Of course, first he would have to come to grips with the futility of his position which he clearly isn't grasping yet. Or maybe he is and he wants to use it as leverage for an appointment elsewhere.

Was it necessary to deliberately try to humiliate the guy in public as part of the tactic?  If I'm remembering the timeline, he was told over dinner Saturday night, and the story was given (clearly not "leaked," carefully given) to the NYTimes immediately.  Sounds like payback for Patterson's clumsy public hastening of Caroline Kennedy's withdrawal.

I have to wonder if doing that isn't a potentially fatal misreading of Paterson's temperament.

I guess it's good to see Rahm is able to throw those razor sharp elbows against somebody other than Howard Dean, but I'd far rather see them used against, oh, say some of the Blue Dogs in Congress.

This kind of thing goes on all the time, and is often rumored.  But I can't remember the last time the story was given to the major local newspaper at the same time as it is to the weakened pol in question.

Our D should put up some good D. So far, the Jets feel dif this year, it's early yet . . . and I should know better . . . but one can hope!

Besides, if it weren't for the fact that I am getting ready to go out to lunch, I would still be sitting outside enjoying what has to be one of the most beautiful days we've had in quite some time; could it get any better to be able to sit out on the deck and eat breakfast and read the paper, and then sit back and just marvel at the cloudless blue sky, listen to the birds and feel the sun on your face, and hear the whisper of the breeze in the trees?

And the Sanchise did just enough...nice bounce back from a rough first half.