Talk:Andrew Cuomo

I'm no fan of Andrew Cuomo, but this article definitely appears to include a ton of bias.

This main articles mention of Cuomo's time with HUD appears to be misleading.

Lucy Komisar’s article:

  "Fees for Our Friends: the Scandal that Taints Andre ..." 
  (The Komisar Scoop, August 22, 2006; http://thekomisarscoop.com/2006/08/22/fees-for-our-friends-the-scandal-that-taints-andrew-cuomo/ )

is a very interesting contrast to that taken by the writer of the original bio.

POV

If anyone wants to recover anything NPOV from this, go ahead. Cory.willis 04:01, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

---

This stuff below is uncited and controversial. It doesn't belong in a wikipedia article--->>

Before Cuomo became Secretary, HUD was seen as among the most wasteful and corrupt agencies in the Federal Government. It was the only cabinet-level agency seen as a "high risk" by the Government Accountability Office. Cuomo continued the HUD tradition of insider corruption and fees for his friends. He ended a policy, started by his predecessor, Cisneros, to sell defaulted mortgages, thus allowing families to keep their homes. Instead he went back to the system of foreclosing them, making profits for insiders that bought defaulted properties and throwing families out on the street.

Later, as reported in The New York Observer, one of the insiders, Andrew Farkas, paid him fees of over half a million dollars. The Village Voice raised that to $1.2 million. And nearly a million dollars in campaign contributions.

When Cuomo was secretary, HUD reported that $59 billion was missing! Cuomo couldn’t say where the money went, because he failed to produce audited financial statements.

Extraodinary claims need extraordinary proof -- but there are no cites at all to the above. -- Sholom 19:24, 6 September 2006 (UTC)

Deleted, as it's been several days without a cite.

Now, what about the "Controversy" section at the end, which is poorly written and appears to link to a blog ("the Komisar Scoop")? Shouldn't that be obliterated as well?--RattBoy 00:29, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Repeated Reversions by user 4.167.*.*

Can 4.167.* be blocked from editing this article? He continually reverts it to his uncited and non-neutral version,, which usually contains potentially libelous statements, long quotes, and a lot of poor writing at that. He has not provided any citation or any response on the talk page. He also refers to any revisions as a Cuomo campaign thing (and for the record, I'm voting for Green tomorrow), this has got to stop. Steve McLinden 03:04, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

-Came here to do research for a civics assignment. All of this appears to be loaded content. Even the picture makes him look like a Neanderthal.

Disruptive edits

Edits such as this [1] are disruptive. Do not use all caps, editorialize, or include unsourced POV rants on this article. We're building an encyclopedia here, not waging a political campaign. Thanks. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 00:28, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

The various 4.167.*.* IPs that have been continuously reverting to POV versions have been warned with messages like this: "Please see WP:RS and WP:BLP about what types of sources and statements are acceptable for living people." Hopefully they'll engage in discussion here to see if a neutrally-written version of their desired content might be suitable for inclusion in the article. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 01:24, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

== Accomplishments

This article needs more substance. Stuff about HUD's NRA gun suit [2], [the KKK suit [3], etc. There's nothing in here for somebody who wants more than a basic resume. This obviously shouldn't be a source, but the claims should be mentioned: [4].

For an example of the proper way to talk about these things: Madeline Albright, William Cohen.

newspaper citations about Cuomo

The fan of Cuomo who has been inserting favorable material and deleting unfavorable material ought to follow the citations. Major publications such as the NYTimes and Washington Post have written about Cuomo in ways that raise serious questions about his integrity. To ignore that is to write pap.

For example: Cuomo lied in his hearing about being under investigation relating to a crooked banking operation, but Attorney General Janet Reno gave him a pass. (“Banking On Andy Cuomo,” by Sam Dealey & James Ring Adams, The American Spectator, Jan. 1999.

The details from The Spectator: The Senate Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee had a form. The form was entitled "Statement for Completion by Presidential Nominees." The nominee was President Clinton's choice for housing secretary, 41-year-old Andrew Cuomo, who was to complete the questionnaire and return it before his confirmation hearing in January 1997. Simple, no? Evidently not.

One question read: "Give the full details of any civil or criminal proceeding in which you were a defendant, or any inquiry or investigation by a Federal, State, or local agency in which you were the subject of an inquiry or investigation." One of the cases he listed, Smith v. Cuomo, et al., had been brought against him and others by the owner of a south-Florida savings and loan, alleging an illegal takeover attempt. But Cuomo failed to disclose a later suit, brought by the S&L itself, and settled only two months before his hearing.

Why? Perhaps because Oceanmark v. Cuomo, et al. revealed that in 1988, federal banking regulators investigated Cuomo and fellow investors for possible change-in-control violations. The nominee should have listed that investigation, too, in answer to the second part of the question. He did not.

Reno's failure to act noted in Washington Post, Sept. 9, 1998 http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/campfin/stories/reno090998.htm]

When Cuomo was secretary, HUD reported that $59 billion was missing. Cuomo couldn’t say where the money went, because he failed to produce audited financial statements. ("Why Is $59 Billion Missing From HUD? - United States. Department of Housing and Urban Development" Insight on the News, Nov 6, 2000 by Kelly Patricia O'Meara.) [5]

As reported in The New York Observer, one of the real estate insiders, Andrew Farkas, paid Cuomo fees of over half a million dollars. A Village Voice exposé by Wayne Barrett says the fees went up to $1.2 million, plus an $800,000 campaign contribution. It noted that HUD under Cuomo let Farkas escape punishment for serious housing violations. "Andrew Cuomos's $2 million man," at http://villagevoice.com/news/0636,lozano,74361,6.html

That was part of a culture of corruption during the Cuomo HUD administration, as described in "Fees for Our Friends," by Lucy Komisar at http://thekomisarscoop.com/2006/08/22/fees-for-our-friends-the-scandal-that-taints-andrew-cuomo/.

Finally, when The New York Times endorsed Cuomo's opponent, Mark Green, it made reference to Cuomo's use of HUD to promote his own political career. The Times wrote:

"Mr. Cuomo’s record at HUD was mixed, and is one cause of our concern about how he would handle the job of attorney general. Before Mr. Spitzer restored it to top professional status, the office was a nesting place for political hacks. It would be unfortunate to see it politicized again by any attorney general whose chief concern was burnishing a political resume. And during Mr. Cuomo’s time in the Clinton cabinet, his first concern did not always seem to be housing. As he left HUD, Mr. Cuomo’s operation produced a 150-page report of his accomplishments that included a CD and pictures of the secretary with celebrities like Sarah Jessica Parker. It cost the taxpayers a whopping $688,000 to produce what amounted to future campaign fodder.

Mr. Cuomo did make gains in housing for the homeless at the huge agency, but there were real problems with his performance. For New Yorkers, the worst failure was insufficient oversight of a federal housing rehabilitation program so overrun by dishonest appraisers, brokers and lenders that it devastated parts of Brooklyn and Harlem. Mr. Spitzer even sued one participant in this program during the Cuomo years and cited “massive fraud” that was increasing neighborhood blight."

Why don't you read the actual articles and see the documentation? If you think an article about a political figure should be limited to facts about school graduation, jobs held, marriage, etc. that's a resume, or a listing in Who's Who, not an article for an encyclopedia, of any sort.

By the way, look up Cuomo's connection to Michael Blutrich, whose law firm he joined as a $150,000-a-year partner in 1985. In 1994, Blutrich pled gulity to sexual assault of a minor and having child pornography. Do you really want an attorney general who can't figure out (or doesn't care) that his law partner is a pedophile? Or a crook? In 1998, Blutrich was charged with racketeering, pled guilty to looting an insurance company in Florida of $237 million, some of which went into a business controlled by the Gambino crime family. He went to jail. (From the American Spectator article. James Ring Adams, one of its authors, coauthored "A Full Service Bank," one of the BCCI books, and was a reporter for the Wall Street Journal.)

The Spectator says: "Andrew Cuomo would like to play down his close relationship with Blutrich and dismiss it as a thing of the distant past, but financial disclosure documents show a relationshiplasting practically to the day of Cuomo's Senate confirmation hearing as HUD secretary in 1997."

The purpose of a Wikipedia article ought to be to tell the truth, not to promote a candidacy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.167.246.37 01:45, September 15, 2006 (talk • contribs)

No, the purpose of Wikipedia is to provide verifable facts, not The Truth -- which is why we demand iron-clad reliable sources for things, especially those concerning living people. What is also true about Wikipedia is that it's not for the purpose of promoting of bloggers like Lucy Komisar, who ought to go elsewhere if they're looking for publicity and notoriety. --Calton | Talk 01:57, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

Facts vs Truth?

Stop playing words games. Facts are presumably true; that makes them facts and that makes them truth.

Why don't you follow the links in the above commentary, all of which lead to articles by experienced journalists who provide detailed documentation?

Lucy Komisar, by the way, is an investigative journalist with 40 years experience who has published in The New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Christian Science Monitor, Wall Street Journal, Miami Herald, Chicago Tribune, Newsday, Boston Globe, Baltimore Sun, Atlanta Journal and Constitution, San Francisco Chronicle, St. Louis Post Dispatch, San Diego Union, Philadelphia Inquirer, Arizona Republic, Toledo Blade, Sacramento Bee, Toronto Star, Minneapolis Star, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, The Progressive, The Nation, The New Republic, Salon, The Observer (London), El País (Madrid), The Russia Journal, CorpWatch and Alternet.

Do a google check.

She does not need lectures on reporting from people with no experience in the field.

I'm very curious about your motivation for protecting the tattered reputation of Andrew Cuomo.

I can't speak for others, but my only motivation is to avoid POV-pushing. which statements like this reveal is your goal. Verifiable facts with reliable sources, presented in with a neutral point of view are fine, but much of what you've been inserting does not fit these requirements for inclusion in an encyclopedia article about a living person. --ZimZalaBim (talk) 13:31, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Another thing that people are missing is the NY Daily News endorsement of Green, which said,in part:

"As would be expected, Cuomo is ambitious. He has aspired to rise in politics since serving at a young age as right hand to his father, Mario. This drive brought Cuomo success while also, at times, prompting him to place his own interests over a greater good.

"He accompanied significant accomplishments at HUD with expensive self-promotion. In his first attempt at elective office, a run for governor four years ago, he raised $12.4 million from supporters and then quit the race a week before the primary. Then he accused the party establishment of shunning him in favor of state Controller Carl McCall because McCall was trying to become New York's first black governor.

"I was an arrogant interloper, interfering on his turf," Cuomo told New York Times columnist Bob Herbert. "I came from Washington. Came here. Didn't wait in line and came here and said, 'I'm going to run.' And got in the way of the first African-American."

"Most disturbing were Cuomo's actions when his marriage to Kerry Kennedy, daughter of Robert F. Kennedy - a union heralded as the melding of two political clans - broke up after his gubernatorial humiliation. Worried about further political damage, he authorized an accusatory public statement about his wife at a time that demanded discretion for the sake of the couple's three children and their relationship with their mother. Career and image trumped family.

"As we wrote then, Cuomo "looks desperate to protect his public image and political career." Such a skewing of values leads to the question of whether, based on character, Cuomo should be entrusted with the responsibility of applying the law evenhandedly to friend and adversary, without calculation as to political benefit. That we feel compelled to ask is answer in itself."

http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:TTXCxwlppMoJ:www.nydailynews.com/news/ideas_opinions/story/450300p-378998c.html+green+yes,+cuomo+no&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1