About
The Albany Project seeks to return New York State Government to its rightful owners - the people.

Getting Started at the Albany Project

New York Blogwire



This belongs to you. Take it back...

Gillibrand's Rockland County Q&A session should be free to all

by: cliffweathers

Sat Mar 21, 2009 at 12:58:43 PM EDT


( - promoted by phillip anderson)

Many Rockland County Democrats and Progressives have been getting a variation of this e-mail from some of their local politicos:
Senator Kirsten Gillibrand will be coming to Rockland in one of her first constituent visits!  On Sunday, April 26 from 4-6 pm she will be at Riverspace in Nyack. The Q&A format will allow us to learn more about her while she learns more about the challenges and opportunities in Rockland County.

Join us in welcoming her to Rockland. General admission is $100, with $250 reserved seats to include a post-program reception.  Please support us in welcoming our new Senator to Rockland County.


I was very bothered by some aspects of the e-mails. First of all, the rest of each emails contained supposedly heartfelt personal endorsements, but they all read pretty much the same. Second, I am still wary of Kirsten Gillibrand's history and worry about what it means for New York's future. Third, I'm wondering why this constituent meeting is a paid event, and an expensive one at that. So, I crafted a response to those e-mails that explains my concerns (and I hope you agree):
cliffweathers :: Gillibrand's Rockland County Q&A session should be free to all
If Sen. Gillibrand is having her first meet-and-greet in Nyack, why is it a paid event to fill her campaign coffers? Is $100 needed for political access? I am concerned that this is but a campaign fundraiser masquerading as a question-and-answer session. Must Rockland County Democrats really fork over an admission fee to gain access to the Senator?

My wife an I have many questions, but $200 is a luxury that we can't afford. I have met Sen. Gillibrand's predecessor, Secretary Hillary Clinton four times and not once did I pay a fee to speak with her. So I, my wife, and several of our friends feel shut out. In the meantime, we have concerns that Gillibrand's history and her past policies don't really jibe well with the Democratic ideal and want to know more about the "new" Gillibrand.

Here are my concerns:

* 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.

Paid access to politicians is arguably the root of all of our political problems today. I would love the opportunity to meet our new Senator and would like to discuss my concerns about our nation, the economy, and our community. However, my wife and I don't have $200 to spare during these difficult times and don't think it's fair that a newly appointed Senator ask us to pay for access. So we are considering waiting outside Riverspace on April 26 and hope that the Senator will come out to talk with us as well. If you're like my family, you're filled with consternation about our future, but have little money; I hope you'll join us outside Riverspace on that day.

Crossposted at Left of the Hudson.

Tags: , , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Let me address these concerns one at a time: (4.00 / 4)
* 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.

To say she cut her teeth working for Al D'Amato is not quite accurate. She interned in his Albany office and never met him during the time she worked there. Governor Paterson invited D'Amato to the event - not the Senator.

* 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.

Gillibrand DID co-sponsor the FDA bill and has a 100% anti-tobacco voting record. This is simply a recycled Republican attack. One in which Sandy Treadwell spent millions spreading over the airwaves. It's simply a non-issue. You can find more info here:

http://kirstengillibrand.com/r...

* 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 ran for Congress and made the war in Iraq a focal point of her campaigns. While almost every Congressional Dem in NY supported Bush's authorization of war, Gillibrand always opposed the war. As a member of Congress she voted for every timetable she could. She continues to call for troop withdrawals as a Senator - consistent with the President.

* 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?

That Housing bill focused only on cities larger than those included in her old Congressional district. Of course, as a statewide figure, she would support it. The Waters bill did nothing for NY-20 or other rural areas.

* 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.

Check this out: http://kirstengillibrand.com/r...

* 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.

This is just wrong- she has consistently called for extending the "middle class" tax cuts in that package and favors rolling back the cuts for the wealthy. She supported the Democratic budget last year that did just that and was attacked by her Republican opponent for opposing Bush's tax 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 supports comprehensive immigration reform with an earned path to citizenship.

* 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.

She went on record on the Fred Dicker show BEFORE her 2008 re-election and endorsed gay marriage in NY. Her support has been consistent. She favors repealing DOMA. Arguing someone doesn't support legislation that they don't co-sponsor is an empty argument. Every session there is thousands of bills.

I hope this helps. She is a very available Senator and will be touring Rockland County all day on the 26th. If you call her office, I'm sure they will give you her schedule so you can meet her in person.



We've got some work ahead of us.


"Gillibrand always opposed the war" is a flat-out lie. (0.00 / 0)
Brian, we've known each other a while and I've supported your candidacy and causes many times.

But to say that "Gillibrand always opposed the war" is frankly either a flat-out lie or stunningly ignorant of the history of her campaigns.

Gillibrand told many of us to our faces when she first ran for Congress that she would not come out against the war. She said so to my face, in the presence of a good friend who can back me up. The precise time and place was Joan Davidson's shadbake in Spring 2006.

There is also this from the Village Voice:

[Gillibrand] 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.

Indeed, Gillibrand did not oppose the war until public sentiment had already turned against it, and it became safe to do so.

Thousands of Americans (and Iraqis) died while Blue Dogs like Gillibrand hewed to the safe path which  they thought would protect their political asses, instead of doing what was necessary and right.


[ Parent ]
You're moving the goalposts, and doing so very dishonestly. (2.00 / 2)
To claim that to oppose the war you also had to oppose funding the troops is a truly ridiculous benchmark. You can pretend all you like that it was only a small fringe who supported that position, but the majority of the Democrats felt the same way, as did the country. The actual fact is that Gillibrand campaigned for congress on a platform of ending the war and beginning withdrawals ASAP.  

[ Parent ]
You apparently didn't read my post. (0.00 / 0)
If you had actually read what I posted, you would note that Gillibrand told me to my face (with witnesses) that she would not speak out against or otherwise oppose the war when she first ran. And indeed, she did not do so until it became safe to do so. And only then, in narrowly spinning her votes so that she could speak out of both sides of her mouth to different constituencies.

Knee-jerk support like this for Blue Dogs such as Gillibrand is of no actual long-term value to people who actually want to see reform and progress both within the Democratic party and in Albany/D.C.


[ Parent ]
Sorry, but I'm going to side with facts over your anecdotes. (0.00 / 0)
Her official campaign website for 2006 reflected her official position in favor of "Establishing an end point and an exit strategy." That's not "supporting the war." If you've got problems with the facts, take it up with OnTheIssues.org.

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

Here's what she said about a bill to begin troop withdrawals that she voted for just a few months after being sworn in:

"This war is a terrible tragedy, and it is time to bring it to an end. This is a straightforward bill to redeploy our military forces from Iraq and to end the war in Iraq. This bill does not walk away from the Iraqi people. It specifically continues diplomatic, social, economic, and reconstruction aid. Finally, this bill leaves all the decisions on the locations outside of Iraq to which our troops will be redeployed wholly in the hands of our military commanders."


[ Parent ]
That trollrating was unwarranted... (4.00 / 1)


[ Parent ]
Never met him, aye? (4.00 / 1)
Gillibrand's first job was as an intern for two summers in D'Amato's senate office, and her father, Doug Rutnik, was so close to D'Amato that, while still married to Gillibrand's mother, he covertly double-dated with the then single senator, squiring a D'Amato press aide on a two-week Caribbean tryst to celebrate the senator's re-election in 1992.

Because Rutnik's ties to D'Amato, George Pataki, and the former GOP senate majority leader Joe Bruno are Albany legend, it was hardly a surprise that Gillibrand wanted D'Amato there. What no one could quite figure out is why Paterson did.

A Voice review, however, of two campaign finance committees--Paterson's and the New York State Democratic Committee, which Paterson controls--reveals that D'Amato may be Paterson's largest single fundraiser.

D'Amato hosted a $1,000-a-plate dinner for Paterson at the Coyote Grill in Island Park on November 2, and Paterson went to the Christmas party sponsored by D'Amato's firm on December 10, and most of the $581,400 in contributions connected to D'Amato that the Voice has identified were given to Paterson's committees near those two dates."

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/...

January 8, 2007 -- ZENIA Mucha, the Disney exec who was once the most powerful woman in New York state, is said to have hard feelings over her breakup with her longtime boyfriend, Albany lawyer/lobbyist Douglas Rutnik - especially now that he seems to be engaged to marry another woman.

Mucha, who was a top aide to Sen. Al D'Amato and then Gov. George Pataki's chief spokeswoman, had been with Rutnik at least 12 years. During that time he made a fortune lobbying the Pataki administration by exploiting his connection to her, even though he's a prominent Albany Democrat.

Rutnik was, in fact, a protégé of longtime Albany mayor and Democratic boss Erastus Corning II. He's also the father of Kirsten Gillibrand, a lawyer who pulled off the upstate defeat of Republican Congressman John Sweeney, a one-time executive director of the state GOP and a one-time close ally of Mucha's.

http://www.nypost.com/seven/01...

Sorry, she interned two summers at the office of one of her father's buddies and she never met him. Riiight!

And then there's some sordid tale with her father and a D'Amato aide that sounds like something from One Life to Live?

And last, Sen. Pothole shows up on stage in January hugging her and whispering in her ear, while Schumer is nowhere near a camera? You're funny.

I'll finish dismantling the rest of your argument tomorrow, dinner is getting cold.

Nice try, though.



Hi Cliff (2.00 / 2)
If you have your mind made up already then there isn't much anyone can say to you about the subject I guess.

But... I'm stubborn so I'm gonna give it a try anyhow.

It is completely understandable that folks that are unfamiliar with Senator Gillibrand should want to know more about her. I strongly suggest you contact her office, speak with her staff, see if you can arrange to have your questions and concerns answered. I am quite certain they will be very responsive to your request. Responsiveness and openness to constituents is one of her strongest suits.

Ok...

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand cut her teeth, quite literally in this case, working with her grandmother Polly Noonan and the first women's democratic club in New York State.

Yes, in college, she interned with D'Amato's office.

If you are going to used her fathers love life against her then we are back to the place where your mind is already made up... and a closed mind is a terrible thing.

The tobacco thing is exactly what Brian said it was... a republican smear job. You find me one thing, anything, anything at all, where she has used her political office to benefit big tobacco and I'll back track completely. In the meantime, don't mind if I settle in for a long wait, ok?

Gillibrand did exactly what she said she would do... and more... regarding the Iraq War while in the House. She was very clear on the campaign trail that she felt the war was wrong from the start; that she wanted the troops out as quickly as possible; but that she would not vote to cut funding for the troops in the field. And that is exactly what her Iraq record in the House reflects. She exceeded her campaign statements however by voting in favor of the McGovern bill to withdraw the troops immediately. She never promised anything that good and yet she delivered it anyhow.

I'm not familiar with the housing bill you are referring to so I can't say anything about that except that knowing Kirsten as I do there must have been more to the story then is presented here. She is very thorough and conscientious in reviewing legislation before voting on it.

The gun issue is one of the few legitimate places where liberal democrats are likely to have disagreement with Sen. Gillibrand's positions. She is a pro-gun democrat from an upstate district that is pro-gun. Even the democrats here want to know if any given candidate is "going to take their guns away." It's just the way it is. Not even all liberals agree with strict gun control. But it is a legitimate place for disagreement. She has however, taken positions much more reflective of her new constituency since becoming a Senator. A good elected official holds their own views but also makes sure to always take into account the views of the majority of their constituents... which is exactly what she has done.

You are incorrect about the tax cuts. She has stated that she feels the cuts should remain for most of us but be allowed to expire for the rich.

One of the things I have noticed is that there is a great deal of mis-information out there regarding Kirsten's positions. I notice you linked to the Village Voice above. Please be aware that what's his face there has written very inaccurate hit pieces against her. I can only assume... Barret? Is that the guy?... that his was a Caroline Kennedy guy because that is when he wrote his first wholly incorrect hit piece against Kirsten. So please look for very specific verification of attacks against her before assuming what you read is correct. There are a few areas that liberal democrats will disagree with her but I've seen some serious hogwash out there about her.

Immigration is one of those areas where she has reflected her district to the right of where the state as a whole is. Again, she is modifying her position to reflect her new constituency. When Spitzer did his drivers license thing, Gillilbrand's office was bombarded with anti-immigrant phone calls. It was far and away the one issue that her office received negative contact on from her constituents. I think it was all drummed up by the wing nuts myself but I know for a fact that no other issue generated anything remotely close to the contact as that issue did.

Gay rights is one of those areas in which there is gross mis-information. She has never been opposed to equal rights for the GLBT community. Never. Her voting record is perfect on the issue.

As far as her holding fund raisers... well... guess what... she wasn't even appointed yet when it was announced she would be challenged for the job in 2010. Since then she has received even more challenges. New York is an expensive state and she had to spend over $5 million just to defend her House seat against a self funding multi-millionaire that still out spent her by more than a million! And that was just for a House seat! And now she has less than 2 years to start from scratch to build up the funds, and learn a new job, and introduce herself to the state, and defend herself against mis-information and inaccurate smears, and defend herself against a primary, and defend herself against whoever the Republican challenger will be, in what is one of the 2 most expensive states in the country.

No shit she is holding fund raisers!

Our electoral system is broken. That isn't Kirsten Gillibrand's fault. We need serious campaign finance reform in this country... something she strongly supports by the way... so that elected officials and candidates can spend their time doing what she did so well during her first few years in NY-20, getting out there and meeting constituents instead of being on the phone all the time raising money. But we don't have that yet. We have a broken system that costs millions upon millions and people like her have to raise gawdawful amounts of money to get into office and to stay there.

One of the things Kirsten Gillibrand did here in NY-20 was make herself available to her constituents on a regular basis. I have no idea how she found the time to do it but she was here every chance she could get moving around the 10 counties holding town halls, congress on your corners, forums, etc. She has been traveling the state as much as possible since being appointed Senator. I don't follow her schedule so I don't know if she is doing completely free events or just fund raising events but I am quite certain that if she was like any other Senator that didn't have to worry about defending their seat for another 6 years (she has to defend her 3-4 times in the next 4 years) then she would be much more relaxed about it and would be showing up in your local grocery store or coffee shop listening to what you and your neighbors have to say.

The bottom line for me is this... Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand is one of the brightest, most hard working, honest, and open politicians you will ever meet. All I ask of my concerned friends is that you give her chance. Take the smear attacks with the same grain of salt that you take them when you hear them directly from Republicans. Ask her or her office questions. They will answer. Ask for an opportunity to meet her without paying the big bucks. She will be available. I'll bet you can even get into that big dollar event without paying big dollars. I've done it. I know others have too. (Shhhh! Don't tell anyone!).

Just relax. Keep an open mind. Give her a chance. I am confident that in the end you will be very pleased with your junior Senator.

Peace,

Andrew


[ Parent ]
You know her better than I do, but (0.00 / 0)
One huge problem is that she is a self-identified blue dog.  That all by itself is enough for me not to support her.  Brian is just spinning on her votes for funding the war.  She took the position that she would not vote against funding the troops and she stuck to that.  She never came over to the good side on the voting on the war issues.  Admittedly there were several votes in which the Dem majority voted badly.  

The bottom line is that if downstate liberals but up almost anyone, perhaps even including McCarthy, Gillibrand is going to lose.  Gillibrand can say she is is the right side of guns, gays, the war and immigrants now, but the perception is that she has been wrong on all of those issues. If she gets out there an says all the right stuff with respect to those, she will appear to be the flip-flopper of all time.  

Gillibrand has to hope that she can prevent a primary.  So for her to survive, it will all be about inside politics, cutting off her challengers, i.e being anti-democratic.  That is clearly her strength, which brings me full circle.

Oh and one more thing, the Nyack event is a bullshit way to raise money.  


[ Parent ]
Excuse me, but what the hell? (2.00 / 2)
You're saying that no matter what her stance on the issues, just being a Blue Dog--if for nothing other than the purpose of networking--is reason enough not to vote for her? That's nonsense.

Second, EVERYBODY took the approach she did that they weren't willing to cut off funding. You could probably count the Democrats on your hands and feet who were willing to actually cut off funding.

Compare that to McCarthy, who as late as 2006 was voting in favor of resolutions supporting the indefinite continuation of the war.  


[ Parent ]
Straw men galore (0.00 / 0)
Both Adama and Andrew are completely mischaracterizing posts to continue their tradition of blindly supporting party establishment figures. It's unproductive.

For example, Andrew takes the cheap shot of saying "If you have your mind made up already" (as if Andrew didn't make up his mind to defend Gillibrand against all criticism eons ago). Adama goes a step farther, and completely distorts jmcbride's legimitate point by deliberately misinterpreting it ad absurdum ("You're saying that no matter what her stance on the issues").

Shades of Rush Limbaugh, fellows. Just because you're doing it as Dems doesn't make such rhetorical trickery right.


[ Parent ]
No distortion at all. (0.00 / 0)
Here's what jmcbride said:

"One huge problem is that she is a self-identified blue dog.  That all by itself is enough for me not to support her."

In other words, he said very clearly that what her actual stance on the issues is does not matter to him. It doesn't matter that she's substantially to the left of both her predecessor Hillary Clinton, and Chuck Schumer, and a lot of the rest of our Senate Dems.


[ Parent ]
I disagree with your characterization of these posts (0.00 / 0)
and it seems to me that you're troll-rating based on difference of opinion.  I understand you're pissed off, and you have every right to be.  But neither of those posts of Adama's deserved troll-ratings.

[ Parent ]
A veteran friend tried to contact her office... (0.00 / 0)
... about a problem with benefits when she was still a Congresswoman, and got the cold shoulder.

This is an experience many have had, despite Gillibrand's claims to be so responsive to "constituents."

But he (like me) still gets the incessant fundraising pitches still.

Another friend, who rented her office space, got royally dicked around by her staff in 2008.


[ Parent ]
I somewhat agree (4.00 / 1)
but I get agigtated when people try to say because she interned with D'Amato, her politics are in question.

I am a very liberal Democrat and I interned with Senator Charles Fuschillo in college...I did because his office was looking for interns and I needed an internship.  


Unfortunately, the cover matches the book. (0.00 / 0)
This isn't mere guilt by association: Many of Gillibrand's positions match up with her Republican associations.

For example, her perfect rating from English First -- the rabidly right-wing anti-immigrant group which wants to make English the "official" language of the U.S., and to eliminate all "multilingual programs."


[ Parent ]
Really? Want to name any others? (0.00 / 0)
Care to name all those pro-gay-marriage Republicans? All the anti-war Republicans? Or those supporting stem cell research, financial industry regulation, discrimination based on sexual orientation, expanding SCHIP, requiring FISA warrants, funding alternative energy research, increasing CAFE standards...

By the way, Clinton supported English as an official language as well--which is a distinction from having it as a national language, and doesn't bar anybody from using any other language, including various states.

Yeah, it is guilt by association. You can find one or two things that you can object to, and once those are knocked down all you can do is shout "Blue Dog, Blue Dog!"


[ Parent ]
Come back down to earth. (0.00 / 0)
You're arguing nonsensically, against points that no one made, with a complete scattershot approach.

Yes, I can name another noxious position from KG: Her stance on immigrants. For example, Gillibrand refused to meet with employers in Hudson who were concerned about her immigrant-bashing mailing, saying that she wouldn't want to "meet with criminals." Her posturing in favor of speedy deportment and "crackdowns" was a disgrace and inhumane.


[ Parent ]
No, I'm naming actual issues, ones that you don't want to talk about. (0.00 / 0)
Because if you address actual issues, you'd have to admit that she's got virtually nothing in common with Republicans as you claimed.

And gee, someone refers to people who want to hire illegal immigrants as criminals? Guess what? Hiring illegal immigrans is, in fact, a crime. Personally I don't care that much one way or another about immigration, but it's not really disputable that the use of immigrant labor can kill the economy in a lot of small farming towns upstate. It's happened before.  


[ Parent ]
Many Democrats support English First (0.00 / 0)
even in the city.  

[ Parent ]
More... (4.00 / 1)
I didn't really want to re-publish those old (and one sordid) articles about the connections between Gillibrand's father and D'Amato, but I wanted to show that it's b.s. when people repeat the, "She never knew him" mantra in regards to D'Amato. That's just nonsense.

And yes, if it were just two summer internships, I wouldn't think much of it, but this relationship obviously goes deeper than that.

And I drew no conclusions about Gillibrand's voting record in regards to tobacco, I did not google some old claim and recycle it and I would be the last person to recycle a GOP attack. I only have questions, and yes I would like those answered. And no, The Famly Smoking Prevention Act does not go nearly far enough:

Here's a summary of the bill:

The act would give the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) greater authority to regulate tobacco products in an effort to assist current smokers with quitting and prevent tobacco manufacturers from enticing youth to smoke.[1] According to the its sponsors, the measure would aim to give the FDA the legal authority it needs to:

   * Prevent tobacco advertising that targets children
   * Prevent the sale of tobacco products to minors
   * Help smokers overcome their addiction
   * Identify and reduce the toxic constituents of tobacco products and tobacco smoke for those who continue to be exposed to them
   * Regulate claims about reduced risk tobacco products
   * Prevent the tobacco industry from misleading the public about the dangers of smoking.[2]

This would include establishing stronger warning labels on tobacco products, more stringent regulations of the advertising and sales of tobacco products, the gradual reduction and removal of hazardous ingredients from cigarettes, and new standards for tobacco products labeled "reduced risk" or "low tar."

Nowhere does this mention FDA oversight as it has with other consumer products (either in this summary or in the full bill). It does mention FDA regulation of the claims about reduced risk tobacco products and stronger warning labels on tobacco products. I'm sure that even the tobacco lobby is not adverse to anything in this bill. This is just a feel good bill.

I am talking about real consumer protection. I mean having the whole farming, manufacturing, and distribution networks come over FDA oversight or inspection like is done with other consumer products. There is no bill on the books that asks for this right now. And slapping on some silly regulations or raising cigarette taxes by a few cents is not going to make a dent in cigarette smoking. But monitoring the practices in producing tobacco products can help mitigate the health problems associated with them.

And I'm not saying that she's adverse to this, I want to ask the question. And that's true with every bullet point in my diary.

And as far as the Brady Bill extensions are concerned, she's been very vague about what she will and won't support. And while Carolyn McCarthy and Paul Helmke of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence have called on her to mend fences by sponsoring these background check extensions, she hasn't replied to the invitation.

Regardless, the point of the diary isn't the questions; the point is that a lot of people have questions. Some are easily answered; others won't be. Some may calm our fears about Gillibrand, others might raise more questions. But we want a forum where those questions are answered and we're being told that we have to pay to do so.

And I'm sure both of you are right, Gillibrand would probably be glad to meet with me if I put together the effort to arrange it with my busy schedule and hers. And I'm sure I'll find her charming and intelligent, but you're entirely missing the point: Many look at Gillibrand with a jaundiced eye, whether deserved or not, and it seems rather elitist and cynical, I must say, for her to advertise a "meet and greet" that's a paid political campaign event. She may fork over a few thousand dollars, but she's not going to win any votes by doing that.

Gillibrand should take a page from Hillary's book. When Hillary came to New York, many people felt that she was a carpetbagger. Yet, she plopped herself down in coffee houses in Batavia and Wegman's bakery aisles in Buffalo and people began to warm up to her. Gillibrand suffers from the same problem that Clinton initially did and making her first appearance in my town in a pay-to-play event is not making me, or anyone else, happy.



Gillibrand's Rockland County Q&A session should be free to all (4.00 / 1)
Of course it should, but as long as there is not meaningful public financing of campaigns, people in public office or want to be, have to continue to raise obscene amounts of money and divert their time from meeting people and doing the job we expect of them.

Until that change in how we fund our elections happens, Gillibrand has to face the reality of an election in 2010 and 2012, a brutal and costly schedule.

Amazingly Senator Gillibrand seems to be able to combine her responsibilities of representing her millions of new constituents in DC with getting around to different parts of the state to learn the issues of the entire state.  She has to simultaneously represent us effectively in the Senate, establish a record as Senator and raise funds, especially as there is sniping from envious members of the Congressional delegation who are threatening a wasteful, costly, divisive primary.

Gillibrand has been an advocate of transparent government and has started with her own schedule and other activities.  While in Congress she went throughout her district having street corner meetings.  

Like her predecessor, Kirsten is smart, funny, caring, thoughtful, open-minded and tough.  And like Hillary, who started off as a Young Republican, Kirsten has developed a highly progressive record and has the endorsement of a wide variety of progressive groups.  

She also has the enthusiastic support of President Clinton and Hillary, and Senator Schumer.  Let's coalesce around our new Senator and keep the Senate seat in the Democratic camp.  We cannot afford to lose a single seat in the Senate.  But if some keep undermining Senator Gillibrand, well all you have to do is look at Guiliani's frog eating grin to know the beneficiary of Democratic in-fighting.


Transparency? (0.00 / 0)
Was it Gillibrand's commitment to transparency that led her, shortly after being elected to Congress, to try to steer a $4 million defense contract (150mm howitzers) that would benefit BAE, the company where her husband worked and her father-in-law was top dog?

[ Parent ]
The pay to play aspect (4.00 / 2)
really bothers me.  If there's a way to ensure that only the usual local elites will show up for an event, it's to charge $100 a seat.

What bothers me more, I guess, is that in much of NYS that kind of thing is totally ordinary.


In Gillibrand's defense... (0.00 / 0)
...we hear we should be patient, relax and give her a chance?

That the system is so screwed up we need to understand she has to raise a lot of money?

That she is a blue dog solely for networking purposes when her family was enriched by a foreign owned military contractor?

It sounds to me like Ms. Gillibrand is exactly the type of politician Eisenhower warned us about when he told us the halls of power in Washington were infected by a military industrial complex seeking to start wars for profit.

I know her family hurriedly sold their stock in BAE but can't we find a candidate without these longstanding ties to defense contractors after the "fiasco" of the last 8 years?

Can't we bring in someone that isn't a second generation lobbyist to represent the hardworking middle-class taxpayer? Pardon my skepticism, but I'd like to shop for a candidate much stronger on reform, ethics, and anti-war, anti-corporate principle - at least in the primary.

I might suggest that if Gillibrand is serious about transparency --a truly transformative issue resonating with young voters--she should open up an ongoing two-way dialogue with average New Yorkers. As Obama has shown, fundraising takes care of itself if you show you are willing to begin protecting voters from lobbyist and corporate influence.


Oh, please. (0.00 / 0)
You're not allowed to make things up to bolster your point.

A lawyer from upstate New York is suddenly a major member of the military industrial complex?

Have we completely forgotten that Gillibrand ran on an anti-war platform? Have you forgotten that Gillibrand was never a lobbyist?

By your standards you'll never find a satisfactory candidate, because everyone will have some six-degrees-of-Kevin-Bacon connection that you or someone else would find objectionable.


[ Parent ]
Lying won't make your case. (0.00 / 0)
Gillibrand most certainly did not run on an anti-war platform in 2006.

As far as the military-industrial complex thing, it is not disputed that her husband's father has been the top executive for various armaments makers (and KG and Jonathan owned stock in BAE, where he worked).

Gillibrand was also a laywer for a firm which did both legal work and lobbying. Her clients included Big Tobacco, and you can read her emails strategizing on their behalf, if you know how to use Google (which I'm starting to doubt, frankly).


[ Parent ]
I'm sorry, but again the facts contradict you. (0.00 / 0)
OnTheIssues.org recorded the official positions on her campaign website. Item number one about Iraq: "Establish an end point and an exit strategy."

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

And I'm sure that if you take it a couple more steps, you can link her to Kevin Bacon, too. But trying to make it out like she's the unholy love-child of Dr. Strangelove and Meyer Lansky for the fact that here husband--not her--owned some stock from years earlier is both disingenuous and completely contrary to the record she's displayed in Congress.

Also, you're either lying or misinformed. Gillibrand was a lawyer, yes, but not a lobbyist. And one tobacco company contracted with her law firm, a decision that she had NO say in. If you get to choose what assignments you work on where you are, congratulations: not everyone does. She worked on organizing subpeona documents during some of the suits against them.


[ Parent ]
Gillibrand apparently serious about transparency! (0.00 / 0)
Giving credit where credit is due, two weeks later, here is an update to KG's website announcing her commitment to transparency - http://gillibrand.senate.gov/n...

[ Parent ]
The Albany Project

Please take my Blog Reader Project survey.

Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Search




Advanced Search


NY blogs

Politics

Adirondack Almanack
Buffalo Geek
Buffalo Pundit
Capitol Confidential
Daily Gotham
Daily Politics
DMI Blog
DragonFlyEye
Empire Page
Empire Zone
Gothamist
Gotham Gazette
Group News Blog
Jason Gooljar
Left of the Hudson
Living In Dryden
Lost In The Ozone
McHugh Watch
Nassau GOP Watch
Planet Albany
Politicker NY
Politics on the Hudson
Reform NY
Rochester Turning
Room 8
Simply Left Behind
Take19
The Community Alliance

Think Tanks

Brennan Center for Justice
Citizens Budget Commission
Citizens Union
Drum Major Institute
Fiscal Policy Institute
New Democracy Project
Progressive States

Organizations

Citizen Action
Citizens for Better Government in New York
Common Cause
New York Citizens for Clean Elections
Progressive States Network
>
National Blogs

Politics

AmericaBlog
Crooks and Liars
DailyKos
Digby
Eschaton
Firedoglake
MyDD
Political Cortex
Senate Guru
Skippy
Swing State Project
Talk Left
Talking Points Memo
The Right's Field

LBAN Network

Agonist
All Spin Zone
AlterNet
AMERICAblog
American Street
ArchPundit
BAGNewsnotes
BartCop
Big Head DC
Blogging of the Pres
BlogACTIVE
Bluegrass Report
Bluegrass Roots
Blue Indiana
BlueJersey
Blue Mass. Group
BlueOregon
BlueNC
Bob Geiger
Booman
BRAD Blog
Brendan Calling
Buckeye State Blog
Burnt Orange Report
Calitics
Capitol Annex
Carpetbagger Report
Chris Floyd
Clay Cane
Cliff Schecter
Comments from Left Field
Confined Space
Corrente
Cotton Mouth
Crooks and Liars
culture kitchen
Cursor
Daily Gotham
Daily Kos
David Corn
Democrats.com
Dem Bloggers
Deride and Conquer
Democratic Underground
Digby
DovBear
Drudge Retort
Ed Cone
ePluribus Media
Eschaton
Ezra Klein
Feministe
Feministing
Firedoglake
Fired Up
First Draft
Frameshop
Greatscat!
Green Mountain Daily
Greg Palast
Hoffmania
Horse's Ass
Hughes for America
In Search of Utopia
Is That Legal?
Jesus' General
Jon Swift
Juan Cole
Keystone Politics
Kick!
KnoxViews
Las Vegas Gleaner
Latino Pundit
Lawyers, Guns and Money
Left Coaster
Left in the West
Liberal Avenger
Liberal Oasis
Loaded Orygun
Mahablog
Majikthise
Make Them Accountable
Matthew Yglesias
MaxSpeak
Media Girl
Michigan Liberal
Minnesota Campaign Report
Minnesota Monitor
MyDD
My Left Nutmeg
My Left Wing
My Two Sense
Nathan Newman
Needlenose
Nevada Today
News Corpse
News Dissector
Newshoggers
News Hounds
Nitpicker
Oliver Willis
onegoodmove
OpenLeft
PageOneQ
Pam's House Blend
Pandagon
People's Rep. of Seabrook
PinkDome
Politics1
Political Animal
Political Wire
Poor Man Institute
Prairie State Blue
Progressive Historians
Raising Kaine
Raw Story
Reno Discontent
Republic of T
Rhode Island's Future
Rochester Turning
Rocky Mountain Report
Rod 2.0
Rox Populi
Rude Pundit
Sadly, No!
Satirical Political Report
Seeing The Forest
Shakesville
SirotaBlog
SistersTalk
Skippy the Bush Kangaroo
Slacktivist
Smirking Chimp
SquareState
Suburban Guerrilla
Swing State Project
Talking Points Memo
Talk Left
Tapped
Taylor Marsh
Tattered Coat
Texas Kaos
The Albany Project
The Blue State
The Democratic Daily
The Hollywood Liberal
The Reaction
The Talent Show
This Modern World
Town Called Dobson
Turn Maine Blue
Uppity Wisconsin
Wampum
War and Piece
WashBlog
Watching the Watchers
West Virginia Blue
Young Philly Politics
Young Turks

Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless

blog radio

Get the albany project in your inbox! Just enter your email address

Delivered by FeedBurner

____________________


Active Users
Currently 1 user(s) logged on.

Powered by: SoapBlox