAN, Republican or Democrat, that is willing to betray those closest to him, his wife and children, is not trustworthy enough to hold any position of power, period! If an idividual is willing to betray those closest to hime, he'll betray ANYONE! Still, the morons on the left don't get this. Know why? Because they themselves are FLAWED. They are DEVIANT. They are not TRUSTWORTHY. This is why the left works so hard to make every bad behavior OK. Whether they are justifying terrorism, pedophilia, drug use, or any and all types of criminal behavior other than corporate crime, the reason behind it is a convenient way to justify their own dastardly deeds!!!!!!!! The Former Gov. Spitzer deserves more respect than any Dem. I've seen in the last 8 years due to the simple fact that he's taking it like a man and holding himself to account, and all you loser liberals that stand for absolutely nothing other than yourselves can learn a whole hell of a lot from him!!!!!!!!!!!

    Posted by barry25 at 03/12/2008 @ 8:32pm

31. This is why the left works so hard to make every bad behavior OK. Whether they are justifying terrorism, pedophilia, drug use, or any and all types of criminal behavior

    Posted by BARRY25 03/12/2008 @ 8:32pm | ignore this person

    How in the fuck are liberals justifying terrorism and pedophilia? Please cite something, anything that can back up your stupid remarks.

    I for one am against criminalizing drug use, from a more realistic/less idealistic viewpoint, but I clearly draw the line at terrorism and pedophilia...

    Posted by BizarroRio at 03/12/2008 @ 9:25pm

32. Pardon me for interrupting this very interesting pissing contest, but how can Nichols label Patterson a progressive when he is a Clinton supporter? Clinton is hardly left of McCain.

    Posted by opeluboy at 03/12/2008 @ 9:39pm

33. Biz, the ACLU is defending NAMBLA's right to put instructions on the internet on how to locate and engage in sexual acts with little boys without getting caught, and the ACLU feels this is free speech and should be protected! Do you agree with this stance, sir? Also, unless you have your head in the sand it is the Dem's that fight ALL types of punishment for pedophiles, See: Jessica's law etc. Look up all the recent examples of child molesters set free by liberal judges ( the state of Vermont for example )only to go and molest/rape/kill more of OUR children! These judges are ALL liberals! Then look a little further into San Fran. politics and you'll find high-powered known pedophiles walking arm and arm with the likes of Nancy pelosi in gay rights parades or even in political funtions. The dirt is there if you're willing to research with an unbiased mind. This is just the tip of the iceburg. As far as proof of the left defending terrorists, I'll start with Ramsey Clark. He's defended Saddam, i believe a few Nazi's just to name a few. The ACLU and many dem's have constantly defending the very terrrorists we are fighting today. They have tied their own gov'ts hands while defending people that want to kill us all. There are far too many examples to cite and I just don't have the desire or time right now, but if you still don't get it, I'll give you a few tomorrow!

    Posted by barry25 at 03/12/2008 @ 9:56pm

34. By the way Biz, I am very encouraged to find a lib on this cite that didn't know that the left defends pedophiles and terrorists, and even more encouraged by the fact that you seem to condemn that action if it is true. If you do your research, you may find yourself in a quagmire come Nov!

    Posted by barry25 at 03/12/2008 @ 9:59pm

35. Posted by BARRY25 03/12/2008 @ 9:59pm

    There's this great document you apparently have never heard of - the Constitution! According to this incredible document, every American citizen has certain inalienable rights (speech, religion, etc.). Of special note to you is the lack of a caveat stating that just Americans with agreeable opinions, religions, etc. have those rights. "I can disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it" used to be a noble thought in this country.

    Posted by Turk33 at 03/12/2008 @ 10:40pm

36. Posted by MASK 03/12/2008 @ 1:41pm

    Culbert Olson, Pat Brown, Jerry Brown? Meanwhile NY had Dewey, Nelson Rockefeller, Pataki.

    MASK, you left out Ronnie Ray-gun. I lived in SoCal during his two terms! It wasn't always easy. Reagan and Nixon at the same time! Yikes.

    Posted by jackwells at 03/12/2008 @ 10:50pm

37. As governor, in case that wasn't clear.

    Posted by jackwells at 03/12/2008 @ 10:51pm

38. Posted by BARRY25 03/12/2008 @ 9:56pm | ignore this person

    Cant argue with the ACLU/Nambla issue, I have thrown my hands up in the air at that one too. However, I think it is fair to say that the vast majority of left wingers do not fit into the same column as the most extreme wing of the ACLU. Now onto the rest of your over-generalized posting...

    Jessica's Law: If you did a little research yourself, you would find that it is a controversial piece of legislation that many law enforcement agencies believe is unenforcable...try looking up "Jessica's Law Opinions" on any search engine. While you are at it look up "republican pedophile's", very scary stuff coming out of the "Law and Order" party.

    Regarding the govts overreaching on the GWOT, I refer you to the Constitution [usconstitution.net]. Maybe you can brush up on it before you educate me on the evils of the left tomorrow. During your insightful lesson on how evil I am, try and refrain from cherry picking nutcases and vague generalities to support your viewpoints. I could cite the craziness of the far right in America, Neo-Nazi/Fascism or Ethno-Nationalism, but that would not be a fair comparison to the Republican Party. If you try being intellectually honest, instead of quoting Limbaugh and Hannity ad nauseum, you might not come across as such an asshole.

    Posted by BizarroRio at 03/12/2008 @ 11:26pm

39. So Turk, you believe that I can go out and physically assault a homosexual while calling him a fag, without being charged with a HATE crime? So, you believe it's OK for me to go online and call for the assasination of say some prominent politician? By the way, where do you think the ACLU is when conservatives get shouted down, ridiculed, assaulted, and need security to "SPEAK FREELY" on our college campuses? Where is the same ACLU when our universities ban their own military's " freedom of speech" on college campuses and at the very same time take the painful steps to facilitate an anti-semite, holocaust denying, Isreal threatening, terrorist's right to freedom of speech, and he's not even a US citizen? I guess you believe in freedom of speech when it's terrorists and pedophiles, but not when it's US men and women serving their country! You're pathetic! I hope that there's never another molestation of a child on this planet again, but we know that's not possible, so, I would hope that if anyone ever has to feel the pain caused by the very child molesters, pedophiles, and just about every other criminal the left defends, that it be people like you, who defend the indefensible! I'm sorry, but FUCK YOU if you have the slightest bit of sympathy for pedophiles and their supposed right to free speech on how to rape little boys! You're an embarrassment to your mother's vagina!

    Posted by barry25 at 03/12/2008 @ 11:40pm

40. Oh rese! The master conspiracy theorist himself! You're always there when I need a good laugh!!!

    Posted by barry25 at 03/12/2008 @ 11:41pm

41. Bizarro, you response was the usual/typical cop out I always get on this issue! It's far far deeper than the ACLU Nambla issue, if you'd just research it rationally. Again, god you people are stupid! The republican party has pedophiles, homosexuals, cheating husbands, tax-dodgers, drug-users etc. just as the Dem. party has them. PAY ATTENTION FOR THE THOUSANTH TIME MORONS: THE DIFFERENCE IS, THE Rep. PARTY DOESN'T DEFEND THEM ONCE THEY ARE CAUGHT because it goes against what the party is about! On the other hand, anything goes, is what the Dem. party is about, and that's the difference, NO Accountability! Every institution since the beginning of time has hypocrites! Whether it be the church, gov't, charities etc. Once again, it's what the parties stand for! Marion Barry get's busted for Crack cocaine several times, tax-evasion, using prostitutes etc. and he continues to get re-elected! Pat Kennedy, William Jefferson etc. get away with these things. Pelosi tried to put a former Judge, Alcee Hastings in one of our most pwerful committees, AFTER she voted to essentially convict him of the bribery charge that caused him to be removed from the bench. MY GOD, don't you see the difference, or do you just not want to? By the way, the Dem's have historically fought each and every type of law aimed at protecting children from pedophiles and molesters and will continue to do so, so your cute little snippet about the toughness of enforcing Jessica's law is just plain ignorant and silly. By the way, guess who has fought the 3 strikes law ( I personally know the author Mike Reynolds, his daughter was shot and killed by a convicted criminal let out early by a LIBERAL judge )? You guessed it, the Dem's. They've fought it even though it's probably the most effective crime-stooping piece of legislation in the history of Ca. and maybe the entire US!

    Posted by barry25 at 03/12/2008 @ 11:59pm

42. Rese, are you an anti-semite? Actually, I know you are, and that's why Osama is getting your vote, isn't it?

    Posted by barry25 at 03/13/2008 @ 12:01am

43. Bizarro, here's a good question for you! Why is it that the only people in the media that seem to get upset about and bring to light the rise in crimes against children and the lack of liberal judges to do their jo and stop it? I never see the NYT, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, ABC, basically the entire MSM outside of FOX and maybe Glenn Beck say a word about this issue or even criticize it? Why is that? Could it be because bringing it to light would be bad for the Dem's? How about all those caring concerned women on the view? They say nothing, but that's expected when you got Bush on the brain ( see BDS: Bush Derangement Syndrome )!

    Posted by barry25 at 03/13/2008 @ 12:07am

44. 'Paterson had sponsored legislatioin...'

    legislatioin? come now, we must still proofread in this modern age! Alas, we are all human.

    Substantively - I find the fact that Paterson's father is a player in the DNC a strike AGAINST his progressive credentials. I would cut him a break...but you list the senior Paterson as junior's 'closest advisor.' A dynasty does not progress make. Not to bring up the term 'dynasty' in this election year or anything...

    Posted by jlm949 at 03/13/2008 @ 01:28am

45. BTW, ya'll....don't fret BARRY25.

    McCain ain't good enough for him (neither were Romney and Huckabee).

    He's sitting the election out, so....who cares what he thinks?

    Posted by Mask at 03/13/2008 @ 09:11am

46. Frida Kahlo's father wasn't Jewish after all | Jerusalem Post A new book devoted to Guillermo Kahlo and his photography reveals that he had no Jewish genes and stemmed from a long line of German Protestants.

    sorry Frostele. plenty of good jews to go around. check Emil Berliner, for instance.

    Posted by emile duBois at 03/13/2008 @ 1:18pm

47. All of you should care. You see, there are many conservatives, like myself, who are leaving the Republican party because it has moved so far to the left. If you loser liberals can somehow enable Mccain to win this election, the Republican party will be finished! McCain is an integral part of the oligarchy we live under! If you don't believe we live in an oligarchy, the tell me how we can have 2 families, from opposing parties, run this country for decades? Then tell me how we can have essentially 3 liberals ( Osama, Clinton, McCain ) running for the Pres. right now! In the end, we have but one choice for Pres., a no-good liberal!

    Posted by barry25 at 03/13/2008 @ 1:52pm

48. the Republican party because it has moved so far to the left.

    to the right of Attila the Hun, I suppose.

    Posted by emile duBois at 03/13/2008 @ 1:58pm

49. You see, there are many conservatives, like myself, who are leaving the Republican party because it has moved so far to the left.-----Posted by BARRY25 03/13/2008 @ 1:52pm

    So either the Democrats or more liberal Republicans will win from now on?

    Okay....cool. Thanks.

    Posted by Mask at 03/13/2008 @ 3:04pm

50. So either the Democrats or more liberal Republicans will win from now on?....

    Posted by MASK 03/13/2008 @ 3:04pm

    McCain isn't a big "C" Conservative but not quite the "liberal" Repub some fear/love. Don't believe Rush!

    Posted by Happy at 03/13/2008 @ 3:22pm

51. Don't believe Rush!

    Posted by HAPPY 03/13/2008 @ 3:22pm

    Oooooh.....ya shouldn't have SAID that! heheh

    Posted by Mask at 03/13/2008 @ 4:13pm

52. i listen to Air America far more than rush! it's important to know your enemy!

    Posted by barry25 at 03/13/2008 @ 4:26pm

53. sorry Frostele. plenty of good jews to go around. check Emil Berliner, for instance.

    Posted by EMILE DUBOIS 03/13/2008 @ 1:18pm

    i saw that her "jewishness" was in doubt, but hey, she's mexican so i thought i'd throw it out.

    marc chagall was my substitute.

    Posted by frosty zoom at 03/13/2008 @ 10:40pm

54. http://www.thenation.com/blogs/action/ignore.mhtml?who=frosty%20zoom

    I did not know about the jewish attribution of Kahlo. what's so interesting about her work is the juxtaposition of very formal elements with the expressionistic "narrative".

    Posted by emile duBois at 03/14/2008 @ 08:20am