The Times has always been close to Bloomberg, as is evident again in the story's lede:
He gripes about her in private conversations with his aides and her colleagues on Capitol Hill. He has yet to take up her invitation to sit down for dinner. And his political team is constantly shopping for potential candidates to oust her.
As New York experiences a tumultuous election season, one question is captivating political insiders: Why does Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg so dislike Senator Kirsten E. Gillibrand?
The story never really answers that question, because to do so would mean bringing up the issue of Caroline Kennedy's maladroit candidacy for the appointment.
The story recounts how Bloomberg and his minions have been advising/encouraging several potential Gillibrand challengers -- former Bush/Cheney war-flack Dan Senor most lately, but also Long Island Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, Harold Ford, and fellow Manhattan billionaire Mortimer Zuckerman. (Manhattan Rep. Carolyn Maloney's short-lived, but nasty, challenge is oddly unmentioned, though Bloomberg types worked on that, too.)
And Bloomberg's political operation leaked this week that his "gal pal" Diana Taylor has been speaking to national-level Republicans about running against Gillibrand.
The only direct Bloomberg quote in the story (from a news conference) is complimentary of Gillibrand:
I think she has been a very competent senator. Hasn't done everything I would like. She's a woman who makes her own decisions. But in most things, she has been very helpful.
Bloomberg has his operatives do the dirty work anonymously, like in this bit about Bloomberg's first visit to Gillibrand in Washington:
The mayor went to Ms. Gillibrand's Washington office, prepared for a robust debate on gun issues. After all, Ms. Gillibrand, who had represented an upstate Congressional district, had long opposed gun restrictions, and the mayor was a leading advocate of them.
Instead, she offered to introduce an antigun bill, according to two people with direct knowledge of the meeting.
But rather than reassuring him, the offer aroused suspicion that Ms. Gillibrand lacked conviction, a grievous flaw in the eyes of a man who prides himself on his willingness to stand up for principles, whatever the political cost.
"It was the worst thing she could have done with Mike Bloomberg," said a top Bloomberg adviser.
Gillibrand's position on gun control matters naturally evolved as she went from representing a suburban/rural/Republican upstate Congressional district to representing the entire state.
Bloomberg should have been thankful, instead he has his people diss Gillibrand as unprincipled. As if only billionaire politicians are willing to "stand up for principles, whatever the political cost."
On another issue, the fiscal impact on the city of changes in Medicaid reimbursements in the health care reform bill, the story notes that Bloomberg has publicly blamed Gillibrand for that.
Bloomberg did not similarly criticize Chuck Schumer, who also voted for the bill and had far more influence on the bill than a freshman Senator.
Gillibrand is trying to mend fences with Bloomberg, but his serial promotion/encouragement of challengers to her must be grating.
Especially since, IMO, there is nothing she can do or say to change Bloomberg's conceit that that Senate seat should be held by someone who is personally beholden to him.
Which Gillibrand, thankfully, is not. |
