« Is Coleman Team Giving Up On The Noble Cause Of Forgery? | Home | Who's Psyched For That Fiscal Responsibility Summit? »
White House Blames Judd Gregg -- And He Does, Too
White House press secretary Robert Gibbs has just released this statement, putting the blame for Judd Gregg's withdrawal squarely on Gregg -- that Gregg had said at the outset they could work together despite economic policy differences, then didn't follow through:
"Senator Gregg reached out to the President and offered his name for Secretary of Commerce. He was very clear throughout the interviewing process that despite past disagreements about policies, he would support, embrace, and move forward with the President's agenda. Once it became clear after his nomination that Senator Gregg was not going to be supporting some of President Obama's key economic priorities, it became necessary for Senator Gregg and the Obama administration to part ways. We regret that he has had a change of heart."
Late Update: It turns out Judd Gregg blames Judd Gregg, too:
"I couldn't be Judd Gregg and serve in the Cabinet. I should have faced up to the reality of that earlier," Gregg said. "I've been my own person and I began to wonder if I could be an effective team player. The president deserves someone who can block for his policies. As a practical matter I can contribute to his agenda better -- where we agree -- as a senator and I hope to do that."
Advertisement
Josh
Matt
Eric
Brian
Good for Obama! When this administration tries to work with Republicans, and gets bad faith bullshit in return, it needs to be front page news.
February 12, 2009 5:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really think this will spin badly for the GOP as a whole. This is lack of bipartisanship in all it's glory.
February 12, 2009 5:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
If he's an example of the GOP, they're a bunch of people, like bush, who do little reflection and seem not even to know themselves! Bodes very ill for their party!
February 12, 2009 5:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
For those of you who haven't heard yet, Gregg said he would NOT run for re-election in 2010! So Dems still have a shot at an open seat.
February 12, 2009 5:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
All this strongly suggests that Gregg's move was calculated partisan politics, and it underscores this fundamental truth of modern politics: the Republican Party can not, and will not, put partisan politics aside for the good of the country.
February 12, 2009 5:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Couldn't agree more. The only way to minimize partisanship in D.C. is not send fewer and fewer republicans to Hill every time.
But O should feel disappointed for a series of failed nominations.
February 12, 2009 5:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Snowe, Collins and Specter certainly did. What Obama needs to be doing is finding more who are willing to work together. Not only is this good for the country, it exposes the rest for what they are.
February 12, 2009 5:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
True, besides didn't Gregg even sidestep if he'd have voted for the stimulus? I'd love to know what happened: Did McConnell and McCain corner him in some dark recess of the Capitol and threaten his family?
February 12, 2009 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep, and that's how this will play out here in flyover country. GOPers are not team players and can't put anything aside for the country they ran right into the ground....
February 12, 2009 5:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Anyone who thinks this looks bad for Obama is probably just skittish or trolly or both.
This is horrible for the GOP and horrible for Gregg. Obama reached out and offered a Republican member a cabinet position (as he said he would during the campaign), and the Republican accepted the job. Only to turn around and say the differences were too great, which is another way of saying: yeah, I can't really return the bi-partisan outreach and work with this president. F*ck it.
The GOP looks more and more like a party that cannot or will not work with an enormously popular president, and frankly they don't know what to do. Obama is playing all of this beautifully.
February 12, 2009 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with you on a larger point.
This Hurts the GOP.
But, following the series of failed nominations, the White House will not get complete acquittal in the public opnion.
February 12, 2009 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bingo.
What the proponents of Obama adopting an overtly and aggressive partisan stance have underestimated is the political value of exposing just how much the Republican party has become captive to their own out of touch ideology and cannot even figure out how to put "Country First."
If the Obama administration had come out swinging then they would have lost the PR war immediately and the Republicans could justify their intemperate and immature oppositional stance as defense against the majority's bullying. Instead we have repeated efforts by the President to be civil, conciliatory, even friendly, and he is getting rudely and childishly rebuffed at every opportunity. He has laid bare for the American people the true nature of the republican party in a way far more understandable than the arcana of policy.
This will work for him the same way that being willing to talk to our enemies overseas was always a good idea. If they refuse to unclench the fist, when an outstretched hand is offered, then they look like jerks who deserve what they get.
February 12, 2009 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, Gregg looks doubly bad.
First, he sought out and accepted a cabinet position out of pure ego -- he was obviously dazzled by the thought of being a cabinet member, and one from the opposition party at that. Wouldn't that be cool! I gotta get me some of that!
Then, when he realized he was actually a bad fit for the cabinet -- when he admitted to himself that he didn't actually share Obama's policy beliefs and goals -- he exited in such a way as to damage Obama as much as possible.
Classy guy.
February 12, 2009 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ditto. Gregg, who first wanted to abolish the Commerce Department, offers his name as Secretary. Obama considers this and offers him the job, in good faith, and in keeping with his campaign pledge. Then Gregg pulls this?
It is Gregg that looks wishy-washy, petty and further underscores that Republicans can't escape Rush Limbaugh partisanship. This makes *Gregg* look bad, not Obama, and he's not lost anything at all--except any reason to take republicans seriously. And the public, seeing Republican pettiness, won't blame him.
Silly rethugs...either way, this was a win-win for Obama: Offer the position, and Obama looks magnanimous; have the offer rejected, and Republicans look partisan. Especially when rethugs are wailing about the importance of bipartisanship and such.
Yeah, rethugs...keep digging.
February 12, 2009 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
All us sane people seem to agree. It's kind of sad that the MSM can't get off the "THIS IS A TERRIBLE PROBLEM!!!!!! FOR OBAMA!!!!!!!! narrative they've been stuck on since before the election, but no one outside the Beltway seems to be buying it so far.
February 12, 2009 6:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yup. I think back to the campaign, when many of us on left wanted Obama to 'attack' more. He knew better then, and still does now, I think.
February 12, 2009 9:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Score a political b**ch slap for Obama :-)
February 12, 2009 5:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agree with some of the other posters, I don't see how this can possibly wind up looking anything but terrible for the Republicans. The Democrats have a perfect opportunity here to build a narrative of the Obama administration bending over backward to accomodate and work with Republicans and the Republicans responding to each overture by spitting in his face in the most nasty, unnecessary way possible...
I guess what confuses me is, why today? Why not monday? Does this have any impact on the stimulus vote that's supposed to be coming soon?
February 12, 2009 5:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Better yet, Obama gets ALLLLLLLLL the benefit that comes with nominating a Republican, but now can choose a Democrat without anyone being able to say, 'He's not really keeping his promise of reaching out to Republicans for his cabinet.'
Wow. We may be seeing a Republican Party that is--and I mean this very seriously--way too fractured and panicked to come up with any effective strategy for meaningful electoral or political success in the next two years.
Could there be a third Democratic wave in 2010? Would there be a precedent?
February 12, 2009 5:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
So far, it's looking like another wave in 2010. Any of you without a federal election in 2010, keep Missouri in mind if you want to volunteer and work on a Senatorial campaign. We have a good candidate in Robin Carnahan.
February 12, 2009 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
It would be hard to characterize the Republican party as anything but clueless. A lot has been written about them and the death spiral, but they seem, if anything, to be hastening it. They may have to hit rock bottom before they can begin their 12-step program and kick their addiction to ideological pure, but failing policies.
If the stimulus package works (and really, how can you spend $800B without a stimulative effect?) the R's will look like even bigger chumps for opposing it. In the Senate the R's will be defending three open seats in OH, MO and FL, and I'd imagine Gregg didn't help himself any, either. Barring a catastrophe, I think a 3rd wave is almost a certainty.
February 12, 2009 5:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Great point.
But I'm fully expecting a series of op-ed pieces in the Times and the Post earnestly explaining why this just reflects the "immaturity" (Katie Parker) of Obama.
Meanwhile, out here in reality-land, Republicans are going to be viewed as hyper-partisan.
February 12, 2009 5:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
And remember, it doesn't have to be a very big wave to get to 60 Democrats.
February 12, 2009 5:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
And if Gregg now tries to vote against the Stimulus Package in any way that threatens it, what a political beating the GOP will take from the public. It will damage them significantly with a public that will see Gregg's vote as the reason for rejecting Obama's cabinet offer. What a colossal mistake that would be.
Can Gregg affect the deal at this point?
February 12, 2009 5:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow, if Gregg votes against the stimulus package, what a heyday.
February 12, 2009 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
His abstention was effectively a NAY vote already. The only plus for him is if he votes for it, which puts him in dutch with his party. He's in a serious lose-lose situation.
February 12, 2009 5:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am watching Judd Gregg's press conference and he looks and sounds like a guy who knows he just lost his reelection bid in 2010.
February 12, 2009 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
It was mentioned up above that he is not running again.
February 12, 2009 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sen Gregg just said he "probably not running" for reelection. But if he isnt then why not take the job?
February 12, 2009 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Apparently, there is a federal investigating that may soon knock this Gregg's door.
I'll tune into Fox News to get rest of the facts.
February 12, 2009 5:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
OMG. Why don't they just investigate the whole House and Senate, I swear, is there no one that is clean anymore? And does anyone know what is up with the Coleman thing? I thought he was in trouble too, and I haven't heard a word.
February 12, 2009 5:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Something smells rotten here. I'm with kash79 in thinking that something has come up about Gregg's background and we just haven't heard about it yet. No one asks for a job like this, and then "discovers" that they can't do the job.
February 12, 2009 5:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Either something's fishy or Gregg's a doofus. He's not new to Washington. Does he really mean to say that he asked for the job, got Reid to recommend him, then just discovered that "Holy shit! A cabinet member is supposed to carry out the President's policies! Who knew?"
But I wouldn't necessarily assume anything criminal. I think it's more likely the GOP leaned on him when they realized that they just added one more open seat they had to defend in 2010.
February 12, 2009 5:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
ROTFLMAO!
What I don't get in all of this, if it was, in fact, pressure from other Republicans, why he succumbed to it. He had a pretty nice job, wouldn't have had to run for re-election in two years, and so on.
He was trying to think about the Republican Party? And made himself look like an indecisive and not very bright ingrate in the process? Something doesn't seem quite right.
February 12, 2009 5:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Especially since it appears he's leaning toward not running in 2010. That would explain why he wanted the job in the first place.
Did Gregg just not do his homework and not discuss policies with Obama before agreeing to the job? Could it be that simple?
February 12, 2009 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
What does karl rove have on this guy?
February 12, 2009 6:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wasn't thrilled with Gregg as Commerce Secretary, although I certainly appreciated that the optics of the nomination looked GREAT for the Obama Administration.
But I have to give Gregg props for saying, in essence, that he wouldn't have been able to be the advocate for Obama that he needed to have been. That's a rare example of candor, and I applaud him for it.
February 12, 2009 5:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
February 12, 2009 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
JohnMcCSF for Biggest Maroon Since Judd Gregg.
February 12, 2009 6:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well you know, I would name Michael Moore. Sorry guys, you had your chance and missed it
February 12, 2009 6:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can't somebody subpoena the skeleton that lives in Gregg's closet so we can drag him into court to explain himself? Are Norm Coleman's lawyers capable of this? What if we offer to pay them?
February 12, 2009 6:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Coleman's lawyers specialize in introducing evidence phantoms. Skeletons are things they endeavor to keep in the closet.
February 12, 2009 7:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why can't Obama simply abolish the Commerce Sec cabinet position, what good is it in this economy anyway?
Obama needs to create a new cabinet position on Technology tasked with bringing the nation into the 21st century and digitalization of all major industries, such as health care and all federal agencies. As well as responsiblity for wiring the nation. That would create jobs.
February 12, 2009 8:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Coitus interuptus is not a fatal affliction. I know!
February 12, 2009 9:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't buy it one bit. This guy was just about to have his confirmation hearing and backs out with some bullshit about needing to be true to this party ideology?
That is a load of smack. There's gotta be more to this that we don't know of yet.
February 12, 2009 10:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
THIS IS EXCELLENT NEWS!!!! FOR MICHAEL STEELE!!
February 12, 2009 11:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
There's a rumor that Gregg and/or his staff have been implicated in the Abramoff investigation. If this is true, it would explain his sudden withdrawal from the Commerce spot and his statement that he possibly won't be a candidate in 2010.
February 13, 2009 7:01 AM | Reply | Permalink