Top

news

Stories

 

Obama the Political Fixer Works New York's Senate Primary

The president gets a hand in the back room

Barack Obama reached out from the White House this month and put his hand firmly on the Democratic Party scales here in New York. He pressed down hard. This sent the non-elected current junior senator, Kirsten Gillibrand, soaring high above the crowd.

She could be seen waving gleefully from high above, wearing her best Tracy Flick smile, batting her eyes at the president who had so hoisted her fortunes. Sprawled on the ground below, dazed and confused, lay several politicians who had dared to think about running in a primary against Gillibrand before Obama brushed them aside.

Watching this scene and chortling with delight was New York's senior senator, Charles Schumer, who is apparently pleased to have a junior colleague like Gillibrand of such meager gifts and talent working alongside him. His thought balloon was this: "When I say there will be no primary, there will be no primary."

Gillibrand now holds a seat in the United States Senate—the same one once held by Robert Kennedy, Patrick Moynihan, and Hillary Clinton—thanks to her unanimous win in a single-vote election. The sole vote came from a governor who was also never elected to his own current post and who is unlikely to hold onto his own job should he face the voters next year. Until winning an upstate congressional seat just three years ago, Gillibrand's résumé mainly consisted of this: lawyer for Big Tobacco. Her Senate appointment owed more to demographics and connections than ability and performance. She arrived at the governor's announcement with Schumer holding her on one side, and her father's pal and fellow lobbyist, Alfonse D'Amato, on the other.

Prior to Obama's intervention, at least five veteran public officials were actively considering running against Gillibrand. Most, like Long Island congressman Steve Israel, who got the warning message directly from the White House, thought they could present themselves to voters in a state primary as a viable alternative to Gillibrand on several issues that Obama himself championed in his own race: gun safety, fairness to immigrants, the economy. That was the plan, that is, until the president told them not to bother.

Apparently, this is the flip side of the leader from the Land of Lincoln, who has otherwise managed so many wonderful things since his inauguration. His heavy-handed politicking is a surprise only to those of us who know him solely from his inspiring campaign. It is old news to those in Chicago who watched Obama's steady rise. I admit to warnings received from Windy City friends who said Obama had taken lessons in kneecapping from his ward-heeler pals in City Hall and the state legislature. This complaint sounded like a petty gripe resulting from a family squabble. Even if true, it was a tiny blemish on a magnificent canvas. This notion held right up until the moment when the White House invoked Chicago rules—one of ours to the hospital, one of yours to the morgue—on any Democrat seeking to challenge Gillibrand.

The political logic behind Obama's vote-rigging is that it is for the greater good of the party. This analysis comes from Schumer, who wears many battle ribbons from having guided his party into a Senate majority. The argument goes like this: If Gillibrand gets a tough primary, it will only eat up money that is needed elsewhere to shore up Democratic seats; the winner of New York's primary will enter the general election broke, exhausted, and up against a fresh and well-funded Republican opponent.

The trouble with this thinking, as Obama should have immediately shot back, is that it is exactly what he heard from those seeking to keep him from running against Hillary Clinton. The Democratic nomination belonged to her and her alone, they argued. His bid was hopeless, divisive, and destructive.

His counter-argument then was that the party was strong enough to survive a well-fought race; that voters needed to hear a different voice, especially on the issue that had so divided the country, the Iraq War. He was more right than even he knew at the time.

This month, as Obama sought to squelch opposition to the unelected Gillibrand, the person quickest to draw this analogy was Jonathan Tasini, the labor advocate who made his own lonely challenge to Clinton when she was still a pro-war Senate incumbent in 2006. "Had the party leadership sought to 'clear the field' in 2008 and control a vigorous debate about the direction of our party and our country," said Tasini, "Barack Obama would not be president today."

Tasini may now end up waging one more lopsided campaign against a Democratic presumptive nominee. "There is anger out there about economic issues that Gillibrand is just not going to be a leader on. Those need to be addressed," he said last week. "The most important thing here is that this is about democracy."

Out in Suffolk County, another long-shot hopeful has also planted a flag in the race and is criticizing Gillibrand's record on guns and immigration, despite the White House threats. Jon Cooper, 54, happens to know Obama better than most. The majority leader of the Suffolk County legislature, Cooper was one of Obama's earliest endorsers in the state. At an Obama rally in the summer of 2007 at the 1199 health care workers' union hall on West 43rd Street, Cooper's was the lone white face on the stage behind the candidate. New York's politicians and media were so overwhelmingly pro-Clinton at the time that Obama's two massive rallies that day barely merited a line in the press.

1 | 2 | Next Page >>
 
  • jackjames 06/12/2009 5:08:00 PM

    The warm feeling I get when someone is thoughtful enough to say thank you for having been helped far outweighs the empty one I get when there's no feedback at all Link Building Service

  • Greta 06/09/2009 8:01:00 AM

    Don't want to interrupt this scintillating dialog (or is it two intersecting monologues?), but I too live in Kirsten's district, and I had dialogue with her when she voted against the bailout. It went kind of like this, "I know you voted the way you do because most of the people in this district think that this is a 'give away vote' to Wall Street, and on that level they're correct, BUT, a 'NO' vote will cost the country and investors BILLIONS, maybe TRILLIONS, so is this grandstanding worth it? Because I think it isn't in terms of what it is costing the IRAs of friends who are going to panic and sell to protect their kid's college money." Kirsten's basic response was, "Yeah, I don't trust the banks." Fine, now she's raising money from them. Message: She'd throw her best friend, but not her mom, under the bus. She's a politician, and as probably well qualified to represent this state as SCUMBAGS like that drunken pontificating blowhard Danial Patrick Moynihan everyone likes to get teary over who threw us Blacks under the train! Benign neglect my crack-burned, shot up ass!

  • Roberta 06/02/2009 6:35:00 PM

    "There could be no finer representation for New York State. Naomi Feldheim" President Obama doesn't seem to think so. The word from the White House is: Don't challenge Gillibrand.

  • Roberta 06/01/2009 1:14:00 AM

    "Roberta, Jon Cooper's record of political achievement is far more impressive than Gillibrand's. He's sponsored landmark bills dealing with public safety, child sexual predators, domestic violence, underage tobacco use, drinking water protection, open space preservation, campaign finance disclosure...the list goes on and on." Where can I find a verifiable copy of these bills, where has he -- specifically -- sponsored them, and were they ever passed in the form he "sponsored" them in? As for your repeated claim that Cooper "advocated for his county's secession from the state", here are actual excerpts from his op-ed that appeared in Long Island Business News two months ago: "In recent years, the deficit between what Long Island taxpayers send to Albany, primarily in the form of personal income tax, sales tax, corporate taxes and mortgage recording taxes, and what we get back in state aid, mostly through payments to local governments and school districts, state pensions and Medicaid, is nearly $3 billion annually. That's why I'm supporting efforts to create a bipartisan, bi-county task force that will work to develop tangible, viable solutions to this problem and encourage policy makers to make bold decisions. Public officials created this disparity and we must begin a serious dialogue aimed at finding an equitable solution. The goal should not be to draft a list of demands or a Declaration of Independence, but rather to develop a model for a better-working interdependence between Albany and Long Island. It's only fair and right." Here's what Newsday had to say about that Op-Ed: "A year ago, Suffolk Legis. Jon Cooper was a proponent of Long Island secession. But that was before he fancied himself a candidate for U.S. Senate." http://weblogs.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/politics/blog/2009/05/li_secession_jon_cooper_runnin.html Hmmm...that doesn't sound like sedition to me, Roberta. It's not sedition if one advocates counties seceding from a state. It's sedition if one advocates states seceding from the United States. But the principle is similar. "It actually sounds quite thoughtful and reasonable. If you were back on your meds, you'd probably see that yourself!" It sounds like a muddle of platitudes to me. Perhaps to people on meds, it makes more sense.

  • Kathy B. 05/31/2009 11:01:00 PM

    Roberta, Jon Cooper's record of political achievement is far more impressive than Gillibrand's. He's sponsored landmark bills dealing with public safety, child sexual predators, domestic violence, underage tobacco use, drinking water protection, open space preservation, campaign finance disclosure...the list goes on and on. As for your repeated claim that Cooper "advocated for his county's secession from the state", here are actual excerpts from his op-ed that appeared in Long Island Business News two months ago: "In recent years, the deficit between what Long Island taxpayers send to Albany, primarily in the form of personal income tax, sales tax, corporate taxes and mortgage recording taxes, and what we get back in state aid, mostly through payments to local governments and school districts, state pensions and Medicaid, is nearly $3 billion annually. That's why I'm supporting efforts to create a bipartisan, bi-county task force that will work to develop tangible, viable solutions to this problem and encourage policy makers to make bold decisions. Public officials created this disparity and we must begin a serious dialogue aimed at finding an equitable solution. The goal should not be to draft a list of demands or a Declaration of Independence, but rather to develop a model for a better-working interdependence between Albany and Long Island. It's only fair and right." Hmmm...that doesn't sound like sedition to me, Roberta. It actually sounds quite thoughtful and reasonable. If you were back on your meds, you'd probably see that yourself!

  • Roberta 05/31/2009 9:57:00 PM

    In case you don't understand the function of these comments pages, this is a discussion where -- presumably -- one's input is not limited to a few remarks. Perhaps in Scooperland, we will be limited in what we may say. Sorry you can't grab the last word. And your attempts to pathologize people who disagree with you is ridiculous. It's pretty obvious that personal attacks on private citizens who don't support him -- along with lies about Gillibrand's record -- is going to be the centerpiece of Cooper's silly candidacy. But Cooper will never be elected to the Senate -- not even when pigs fly. The very idea of giving any serious responsibility to some rich fool with no political record to speak of, whose noisiest "achievement" is to advocate for his county's secession from the state (if he held national office, that would be sedition, you know)is a nonsense. For that reason alone, he is somebody who will not be taken seriously in any context larger than his immediate neighborhood. Your candidate is disguising himself as a progressive in order to achieve goals of personal ambition -- and nothing more. But what he is really doing is sabotaging progressivism and the programs that his supposed hero -- Obama -- is trying to enact. Shame on him, and shame on you!

  • Kathy B. 05/31/2009 8:05:00 PM

    Roberta, you've obviously gone off your meds. For starters, are you aware that you've posted 13 separate comments on this thread?! You clearly need to get a life, dear. While you've had one or two rationale moments in some of your posts, you obviously get way too agitated whenever anyone disagrees with you and your lovefest for Gillibrand. Really, this is not normal. Your latest post is filled with misinformation as well as personal attacks that have grown increasingly desperate and sad. You obviously have a great deal of personal experience with Thorazine -- I suggest that you up your dosage.

  • Roberta 05/31/2009 6:59:00 PM

    "My, my Roberta. Do you always get this nasty when challenged?" This is not about me. If you think it is, then your so-called "intelligence" is beyond insult. It's about a minor public official who thinks far too much of himself, and is willing to hand the election to the GOP to accommodate his ridiculous fancies. "In any case, this really does come down to an issue of character and consistency." In other words, you're saying that Scooper still thinks Long Island should secede, right? "If you truly think that a "liberal" opposes reasonable gun control measures," Gillibrand doesn't. You are distorting her record. "opposes fair immigration policies" Gillibrand doesn't. You are distorting her record. "and advocates for Big Tobacco," Gillibrand's votes have been consistently anti-tobacco. I see Scooper is even willing to have his tools and sock puppets lie in order to boost his brand name. "then you're living in some alternate universe." I think you and your hero ought to pick up a newspaper once in a while, seriously. "And please don't tell me that Gillibrand's positions have "evolved". She did one 180-degree flip flop after another within days after Paterson appointed her Senator." Her positions were misrepresented by the sore-loser Wannabes who thought THEY should have been appointed -- along with your candidate, the Neverwas. But people's positions do change, yes. Most people -- including President Obama -- don't share the Scooper mentality that if you happened to be the first person on your block to have endorsed Obama, that entitles you to something. "You can defend her all you like," I intend to -- and vigorously. "but please don't insult my intelligence by portraying her as a strong and consistent liberal." She has advocated for her constituents. That is -- and always has been -- her job. As a non-lawyer, Scooper and his acolytes obviously do not understand that. "She clearly adopted conservative, even extreme, views on some important issues when she thought it would benefit her." It's not "clear" at all, except to people who need to take their Thorazine and people -- like Robbins -- who have ulterior motives. "Let's allow Democratic primary voters to decide whether her past conservative views and actions are enough to disqualify her." Let's not risk the seat because some conceited rich chazzer of a Chaim Yankel from the middle of Nowhere thinks he's such hot stuff that he needs to replace a hard-working, progressive senator. " Remember, she was appointed and not elected to the U.S. Senate. Why are Gillibrand and her supporters (like you) so afraid of a primary challenge by a strong progressive like Jon Cooper? Oh wait, I think I just answered my own question." Answering your own questions is not a good sign. Again -- what about that Thorazine? I think I've already explained -- many many times -- why, in this instance, a primary is not only a useless waste of time, but might endanger the seat for the party. I think the President has also explained it. If the news has been slow to reach Scooperland, then it's your loss -- and Scooper's -- because it makes him look like a conceited jerk who is blindly determined to get above himself, even if it costs the Administration this Senate seat.

  • Kathy B. 05/31/2009 8:31:00 AM

    My, my Roberta. Do you always get this nasty when challenged? In any case, this really does come down to an issue of character and consistency. If you truly think that a "liberal" opposes reasonable gun control measures, opposes fair immigration policies and advocates for Big Tobacco, then you're living in some alternate universe. And please don't tell me that Gillibrand's positions have "evolved". She did one 180-degree flip flop after another within days after Paterson appointed her Senator. You can defend her all you like, but please don't insult my intelligence by portraying her as a strong and consistent liberal. She clearly adopted conservative, even extreme, views on some important issues when she thought it would benefit her. Let's allow Democratic primary voters to decide whether her past conservative views and actions are enough to disqualify her. Remember, she was appointed and not elected to the U.S. Senate. Why are Gillibrand and her supporters (like you) so afraid of a primary challenge by a strong progressive like Jon Cooper? Oh wait, I think I just answered my own question.

  • Roberta 05/31/2009 6:55:00 AM

    "Roberta, NOW you've really embarrassed yourself (and your favorite appointed Senator!)." I don't think so. Frankly, embarrassmentwise, it's hard to top people who are backing a piece of work who only a few months ago was advocating for Long Island's secession from NY State. It doesn't get any wackier than that. "Jon Cooper's exploratory campaign website actually has just as much info as Kirsten Gillibrand's site (or, following your lead, I guess I should refer to it as "Kirsten-Kirsten's site")." I shall henceforth refer to your candidate as "Scooper." "True, Cooper has not yet posted his "Issues", BUT NEITHER HAS GILLIBRAND!!" In case you have been in a coma for the past few months, Gillibrand's record and issues are now very widely known and a day doesn't go by when some piece of Gillibrand policy is not in the papers. On the other hand, nobody has ever heard of your Scooper outside of Suffolk County, so it's far more important that he get his program out there. Assuming he has one, that is. "With all of her staff and financial resources, what's HER excuse for providing NO details about her positions on ANY issues?" You can find out details on Gillibrand's positions on most issues -- both actual and fictitious (as in Tom Robbins's mendacious little inventions -- by simply reading the newspapers. The last time Scoop even made it into Newsday was nearly a week ago. In short, Cooper's is a candidacy that has no reason to exist, other than the fact that -- as Newsday put it -- he fancies himself as a Senator. It is pointless and harmful to replace a liberal Senator with another liberal . And if we were going to do that, we'd choose somebody with a far more impressive resume than Cooper has got.

  • Kathy B. 05/31/2009 5:21:00 AM

    Roberta, NOW you've really embarrassed yourself (and your favorite appointed Senator!). Jon Cooper's exploratory campaign website actually has just as much info as Kirsten Gillibrand's site (or, following your lead, I guess I should refer to it as "Kirsten-Kirsten's site"). True, Cooper has not yet posted his "Issues", BUT NEITHER HAS GILLIBRAND!! Have you even bothered to check Gillibrand's campaign website recently? She lists a total of three categories for issues, but when you click "Learn More" about any of these, guess what shows up: "Coming Soon!" Cooper has had his exploratory committee for just a few weeks, while Gillibrand was appointed to the U.S. Senate over FOUR MONTHS ago! With all of her staff and financial resources, what's HER excuse for providing NO details about her positions on ANY issues?

  • Roberta 05/31/2009 4:33:00 AM

    "Thanks for sharing the web link, Kathy! Its got a lot of great info." It has NO "info." The section on "Issues" is empty. That figures. Here's a link to a news story about Cooper's flirtation with secession. This was before -- in Newsday's words he began to "fancy himself a senator." http://weblogs.newsday.com/news/local/longisland/politics/blog/2009/05/li_secession_jon_cooper_runnin.html

  • Maggie Eastwood 05/31/2009 3:38:00 AM

    Thanks for sharing the web link, Kathy! Its got a lot of great info.

  • Roberta 05/31/2009 1:46:00 AM

    I see from looking at Jon-Jon's website that he still hasn't figured out what the issues are. The one thing that people know about him is that he was in favor of Nassau and Suffolk counties seceding from New York State. He doesn't mention it on his web page, and I presume from the duplicate language of the pro-Cooper posters (or poster, as the case may be) that they are merely spouting "talking points " from some silly memo. The fact that he favored secession brands him as a crackpot whose candidacy -- so-called -- doesn't even bear considering.

  • Kathy B. 05/30/2009 6:38:00 AM

    Speaking of websites, Maggie, here's another one where folks can learn more about Jon Cooper: www.CooperforNewYork.com. It's the new site for his U.S. Senate exploratory campaign. Check it out!!

  • Maggie Eastwood 05/30/2009 6:19:00 AM

    Is it cool to put up links here? Guess I'll find out. Try: www.legislatorcooper.com for more information.

  • Maggie Eastwood 05/30/2009 5:55:00 AM

    Roberta, instead of waiting to be spoon-fed info, kindly google "Jon Cooper Legislator". You may end up less opposed to him, you may end up more opposed to him... but go with an open mind.

  • Roberta 05/30/2009 4:08:00 AM

    "Roberta, your true colors are finally showing. You told Maggie that "the only reason you lot are backing Cooper is that he's gay". What a condescending -- and homophobic -- comment!" How is it "homophobic" to bring up that he's gay -- which is no secret, by the way -- when upthread, one of you sock puppets wrote that we are for Gillibrand only because she's a woman. It's only condescending when I do it, but not when YOU do it, right? "As a Long Island resident, I can assure you that Jon Cooper is far better known here than our newly appointed Senator Gillibrand." It's too bad for you and Cooper that Senators represent the entire state, and not just the New York metro area, and especially, not just Long Island. "You want some reasons to support Cooper? How's this for starters: Ten years of legislative experience (far more than Gillibrand!), including four years as the Majority Leader of a Legislature that represents 1.5 million people. President and co-owner of a successful manufacturing company (with a union shop!), who has real-world business expertise and knows how to grow jobs. Author of several landmark laws that have spread nationwide. Widely respected on both sides of the aisle for his efforts to work in a bipartisan fashion for the sake of good government. True champion of the environment who was selected by the Sierra Club as their "Environmentalist of the Year". Dedicated defender of children (and father of five adopted kids!), who authored two of the toughest laws on the books in New York State to protect children from sexual predators." Very nice. FINALLY somebody has gotten around to listing Cooper's achievements, although specifics are missing. Of course, Senators don't grow jobs -- businessmen do that. Maybe he should remain where he's needed the most. Which laws did he write? "I could go on and on." You should -- instead of accusing people of being "homophobic" and anti-semitic. That kind of rhetoric won't help your candidate. " Gillibrand shouldn't be afraid of a primary against Cooper -- let the best Democrat win!" I'm sure Gillibrand isn't "afraid" of a primary against Cooper. But several of these little crackpot candidacies -- and there's another Jon who also thinks he'd Like to Be a Senator (I think he's a dentist from someplace upstate) -- could divide the liberal vote and allow the GOP candidate to win. Your candidate has said he could win the nomination if he gets only fifteen percent of the vote. That doesn't strike me as democratic. It's strikes me as opportunistic and, frankly, kind of crass.

  • Kevin 05/30/2009 2:52:00 AM

    Roberta, your true colors are finally showing. You told Maggie that "the only reason you lot are backing Cooper is that he's gay". What a condescending -- and homophobic -- comment! As a Long Island resident, I can assure you that Jon Cooper is far better known here than our newly appointed Senator Gillibrand. You want some reasons to support Cooper? How's this for starters: Ten years of legislative experience (far more than Gillibrand!), including four years as the Majority Leader of a Legislature that represents 1.5 million people. President and co-owner of a successful manufacturing company (with a union shop!), who has real-world business expertise and knows how to grow jobs. Author of several landmark laws that have spread nationwide. Widely respected on both sides of the aisle for his efforts to work in a bipartisan fashion for the sake of good government. True champion of the environment who was selected by the Sierra Club as their "Environmentalist of the Year". Dedicated defender of children (and father of five adopted kids!), who authored two of the toughest laws on the books in New York State to protect children from sexual predators. I could go on and on. Gillibrand shouldn't be afraid of a primary against Cooper -- let the best Democrat win!

  • Roberta 05/30/2009 12:25:00 AM

    "Roberta, I must say your tone is extremely disturbing." You are far too easily disturbed. "You don't see the wonderful things Jon has accomplished," Of course I don't. Nobody has ever heard of him outside of his district. "you don't see the kind, intelligent man who wants to serve his constituents." As what? A nurse? A babysitter? "No, to you he's just a DOWNSTATE JEWISH GAY MAN. All individualism is gone." Are you saying he's not? That's what he boils down to, demographically. If we HAD to have yet another downstate Jewish man as our junion senator, then I'd prefer Jerry Nadler, or Steve Israel, both of whom have long-time legislative experience that make's your puffed-up little county legislator look silly. "That isn't feminism" I never said it was "feminism." It's got nothing to do with feminism. You DO know what feminism actually is, right? "... but it is regressive, and overall a little sad." Boo hoo. If telling you the cold hard facts that you don't wish to hear is "regressive," then so be it. "You do not serve Senator Gillibrand well." My goal is not to "serve" Senator Gillibrand. I do not work for her, I am not a resident of her former congressional district, and I've never met her. My goal is to see this matter honestly reported -- which includes NOT distorting Gillibrand's record -- and to make sure that the Democrats retain this seat -- which won't happen if your silly, over-reaching candidate is on the ballot.

  • Roberta 05/30/2009 12:08:00 AM

    "Roberta, I must say your tone is extremely disturbing." YOUR tone, on the other hand, is obnoxiously self-righteous. "You don't see the wonderful things Jon has accomplished, you don't see the kind, intelligent man who wants to serve his constituents." This is simply fulsome mush that belongs at his farewell banquet. "No, to you he's just a DOWNSTATE JEWISH GAY MAN. All individualism is gone. " Demographically, that's what it boils down to. A pointless, "me-too" candidate. And whether YOU happen to like it or not, voters' decisions are made on that basis. People don't care about the hearts and flowers. They are interested in the substantive stuff that Cooper's supporters have been unable to supply. And if we HAD to have a second Jewish male from downstate representing us in the Senate, I'd certainly prefer Jerry Nadler or Steve Israel, both of whose experience dwarfs that of your little puffed-up county legislator. "That isn't feminism... " Who claimed it was "feminism?" I sure didn't. It has nothing to do with feminism. You do know what feminism actually is, right? "...but it is regressive, and overall a little sad." Sez you. That's the way decisions are made in the real, non-pie-in-the-sky world. "You do not serve Senator Gillibrand well." I don't "serve" Senator Gillibrand at all. I think she does a good job, and I don't like it when people distort her record, or anybody else's. And I think that nonsense, vanity candidacies such as Cooper's threaten to harm the Democratic majority that the President needs to implement his campaign promises. I do not live in Gillibrand's former district, I am not part of her organization nor have I ever met her. I'm simply giving my opinion as a citizen.

  • Maggie Eastwood 05/29/2009 8:33:00 PM

    Roberta, I must say your tone is extremely disturbing. You don't see the wonderful things Jon has accomplished, you don't see the kind, intelligent man who wants to serve his constituents. No, to you he's just a DOWNSTATE JEWISH GAY MAN. All individualism is gone. That isn't feminism... but it is regressive, and overall a little sad. You do not serve Senator Gillibrand well.

  • Nora13 05/29/2009 6:57:00 PM

    Let's take time to wonder what's happened to the other US Senators who were appointed this last January. Who else is facing a possible primary? Yes, of course Roland Burris, the pay-to-play suspicions compel a challenge. But what about Michael Bennet, chosen to replace Ken Salazar in Colorado? Talk about coming out to nowhere - Bennet was head of the public schools in Denver and had never held elective office. But according to CQ, no Democrats have stepped up to challenge him in a primary. Certainly there are lots of reasons for Democratic peace in Colorado - there are a lot fewer of them than in NYS. And maybe my inner Gloria Steinem is coming out, but part of me has to ask, do our gender-based beliefs make it easier to elbow aside a woman? Easier to question her toughness, smarts and effectiveness? Is this Hillary Redux, with the media hounding her to quit the 2008 primaries and stop fighting like a guy? (At least this time, Obama's in Gillibrand's corner.) No conclusions here, but we should at least ask the question.

  • Roberta 05/29/2009 2:33:00 PM

    "Roberta, I'm surprised at you. You certainly can't be meaning that because they're both Jewish and reside in the same general area that they also think alike... can you? Oh, that's good. Whew. You were creeping me out for a sec.' "Maggie," you creep ME out. Once again, kindly Google "diversity" and "balanced ticket" before posting anymore of your ignorant nonsense. And I said, they were both Jewish MEN who lived in the same area. You and your fellow sock puppets seem to be willfully ignoring that feature. Since the only reason you lot are backing Cooper is that he's gay -- for surely, he has nothing else to recommend him -- I find that more than a little disingenuous. A matching pair of Jewish guys from Long Island is nobody's idea of balance, and nominating another such person to the Senate would be a red flag to your fellow New Yorkers from upstate.

  • Maggie Eastwood 05/29/2009 9:49:00 AM

    But seriously (even though the back and forth here is fun!) the important thing is that Senator Gillibrand face a Democratic challenger in a lively forum where their views and passions are expressed, examined, and debated. And it's my hope that that challenger will be Jon Cooper!

  • Kathy B. 05/29/2009 7:46:00 AM

    I've been following this thread and finally had to chime in after reading Fran's last comment. You say Gillibrand is a true progressive? Well, she certainly had ultra-conservative views on gun control, opposing any efforts to ban assault weapons and even opposing restrictions on the sale of armor-piercing bullets. Over a 10 year period, Gillibrand advocated for Big Tobacco and made a boatload of money as a high-priced attorney for Philip Morris. She also took an intolerant, even extreme position against immigration reform. That's certainly not my definition of progressive! Keep in mind that this is the same Senate seat previously held by Bobby Kennedy, Daniel Patrick Moynihan and Hilary Clinton. And now gun-toting, flip-flopping Kirsten Gillibrand? Please...we can do better than that!

  • Maggie Eastwood 05/29/2009 7:42:00 AM

    Roberta, I'm surprised at you. You certainly can't be meaning that because they're both Jewish and reside in the same general area that they also think alike... can you? Oh, that's good. Whew. You were creeping me out for a sec.

  • Maggie Eastwood 05/29/2009 7:12:00 AM

    Fran, I wouldn't call it close-minded; I just tend to take notice of b.s. when it's offered up. What the Senator said made no sense. When I heard it I thought, who in the world defends their home against a burglar with a rifle? It's just silly. (Well, I suppose she could stick a bayonet on the end and jab the intruder with it, but since this isn't 1865 and the Civil War is over we'll assume that wasn't her plan). So why did she say that? Was she trying to appeal to a particular voting bloc, or not put off another bloc? Is she plain clueless about guns? (if so, I hope the rifles have been removed, because she would clearly have no business owning one.) Look, is it a huge deal? Nope. But I'd like to know the answer either way. That doesn't sound too unreasonable to you, does it?

  • Roberta 05/29/2009 7:09:00 AM

    "O.k. Gillibrand supporters. How about having our vote counted? Oh and the BS about losing to the GOP. NY is the bluest of blue states. Please!!!" Well, sweetheart, if NY is the "bluest of blue states," how do you account for all those years of George Pataki and Al D'Amato? Or Rudy Giuiliani? Or Michael Bloomberg? The news hasn't reached Scooperland, apparently, but New York is not now, and never has been a reliably Democratic state.

  • Roberta 05/29/2009 7:03:00 AM

    "Well, now that we've hit a new low courtesy of Roberta (two Jews are apparently too much for you?)" Don't bother going there, "Maggie." I'm Jewish myself. I guess you've never heard of "diversity." Google it. Two Jewish males from downstate (not just "two jews", nice try, Tootsie), are too many of the same thing if they are our entire representation in the Senate.

  • Ken Preston 05/29/2009 6:28:00 AM

    O.k. Gillibrand supporters. How about having our vote counted? Oh and the BS about losing to the GOP. NY is the bluest of blue states. Please!!!

  • fran 05/29/2009 6:01:00 AM

    Maggie Eastwood wrote: I wondered about Senator Gillibrand: Why would she say she kept rifles under her bed... for self-defense? As a female gun owner I immediately thought that that didn't make a whole lot of sense. I called one of my gun-toting friends and asked her what she thought about that. Her response was "Wow, how big is that lady's house??" What does this even MEAN? Again, if you'd done some research, you would know that their house had been burglarized, and one of the rifles had been won in a county fair or something. Your attitude is blatantly biased. Why are you so close-minded? You seem to have a very specific agenda that is personal, and not based on fact--like some of the others here who repeat media talking points like "flip-flopper" and that Gillibrand is not quite a Democrat. Here are some facts: Her voting record is solidly progressive. She opposed the war in Iraq, is a staunch advocate of women's rights, pay equity and choice; gay rights; stem cell research; increasing the minimum wage; and expanding affordable housing, Head Start and SCHIP. She is also greatly respected for her experience in financial services and banking. She has been endorsed by numerous progressive democratic issue-groups, including the ACLU, the League of Conservation Voters, EMILY'S List, NARAL, the Sierra Club, and the AFL- CIO. She represented a conservative upstate district, and advocated for those constituents and their needs. Now, she represents all of NY, and is aligning other policies to her solidly progressive record to address the concerns of her new population. Why is that so hard to understand, unless you see everything through a cynical lens? As for Ken, who reduces everything to the representative being a woman, your sexism reveals itself. I support THE CANDIDATE, not a woman or man. Look at her record please--very impressive--just like Hillary.

  • Maggie Eastwood 05/29/2009 3:10:00 AM

    Well, now that we've hit a new low courtesy of Roberta (two Jews are apparently too much for you?), here's something else that I wondered about Senator Gillibrand: Why would she say she kept rifles under her bed... for self-defense? As a female gun owner I immediately thought that that didn't make a whole lot of sense. I called one of my gun-toting friends and asked her what she thought about that. Her response was "Wow, how big is that lady's house??" The point is, I don't like phonies. If the Senator likes to blast away at deer and geese, that's fine. But the image of the Senator skulking about her home, scope in place, waiting to put the bead on that bunnie I mean burglar... well, some things you just can't put a price on.

  • Roberta 05/29/2009 2:24:00 AM

    "...Or maybe I'm missing her supporters main/only point. She is a WOMAN. Same BS we heard with Hillary. Give me a break. Please." Similarly, there's really only one "point" to Cooper's support, and it's the one that you guys aren't talking about -- at least not in this thread. I guess you could call it "the point that dare not speak its name." The rest of your so-called points are simply empty jaw music that belong in a toast, not a political campaign.

  • Roberta 05/29/2009 2:20:00 AM

    "... would provide New York State voters with an intelligent, knowledgable, tirelessly hardworking individual. Jon Cooper has proven that he has a deeply felt conscience on vital issues such as fairness to immigrants and gun control.Additionally, his proven foresight, compassion and strength, he has the capacity and experience to be a champion of consumer as well as workers' rights. " This is simply meaningless, boiler-plate campaign mush. Can't C ooper's supporters offer any substantive reasons why he should challenge Gillibrand?

  • Roberta 05/29/2009 2:16:00 AM

    "Has anyone else noticed that whenever the current New York Senator is challenged, the board is infected by a virulent case of SQS (aka Spivey Quince Syndrome)? These rather whiny personal attacks directed at those who dare to run against Gillibrand are getting a bit embarrassing...yappity yappity yap) And has anybody noticed that all of a sudden four -- FOUR!!! -- comments appear on this thread in praise of this useless overreacher -- Scooper -- whom nobody has every heard of? You can attack pro-Gillibrand commenters personally if you and Mister Vanity Candidacy whom you advocate for think it's appropriate. But it's pretty clear that none of the pro-Cooper (who dat??) posters to this thread know the first thing about Gillibrand or her record, but that -- furthermore -- they are unable to advance any pro-Cooper arguments beyond that he's a nice guy, supported Obama (see how much THAT counts for, right?) and ran a smallish company on Long Island. None of you sock puppets has discussed the question of how a liberal vs liberal primary might easily throw the seat back to the GOP in a D'Amato style election. And none of you has come up with a valid answer to the point that New York really does not need to have two senators who are both Jewish men from downstate.

  • Lois Schaffer 05/29/2009 1:55:00 AM

    A primary election initiated by Jon Cooper against Senator Gillibrand would provide New York State voters with an intelligent, knowledgable, tirelessly hardworking individual. Jon Cooper has proven that he has a deeply felt conscience on vital issues such as fairness to immigrants and gun control.Additionally, his proven foresight, compassion and strength, he has the capacity and experience to be a champion of consumer as well as workers' rights. He has demonstrated in his varied career as a successful businessman and Suffolk County Legislator since 1999 that he is equipped to fulfill this senatorial seat once held by the esteemed Robert Kennedy, Patrick Moynihan and Hillary Clinton. The possibility of Jon Cooper's election would carry on in the tradition of those respected people. He is the personification of that sought after "real diamond," possessing multifaceted qualities, depth of character in addition to strong leadership abilities and ethics.

  • smitty 05/29/2009 1:52:00 AM

    This article is great

  • Reed 05/28/2009 5:49:00 PM

    Other than having run a successful political campaign for her congressional seat, what has Gillibrand run that shows her ability to benefit New Yorkers? Now more than ever, the mantra "It's the economy, stupid" fits the times. Though Jon Cooper has other merits, his ability to successfully run a profitable, unionized company in this economy is telling of his ability to adapt and prosper in difficult times. We can all benefit from his know-how.

  • Ken Preston 05/28/2009 4:24:00 PM

    Hey when did my fellow Dems stop holding primaries??? Jon Cooper is a progressive Democrat and he has a record to prove it! I don't want a semi Democrat representing me in the u.s. senate. Gillibrand is a flip flopper and her so called supporters know it. Or maybe I'm missing her supporters main/only point. She is a WOMAN. Same BS we heard with Hillary. Give me a break. Please.

  • Jon Cruz 05/28/2009 4:16:00 PM

    Jon Cooper is a liberal voice that speaks for the views of the majority in our state. Given a chance, he is sure to best Kirsten Gillibrand in an election. I'm not a knee-jerk critic of our governor, but he let me -- and many others -- down when he appointed Ms. Gillibrand to this seat. I don't believe it was appropriate for the President to endorse her at this early point given her scant legislative record and the nature of her appointment, and I hope New Yorkers will give this primary a thorough examination and participate.

  • Maggie Eastwood 05/28/2009 9:05:00 AM

    Has anyone else noticed that whenever the current New York Senator is challenged, the board is infected by a virulent case of SQS (aka Spivey Quince Syndrome)? These rather whiny personal attacks directed at those who dare to run against Gillibrand are getting a bit embarrassing; after all, a strong woman loves a good fight... and besides, if you truly had confidence in the Senator, you wouldn't need to respond so often with such knee-jerk defensiveness. As Governor Ann Richards was fond of saying, that dog just won't hunt, ladies. Anyway, as far as Jon Cooper... he is brilliant, determined, passionate, compassionate, and committed to representing the people of New York. He is also a great listener, one who responds with common sense reforms. Cooper will make a great Senator.

  • BRCC 05/27/2009 9:16:00 PM

    WHEN IS THE VV GOING TO ACTUALLY LOOK AT WHAT SENATOR GILLIBRAND IS ACCOMPLISHING THROUGHOUT NYS INSTEAD OF WHINING ABOUT THE LEGAL PROCESS WHERE SHE WAS APPOINTED? GET OVER IT AND START TO RECOGNIZE HOW HARD WORKING AND EFFECTIVE SHE HAS BEEN EVEN DURING THE SHORT PERIOD SHE HAS BEEN IN THE SENATE. SHE DESERVES ALL OUR SUPPORT AND RESPECT. PRESIDENT OBAMA IS DOING HIS PART AS THE LEADER OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY IN HIS SUPPORT FOR SENATOR GILLIBRAND--THAT IS THE DEMOCRATIC PROCESS.

  • cici 05/27/2009 9:15:00 PM

    If you were not so obviously biased in your likes/dislikes of certain pols, and you did your research, you would know more about Obama's history of "knee-capping" opponents and thuggish behind-the-scenes tactics. Ask Alice Palmer, his original mentor in Chicago, who he had thrown off the ballot using ruthless and unethical methods. And to suggest he did not use these same methods during the last primaries and election is preposterous. Robocalls, scurrilous flyers in swing states, buying off superdelegates, caucus fraud--the list goes on. You wear rose-colored glasses for your favorites, and demonize others. A complete lack of credibility.

  • fran20 05/27/2009 9:06:00 PM

    This comment drips with condescension and contempt--and is sorely lacking in actual facts about our new Senator. This was the first tip off: "a junior colleague like Gillibrand of such meager gifts and talent." Do you know ANYTHING about Kirsten Gillibrand?! This is a young woman who beat four-term GOP incumbent John Sweeney in her former district by 6 points, after everyone said she could not win in the traditionally conservative area. After working diligently for her constituents in job creation/economic development, health care, agricultural issues, and veteran's benefits--she went on to beat her wealthy challenger, Sandy Treadwell, last year by a 2:1 margin. She enjoys a 68% approval rating in this district, where I live, because she has been an excellent advocate, intelligent and insightful representative (who voted against the TARP funds twice because they lacked oversight, prescient indeed), and is a pioneer on issues of transparency, and accessibility. She regularly held corner and Town Hall meetings to meet with people to learn about their concerns and needs. Your careless and ignorant dismissal speaks more of your cynical attitude than it does of our new Senator who is working just as hard to meet the rest of NY and fight for job growth, stimulus funds, high-speed rail, veteran's benefits, single-payer health care etc. Your bias is evident, but her work ethic will prevail against your negativity.

  • jeanne spivey 05/27/2009 8:48:00 PM

    Perhaps Tom Robbins -- despite the fact that his so-called area of expertise is politics -- had his head stuffed up the usual place during the Alice Palmer controversy that he was unaware of Obama's willingness to load the dice -- when it's important. And who knows where Robbins was when his much-despised Al D'Amato won two elections -- TWO!! -- because warring Democratic divas from the left could not let go of their senatorial ambitions. Perhaps the main point of helping Gillibrand hold on to that seat is to keep it in the family so to speak. The subordinate point is that Gillibrand is eminently qualified to hold it. She is far more qualified than the loathsome, envious Carolyn sisters who coined that idiotic "Tracy Flick" cliche. She is far, far more qualified than that Professional Orphan of a failed President (whom Robbins apparently would have preferred), who thought she was entitled to be handed that seat by Divine Right. What is it about a summa cum laude degree from an Ivy League college, a clerkship with a court of appeals judge, a coveted job at a white-shoe law firm, plus a few years working at HUD, that strikes Robbins as "meager gifts?" What are Robbins's own creds that qualify to make a ridiculous statement like that? As for that nonentity Cooper, whose candidacy Robbins touts, don't be ridiculous! Talk about meager gifts, lack of creds -- or anything else -- encouraging Cooper in his folly is, in my opinion, not only foolish but also destructive.

  • rrlieberma 05/27/2009 7:20:00 PM

    Sigh. Another silly article by the V V. Kirsten Gillibrand will win in 2010 because she is an excellent choice to succeed Hillary Clinton, and voters recognize this as more get to meet her and learn about her positions and interests. The rest is just a sideshow. New Yorkers appreciate that, like her predecessor, Gillibrand is smart, funny, caring, thoughtful, open-minded and tough. She focuses on issues and solutions, and is not distracted by media snarkiness and political envy. We are really fortunate to have her as our new Senator.

  • ParadoxFarms 05/27/2009 6:58:00 PM

    your (mis)characterization of Kirsten Gillibrand could not be more off-base--in fact, she is one of the brightest, capable and most hard-working elected officials that we have. Did you even bother to look at her schedule since she took office? Or her schedule when she was a Congressman? In addition to her legislative responsibilities in DC, she has tirelessly traveled the state to meet her constituents and hear what they have to say. Your article also fails to mention all the legislation she has authored during her short time in the Senate or the support she enjoys from such groups as the Sierra Club, NARAL, NAACP, League of Conservation Voters, unions, and let's not forget the Kennedys, the Clintons, President Obama and many other prominent individuals. There is a reason for all of this, but apparently it is lost on the Village Voice, whose only mission is to twist the truth into an unrecognizable mess. Why don't you just give her a chance? The day will come when you will have to eat your words...

  • Penny Quince 05/27/2009 6:51:00 PM

    I'm sorry, this is what passes for journalism these days?: "She could be seen waving gleefully from high above, wearing her best Tracy Flick smile, batting her eyes at the president..." It's no wonder the newspapers are all going out of business and, with this kind of vicious, unwarranted venom, the sooner the better. Senator Gillibrand is all over the state, working hard to help her consitutents while simultaneously writing landmark legislation: to halt the traffic of illegal guns into the state, to stop the contaminaiton of drinking water from pharmaceutals, to end the eviction of tenants when buildings are in mortgage default, to get health care to returning NY Veterans... The list goes on. She will win re-election handily, on her own merits, just as she did in a heavily Republican Congressional District. No one works harder, no one is smarter. There's a darn good reason she was the one chosen for the US Senate, as most NYers are now learning. Grow up, VV, your churlishness is showing again.

  • 05/27/2009 6:32:00 AM

    Breakfast, Lunch & Dinner Schumer is basking in his glory for now, He has hand picked a replacement for Hillary Soprano, hand picked replacement for US Attorneys, and was able to get Big Brother Obama to CALL all those who would challenge his choice and give them a "WARNING". But will he be able to call off the dogs from his "BRAIN" Hank Morris who caused a nationwide pensiongate scandal that in the end will be bigger than "Watergate". So far Breakfast, Lunch & Dinner Schumer's name has not yet serviced, but who knows what the future holds. It is hard to believe he never visited Hank Morris's 4 million dollar home in East Hampton. Plus what role did he play in the selection of DiNapoli who was a client of Hank Morris in 2001. Plus what role did he plan in helping to re-elect Hevesi in 2006. These and many other questions that need to be answered. In the end Big Brother Obama might regret using his office to promote Breakfast, Lunch & DInner Schumer's agenda. VJ Machiavelli http://www.vjmachiavelli.blogspot.com NO MORE SCHUMER NO MORE PELOSI NO MORE RANGEL NO MORE ENGEL AND HIS MILLION DOLLAR HOME IN MARYLAND.

 

Most Popular Stories


Browse Voice Nation
  • Voice Places

    Voice Places

    Discover restaurants, nightlife, travel, shopping...

  • VOICE Daily Deals

    VOICE Daily Deals

    Get 50 to 90% off every day on restaurants, movies, massages...

  • Best Of

    Best Of...

    More than 10,000 of the BEST things to eat, drink, and experience

  • My Voice Nation

    My Voice Nation

    Join the Village Voice community and get exclusive deals and info

  • Happy Hour

    Happy Hour

    Your local Happy Hour guide at your fingertips

or

Log in or Sign up

Social Connect:

Use your favorite account to access My Voice Nation.


Use your My Voice Nation account to log in:





Forgot password?
or

Sign Up or Log in

Social Connect:

Sign up for My Voice Nation with your preferred network.


Sign up for a My Voice Nation account:



Privacy policy