Records show McCarthy contributed to Gillibrand races

[wyldwolf]

WASHINGTON - Rep. Carolyn McCarthy may be threatening a primary challenge to newly named New York Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand over her pro-gun stand, but records show McCarthy donated $1,500 to Gillibrand's two successful races for an upstate House seat.

McCarthy's leadership PAC gave Gillibrand a $500 contribution for her first run for Congress in 2006, and doubled it to $1,000 for her re-election bid last June, according to federal campaign finance records.

McCarthy made the second donation June 5, months after Gillibrand had publicly signed on to a legal brief that drew attacks from McCarthy's friends among gun-control advocates...

... "Yeah, I gave her money. I didn't know what her stance was," said McCarthy... McCarthy said she was trying to help a Democrat win an uphill race in a conservative Republican district. She insisted she did not know about Gillibrand's strong pro-gun views.

McCarthy said she is "nowhere near" declaring her candidacy (for Senate) and won't decide if she will until spring or early summer.
Rep. Peter King (R-Seaford) wavered a bit yesterday, saying Gillibrand could be a tougher opponent than Caroline Kennedy, who dropped out of the running for Paterson's appointment last week.

King said he was ready to file "30 seconds" after Kennedy's appointment, and though he's still "very much inclined" to run, he'll take more time to think it over now that he'd face Gillibrand.

http://www.newsday.com/services/newspaper/printedition/tuesday/nation/ny-usmcca276013825jan27,0,6231446.story

[Renew Deal]

1. Of course King wavered. He's a wimp.

I hope he runs. He's going to get stomped by Kristen, McCarthy, or whoever.

[THUNDER HANDS]

4. King would have it tough trying to win state-wide

no matter who he ran against.

Outside of Nassau and Suffolk, I don't see how he beat any dem in a state-wide race, and even then he'd only win Nassau and Suffolk by slim margins.

[Renew Deal]

6. There are 60,000-70,000 more republicans in his district than dems

That's the only reason he's still around.

[hlthe2b]

2. So? McCarthy donating for a COngressional race....

hardly implies support for that same person on a statewide basis... She's very sincere on the gun issue (for very good reason)... The implications of this article are without basis.

[Shiver]

5. You'd think someone so invested in gun control

would research a candidate's position on that issue before giving them money...

[hlthe2b]

11. Reread my post... You have missed the point..

perhaps, just perhaps, McCarthy recognizes the differences in gun issues for Gillibrand's district over her own, yet she is unwilling to have the gun control issues that are so important for big cities be subverted by G and others like her on a national level.

[Shiver]

12. Skimmed over the point, actually

I missed the "statewide" part of your post. I understand what you are getting at, but McCarthy is quoted in the OP as not knowing what Gillibrand's stance on gun issues was when she donated money:

"Yeah, I gave her money. I didn't know what her stance was," said McCarthy... McCarthy said she was trying to help a Democrat win an uphill race in a conservative Republican district. She insisted she did not know about Gillibrand's strong pro-gun views.

While I agree that it is entirely possible that McCarthy would recognize the difference in district issues, someone as pro-gun control as her should have known the stance of the candidate she was donating to.

[BeyondGeography]

3. Has Carolyn McCarthy ever been north of The Bronx?

What a terrible statewide candidate she'd be. Just stop it already, Ms. McCarthy.

[Renew Deal]

7. I don't think she'd be great statewide either.

She's a gun candidate in a state where guns are not a big issue.

[THUNDER HANDS]

8. i don't think much of her as a congressperson either

I have tepid support for her, at best.

She pretty much flies under the radar until a mass shooting happens, then the news agencies come calling, she does a few interviews, and then fades into the background. She's never authored a piece of significant legislation in her tenure in congress.

[Renew Deal]

9. I feel the same way.

She just kind of hangs on voting with the popular side on bills. On tight bills that's not usually the correct side.

[Drunken Irishman]

15. They're both pathetic candidates.

And both would probably lose a state-wide race.

[sohndrsmith]

10. I don't get the significance of this story in the larger picture of

things, particularly in light of Paterson getting $50,000 in late December - shortly after Clinton was named to be Obama's pick and the senate seat "open" in every sense of the word except for Clinton's official resignation. Still, Paterson had to be thinking of who would make the best choice to fill the seat should the likely appointment go through as expect...

And who gave Paterson $50,000? Well, David Boies, the senior partner of Gillibrand's ex law firm (and highest financial donor to her campaign directly, as well) gave $25,000 on December 23rd...

And...

Lo and behold... his son (also a partner in the firm) gave another $25,000 to Paterson's campaign coffers.... THE SAME DAY. The significance of which is even more interesting considering Kennedy had just announced her interest in the Senate seat only days prior.

If "pay to play" is so abhorrent to us, then why is this not an issue as crucial as Blago's failed attempts. This transaction was successful! ... It's just to cute to be purely coincidental, in my opinion. Especially in light of how we have railed Illinois for playing dirty politics. What makes this so different? Just because Paterson isn't being impeached or under investigation - oh, it's okay... we're cool with it. I don't think that's playing cricket, personally...

No, this is far more interesting than a small contribution made by a potential adversary, made in error or not, which pales in comparison, in my view...

http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/archives/2009/01/the_new_frontru.php

[xchrom]

14. it is awful -- just not much we can do about it now.

except to expose paterson and let the chips fall where they may.

[sohndrsmith]

17. rather ironic as I hear the same topic all over the news in regards to Blago...

letting the chips fall where they may doesn't seem right - or appropriate to just acquiesce to since it's in the past (what, 3-4 weeks?)

Wow. No wonder we have corruption, if it's too much bother to challenge it when appropriate. If it's legit, then fine, but the ongoing stories about Illinois make me furious about what seems like a double standard... of what..? Indifference?

Well, then we get the consequences of what we ignore, if that's the case...

sigh...

[FLAprogressive]

13. what a maroon

one DLC hack donates to another.....

[AtomicKitten]

16. +1