This wouldn't be a bad fit for Pataki. It would effectively eliminate him from running for President in 2008 - which ain't all bad. It would also help redeem the indignity that NY suffered with Kerik...
Just my thoughts...
Sharper Minds Daily
Posted on 12/13/2004 10:50:06 AM PST by crushelits
Unlike Kerik, everything about Ollie is already public information. For this particular cabinet position they need a gritty, hands-on type and should lighten up on the usual prim and proper confirmation standards (IMO).
Is there not ONE good Republican who can take over DHS?!?!?!? Why are RINOs the only ones people are mentioning?
He's a weak administrator..too willing to delegate..not hands on..Kerik would have been perfect, because the main job of the next guy in DHS will be to really get all the parts to work together as one cohesive agency. Kerik knows well the importance of that, after 9/11, because for decades, the FDNY and NYPD didn't even talk to each other. Had the radio nets been compatible, you might have saved the lives of 200 + firemen..
on the Kerik thing; let's face it, if Bill Bratton or Timoney or Ray Kelly were nominated tomorrow, they would also be cut down. Perhaps not on the nanny thing, but anyone coming up through the "real world" ranks of an urban environment, is going to have baggage that the media can whip into an instant "scandal". and this WH isn't willing to fight it out. so what kind of nominees does that leave you with?
Right now, I would ask Norman Schwarzkopf to take it if he were available.
its a thankless job, you aren't going to get alot of visible politicians to take such a role.
NOT!
Admitting to being "snookered" by Sadam does not bode well for him.
We did not forget, things are just as F-ed up as back then, only worse.
The choice was pataki or vallone, an old worn out liberal. I did not vote in the election for Gov. last time.
PATAKI sucks, as do most other NY Repubs. I am embarassed to be a republican in NY.
Hmmmm? I wonder if Pataki sees that running against Spitzer is going to be a tough road to hoe.
You, my friend, are a victim of the MSM. That, or you didn't live here during the Cuomo administration. You show me the 'disasters' and I will show you point by point and program by program, what this governor has done to bring New York back from 12 years of liberal destruction!
Granted, Pataki is not a 'conservative' Republican. He would never have been elected in this state. However, he has accomplished much - DESPITE - the efforts of a predominantly liberal Senate and Legislature, that has done everything in its power, under Sheldon Silver, to shoot down the governor's programs.
I'll even begin with the latest court debacle demanding that NYS fork over millions of dollars into the NYC school system. Your turn!
How fellow Conservatives - how about abolishing the damned office? We did not need it during WW2 and we don't need it now. It is another federal program we can be without.
Excuse me, I am a lifelong New Yorker, so you can take that argument and shove it.
The fact of the matter is that Pataki, only until very very recently, has gone along with every liberal spending program; has presided over a complete ruining of the state party; has been more liberal than most liberals could ever dream of, and has let NY become the highest taxed state in the country.
Cuomo, although a disaster in his own right, was not a republican. I expect terrible government out of a liberal.
What about Gen. Franks? Ollie North as well.
Even considering Pataki for security chief is demeaning to Republicans everywhere. He cannot stand up to the Rat terrorists in this state how can he stand up to the international types...
I like either one of your choices!
He would be a great choice.
John
And Ollie is from right here in NYS! Maybe we should start a campaign...
(imagine the chutzpah of Pataki to think he could take on the position not to mention the Presidency. What a joke the man is!)
Michelle Malkin suggests Peter Nunez:
Peter Nunez, former United States Attorney, Southern District of California (1982-1988), former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Enforcement (1990-1993) overseeing all law enforcement components of the Treasury Department including Customs and BATF, lecturer in the Department of Political Science and International Relations at the University of San Diego and Chairman of the Board of Directors at the Center for Immigration Studies.
Nunez has been in the trenches, has demonstrated his ability and determination to enforce our immigration laws, and has worked with law enforcement officials and agencies on both the northern and southern borders. He gets it. Here's an excerpt from Nunez's congressional testimony in February 2004 on preventing the entry of terrorists into the United States:
"This country must remember that it is based upon the concept of the rule of law. We are a nation of laws - we must abide by the laws we have adopted to deal with the problems of immigration, drugs, and terrorism. It is not enough to pass laws in Congress or in the state legislatures and then ignore them because we are afraid of offending special interests or because of notions of political correctness. And there is no way a country can fight a war against terrorism when it ignores its borders, refuses to enforce its laws away from the borders, and provides sanctuary or informal immunity to those who have broken our laws by coming here illegally or staying beyond their welcome."
Sounds like he deserves a look. We've had enough "politicians".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.