Maureen Dowd Doesn't Speak for All of Us!

Maureen Dowd's diatribe today against Kirsten Gillibrand was a bit much. She was grossed out that Gillibrand was introduced with Alphonse D'Amato standing near. D'Amato, for whom she interned once-upon-a-time, was a mentor. So was Andrew Cuomo, who failed to show up.

Why do we instantly have to be against Senator Gillibrand because she is a Blue Dog Democrat? She represented a conservative area, for goodness sake! All of us don't agree on everything, and women are no exception. I sometimes think that women are even more polarized than the general population.

I was not thrilled with the Kennedy fiasco, primarily because I did not think Caroline was entitled to the seat for the asking. But I did want a woman to replace Hillary Clinton. I have known Carolyn Maloney since she campaigned for her first term, and wondered why Patterson would pick such a new Congresswoman (other than she was not from Manhattan).

But I saw the press conference and have read some about Ms. Gillibrand -- and I like her. She really wants to be an ELECTED official, and she has fire in her belly for her constituents. She is one of only 27 members of Congress that supports Marriage Equality...She may well change her stand on guns, because she already understands that she now represents a whole state. Of course, she will be called a flip-flopper -- but only by those who don't get it, or want to get it.

And probably mostly by Liberal women who don't understand that we need critical mass in Congress and to find common ground. Like Maureen Dowd, they are in the pocket of the Liberal establishment which does not care about parity for women enough to widen their horizons. What happened already to "Change We Can Believe In?"