7 Days: Kirsten Gillibrand Talks Policy

She's called it her "baptism by fire" -- literally one day a little known upstate congresswomen, the next a national celebrity after her appointment by Gov. Paterson to succeed mentor Hillary Clinton. Her friends call her brilliant -- her critics expedient. 7 Days found a person thoroughly substantive and adaptable.

INTERVIEW OF SENATOR KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND, FEBRUARY 13, 2009

MARK GREEN: When did you realize you had a real shot at being appointed to the Senate seat by Governor Paterson?

SEN. KIRSTEN GILLIBRAND: During the process, I figured I had about a 5% chance. I thought there were so many qualified public servants that were offering their time and talents to the governor to take on Senator Clinton's seat.

GREEN: You're apparently a better Senator than handicapper.

GILLIBRAND: Well, yes. I think so. But you know, a lot of things came into play and I feel very grateful that I had the opportunity to do this. I really didn't have state-wide aspirations, I was looking to work very hard for my district for a very long time, and it's just a privilege to actually serve in Senator Clinton's seat. Our Secretary of State is someone I've admired for years and years, someone who's been a mentor and a friend. She's always been an adviser, you know. When I ran my first race for Congress, my husband and I paid for our own poll to see if it was possible to win, and I showed that poll to Senator Clinton. I said: "will you look at this and tell me your advice and guidance about whether I should run?" And so to try to follow in her footsteps is quite an extraordinary privilege because those are very large shoes to fill, and I hope I do my best to serve near state as well as she did.

GREEN: In your view, is the Stimulus/Recovery bill good enough for New York -- or, if you were on the Conference Committee, what would you have tried to get back in good for NY?

GILLIBRAND: Well, I would've been advocating for more funding for education. It's one of the areas that the senate took out. And those dollars would've been very, very valuable to New York state, because, obviously, education is the gateway for the American dream. And I think it's so important that we're investing in our kids by giving them, not only the resources to have the best education possible, but opportunities for early childhood education and for college tuition. So, having more of those dollars in education funding, I think, would've been a long term economic stimulative effect that really can't compare to anything else. Because when you educate a child, and you give them the opportunity to achieve their God given potential, that child will then excel and they will go on to high school and go on to college. And when you have a college education, you know, you can earn much more money. The average high school diploma earns you about $25K, but the average college diploma is closer to $45K. And that means you can provide more for your family and invest more in our economy. That's an effect that's long-term economic growth.

GREEN: What do you think of Treasury Secretary Geithner's proposed bank bailout plan this week?

GILLIBRAND: Well, what was hopeful is that he has three basic approaches that he's going to use in concert, which I think is a greater opportunity for success. One of his approaches includes buying equity. Significant portions of equity, getting preferred chairs, warrants, seats on boards, controlling shares, voting rights. So that you can actually have an impact on making sure we don't pay dividends, making sure we don't pay excessive CEO salaries and bonuses, making banks recapitalize, helping them to write down bad debt, take on new equity, become healthy again so they can lend. That's an approach that I thought Paulson should've pursued. He ultimately did do a buy-equity strategy, but then he didn't do it right because he didn't take any of the controlling interests. But, the bottom line with Geithner's approach right now is that he has the framework laid out. And the framework seems fine, but the details are so essential, and so many of us are waiting on those details because they will determine whether it has a chance for success. So, in the one prong that we're talking about, the buy-equity approach, how much control is he going to take? And how long? And how will he transfer that ownership interest back into the private sector over time? Because we don't want to own banks forever...

GREEN: What are your colleagues saying could be a Plan B if this plan doesn't work?

GILLIBRAND: Well, let's go to the recovery package, because that's different. What the recovery package is talking about is, how do you stop the rapid job loss that's happening? You know, in the last several months, we've lost 3.5 million jobs. More than half of them in the last three months. That is very sobering statistic that creates a great sense of urgency for solutions. So, the recovery package is basically three approaches. One is to invest in energy independence. The other is to invest in infrastructure, both old and new. And the third is to invest in targeted tax cuts and getting money immediately into the market through things like unemployment insurance increases, increases in food stamps. Having these separate approaches is very important because it has both long term and short term investment.

On the long term, some of the new infrastructure, if you build a road or a bridge, traditional infrastructure, that creates a job of the worker that's actually working for that time that it's being constructed. But when you're building rural broadband, or high speed rail, or healthcare IT, what you're talking about is decades of economic generation. If you build a high speed rail from New York City, to Albany, to Montreal, and then from Albany straight to Buffalo, you are basically creating an opportunity to put jobs in upstate New York, and throughout New York State for decades to come. And that's exciting. Here's an example of what I would've put more in if I was in the conference committee: we put two billion dollars behind high speed rail. And it may be just because there aren't many "shovel-ready" projects, which is the point of this particular investment, but that's something I hope President Obama says: "A hallmark of my administration is going to be to put high speed rail across America." So, that's a Plan B, for example.

[Another] area is energy. This package has about $40bn in energy tax cuts, research and development grants for the alternative markets, so people who are working on wind energy, or solar, or bio-fuels, or cellulosic ethanol, or fuel cell, or battery technology, can get the R&D grants and tax credits to make those business cost-efficient so that they can make money to stimulate the entrepreneurs and the businesses that are in this sector.

GREEN: How do you answer your critics -- from the Village Voice to the New York Times editorial page, who've labeled your views as "expedient"?

GILLIBRAND: Well, they don't know me well, so they don't know what I believe in. They don't know my core-beliefs. I've always fought for middle-class tax cuts, so that we educate our kids, to make sure that every child in America has the opportunity to achieve their God-given potential. My core values are about opportunity, education, and healthcare. So, when you hear criticisms, they're usually from political opponents, they're often political rhetoric, and they're often not accurate.

On areas where I did not take a leading role in advocacy, or my district was focused on a different aspect of those issues, there's enormous opportunity for me to travel across the whole state and spend time in every community. And I'm going to do exactly what I did when I was a congresswoman in upstate New York. I'm going to listen to their views, I'm going to take their priorities and translate it into legislation, I'll create a legislative agenda that reflects all of New York and the priorities of every community, and work hard every day for our constituents... The proof will be in the pudding. It'll take time. You know, you have to remember, I represented 600,000 upstate residents. I now represent almost 20 million people all across New York state. So, there's a lot of different constituencies and a lot of different priorities where I will be a leading voice on the issues that they care about.

GREEN: You spoke to Mayor Bloomberg this week about gun violence. You've previously focused on "hunters rights", with hunters caring essentially about long guns. What handgun controls might you now support?

GILLIBRAND: Well, I think you're mixing apples and oranges, actually. What Mayor Bloomberg and I talked about was -- how do we end gun violence and how do we keep guns out of the hands of criminals? And those are core values I've always held. But we didn't have gang violence in upstate New York in my district. We didn't have the sense of urgency because young people were getting killed because of gun violence, and getting in the crossfire of gangs. And we didn't have the problem of traffickers coming into our districts selling illegal guns on the street corners for criminals. So what I'm going to work on with Mayor Bloomberg is actually solving that problem. Because what we need to do is have a way to get guns out of the hands of criminals to keep our communities safe, to make sure our children can be safe.

But, in my district, those weren't our issues. Our issues were more making sure Americans who are law-abiding citizens can go hunting if they want to go hunting. Or own guns because they're sportsmen, or because they want to have home protection. Those are fundamental Constitutional rights that can be protected. It's so different than the issues of ending gun violence. And so, I can be an advocate for ending gun violence. I can be an advocate for keeping our community safe and keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. I'm actually going to work on legislation to address two things. One is, get the guns off the streets. The guns that are in New York today are from other states -- they are 85% from out of New York state, and they are sold illegally directly to criminals. We need to end that influx of guns and weapons and this illegal sale. I'm actually going to write legislation on trafficking, because there is no federal legislation on cracking down on gun trafficking and trying to keep these guns out of the hands of criminals.

The second thing that the students asked for -- "what we really need is an answer to the gangs." Gangs for many people is very attractive, because it's a community, it's something to do after school, it's something they see other people in their community doing. And if they had something to do, like going to a club, having some after school programming where they can do sports or job training, or develop their interest in professional areas. That, and have a community of its own, they said that would make a difference. So I'm going to work on legislation to figure out how to do this, whether we do it through a funding mechanism, through a pilot program, whether we empower local communities to do this, but actually create a legislative agenda around that problem. That's something that Mayor Bloomberg appreciated, and he thinks it's going to be very helpful.

GREEN: If a version of the Kennedy/McCain bill came up on the Senate floor -- creating a "pathway to citizenship" by the payment of fines, learning English, waiting 12 years -- could you support a version of that, or would you continue to view it as "amnesty"?

GILLIBRAND: Well, the Senate bill had a lot of flaws. So, we need a lot of work on a comprehensive immigration strategy. One of the biggest flaws of the bill was that it accepted that, for family reunification, an eight year backlog was acceptable. To me, that's outrageous. Why would you say you're doing immigration reform and not solve that issue? What you should have is to hire the right number of lawyers and caseworkers, have infrastructure in place so you can get that backlog done within six months. Immigration is part of our nation's heritage. Our country was built on immigrants. We have so much richness in our culture and in our traditions because of our immigrant populations. Family reunification is a core value of America, and it's something that we should solve.

The second issue that I felt was very problematic was if we're going to have a guest worker program, then you need to have one that is going to work. Immigrant communities are very vibrant and essential for our economy and for many, many industries. I happen to know a lot about farming. So, in that regard, we need to right-size immigration. We need to know how many visas we need in this country and have the right number and have a system that actually allows for an immigration system that works, and works for everyone. So, I will work with the President on a comprehensive immigration plan... Whether it's similar to what the Senate bill had, whether it's learning English, paying back fines, paying back taxes, having a job training opportunity, whatever the President wants to do, I will work with him in that regard. I think we do need t o solve the problem in a comprehensive way so that we can have a system that works and works for everyone.

Interview audio can be found at airamerica.com

Panel with Arianna Huffington & Katrina vanden Heuvel

MARK GREEN: Katrina, you heard Sen. Gillibrand in our opening two segments and previously when she spoke privately to leading progressives in NYC. Your view of her?

KATRINA VANDEN HEUVEL: Well, I was in a small group and Senator Gillibrand talked about her listening tours with different constituencies. Immigrant rights, gun control, but this was with an exotic group of birds called New York progressives. I have to say, before I went into that meeting, I was in touch with one of the leading progressives in New York and he said she had called him the day before and said: "I know I have to keep the left happy." After that she had been talking about Swedish bank nationalizations. But still she was very eloquent. Very long- winded, but eloquent about "green jobs" in upstate New York. About economic recovery, about investment in infrastructure, such as light rail and high speed rail. And she gave one of the best explanations about the original Bush-Paulson bailout, which is why I'm confused that she's more supportive of Geithner's plan, which I think is sort of "Son of Paulson", because she gave an analysis of why she voted against that original bailout bill. Which sounded like a combination of Bill Greider and David Sirota. It was really quite striking... Mark, you know, I think it was 39 years ago, another upstater -- Republican Charles Goodell -- was appointed to the Senate to fill a vacancy. He too was pretty conservative and became one of the more progressive members of the senate. He was voted out. So, we'll see what happens with Gillibrand.

GREEN: You mentioned Goodell's appointment and then loss [to Conservative Party nominee James Buckley in 1970]. Do you think Gillibrand -- who actually gets 95% to 100% ratings from the ACLU, NARAL, NAACP, League of Conservation Voters -- is vulnerable to a challenge from the left because of some of her previous moderate or conservative views?

VANDEN HEUVEL: I think there are a smaller group of progressives beginning to circulate and trying to find a left candidate. I was talking to Wayne Barrett of the Village Voice the other day who asked me to go listen to Carolyn McCarthy, the congresswoman who's husband was killed in the Long Island Railroad massacre in 1993. He said he'd never heard such a passionate explanation of why someone, in this case Carolyn McCarthy, might run against Gillibrand. I don't know where that goes, Mark, but the gun and immigration issue will be very important ones for Gillibrand to work with because I think those could launch a more progressive opposition.

GREEN: While Gillibrand might theoretically be ideologically vulnerable in a primary, I very much doubt any major progressive congressperson will run since she is adapting to the more liberal state electorate and, protected by Schumer and Paterson, will presumably be a very successful fundraiser. But onto the economy: why did Secretary Geithner get such a "Bronx cheer" for his bank bailout plan?

ARIANNA HUFFINGTON: Well, because it wasn't clear enough, it wasn't good enough, it was against the emerging consensus that the banks that have failed, as Martin Wolfe put it in the Financial Times put it, and should basically be allowed to be restructured. But that is not our job as taxpayers to simply protect these "zombie institutions", as many have been calling them. So, the fact that you have such a consensus emerging on that, that in fact we cannot save the banks, even Anna Schwartz, who co-wrote the seminal book: A Monetary History of the United States with Milton Freedman, said that we should not be recapitalizing firms. They should be shut down -- that firms that made wrong decisions should fail. That's the essence of capitalism, right? So what are we doing here? That's actually the problem with Geithner.

GREEN: Let's talk about bi-partisanship. Obama's phrase about Iran could be used about Republicans in the Congress -- he'll extend his hand if they unclench their fists. Since he seems to have been slapped down by nearly all Republicans in the Congress, was he smart to have at least tried or was it a mistake that will move him toward a more partisan tone in the future?

HUFFINGTON: I don't think it was a mistake in terms of style. I think that bipartisanship in terms of civility, inviting Republicans to the White House, all that is great. What is not great is losing track of what you want to achieve. What isn't great is losing track of your principles. That is really the key here. Leadership is ultimately about building a consensus about what you believe should be done, not about splitting the difference. And that is the problem with the stimulus bill. I mean, it's a huge victory, but it's not a victory that answers the problem. The metaphor about jumping half way across a chasm, which Van Jones first used in a blog post I did, it's the same metaphor as yours Mark about not throwing a 30 foot rope to a person drowning 40 feet offshore. The Recovery Plan is not sufficient. If it's not sufficient, it's not going to work, and then Republicans can draw their own conclusions from it.

VANDEN HEUVEL: Mark, I was going to say one thing we haven't talked about, and John Judas in the New Republic has a piece on this point. He thinks one of the main reasons that Obama is having trouble with is that there isn't a popular left-progressive movement that's agitating for him to go well beyond where he would even ideally like to go. I think it's interesting. There are intellectuals like Krugman and others who are all beating the drums for different plans. The labor movement is having trouble. But it's still not what we've seen at different points in our history where there's been a very powerful left-progressive movement pushing the President beyond the limits his own politics. Like FDR.

GREEN: What happens if the Stimulus fails? Since Obama amazingly said that if the Recovery Plan fails, voters may well make him a one-term president, what then is Plan B if unemployment is at 7-8% this time next year?

HUFFINGTON: Well, unless we do more than we're doing on the stimulus plan, and do something different on the bank bailout plan, it'll be much more than 7-8%. We're going to be in double digit unemployment. Just look at the fact that we're not including the 5% additional unemployment among those who've given up on actually being part of those that we count as unemployed. We're not looking at the fact that credit card defaults are going to be infinitely worse than the 6% that bank balance sheets are allowing. So, there's so much that we're not taking into account that there's no question that what we're doing is both wrong, when it comes to the Geithner plan, and insufficient when it comes to the stimulus plan. We need to be stressing that every day. Talking Points Memo had two great videos that I highly recommend. An interview with Joseph Stiglitz and an interview with Simon Johnson. They're both saying the same thing - banks fail throughout history. And new banks take their place. You know, if we were in Argentina, everybody would be saying: "get rid of the oligarchs!"

Comments

[longislandlol]

Newsday claims she sleeps with two loaded you-know-whats under her bed-- says she has to protect her brood-- yeah-sure if she was Wilma Flintstone!

[DavidEBrown]

I am profoundly impressed with Senator Gillibrand, as presented here, and, by extension, Governor Paterson, for having chosen her.

What an articulate (though I would agree - tending toward the long-winded) person, and what a stunning grasp of the issues she's addressing here.

She's a telling contrast with Sarah Palin. It is interesting to speculate what would have happened if McCain had chosen her instead. My guess is the Obama/Biden ticket would have had a horse race, especially because I suspect she would have been able to influence McCain to moderate his positions considerably.

I was concerned, originally, about her views. I'm from Northern New York also (though not her district) so I have a sense of what a challenge she must have faced in her most recent election contest in a relatively conservative part of the state, but, as I had hoped, she is intelligent and principled enough to be able to shift gears, and effectively and plausibly represent a wide diversity of views, the kind she inevitably confronts as junior senator from New York.

I wish her well. She's off to a great start.

[GrannyForObama]

Although now living in PA, I formerly lived in an adjoining district to Senator Gillibrand's Congressional district. She was such an extraordinarily good candidate when she first sought election that, even though it wasn't my district, I worked hard along with many others for her election against what was thought to be a securely Republican district. She is extremely intelligent, very personable but very tough when she needs to be - very much like her predecessor in the Senate. Also like Senator Clinton, she has the rare ability to "get" the two sides of New York - upstate and downstate. She can always hold her own, yet she is not an attention seeker for attention's sake. She is a tireless worker, a good family person and really cares about her constituents. I think she and Senator Schumer make a great team for New York!

And I commend Mark Green for his thoughtful, intelligent and in-depth interview.

[dphilip]

I commend Ms. Hillibrand for her support of the Constitutional right to bear arms.
With all due respect and condolences to Ms. Mc Carthy, Since 1993 I am sure many New Yorkers have been in circumstances where the presence of a gun would have saved lives. The situation that ended her husbands life is one.
Mr. Green, I was going to take you to task for offering the pretext that Ms. Hillibrand must do "something" about handguns, But when you compared Obama's approach to dealing with republicans to his approach to dealing with Iran I determined that you lack the credibility for an honest debate. But 't please don't stop. We republicans will need all the help we can get in 2010. Choose not to be a victim. Develop a self defense strategy for you and your family.

[lisa12345]

I really admire her, and I appreciate all of the comments here. Everyone makes good points.

Gillibrand will have to balance convictions with her democratic duty to reflect the will of the citizenry. She represents a whole state now--and has a lot of power as a senator to nake decisions that will effect all of the US citizens.

Yes, to reflect the will of the people, she will have to ease back her position on guns. A 70% rating from the NRA is more American than a 100% one. Most Americans do not support strident pro-gun measures.

However, if she is going to represent the interest of the people, she needs to consider that most Americans are against illegal immigration and desire a tightening of the border. We are not against immigration, but illegal immigration. This is the viewpoint held by most in the center--including the center-left.
I hope she continues to support E-Verify and other projects that protect American workers, especially during a time like this.

[dphilip]

You have an interesting and deceptive way of framing the gun rights issue..See the Second Amendment as it exisits protects private gun ownership for self defense. Your view is that those are rights that do not currently exist. So, if you and/or your family were faced with an imminent violent attack you are comfortable with granting your attacker the decision of whether you live or die?

[fif]

I live in the 20th District, and Kirsten Gillibrand has been our Congressional Rep. This is one of the first pieces I have seen that have accurately conveyed her intelligence, earnest advocacy, and commitment to public service in a fair and balanced way. It's so refreshing to hear Gillibrand explain, in detail, her understanding and positions in the past and present on fiscal policy, immigration and gun control without the reactionary and inflammatory judgment of media and political commentary. As she clearly states, the "proof will be in the pudding." Give her a chance to do what she did in our District--listen to her new constituency, study the issues in detail, and use her formidable intelligence and insight to advocate for the best interests of NY state. You will not be disappointed--she is a rare talent.

[Givethemhellharry]

My Niece, Annette Nielsen, who was an aide to Senator Moynihan for many years, also lives in Gillebrands congressional district. She had very high praise for her and if you read some of my earlier blogs, you will find I was pushing her or Mike Arcuri of Utica for the Senate seat.

All of the other Statewide offices are held by people from New York City. Many of my Progressive friends cannot see past the Westchester County line. The rest of the State deserved to be represented also in the halls of power. Over the last 2 election cycles Upstate has elected Democrats as never before. The inroads made, very honestly, I never thought I would see. Having said that, If the New York City crowd gets so greedy that they displace Gillabrand from the ticket, I will guarantee there will be such a backlash that both Schumer and Patterson will be in trouble.

New York now has a Senator with intelligence, work ethic and capability, who IMHO is far superior to the carpetbagger from Arkansas. NYC mess with her at your peril! Remember how Koch's stupid comments cost him the Governorship. The adverse reaction will be ten times worse this time if Gillibrand is not given a fair chance to serve and succeed.

[Teddie R4]

The more we learn of Kirsten Gillibrand the more there is to like.
An articulate woman with an excellent grasp of the issues whose willingness to consider a wider range of viewpoints has immediately placed her in the center of a firestorm from those who want only a left or right advocate. After passing through this current “baptism by fire”, Gillibrand immediately faces an election next year (2010) and winning that will again face the electorate two years later in 2012.
Senator Gillibrand remains continuously available to the media and her constituents to expound on her views, to listen and to incorporate policies necessary for all of New York State.
So what’s the problem? Democracy works even by appointment.

[eleanorr]

Teddie R4 makes good points. Finally we get a brilliant young woman in the US Senate who actually reads legislation, does independent research, reaches out to people of differing opinions and arrives at a well-informed position on the issue. But the questions remain: will the knee-jerk, down-state liberal demagogues and the upstate NRA-types give her a fair chance to arrive at reasonable positions instead of slavishly adhering to their particular hard-line ideology? The same question applies to the news media: will they give her a fair chance to define herself, now that she represents the entire state with our diverse, competing points of view, or just scream "flip flop" whenever she reconsiders a prior point of view? Hats off to Mark Green who is the first journalist in America to ask her direct questions and then actually listen to her answers.

[aga6943]

It seems that Senator Gillibrand's appointment was based on her choosing positions that NYC and Long Island like but are rejected by the rest of the state. Upstate New York should demand equal representation.

[pkafin]

Sorry, It doesn't work that way. The vast majority of new Yorkers live in NYC. A senator represents all of the people from his or her state. Upstate NY, particularly the upper Hudson Valley has very rarely been "represented" by the New York State Senator.

[Doofus]

If you look at the demographics, a 'vast majority' of NYers do not live
in NYC. More than half in fact live outside the city. Most likely, a large
majority lives NEAR the city. Upstate is not so often represented, but
certainly D.P. Moynihan *could* have been considered as such a one.

It seems that Sen Gillibrand is off to a pretty good start, which includes
some awareness of the fate that befell Chas Goodell back in his day,
about being all things to all people.

[renatam]

Upstaters should have known Gillebrand would shift her politics for ambition. And, downstaters here in NYC don't want a Neocon/DLC­-Lieberman­-like Senator, who shifts w/the weather.

Consequently, she doesn't stand for anything and is unworthy of the State of NY. She should go the way of her mentor - Al D'Amato, back to LOBBYING, where she came from.

[111]

I remember there were polls that had Sweeney ahead of Gillibrand until the week before the election when the someone leaked a 911 call from Sweeney's wife. Sweeney is up by the double digits in the polls and Gillibrand will probably be defeated until ... interesting how that works, isn't it? Gillibrand's dad is a NY lobbyist with ties to Bruno, Pataki and D'Amato. Ms. Clinton's advising her. A state agency leaks information to the public and daddy's little girl beats the incumbent. Not that anyone did anything wrong, I'm certain.

Gillibrand gets 100% ratings from the NRA but why bother with citing ratings from various agencies? I believe that Paterson chose her because of her political and lobbying connections and her fund raising abilities and Centrist Democrat = Republican. We have to live with her for a couple of years but we don't have to re-elect her.

Like all politicians she will say what she thinks will get her elected. If McCarthy runs I will vote for her. I will not vote for Schumer, Paterson or Gillibrand.

[Givethemhellharry]

What a bunch of crap! Of course, she will hopefully change some of her votes to reflect her NEW constituency. She is there to represent their will not just her views and I am sure she is smart enough to see that.

I have been a Progressive for 40 years and agree with most of the goals of my friends from NYC. But there is an element in this group that can't see past the Westchester County line, that the only intelligence is in the Boroughs of NY. Over the last 2 election cycles we have seen a major shift to the Democratic here in Upstate. All the other statewide offices in the state are held by downstate Dems. I guarantee you, if NYC does not support Gillibrand in 2010, Upstate will not only not elect her replacement but will put Patterson and Schumer at risk. Get greedy and arrogant NYC and you will lose in the end. Remember Koch's try for the Governor ship. You have a great new Senator, get behind her and stop the pettiness.

[Palemoon]

Pretty much proved to me what I already knew about her, she's a neocon. Might as well put that R-NY after her name from now on.

[pkafin]

"Neocon"?

I think you need some new words in your vocabulary. I understand objections that some may have because she is not flamboyantly progressive. However "neo-con" there are many versions of "not entirely progressive" that are not at all well described by the word "neo-con".

[AlwaysaLiberal]

Exactly, not even all Republicans can be classified as Neocons!!!

[AlwaysaLiberal]

I'm beginning to think people don't know what neocon means. She might not be a progressive but she obviously isn't a neocon. You can't just call people you don't like neo-cons when it doesn't make any sense.

[AnnfromCA]

She's sharp. An excellent appointment by NY.