August 8, 2005

NOW GET RUDY TO RUN FOR GOVERNOR:

Pirro to Challenge Senator Clinton in '06 (PATRICK D. HEALY, 8/08/05, NY Times)

Jeanine F. Pirro, a moderate Republican and high-profile district attorney of Westchester County, said today that she would challenge Hillary Rodham Clinton for her United States Senate seat in 2006. [...]

In three terms as district attorney, Ms. Pirro, 53, has built a national reputation as a hard-charging prosecutor of sex crimes and domestic violence cases and a proponent of Internet stings targeting suspected child molesters. Her tough talk, quick wit, and good looks have made her a frequent commentator on Fox News and cable television shows.

A Clinton-Pirro race is one that Mr. Minarik and some other Republicans have sought for months: They believe that a battle-tested Republican woman from the suburbs like the Elmira-born Ms. Pirro, who is also a centrist on some social issues like abortion rights and gay rights, would be best matched against Mrs. Clinton and have the broadest appeal for New York voters.


If Ms Pirro just runs a credible race this becomes a black hole sucking up all the Democrats' time, money and energy while MD, FL, NE, WV, MI, etc., teeter in the balance.

Posted by Orrin Judd at August 8, 2005 4:12 PM
Comments

This has got to be one of the funniest lines I've ever read in a "news" story:

"More serious, some analysts say, is the shadow that Mr. Pirro's husband, Albert J. Pirro Jr., has cast over her political career for nearly two decades."

Can even the average NYT reader of today read that without guffawing?

"...Ms. Pirro, who is also a centrist on some social issues like abortion rights and gay rights..."

Just for my own edification, what, according to the NYT style manual, would one call the "liberal" position on these two issues?

Posted by: b at August 8, 2005 4:24 PM

Why run somebody with alleged Geraldine Ferrera type husband problems and give the Dems an opening to spill their vemon into?

Posted by: erp at August 8, 2005 4:26 PM

"Why run somebody with alleged Geraldine Ferrera type husband problems and give the Dems an opening to spill their vemon into?"

Well, maybe to provide an excuse to remind people of who Hillary's husband is, and the things he did which make me eager never to see him on the public stage again.

Posted by: John Barrett Jr. at August 8, 2005 4:32 PM

This race will be an ugly cat fight. Watch the NY based media try and direct interest elsewhere and "tut,tut" editorials.

Posted by: Luciferous at August 8, 2005 5:04 PM

If Pirro can be tarred by her husband' s actions, then of course the same can't be said of St.Hillary! when it comes to her husband de jure's past behavior. After all, she spent those 8 years baking cookies and being a dutiful little housewife.

Then again, New York is probably one of the few states where reminding the voters of Bubba is probably not a negative.

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at August 8, 2005 7:07 PM

Pirro probably won't win given Hillary's saint status on blue state NY but hopefully she can make Hillary sweat and spend $ and provide some ammunition to the GOP for '08.

Posted by: AWW at August 8, 2005 7:16 PM

Pirro is enough of a street fighter to get under Hillary's skin in a way I think Cox can't -- any attack by him will be spun into a "he's being mean to a woman" allegation that the Clinton campaign used on Rick Lazio, when he crossed the stage to confront Hillary during the debate. A charge like that shouldn't work after all these years of equal rights indoctrination, especially in New York and especially with this candidate, but the 2000 race showed it's still effective.

As for the husband problem, that wasn't going to work against the missus anyway, so its just as well both candidates' hubbies are tarred. Better Pirro run on the issues and from a suburban New York City base with an obvious ethnic background -- that may not beat Hillary, but it may be enough both to give her a scare and possibly force her to move towards the left, in order to make sure the Democratic Party base remembers to show up and vote in November. That could come in handy for the GOP when the 2008 election season rolls around.

Posted by: John at August 8, 2005 11:30 PM

Heard her on Hannity for a few minutes last night. Seems like a tough, no-nonsense lady. I'd like to hear a debate if they have one. She did say she was pro-choice.

Posted by: Rick T. at August 9, 2005 9:44 AM
« IF YOU CAN'T COMPETE YOU DEMAND A MONOPOLY: | Main | GODSPEED: »