Heather Mac Donald over at The Corner touches on Kirsten Gillibrand [1], perhaps unintentionally making a nice follow on to my Pajamas Media peice of last week [2]:
What are the chances that New York’s new senator, Kirsten Gillibrand, will maintain her support for immigration enforcement after being rushed by a massive line of illegal-alien advocates and other members of the liberal elite? Gillibrand is said to said to harbor ambitions for much higher office. If she holds onto her immigration principles despite the intended sacking, she will have distinguished herself early on as a unique politician worthy of further attention.
Gillibrand seems to have backed just about every measure to strengthen the immigration rule of law during her single term in Congress representing an Albany-area district. She opposed amnesty and driver’s licenses for illegal aliens; she supported using local police to enforce immigration laws. She co-sponsored the SAVE Act [3], which would have required employers to verify the legal status of their employees, expedited deportation of illegals, and boosted border technology. She wanted to protect employers who require their workers to speak English from being sued as civil rights violators.
Needless to say, these positions are anathema to the open-borders lobby, so earlier this week, the New York Times published what was virtually a set of serial press releases [4] from that lobby denouncing her. “Borders on xenophobia,” “extremist,” a “slap to immigrant New Yorkers,” and a “disappointing choice” were among the predictable jabs from New York City politicians, Spanish-language newspapers, and advocates. Particularly amusing was the charge from the executive director of the New York Immigration Coalition that Gillibrand’s “past positions are pretty much out of line with the rest of New York State.”
Heh. Well, I guess you could argue it’s out of touch with New York City. As I suggested recently, anything north of about Hilburn isn’t considered to be part of the state by those within the confines of the Apple.
Heather does raise an interesting question, though. about how long such a person can hold out in such an environment. What it comes down to is what her stands until now, have been driven by. If they’re driven by principle, then, she’ll do fine. If she has until now been simply doing what was needed to extend her power, as I suggested in the PJM comments section, then she won’t last out the term. And now’s the test.
It will be interesting to see if she’s just another power hungry Democrat.