JONATHAN CHAIT AUGUST 28, 2010
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
[Guest post by Isaac Chotiner]
The New York Times is a wonderful newspaper, but it is rarely a humorous one. Indeed, most of the funny or ridiculous things one finds in the paper are unintentionally amusing (Lisa Miller's credulous "report" on reincarnation is a good example). Some reporters (like John Burns, for example) are allowed to stretch their legs and add ironic or opinionated bits to their stories, but generally the news coverage is kept at room temperature.
Somewhere deep inside the paper, however, a decision was clearly made that it was simply impossible to write about New York's governor, David Paterson, with a straight face. The result is a delicious story today by N.R. Kleinfield and David W. Chen. The headline gives a hint of what's to come: "With Patterson, the Simple Facts Can Get Complicated." Here is the lede:
A thoroughly honest politician has pretty much always been considered an undiscovered species. But for Gov. David A. Paterson, the distinction between the truth and an untruth can get unusually murky.
Paterson is in hot water because an independent counsel has accused him of lying about whether he (Paterson) was going to pay for Yankees tickets. The piece's third paragraph is even more remarkable because it basically says that the governor of New York is dumb:
But how do you sort that out? After all, according to many people who deal with Mr. Paterson, it’s not always clear when he might be intentionally lying and when he is just saying wrong things.
Saying wrong things! Referring to an earlier scandal involving the governor, Kleinfield and Chen write:
One of the odder passages in that report recounted how Mr. Paterson ordered his staff to draft a statement from the victim who reported the abuse to say that although her breakup with the aide was “not friendly, there was nothing acrimonious about our relationship or its ending.” The woman would not go along, because she said it was false.
When investigators asked Mr. Paterson whether he considered the statement accurate or inaccurate, he replied, “I would say it was neither.”
He did not clarify what something is, if it is neither accurate nor inaccurate.
The last sentence here is perfect: dry, damning, and very amusing. Then there is this tidbit:
Before Mr. Paterson became governor, his official biography recounted that he was born and raised in Harlem. In actuality, he was born in Brooklyn, and when he was young, his family moved to South Hempstead, on Long Island.
Mr. Paterson said that he had not carefully read his biography, which was prepared by staff members who he said cannot always get everything right.
Nonetheless, confusion appears to follow him around.
The whole piece--with many more examples of "confusion"--is a must-read.
9 comments
I had an internship with Paterson in 2003. He is thoughtful and intelligent, and an effective Minority leader when he was a State Senator. Even more effective in the years that followed in the strategy to get a Democratic majority in the State Senate. There is something mean-spirited and childish in the way the NYT demeans Paterson as Governor. Is TNR in kindergarten mode? The far more meaty story in today's NYT is in the contest for the Democratic nomination for Attorney General, and Eric Schneiderman's curious strategy to run as a proud liberal, counting on the usual low turnout. Sorry Eric, I know your dedication and integrity, but this is my message vote year and I was leaning to Brodsky anyway because of his attention to the threat of Cuomo senior's legacy of off the books Authorities. Is Andrew Cuomo so perfect? I will not even vote for Andrew in the Democratic primary! I wonder how many other voters will deliberately leave the gubernatorial nomination lever in place while casting votes for every other nomination on September 14?
- K2K
August 28, 2010 at 4:34pm
No, but K2K is in kindergarten mode. Not every thread at TNR has to be "meaty." Isaac was going for something a bit light, and his post is interesting against the backdrop of the usually humorless New York Times.
- liberal reformer
August 28, 2010 at 6:44pm
Trust me, K2K, the vast majority of us who don't live in NY don't give a fart about your state attorney general's race. Paterson, though, always brings the funny. And now, if I may immediately contradict myself and ask what you mean in that 'message vote' statement? You seemed to have left out some words, or edited it into incomprehensibility.
- W_Bombay
August 28, 2010 at 7:21pm
It seems the first order of business is to determine the correct spelling of the name of the governor of New York.
- Doug12
August 28, 2010 at 7:54pm
"It seems the first order of business is to determine the correct spelling of the name of the governor of New York." Yep! Chait and the authors of the cited NY Times article were so eager to put out their meme -- the dumbness of David Patterson -- that they misspelled the governor's name. How ironically dumb is that? I'd bet non of them ever had an up-close relationship with the governor, as k2k had. And k2k says the governor is thoughtful and intelligent.
- scrubby
August 29, 2010 at 9:54am
Paterson has been an awful Govenor, even considering the mess he inherited and I have tried. I will give him credit for trying to be tough on our budget, but this effort has come across as impotent bleating rather than real leadership. Sadly, he visibly panicked from his first day in office and has morphed in to a remarkably ridiculous figure ever since. Add petulance to his incompetence (both to his state and his party) and you have fair game for mocking, whether he's was a competent pol at some point or not. Fair is not a word used much in New York. Govenor of New York is one of the most prestigious jobs in American political life. Being held to high standards is baseline as is dealing with the toxic buffoons in Albany. Serving irrascible, smart, pitiless New Yorkers and our equally pitiless press is also baseline. He's failed at every level. Whenever my highly political family in California moans about the crowd in Sacramento, all I have to do to silence them is forward one or two stories from Albany that day. In New York, we have the finest mayor in America running New York City and a banana republic level group of vicious nitwits supposedly running the state.
- WandreyCer
August 30, 2010 at 9:49am
Wow, WandreyCer -- I have mixed feelings about Paterson -- he hasn't been effective, but then given the total mess that is NY's state government, I'm not sure anyone could have been. Based on his earlier years in political office, I would have tended to go along with K2K's assessment -- he was competent, and got some good stuff done. What really bothers me is your take on Bloomberg. He hijacked his way into his 3rd term -- totally unforgivable and anti-democratic. (By the way, I'm against term limits -- but this wasn't the way to do things.) He is clearly out to destroy our public schools by blaming teachers for education problems that begin in the home. He's trying to destroy the municipal unions. He's even more in bed with the city's real estate players than our past mayors. He's playing games with everything from the city's traffic patterns to the Independence Party. He's a very rich man who has no idea how the rest of us live and doesn't give a rat's ass about the real problems of real people. His condescending attitudes just round out my disgust with him. By the way, I cast my mayoral ballot last year for the guy on The Rent Is Too High ticket.
- LISAH
August 30, 2010 at 12:27pm
LISAH! Hey there - well, you have a well supported case. I'm afraid I'm not riled about your issues though, much as I probably should be. I am not an economic royalist, quite the opposite. I simply do not experience him the same way you do. I don't find him the least bit snobby or out of touch. I see him as a former Salmon Brothers guy who started his own company from scratch and made jillions. He's probably rough around the edges, but compared to his godawful ghoul of a predecesor, he's fine. He's been magnificient on the Ground Zero Mosque, spot on. He has credibility which he used well used when it counted. He rarely comes out guns blazing, which is smart. I just don't care that Bloomy bought his third term. I wish I could but I don't. He's the exception to a really good rule of thumb about power, your point is well taken. I"m afraid I wish he could be mayor forever, he's so good at administration and budgeting, keeping the lid on race relations. We have the best Police Commish in America thanks to Mike too. I worked with the unions for years, you can't destroy those bastards, God love em. They are expensive pains in the ass - and I say that as a member of two (one of which I was strong-armed in to joining against my express wishes by a thug. I liked that guy - and it was a social worker union. I love New York). But I'll give you that. Any fighting back against Big Bad Mike by them is OK by me. Net, we need unions. His work on the traffic patterns has eased traffic immensely and opened up public spaces in areas where it is greatly appreciated. I'm OK with his leadership on that. Sorry, I like him alot, appreciate his competence so much I don't care about his plutocratic credentials. Think of his New York City mogulness this way: no one owns him. He owes no one anything. He uses his power well considering.
- WandreyCer
August 30, 2010 at 6:02pm
Hi, Wandrey, in case you're still checking this thread -- I guess we just have to agree to disagree. To me, the 3rd term manipulation was so deeply anti-democratic that even if I liked Bloomberg on other issues, I would never vote for him or support him. It was unforgivable. And much of the other stuff I mentioned is also highly questionable in terms of democratice political process -- perhaps especially the ongoing efforts to essentially privatize the NYC schools. Bloomberg's competence in the private sector is clear. That's not the issue. His high-handed application of his private sector talents to messing up the public sector is more than annoying. Anyway, I'd really like to hear about how you were strong-armed into joining the social worker union -- sounds like a good one. ...
- LISAH
August 31, 2010 at 11:25am