Michael Gaynor
Wendy Long: NY's best choice to defend religious liberty and rebut the "War Against Women" charge
FacebookTwitterGoogle+
By Michael Gaynor
March 17, 2012

New York's Republicans and Conservatives should nominate Wendy Long to debate and then replace Gillibrand in the United States Senate, because she's the best qualified AND a women and not nominating her would give credence to the idea that Republicans and Conservatives are unfair to women.

The upcoming presidential election is huge.

In New York, there is a United States Senate race too.

It's not as important as the presidential race, but it is potentially a game changer too.

Just imagine a well qualified female Republican-Conservative Senator actually representing New York.

New York's junior Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, whose exemplifies flip flopping, is running for a full term. She was appointed to replace Hillary Clinton in 2009 and elected to complete Clinton's term in 2010. After her appointment, she quickly morphed from a moderate representing an upstate congressional district to win the same designation that National Journal gave to then Senator Barack Obama before he was elected President — most "liberal" United States Senator.

Gillibrand is so "liberal" that she was upset with Obama's phony "accommodation" intended to quell the outrage over the violations of religious liberty that would result from his proposed HHS regulations.

But Gillibrand won easily (by more than 27%) in a Republican year against a male Republican-Conservative candidate.

Gillibrand has a gender advantage against all of her potential male opponents.

The liberal Democrats know it and plan to exploit it.

New York's senior Senator, Chuck Schumer, is already working to help Gillibrand win re-election by posing as a women's champion in an illusory "War Against Women."

On March 14, 2012, Obama-friendly Politico reported as follows (http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=FCB7044F-74DF-4E91-AA01-634E48910FF9):

"New York Sen. Chuck Schumer believes he has found a political weapon in the unlikeliest of places: the Violence Against Women Act.

"Republicans have several objections to the legislation, but instead of making changes, Schumer wants to fast track the bill to the floor, let the GOP block it, then allow Democrats to accuse Republicans of waging a 'war against women.'"

The United States Senate soon may begin debating a bill to update expired provisions in the 1994 Violence Against Women Act, which provides assistance to victims of domestic abuse and other crimes.

The bill is far from a mere reauthorization and was approved in committee last month on a party-line vote.

Seven years ago the bill sailed through committee on its way to reauthorization a second time.

Iowa Sen. Chuck Grassley, the top Republican on the committee, explained that he supports a reauthorization of the law, but voted no because the bill would result in the granting of legal status to illegal immigrants who are victims of crimes under "liberal" criteria, among other things.

Democrats are pretending that Republicans are conducting a "War Against Women." For example, Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) ranted, "Not to reauthorize this [Violate Against Women Act] is a tragedy. This is one more step in the removal of rights for women."

This "War Against Women" notion is nonsense, but politically potent nonsense.

Of the five female Republican United States Senators, three have already expressed support for bring the reauthorization bill to the floor.

Republicans need women to stand up for religious liberty and not to be cowed by the phony "War Against Women" charge.

New York's Republicans and Conservatives should nominate Wendy Long to debate and then replace Gillibrand in the United States Senate, because she's the best qualified AND a women and not nominating her would give credence to the idea that Republicans and Conservatives are unfair to women.

© 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.)

Click to enlarge

Michael Gaynor

Michael J. Gaynor has been practicing law in New York since 1973. A former partner at Fulton, Duncombe & Rowe and Gaynor & Bass, he is a solo practitioner admitted to practice in New York state and federal courts and an Association of the Bar of the City of New York member... (more)

Subscribe

Receive future articles by Michael Gaynor: Click here

More by this author

September 6, 2018
Senator Leahy owes apologies to Judge Kavanaugh and Manuel Miranda for impugning their integrity


August 13, 2018
Will President Trump stand up for the original Declaration of Independence or kneel to the de-emphasis of God in the Library of Congress's revision of it?


July 9, 2018
Librarian of Congress and Federal Court should respect America's Declaration of Independence as approved by Congress, instead of a revision de-emphasizing the importance of God


June 27, 2018
SCOTUS holds Trump travel ban to be constitutional; anti-Trumpers outraged


June 23, 2018
Would Cardinal McCarrick have followed canon law on distributing Holy Communion if he had not been a sexual abuser?


June 19, 2018
Should child neglect be overlooked when children are used as shields by parents entering the United States illegally?


June 6, 2018
The Constitution does not limit the presidential pardon power except in case of impeachment


May 7, 2018
President Trump, please turn the tables on Special Counsel Mueller by challenging him to subpoena you instead of letting him interview you


March 26, 2018
President Trump's choice of John Bolton as National Security Adviser is an unmistakable message to Kim Jung-Un


March 20, 2018
"Fruit of poison tree" protects President Trump as well as you and me


More articles