Patterico's Pontifications

2/12/2009

Gregg Withdraws

Filed under: General — Patterico @ 4:58 pm



His statement says why:

However, it has become apparent during this process that this will not work for me as I have found that on issues such as the stimulus package and the Census there are irresolvable conflicts for me.

I suspect it had more to do with the latter than the former; the Census land grab was a Rahm Emanuel-inspired “f[vowel deleted]ck you” to Gregg and left him little choice.

82 Responses to “Gregg Withdraws”

  1. It’s good to see that Gregg has some principles anyway, and that a fancy title simply wasn’t a sufficient bribe to empty his Senate seat after the Obama/Emmanuel hijack of the Census into the White House.

    A better statement, of course, would have been a challenge to a duel in defense of the Constitution.

    Insufficiently Sensitive (673620)

  2. Look, I don’t know what the big deal about the census is. I mean, after all, let’s look at it from the other side. Let us assume that George Bush was able to be elected for another term, instead of being term limited out. Now, suppose that the reason that Karl Rove left was because he wanted to establish some brand independent of his role as presidential advisor before Bush had to leave. If Bush had a chance at a third term, he doesn’t need to leave.

    So, here it is, 2009, and George Bush is president, with Karl Rove as his political advisor. Now, let us suppose that George Bush did exactly as Barack Obama is doing. He has ordered that the director of the census report directly to the White House, for the purposes of monitoring the progress of the effort.

    Does anyone REALLY think that the Democrats would have raised a stink about the “politicization of the census”? Or that they would have invented nefarious plots involving conspiracies on the part of the Karl Rove and the Republicans to cook the numbers to allow the Republicans a permanent majority? Or that they would consider the President so dishonest and untrustworthy as to abuse his office and violate the Constitution for mere partisan political gain?

    Once you view it from that perspective, I am sure that anyone who believes that President Obama had anything but the purest of intentions in this move will be ashamed at their lack of faith in him.

    David

    David J Harr (c6fe09)

  3. Censes controlled from the White House reminds
    me of Chicago 1960. They had new voters with
    addresses located in some of the best cemetaries.

    Tino Manus (9d1bb3)

  4. Does anyone REALLY think that the Democrats would have raised a stink about the “politicization of the census”?

    Yes. Beyond a shadow of a doubt, yes. They would have cried racism for not counting illegal immigrants. They would have cried racism for actually counting people, instead of projecting numbers. They would have cried consolidation of power, unitary executive, and all of the other silly little things that they had thrown at President Bush since before Day 1.

    JD (c6800b)

  5. David, you really need to be more careful in picking your mushrooms for your home-made pizza. The ones in the bovine byproduct are not good.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  6. Kudos to Sen. Gregg from walking away from being the token Republican. I listened to about 20 minutes of Olberdouchenozzle tonight and he said Gregg looks like a fool for not joining the bipartisan governing coalition. I almost hurled. This was a token gesture, overtly political, and one of the most important jobs in the Dept was being transferred to Baracky’s political folks in the White House. Gregg saw this for what it was, and did not feel like being the token Republican for the next 4 years. Bravo.

    JD (c6800b)

  7. This David person, that was someone doing a parody, right?

    JD (c6800b)

  8. BTW, according to Andrew Sullivan, the Census is not a real issue, but ginned up:

    by Republicans for the usual “the-darkies-are-taking-over!” reasons.

    In his rush to playthe race card, he ignored the fact that Democrats like Rep. Carolyn Maloney and minority special interest groups made the Census (and the Commerce Secretary’s role) a political issue in 2000 because they would like to inflate their numbers for all sorts of political funding, etc. I’m guessing Sullivan’s brain is so gelatinous at this point that he wouldn’t even get the irony.

    Karl (2491e1)

  9. Karl – It would take introspection for them to consider such things. Never.

    JD (c6800b)

  10. And, yes, that was sarcasm, for those of you who thought I might be serious.

    David

    David J Harr (c6fe09)

  11. Yes, JD, David was pulling our legs. And he did a fine job of it.

    Steverino (b12c49)

  12. The “Census land grab” issue is very similar to the Tom Daschle issue. President Barack Obama simply doesn’t have a clue what is going on in his cabinet. “Let them eat cake.”

    Wesson (3ab0b8)

  13. Why did he accept it in the first place? Why did he lobby for the post since he knew he had a lot of unresolvable differences with the President? I think this is a Republican plot to embarrass Obama’s bipartisan bid. Well they succeeded finally. Hope he does not live to regret this blunder.

    Emperor7 (0c8c2c)

  14. Awesome parody, David – you had me fooled there for awhile. But when you consider the inane postings from Hacky Sack here recently, you can understand why.

    Dmac (49b16c)

  15. Once again the house idiot is heard from. Yes, Obami is soooo bipartisan and the Rethuglicans want to embarrass the great one. Kind of scary when I was at beach and realize how much the oceans have fallen. And no doubt the cooling trend originating since 2000 was a preemptive move hope and changey when he was still in Ill. Senate. At least I’ve never bought into anyone’s cult of personality, unlike the libtard lackeys, including the buffoon O apologists/idolators on this blog.

    aoibhneas (0c6cfc)

  16. Why did he accept it in the first place? Why did he lobby for the post since he knew he had a lot of unresolvable differences with the President?

    From the undefineable pink froth which passes for discussion from Obama, there was probably much warm fuzzy personal feeling to start with, and barely a hint about any ‘unresolveable differences’. He wanted Gregg as some sort of window dressing, apparently, and perhaps the decision about moving the Census to the WH wasn’t yet overt. Obama will rarely deliver a declarative sentence – his speaking is deliberately parsed to mean all things to all people. So give Gregg some points for the ability to make an executive decision: when he saw after some discussion that his position would be untenable, he bailed.

    He’s certainly a notch more honest than Obama.

    Insufficiently Sensitive (673620)

  17. Let’s have Gregg out talking against the stimulus. He is the one Republican who has credibility or gravitas at this point.

    Patricia (89cb84)

  18. I imagine it was the death of 1000 cuts. Gregg had to be spending all his time defending his decision to other Republicans, and every time he turned around there was some further issue heaped on the pile.

    I suspect he was told that abstaining on the stimulus wasn’t good enough, and he had to vote YES next time, or withdraw. And the Obamites never thought he’d withdraw.

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  19. I suspect it had more to do with the latter than the former; the Census land grab was a Rahm Emanuel-inspired “f[vowel deleted]ck you” to Gregg and left him little choice.

    Not to mention a fuck you to the constitution and the American people.

    E7,
    When Gregg was nominated for the post, all the details of the porkulus weren’t out. That’s no excuse, however, as enough was public that he should have run away from this administration. The constitutional usurpation of the census was announced after he had publicly accepted. Had he not resigned in the face of lawlessness, he’d never live it down.

    Chris (b886a5)

  20. Why did he lobby for the post since he knew he had a lot of unresolvable differences with the President?

    What makes you think he did?

    Pablo (99243e)

  21. Comment by aoibhneas — 2/12/2009 @ 6:56 pm
    I am sure you are wetting your pants over this. You are the real idiot here. As long as there is an “R” behind the name, he is a hero. And you dare to call someone a “lackey”. Learn to think for yourself. Take your stand and make your OWN point. Whether people agree with it or not. Don’t just echo the common meme.

    Emperor7 (0c8c2c)

  22. It’s hilarious that David’s obvious sarcasm was misinterpreted. I blame the trolls here, who actually are crazy enough occasionally to seriously argue the kind of things that normally intelligent people would instantly assume are jokes.

    We’ve been spoiled.

    Joco (4cdfb7)

  23. What makes you think he did?

    Comment by Pablo — 2/12/2009 @ 7:11 pm
    What makes you think he did not?

    Emperor7 (0c8c2c)

  24. Learn to think for yourself.

    How ironic, considering the source never actually uses any form of logic or examination before worshipping B Hussein Obama.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  25. What makes you think you think?

    steve miller (3381bc)

  26. Comment by Emperor7 — 2/12/2009 @ 7:12 pm

    My goodness. Sounds like someone isn’t having a very good evening.

    Hey, has Sullivan demanded Judd Gregg’s birth certificate yet?

    Jim Treacher (796deb)

  27. There seems to be a slight difference of opinion on whether Greg was asked or if he lobbied for the post.

    Later, at a news conference in the Capitol, he [Gregg] sounded more contrite.

    “The president asked me to do it,” he said of the job offer. “I said, ‘Yes.’ That was my mistake.”

    Obama offered a somewhat different account from Gregg.

    “It comes as something of a surprise, because the truth, you know, Mr. Gregg approached us with interest and seemed enthusiastic,” Obama said in an interview with the Springfield (Ill.) Journal-Register. “But ultimately, I think, we’re going to just keep on making efforts to build the kind of bipartisan consensus around important issues that I think the American people are looking for.”

    Dana (137151)

  28. Comment by John Hitchcock — 2/12/2009 @ 7:16 pm
    No one is “worshipping” Barack Hussein Obama. Don’t be stupid.

    Emperor7 (0c8c2c)

  29. Dana,
    Who ya gonna believe?

    “But ultimately, I think, we’re going to just keep on making efforts to build the kind of bipartisan consensus around important issues that I think the American people are looking for.”

    Bipartisanship-heretofore defined as locking the opposition party out of negotiations on the biggest spending bill in the history of the world.

    Orwell chuckles.

    Chris (b886a5)

  30. Yes, let’s believe dear leader. He has only lied about all his campaign promises. Dear leader wouldn’t lie to us. He’s the second coming doncha know. Screw that. Anyone who lies is not deserving of mindless worship, just as anyone who prophesies wrongly is not deserving of life.

    And our resident Obama worshiper can attest that God wrote in His Ten Commandments one commandment not to lie.

    Or will she find a reason to accept the chosen one’s lies despite her proclaimed faith in Christ?

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  31. Using Obama on candles for a religious service isn’t worship?

    Singing songs about his wonderful attributes isn’t worship?

    Crying to him as if he’s Jesus isn’t worship?

    You have a very odd view of worship.

    steve miller (3381bc)

  32. Huh. There must be some kind of cognitive disconnect going on there, Dana. The words say “bipartisan consensus around important issues that I think the American people are looking for”, but when I read it I keep hearing “ass-covering that might guarantee that my all-important Congressional majorities don’t get their asses thrown out once the American people see how badly our Eternal Debt Plan has cornholed the economy”.

    PCachu (e072b7)

  33. No one is “worshipping” Barack Hussein Obama. Don’t be stupid.

    lovey, meet Julio.

    Pablo (99243e)

  34. Comment by Dana — 2/12/2009 @ 7:18 pm
    The question is, who do you believe? Someone is lying. But we have a tendency to believe who we want to believe. Depending on party affiliation. So it doesn’t matter at the end of the day who is lying. We have made up our minds who we want to believe.

    Emperor7 (0c8c2c)

  35. There seems to be a slight difference of opinion on whether Greg was asked or if he lobbied for the post.

    Considering Obama’s inability to propperly relay the jist of a conversation with CAT’s CEO, I find his statement suspect…

    Scott Jacobs (90ff96)

  36. I doubt that Obama really gives a damn about Gregg’s resignation, mainly because Obama’s gut biases are quite liberal, so he must have held his nose when selecting Gregg to begin with.

    As for moving the Census into the White House? Sounds like something a backwards, one-horse-town nation would do. But the whole thing is hardly surprising since the US electorate, by choosing its current occupant of the Oval Office, pretty much has decided America needs to enter a phase as a Banana Republic.

    Mark (411533)

  37. What makes you think he did not?

    I’ve seen nothing that leads me to believe that he lobbied for the job. Therefore, I have no reason to believe that he did so.

    What makes you think he did? Have you seen something I haven’t?

    Pablo (99243e)

  38. What makes you think he did? Have you seen something I haven’t?

    Comment by Pablo — 2/12/2009 @ 7:31 pm

    Barack said so. See above. So it is written,…

    Chris (b886a5)

  39. You have a very odd view of worship.

    Comment by steve miller — 2/12/2009 @ 7:27 pm
    Well if that’s what you are doing, I suggest you stop. He’s just a man. Nothing special about him except that he won a historic election that is a symbol to many. Nothing more. Worship God.

    Emperor7 (0c8c2c)

  40. That’s a pretty squishy statement, Chris. Par for the O! course, but not terribly conclusive.

    Pablo (99243e)

  41. In an interview with The Associated Press, Gregg said, “For 30 years, I’ve been my own person in charge of my own views, and I guess I hadn’t really focused on the job of working for somebody else and carrying their views, and so this is basically where it came out.”

    As a professional pol, I believe Gregg had a hand in promoting himself to some degree. If he’s guilty of anything, it’s vanity which frequently begets stupidity in politicians, and did in this case. 30 years being his own person and doesn’t seriously consider that he would not only be working for somebody but publicly supporting a person whose views he does not agree with? It doesn’t wash. No doubt he was flattered by the possibility of being the chosen one of the Chosen One and for 9 days was willing to compromise himself for the fame.

    I also think Obama, in his continuing desperate quest to establish himself as the Bipartisan Builder of the Century probably found a weak link in Gregg and went after him… Obama isn’t a fool and every move is carefully thought out. It wasn’t a mistake that he chose a guy who would actually consider turning his back on his own party.

    And Emporer @ 7:30 p.m., in this, party affiliation is less a determining factor in my view, but rather human nature and it’s seeming inherent weakness in both people revealed itself.

    Dana (137151)

  42. Comment by Pablo — 2/12/2009 @ 7:31 pm
    That is my point. You don’t know that he did not. I don’t know that he did. So we wait for the truth to surface before jumping into conclusions as we are wont to do on this partisan blog. They are both guilty/innocent till proven otherwise.

    Emperor7 (0c8c2c)

  43. I don’t know that he did.

    Then why did you say that he did?

    Pablo (99243e)

  44. They do not worship God Jr. They kneel at the altar and prostrate themselves in homage to Teh One. Teh One that made the oceans stop rising. Teh One that we have been waiting for.

    JD (c6800b)

  45. Comment by Dana — 2/12/2009 @ 7:44 pm
    I agree with you entirely. They are both culpable. (not finding a better word.).
    As always, Dana, you are one of the very few reasonable voices on this blog. Just like DRJ. Thank you for that balanced comment. 98%!
    (On another issue, are you the Adjective-less “Dana”? 🙂 )

    Emperor7 (0c8c2c)

  46. Comment by JD — 2/12/2009 @ 7:50 pm
    More lies.

    Emperor7 (0c8c2c)

  47. heh.

    As if I’d worship The Big O!

    No, it’s his acolytes in the media (‘thrill going up my leg’) and in the mass meetings (Julio et al.) that are worshipping him.

    You don’t like them worshipping The Big O! – you go talk to them.

    steve miller (3381bc)

  48. Comment by Pablo — 2/12/2009 @ 7:49 pm
    My mistake, Pablo. I was too hasty. But time will tell.

    Emperor7 (0c8c2c)

  49. Emp, it is very easy to determine which Dana is which. They both have blog sites connected to their names. Rest your curser on them and you will see which is which.

    (I discommunicate myself for speaking kindly to the Obama worshiper.)

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  50. But Baracky will not tell, lovie. Teh Emperor will believe that which shines favorably on Teh One, because she is invested in Teh Lightworker, emotionally, not rationally. It feeeeeeeels good to her. So, Gregg campaigned for the job because it makes it easier for her to demonize him when he walked away.

    JD (c6800b)

  51. I think that Dana #41 is right on the money but I give Gregg credit for stepping back from the abyss whatever his reasons. The Obama administration is a cesspool and nobody will come out of it clean.

    nk (a12124)

  52. Comment by steve miller — 2/12/2009 @ 7:57 pm
    So you don’t worship the big O! Good for you Steve. Don’t even give it a thought. Worship God only. He alone is the Maker of men, whether great or small.

    Emperor7 (0c8c2c)

  53. Emperor7, ask yourself who had the most to lose in this – a senator who comes to his senses and scurries back to his party, or a new President who clearly has plenty of motive for appointing a Republican to the post? You can easily tick off the benefits had he been successful in placing an R in the post. (He may still…)

    Dana (137151)

  54. It’s good to see that Gregg has some principles anyway

    Huh? He decided being a minority Senator under Minority Leader Suzie Collins’ superciliously postmenopausal neomarxist leadership was a better deal than being a publicly castrated dirty socialist collaborator is how it looks to me. What a sorry spectacle he made of himself. What he revealed was not that he is a principled man. What he revealed was a foolish, profoundly unserious, and decidedly not narrow-stanced fop I think.

    happyfeet (4eacbc)

  55. I love happyfeet.

    JD (c6800b)

  56. Footsie (and I pre-denounce myself) you are being a bit rough on Sen Gregg. Given a Republican replacement in the Senate and a position with major responsibilities within the Cabinet, I would find it hard to reject such a position. The possibility to do my best to serve this nation in a much stronger manner would be very enticing to me. And if I got stabbed in the back as much as B Hussein O did Gregg, I would also choose to say “screw this” and go back to doing my best to serve my state and my nation despite the worshiped one’s ulterior motives.

    In fact, I would use the worshiped one’s ulterior motives against him. “He nominated me for his cabinet. That proves even Democrats respect me. That’s why I deserve your vote. I value New Hampshire and the US and I am respected by the Democrat Party.” To me, Gregg chose the win-win-win position and backed out for the good of the nation and the good of his state and the good of his career.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  57. oh. Maybe. But I’m not certain what you’re describing is principles. Me I think giving a corrupt and fundamentally anti-American administration a bipartisan veneer is quintessentially fail-fail-fail, but then I think Baracky is a genuinely malevolent and deleterious presence, so I might could be biased.

    happyfeet (4eacbc)

  58. Comment by John Hitchcock — 2/12/2009 @ 8:38 pm

    You are assigning to Senator Gregg the same honorable motives that you would have if in that position. While I think he may indeed have considered serving his country more fully in the post, it’s good to remember that he is a professional politician.

    Dana (137151)

  59. Why did he lobby for the post since he knew he had a lot of unresolvable differences with the President?

    This is idiot Gibbs’ spin. There is no evidence that Gregg initiated the Commerce offer. He is a very solid guy from New Hampshire. When I was at Dartmouth, I went to his staff about my plans in 1994. I was interested in a staff job after the Republicans took over Congress. I wasn’t interested in being paid but thought it would be exciting to be involved in health reform. I was told that the health committees were only interested in tax lawyers. Maybe that’s why there has been no reform.

    Mike K (2cf494)

  60. Footsie, I agree that Barack is genuinely malevolent. But I suggest a man of integrity can still do good things from within a malevolent man’s inner circle. For a prime reference, I give you Moses prior to the “let my people go” stage of his life.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  61. See, you’re more sophisticated than I am. That doesn’t mean you’re wrong.

    happyfeet (4eacbc)

  62. Gibbs may be the only guy that can make McClelland look capable.

    JD (c6800b)

  63. Artful Dana, you may be right in your position that Gregg is politician first and statesman second. In fact, I give you a 70 pc chance you are right. But there is still a fair chance that the statesman side of him found the position enticing prior to the final backstab.

    John Hitchcock (fb941d)

  64. Obama has changed his mind dooozens of times. No one’s been concerned. Not the worshippers.

    The real issue here is bringing the Census into the White House. GOOD for Sen. Gregg for not going along with this. Barry’s trying to scam the country for votes but he just got thrown under the bus.

    So, Gregg campaigned for the job because it makes it easier for her to demonize him when he walked away.

    It’s fantastic.. Michael Steele needs to put Judd Gregg front and center to explain his decision.

    Vermont Neighbor (ab0837)

  65. Here’s an easy task: Spot the bias in this WashPost story about how bipartisan Obama just can’t get no co-op-er-a-tion from those partisan Republicans.

    Bradley J. Fikes, C. O.R., who wants DRJ back! (0ea407)

  66. The “Audacity of Entropy” continues.

    Neo (cba5df)

  67. I believe I need to retract my petulant remarks concerning Mr. Gregg in a prior thread where I in a fit of disgust called his preliminary acceptance of the Commerce appointment as an act of an useful idiot. Not knowing much of the man, I can at least say with certainty this withdrawal of acceptance most assuredly compromises his usefulness in the current attempt to create more national debt which only lengthens the fiscal and economic recovery. And I trust as the weeks and months unfold I will be able to confidently retract the idiot portion of my remarks. Would that more persons in both parties realize we have very few chances left to turn this car around.

    allan (6515a4)

  68. I wonder if Gregg’s change of mind came before or after his staffers got caught in the abramoff probe.

    imdw (a81897)

  69. “There is no evidence that Gregg initiated the Commerce offer.”

    But there is plenty of evidence he accepted it.

    imdw (a81897)

  70. But there is plenty of evidence he accepted it.

    Duh. imdw has an incredible grasp of the obvious.

    But, I am interested in hearing how this relates to Abramoff. Interesting how tangential ties to Republicans are criminal, but they have a nothing to see here move along kind of attitude about it with people like Reid.

    JD (c6800b)

  71. Oh, it’s totally a big, fat huge smoking gun, JD.

    A day after Gregg’s nomination had been announced, the AP reported that a former staffer, Kevin Koonce, was under criminal investigation for allegedly taking baseball and hockey tickets from a lobbyist in exchange for legislative favors while working for Gregg.

    That’s the new Abramoff probe the AP is conducting. Probe him, try him and hang him, I say. Gregg, that is. Also, Kevin Koonce is plural.

    Pablo (99243e)

  72. “Duh. imdw has an incredible grasp of the obvious.”

    You see the point. It doesn’t really matter who initiated the flirting. Dude accepted. When grownups accept offers, we know what we’re getting into.

    “But, I am interested in hearing how this relates to Abramoff.”

    It was recently revealed that a staffer took Abramoff bribes. Bribes to affect their work at Gregg’s office. Nothing has been revealed about Gregg’s involvement. But you know how people have been digging stuff on Obama’s nominees. And now right after this revelation Gregg has figured out that he doesn’t agree with Obama on some very unsurprising stuff.

    Google ‘Abramoff Gregg’ to find articles on the staffer.

    imdw (8bb588)

  73. Google ‘Abramoff Gregg’ to find articles on the staffer.

    As opposed to Murtha’s direct link?

    Scott Jacobs (90ff96)

  74. Yes, let’s forget Greenberg Traurig’s (that’s Abramoff’s firm) contributions to Obama in 2005, lets’ focus on some low level staffer. Than again that 67 question application needs some serious tweeking, Anyone see what a farce that turned out to be.

    narciso (57971e)

  75. So this is the new meme on Gregg, I suppose. You folks really need to work on picking one. I suggest trying this one out – he left because it became abundantly clear that he was nothing other than “bipartisan” window dressing, which became obvious when he was ignored on the “stimulus” plan and had the census illegally stripped from his department.

    JD (09132b)

  76. I think that Obama shot himself in the foot with Gregg due to his sudden turn to hyperpartisan rhetoric and lies about the Republicans not wanting to do anything to help with the economy. That change of tone began about a week ago and grew to the nastiness seen Monday and Tuesday. Gregg is not like Gates. He is a member of the Senate himself and therefore the insults were against his own colleagues. And he knew that Republicans had tried to get their own plan presented and their own ammendments listened to and were shut out. Then Obama turns around and lies and insults them publicly again and again. That probably was the last straw for Gregg. Obama got what he deserved here.

    bio mom (a1e126)

  77. This attempted smear job is just ridiculous. Or at least it was before Gregg withdrew. There might be something to it, now that he’s out.

    Pablo (99243e)

  78. I think this is a Republican plot to embarrass Obama’s bipartisan bid. Well they succeeded finally. Hope he does not live to regret this blunder.

    Ya might want to rephrase that last sentence.

    And reconsider the whole premise. Yes, Republicans launched a plot that made it possible they’d lose the ability to filibuster in the Senate in order to “embarrass” Obama.

    Seriously, if Republicans want to “embarrass” Obama, all they need to do is point to Joe Biden.

    Rob Crawford (04f50f)

  79. imdw, get help.

    SPQR (72771e)

  80. Senator under Minority Leader Suzie Collins’ superciliously postmenopausal neomarxist leadership

    Heh.

    Dmac (49b16c)

  81. feets!

    Karl (cbb1a2)

  82. allan and bio mom,

    I totally agree. I sent a thank you email to Gregg’s office —
    http://gregg.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Contact.ContactForm

    Vermont Neighbor (ab0837)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1098 secs.