Gillibrand Loses Another Challenger

[wyldwolf]

Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer (D) has decided not to challenge Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) in a primary, the Albany Times-Union reports.

Said Stringer: "In light of President Obama's clear desire to avoid a Democratic primary in New York State, I have decided to focus on my re-election race for Manhattan Borough President and to suspend my exploratory committee and fund-raising efforts for the 2010 Senate race."

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2009/05/20/gillibrand_loses_another_challenger.html

[Captain Hilts]

1. Huh? It's Pres Obama's fault you aren't running? Anybody know the polling numbers? nt

[Renew Deal]

2. Yes, 100-0

She's not running against anyone credible.

[Perky]

3. QUid Pro quos are being handed out by the Schummer and the DSCC

[rvablue]

6. I guess that's one way of looking at it. Another could be

why spend money on a primary fight in NY State when we could be increasing our numbers by spending our resources on contested states, where there is a battle in the general election.

Maybe like in Kentucky, where it looks like Bunning is not going to step aside. McConnell barely won re-election there last year and there is a decent chance of picking up a Democratic Senator in a red state.

So far, nobody has provided any proof that Gillibrand isn't doing a decent job in the Senate and hasn't been voting with the Democratic caucus.

I haven't seen her on these lists that DUers put out, showing how some "Blue Dogs" aren't voting with the rest of the party.

And I don't really care how she voted or what she supported as Congressperson. That's in the past, as far as I'm concerned.

If she's helping the party and helping Democratic policies pass now, then why stir up a primary fight (especially in a state that is bound to vote for the Dem in a general)-- all it will do is take resources away from other races where we might increase our numbers.

[Freddie Stubbs]

9. She has voted with the Democrats 97.1% of the time since becoming a Senator:

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/111/senate/party-voters/

[rvablue]

12. Sounds pretty good to me. No huge need to waste the money, time and unity

[billyoc]

34. Attention to detail, that's the key.

You need it.

http://kansasprogress.com/wordpress/index.php/2009/05/05/pollster-on-ny-2010-possible-races/

Gillibrand is a General Election disaster.

[ronnykmarshall]

4. Who was the Congresswoman that was going to run?

Mahoney? Is she still running?

[TheWraith]

16. Maloney and McCarthy haven't bowed out yet.

But neither one really looks to have much of a chance, in my opinion.

[totodeinhere]

5. What are the Dems in NY thinking? If Gillibrand runs in the general we risk losing that...

senate seat to the GOP.

[Muttocracy]

7. you really think a NY senate seat is at risk of going to the GOP next year? nt

[wyldwolf]

8. why do you say that?

[totodeinhere]

10. Gillibrand is a DINO running in a liberal state.

Rudy Giuliani has a lot of name recognition and if he decides to run he will be well financed. Given a choice between two conservatives, why not go with Rudy rather than an appointed senator who doesn't represent the majority views of her state? Remember that the GOP, while a minority party in NY, has won many statewide elections there.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rvablue]

13. Something tells me you would have slapped the same label on Clinton.

And she won NY state twice, with a decent margin to boot!

[wyldwolf]

14. and Schumer

[TheWraith]

138. Ironically, Gillibrand is substantially more liberal than either Clinton or Schumer.

It was kind of Gillibrand's appointment that dragged Schumer on board about gay marriage.

[yourguide]

58. compare Hillary's voting record to these sobering facts

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/01/the_new_frontru.php

Gillibrand has described her own voting record as "one of the most conservative in the state." She opposes any path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, supports renewing the Bush tax cuts for individuals earning up to $1 million annually, and voted for the Bush-backed FISA bill that permits wiretapping of international calls. She was one of four Democratic freshmen in the country, and the only Democrat in the New York delegation, to vote for the Bush administration's bill to extend funding for the Iraq war shortly after she entered congress in 2007. While she now contends that she's always opposed the war and has voted for bills to end it, one upstate paper reported when she first ran for the seat: "She said she supports the war in Iraq." In addition to her vote to extend funding, she also missed a key vote to override a Bush veto of a Democratic bill with Iraq timetables.

But it's her votes on the bailout bills -- which pleased no one but were widely seen as vital to the national and New York economies -- that could become the most damaging ammunition against her should she run statewide in 2010. She was one of 63 Democrats to break with the other 172 party members in the House and vote against the second bill, which she called "fundamentally flawed."

[Muttocracy]

15. You just wrecked your own argument

If NY is a "liberal state", the majority will vote for the more liberal candidate. Gillibrand is more liberal than Rudy the joke. By your logic, the majority would NOT vote for the GOP. If you think Gillibrand doesn't represent the majority views, why the hell would Rudy?

Gillibrand is more moderate than some of her potential challengers, which would lead to her pulling Dem, Independent, and GOP voters.

And as for remembering, perhaps you haven't been following what's happened recently to the GOP #s in NY's US House seats, NY Assembly, and NY Senate.

[TheWraith]

17. Evidently you haven't checked your facts.

Gillibrand votes 97% with the party in the Senate, voted 93% with the party during her entire stay in the House, is pro-gay-marriage, pro-medicare-for-all, and anti-war.

[ronnykmarshall]

20. Shhhhh!

Don't tell them THAT!!

She's a .....

[totodeinhere]

21. She used to be one of the NRA's best friends in Congress.

Remember her comment that she kept two guns under her bed? She might be trying to come off as more moderate now, but I doubt if everybody will fall for that.

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/politics/ny-usgill0217,0,903835.story

Also, she used to be ambivalent on gay marriage saying that the issue should be left to the states, but then due to political expediency she decided to modify her position.

And then the question of whether you call it a marriage or not, what you label it, that can be left to the states to decide. (It’s) so culturally oriented. My mom’s generation, they want their gay friends to have every right and privilege that they should be eligible for as a married couple, but they feel uncomfortable calling it marriage. To them, a marriage is a religious word that they learned from the Catholic Church: It’s a covenant between a man, a woman, and God. So they feel uncomfortable with the word. But they don’t feel uncomfortable with the rights and privileges.

I think the way you win this issue is you focus on getting the rights and privileges protected throughout the entire country, and then you do the state-by-state advocacy for having the title.

http://www.insideouthv.com/Features/gillibrand.html

[Occam Bandage]

22. Being in favor of 2nd-Amendment rights is not incompatible with being a Democrat.

In D.C. v. Heller the Supreme Court declared that personal firearm rights are Constitutionally protected under the Second Amendment.

I'm glad her position on gay marriage is even more liberal than it used to be. Why would you complain about a politician moving to the left once they get to the Senate? Isn't that what you would hope to see?

[totodeinhere]

24. I prefer someone who had views similar to mine in the first place.

I have been burned too many times by politicians who found the need to bend with the political winds.

New York liberals intensify criticism of Gillibrand (and Paterson)

Gillibrand has talked extensively against granting “amnesty” to undocumented immigrants, strengthening patrols and security fences on the Southern border, and denying immigrants driving licenses. Fliers have surfaced in which Gillibrand touts her positions (see below), and while these might be fine in NY-20, they certainly can cause a huge amount of trouble for Gillibrand in a blue state like New York.

She is also a conservative on immigration issues.

[Occam Bandage]

27. *shrug* I'm not going to punish politicians for moving in the right direction. nt

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

120. And you can vote for that person in Nevada.

You do not get a say in this race.

[joeybee12]

55. As opposed to the hypocrite Guiliani who snubs his best friends...WHO LET HIM STAY

at their home when he got tossed out during his nasty divorce...and don't go to their wedding solely for political expediency.

[rvablue]

25. Two questions:

John Kerry is a gun owner. He might not "keep them under his bed," but he owns guns and goes hunting. Not my cup of tea, but I voted for him -- did you? And there is that pesky 2nd ammendment...

And would you have rathered that Gillibrand didn't "modify" her stance on gay marriage? She seems to belive it's up to the states. And that is happening right now. It's also what Obama has said. Did you vote for him? Do you want him to be primaried in 2012?

Her voting record in the Senate has been close to 100% with the Democratic caucus. So what is your beef, exactly?

[totodeinhere]

31. I would vote for her if she's the candidate. But I would prefer someone who has been a liberal...

from the get go, not someone like Gillibrand who has changed positions for political expedience. And her position of immigration reform is a real deal killer for me. (See post #24.)

[Occam Bandage]

33. So if your problem with her is that she adjusted a handful of positions to win in NY-20, and then

adjusted those positions again to appeal to NY at the state level, doesn't that completely invalidate your claim that her positions don't appeal to New York? She can't both be a dyed-in-the-wool conservative DINO who'll turn off NYers and be a chameleon who effortlessly glides from position to position in order to remain popular wherever she goes. Those are incompatible slurs.

[leftynyc]

32. Being pro-2nd amendment

doesn't make someone conservative. Plenty of liberals decided to arm themselves during the last 8 years. And I don't understand what is objectionable in your blockquote.

[TheWraith]

37. Did you read her entire spiel on gay marriage?

Her point, in case you missed it, was to start with the repeal of DOMA and a strong federal civil unions law, then to lobby state-by-state on the use of the word "marriage." And THEN the point about how a lot of older people would be made more comfortable by going first with the rights, then with the language. It's a good strategy, actually.

[Zynx]

43. So, she supports our economic and social policies, but likes guns. Therefore she is hellspawn

and must be cast out?

[Occam Bandage]

45. She's seriously one of the best Senators we have.

I don't know why people choose to spend time bashing her for guns (where she isn't out of the mainstream at all) or for her shift to the left on immigration. Disregarding the stupidity of spending our time attacking moderate Democrats instead of extremist Republicans, Gillibrand isn't even moderate. She's got one of the most liberal policy platforms and one of the most liberal voting records of any of our Senators. She's apparently inherited the mantle of "Liberal Democratic Woman From New York DUers Arbitrarily Hate" from Sen. Clinton.

[Occam Bandage]

18. She's liberal on every issue I can think of.

She's for gay marriage, EFCA, a public option on health care, the stimulus package, credit-card reform, withdrawal from Iraq, bankruptcy reform, and liberal Supreme Court nominees. The only issue she's remotely conservative on now is guns, and quite frankly being in favor of gun rights is no longer a purely conservative position. Quite a few Democrats are in favor of the entire Constitution, including the 2nd Amendment.

[yourguide]

56. What about these issues?

Gillibrand has described her own voting record as "one of the most conservative in the state." She opposes any path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, supports renewing the Bush tax cuts for individuals earning up to $1 million annually, and voted for the Bush-backed FISA bill that permits wiretapping of international calls. She was one of four Democratic freshmen in the country, and the only Democrat in the New York delegation, to vote for the Bush administration's bill to extend funding for the Iraq war shortly after she entered congress in 2007. While she now contends that she's always opposed the war and has voted for bills to end it, one upstate paper reported when she first ran for the seat: "She said she supports the war in Iraq." In addition to her vote to extend funding, she also missed a key vote to override a Bush veto of a Democratic bill with Iraq timetables.

But it's her votes on the bailout bills -- which pleased no one but were widely seen as vital to the national and New York economies -- that could become the most damaging ammunition against her should she run statewide in 2010. She was one of 63 Democrats to break with the other 172 party members in the House and vote against the second bill, which she called "fundamentally flawed."

[Occam Bandage]

83. Can you find any problems in her Senate voting record, or in any policy statements made

since she left the conservative NY-20 district and became a Senator?

[yourguide]

96. Here you go

She's already voted against oversight on the bailout money.

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/g000555/votes/against-party/

[Freddie Stubbs]

19. During the last Congress she voted with Democrats 96.4% of the time:

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/111/house/party-voters/

Someone who votes with the Republicans less than 4% of the time doesn't sound too conservative. Perhaps you should have looked at her record before you tried labeling her.

[leftynyc]

30. Rudy took a far right turn

when he decided to endorse the chimp - New Yorkers haven't forgotten that. Upstate always hated him so I have no idea where you're getting your info from. Rudy stands no chance in getting that seat.

[burning rain]

48. Rudy has a better shot running for governor.

If he were US senator, by contrast, he'd be propping up theocons, Dixiepubs, and other far-right maniacs, and New Yorkers know it. NY is one of a number of northeastern states that can elect a Republican governor, but are scarcely likely to send a GOP US senator to Washington.

[totodeinhere]

54. Or Pataki might take on Gillibrand. I don't have it right in front of me but I remember...

seeing a recent poll that had Pataki leading her in a theoretical matchup.

[whistler162]

61. Yup just like we lost her former Congressional seat!

GEEEEEZZZZZ!!

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

23. And there you have it, folks. Another DLC DINO Democrat. Really now.

Seriously, the DLC and the Blue Dogs are very well represented. They cannot complain that they aren't. They are, quite frankly, the most powerful factions in the Democratic Party. Why do we need more?

[Name removed]

26. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

28. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Occam Bandage]

29. On what issues do you disagree with her?

I assume gun rights, because many progressives seem to think the Bill of Rights includes only numbers 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8. But on which other issues do you find her too conservative?

[yourguide]

59. Is this enough for you?

Is this enough for you?

Gillibrand has described her own voting record as "one of the most conservative in the state." She opposes any path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, supports renewing the Bush tax cuts for individuals earning up to $1 million annually, and voted for the Bush-backed FISA bill that permits wiretapping of international calls. She was one of four Democratic freshmen in the country, and the only Democrat in the New York delegation, to vote for the Bush administration's bill to extend funding for the Iraq war shortly after she entered congress in 2007. While she now contends that she's always opposed the war and has voted for bills to end it, one upstate paper reported when she first ran for the seat: "She said she supports the war in Iraq." In addition to her vote to extend funding, she also missed a key vote to override a Bush veto of a Democratic bill with Iraq timetables.

But it's her votes on the bailout bills -- which pleased no one but were widely seen as vital to the national and New York economies -- that could become the most damaging ammunition against her should she run statewide in 2010. She was one of 63 Democrats to break with the other 172 party members in the House and vote against the second bill, which she called "fundamentally flawed."

[Occam Bandage]

86. Not at all, since none of that has to do with anything she's done since she joined the Senate.

Why did you highlight the votes on the bank bailout bills? Those aren't and weren't popular among progressives.

[yourguide]

95. Here's a nice long list of her votes against her party

http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/g000555/votes/against-party/

She's already voted against party 4 times since becoming a senator.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

89. Progressives DO believe in gun rights. Where are you getting this wingnut bullshit from?

[wyldwolf]

35. And there you have it, folks.

Another example of "progressive" heretic hunting.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

90. The demonization of "progressives" has been coming from the DLCers and the right wing

for over 30 years. When any of us call you out, you resort to straw man arguments, hyperbole, and act as if you are the victim. The bottom line is that the corporations own BOTH parties. Behaving as the victim does not negate that fact.

[wyldwolf]

91. the demonization of DLCers has been coming from the left wing

for over 20 years. When any of us call you out, you resort to straw man arguments, hyperbole, and act as if you are the victim. The bottom line is that "progressives" have not won many elections of consequence. Behaving as the victim does not negate that fact.

Oh, and the leftwing has been under fire since FDR expressed joy that they got beat in the '38 midterms.

And the DLC has not been around for 30 years.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

110. No, it hasn't, but pro-corporate, moderate Democrats have and that's what the DLC represents.

I don't mind the DLC; I just wished that they would not caving in to right-wing Republicans and essentially giving them everything they want.

Don't play victim here. The DLC is very powerful and influential.

[Lord Helmet]

38. You're right. Schumer called Emanuel to get Obama to stop a primary challenge

The fix is in. The dlc and blue dogs are trying to stop a primary challenge. She has flipflopped on gay marriage, immigration, labor and so forth while Schumer polishes that blue dog turd and repackages her as a liberal.

http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/schumer-and-obama-take-control--of-gillibrands-fate-in-the-primary-2009-05-18.html

Schumer and Obama take control of Gillibrand’s fate in the primary
By Aaron Blake
A major offensive is under way to make sure New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand is the Democratic nominee for Senate in 2010, and the biggest guns of all — President Obama and Sen. Charles Schumer — are leading the charge.

Obama made a splash Friday by convincing Rep. Steve Israel (D-N.Y.) not to challenge Gillibrand in a primary, and his backing provided a warning shot for any Democrats who would enter the race.

A New York Democratic source confirmed Monday that Schumer (D-N.Y.) made the call to White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, who then got Obama on the horn with Israel.

While it is evidence of friends in high places, it is also evidence of just how far askew the situation has become.

There was plenty of griping among the state’s opinionated congressional delegation when the young, centrist Gillibrand was appointed to Hillary Rodham Clinton’s old seat in January, but the situation didn’t become serious until Israel made it clear in recent days that he was ready to launch his campaign.

While Obama made the big splash, Schumer has emerged to take ownership of the situation. He was instrumental in getting Gillibrand the appointment, but his advocacy had been understated until recently.

Schumer’s fingerprints are all over Gillibrand’s appointment. And while it probably would have been safer for him and Gov. David Paterson (D) to pick a more established member like Israel, picking Gillibrand essentially gave Schumer a close and indebted ally in the state’s other Senate seat.

But that has also opened the door to a competitive Democratic primary, given Gillibrand’s conservative record on social issues like gun rights and illegal immigration. The primary chatter reached a fever pitch last week, when Israel’s entry appeared imminent. (One Democratic operative close to Israel said that nothing, short of the president’s urging, would have derailed Israel.)

Even while the Israel momentum was building, though, The New York Times quoted Schumer saying at a fundraiser that there would not be a primary.

Then came Obama. Similar pressure will undoubtedly be visited upon any other member who takes significant steps toward running, including Reps. Carolyn Maloney, Carolyn McCarthy and José Serrano.

[Occam Bandage]

39. How many blue dogs are in favor of gay marriage, EFCA, bankruptcy reform, and medicare for all?

Seriously, can you find a current position she holds on which she isn't progressive? Digging through previous positions for signs of impurity is a waste of time. Even Saint Dennis of Cleveland flip-flopped to the left on abortion rights for his 2004 run for President.

[Lord Helmet]

40. the point is she was a conservative blue dog being transformed into a "liberal" to keep the seat

[Muttocracy]

42. those are two completely different seats (NY-20 vs. Senate). nt

[Occam Bandage]

44. So the point involves admitting that her positions are all great now,

and that with two exceptions (being immigration and gay marriage) they were mostly great when she was an elected Democrat in a strongly conservative district.

I don't find a problem with Democrats switching to support gay marriage. If we want gay marriage, we're going to need a lot more Democrats to switch. I think we should reward and not punish politicians for shifting their positions in the right direction.

[Lord Helmet]

49. lol --- you are white washing her record too

http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/2009/01/kirsten-gillibrand-is-lefts-blue-dog.html

Gillibrand has described her own voting record as "one of the most conservative in the state." She opposes any path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, supports renewing the Bush tax cuts for individuals earning up to $1 million annually, and voted for the Bush-backed FISA bill that permits wiretapping of international calls. She was one of four Democratic freshmen in the country, and the only Democrat in the New York delegation, to vote for the Bush administration's bill to extend funding for the Iraq war shortly after she entered congress in 2007. While she now contends that she's always opposed the war and has voted for bills to end it, one upstate paper reported when she first ran for the seat: "She said she supports the war in Iraq." In addition to her vote to extend funding, she also missed a key vote to override a Bush veto of a Democratic bill with Iraq timetables.

------

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/01/gillibrands-record-shows-shes-true-to-the-blue-dog-creed.php

- Gillibrand split from the majority of fellow Democrats in 2007 to support a $100 billion Iraq funding bill without a timeline for troop withdrawal. (Clinton opposed the bill, along with President Obama.)

- Gillibrand was the only Democrat voting against Rep. Maxine Waters' (D-CA) proposal last year to help states purchase foreclosed homes and offer them at discounted rates to low-income families.

- She did stand apart from 41 House Democratic centrists in 2007 to oppose the "bipartisan" Protect America Act, which enabled the Bush warrantless wiretapping program to continue with minimal judicial oversight

[Occam Bandage]

50. All Democrats in conservative districts (and all Republicans in liberal districts)

will occasionally vote against their party on bills that are going to pass or fail by wide margins. It's a harmless way of looking "centrist" without actually changing much of anything. Same with claiming your record is "moderate" or some variation of the term.

We had a Republican representative in my district for years who often claimed to be a "moderate" and a "centrist" who "worked for everyone." He would break with his party on high-profile but sure-thing votes from time to time, and play that up. On the overwhelming majority of votes, though--including all closely contested votes--he went with his party. It's nothing but a game to fool people who don't really pay attention. It's how you survive as a conservative in a liberal district, or a liberal in a conservative one.

All your quotes and cherry-picked votes show is that she knows how to play the game. Good. What matters now is how she plays being a Senator. So far, she's been flawless.

[yourguide]

60. Oh stop, seriously.

This is not a state you need to play the game in. I hope mahoney or tasini runs against her. She is a republican. period.

She kept her GUNS under the friggin bed with a 3 year old in her house. That isnt smart, that is just stupid.

What you dont get is she is playing being the democrat, not the other way around.

[Occam Bandage]

70. NY-20 isn't NY at large.

You need to play the game in NY-20. You don't need to play the game in NY at large. Which is why she's been a fantastic Senator.

Are you planning on voting against her because of her personal gun safety violations? The guns were locked in a safe under the bed, if I recall correctly. That's still a very silly reason to vote against someone. I would think you would vote based on her performance as a Senator. Of course, if you were to do that, you'd have to vote for her--since her Senate record is flawless so far--and it's clear that your opposition to her is not based on her work as a Senator.

[yourguide]

72. Haaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahaha

I am planning on voting against her because she is a republican pretending to be a democrat. She has not been flawless, she has been a joke, she stinks, and I will do everything in my power to support ANY democrat that opposes her. You might look deeper into local politics, here's a great blog:

http://www.lefthudson.com/2009/03/gillibrands-rockland-q-should-be-free.html

* Sen. Gillibrand is a protégé of former Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, having cut her political teeth while working in his office. You may have noticed that it was Sen. D'Amato—and not a high-ranking Democrat—that stood at her right hand when Governor Paterson announced her appointment. This underscores that Gillibrand’s professional and legislative record are ambiguous at best.

* Gillibrand worked as a lawyer representing the tobacco industry. At her firm, Gillibrand worked for Philip Morris during major litigation brought by the victims of cigarette smoking. She also assisted the company during FBI criminal investigations. If you look at Gillibrand's campaign finance records, it will show that she had since received $23,200 in contributions from Phillip Morris employees. So, I would like to know if she will support FDA oversight of tobacco. As it currently stands, tobacco is the only product not regulated to protect consumers.

* In 2007, Gillibrand split from the majority of fellow Democrats to support a $100 billion Iraq funding bill without a timeline for troop withdrawal. (Clinton opposed the bill, along with Obama.) I want to know if and how Sen. Gillibrand will support President Obama’s policies on Iraq and Afghanistan going forward.

* Gillibrand was the only Congressional Democrat to stand against Maxine Waters' proposal to help states buy foreclosed homes and offer them at discounted rates to low-income families. Does she still feel the same way?

* Gillibrand has received an “A” rating from the National Rifle Association and has backed them on every piece of legislation that the group has supported during her tenure in Congress. I understand that she claims to be shifting her policies on guns, but I want to hear what she specifically thinks about legislative measures. I am particularly interested to hear if she wants to extend the Brady Background Checks to gun shows, which are currently exempt from them. This loophole allows convicted felons, domestic violence abusers, and those who are dangerously mentally ill to walk into any gun show and buy a great variety of weapons from unlicensed sellers without being stopped, no questions asked.

* Gillibrand has expressed support in extending the Bush 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for the rich. I want to know if she still intends to extend those cuts.

* Gillibrand voted in favor of an amendment that increases funding for the construction of a fence along the Mexican border. The legislation, the Brown-Waite amendment to HR 2638, redirects $89 million used to create 700 miles of barbed-wire and chain-link along that southern border. Now that she’s repacked herself as the kinder, gentler Gillibrand, I would like to know if the xenophobic stance she took when she was representing the 20th Congressional District will continue during her tenure in the Senate.

* Gillibrand may be shifting more to the left on gay rights now that she’s Senator, but in 2007, she received an 80 out of 100 rating from the LGBT advocacy group the Human Rights Campaign—the lowest score out of New York’s Democratic representatives. She declined to cosponsor legislation repealing the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. She voted against legislation to grant same-sex partners of U.S. citizens and permanent residents the same immigration status of married couples. Now she flip-flops: the morning of her appointment to the Senate, she notified the Empire State Pride Agenda of her full support for same-sex marriage and her support of a repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act and the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. I am interested in knowing what prompted this change of heart and if her new support for Gay Rights is unwavering.

[Occam Bandage]

85. Can you not find a single negative thing she's done or said since taking office?

I assume you can't, and that's why you keep cherry-picking her attempts to pander to her conservative constituents when she was a representative in the deep-red 20th district.

[yourguide]

93. So you want me to disregard 85% of her voting record

2 years of votes, and only look at the past 4 months? That's a joke.

[TimesSquareCowboy]

103. So report her to child services.

Tasini etc. are just folks with a little infrastructure built up from the run against Clinton in the primary who are looking around for something to do. There are plenty of issues they could be working on but they prefer a politics of personality, apparently.

[wyldwolf]

41. So Schumer must have the goods on Obama to force the President to do that! LOL!

[Occam Bandage]

47. Poppy Bush has the goods on both, and got Rove to

tell Cheney to waterboard James Carville until he promised to get Bill Clinton to convince AIPAC to force Pelosi to ask Reid to convince Schumer to request Emanuel to manipulate Obama into petting the dog that chased the cat that ate the rat that ate the malt that lay in the house that Jack built.

[wyldwolf]

51. hysterical!

[Muttocracy]

53. dangit, I think I already used up my DUzy nom for the week :(

[Uzybone]

74. DUzy for sure

[Bucky]

101. So it all comes back to Abramoff, eh?

[Bucky]

100. Thank you. Everyone's talking about her 97% party line voting, not her 3% disloyalty rate.

They're blind to The Truth, I tell you... BLIND!!

[Politicalboi]

36. Good because we need

DINO Specter out of Pa so the money can be spent to oust him.

[Freddie Stubbs]

46. Specter's only announced Democratic opponent just dropped out last week

[ShortnFiery]

52. Perhaps it's not only the GOP who will be experiencing an identity crisis?

I hope so, because after listening to Reid today re: Gitmo, I don't even recognize our so called "leaders" in The Senate. :thumbsdown:

[Raineyb]

108. Obama promised to back Spectre in the primary

So I don't see how that's going to happen. We'll have yet another DINO in PA and apparently, the people of NY are too stupid to choose our Senator so those in DC need to maneuver things for us so we won't have a chance to put someone better in there.

[yourguide]

57. If there is ANY question about Gillibrand being a DINO

Dont fool yourself people, my state deserves better than this republican in democrat's clothing. This is wrong, I hope Tasini runs against her, I will donate to his campaign as vigorously as I did President Obama's



http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/01/the_new_frontru.php

Gillibrand has described her own voting record as "one of the most conservative in the state." She opposes any path to citizenship for illegal immigrants, supports renewing the Bush tax cuts for individuals earning up to $1 million annually, and voted for the Bush-backed FISA bill that permits wiretapping of international calls. She was one of four Democratic freshmen in the country, and the only Democrat in the New York delegation, to vote for the Bush administration's bill to extend funding for the Iraq war shortly after she entered congress in 2007. While she now contends that she's always opposed the war and has voted for bills to end it, one upstate paper reported when she first ran for the seat: "She said she supports the war in Iraq." In addition to her vote to extend funding, she also missed a key vote to override a Bush veto of a Democratic bill with Iraq timetables.

But it's her votes on the bailout bills -- which pleased no one but were widely seen as vital to the national and New York economies -- that could become the most damaging ammunition against her should she run statewide in 2010. She was one of 63 Democrats to break with the other 172 party members in the House and vote against the second bill, which she called "fundamentally flawed."

[wyldwolf]

62. Tasini would lose like he did to Hillary - fortunately.

[yourguide]

63. Still a better bet than a republican in democrats clothing n/t

[wyldwolf]

64. I'll take a Democrat like Gillibrand over a Dem wannabe like Tasini

[yourguide]

65. Not me

Tasini was endorsed by a number of prominent political activists, including Susan Sarandon, Cindy Sheehan, Barbara Ehrenreich, and Howard Zinn. On September 7, 2006, The Gay City News endorsed Tasini's Senate candidacy, citing his support for same-sex marriage, and Clinton's stated opposition to legalizing same-sex marriage. In his campaign, Tasini emphasized his opposition to the 2003 invasion of Iraq and called for universal health care and curbs on corporate power as part of what he termed "New Rules For the Economy".

Not sure how these credentials equate into a wannabe dem. Well, unless your definition of a Dem is one who was in favor of the Iraq war, warrantless wiretapping, and denying illegal immigrants a path to citizenship. Perhaps you can explain it?

[wyldwolf]

66. so?

Tasini was endorsed by a number of prominent political activists...

Clinton and Gillibrand were endorsed by a numner of prominant DEMOCRATS (including President Obama in Gillibrand's case)

...including Susan Sarandon, Cindy Sheehan, Barbara Ehrenreich, and Howard Zinn

Cindy Sheehan - NOT a Democrat.
Barbara Ehrenreich - NOT a Democrat.
Howard Zinn - NOT a Democrat.

[yourguide]

68. Why dont you answer the question?

What part of his platform makes him a wanna be democrat?

Oh wait, no part of it.

So you'd rather split hairs over Sheehan leaving the party in late 2007?

Try answering the question.

[wyldwolf]

71. sure

Well, unless your definition of a Dem is one who was in favor of the Iraq war,

Gillibrand was not in Congress when the IWR was voted on. However, voting for the IWR does not define what a Democrat is. She voted to fund the war, but Barack Obama did as well in 2006.

warrantless wiretapping,

Obama holds a very similar view. But again this does not define what a Democrat is.

and denying illegal immigrants a path to citizenship.

Again this does not define what a Democrat is.

Perhaps you can explain it?

Sure. You have a misguided notion of what constitutes what being a Democrat means. The only thing you have done is express your disagreement with Gillibrand.

[yourguide]

73. You still havent addressed the REAL question

what makes Tasini a wanna be? Here's some more info for you...

http://www.lefthudson.com/2009/03/gillibrands-rockland-q-should-be-free.html


* Sen. Gillibrand is a protégé of former Sen. Alfonse D'Amato, having cut her political teeth while working in his office. You may have noticed that it was Sen. D'Amato—and not a high-ranking Democrat—that stood at her right hand when Governor Paterson announced her appointment. This underscores that Gillibrand’s professional and legislative record are ambiguous at best.

* Gillibrand worked as a lawyer representing the tobacco industry. At her firm, Gillibrand worked for Philip Morris during major litigation brought by the victims of cigarette smoking. She also assisted the company during FBI criminal investigations. If you look at Gillibrand's campaign finance records, it will show that she had since received $23,200 in contributions from Phillip Morris employees. So, I would like to know if she will support FDA oversight of tobacco. As it currently stands, tobacco is the only product not regulated to protect consumers.

* In 2007, Gillibrand split from the majority of fellow Democrats to support a $100 billion Iraq funding bill without a timeline for troop withdrawal. (Clinton opposed the bill, along with Obama.) I want to know if and how Sen. Gillibrand will support President Obama’s policies on Iraq and Afghanistan going forward.

* Gillibrand was the only Congressional Democrat to stand against Maxine Waters' proposal to help states buy foreclosed homes and offer them at discounted rates to low-income families. Does she still feel the same way?

* Gillibrand has received an “A” rating from the National Rifle Association and has backed them on every piece of legislation that the group has supported during her tenure in Congress. I understand that she claims to be shifting her policies on guns, but I want to hear what she specifically thinks about legislative measures. I am particularly interested to hear if she wants to extend the Brady Background Checks to gun shows, which are currently exempt from them. This loophole allows convicted felons, domestic violence abusers, and those who are dangerously mentally ill to walk into any gun show and buy a great variety of weapons from unlicensed sellers without being stopped, no questions asked.

* Gillibrand has expressed support in extending the Bush 2001 and 2003 tax cuts for the rich. I want to know if she still intends to extend those cuts.

* Gillibrand voted in favor of an amendment that increases funding for the construction of a fence along the Mexican border. The legislation, the Brown-Waite amendment to HR 2638, redirects $89 million used to create 700 miles of barbed-wire and chain-link along that southern border. Now that she’s repacked herself as the kinder, gentler Gillibrand, I would like to know if the xenophobic stance she took when she was representing the 20th Congressional District will continue during her tenure in the Senate.

* Gillibrand may be shifting more to the left on gay rights now that she’s Senator, but in 2007, she received an 80 out of 100 rating from the LGBT advocacy group the Human Rights Campaign—the lowest score out of New York’s Democratic representatives. She declined to cosponsor legislation repealing the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy. She voted against legislation to grant same-sex partners of U.S. citizens and permanent residents the same immigration status of married couples. Now she flip-flops: the morning of her appointment to the Senate, she notified the Empire State Pride Agenda of her full support for same-sex marriage and her support of a repeal of the Defense of Marriage Act and the "don't ask, don't tell" policy. I am interested in knowing what prompted this change of heart and if her new support for Gay Rights is unwavering.

[wyldwolf]

75. I addressed the only thing in your post that ended in a "?"

None of what you've written makes a dime's worth a difference.

The only thing you've demonstrated is you disagree with Gillibrand on a number of issues.

Since you're not in charge of defining what a "Democrat" is, your opinion is really all ya got.

[yourguide]

77. So essentially you cant answer the question.

And you know nothing about Tasini or local NY politics.

I think her stance on the Bush tax cuts shows her true colors, as does her miserable rating on LGBT issues, as does her vote to continue funding the Iraq war, and that pesky vote against low income homeowners and foreclosed properties but you are in denial. She is a DINO and although her version of the Democratic Party may be suitable to you it's not suitable for a liberal state like NY which is why they are seeking to avoid a primary. Mahoney is within the MOE in a match up with Gillibrand yet Gillibrand fails miserably against all other republicans except Peter King.

They need all the money they can get to prop her up which is why they want to avoid a primary. If they werent concerned about her losing her seat why not put her up in a primary.

It's a joke and NY doesnt need a DINO. Go look at her voting record before spouting off and what a fabulous democrat she is.

[wyldwolf]

82. I did answer the question

Post 65 - your question:

Well, unless your definition of a Dem is one who was in favor of the Iraq war, warrantless wiretapping, and denying illegal immigrants a path to citizenship. Perhaps you can explain it?

Notice the "?" at the end of that?

Post 71 - My answer:

Well, unless your definition of a Dem is one who was in favor of the Iraq war,

Gillibrand was not in Congress when the IWR was voted on. However, voting for the IWR does not define what a Democrat is. She voted to fund the war, but Barack Obama did as well in 2006.

warrantless wiretapping,

Obama holds a very similar view. But again this does not define what a Democrat is.

and denying illegal immigrants a path to citizenship.

Again this does not define what a Democrat is.

Perhaps you can explain it?

Sure. You have a misguided notion of what constitutes what being a Democrat means. The only thing you have done is express your disagreement with Gillibrand.

Perhaps you just didn't like my answer. Or maybe you were expecting me to answer a certain way. Who knows. But obviously I did answer your question.

[yourguide]

84. The question was

RE: Tasini

Not sure how these credentials equate into a wannabe dem. Well, unless your definition of a Dem is one who was in favor of the Iraq war, warrantless wiretapping, and denying illegal immigrants a path to citizenship. Perhaps you can explain it?


And then there was:


What part of his platform makes him a wanna be democrat?


So again I ask, what part of Tasini's platform makes him a wanna be democrat?

[wyldwolf]

88. you posed the question AFTER the initial question you wanted an answer to.

Now, are you sure that's the REALLY REAL NO FOOLING question?

OK.

Tasini was slaughtered in his bid to Challenge Clinton - he garnered just 17% in a supposedly liberal state. He didn't get 17% in a red state. He got it in NEW YORK! He's an idealistic kid who wants to play with the adults. An imitation. A cheap wannabe operating under the mistaken impression from the "progressives" of what a "real Democrat" is - "progressives" as much in a minority as his vote tally in 2006.

He kind of reminded me of Henry Wallace - but less bright.

[yourguide]

92. So he's a pretend democrat based on

Hillary beating him? Obama beat Hillary so I guess she's a pretend democrat as well using your logic. Obama lost to Bobby Rush in 2000, only getting 30% of the vote so I guess HE'S a pretend dem too.

But let's talk about your assertion:

So all of the Democrats in Massachusetts, Connecticut, Iowa, Vermont, and Maine who got same sex marriage passed were also wanna be dems?

Opposition of the war in Iraq: President Obama spoke out strongly against the war in Iraq so I guess that makes him a wanna be dem.

Universal Health Care: President Obama supports universal health care, I guess that makes him a fake dem too.

So essentially your assertion is, because he lost to the Clinton machine in the NY primary, regardless of his obviously Democratic stances he's a fake dem.

So I guess Hillary & Gillibrand are the only real dems? If she's so strong then why not put her in a primary, or is it because she might get 17%?

I guess you're a wanna be dem too, you havent beaten her in a primary either.

So essentially you cant pick apart his platform and in an effort to defend Gillibrands love of guns and hate of illegals and gays you opt to trash someone with a solid stance on Dem issues.

[wyldwolf]

97. he's a pretend democrat as much as you believe Gillibrand is a Republican

Democrats vote for Democrats. Tasini and his (and your) policy positions were roundly rejected by the Democratic party in a liberal state.

Your insistence of using ideological litmus tests in a party who's existence predates your by centuries is laughable.

[yourguide]

99. No.

Tasini was rejected based on lack of funding and name recognition. When you have a fraction of the funding it's a bit difficult to beat the Clinton machine.

By the same token your own DLC policies lost in Roswell so I guess you arent a real democrat either.

Obama lost in NY in the primary as well, or did you miss that portion of the program? So I guess Obama's policy positions which are much more similar to Tasini's than Gillibrand's were roundly rejected in NY as well even though he won overwhelmingly in the general? You cant have it both ways.

She has a voting record akin to Republicans on issues like gay marriage, Bush Tax Cuts, Iraq War, Gun Control, immigration, and the list goes on and on.

Did you miss the plot? Ideological litmus tests are what determines whether you are a democrat or a republican. Without some division on issues there would be no way to identify a party.

Gillibrand is a hack and there is a reason why they dont want a primary fight, the same reason as in PA, she would lose.

[wyldwolf]

102. he was rejected based on the choice voters were given

Why do you think "progressives" always have a deficit of money and name recognition? Because very few want to donate to them.

Tasini is a hack.

[yourguide]

104. So that's why you won in Roswell?

Oh wait, not so much.

You can sit there and suggest that being against the iraq war and for universal healthcare is progressive but most of the democrats in the house and the senate seem to support it.

You can call Tasini a hack as much as you like but you and your DLC brethren are on the outs with the party.

[wyldwolf]

105. 6th congressional district originally drawn to be a Republican stronghold

Ya know? Newt Gingrich's old district? Tom Price's current district?

That same year saw DFA-backed candidates lose big - even a co-founder of Air American radio lost big the next year in that district.

You want to compare Roswell, GA to the state of New York? How moronic can you get?

:rofl:

The funny thing about "progressives" is how you always make it personal (and with poor examples at that) when you're losing an argument.

So how did your last election turn out? I've won my last two.

[yourguide]

107. I do know Newts old district

I used to live there. And even pretending to be a Republican you couldnt win.

Really, what two elections did you win? PTA chair? Homeowners association? Or are you referring to your City Council wins prior to your loss? Whoopie, that certainly doesnt make you the end all be all when it comes to determining what policies lean dem and what policies lean wingnut.

I am not comparing Ga to NY, I am just using your own logic to illustrating how flawed it is. Clinton is a BIG BIG BIG name, the only person who could have possibly beat her is another BIG BIG BIG name. The only person that could have raised enough money to go against her is another BIG BIG BIG name.

It had nothing to do with DEMOCRATIC policies and everything to do with name recognition. Please, had she not been the president's wife she wouldnt have been able to win her senate seat.

RIP DLC, farewell.

Not sure why you think you're winning this arguement, well then again the republicans think they have the democrats right where they want them as well.

So again, other than Tasini losing to Clinton you really cant point to anything re: Tasini that makes him anything other than a Democrat while I can point to vote after vote showing what a hack Gillibrand is.

Speaking of, you just reminded me, I need to call Mahoney's office and urge her to run. Thanks!

[wyldwolf]

109. yeah, SURE you used to live there. LOL

even pretending to be a Republican you couldnt win.

Which, of course, no one does.

Really, what two elections did you win?

Fulton County Post Seat 5 (twice). I currently hold it.

How about you?

that certainly doesnt make you the end all be all when it comes to determining what policies lean dem and what policies lean wingnut.

Whoopsie! That's been YOUR routine throughout this thread - claiming who is and isn't a Democrat.

RIP DLC, farewell.

:rofl: Read my signature!

other than Tasini losing to Clinton you really cant point to anything re: Tasini that makes him anything other than a Democrat while I can point to vote after vote showing what a hack Gillibrand is.

WAIT? Didn't you just accuse ME of determining what policies lean dem and what policies lean wingnut? :rofl:

Speaking of, you just reminded me, I need to call Mahoney's office and urge her to run.

And I'll look forward to Gillibrand stomping on her.

So, AGAIN, how did you do in your last election?

[yourguide]

111. You might want to look at my yearbook

South Cobb High School, Austell Ga. Maybe you're familiar with it? Mableton, GA? Perhaps you're familiar with that too? Prior to moving to Mableton we lived in Roswell in a crappy apartment complex. Floyd Middle School? You familiar with that? Would have to imagine you'd be somewhat familiar with GSU where I went to school, ALbum 88, remember that college radio station? What about 688, the white dot, and the metroplex, you familiar with those now defunct establishments?

Seems the Fulton County Taxpayers are getting ripped off, maybe you should get off DU and get to work on the issues of Fulton County.

Good luck with KG stomping her, considering a recent poll showed Mahoney within the MOE I think she'll have a run for her money.

Considering you dont live in NY, you wouldnt know that most NYers had never heard of Gillibrand until she was appointed.

[wyldwolf]

112. I can find that all on google, lol!

Seems the Fulton County Taxpayers are getting ripped off, maybe you should get off DU and get to work on the issues of Fulton County.

LOL! You have NO IDEA what I do in Fulton County. Right now, and just as a hint, I'm fighting to prevent Milton County from reforming.

But hey! What do YOU do? You keep avoiding that.

Considering you dont live in NY, you wouldnt know that most NYers had never heard of Gillibrand until she was appointed.

No, just my inlaws. Long Island.

Pretty irrelevant info for a candidate being backed by a very popular President.

[yourguide]

113. Good luck finding the white dot on google.

Or anything comprehensive about the metroplex and 688 as well.

How would you google that? Closed rock clubs from the 80s and 90s, atlanta?

Or you could go back and look at some of my old posts where I talk about living in hickville GA growing up.

I dont know what you do in Fulton County, but I *DO* know you spend all day arguing on DU on behalf of the DINO wing of the party so you cant be doing much for Fulton County if you spend all your time here.

Well considering that president has stances closer in line to Tasini's policies rather than Gillibrand's I am not sure why you'd want a wanna be dem like Obama who lost to Bobby Rush in 2000 to be supporting her. Or maybe it's because he's just listening to Schumer, who will be my next call.

[wyldwolf]

114. you keep contradicting yourself

I *DO* know you spend all day arguing on DU on behalf of the DINO wing of the party

Funny! You keep using words and phrases like "DINO" but declared a few posts up you don't decide what policies lean dem and what policies lean wingnut.

Actually, "progressives" are DINOS. You've been trying to get footing in the party since the 1930s (back when FDR said he was glad progressives were losing elections.) Occasionally you show your true colors (like 1948, 1960, 1972, and 2000) and get stomped in the dirt.

Seems to me you spend quite a lot of time on DU, too. And you still won't answer what you do BESIDES arguing on DU on behalf of the DINO-loser wing of the party.

[yourguide]

115. I'm hardly contradicting myself

Those Democrats who support the republicans stances on immigration, the war, gun rights, bush tax cuts, and gay rights are DINO indeed. SEE: Gillibrand in the dictionary. Again, that's why there are two parties and why Gillibrand, in her own words, said she has the most conservative voting record in the state.

Best of luck with that. Again so long DLCers.

You might want to get back to work for Fulton county, with leaders like you spending all day fighting on the intrawebs no wonder it's just as bad as it was in the late 80s and early 90s.

Here's hoping GSU at least put in a new parking deck, that old one was a piece of crap.

Mahoney will run, Mahoney can raise money, and Mahoney will easily draw a stark contrast to Gillibrand. On top of that Gillibrand will lose because she wont get the re-puke votes she will be counting on to make up for lost dem votes in a race against Pataki while Mahoney will get all the dems in a heavily dem state.

Poor Fulton County...you should probably get back to serving the people right?

[wyldwolf]

117. you don't make that determination

Those Democrats who support the republicans stances on immigration, the war, gun rights, bush tax cuts, and gay rights are DINO indeed.

Works both ways. The Republicans are supporting those Democrat's stance on those issues. Obama is against Gay marriage, as was John Kerry, and gun rights are in the the DNC's party platform.

Again so long DLCers.

Again, see my signature!

16 new DLC house members in 2006. 13 more in 2008. HELLO!

You might want to get back to work for Fulton county,

You might want to get to work doing something. :shrug:

Mahoney will run, Mahoney can raise money, and Mahoney will easily draw a stark contrast to Gillibrand.

And Mahoney will lose... IF she runs... and it's doubtful she will.

Poor Fulton County...you should probably get back to serving the people right?

Poor New York... well, not really. As long as all you're doing is spewing on the internets, you can't do any damage.

[yourguide]

118. Care to make a wager?

I wager a $200 contribution to Gillibrands campaign if Mahoney doesnt announce she's running. If Mahoney does announce she's running you have to donate $200 to Mahoney's campaign. I am that confident she is running.

I've seen your signature. A new democrat doesnt mean DLC, even though you'd like to believe it does.

Republicans are not supporting the democrats stance on the Bush tax cuts, nor immigration, nor gun control.

But best of luck with that.

Care to accept the wager?

[wyldwolf]

119. yeah, I'll make a wager

I don't believe Carolyn Mahoney will run. And if she runs, I'll wager she loses.

A new democrat doesnt mean DLC, even though you'd like to believe it does.

What spin!

A New Democrat is a proponent of the Third Way. The DLC is the oldest organization of New Democrats. Obama made that statement talking to the New Democrat Coalition, the DLC's congressional arm.

[yourguide]

121. Yeah so basically you're all talk

AND you dont know what you're talking about when it comes to Mahoney running. The worst.

I wouldnt put too much water in his statement, you can try but his policies are clearly to the left of the DINOS.

[wyldwolf]

122. Well, for one thing, MAHONEY isn't running.

And I doubt Carolyn MALONEY is, either.

AND you dont know what you're talking about when it comes to Mahoney running. The worst.

I'm sure Mahoney isn't running.

I wouldnt put too much water in his statement, you can try but his policies are clearly to the left of the DINOS.

Of course you wouldn't - it sort of ruins your entire shtick.

[yourguide]

123. Lord

My apologies, typing in a hurry.

Glad to see you staying on the issues. :rolls eyes: Looking forward to the days when the DINOS become extinct.

[Marsala]

124. Yeah, purifying the party is such a great idea

Just look how well the Republicans' quest to eliminate the RINOs has gone. :eyes:

[wyldwolf]

125. you missed it every time.

;)

Looking forward to the days when the DINOS become extinct.

That'll happen when you and yours finally realize you can't win national elections.

[yourguide]

126. *snicker*

What you fail to recognize is as times change as does the country and the party. You want the ye olden democrats of times past. ye olden democrats of times past wouldnt have been in favor of gay rights and other issues you seem to think are progressive issues.

Welcome to the Democratic Party, do try and keep up.

[wyldwolf]

127. no I don't fail to recognize that

But even as times change, one thing remains constant - "progressives" can't win national elections. You've certainly tried ('48 and 2000) and managed to get about 3%. You even pitched little whiney hissy fits when your favorite candidates didn't get the nomination (1960 and 1980.)

And the party is getting even more centrist, not less. Over half the new Senate seats that Rahm Emanuel won for us in 2006 joined the House New Democrat coalition. 13 more did in 2008. Obama filled his cabinet full of centrists. Most the the new Senate seats Democrats won in 2008 were centrists. A DLCer is now chair of the DNC.

Welcome to reality, 2 percenter, do try and keep up.

[yourguide]

128. Just depends on what you consider progressive

However considering your harping in a thread how Obama's DNC speech "could have actually delivered at the Republican National Convention." I find your grasp of what constitutes any party a bit mockable.

You might want to pay attention to the way the party is changing rather than assuming the progressives are moving further left, the party itself is moving left, if it wasnt then gay marriage wouldnt be legal in 5 states so far. In '48 gay rights would have been considered well beyond progressive but now many Democratic states have voted in favor of gay marriage.

Again, perhaps you should acknowledge and embrace the direction the party is moving in rather than the democratic principles of 1948 and their proponents, they are well out of step with the party of 2009.

[wyldwolf]

129. again, an opinion from the far left reaches of space means very little

The entire post you just made is extremely vague and littered with your interpretation of that vagueness.

You can't even respond to what I wrote, you just ramble about how "the party is changing" and implying "progressives" aren't moving further left without an ounce of proof.

However considering your harping in a thread how Obama's DNC speech "could have actually delivered at the Republican National Convention."

:rofl: What? Quoting Jane Hamsher is now offensive to "progressives?" Well, I guess for the perpetually outraged, one would have to do some heavy duty planning NOT to offend you!

[yourguide]

130. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight

I gave you some proof, progressives have been in favor of Gay marriage for quite some time, now the Democrats are embracing it.

As for your Jane Hamsher quote, again, I question you grasping what even qualifies one to be a democrat for reposting and promoting it.

Again, we know where the DLCers stand. You stay stuck in the 1950s while the rest of us move forward. I'm not at all surprised you're from Roswell, not even a little. Stay in the south, perhaps Ga will secede after all and you can go with them.

[wyldwolf]

132. riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight

I gave you some proof, progressives have been in favor of Gay marriage for quite some time, now the Democrats are embracing it.

Proof of what? That's proof progressives "aren't moving further left?"

As for your Jane Hamsher quote, again, I question you grasping what even qualifies one to be a democrat for reposting and promoting it.

??? Odd retort, has nothing to do with the Jane Hamsher quote.

Again, we know where the DLCers stand.

Yeah, at the top of the polls.

You stay stuck in the 1950s

You stay stuck in the 1930s

I'm not at all surprised you're from Roswell, not even a little.

it's so cute how "progressives" have to get all personal with people.

Stay in the south, perhaps Ga will secede after all and you can go with them.

"Progressives" like you have a better chance of trying to start your own party again. Perhaps you can improve on your 2 percent.

[yourguide]

133. *snicker*

How are progressives having the same stance for years on gay rights moving father left? They stayed in the same place, the democrats moved to the left.

Yeah, that DLC thing worked out GREAT for you guys in the primaries, Hillary lost. *snort*

The thing is, I'm not stuck in the 30s. I'm enjoying watching the democrats come around as they have been on numerous issues including the war and gay rights.

Not an odd retort at all, you've clearly shown that you have zero grasp on what the democratic party stands for unless you go back in a time machine. That's yet another post that just illustrates it. Especially considering how much more liberal Obama is than Gillibrand.

Sorry for you but we have our own party, it's the Democratic Party, and you have yours. Just go with the party that is pro bush tax cuts, voted for more war funding, voted against bailout oversight, anti gun regulation, and is against a path to citizenship for illegals...that's where you and Gillibrand belong, regardless of how you see yourself.

[wyldwolf]

134. *snicker*

How are progressives having the same stance for years on gay rights moving father left?

Who said they were?

Yeah, that DLC thing worked out GREAT for you guys in the primaries, Hillary lost.

"I am a New Democrat" - Barack Obama to the New Democrat Coalition (DLC members of Congress)

The thing is, I'm not stuck in the 30s.

Yes you are. You think there is some glorious "progressive" revolution just waiting to happen.

Not an odd retort at all, you've clearly shown that you have zero grasp on what the democratic party stands for unless you go back in a time machine.

It stands for what the DNC platform says it does. Anything else is purely subjective (or in your case a fantasy)

Sorry for you but we have our own party,

The Progressive Party is still around? OHHH, the Green Party! Right!

[yourguide]

135. rolls eyes

Perhaps you could use your own subject lines?


"I am a New Democrat" - Barack Obama to the New Democrat Coalition (DLC members of Congress)

Again, I wouldnt put too much stock in that considering how much further left he leans. I dont see him on the list of DLC members or new democrat members on either site's member list. On top of that the DLC worked against him vigorously when supporting Clinton or did you forget that?


Yes you are. You think there is some glorious "progressive" revolution just waiting to happen.

What are you talking about? all I suggested was the Democrats are embracing more progressive issues which by default means they are now Democratic issues. Green energy, gay rights, etc.


It stands for what the DNC platform says it does. Anything else is purely subjective (or in your case a fantasy)

Hahahhahahahahahaha, the DNC doesnt lead the party, the president does. However head on over to the DNC home page, you'll see multiple photos of the president on the home page and HIS agenda under the agenda section.


The Progressive Party is still around? OHHH, the Green Party! Right!

The only one bringing up that joke of a party is you, I've never voted for the green party in my life. Thats not the party of progressives. In case you missed it the Democratic Party is working on progressive issues just fine these days.

[wyldwolf]

136. rolls eyes back

Again, I wouldnt put too much stock in that... I dont see him on the list of DLC members or new democrat members on either site's member list.

It's hysterical how you're trying to spin this. WOW! Obama making that proclamation sure made the left go back and regroup! Hey, the reason his name isn't on either site's list" is because to be a House New Democrat, you have to be a Congressman. But hey! Getting hung up over three letters "DLC" but not the Third Way New Democrat philosophy only works in our favor. While you're trying to make the case he isn't an official DLC member, he's enacting the Third Way agenda.

considering how much further left he leans.

In what respects? His book "Audacity of Hope" read like a long anecdotal DLC policy book. I especially like the part where he calls out the left:

"In distilled form, though, the explanations of both the right and the left have become mirror images of each other. They are stories of conspiracy, of America being hijacked by an evil cabal. Like all good conspiracy theories, both tales contain just enough truth to satisfy those predisposed to believe in them, without admitting any contradictions that might shake up those assumptions. Their purpose is not to persuade the other side but to keep their bases agitated and assured of the rightness of their respective causes--and lure just enough new adherents to beat the other side into submission."

Sounds just like you!

[yourguide]

137. shouldnt you be giving the tax payers what they paid for?

It's hysterical how you're trying to spin this. WOW! Obama making that proclamation sure made the left go back and regroup! Hey, the reason his name isn't on either site's list" is because to be a House New Democrat, you have to be a Congressman. But hey! Getting hung up over three letters "DLC" but not the Third Way New Democrat philosophy only works in our favor. While you're trying to make the case he isn't an official DLC member, he's enacting the Third Way agenda.


Well, since the third way/new democrat site bleeds directly into the DLC site and the DLC site is still touting Bill and Hillary's victories and campaigns I think it's pretty clear what Obama's affiliation to either organization is.


In what respects? His book "Audacity of Hope" read like a long anecdotal DLC policy book. I especially like the part where he calls out the left:

"In distilled form, though, the explanations of both the right and the left have become mirror images of each other. They are stories of conspiracy, of America being hijacked by an evil cabal. Like all good conspiracy theories, both tales contain just enough truth to satisfy those predisposed to believe in them, without admitting any contradictions that might shake up those assumptions. Their purpose is not to persuade the other side but to keep their bases agitated and assured of the rightness of their respective causes--and lure just enough new adherents to beat the other side into submission."

He's calling out extremism on both sides, you can claim it to be DLC if you desire but the truth of the matter is this isnt something spawned forth solely from the DLC. This is just basic logic that many besides the DLC find pragmatic. IE: Ditch the partisanship and get things done.

You seem to be reading whatever you want to be reading into it, however if he was firmly DLC or New Democrat I think he would have tied himself to that organization long ago, but best of luck living in your fantasy world.

But here's a friendly reminder:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/3/23/711984/-DLC-tries-to-glom-on-to-Obama.-Again.

On top of that, I find it interesting this "New Democrat" quote was merely sourced from 2 anonymous sources without context, he could have said "On issue X I am a New Democrat" Considering how actively he has had to ask to be removed from the DLC web site I'd suggest it's just more wishful thinking from the DLC. Sort of like Hillary's presidential run.

Even the slate article in which Bruce Reed claims Obama called himself a New Democrat doesnt actually source any of the members that were there, but sources politico.

I find this quote from the article particularly interesting:

http://www.slate.com/id/2213474/

The president is right that old labels don't mean anything, but new labels do—and in Obama's capable hands, the term New Democrat can take on new meaning. As Obama and others have observed, the traditional terms of the ideological debate—liberal and progressive, moderate and centrist, conservative and right-wing—are stale and imprecise. Obama has the opportunity to define a governing philosophy for our time on his own terms.

Sounds to me like the New Democrats and the DLC will be conforming to his policies, not the other way around.

[wyldwolf]

140. shouldn't you be staying on topic? You do have a problem with that

Well, since the third way/new democrat site bleeds directly into the DLC site and the DLC site is still touting Bill and Hillary's victories and campaigns I think it's pretty clear what Obama's affiliation to either organization is.

Really? You need to clear your cache then. When the rest of the world goes there, they see big headlines on health care modernization, the housing crises, Obama's cabinet, and a nice piece on Michelle Obama.

He's calling out extremism on both sides

Yeah, conservative heretic hunters (the ones who whine about RINOS) and "progressive" purists (the ones who whine about DINOS)

however if he was firmly DLC or New Democrat I think he would have tied himself to that organization long ago, but best of luck living in your fantasy world.

On the contrary, most people go left in primaries and then go right in the general.

Oh, yes, a DailyKOS article (lol!) Interesting they don't DENY Obama calls himself a New Democrat but they sure do try to spin it using a 5-6 year old piece from the blackcommentator.

Here, by the way, it what the same writer from the Black Commentator piece, Bruce Dixon, is saying in 2009:

President Obama Declares His DLC Allegiance

"As a candidate for the Democratic nomination to the US Senate in 2003, Obama urgently needed to lock down the progressive, black and antiwar vote in his home state of Illinois, and was compelled to renounce the Democratic Leadership Council. That was then. This is now. Perhaps the president feels himself untouchable and unaccountable now that he is safely in the White Hose. Maybe he was just relaxed. Whatever the case, the truth of where his political allegiance lies is no longer a matter of conjecture... The Democratic Leadership Council... '

http://www.blackagendareport.com/?q=content/president-obama-declares-his-dlc-allegiance-says-i-am-new-democrat

The best thing of all is The Audacity of Hope shows exactly where he got his policy positions from.

[yourguide]

141. Been on topic...

Really? You need to clear your cache then. When the rest of the world goes there, they see big headlines on health care modernization, the housing crises, Obama's cabinet, and a nice piece on Michelle Obama.

*Snort* You see I went deeper into the AGENDA in which they are touting Hillary and Bills achievements and stances. I guess they havent updated anything past the home page in years. *shrugs*


Yeah, conservative heretic hunters (the ones who whine about RINOS) and "progressive" purists (the ones who whine about DINOS)

Again, read into it what you will but that's not what it actually says. Reading comprehension much?

"As a candidate for the Democratic nomination to the US Senate in 2003, Obama urgently needed to lock down the progressive, black and antiwar vote in his home state of Illinois, and was compelled to renounce the Democratic Leadership Council. That was then. This is now. Perhaps the president feels himself untouchable and unaccountable now that he is safely in the White Hose. Maybe he was just relaxed. Whatever the case, the truth of where his political allegiance lies is no longer a matter of conjecture... The Democratic Leadership Council... '

http://www.blackagendareport.com/?q=content/president-o...


The only thing each of these articles have in common is the poorly sourced Politico piece. No other publication is reporting this nor has anyone mentioned what he said prior to that quote, commonly known as the context it was said in. The DLC has tried to glom on to him for years which immediately makes these anonymous sources suspect. However, not surprised you'd put faith in "Drudge with a tie" aka Politico. If Bruce Reed, the head of the DLC can't accurately source this from his own members I would suggest a piece of the puzzle is missing. Again, based on Reed's own words it looks like they are conforming to him, not the other way around. And if they didnt, they would just die on the vine.

The best thing of all is The Audacity of Hope shows exactly where he got his policy positions from.

Again, you seem to just be seeing what you want to see, but best of luck with that.

[wyldwolf]

142. *snort*

*Snort* You see I went deeper into the AGENDA in which they are touting Hillary and Bills achievements and stances. I guess they havent updated anything past the home page in years. *shrugs*

Tell us the difference in the agendas of the Clintons and Obama, using comparitive source material. :shrug: OOPS! I see lots of stuff past their homepage beyond the Clinton era. You must still have a cache issue.

Again, read into it what you will but that's not what it actually says. Reading comprehension much?

Again, you try to spin the words of Obama to meet your agenda. His words are very clear. They just hurt you.

The only thing each of these articles have in common is the poorly sourced Politico piece.

Interesting, the writer of the Black Commentator piece you admire so much, Bruce Dixon, says it's a "well sourced story." It doesn't surprise me you're going to now cherry pick Dixon's articles to again meet your agenda.

No other publication is reporting this

http://www.slate.com/id/2213474/
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/131210/uh_oh:_obama_calls_himself_a_new_democrat/

So where's any evidence to the contrary?

The DLC has tried to glom on to him for years which immediately makes these anonymous sources suspect.

Only suspect because you don't want to face the reality of it.

If Bruce Reed, the head of the DLC can't accurately source this from his own members I would suggest a piece of the puzzle is missing.

It's been sourced.

President Barack Obama considers himself a “new Democrat” and will rely heavily on the New Democrat Coalition in Congress to advance his legislative agenda, Democratic Rep. Ron Kind said Tuesday after a White House meeting with the president."

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/41056907.html

As you've done throughout this thread, you're spinning established fact to meet your agenda.

[yourguide]

143. Do you grasp sourcing?

Interesting, the writer of the Black Commentator piece you admire so much, Bruce Dixon, says it's a "well sourced story." It doesn't surprise me you're going to now cherry pick Dixon's articles to again meet your agenda.

The Black Commentator piece sources politico. Politico sources 2 anonymous sources and offers no context for the quote.

Again, you try to spin the words of Obama to meet your agenda. His words are very clear. They just hurt you.

Take a look in the mirror. You've done nothing but spin his words. If "The Audacity of Hope" is a DLC playbook then why has he been so adamant about not being associated with the DLC?

http://www.slate.com/id/2213474 /
http://www.alternet.org/blogs/peek/131210/uh_oh:_obama_... /

So where's any evidence to the contrary?

You seem to be missing the plot. Both slate and alternet are sourcing the non-sourced politico article.

From the jsonline article:

President Barack Obama considers himself a “new Democrat” and will rely heavily on the New Democrat Coalition in Congress to advance his legislative agenda, Democratic Rep. Ron Kind said Tuesday after a White House meeting with the president.

I dont see any quotes from President Obama in the jsonline article, I see Ron Kind's interpretation of what President Obama said in the meeting.

So essentially you have the DLC spinning that Obama is DLC as they have been for years. No new news here.

[wyldwolf]

144. Do you understand you can't keep asking for sources then deny them when you get them?

So essentially you have the DLC spinning that Obama is DLC as they have been for years. No new news here.

Nope, we have Obama declaring himself to be a New Democrat. We have Ron Kind confirming it. We have Obama complimenting the third way. We seen no sources - not even Obama - denying it. And we have you obviously with some inside information denying that that isn't what Obama really means.

[yourguide]

146. No.

We have politico offering a quote, out of context, from two anonymous sources. With no facts to back it up - again they are the only outlet reporting he used that phrase and without audio or video I would again question the validity of that reporting based upon him adamantly not wanting to be associated with the DLC and the lack of other independent sources reporting it as well.

Then we have a DLCer claiming he is a New Democrat with no quote from the President. The President might have said I support policies X, Y, & Z and Kind interpreting his stances as him being a new democrat. Again the DLC has been trying to claim him for years.

This hasnt become a big enough story for him to need to deny it. It's a blip on the radar and it's a blip on the radar because it's poorly sourced.

Sorry, keep reaching but you fail on this one.

[wyldwolf]

147. and Ron Kind confirming it, and no one but YOU, apparently, squirming away from it

:shrug:

You're alone in this world. No one else doubts it. But you.

FAIL!

[Lavender Brown]

67. That article contains a bunch of factual errors

She was opposed to the war from the beginning-unambiguously for ending it during her first run for Congress. The article that this article quoted is wrong.

[yourguide]

69. You might want to check her voting record

In 2007, Gillibrand split from the majority of fellow Democrats to support a $100 billion Iraq funding bill without a timeline for troop withdrawal. (Clinton opposed the bill, along with Obama.) I want to know if and how Sen. Gillibrand will support President Obama’s policies on Iraq and Afghanistan going forward.

http://www.lefthudson.com/2009/03/gillibrands-rockland-q-should-be-free.html

[Lavender Brown]

76. I'm familiar with it, thanks

She voted for withdrawing troops from Iraq two years ago (shortly after the one vote you're talking about). Her position is pretty clear at this point.

[yourguide]

78. So her voting record shouldnt be taken into account?

So if she is going to get so much support from Democratic voters here in NY then why is everyone afraid of putting her in a primary.

Her position is clear my tuckus...

[Lavender Brown]

79. Yes, ALL of her record should be, not just one or two votes

that support your skewed view of her (all the other votes to the contrary).

[yourguide]

80. Yes, I am taking ALL of her votes into account

and she has had shitty voting records on the bush tax cuts, gun laws, gay rights, and that pesky iraq funding.

Oh and there's this:

Gillibrand was the only Democrat voting against Rep. Maxine Waters' (D-CA) proposal last year to help states purchase foreclosed homes and offer them at discounted rates to low-income families

She is a dino.

[Occam Bandage]

87. All her votes? She voted Democrat 97.2% of the time in the 111th.

Of course, there was her time as an ultra-conservative DINO republican in the 110th, in which she voted with the Democrats 93.8% of the time. Keep on cherry-picking from that 6.2%, though--that's what really counts.

[yourguide]

94. Interesting

So gay rights dont matter? Or gun control? Or the Bush tax Cuts? Or her vote to continue funding the war? What about a path to citizenship for illegals? Those things dont count huh? We should just ignore that 6.2% regardless of the number of lives it affects.

By her own words Gillibrand has described her own voting record as "one of the most conservative in the state."

So her votes dont count, her own words dont count and we are all to assume she's been pretending the whole time. Got it.

[fujiyama]

81. I think Gillibrand will take the primary and general election pretty easily

I don't even know why anyone is taking those polls seriously with Giuliani or Pataki leading or even coming close. A lot of people probably don't quite even know who Gillibrand is.

[BeyondGeography]

98. Good

[liskddksil]

106. For those New Yorkers who want a choice

The Polit Bureau has spent plenty of time discussing the merit of Suffolk County Legis. Majority Leader Jon Cooper’s proposed run against Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand.

Now, it’s Latino Long Island’s turn.

The site called Cooper the “perfect antagonist” to Gillibrand and argued that he had a shot because:

1) He’s a genuine Progressive in a Democratic state. Our note: True, though Gillibrand is hardly conservative. You can be sure Cooper will hit the Second Amendment issue hard.

2) If multiple people run, Cooper can sneak out a victory based on a fractured vote. Our note: That seems less likely, since many of the other candidates have dropped out in recent days.

3) Only Cooper’s entry neutralizes the Clinton-Schumer factor because of his grassroots support. Our note: That’s possible, sure. Cooper’s going to need to tap into Democratic voters’ dissatisfaction with government to have any shot. But do they blame Gillibrand? No proof, at this point, that a lot of voters know much about her at all.

4) While McCarthy, Maloney and Nadler are formidable fund raisers, and Gillibrand’s big ace was raising big bucks, Cooper has his own money. More importantly, he has the appeal and capacity to tap into a national progressives network to fuel his campaign. Our note: By all accounts, Gillibrand will have plenty of money. Cooper will desperately need support beyond the New York network to compete. Is that possible? Sure. And, yes, Cooper has plenty of his own money.

http://libn.com/politbureau/2009/05/21/latino-li-pumps-cooper/

http://www.cooperfornewyork.com/Homepage.html

[Captain_New_York]

116. Lets Put the Gun thing in Context

I live in the NY 20 Congressional District, Across the Hudson river from Sen Gillibrand's home. I have spent $60 and 5 months applying and attending classes to get a gun permit. I am waiting 2 months for my finger printing appointment, then I will be scheduled for an in person interview with a Judge (I don't know how long that will take to schedule), if that goes well I can expect at least a 4 month wait for processing with addi tonal cost of over $110.

So in a local sense, this is more gun control than 99% of the country. Kirsten could not support more gun control without a large part of her Congressional District going nuts!!!

[Muttocracy]

131. welcome to DU. Not many people from her district post. nt

[Raineyb]

139. Why do you insist on consistently celebrating New Yorkers being denied the ability to choose their

own damn representation?

Do you have some beef with us or something?

[wyldwolf]

145. Gillibrand picks up some endorsements

New York Senate Majority Leader Malcolm A. Smith
Nassau Democratic Chairman Jay Jacobs
CONGRESSWOMAN YVETTE CLARKE (BROOKLYN)
CONGRESSMAN MICHAEL MCMAHON (STATEN ISLAND, BROOKLYN)
CONGRESSMAN BRIAN HIGGINS (BUFFALO)
CONGRESSMAN MAURICE HINCHEY (HUDSON VALLEY, SOUTHERN TIER)
MAYOR MATTHEW DRISCOLL (SYRACUSE)
President Barack Obama, United States of America