Tweet
New Hampshire’s Democratic governor John Lynch says he will appoint a Republican:
“I have had conversations with Sen. Gregg, the White House and U.S. Senate leadership,” Lynch said in a statement. “Sen. Gregg has said he would not resign his seat in the U.S. Senate if it changed the balance in the Senate. Based on my discussions, it is clear the White House and Senate leadership understand this as well.”
“It is important,” Lynch went on, “that President Obama be able to select the advisers he feels are necessary to help him address the challenges facing our nation.”
As Jonathan Martin points out, this may make Robert Gibbs a somewhat less svelte Dana Perino:
Lynch appeared to contradict White House press secretary Robert Gibbs’ assertion at his briefing Monday that the White House has not been involved in the New Hampshire appointment or any other Senate appointments.
What makes Gregg so indispensable as Commerce Secretary I can’t say. Cillizza hears talk of Lynch appointing Bonnie Newman, I’ve heard Elizabeth Hager.
37 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
big mistake
The Union-Leader was saying Newman as well this morning.
What a crock of
OT and hopefully not a repeat of anything earlier:
Link to full story.
crap, to complete my #3 comment.
What I’ve heard is that Lynch himself wants to run for the seat in two years.
Digg it
Whoops…hit send too fast. And that he is extracting a promise from the appointee not to run against him.
Does this whole thing strike anyone else as being an exceedingly odd strategy on Obama’s part? In other words, WTF??
Given the hoops Lynch is going to have to jump through to get a budget (including cutting state workers), he will not necessarily win a primary against Paul Hodes or Carol Shea-Porter, both of whom are rumored to be interested in the seat.
Why is this not a “quid pro quo” and thus illegal? And a conspiracy as well? What happens if the Govenor says, I changed my mind?
Apparently Newman formed a group called, ‘Republicans for Lynch’, when he ran for office. Honestly, I don’t care about this. Put a progressive liberal in Gregg’s seat please!
no sale.
I don’t know why this surprises people. Obama’s style isn’t the ruthless kind where he’d do anything to get the filibuster-proof majority. He believes he can reach out to the other side and get some cooperation, that’s his big thing. Even if so far it’s been a laughable failure in the House.
The thought that he’s doing this to get Gregg’s guaranteed vote on the stimulus bill is more in line with how Obama operates. Cleaving just one or two GOP senators from the party line gives Obama the stimulus win. And he does it in that “bipartisan” way that seems to be so in vogue, at least in the rarified minds of the Beltway class.
“Sen. Gregg has said he would not resign his seat in the U.S. Senate if it changed the balance in the Senate. […] It is important,” Lynch went on, “that President Obama be able to select the advisers he feels are necessary…”
If it’s so goddamn fucking important, you’d think Gregg could put country over party and take the job without all the drama and backroom dealing.
This is the kind of guy Obama wants to rely upon to run Commerce?
Pisses. Me. Off.
.
Still OT, and then I’ll stop.
If you are thinking about sending kudos to Rep. Barney Frank for calling the bailed-out bank heads to testify before his committee next week, here are his D.C. phone and fax numbers.
Staff was very polite and pleased to get my message, even though I am not Frank’s constituent.
Obama sometimes seems to be a really stupid smart person. He is thinking himself into a box.
Dugg.
Thanks Jane, hoping for the best on this one.
When will it start to feel like Dems won big last November?
Fewer rethugs, more dems in the Senate please. Now’s a chance. Take it.
Obama ally (McCaskill)OK with deal on Gregg seat via Boston Globe.
Still seems to think “bipartisanship” is an end in itself, rather than just one potential means to an end. And a means that requires good faith on both sides. He may be able to make the giant leap of faith required to believe he’ll get a fair shake from the ‘Thuglicans, but I’m sure as heck not!
[head, meet desk…again!]
Sigh…
FunnyDiva
What is wrong with these people? The only possible reason to appoint a Pub to the cabinet is to get him replaced by a Democrat.
Good point.
grrrr. reading the news is making me cranky again. I thought we voted for CHANGE?
Back when Specter chaired Senate Judiciary, Ted said “You got a letter I sent to you” – Specter interrupted (chairs can do that!) and said (though both understood there had to have been signatures for sending and a return receipt) for the record, “You sent it but it doesn’t mean I read it” (words to the effect). Those guys are what? Almost the age of the Republic combined, and they act like that. Senators that good (and funny) happen once in a lifetime. Be careful. Blogs like this have cracked the code, so a new one is emerging.
Am I to understand that a principle is being articulated in such a way that if, say, Senator Bernie Sanders joins the administration, and if Vermont’s governor fills the vacancy, Vermont’s governor would have to appoint neither a Democrat nor a Republican?
We voted for CHANGE but Obama thinks we voted for bipartsanship
Good afternoon.
Everyone worked so hard to elect Democrats in all fifty states, and Obama cuts a deal that ensures a Republican just waltzes in? I think it’s a slap in the face. Judd Gregg is a horrible Senator. This is just so disheartening to me. I’m rapidly losing faith in Obama.
The only thing I can see as a possible plus in appointing Gregg to Commerce is that he may be able to help sell some agenda of Obama’s to his buddies on the right. Was Cohen helpful to Clinton in this regard?
It bugs the hell out of me that they’re willing to increase the number of Republicans in the federal govt by even this one person.
It’s hilarious that he puts a Republican in Commerce, given the state of American commerce thanks to the Republicans.
We did get change. We’re now getting screwed a member of the Democratic branch of the capitalist party instead of a member of the Republican branch.
This is a one party system with money calling the shots. See any changes coming in the way of REAL bankruptcy reform or REAL relief from usurious credit card interest rates? No. What we are hearing is entitlements (that nice code for programs that keep poor people from freezing/starving/dying) are going to be reformed. Right. Ask Dean Baker just how likely Social Security is to tank in the next twenty years. Granted with the fiscal shape Bush left us in our financial future looks bleak, but Social Security is solvent.
Democrats will be the ones who take away the final vestiges of the New Deal just like Bubba did away with welfare while allowing media to become more consolidated in the hands of people like Murdoch and removing oversight and control from banks.
It’s very telling in the youtube video going around that Carter chose to smooch and greet Ice Lady Babs Bush while ignoring Clinton. Carter knows evil when he sees it and he sees it in Clinton.
Not that a politician’s word is any good, but Lynch has stated outright that he does not intend to run for the US Senate.
By removing Judd Gregg, Lynch will throw the Republican side wide open. Given the state of the GOP, this could end up being a knock down drag out against the primary challengers. This is what happened in the congressional seats for the GOP in NH this year. They beat each other-up silly and then lost everything.
-G
Hey pups!
Did I miss a tax revolt? Why wasn’t I told?
I want a full financial vetting of all senators past and present!
waving pitchfork
IOKIYAR, dontcha know.
requires good faith on both sides
Good luck with that.
I saw Carter explain to Jon Stewart why he didn’t shake Clinton’s hand. There should be video of that on the comedycentral site.
No snub. He’d already spent twenty minutes greeting and chatting with them before climbing the steps together. The elder Bushes had just arrived via elevator.
Actually I think the fact that Gregg’s replacement will be a Republican is much better politics than the alternative, which I presume was appointing a rabid blue dog. If Obama can leverage Gregg from one Republican he can deal with to two Republicans he can deal with that’s a meaningful gain, sadly.
I think the one thing Gregg’s replacement guaranteed respect is that Gregg was elected and that while yes Gregg ensured a Republican replaced him, more noticeably he joined the Obama administration. As an isolated act, that’s about as bipartisan as you can get and really sets a Mr. Smith goes to Washington example when compared to the Pavlovian numbers coming out out the house. How can any party claim to be for individual responsibility and yet come up with 100% party line opposition to the first major symbolic vote of a new government. They know they’ll get another chance to vote for or against an actual package, this was pure symbolism and they chose a Cheney single-finger-salute welcome. He may pay a huge policy price, or not, but politically Obama is relentlessly exposing and marginalizing the truly fringe zealots who wrested control of the Republican delegations. The Republicans are so damned insistent on marginalizing everyone and anyone in their own party who is willing to work across party line and with this Gregg choice, quite aside from the nominee’s merits, I think Obama is working around that in a pretty practical way.
Whoever replaces Gregg will, of course, vote Republican more often than not, but on -say- issues of Commerce it will look pretty petulant to vote against Gregg. He was elected after all, unlike whoever replaces him. In fact it will look pretty petulant to join the modern lockstep-opposition-to-everything-Dem school of Republican power politics. I would argue it is politically quite a bit easier for Gregg’s replacement to vote with the majority than it is for Gregg. Certainly it is no harder.
Yes it’s crass triangulation on Obama’s part, even if heartfelt. He’s a gifted politician. Yes it’s giving the defeated party real say in government. That’s why it might actually be effective. Rush Limbaugh is being marginalized, and not because he’s any less insane.
If Gregg puts a condition like that on the table, he’s wrong for the job. Surely the pool of available talent out there includes someone with political skills beyond partisanshit.