New York Gov. Paterson to Name Rep. Gillibrand to Clinton's Former U.S. Senate Seat

Fox News ^ | January 22, 2009

[Stars&StripesNE]

New York Gov. David Paterson will name Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand, an upstate Democrat, to replace Hillary Clinton in the U.S. Senate, a Democratic official with knowledge of the governor's decision told FOX News on Thursday night.

Gillibrand, elected in 2006, represents the state's 20th congressional district in the U.S. House of Representatives. She is the first Democrat to represent the district since 1978 -- and the first female representative of the district.

Paterson is scheduled to formally announce his pick Friday

[FreeReign]

The outrage is all staged. I have seen a couple Dem stategists already trying to call her the Sarah Palin of the left. More like Nancy Pelosi with a gun.

Right you are. I would only add that she's more like Nancy Pelosi with a gun along the 600-mile Washington-Rochambeau National Historic Trail.

Her only direct pro IIA vote was the following...

GOA:On July 10, 2008, the House of Representatives narrowly defeated an attempt by Republicans (by a vote of 202-211) to prevent a 600-mile gun ban along the Washington-Rochambeau National Historic Trail from going into effect. Instead, the House voted to place the trail under the jurisdiction of the Department of Interior and the National Park Service, thus subjecting the entire trail to a gun ban. A vote in favor of sending HR 1286 back to committee -- with instructions to allow state and local gun laws to govern firearms possession rather than National Park Service regulations -- is rated as a pro-gun vote.

She voted against that one gun ban. For that one vote some would overlook Gillibrand's 92% liberal voting record.

[FreeReign]

Are you sure she is a Second Amendment supporter and not a typical Democrat who supports the right of a hunter to own one .22 caliber single-shot rifle, as long as it is stored in a police station and can only be checked out for an hour once a year?

I'll answer that with this info from a Hudson River blog...

Newly appointed Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand defended her position on gun rights when she talked to reporters tiday, saying she and her family come from a long line of hunters. She said she wants to rid the streets of illegal guns, but that hunters should have rights too.

“I grew up in a hunting family. I grew up here in upstate New York,” she said. “My mom is probably the best shot in my family. My brother hunts, my dad hunts. In upstate New York, we typically shoot the Thanksgiving turkey. So that’s what we do.

“And so I’ve always wanted to protect the hunters’ rights because they are such an important part of our culture.”

Link

[BillyBoy]

>> Unbelievable. <<

What's unbelievable about my comments? You must have missed my statement that RINO Peter King is more conservative than Gillibrand overall but nevertheless Gillibrand is better than King on some key issues. King is a Clinton-loving RINO, it's not hard to be to the right of him on some issues. The only issue I can think of where he is CLEARLY on the side of conservatives and his opponent is not the issue of rights of the unborn. If you want to dispute these simple facts, feel free to post any evidence you have.

>> What is ironic about your statement is that Gillibrand is the single conservative issue candidate. <<

Gillibrand voted 100% right on gun rights, supported extending the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts, opposes ANY type of "path to citizneship" for illegals -- supported the fence bill and opposed Governor Spitizer's plan to issue New York State drivers licenses to illegal immigrants (the pro-illegal alien lobbyist group "New York Immigration Coalition" denounced her selection), she opposed the socialist bailout bill BOTH times, she opposes deficit spending, and she voted with the Bush administration and against her own party leadership on funding the war (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), as well as supporting the Bush-backed anti-terrorism FISA bill that permits wiretapping of international calls.

Which of those HALF DOZEN issues where she's been on the right side is the "single" issue in your mind? I would hardly call her position on deficits or illegal aliens "liberal". Nobody is claiming she's Jesse Helms, just that she's to the right of the average Marxist Democrat in NY. She certainly isn't "moderate" by nationwide standards, but she IS "moderate" compared to the typical socialist elected in NY. If she wasn't, then the DailyKos, MoveOn.Org, and DU regulars wouldn't be tearing their hair out and expressing outrage over her appointment. As far as NY Dems go, she's the most conservative they have.

Of course if the GOP had a REAL Republican ready to run for the seat instead of the odious RINO Peter King, then we'd have a candidate who would clearly be better than Gillibrand on some major issues. Instead, a King vs. Gillibrand race would be moderate Democrat vs. moderate Democrat. Since I cannot support any pro-abortion candidates, I wouldn't vote for Gillibrand. However, anyone with half a brain can tell she's at least more likeable than the pro-terrorist, gun-grabbing, Clinton-loving thug Peter King. (whom this forum has rated as an unacceptable RINO for more than a decade) I won't be shedding any tears if King loses.

[xkaydet65]

Rudy is pro choice and a zealous practioner of government power. His conservative cred comes from dealing with crime, but he followed the lead of Bratton, a Boston dem. Rudy endorsed and still backs Bloomberg. Rudy’s cachet is tied totally to his performance at 9/11. He did his job. He was Mayor. He did what he was supposed to the way the cops, fdnees, bus drivers, and school teachers did their jobs. Rudy endorsed and actively campaigned for Mario Cuomo against Pataki in 94.He did so out of pique because Pataki was a creature of D’Amato, Giuliani’s sworn adversary. So he puts personal pique as more important than the welfare of his state. RINO is too nice a name for Rudy.

[BillyBoy]

>> I think the fact that she’s for an issue I care deeply about is great! I like Peter King but I want to see his 2nd Amendment bona fides before I support him. Besides, she’s a babe! <<

Gillibrand is about 10X to the right of Peter King on gun issues. Far from having 2nd amendment "bona fides", King is a gun-grabber who gets D and F ratings from gun groups and took the lead in supporting the 1994 Brady Crime Bill and Assault Weapons Ban when his buddy Bill Clinton asked him to.

Here's King's scorecard from pro-gun groups:

2008 In 2008 National Rifle Association gave Representative King a grade of D.

2007 In 2007 Gun Owners of America gave Representative King a rating of D-.

2005 Representative King supported the interests of the Gun Owners of America 25 percent in 2005.

2003-2004 Representative King supported the interests of the Gun Owners of America 20 percent in 2003-2004.

2003 Representative King supported the interests of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence 66 percent from 1988-2003 (Senate) or 1991-2003 (House).

2003 In 2003 Gun Owners of America gave Representative King a grade of D-.

2002 On the votes that the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence considered to be the most important as of 2002, Representative King voted their preferred position 64 percent of the time. These scores are cumulative for each representative's time in their current office. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence considered votes from 1988-2002 in the House and 1991-2002 in the Senate when determining these scores.

2002 Based on lifetime voting records on gun issues and the results of a questionnaire sent to all Congressional candidates in 2002, the National Rifle Association assigned Representative King a grade of D (with grades ranging from a high of A+ to a low of F).

2001-2002 Based on the results of a questionnaire the Gun Owners of America assigned Representative King a grade of D-.

2001 Representative King supported the interests of the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence 100 percent in 2001.

==============================================

Of course this does NOT mean Gillibrand is a "conservative" overall. But on gun issues, there's no doubt who is the more conservative candidate in the race.

But since I'm not a single issue candidate, I won't be endorsing Gillibrand.

[BillyBoy]

>> For that one vote some would overlook Gillibrand's 92% liberal voting record. <<

Kinda like how some Peter King apologists on this board point to one vote he cast on immigration and right-to-life, and are therefore willing to overlook six years he spent in Congress carrying the water for Slick Willie and being THE biggest Clinton defender in the GOP -- and the 100% pro-IRA terrorists voting record he racked up, gloating quite openly that he was more pro-IRA than ANY other member of Congress.

Like I said, King vs. Gillibrand is a race between two moderate Democrats. King is overall the more conservative of the two, but Gillibrand is the more likeable and honest of the two.

Supporters of RINO Peter King shouldn't be in glass houses throwing stones at others for "overlooking" liberalism. Anyone who supports the likes of Peter King is willing to overlook a ton of sleazy things.

[FreeReign]

However, anyone with half a brain can tell she's at least more likeable than the pro-terrorist, gun-grabbing, Clinton-loving thug Peter King. (whom this forum has rated as an unacceptable RINO for more than a decade) I won't be shedding any tears if King loses.

Billyboy, anyone with half a brain can see that there is no comparison between King and Gillibrand when one looks at all the issues. King votes conservative 76% of the time and Gillibrand votes conservative 8% of the time. You are reading drive-by propaganda about Gillibrand that distorts her real voting record.

Read my posts #108, #121, #122 and learn.

BTW, back a decade ago, I vowed on this board never to vote for King(my congressman) again because of what he did during impeachment. That said, Bubba has a new bud and if King is running against her, I will vote for the candidate who is ten times more conservative than her, Peter King.

[Darkwolf377]

She voted against the bailout last fall and she is a second amendment supporter too, a much better pick than Kennedy.

I hope the RNC is paying attention. If the Dems are trying to cut them off on the right as well as the left, what possible reason would a conservative have to support the Republicans?

Considering their pathetic candidates and the fact that they don't have the guts to fight for conservative values or oppose Obama in the name of "getting along," why on Earth SHOULDN'T conservatives take a look at the Dems if they are willing to put people like this up? I'm not saying she's perfect, but she's no more objectionable than RINO's like Olympia Snow, and I'm expected to support Snow because there's an R after her name.

I'm loyal to conservative values, not a party, and the RNC better get a clue fast, as in NOW, or this party is doomed.

[Darkwolf377]

She voted against the bailout last fall and she is a second amendment supporter too, a much better pick than Kennedy.

I hope the RNC is paying attention. If the Dems are trying to cut them off on the right as well as the left, what possible reason would a conservative have to support the Republicans?

Considering their pathetic candidates and the fact that they don't have the guts to fight for conservative values or oppose Obama in the name of "getting along," why on Earth SHOULDN'T conservatives take a look at the Dems if they are willing to put people like this up? I'm not saying she's perfect, but she's no more objectionable than RINO's like Olympia Snow, and I'm expected to support Snow because there's an R after her name.

I'm loyal to conservative values, not a party, and the RNC better get a clue fast, as in NOW, or this party is doomed.

[BillyBoy]

>> Billyboy, anyone with half a brain can see that there is no comparison between King and Gillibrand when one looks at all the issues. King votes conservative 76% of the time and Gillibrand votes conservative 8% of the time. You are reading drive-by propaganda about Gillibrand that distorts her real voting record. <<

If that person ONLY looks at how King and Gillibrand vote on legislation itself according to ONE organization (not on their actions in office when they're NOT voting, which demonstrates King is a thorn in the side of conservatives far worse than Gillibrand... I don't see Kristin holding any fundraisers for terrorist groups, for example), and ignores the fact that King's "lifetime" score dates back from 1993, whereas Gillibrand's "lifetime" score covers only a SINGLE year (since the 2008 ratings haven't come out yet). If she voted conservative 90% of the time in 2008, then her "lifetime" ACU would be averaged at 49%. Following your logic, Peter King is "more conservative" than Zell Miller, since Zell only got scores for four years, and it was something like 30-40% conservative originally, but then 95% conservative after he announced he was retiring. Average those together, and King is "more conservative" than Miller, even though today Miller is to the right of King on most issues.

So yes, if you have half a brain and just look at one organization's scorecard on one year's votes, then King is "clearly more conservative". However, if you at their careers as a whole, the content of their characther, and what they have actually done in office for conservatives, then King is slightly to the right of Gillibrand overall, but Gillibrand is more honorable and truthworthy and better than King on the issues MOST important to conservatives, except abortion. That RINO thug Peter King even made up a "scandal" about the CIA and vowed to "get back at Bush" if he didn't get his requested amount of pork for NYC -- not that his ACU ratings will factor any of his typical treasonous behavior into his scorecard.

>> BTW, back a decade ago, I vowed on this board never to vote for King(my congressman) again because of what he did during impeachment. <<

And the fact you're not following through on it shows why the GOP leadership laughs at you guys behind your back and feels they can screw over the GOP base with impunity. Your threats to get back at RINOs are worthless because you guys don't even oppose them in the PRIMARY anymore, where there's not even the "we gotta stop the Dem" excuse. Even I don't take the angry freeper rants to "never again" support politicians who voted for amnesty or the bailout -- we've heard the same old story on this board during impeachment and McCain-Feingold. These politicians never admit they were wrong, and continue to stab you in the back, and you vote for them anyway. Then you whine that they're still screwing you over. Of course they are, and you have only yourselves to blame. Keep voting for RINOs, and the GOP will keep running them.

>> That said, Bubba has a new bud and if King is running against her <<

Bubba may have endorsed Gillibrand over an ACTUAL Republican (namely John Sweeney), but when it comes to the likes of King vs. Gillibrand, Bubba knows which one of them has carried the water for him longer and harder. There is no greater friend of Clinton in NY than Peter King. There is no doubt in mind he is going to sit this one out and privately root for his boy to win again. King will do for the Clinton's in the Senate than Gillibrand will, simple as that.

>> I will vote for the candidate who is ten times more conservative than her, Peter King. <<

Keep telling yourself that based on a handful of votes they cast in 2007. You will be supporting the gun-grabbing pro-terrorist candidate in the race over a candidate who explictly rejects these things. I will endorse neither candidate in the race (shame Gillibrand isn't on the right side of abortion and traditional marriage or I'd support her in a heartbeat over the backstabbing RINO puke you want promoted), but I certainly will shed no tears if King loses. It's long overdue that we rid Washington of that vemin, and Gillibrand would be a definite improvement over Hillary. Her win won't change the ratio of Dem Senators either since the seat has already been safe RAT for years. I hope conservatives crossover to vote for her in the RAT primary over the likes of Carolyn McCarthy, and then vote for a good conservative third party candidate in the general over the two moderate Democrats slated by the major parties.

[FreeReign]

If that person ONLY looks at how King and Gillibrand vote on legislation itself according to ONE organization (not on their actions in office when they're NOT voting, which demonstrates King is a thorn in the side of conservatives far worse than Gillibrand... }

One organization?? Why don't you do some research instead of living in fairytale land. I've seen liberal organizations that give her a positive rating of 95%. It's not just one organization.

All one has to do is look at her voting record to see that she is liberal thru-and-thru.

She voted against the surge.

She voted for (back in 2007 while we were fighting Al Qaeda in Iraq) a 180 day deadline for troop withdrawal.

She voted against the alternative minimum tax.

She voted for hate crime legislation.

She voted against the border fence acceleration.

She voted against secret union ballots.

She voted against missile defense legislation.

She voted against religious based charities.

She voted against legislation that would have reversed some of "Campaign Finance Reform".

She voted against offshore Natural Gas Development

She voted for minimum wage increases.

She voted for government funded stem cell.

She vote for the funding of international family planning organizations that perform or promote abortions.

She voted to ban incandescent light bulbs.

She voted for more government funding of the construction, rehabilitation and preservation of “affordable” housing for low-income families.

She voted for the expansion of Medicare.

I could go on...and all of this in one years time.

Really unbelievable.

She brags that she's pro choice and pro gay marriage.

She is against the bailout only because she things the government should have more control over the banks.

She blame Wall Street and doesn't say a word about her corrupt Democrat friends who were a bigger part of our financial problems.

Her so-called 100% rating by the NRA is based on one frickin' vote related to guns that has come before congress since she's been there. And it was a vote on allowing guns along a 500 mile trail in one national park. Based on her statements she has no idea what IIA. Have you read them. She believes it's about "hunter's rights".

If she voted conservative 90% of the time in 2008, then her "lifetime" ACU would be averaged at 49%.

What? You can't be serious with that statement. The person voted 92% liberal in 2007 and based on nothing at all you give me some what-if about her voting 90% conservative in 2008.

Hay criticize Peter King all you want. At least for every one thing I hate him for there are three things that he voted for correctly.

Not so is the case with abortion loving, traitorous, troop-withdrawal-deadline loving 92% liberal Gillbrand who as I said is ten times worse.

[FreeReign]

And the fact you're not following through on it shows why the GOP leadership laughs at you guys behind your back and feels they can screw over the GOP base with impunity.

The fact that you would support such a left wing traitorous cut-and-run, baby killing candidate such as Gillibrand in a "heart-beat" is sickening. The Democrats who have produced this Gillibrand-is-a-conservative scam are laughing their asses off -- at dupes such as you.

[SunkenCiv]

NY Senate Pick voted AGAINST the bailout (change we can believe in)
WCBS TV
Posted on 01/23/2009 8:38:03 AM PST by quesney
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2170290/posts

DAVE PICKS GILLIBRAND AS LIBERAL DEMS HOWL ( An Upstate Conservative for Hillary’s slot???)
New York Post | January 23, 2009 Posted: 2:03 am | FREDRIC U. DICKER State Editor
Posted on 01/23/2009 7:42:32 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Edited on 01/23/2009 7:52:04 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2170246/posts

-Second Amendment-

Late in the Game, A Hit on Gillibrand (Possible Hillary replacement)
NY Observer | January 20, 2009 | Jimmy Vielkind
Posted on 01/22/2009 8:48:52 PM PST by neverdem
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2170039/posts

McCarthy knocks Gillibrand as choice for Senate (Schumer to McCarthy: stifle yourself)
Newsday | January 23, 2009 | REID J. EPSTEIN
Posted on 01/23/2009 1:30:50 PM PST by neverdem
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2170483/posts

-privilege denied-

CAROLINE KENNEDY ENDS SENATE SEAT BID
New York Post | January 21, 2009 | Fredric Dicker
Posted on 01/21/2009 4:02:28 PM PST by kregger1
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2169141/posts

Kennedy cites ‘personal reasons’ for dropping Senate bid [Issues Statement Confirming Drop Out]
CNN.com | Jan 22, 2009; 3:20 ET
Posted on 01/22/2009 12:26:20 AM PST by Gondring
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2169364/posts

[SunkenCiv]

'Saturday Night Live' mocks Governor Paterson's blindness, past drug use by Stephanie Gaskell Sunday, December 14th 2008 Saturday Night Live pushed the envelope last night with... Fred Armisen as Paterson during a segment on "Weekend Update." ...Armisen, as Paterson, says he has three criteria: economic experience, upstate influence and someone with a disability who is completely unprepared for the job - just like him. "I want to choose a senator not from the glitzy coke parties of Manhattan but rather from the shabbier coke circles of upstate new york," he said. "I'm tired of all these fancy, two-eyed smart alecs from the big city running the whole show. It's time we get someone from Utica, Syracuse or Schnectady - towns where people have something a little off about him. I mean, they don't have to be blind," he said. "I just need someone with like a gamey arm or maybe the giant gums with the tiny teeth. Let's get one of those in the Senate." The fake Paterson points out that he only became governor because of former Gov. Eliot Spitzer's prostition scandal. "Whoever is appointed senator must - like me - be caught totally off guard and be comically unprepared to take office," he said. "Come on, I'm a blind man who loves cocaine who was suddenly appointed governor of New York. My life is an actual plot from a Richard Pryor movie."

---

ACTUAL HEADLINE:

Paterson In A Blind Rage Over 'SNL' Skit

---

Governor Paterson proposes 'Obesity Tax,' a tax on non-diet sodas
by Glenn Blain and Kenneth Lovett
with Edgar Sandoval and Erica Pearson
Daily News Albany Bureau
Sunday, December 14th 2008

Gov. Paterson, as part of a $121 billion budget to be unveiled Tuesday, will propose an "obesity tax" of about 15% on nondiet drinks. This means a Diet Coke might sell for a $1 - even as the same size bottle of its calorie-rich alter ego would go for $1.15. Paterson's budget also calls for a 3% cut in education spending, a $620-a-year tuition hike at SUNY and a $600 increase at CUNY - and about $3.5 billion in health care cuts, a source said. The Democratic governor will not call for a broad-based income tax boost, but he will push to restore the sales tax on clothing and footwear... State employees again will be asked to forgo their 3% raises next year and defer five days' pay until they leave their jobs, the source said. In all, Paterson will propose about $9 billion in cuts, $4 billion in new taxes and fees, and $1.5 billion in nonrecurring revenue, a second source said. The so-called obesity tax would generate an estimated $404 million a year. Milk, juice, diet soda and bottled water would be exempt from the tax... Public health advocates welcomed news of the tax, saying it would help the fight against childhood obesity. "Raising the price of this liquid candy will put children and teens on a path to a healthier diet," said Elie Ward of the American Academy of Pediatrics of New York State.

[and now, the buried lead:] The Paterson administration also announced steps yesterday to expand the state's social services net, including a 30% increase in welfare payments over three years starting January 2010, increased money for food banks and expanded access to the state's Family Health Plus program. Paterson also hopes to make it easier for people to enroll in Medicaid by eliminating face-to-face interviews and fingerprinting requirements.

[Postman]

Thanks for the detailed information on King’s anti Constitution activities. That will undoubtedly guarantee her election as a senator for life.

After seeing Gillibrand on Fox, I’ll amend my statement to “She bears traces of having recently been a babe.”

OTOH, based on current insider gossip, we could have gotten Randi Weingarten. The times makes me grateful for small blessings

I won’t be sending King a cent as I might have and since no one gives a rat’s derriere about my endorsement anyway, I’ll bow out at this time.

Thanks again.

[Impy]

I’m ashamed to say I totally spaced on Roland Burris as a possibily. In retrospect he was such an obvious choice.

But Patterson was totally channeling me on Gillibrand!

I don’t usually follow the NRA ratings I look at the purist GOA. Jill gets a C to King’s F. Barf.

DJ: “”I had to chuckle at Gunzburger’s description: “Gillbirand is one of the more conservative members of the New York Democratic delegation and a member of the centrist Blue Dog Democratic Caucus.””

Yes it’s funny how they call her a conservative blue bog. She’s appears to be a solid leftist on most things but she’s a rightwinger in NY dem party because of straying on a few things. It’s ridiculous they are the ones who demand purity, I see a lot more dissent allowed in GOP ranks.

Now will she go full tilt moonbat to help in her primary or not, that is the question.

If she stays to the “right” she will be a bad match up for King. Especially if he pulls a boneheaded stunt like campaigning for gun control if she remains against it. This issue has lost it’s luster for the pro side even in NY. Only a minor stink was made about the assault weapons ban expiring. Rats know it’s a powerful wedge issue against them.

I am skeptical if he could even beat a weak rat in a good year in New York. A respected incumbent D’Amato was thrashed in anti-impeachment NY in 1998 as Pataki won a landslide.

Dumbass Carolyn McCarthy would be an easier rat to beat.

I wouldn’t label King a Clintonista thug just cause he voted against impeachment 10 years ago. What he looks like to me is a full of himself self promoter type. Possibly his only motive was fear that impeachment was a political loser which I guess it was given 1998 and Clinton’s approval ratings. And it would have led to an incumbent Gore to run against. Of course he didn’t care it was the right thing to do because Clinton is a criminal disgrace.

I would rather have him in the Senate than a democrat, but I also will hardly be crestfallen in he losses.

[widdle_wabbit]

She is unbeatable. Shumer is correct. On another note, Obama told Republicans to stop listening to Rush? FReeper GoCards asked;

“is he going to tell his Dem buddies to stop listening to Keith Doberman and Dem Underground and Hollywood?” (D in Doberman was added for artistic reason)

I thought the question was good, what do you think?

[BillyBoy]

>> The fact that you would support such a left wing traitorous cut-and-run, baby killing candidate such as Gillibrand in a "heart-beat" is sickening. <<

Apprently you're not even reading my posts now, since I specifically stated that I would NOT vote for Gillibrand in the general election, citing the fact she's pro-abortion. I did suggest freepers crossover and vote for her in the RAT primary, because it's far preferable to have a Dem who is right 10% of the time (Gillibrand), and those 10% being issues of major importance to conservatives (gun rights, bailout, immigration, etc.), than a total moonbat like McCarthy who is right 0% of the time. Yes, between two baby killing candidates (McCarthy and Gillbrand), I will take the one who is right on guns, immigration, and spending, rather than let the baby killer who is a total marxist win.

I stand by my claim that the only MAJOR issue where King is significantly to the right of Gillibrand is abortion. On several other MAJOR issues, she is to the right of him. He might be better on many minor non-hot button issues that the ACU rates him on year after year (something like "Voted YES on allowing pro-ANWR license plates in the district of Columbia"), but in the grand scheme of things, Gillibrand far outshines your backstabbing, terrorist loving RINO scumbag.

Also, the fact you refer to Gillibrand as a "traitorous cut-and-run" candidate shows me you really haven't researched where she stands on the issues (and likely don't care), given the fact she was the only Dem in the entire NY delegation to vote WITH Bush on the WOT.

Enjoy your RINO Peter King. Just don't come crying to me when SOS Hillary wreaks this nation with her latest socialist scheme and your RINO is standing behind her cheering him on. At least when Gillibrand is voting with liberal Democrats she's honest enough to run as a RAT and doesn't pretend to be "one of us".

Freepers like you are part of the problem. I do enjoy watching all the idiot "conservatives" in Florida who cheered on Mel Martinez's in the Florida primary get their just desserts though. Vote Republican In Name Only, get Republican In Name Only.

[BillyBoy]

>>> I don’t usually follow the NRA ratings I look at the purist GOA. Jill gets a C to King’s F. Barf. DJ: “”I had to chuckle at Gunzburger’s description: “Gillbirand is one of the more conservative members of the New York Democratic delegation and a member of the centrist Blue Dog Democratic Caucus.”” Yes it’s funny how they call her a conservative blue bog. She’s appears to be a solid leftist on most things but she’s a rightwinger in NY dem party because of straying on a few things. It’s ridiculous they are the ones who demand purity, I see a lot more dissent allowed in GOP ranks. <<

I bashed the freepers who drank the "Joe Lieberman is one of us and should join the GOP" kool-aid, so of course it would be hypocritical for me to claim Gillibrand is conservative. She's not. She's not even moderate either -- but by Marxist NY Democrat standards she is, since they consider anyone to the right of Karl Marx to be "not progressive enough". There's no doubt the "progressive" moonbats on these liberal blogs are pull their hair out in frustration, and I am loving every minute of it. Basically the whole NY delegation is full of far-left socialist nut and Gillibrand is the least socialist nut of the bunch. That seat has been RAT for the last 30 years and isn't likely to go Republican any time soon, so any improvement over Hillary is welcome. I also believe the 10% of the time Gillibrand has taken the conservative side involve issues of major importance to conservatives (bailout, guns, immigration), rather than siding with us on low-key issues, so if she maintains the record we will have an occasional ally (say 1 out of 8 times) in the Senate.

>>> Now will she go full tilt moonbat to help in her primary or not, that is the question. If she stays to the “right” she will be a bad match up for King. Especially if he pulls a boneheaded stunt like campaigning for gun control if she remains against it. This issue has lost it’s luster for the pro side even in NY. Only a minor stink was made about the assault weapons ban expiring. Rats know it’s a powerful wedge issue against them. <<

That is a concern, given that alot of these rural Dems started off as so-called "moderate" populists when they represented a "local" House seat (Durbin, Gore, etc.), but morphed into far-left kooks once they had established themselves in the Senate as national leaders. But in a worse case scenario, we'd just be back to where we were when Hillary held the seat -- neither a gain or loss for the GOP.

>> I am skeptical if he could even beat a weak rat in a good year in New York. A respected incumbent D’Amato was thrashed in anti-impeachment NY in 1998 as Pataki won a landslide.Dumbass Carolyn McCarthy would be an easier rat to beat. <<

I agree, NY state goes RAT by something like 2/3rds of the vote, making it extremely difficult for even an A-list candidate to win statewide there. That's why I suggesting freepers cross over and vote for Gillibrand in the RAT primary over McCarthy, unless there is a major contest on the GOP side for an important office, of course. I have not endorsed or promoted Gillibrand in the general election, but it seems some of RINO Peter King's more ardent groupies consider anything less than total alliance of King to be "working for the Democrats". Reminds me of the Arnoldbots accusing anyone who didn't blindly support Arnie of being on Cruz Bustamante's payroll. For the reason, I would not vote for Gillibrand over King unless her views on abortion and gay rights were 180 degrees from where they are today (such a scenario would be a Poshard vs. George Ryan style contest in New York). I HAVE pointed out that although King is more conservative than Gillibrand overall, Gillibrand is more conservative than King on some of the most important issues -- guns & federal bailouts being prime examples. Some of Peter King's fans seem to dislike freepers reporting the facts that their RINO is inferior in this regard and thus respond with "you're a Democrat" rants.

From a simple personality standpoint (ignoring political ideology), there is no question who is a more a likable and decent human being, that being Gillibrand. I have as much respect for King's past history as I have for Al Franken's. From a political standpoint, ACU ratings don't mean much. Gillibrand's "lifetime" score of 92% is taken from a single year she was there that the ACU rated her - 2007. Both Gillibrand and King generally vote along "loyal party lines" on final passage of a bill (Gillibrand moreso than King), but depart from their party on a handful major hot button issues. At their core, both root for the Clintons, Gillibrand mildly and King with huge enthusiasm. Gillibrand is low-key and registers personal dissent, but King is a bully and resorts to any low-life tactic to force his way. A King vs. Gillibrand race is basically two moderate Democrats running against each other. Neither gets my support (I will not assist a pro-abort over a pro-life candidate), and would vote third party. However, I would enjoy watching King go down to defeat, it's long overdue.

>> I wouldn’t label King a Clintonista thug just cause he voted against impeachment 10 years ago. What he looks like to me is a full of himself self promoter type. Possibly his only motive was fear that impeachment was a political loser which I guess it was given 1998 and Clinton’s approval ratings. And it would have led to an incumbent Gore to run against. Of course he didn’t care it was the right thing to do because Clinton is a criminal disgrace. <<

I agree. Chris Shays voted against impeachment, and while he's a liberal douchebag, he's not a Clintonista by virtue of the fact he was never close to Clinton in the first place and voted NAY purely out his liberal convictions. King, however, was a Clintonista before impeachment ever took place. He has, by his own admission, a very close working relationship with the Clintons and was instrumental throughout Clinton's term in drumming up GOP support for Clinton's key agenda. He didn't merely vote against impeachment, he was the ringleader of the 'stop impeachment' forces. In short, King would be a disaster in the Senate because he is a Clinton sleeper cell who would "usually" vote Republican 75% of the time, but be on standby to ram through any initiative Hillary wanted him to. Just as Ray LaHood generally voted "conservative" on the floor but has unmasked himself as one of Obama's greatest allies behind the scenes.

[BillyBoy]

>> The fact that you would support such a left wing traitorous cut-and-run, baby killing candidate such as Gillibrand in a "heart-beat" is sickening. The Democrats who have produced this Gillibrand-is-a-conservative scam are laughing their asses off -- at dupes such as you. <<

I NEVER said I'm supporting Gillibrand. Show me where I said I'd vote for her in the general election. I said hypothetically she'd get my vote IF she a was pro-life and pro-family candidate (which she is NOT), I'd vote for her in a heartbeat, but of course she's not so there's no way I'd vote for her.

This will be my final reply to you, since you ignore the actual statements listed in my posts and substitute your own nonsense garbage that I'm endorsing Democrats. Kristin Gillibrand is no way, shape, or form a conservative. Your terrorist loving IRA shrill Peter King is simply SO incredibly bad that even she's more ethical than him and better on most issues of MAJOR importance to conservatives. That is a fact. Sure, King votes the "party line" on 75% of the run of the mill issue the ACU rates him on (stuff like "motion to recommittee an amendment to H.R. 343 on endorsing the George W. Bush declaration celebrating the use of Intelligent Design in Minnesota", but he was neverthless WRONG on the big stuff like the bailout and gun rights, whereas Gillibrand was RIGHT. You should be a spokesman for Dick Durbin, he used similar logic to claim Kerry was the most "pro-Catholic" candidate because Kerry had supported the Catholic church on all their minor obscure policies, eve though he was dead wrong on every major thing they held dear.

Your produced a nice, cherry picked, laundry list of all the liberal crap Gillibrand voted for. And why not? She was running as a Democrat. At least she's honest about it Your buddy Peter King is running as a "Republican", but I could just as easily produce a cherry picked, laundry list of all the liberal garbage he supported from 2007-2008. I could easily name 30 times he stabbed conservatives in the back. He wouldn't have lasted one day on a conservative forum, given his non-stop shrilling for Giuliani and bitter attacks on Fred Thompson. There's no use though in bothering though. Peter King aiding and abetting bloody-thristy Irish terrorists who murder innocent civilians is even worse than Gillibrand's support of abortion on demand, but you don't care because that POS Peter King has all the important "R" next to his name on the ballot. Those who put party above all else are the real traitors to American justice. You'd probably vote for Adolf Hitler if he had an R next to his name.

If Gillibrand were as bad as you say she is, the liberal base wouldn't be tearing their hair out at her appointment. They claim Harry Reid is "conservative" too, but not one "progressive" went nuts with Reid's election. They ARE going nuts over Gillibrand, because she's simply not as far left as the average NY Dem. The liberal equivilent of the ACU, namely the ADA, said she OPPOSED them 30% of the time, so the leading liberal advocacy group in this nation refutes your statement that she is rated "95% liberal".

The Republicans have who have produced this King-is-a-conservative scam are laughing their asses off -- at dupes such as you. Conservatives like you continue to ensure the GOP is run by RINOs, because your word means nothing. You will not only support this scumbag to prevent a baby-killer from winning, but you'll also vote for him in the primary over a real Republican because you drink the "only RINOs can win!!!" kool-aid. Therefore the only one on this forum who will cast a vote to put a liberal in office over a conservative Republican is you, despite all your lies to the contrary.

Go ahead and vote for King, it won't make any difference because "electable moderate" Peter King is going to lose to Gillibrand in a landslide. Procedual party-line votes aside, when it comes to their core values they're both moderate Democrats, the only differnece is Gillibrand is honest about it.