Saturday, January 31, 2009
Thursday, January 29, 2009
Yesterday King capped it all by voting against the Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009.
The supposedly "pro-worker" King who revels in his almost half-century removed blue collar background voted against a bill that gave recourse to women who find out that they make 1/3 less than thier male counterparts.
"Title I: Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 - Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 - (Sec. 3) Amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to declare that an unlawful employment practice occurs when: (1) a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice is adopted; (2) an individual becomes subject to the decision or practice; or (3) an individual is affected by application of the decision or practice, including each time wages, benefits, or other compensation is paid. Allows liability to accrue, and allows an aggrieved person to obtain relief, including recovery of back pay, for up to two years preceding the filing of the charge, where the unlawful employment practices that have occurred during the charge filing period are similar or related to practices that occurred outside the time for filing a charge. Applies the preceding provisions to claims of compensation discrimination under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.
(Sec. 4) Amends the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 to declare that an unlawful practice occurs when a discriminatory compensation decision or other practice is adopted, when a person becomes subject to the decision or other practice, or when a person is affected by the decision or practice, including each time wages, benefits, or other compensation is paid."
Siena poll conducted 1/25-1/27/09
Gillibrand beats King in every age group and every ethnic background and both genders. The ONLY sub-section besides republican party King wins is "suburbs" but that is a close 38%-33%.
Worse yet, if their were a Republican primary for the Senate race in 2010, republicans prefer Giuliani over King 69% - 16%
Chances of King actually running: 30%
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
King has done his best to get his face in every newspaper and on every political talk show he can. He has been grandstanding on immigration and homeland security for 7 years.
Kirsten Gillibrand is a big unknown outside of her district but she tops King 49% - 24% in the new Marist poll.
Looking at the polls matching King against Kennedy and Coumo, if we are looking for a pattern, it's that King is not liked.
This poll proves that King is not popular outside of his district.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Newsday reported that King "variously called her selection by Gov. David A. Paterson a "fraud," "payoff" and a "backroom" deal."
Strong words from King.
The NY Daily News is reporting that King may have been getting campaign contributions for steering $3million in taxpayer money to local companies. "U.S. Rep. Pete King funneled $3 million in taxpayer money to a campaign donor for custom manhole covers that Con Ed said could be dangerous, a Daily News probe found.
"The Long Island Republican sponsored federal dollars to pay for about 5,000 locking manhole covers designed to thwart terrorists. They would cover only about 2% of Con Ed's manholes in the city...
"Con Ed was approached to cover its 250,000 manholes with the devices, but the utility decided they would pose an obstacle not just to terrorists - but also to firefighters in an emergency.
"We said 'no,' it's impractical," said a Con Ed official who spoke on the condition of anonymity. "What are you going to do? Have 250,000 keys for these things?
"Manhole Barrier did better with Congress than with Con Ed, with the help of a few timely campaign contributions.
The company CEO, his wife, some relatives and lobbyists contributed $16,700 to King as he was trying to earmark funds for the firm, records show.
CEO Michael Manoussos first gave $4,000 to King beginning in August 2006. In March 2007, King requested money for the covers. That year, the effort failed.
Manhole Barrier tried again last year. This time, Manoussos got relatives and lobbyists to kick in as well, records show.
He and his wife, Dawn, each gave the maximum allowed, $4,600, on Feb. 7. Two company lobbyists donated on the same day, and two other Manoussos relatives gave another $1,500 shortly after."
And that's not the only instance.... "Still, campaign donations were also present when King got taxpayer funding this year for another Long Island company, American Defense Systems Inc.
Last spring, King sent a letter to the House Appropriations Committee requesting $1.2 million for development of a new ballistic helmet to protect soldiers. ADSI was the beneficiary.
Before December 2007, ADSI employees never donated to King. That month, they began writing a total of $16,800 in checks for his 2008 re-election campaign.
"I never asked them for anything," King said, adding that he didn't know why ADSI decided to start contributing.
ADSI turned out to be King's top donor this election cycle, the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics says.
In a March 17 letter, King submitted his funding request for the company. Most of the donations from ADSI executives came May 9, less than two months later.
ADSI's chief operating officer, Fergal Foley, gave four separate donations totaling $5,300 - $700 more than legally allowed. King's campaign sent a refund check after The News asked about the donation.
Executives of ADSI thought so much of King that they gave him an award for outstanding public service, The Golden Eagle of Freedom, at a Jan. 9 dinner."
King of course will deny this and attack the Daily News for being a "liberal newspaper."
There needs to be an invesigation into the process and the contributors, especially the employees, questioned under oath.
King of course has no idea that Paterson doesn't have to tell anyone how he made his decision. So says that CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES. King should read the 17th Amendment "When vacancies happen in the representation of any State in the Senate, the executive authority of such State shall issue writs of election to fill such vacancies: Provided, That the legislature of any State may empower the executive thereof to make temporary appointments until the people fill the vacancies by election as the legislature may direct."
Paterson as Governor is empowered to appoint anyone he wants.
Kirsten Gillibrand is great choice.
And that is what scares King.
Friday, January 23, 2009
King was itching to get into a fight with Senator Caroline Kennedy but has instead toned down his rhetoric on running. “If he appointed Caroline Kennedy, I was ready to file papers right away because she’s a superstar and you can’t let her build a head of steam – and she was totally unqualified in my perspective,” King told Politico. “With Kirsten, she’s entitled to be given an opportunity to build a record for the state.”
So King isn't ready right away to file papers against Gillibrand?
Of course not, because King knows Gillibrand will be a tougher candidate.
I mean if King REALLY wanted to run for Senate, he could have delcared to run against Schumer.... but he didn't.
King is all talk and nothing more.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Gillibrand is a fiscal conservative with progressive/liberal social stances in line with most New York Democrats.
Gillibrand's stances neutralize anything King can bring to the table. King won't be the "moderate" in the race. He can't throw the "LIBERULLLLL!!!!!!" label at her.
Does this mean King will decide not to run?
I think so.
Gillibrand represents upstate New York where there hasn't been a
King spent so much time bashing Caroline Kennedy hoping sh was the choice, he didn't think he'd have an opponent he can't easily label.
Gillibrand will have almost 2 years to make a name for herself - which she will do with Schumer's help- and she will be a formidable candidate in 2010.
"PIX11 News has learned Congresswoman Kirsten Gillibrand is the choice of Governor David Paterson to fill the U.S. Senate seat vacated by Hillary Clinton. Two Congressional sources tell PIX News that the Governor will make his announcement in Albany at noon tomorrow. He has invited members of the state's Democratic Congressional delegation to join him."
Thursday, January 15, 2009
Under Approval, King gets 39% Approval, 41% Disapproval, and 20% No Opinion.
Guiliani fares much worse with 38% Approval, 56% Disapproval, and 6% No Opinion.
In the head-to-head match-up, Cuomo beats King 45% to 32%.
Cuomo beats Giuliani 48% to 33%.
Kennedy still trounces King 47% to 31% and does the same thing to Giuliani 49% to 32%.
Congressman Steve Israel who is new to the polls and is very much an unknown compared to any of the other possible candidates beats King 34% to 31% and does the same to Giuliani 35% to 32%. That isn’t much but no one knows Israel.
King and Giuliani pull the same low number against well-known Dems and a virtually unknown Dem.
Monday, January 12, 2009
That poll is now made irrelevant by a new poll conducted by Rasmussen Reports.
In the poll conducted January 6, 2009 Caroline Kennedy trounces Peter King 51% - 33%.
Also in this new poll King takes a beating in the favorability column with only 39% “Very to Somewhat Favorable” while Kennedy is 63% “Very to Somewhat Favorable.”
King gets 37% Very-Somewhat Unfavorable.
So this would all mean something if Kennedy was chosen to replace Hillary and Kennedy ran in 2010. But none of that is happening yet.
I think though the Kennedy doom-sayers from the last poll should take this one just as seriously and trumpet her new numbers.
Wednesday, January 07, 2009
Schumer is up for re-election next year and the ballot will have Schumer name right before whatever Dem is running. Not much of a chance of a down-ballot drop-off of votes unless the candidate is Zombie Hitler. Not many Dems are going to switch lines right after Schumer or stop voting after Schumer.
King is trash-talking Caroline Kennedy secretly hoping she gets appointed because he feels he can beat her.
The question is if King really wanted to go to the Senate, why didn’t he float his name as a challenger to Chuck Schumer?
Why did he wait until he would face an unelected 2 year incumbent?
Seems to me that tough-guy King doesn’t want a tough fight like he would have against Schumer who won 71% of the vote in 2004.
Last time King ran state-wide it was for Attorney General against Robert Abrams and he got 36% of the vote.
Tuesday, January 06, 2009
A Public Policy Polling poll(opens as .pdf) shows "King has decent favorability numbers for someone who’s not a major statewide figure. 34% of voters see him positively while 26% have a negative opinion. A 40% plurality has no opinion at this point in time."
After being in the news so often not just Caroline-bashing but hogging as much spotlight on Homeland Security issues for years you would think King would be better known and have higher favorability numbers.
King gets clobbered by Andrew Cuomo in the poll and Kennedy beats him too. "Cuomo, it appears, would be an easy winner against King. He leads him 48-29 in a hypothetical pairing, and that’s with only 35% of black voters pledging to support him at this very preliminary stage. Kennedy only edges King 46-44. She loses a full quarter of the Democratic vote at this point in time and also has a 15 point gap among independent voters."
Two things... Obama comes in for Cuomo, Cuomo takes 99% of black vote. Cuomo wins NYC and surrounding areas plus a few upstate counties. Game over.
For Kennedy, Democrats won't be pulling the lever for King no matter how much he flogs his almost 40 year old "blue-coller" background.
Here's a letter I wrote a few years ago to the Massapequa Post and I make note of why he is unsuited for the Senate.
"As we teeter on the precipice of war, a healthy debate is necessary. Opposing views must be aired and be heard. Our elected officials have a duty to listen to their constituents whether they agree or not. Here on Long Island all the representatives voted for the Iraq resolution. All but one are willing to listen to voices of opposition. A national effort was undertaken a couple of weeks ago by antiwar groups to have people lobby their representatives to choose peace over war. Rep. McCarthy invited her constituents into her office to explain her positions and listen to theirs. While they may have had differing opinions, a civil, courteous discussion resulted.
There was a different story at the Massapequa Park office of Rep. Peter King. Instead of meeting with his constituents who offered an opposing view, he called the police to make them leave. Let me repeat that: Peter King called the police on his constituents. He claims that he does not want to be a part of "undermining the president." I would like to know how airing opposing views on the reasoning behind war is "undermining." How does meeting with constituents do any harm? Peter King serves at the pleasure of his constituents. They are to be heard, not ignored or arrested for trying to speak with him in the office they pay for. Cowering in his office from opposing views and hiding behind a skewed idea of patriotism is not serving his district well. King has said he is interested in gaining a seat in the senate which is, above all, a deliberative body. His inability to consider opposing views is not well suited for that job."