Her fellow New York Democrats don’t like Senator Gillibrand:
Gillibrand, the newly appointed junior senator from New York, has never been shy about her political ambitions — or her willingness to vault over older, more experienced politicians.That aggressiveness and self-confidence has endeared her to the powerful politicians who share her impatience to get ahead — including Hillary Clinton, whose seat she’ll take; David Paterson, who appointed her to it; and Chuck Schumer, who’ll be the senior senator to her junior.
But many of those who know Gillibrand best — Democratic members of the state’s congressional delegation — weren’t exactly high-fiving over the pick, and not just because several wanted the job themselves.
“Nobody really likes her,” sniped one New York City-area member, speaking on condition of anonymity.
She’s smart and capable, but she’s rubbed people the wrong the way,” said another.“I think she’s going to get a serious primary in 2010,” opined a longtime state Democratic operative who supports Gillibrand.
Many members of the state’s congressional delegation skipped Gillibrand’s announcement in Albany, mostly citing other commitments.
And one notable absentee was sending a message: Pro-gun-control Long Island Rep. Carolyn McCarthy says she’ll run against Gillibrand to protest the new senator’s pro-gun record and perfect NRA rating.
Pro-gun? Perfect NRA score?
I might just peel off a $20 to support her myself.
Gillibrand is your worst nightmare, Mitch. She’s from the district once held by conservative Republican Gerald Solomon. In 2006, she took it away from drunken Republican fratboy John Sweeney (a veteran of the 2000 Brooks Brothers riot, nicknamed “Congressman Kickass” by the former Rush Chairman-in-Chief).
Gillibrand, if she holds onto the seat, could represent the resurgence of the centrist/conservative Democrat. She’s pro-gun, anti-immigrant, squishy on gay marriage and voted against the bailout.
With the collapse of the national Republican Party, the Democrats have a huge opportunity to claim the center of the electorate. Lord knows you kooks don’t want it. Soon all the normal people will be Democrats and the Republicans will be limited to a Southern-based party of God-botherers and the occasional flat-tax kook or anti-immigrant extremist in the north, west and midwest.
So definitely, Mitch, send Gillibrand $20.
Yeah, because Republicans don’t want sane competition. We have to help angryclown maintain the “crazy” in Democrat Central. 😉
Clown,
Had there been more Democrats like Gillibrand, I might have remained one.
Have no fear. The party will eat her, just like they ate Norm Coleman and Randy Kelly and every other Democrat that’s not, y’know, whoohoohoohooohooohoo.
Gillibrand is your worst nightmare, Mitch.
That’s Senator Gillibrand to you.
SUCK IT MANGY CLOWN!!!!!!
“”Gillibrand, if she holds onto the seat, could represent the resurgence of the centrist/conservative Democrat. She’s pro-gun, anti-immigrant, squishy on gay marriage and voted against the bailout.””
My kind of Democrat . . and ‘mitch’, she’s a Democrat . .can’t be pulling the ole tug of war rope with that., Remember, your said the best Democrat in the world is still worse than the worse Republican. Like everything else has become here, you may ‘say’ you might peel of a $20, but we all know it would never happen.
Funny, I thought Norm Coleman was that Republican fellow who’s unable to accept that he needs to look for a job. No Mitch, it ain’t the Democrats insisting on ideological purity these days. Heck, Joe Lieberman, whom most people consider fatally insubordinate to his former party, wasn’t stripped of his Homeland Security committee chairmanship.
Funny, you thought you were informed. Norm was a centrist Democrat until 1996 when you far leftists, who wouldn’t know centrism if it hit you, made him decide to become a centrist Republican.
As long as Nancy Pelosi can crush enough skulls to get her way, she’ll let a few of he minions appear centrist to the public, but when it’s time to pay the bills, there WILL be ideological purity.
I thought Norm Coleman was that Republican fellow
Well, yeah, for about 12 years now. But that was after a lifetime of being a Democrat. He was elected mayor of St. Paul as a DFLer; he even gave Paul Wellstone’s nomination speech at the ’96 DFL Convention. The wackjobs – the ones that currently control the Dems at all levels – chased him out, so he spent his last time as mayor in the GOP.
As to Lieberman; Wow – the Trotskyites are too smart to strip your former Veep candidate and one of your most senior and respected Senators of his committee position. I bet they also keep their genitals out of light sockets on a good day.
Other say she’s actually pretty liberal (2nd amendment rights is an exception). Because she’s not a left wing fundementalist though, the party of Barry hates her. No desention allowed on any issues.
Speaking of Democrat wackjobs, did you see where Coleen Rowley and Phylis Kahn spoke at a rally this week supporting the terrorists who were here for the RNC…….kind of like Democrats supporting KKK terrorists 60 years ago.
Zat so Chuckwagon? Cause it looks like she’s got herself a Senate seat.
And thanks for the walk down memory lane, Mitch. But I don’t think Coleman’s treatment by the Minnesota DFL in 1996 says very much about the 2009 Democratic Party.
Your tap-dancing on Lieberman isn’t exactly convincing. (Respected? By GWB, maybe.) Republicans would have cut off his nuts in a heartbeat.
We’ll see how big the D’s tent is — The test is if Gillebrand’s rivals forgo a primary challenge in 2010. And we understand that she’s a Democrat; the key is that she won’t be a cipher (like Caroline) a one-note samba (like McCarthy) or a Schumer clone (like the rest of the Congressional delegation in New York). In 2009, we have to take what we can get. In 2010 it may look different.
Gotta love those big-tent Dems.
“And thanks for the walk down memory lane,”
And Freud calls this stress coping mechanism “aggression”.
Well it could possibly be “rationalization” too.
I don’t think Coleman’s treatment by the Minnesota DFL in 1996 says very much about the 2009 Democratic Party.
I’ll bet you don’t!
Your tap-dancing on Lieberman isn’t exactly convincing. (Respected? By GWB, maybe.) Republicans would have cut off his nuts in a heartbeat.
Olympia Snowe. Susan Collins. Chuckles Hagel. Jim Ramstad.
Please.
Which one of those ran on an independent line against the winner of a party primary and campaigned, very visibly, for the opposing party’s presidential candidate?
“Please” yourself.
I think she was a very, very smart choice. Regardless of whether the Obama regime (see, I’m learning from the euphorians!) is bad or terrible on self-defense and less important gun-related issues, it is one of those wedge issues that the Democrats are very smart to try to defuse, and Paterson is showing a real depth of thinking here, both in terms of his own political future, and the party’s.
Unless they can ruin him, it really signifies that the Kennedy clan is in freefall decline.
“made him decide to become a centrist Republican. ”
You can’t rewrite history, Sen. Coleman has always been about Norm, and he knew the best way to move up the political ladder was to compete against a weak GOP bench then a strong Democratic one. Sen. Coleman didn’t leave cause he was pushed out, he left cause it benefited him greater politically. He has never made a decision that wasn’t about Norm first!
Sheesh, do you guys actually pay attention anymore, or just stick to your crib notes so you know what you are suppose to say.
Sen. Coleman has always been about Norm, and he knew the best way to move up the political ladder was to compete against a weak GOP bench then a strong Democratic one.
Strong Democratic bench? Like Skip Humphrey? Ann Wynia? John Marty? Roger Moe? Joan Growe? I’ll bet Norm was quaking in his boots.
From what he says, flash seems to know Norm personally and really, really well.
For some reason, however, I doubt that he does. *shrug*
Actually, I think there’s something in what Flash says. A centrist politician with ambitions has only two choices hereabouts, talk about third parties aside. In terms of a centrist Democrat to get much of anywhere in the party in recent years, only two names come to mind: Mike Hatch and Lori Swanson.
A centrist Democrat who wants to move up the ladder is going to have to do it with the likes of Pogie and Entenza and Marty and Kelliher stomping on his or her fingers, ’cause they can’t tolerate moderation.
As the Republican party rethinks itself, it may or may not want to consider how the call from some — most? — Republican conservatives for more party discipline will effect choices some people make over the next ten or twenty years.
“flash seems to know Norm personally and really, really well.”
He read about him in his crib notes.
AC as an NRA member I want Democrats to recognise the 2nd Amendment as an individual right, a check on Government power.
I hope that change means Democrats will recognise the Bill of Rights limits the Government not the citizens.
A centrist Democrat who wants to move up the ladder is going to have to do it with the likes of Pogie and Entenza and Marty and Kelliher stomping on his or her fingers, ’cause they can’t tolerate moderation.
Today that is true, Joel. Back when Norm made his move, Marty was the only one of that group to be a factor. Perhaps the leadership back then would bully people the way that Pogie et al. does now, but it certainly seems to be a more pronounced matter now. I suspect that the primary issue for Norm was his prolife stance, though — he’s said as much more than once.
Your point about party discipline is correct, though. And who does the enforcing matters a whole lot, too.
Mr. Dipshit said: “Strong Democratic bench? Like Skip Humphrey? Ann Wynia? John Marty? Roger Moe? Joan Growe? I’ll bet Norm was quaking in his boots.”
Yeah, it takes a minor SNL cast member to beat Coleman.
A minor SNL cast member who first had to beat the titans in his party to win the DFL nomination.
Yeah, it takes a minor SNL cast member to beat Coleman.
Whatever, Carrot Top.
AC excreted:
Which one of those ran on an independent line against the winner of a party primary and campaigned, very visibly, for the opposing party’s presidential candidate?
“Please” yourself.
Um, kind of proves our point, eh? Why did Lieberman run as an independent?
OH YEAH! THE DEMS KICKED HIM OUT OF THE PARTY FOR NOT BEING IDEOLOGICALLY PURE!!!
Seriously, you are a retard!
“She’s pro-gun, anti-immigrant, squishy on gay marriage and voted against the bailout. ”
“With the collapse of the national Republican Party, the Democrats have a huge opportunity to claim the center of the electorate. Lord knows you kooks don’t want it. Soon all the normal people will be Democrats…”
Hell, toss in small government and fiscal constraint and I’m in too.
Call ’em what you want, dolt. As long as they vote the right way, I’m good.