4:55 pm May. 24, 2012
In a story about the pitfalls of the Obama campaign's attacks on Mitt Romney's business record, The New York Times cited the lack of a comment from Senators Kirsten Gillibrand and Chuck Schumer ("two Democrats with close ties to Wall Street") as evidence of the precariousness of the president's strategy.
Gillibrand has defended the Obama campaign's attacks, though. In a television interview recorded yesterday afternoon (it was on Time Warner Cable Channel 91, and I wouldn't have seen it if it wasn't pointed out to me by Gillibrand's spokesman), Gillibrand said the questioning of Romney's record is not only appropriate but "very much required."
"His record is absolutely relevant in this debate," she told Richard French. "And looking to see how many jobs he slashed while he was apparently creating jobs, is really very much required in this debate. And I think it's not only legitimate but appropriate.
"I don't think there's any attack on private equity per se."
If there were, Gillibrand probably wouldn't be the one doing the attacking. She has consistently outraised her fellow senators (with the exception of Schumer) in contributions from the financial industry, and has become an increasingly trusted champion of the industry in recent months.
More by this author:
- 'Women for Anthony,' Teachers for Thompson
- Pro-U.F.T. groups hit Wolfson for his past union work, Wolfson hits union supplicants