January 22, 2005


Pataki for UN? (Robert Novak, January 22, 2005, Townhall)

Sources close to New York Gov. George Pataki say he has been asked whether he would consider filling the vacancy of U.S. ambassador to the United Nations.

Posted by Orrin Judd at January 22, 2005 9:03 AM

Genius - Take a politician you want to sideline and pair him with the institution you want to sideline.

Posted by: pj at January 22, 2005 9:14 AM

It actually works for Pataki a bit as well, since most coservatives right now would trust him only slightly more than they would Arlen Spector. Dropping him into the U.N. and giving him the chance to follow the Moynihan template would not only be like shooting fish in a barrel for the governor, given the current corruption level over on East 43rd Street, but would improve his standing among the general GOP electorate.

He still wouldn't win the 2008 nomination, but at least he'd have a dark horse shot at the VP nomination if he spent the next three years letting Kofi and the gang know what the U.S. thinks of them.

Posted by: John at January 22, 2005 9:33 AM

If Bush has one weakness it's his loyalty to any Republican who served as governor when he was governor of Texas. Mediocrities most of them.

Posted by: Jim in Chicago at January 22, 2005 11:57 AM

They sure got re-elected a lot.

Posted by: oj at January 22, 2005 1:18 PM

Yep, as governors. I'm quite happy to see the likes of Tom Ridge as governor forever. I just prefer not to have them setting and implementing national policy.

Posted by: Jim in Chicago at January 22, 2005 2:18 PM

Their cabinet officers--they don't set policy they execute it.

Posted by: oj at January 22, 2005 2:25 PM

for and read and/or.

(for their read they're?)

Posted by: Jim in Chicago at January 22, 2005 2:46 PM

Never underestimate the good will that Pataki and Guiliani have built up in the base from their firm, public support of Bush, and don't underestimate how badly folks like McCain and Hegel have hurt themselves by being the "go to" guys for the media whenever they want to get a sound bite of a Republican bashing Bush. Yes, they both would have some fence mending to do, but it can be done. If Pataki is in fact offered the U.N. job, and doesn't take it, then he is dumb as a post. After Bush's 1/20 speech, he will have the 2nd bulliest pulpit in the world.

Posted by: Dan at January 22, 2005 2:58 PM

Pataki's skills are not made for a 'bully pulpit.' It would be like having PeeWee Herman fight for the Heavyweight Championship of the world.

Pataki is an intelligent, able man who was a decent governor of NY who stayed on too long in the job and became the captive of the Albany lobbying community. The freespenders on both sides of the aisle have him in their thrall. He'd be a decent S Court appointment once the ideological swing were finalized. A Court where Pataki was the most liberal voice wouldn't be a bad place.

Posted by: Bart at January 22, 2005 3:11 PM


Dr. Kirkpatrick wouldn't be my first choice for occupying a bully pulpit, but she pulled it off. In her case, it was brains; all Pataki needs is a decent speechwriter to keep this even more degenerate version of a circus on the ropes.

Posted by: Dan at January 22, 2005 5:15 PM

Dr Kirkpatrick had a core ideology that activated her every statement, as did Pat Moynihan who was similarly brilliant in the role. Pataki's instincts are conservative but I have my doubts as to his ability to stand up to the constant drumbeat of criticism. The UN reporters are worse than the Albany press corps and Kofi Annan is worse than Sheldon Silver.

Posted by: Bart at January 24, 2005 7:57 AM

Moynihan had no beliefs, just rhetorical flourishes.

Posted by: oj at January 24, 2005 8:46 AM

Moynihan was probably the most important postwar thinker in America not named Milton Friedman.

Posted by: Bart at January 25, 2005 4:19 PM

Moynihan was a drunk and a fool who coasted on one report about welfare dependency.

Posted by: oj at January 25, 2005 5:11 PM