Paterson to Obama: Pffffttttt!!!!

Earlier today, Obama administration asks Gov. Paterson not to seek reelection in 2010.

Well, it didn’t take long for Paterson to give Obama the raspberry:
Paterson Says He Will Run, Rejecting Call From Obama

Gov. David A. Paterson defiantly vowed to run for election next year despite the White House‘s urging that he withdraw from the New York governor’s race.
…
“I have said time and time again that I am running for governor next year,” he said at the 40th annual African-American Day Parade.

Mr. Paterson would not characterize what he was told by the White House, saying that he would not “discuss confidential conversations.”

“I’m not talking about any specific conversations,” he said. “As I said, I am running for office.”

President Obama had sent a request to Mr. Paterson that he withdraw from the New York governor’s race, fearing that Mr. Paterson cannot recover from his dismal political standing, according to two senior administration officials and a New York Democratic operative with direct knowledge of the situation.

The decision to ask Mr. Paterson to step aside was proposed by political advisers to Mr. Obama, but approved by the president himself, one of the administration officials said.

As you may recall, Paterson was not elected; instead, he became governor following Eliot Spitzer’s resignation over a sex scandal involving prostituties.

Why did Obama ask?

The general election is more than a year away, but Mr. Obama and his political team are moving now in part because of signals from Rudolph W. Giuliani, the former New York City mayor, that he may run for governor, according to Democrats who have spoken with White House officials. Many Democratic leaders believe that Mr. Giuliani’s presence at the top of the Republican ticket could spark enthusiasm among his party’s voters, who might otherwise have little desire to go to the polls.

Should a President be involved in state politics to this extent? James Joyner says,

A sitting president has long been considered the nominal “head” of his party. Obama seems to be taking that to its logical conclusion. There’s not really any reason he shouldn’t use his influence behind the scenes in this manner, although it’s yet another step down the rather depressing road of presidents thinking they actually “run the country” rather than just heading up one of three branches of the central government in a federal system.

What do you think?

And, would Giuliani present a formidable challenge to a Democrat?

UPDATE
It’s happened in Minnesota