Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

DWT: Kirsten Gillibrand Choice Exposes How Weak And Unqualified David Paterson Is To Be Governor

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
FLAprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 06:50 AM
Original message
DWT: Kirsten Gillibrand Choice Exposes How Weak And Unqualified David Paterson Is To Be Governor
"In 2006 Blue America helped Kirsten Gillibrand defeat bumbling reactionary incumbent John Sweeney and she beat him-- in a Republican-leaning district (PVI-R+3)-- 117,799 (53%) to 104,157 (47%). She presented herself to us as a grassroots progressive reformer but immediately upon taking her seat she joined the pro-business/anti-working family Blue Dogs and has amassed a sickeningly reactionary record since her election. Just looking at substantive issues that divided members of Congress along partisan lines, Gillibrand has been one of the members most likely to abandon the Democrats and vote with the GOP. Only 12 House Democrats have been worse than Gillibrand: Joe Donnelly (IN), Travis Childers (MS), Brad Ellsworth (IN), Heath Shuler (NC), Jason Altmire (PA), Chris Carney (PA), Dan Boren (OK), Harry Mitchell (AZ), Zack Space (OH), Gene Taylor (MS), Gabrielle Giffords (AZ), Collin Peterson (MN). Her record is actually worse than arch-reactionaries like Jim Marshall (GA), Henry Cuellar (TX), Mike McIntyre (NC), John Barrow (GA), Allen Boyd (FL) and Jim Matheson (UT), the Democrats who have done the most to help the Republican leadership build an effective conservative ruling coalition.

Pelosi has taken a dim view of Gillibrand's propensity to cross the aisle on key issues, even voting to keep the war in Iraq going and to allow Bush to put through his FISA policies, and for a moment it looked like Pelosi's antipathy would prevent Gillibrand from being able to push her bid for the New York Senate seat. Many of her colleagues have a low opinion of her as well. In the end it didn't mean anything and Gov. Paterson chose her. ..... "

READ MORE: http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2009/01/kirsten-gil...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
K Gardner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 06:55 AM
Response to Original message
1. I've been working and not able to keep up with news the past few days. Was hoping that was rumor..
what happened to Cuomo?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 12:34 PM
Response to Reply #1
26. It's not rumor, but it is full of crap.
Here's the facts on Gillibrand:

Pro-gay-marriage.
Pro-Medicare-for-all.
90% lifetime rating from the ACLU (Compare to 73% for Clinton and 87% for Obama).
Voted to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq within 90 days.
Voted to close offshore corporate tax loopholes.
Voted to restore habeas corpus to detainees.
Voted to require warrants for all FISA wiretapping.
Voted to expand SCHIP.
Supported lobbying reform.

She also won reelection by 24 points against a Republican former NY SecState who dumped $6 million on the race, mostly out of his personal fortune.

http://www.ontheissues.org/NY/Kirsten_Gillibrand.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marshall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 03:18 PM
Response to Reply #26
63. That's "some facts" not "the facts"
I think she's an okay choice, but I also recognize the gripes some people have about her, none of which are listed in your list.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nradisic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 07:28 AM
Response to Original message
2. Agreed...
Patterson could have picked Cuomo or Malloney. I agree that the current pick makes him weaker with Democrats in the primaries in his next run to stay as Governor.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
connecticut yankee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 07:41 AM
Response to Original message
3. Apparently
she can get Patterson votes in her predominantly Republican district.

or at least he thinks so.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
terisan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 07:56 AM
Response to Original message
4. Obama voted for Fisa 2008 and also voted for war funding-maybe she should be president
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 08:00 AM
Response to Original message
5. DWT exposes how weak and unqualified they are as bloggers
Edited on Sat Jan-24-09 08:00 AM by wyldwolf
:eyes:

Honestly - why bitch and moan about the Democratic party? They've never been and never will be what you want them to be.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Paladin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 09:16 AM
Response to Reply #5
12. "Why Bitch And Moan About The Democratic Party"?

Jeez, are you serious? What else do you and the rest of your DU Gun Nut compatriots do here, 24/7, year after year, other than bitch and moan about the Democratic Party? Unbelievable.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 09:25 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. Very serious
1. The Democratic party isn't and never has been the "progressive utopia" blogs like "downwithtranny" think.
2. The Democratic electorate passes judgement on "progressives" election cycle after election cycle.
3. Many Democrats have had a long good relationship with the NRA, including Harry Truman, Howard Dean.

"I am pleased to accept Life Membership in the National Rifle Association and extend to your organization every good wish for continued success."

-John F. Kennedy, March 20, 1961

4. Being that the Democratic party isn't and never has been what "progressive" blogs think it should be, I believe their time would be better spent tearing down the GOP or building their own party where they can install "progressive" litmus tests to their heart's content.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 01:22 PM
Response to Reply #13
31. Your hatred for progressive bloggers/progressive causes is duly noted. Again.
Edited on Sat Jan-24-09 01:55 PM by ClarkUSA
Sorry to inform you, but the most liberal senator won the presidency in 2008. That should tell you something
about how progressive this country really is. Also, progressive bloggers drove the national debate on so many
then fringe issues years ago (Gitmo, Iraq War, anti-Bush feeling) that has become mainstream today. Face it,
the DLC is only good nowadays for being mouthpieces ordered around by Team O to do the latter's progressive
bidding. Watching co-opted DLCers obey and laud the wily President Obama is a joy to see.

Earth to wyldwolf: Nothing's wrong with being liberal. Even Rahm Emanuel described himself as one on
his last Meet The Press. And I love our liberal Obama Is 44...

:)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mvd Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #31
37. The Democratic Party has always had a liberal wing
Edited on Sat Jan-24-09 01:35 PM by mvd
It hasn't had a lot of influence on the platform, yet progressives have forced the party left at important times, like with Roosevelt and LBJ, and now possibly with Obama. Foreign policy wise, we haven't made as many inroads - see McGovern. But Obama opposed the majority of the party on the Iraq War.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 01:54 PM
Response to Reply #37
41. Amen.
Edited on Sat Jan-24-09 02:01 PM by ClarkUSA
I do believe that President Obama will make a big difference in foreign policy, too, as he turns decisively away from
patented Republican-lite/DLC saber-rattling @ Iran and Syria to the 21st c. progressive stance of meeting our
enemies to enact diplomacy without preconditions.

Barack's opposition to the Iraq war from before the beginning of it signals to me that he was,is, and will always be a
man of rare personal integrity and even rarer political courage, thus I trust him to do what's needed in the Middle East
with a balanced approach that stresses respect for all sides in the issue but takes into account that anti-Israel forces
must change their ways in order for peace to occur.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FLAprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #31
39. And DLCers would not win without the progressive left.
because the progressive left holds their collective noses and votes for the DLCers because we often don't have any other choice......
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Aloha Spirit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 02:09 PM
Response to Reply #31
48. I agree that nothing is wrong with being like me, a liberal, however I dispute the classification of
Obama as most liberal Senator.
He was deemed so by the National Journal in an open-to-criticism overview of certain votes from 2007 only.
why is voting for ethics reform and funding for port security and veterans considered the liberal position?
Many times when votes are cast against one's own party, they are cast for completely opposite reasons than those on the other side of the aisle.
If one looks at voting records more broadly over the whole 210 congress, there are several Senators who voted the more liberal position more frequently than Obama.

I guess I get annoyed that people accept the National Journal study as fact.
Obama is definitely liberal, but here is a link to a 538 article describing why another study is more thorough, and where that study places Obama ...
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/06/liberal-conserva...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #48
55. I am only using the argument that DLCers used as a reason that Obama couldn't win the GE.
Thanks, but I know about the National Journal gimmicky ranking already. I love Nate Silver and FiveThirtyEight, too. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 02:14 PM
Response to Reply #31
49. your hypocrisy is duly noted
Amazing how you can slime centrist but whine when "prooogreeesssssivvveesss" get it returned to them.

Sorry to inform you, but the most liberal senator won the presidency in 2008.

based on one year - primary candidates usually run left.

That should tell you something about how progressive this country really is.

And a Republican president with a less than 30% approval rating was no factor - and winning independent votes that have typically swung right means nothing. :rofl: you display a typical "progressive" simplified black and white thought process.

Face it, Obama used the left, then appointed DLC members and promoted their policies.

Earth to clarkUSA: Nothing's wrong with being liberal. Even Rahm Emanuel described himself as one on his last Meet The Press. But there's plenty wrong being "progressive." Thank God Obama is a centrist.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 02:16 PM
Response to Reply #49
50. Some "progressives" wink, wink here at DU sound a lot like Bush
Yer either with us or against us.

You are either "progressive" or you are a conservative.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #50
52. that's the truth
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 02:52 PM
Response to Reply #49
58. If plain speaking is hypocrisy, then black is white in your world, too.
Edited on Sat Jan-24-09 03:00 PM by ClarkUSA
Obama is anything but a centrist; his executive decisions prove that. He has been coming from the left all his life.
He's just great at co-opting DLC and Republicans into following his progressive/liberal policies, as he did in IL.
Note that Hillary isn't rattling her DLC saber at Syria or trying to "Obliterate Iran" anymore as SoS. Why? Because
she is following Obama's orders on foreign policy to meet our enemies without preconditions.

Now tell me again what DLC policies he's promoting?

Closing Gitmo? Progressive cause. Check.
Funding abortions abroad? Progressive cause. Check.
Restoring habeus corpus? Progressive cause. Check.

He was the most liberal senator which DLCers and Republicans never stopped reminding Americans and the
country still loved his policies enough to give him the largest popular vote victory since LBJ. That's how progressive
this country really is. That's how progressive Democrats really are, too, because he won the majority of their votes,
too, during the primaries.

You can split hairs all you want, but the truth is progressive bloggers are the most powerful political voice on the
Internet in this country, much to the continuing chagrin of the DLC and Republicans alike. DLCers like you should
get a clue from Vilsack, Salazar and the Clintons and fall in line, because liberals/progressives finally have the
president we always wanted. So far, he has kept his promises to us and there is more to come. There won't be
any pandering to the right or triangulating for Barack. Enough is enough.

The best part? Obama is a wonderfully wily liberal/progressive who has co-opted the leaders of the DLC into doing
his bidding and making DLCers like you and Republicans like Bill Kristol think he's a centrist because you guys are
in denial that the candidate you were lambasting as a liberal/progressive chas turned out to be the most popular
president in post-modern history after four days in office. Gotta love it. I'll be chuckling for the next eight years.

:rofl:



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 02:57 PM
Response to Reply #58
59. ha ha... you haven't been paying attention
Obama is anything but a centrist; his executive decisions prove that.

So anytime a Democratic president undoes a Republican policy, that makes that Democrat a "progressive?" No, it makes him a DEMOCRAT.

Obama has been coming from the left all his life. He's just great at co-opting DLC and Republicans into following his
progressive/liberal policies.


Welfare reform, private social security companion accounts, a rebuke of "progressive" identity politics, classic third way rhetoric,


He was the most liberal senator

So says every rightwing source. :)



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 03:07 PM
Response to Reply #59
61. I have paid very close attention. That's why I backed the winner in the presidential contest.
Edited on Sat Jan-24-09 03:31 PM by ClarkUSA
You still can't link to any DLC policies of his, eh? Figures.

Every executive decision he's made has been lifted from the wish list of every progressive since 2003. I am sure
anything else he does will please progressives, too, as what he is doing is for the good of the nation's economy (as
he said, we all have to sacrifice, which is a wonderfully progressive way to think) as well as for the sake of unity
(again, progressive pragmaticism to get policies passed in Congress and to win popular opinion).

President Obama and progressives understand "means to an end" and all that, with the means pleasing DLCers
and Republicans and the ends making progressives happy (meeting with our enemies without preconditions, closing
Gitmo, restoring habeus corpus, ending torture, etc.).

And from my previous post, as it bears repeating:

"He was the most liberal senator which DLCers and Republicans never stopped reminding Americans and the
country still loved his policies enough to give him the largest popular vote victory since LBJ. That's how progressive
this country really is. That's how progressive Democrats really are, too, because he won the majority of their votes,
too, during the primaries.

You can split hairs all you want, but the truth is progressive bloggers are the most powerful political voice on the
Internet in this country, much to the continuing chagrin of the DLC and Republicans alike. DLCers like you should
get a clue from Vilsack, Salazar and the Clintons and fall in line, because liberals/progressives finally have the
president we always wanted. So far, he has kept his promises to us and there is more to come. There won't be
any pandering to the right or triangulating for Barack. Enough is enough.

The best part? Obama is a wonderfully wily liberal/progressive who has co-opted the leaders of the DLC into doing
his bidding and making DLCers like you and Republicans like Bill Kristol think he's a centrist because you guys are
in denial that the candidate you were lambasting as a liberal/progressive chas turned out to be the most popular
president in post-modern history after four days in office. Gotta love it. I'll be chuckling for the next eight years."


:) :woohoo: A Progressive Is 44!! :party: :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 03:16 PM
Response to Reply #61
62. still repeating that Limbaugh/Hannity lie about "most liberal senator?"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #62
64. I wouldn't know; I don't listen to them. I heard it from anti-Obama DLCers ad nauseum, though.
Edited on Sat Jan-24-09 03:26 PM by ClarkUSA
But everything's fine now under liberal/progressive President Obama. I can't wait until the SoS meets with our enemies
without preconditions! Now that's why progressives voted for Obama in the primary and the general election, as well
as so many left-leaning independents who like that kind of progressive talk!

:woohoo: Progressive Obama Is 44 :party:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #64
66. link to them saying that?
Edited on Sat Jan-24-09 03:25 PM by wyldwolf
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #66
67. Sorry, but I have no interest in rehashing the primaries in detail.
Edited on Sat Jan-24-09 03:30 PM by ClarkUSA
Go check the archives here and at CNN and MSNBC since you seem to have amnesia. :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #67
68. translation: you don't have one
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 03:37 PM
Response to Reply #68
69. No. As I said, if you're so interested, go check DU Archives for the usual suspects .
CNN and MSNBC has plenty of footage from the election year and which of Obama's opponents and their surrogates
said so.

Hint: Some of them are in his cabinet today, co-opted into following his progressive policies with a smile.

:woohoo: Progressive President Obama Is 44 :party:


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #69
70. nah, you throw out some erroneous claim then refer to vague media and DU "archives."
LOL!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #70
72. lol! You're won't check my sources because you know I'm right.


:woohoo: Progressives rule! Obama Is 44! :party:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #72
73. well, if you'll actually GIVE sources instead of vague "archive" references!
Edited on Sat Jan-24-09 03:48 PM by wyldwolf
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #73
75. Um, those are sources. I won't waste my time on you further than that, since you hate progressives.
Edited on Sat Jan-24-09 04:01 PM by ClarkUSA
Oh, and I can't wait until President Obama's co-opted DLC SoS meets our enemies without preconditions,
just like a good progressive should. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 03:56 PM
Response to Reply #75
78. um, no they're not. They're vague references to things that may not even exist
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #78
82. Keep spinning those wheels. Face it, your hatred for progressives makes you an odd man out.
Edited on Sat Jan-24-09 04:21 PM by ClarkUSA
Get used to it, because the progressive bloggers you hate so much rule the American political blogosphere.
For the next eight years, it will be a progressive heyday in this country, as liberals rejoice in the President
we worked so hard for during the past two years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #82
83. LOL! you suddenly found time. Did you spend it looking for links to prove yourself?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #83
86. That's your job. But you know what I say is true which is why you won't check my sources.
Edited on Sat Jan-24-09 04:29 PM by ClarkUSA
You'll never win any elections without the support of progressives. That's because voters prefer progressive policies to Republican-lite,
as President Obama many victories prove.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #86
87. the burden of proof is on you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 04:33 PM
Response to Reply #87
88. I gave you a treasure trove of sourcing; now you go dig through the anti-Obama DLC muck. I won't.
Now run along and hate on progressives as is your DLC wont. :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 04:36 PM
Response to Reply #88
90. if by "treasure trove" you mean "MSNBC and DU archives" LOL!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 04:55 PM
Response to Reply #90
92. Yup, CNN, too. Plenty of DLCer anti-Obama "most liberal senator can't win the GE" utterances there.
Edited on Sat Jan-24-09 04:58 PM by ClarkUSA
As I am sure you recall.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 04:57 PM
Response to Reply #92
93. ok, give me a specific example... burden of proof is on you
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 04:59 PM
Response to Reply #93
94. You're very lazy and just want to argue. Do the work yourself, Great Hater of Progressive Bloggers.
Edited on Sat Jan-24-09 05:33 PM by ClarkUSA
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 05:03 PM
Response to Reply #94
95. you've said that before. lol. And we know you have no links to share.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Binka Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 08:23 PM
Response to Reply #94
100. OMFG you are arguing with THAT THING?
Slimy. Really slime. Fat ugly bastard.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polmaven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 05:48 PM
Response to Reply #64
96. you do understand,
don't you, that the vast majority of DUers who supported another candidate in the primary season were/are not "anti-Obama"? We were "pro other candidate"....There is a difference.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #96
97. I understand what you are saying. But it is more like this...
A very small percentage of people purporting to be "Pro-Obama!" were actually anti-Clinton.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
polmaven Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #97
98. But look at the post to which I was responding,
as well as, may I add, the poster.....

I heard it from anti-Obama DLCers ad nauseum, though.


With this particular poster, anyone who supported Hillary was not pro-Hillary, but was an anti-Obama DLCer. It is just simply not true!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ShortnFiery Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 08:30 PM
Response to Reply #58
101. Kudos ClarkUSA!
You put it so well --> My thoughts and sentiments MUCH better than I could have written. :thumbsup: :hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dionysus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 07:15 PM
Response to Reply #49
99. can you tell us what it is about liberals you despise so?
:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #13
71. The NRA was a different organization before the Cincinnati Revolt in 1977
So I don't think that Harry Truman and JFK's association with the organization are comparable. That said, the uproar over Gillibrand is a bit ridiculous IMO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SuperTrouper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 08:09 AM
Response to Original message
6. Yesterday I posted that I got a very bad vibe about Gillibrand and I am still
willing to give her a chance, but this report is indeed disturbing and alarming. Governor Paterson, again, like I have been saying all along, is unqualified and is one of the worst Governors in America. I believe only Blago is worse among Democratic Governors.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muttocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 11:59 AM
Response to Reply #6
18. So did you pause before voting for the Spitzer/Paterson ticket?
And having been state senate minority leader makes Paterson unqualified?

Oh wait, your profile says CT. I'm sure your governors and lt. governors have been fantastic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SuperTrouper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #18
43. Yep, Governor Rell has not been that bad for a Republican. Unfortunately we have not had many
Democratic Governors, mostly Republicans and Independents. Nonetheless, they have not been incompetent (Rowland was a crook, but did some good things for the stete before his greed toppled him). Spitzer was a qualified and competent Governor until his romp with the call girl, Paterson is not competent (and he has his own pecadillos, too) just like Betsy McCaughey was not, either. Senator-designate Gillibrand will get a fair deal and it is up to her to clarify and solidify her positions otherwise Robert Kennedy, Jr. or one of the Downstaters will topple her in the primaries. Paterson is history, everyone knows it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 12:29 PM
Response to Reply #6
25. This "report" is full of bullshit and lies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 01:35 PM
Response to Reply #6
38. Take the post with a grain of salt, they are saying things their links don't support
example #1: "sickeningly reactionary record" links to an article that doesn't say anything like that at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 08:12 AM
Response to Original message
7. BWAHAHA!
I think I will live with her 96% rating from the AFL-CIO and her 100% rating from AFSCME.

And the fact that Pelousy has a problem with her makes me even more optimistic.

And I love this little quip:

Only 12 House Democrats have been worse than Gillibrand: Joe Donnelly (IN), Travis Childers (MS), Brad Ellsworth (IN), Heath Shuler (NC), Jason Altmire (PA), Chris Carney (PA), Dan Boren (OK), Harry Mitchell (AZ), Zack Space (OH), Gene Taylor (MS), Gabrielle Giffords (AZ), Collin Peterson (MN).

Of that group, only Taylor, Boren and Peterson have been in the House longer than Gillibrand. Donnelly, Ellsworth, Sculer, Altmire, Carney, Mitchell, Space and Giffords were elected in '06 along with Senator-designate Gillibrand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tutonic Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 08:24 AM
Response to Original message
8. Haaaa! Now Paterson hs Cuomo to fend off for Governorship. And
Gillibrand has Kennedy's to fend off--they'll get behind somebody else. Is Paterson incompetent? or off his meds?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SuperTrouper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 08:29 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. I think that RFK, Jr. may end up challenging Gillibrand and Cuomo will go
after nincompoop Paterson. It will not be a boring 2010 and the race starts in about 3 to 4 months, little time for Gillibrand to get going.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 11:54 AM
Response to Reply #9
16. Good
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bottomtheweaver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 08:31 AM
Response to Original message
10. Somebody needs to remind him who won the Dem primary.
He seems to have forgotten.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muttocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 12:00 PM
Response to Reply #10
19. For the Senate seat or the Governorship? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HelenWheels Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 08:36 AM
Response to Original message
11. Limpballs likes her
As I posted previously, Limpballs was singing her praises. Makes one wonder. I don't think much of Patterson after his blind backing of Israel. I sure wish Spitzer had kept his pants zipped up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mnhtnbb Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
14. She looked and sounded like she was accepting the presidency of her 8th grade class.
She presents as a very immature individual.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SuperTrouper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 02:00 PM
Response to Reply #14
44. Very true. She was not Palinesque, but she indeed was Quaylesque
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Robeson Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #14
51. I agree. I wasn't impressed...
...hopefully, she'll surprise.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Me. Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
15. To Get Blue America & Move-On Support
The candidates promised to support a progressive agenda. She wasn't the only one who double dealt. I phoned banked for her and a number of others through Move-On who did just that. Lesson learned. Hence she will never have my vote. The same for Patterson. He has bungled the entire process to end up with a less than satisfactory choice. RFKjr. was long rumored to want the seat if HRC won the nom. I hope he runs. It was very telling, to me, that one of the people standing behind her was D'Amato.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FLAprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #15
20. proves what a deceitful opportunist she is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 11:58 AM
Response to Original message
17. It has shown that he had the strength to stand up to the most powerful political family in the US
The guy has balls.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muttocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 12:02 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. and another big political family (Cuomos). nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bottomtheweaver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 12:07 PM
Response to Reply #17
22. The Bushlers? The Kennedys are about the only family
that has ever stood up to the Bushlers and their clients, and he didn't have the guts to appoint a Kennedy. So I disagree. Appointing Caroline really would have required some guts, and he flaked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AtomicKitten Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 12:16 PM
Response to Reply #17
23. and effectively kowtowing to another powerful political family instead
Edited on Sat Jan-24-09 12:21 PM by AtomicKitten
It has been suggested this choice works for some (who pushed Gillibrand) in a demented place-holding scheme tantamount to a shopper squatting on two lines in a grocery store to see which line moves first.

edited for link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Balls? Nah. It was mismanaged political expedience that will bite him in the ass in 2010.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TheWraith Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 12:27 PM
Response to Original message
24. Whoever wrote that blog doesn't know their ass from a hole in the ground.
Gillibrand's record is superb, if anyone bothers to actually look at it.

http://www.ontheissues.org/NY/Kirsten_Gillibrand.htm

She's more liberal than Hillary Clinton, votes with the Dems 93% of the time, has a more progressive record than some of New York City's representatives, and voted to begin pulling troops out of Iraq within 90 days. In other words, she's only "bad" in made-up bullshit designed to lie to people who can't be bothered to take the time to find out the truth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FLAprogressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 12:37 PM
Response to Reply #24
27. yes....you can use a little diamond to determine that she's "more liberal" than HRC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 12:40 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. Better than pulling an opinion out of your ass
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
psquare Donating Member (76 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 01:13 PM
Response to Original message
29. Folks, you're just seeing the "tip of the iceberg" here
For those of us who follow this stuff, NY politics is extremely complicated (and fun), and this whole affair has been very illuminating for seeing where the fault lines lie.

This pick was all about two competing ideas -

1 - Helping Paterson get himself elected. He was not a well-known figure when he ran on the Spitzer ticket. NY voters vote for Governor-Lt. Governor together, like we did with Obama-Biden. Andrew Cuomo wants the job. Paterson would never have given Cuomo Senate because it gives Cuomo tons of free publicity for two years leading up to either a run for the full term (with little opposition) or a switch to run for Governor. Either way Paterson would get into a popularity contest or a numbers contest. It's a no-brainer he would go for someone who is a relative unknown. It would draw competition to the Senate primary in 2010 and that makes it easier for Paterson to get re-nominated.

2 - Caroline Kennedy may be wonderful in speeches and gala events and Boards of organizations, but in NY you have to be popular in both upstate and NYC to get elected. She showed that she has a very thin skin to criticism and very little knowledge of the issues in NY. I personally believe that she was offered a chance to show her stuff by the Obama administration because they were looking to develop a succession plan for her as a possible VP in 2012 and Pres in 2016. Caroline Kennedy proved she was a lightweight in her attempts to be a politician, and picking her would have been a disastrous two-year experiment gone wrong. People thought the same thing about Hillary in 2000, but she surprised everyone by showing herself to fit right in, to learn about the issues, makes tons of speeches, connect with the audience everywhere in the state. Plus she did it in an election primary and campaign. She was incredibly tuned in to all of NY state and she didn't shy away from anything. What a huge contrast with that upstate tour Caroline did. Her performance on that tour practically sunk her chances to be anything but a two-year Senator. It was clear that she didn't like the routine.

So you see why a Kennedy pick might have been good for Paterson, and indeed all indications were that he was going to pick her. There was a high probability that she would have proven out to be a lightweight and that would lead to a wide-open primary. But making that pick would have shown him to be a poor judge of talent. He couldn't bring himself to make it because, frankly, the writing was on the wall that there wouldn't even be a honeymoon period with her being in the Senate. He would have looked bad from the start. Better to pick someone from the "B" list who at least knows how to run a campaign. And Gillibrand is a good campaigner, has a lot of appeal to upstate, and given two years she likely will not embarrass the governor, whether or not she wins the Senate primary.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
annabanana Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 01:23 PM
Response to Reply #29
32. Thanks for the background
very illustrative.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muttocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 01:24 PM
Response to Reply #29
33. good summary. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SuperTrouper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #29
45. Thanks. I am on record saying that I will give Gilli a chance, although I am not
happy with her selection...would have preferred either Maloney or Mario Cuomo.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muttocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 09:04 PM
Response to Reply #45
102. I would have liked Mario Cuomo or Hinchey. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 01:15 PM
Response to Original message
30. Good job to everyone who helped tank Caroline
You reap what you sow.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muttocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #30
34. And why is Caroline the best choice of all other NY Dems? Caroline & her handlers tanked themselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LittleBlue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 01:33 PM
Response to Reply #34
35. It doesn't matter now.
The Chamber of Commerce got their way.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SuperTrouper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 02:03 PM
Response to Reply #34
46. As much as I like Caroline, she was not ready, not yet, for now..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 01:33 PM
Response to Original message
36. Your link to "sickeningly reactionary record" says nothing of the sort
except that she voted against the bailout.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muttocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 01:46 PM
Response to Reply #36
40. so is Kucinich now a corporate dude too? sigh. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 01:56 PM
Response to Original message
42. It's smarter than a choice based solely on celebrity and nostalgia.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
CreekDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 02:07 PM
Response to Original message
47. I'm realizing now that you will be working to defeat two Democrats in New York
Paterson and Gillibrand.

of course you are going about it in the most amateurish way. your links should back up what you say --they don't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Still Sensible Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 02:30 PM
Response to Original message
53. Personally I think this is bullshit
I am not thrilled that she is 100% NRA rated, because while I accept that people should have a right to own firearms I reject that the right is absolute. I don't consider this a dis-qualifier, though.

The place where I have a serious concern, however, is on the immigration issue. She is wrong. I don't have any problem with people who want to secure our borders, although I don't believe the border fence is the answer for a whole host of reasons. But she is on the wrong side of the issue to deny all illegal immigrants a path to citizenship.

That said, Gillibrand gets quite high ratings from gay rights advocates, Emilys list, NARAL (100), ACLU (100), NAACP (96), NEA (gave her an 'A'), AFL-CIO (96), and NOW (100).

She voted for expansion of SCHIP, to require warrants for all FISA wiretapping, to restore habeas corpus to detainees, and to close offshore corporate tax loopholes. She favors medicare for all and gay marriage. All in all, she looks a little more progressive than either Secretary Clinton or President Obama.

Look, I'm in Oklahoma and I know what a Blue Dog looks like. Gillibrand isn't one and it isn't even close.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PBS Poll-435 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 02:37 PM
Response to Reply #53
54. Exactly
And I am in Texas. They would either call her a San-Francisco liberal or a communist with that voting record.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Still Sensible Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 02:46 PM
Response to Reply #54
56. lol, I'd trade our Blue Dogs for her in
a New York minute!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 02:49 PM
Response to Reply #53
57. Thank you for what you said in the body of your post. Excellent stuff!
I share the same sentiments, only you worded it perfectly.

I'm not a hundred percent high on Kirsten, like the NRA associations or the border thing, but she's got so many positives if only people would consider her plusses as much as they dwell on her few negatives. Only on internet message boards are politicians completely written off by some people if they're not 100% perfect in their view.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Still Sensible Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 03:02 PM
Response to Reply #57
60. And thank you
No, people like us won't win any DK purity awards (I like DK, I just don't agree with him on everything), but there are more of us common sense democrats here than might be apparent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
samsingh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
65. i hope this is not true
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveOurDemocracy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
74. Can't you find some Florida Democrat to focus your...
vitriol on? You've been on a rant since before the choice was even official ... and it turns out she's NOT the demon you've been portraying.


As 'Still Sensible' noted:

"...Gillibrand gets quite high ratings from gay rights advocates, Emilys list, NARAL (100), ACLU (100), NAACP (96), NEA (gave her an 'A'), AFL-CIO (96), and NOW (100)."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...


I think I'll go with facts.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IndianaGreen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
76. Gillibrand is being challenged in the 2010 Democratic primaries
Tweety had Congresswoman McCarthy on, who referred to Gillibrand as a tool of NRA. McCarthy is already fund raising to challenge Gillibrand in 2010.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/28818243#288182...

U.S. Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, whose husband was killed by a gunman on the Long Island Railroad, criticized Gillibrand as recently as Thursday evening, saying her support of more conservative issues such as gun ownership rights was out of step with most New York Democrats.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/28780112 /

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sebastian Doyle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 03:56 PM
Response to Original message
77. Anybody who has shilled for Phillip Morris should be viewed with suspicion
One of the worst corporations on earth, who target children, kill their own customer base by design, and use the money made from such mass murder to fund the Republican party.

Why would any "Democrat" want any part of them?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #77
79. Like Al Gore?
In 1988, while running for president, he defended tobacco farmers while campaigning in Southern tobacco states. He accepted contributions from tobacco companies as late as 1990.

Gore claimed that "emotional numbness" led him to defend and profit from the tobacco industry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sebastian Doyle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #79
80. Al Gore's family were tobacco farmers in the past
Edited on Sat Jan-24-09 04:07 PM by Sebastian Doyle
Sadly, he learned all he needed to know about that industry when it killed his sister :(

You'll notice he doesn't defend them anymore.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 04:09 PM
Response to Reply #80
81. yes they were
his sister died in '88.

He was still defending and taking money from the tobacco industry in the '90s.

I'm not defending it. I'm just saying we should hold people to the same standards.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Sebastian Doyle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #81
84. I'll let former President Gore speak for himself on that one
As Mr. Gore spoke of his sister, a two-pack-a-day smoker who died at age 46, women in the audience brushed tears from their cheeks, and Mr. Gore's ailing 83-year-old mother, Pauline, had to rest her head on her husband's shoulder.

The convention speech was Mr. Gore's first public statement on his sister's illness and the culmination of an awkward relationship with the tobacco industry.

In his 1988 campaign for President, he deflected questions about her death and its impact on his thinking, saying the memories were too tender to discuss. But on Wednesday night, with a lumpy throat and a whispery voice, Mr. Gore described his sister's death in 1984 at Vanderbilt Hospital in Nashville in a four-minute remembrance that included a portrait of her final seconds of life.

''I knelt by her bed and held her hand,'' Mr. Gore said. ''And in a very short time her breathing became labored and then she breathed her last breath.'' He added later, ''And that is why until I draw my last breath, I will pour my heart and soul into the cause of protecting our children from the dangers of smoking.''

Mr. Gore said today that he ''felt a numbness'' after his sister's death that made it hard to translate her illness into personal and policy decisions. ''It takes time to fully absorb the most important lessons in life,'' he told reporters at a luncheon today.


http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&r...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #84
89. sure, and here are the opening paragraph of the link you provided:
"Six years after Vice President Al Gore's older sister died of lung cancer in 1984, he was still accepting campaign contributions from tobacco interests. Four years after she died, while campaigning for President in North Carolina, he boasted of his experiences in the tobacco fields and curing barns of his native Tennessee."

It confirms what I previously wrote.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lavender Brown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #77
85. They were one of her law firm's clients years ago
You don't get to choose the cases you work on when you are a young associate at a huge firm.

This is the same BS line of attack that her opponent used against her last fall.

http://timesunion.com/ASPStories/Story.asp?StoryID=7299...

"Gillibrand says she is independent and not influenced by money from the Altria Group, Philip Morris's parent company.

In fact, the Columbia County Democrat, now seeking re-election, has voted in favor of all three bills pushed by anti-tobacco lobbyists and passed by the House of Representatives."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jan-24-09 04:40 PM
Response to Reply #85
91. what? "Progressives" are using right wing lines of attack against Democrats?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Sep 02nd 2014, 02:38 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC