Conservative reaction to the Kirsten Gillibrand appointment thus far has been mixed. Some approve, on the grounds that it will bother liberals. “LIBERAL DEMS HOWL,” heds the New York Post. Wake Up America is happy that liberal blogs are unhappy.
NewsBusters says the mainstream media’s refusal to use their terminology is proof of bias. “When will the mainstream [media] begin labeling Gillibrand as a ‘Maverick Democrat?'” they demand. “Or is the ‘maverick’ label applied by the MSM only to Republicans who are liberals or ‘moderates’ (really meaning liberal)?… If she holds to her views then she would definitely be qualified to be labeled as a ‘Maverick Democrat’ although the MSM, as we have seen, are loathe to use that term.”
Others are more cautious. “She’s not all bad, of course,” says National Review‘s Jim Geraghty. “She has adorable children, likes offshore drilling, voted against the $700 billion bailout and Nancy Pelosi doesn’t like her.” But Geraghty also notes that she votes with her party most of the time and, even worse, refuses to aid in the prosecution of Charles Rangel. Townhall says Gillibrand has the same super-low American Conservative Union rating as (cue sinister music) Hillary Clinton.
Right Wing News says something about politics and strange bedfellows.
This article from the Village Voice Archive was posted on January 23, 2009