Michael Gaynor
Senator Gillibrand wants to run against a Republican man, not Wendy Long
By Michael Gaynor
Gillibrand obviously wants to talk about abortion and contraception instead of the actual issues — religious liberty and conscience protection — and she's NOT looking forward to debating even them, much less "the other issues," with Long.
Jimmy Vielkind's latest post on the New York Senate race (http://blog.timesunion.com/capitol/archives/119032/long-and-carvin-on-social-issues/) shows who New York junior Senator Kirsten Gillibrand does NOT want to run again in November: Wendy Long. Vieklind not only wrote that "with an $8.1 million war chest, Gillibrand has the advantage at defining her opponents before they can introduce themselves to voters on their own terms," but also reported that "Gillibrand...immediately sought to define Long based on her views on abortion" and "the senator's spokesman attacked Long as 'far out of step with our state.'"
That's what psychologists call projection: Gillibrand is the one who is "far out of step with our state."
Inconveniently for Gillibrand, National Journal just rank Gillibrand tied for first as the most liberal United States Senator.
Before he was elected President, Obama received that designation from National Journal.
Gillibrand is the extremist in the race.
She's even more extreme than Obama on life issues (and Obama as an Illinois State Senator supported infanticide).
Both Gillibrand and Long are baptized Catholics, but Gillibrand obviously is a "Nancy Pelosi-type Catholic."
As such, Gillibrand led the charge against the Blunt amendment, which would have afforded conscience protection.
Long, a staunch proponent of constitutional fidelity and judicial impartiality, is for it.
Vieklind quoted Long as follows:
"[S]enator Gillibrandd supports Obama's enforcement of their view on Catholic institutions and all religious institutions and people of conscience who would have a problem with it. I support permitting churches and people of conscience not to abrogate their conscience ... I would be willing to stand up for that and vote for the Blunt Amendment and not, in any way, support what the president is doing ... She is angry and annoyed with the president for considering any kind of compromise, even though it wasn't any compromise, it was just completely cosmetic. She was just annoyed that he would even consider backing off in any way."
Vieklind also quoted Long as saying that Gillibrand talks about "[a]bortion in general" because "she doesn't want to talk about the other issues."
Gillibrand obviously wants to talk about abortion and contraception instead of the actual issues — religious liberty and conscience protection — and she's NOT looking forward to debating even them, much less "the other issues," with Long.
© Michael Gaynor
March 7, 2012
Gillibrand obviously wants to talk about abortion and contraception instead of the actual issues — religious liberty and conscience protection — and she's NOT looking forward to debating even them, much less "the other issues," with Long.
Jimmy Vielkind's latest post on the New York Senate race (http://blog.timesunion.com/capitol/archives/119032/long-and-carvin-on-social-issues/) shows who New York junior Senator Kirsten Gillibrand does NOT want to run again in November: Wendy Long. Vieklind not only wrote that "with an $8.1 million war chest, Gillibrand has the advantage at defining her opponents before they can introduce themselves to voters on their own terms," but also reported that "Gillibrand...immediately sought to define Long based on her views on abortion" and "the senator's spokesman attacked Long as 'far out of step with our state.'"
That's what psychologists call projection: Gillibrand is the one who is "far out of step with our state."
Inconveniently for Gillibrand, National Journal just rank Gillibrand tied for first as the most liberal United States Senator.
Before he was elected President, Obama received that designation from National Journal.
Gillibrand is the extremist in the race.
She's even more extreme than Obama on life issues (and Obama as an Illinois State Senator supported infanticide).
Both Gillibrand and Long are baptized Catholics, but Gillibrand obviously is a "Nancy Pelosi-type Catholic."
As such, Gillibrand led the charge against the Blunt amendment, which would have afforded conscience protection.
Long, a staunch proponent of constitutional fidelity and judicial impartiality, is for it.
Vieklind quoted Long as follows:
"[S]enator Gillibrandd supports Obama's enforcement of their view on Catholic institutions and all religious institutions and people of conscience who would have a problem with it. I support permitting churches and people of conscience not to abrogate their conscience ... I would be willing to stand up for that and vote for the Blunt Amendment and not, in any way, support what the president is doing ... She is angry and annoyed with the president for considering any kind of compromise, even though it wasn't any compromise, it was just completely cosmetic. She was just annoyed that he would even consider backing off in any way."
Vieklind also quoted Long as saying that Gillibrand talks about "[a]bortion in general" because "she doesn't want to talk about the other issues."
Gillibrand obviously wants to talk about abortion and contraception instead of the actual issues — religious liberty and conscience protection — and she's NOT looking forward to debating even them, much less "the other issues," with Long.
© Michael Gaynor
The views expressed by RenewAmerica columnists are their own and do not necessarily reflect the position of RenewAmerica or its affiliates.
(See RenewAmerica's publishing standards.)
