Who is the "purer" Dem: Lieberman, Reid, or Kennedy

[theboss]

2003 NAACP Report Card:
Lieberman: 100 percent
Kennedy: 96 percent
Reid: 93 percent

Joe Wins! Joe Wins!

2003 American Association of University Women Report Card:
Lieberman: 100 percent
Kennedy: 100 percent
Reid: 80 percent

Joe Ties! Joe Ties!

ACLU Scorecard
Lieberman: 83 percent
Kennedy: 86 percent
Reid: 44 percent

Joe makes a strong showing!! Joe makes a strong showing!!

So, tell me again why we hate Lieberman?

[Mistress Quickly]

1. Because Bush kisses him?

:puke:

[theboss]

3. Well, that's a mature reason, I guess

From what I can tell, we have a Senator who is as pure ideologically as Ted Kennedy on every domestic issue that should matter to us. And because he went along with a war that most Democrats (including our nominee) went along with, he's the enemy.

[Mistress Quickly]

18. Sorry, its the first thing

that pops into my head now when I see his name.

It was his war vote.

It is funny, he was good enough when he ran with Gore, but now he's the anti-Dem.

[EST]

34. Actually, at the time, I felt he was about the lousiest choice

that could be imagined. The DNC simply was doing the democratic hump up and whine to distance itself from the thuglican whoop ass over the dawg's minor infractions. I see no reasons for elevating my opinion.

[Andromeda]

57. I think you mean he kisses Bush's ......

:shrug:

[BlueInRed]

2. why not post his stats on insurance, corp interests, Iraq and such topics

that would answer the question

[theboss]

4. Insurance is unfair; that's like posting Byrd's environmental record

Or Reid's mining record. I refuse to judge any Senator for their votes on their state's major industry.

I don't know how to judge "corporate interestst."

And most Dems agreed with Lieberman on Iraq.

[BlueInRed]

12. You asked, I answered

sorry you didn't like the answer

[Coastie for Truth]

13. Refusing to judge any Senator for their votes on their state's major indus

I lived in Michigan -- and the Brothers Levin (former Ford Motor Company lawyers), Congressman David Bonior (former UAW Bureaucrat), John Dingle (married to a GM VP), and John Conyers (largest Ford dealer in the US) were terrible on the environment and fuel economy (CAFE) - but otherwise very very good.

[sui generis]

16. "most dems?"

hard numbers please. Feel free to quote any study that draws that conclusion.

[theboss]

19. The IWR vote does nicely...

29 Democrats voted for it. 21 against.

That's "most" by any definition.

[sui generis]

28. a freaking mandate by republican standards

I for one am sick and tired of having other people tell me what's best for me based on their interpretation of a vote.

If you are hoping to convert anyone here to be fans of Loserman, I think you have a tough row to hoe. He's absolutely the worst kind of politician I can think of for where the Democratic party needs to head, and certainly not a leader who can differentiate himself from the moderate side of the republican party on key issues. When you are unable to differentiate yourself from the opposition, the status quo always wins.

[theboss]

32. I'm not trying to convert anyone to loving Joe

I don't particularly love Joe.

What I don't get is the gushing that goes on for Byrd or - at least for today - Reid or any other Dem whose voting record is far less progressive than Joe's. Lieberman is extremely liberal on social issues, is moderate fiscally, and is hawkish on foreign policy.

To me, that's what JFK was and is a pretty good template for a Democratic Senator.

[messiah]

5. I dont know why democrats hate Lieberman

bacause most denocrats vote for anti new deal candidates anyway.
If having values means being "pure" then so be it!. I will not sellout to the culture of greed and evil.

[paineinthearse]

6. Let's make a deal....Connecticut will trade Leiberman to your state....

...for cash and a carpetbagger to be named later.

[theboss]

7. Fine, CT gets Allen...I get Lieberman

Who wins on that deal?

[Still_Loves_John]

8. Ok fine, I'll trade senators

Which do you want, Kay Bailey Hutchinson or John Cornyn?

[Mistress Quickly]

Do you want Chambliss or Isakson?

[OKNancy]

40. I'll trade PLEASE

Jim Inhofe and Tom Coburn.

[LSparkle]

How many total issues are there again?

Winning on 3 doesn't make him the purest Dem.

[wuushew]

9. Because he is fucking WAR HAWK!!!

all these liberal ratings do not consider what is possibly the most illiberal philosophy a person can have. That of scheming and justifying reasons to kill non-Americans for bullshit reasons the victims of which have no recourse in the American political system.

Neo-liberals and neo-cons need to go back and read Washington's Farewell Address and commit themselves to staying out of the rest world's affairs. The problems that come back to bite us in the ass are a result of our failed foreign policy approach and our attempt to spread malevolent corporatism over the face of the Earth.

[theboss]

11. Then why is singled out among all the "Hawks?"

Like...I dunno...Kerry and Edwards....

[wuushew]

17. Lieberman is unapologetic

Kerry at least during the campaign tried to have his cake and eat it too by attaching conditional explanitions on the IWR.

When did Lieberman do this?

[theboss]

21. So, unlike Kerry and Edwards, he's principled....

I hate Joe's vote on Iraq. But at least he's consistent about it. He actually had the balls to run on it in the primary.

Kerry twisted himself into so many knots over Iraq, he's stil trying to untie himself.

[Guaranteed]

38. Yeah. Unfortunately he's on the wrong side.

I don't think you're helping your case.

[WI_DEM]

10. domestically, Joe is solidly in the liberal wing of the party

on foreign policy and defense issues he is a hawk. He is a "Scoop" Jackson Democrat. I think that many people here don't like him because they don't like his stands primarily on foreign issues and perhaps feel his rhetoric is too moderate.

[IndianaGreen]

14. Those report cards are on narrow issues

The NAACP and ACLU doesn't give a rat's ass what Lieberman's positions are on the war in Iraq.

Here is the only report card that counts: Holy Joe believes in censorship, supports the PATRIOT Act, loves war in Iraq and Iran, and he kissed Bush at the end of the SOTUS.

[EST]

15. My unofficial scorecard has Kennedy at the top of the list.

Having watched Lieberman for some years, and really tracking him from Januarary,2003, I can say, with no reservations, he is an absolute pig! He is even worse than some republiCONS, because he pretends to be a Dem. I feel his positive stance on some issues is simply protective coloration, a way to sell himself to the vile influences of the shades of hell and be able to keep on doing it with relative impunity. If he were intellectually honest, he would sell himself as a moderate Republican. Too much to expect, I suppose. (Be ye either hot or cold. If ye be lukewarm...)

[sui generis]

22. agree completely

plus he's a sham. He's a mush mouth who is utterly incapable of answering any question directly, possibly including his own name.

We don't need no stinking mush mouth politicians. We need leaders, not followers.

And he's a fucking bigot - if anyone has ever heard him speak on the topic of the Palestinian conflict they would agree. Also his stance on same-sex marriage, "states rights", and his tepid feigned grasp of "moral values" and "Godliness".

He's a republican. Another goddamn Zell Miller. I wish we would get some balls and excise them from the party.

[theboss]

25. Did you see him on the Daily Show last month?

It was probably the most honest, straight-forward interview any Democrat has given in a year.

In summary:

I'm depressed Bush is president. I'm going to kill his Social Security reform. I'm going to fight to reduce the deficit.

Such a monster....

[sui generis]

29. actually, I deleted that show off Tivo without ever watching

ONLY because I saw Lieberman on there again, and he pissed me off so much the first time he was on there.

I have listened to him campaign with Gore. I have listened to him interviewed everywhere in the past four years and I absolutely despise his speaking style and his interview style.

I didn't drink whatever was in the water you drank. He is a mush mouth wishy washy ultra politician and the last person I would ever vote to be a party leader.

[theboss]

30. So, you don't like his voice?

He was really really funny on the Daily Show.

By the way, how can a "bigot" get 100 percent from the NAACP?

[sui generis]

31. I don't like his technique

and don't much care for his voice. Being a comic is not a requirement of leadership. Being a leader at a time that leadership is required is leadership. He is a proven non-leader with the brilliant rejoinder two days later. He is reactive in most cases, and quite frankly I don't care who thinks he walks and water and raises the dead twice a day before breakfast, I think he turns off more people than he excites, so from a practical standpoint he is the wrong horse to put money on.

[theboss]

33. Whose asking him to be a leader (aside from Al Gore in 2000)?

I don't think he should be in the Dem Leadership. But day after day there are calls to purge him from the party. I find that outrageous.

By the way, you defined leadership as "being a leader." I'm not sure what that means exactly.

[sui generis]

36. in the 2000 campaign when dems were

accused of being "godless", he turned into a one man revival tent during the campaign.

When asked directly about his stance on same sex marriage he evades the answer. When asked about whether with recent information about WMD he would still go to war, he hedges. Wishy washy. When you are asked a direct question, answer first, explain second. Never apologize for having a point of view, and certainly never offer an apologia in advance that leaves the listener wondering what the hell you just gave as an answer. Plus I absolutely despise his stance on the Palestinian conflict.

Being a leader means not trying to convince republicans that you are "more moral" than they are, or that you are more "warlike" than they are or that you are more "religious" than they are. That's not leadership. Leadership is explaining effectively that religion has no place in government, that restricting the rights of some taxpayers because they are queer or have blue eyes is immoral and unAmerican, that war for oil is wrong, and that our support of hard line Israeli land grab policies for "the chosen people" are responsible for much of the bitterness, distrust and outright hatred expressed against Israel and America by the muslim world.

Being a leader means leading your party on these topics, not just braying whatever the hell you think will keep your public opinion polls from sagging.

[PassingFair]

47. I believe in a separation of church and state.

He doesn't.

I was against going into Iraq.
He wasn't.

I was against the Patriot Acts.
He wasn't.



He is NOT objective in so far as the Israeli/Palestinian conflict is concerned.

If he were my senator, I'd actively work against him in a primary. If there was no challenger for him, I'd run.

[OKNancy]

41. I saw him

on one of those shows and he was pretty funny. Asked why he gets along with Republicans, he said, "I have a high tolerance for pain"

[EST]

44. I am now blessed with having two of the best-

Durbin and Obama.
In order to create the conditions we need to live the way that so many of us and I wish, we must have pols of national stature who take a stand with no (or as little as possible) give on values, morals and ethics. Values, morals and ethics have nothing to do with whom you love, live with or sleep with. They do include the commitment to our fellow (wo)men, kindness, respect, tolerance, generosity, peaceableness, character, honesty, and charity. Yes, of course, the willingness to fight and kill-but as the last option, not the first.

These characteristics and our willingness to stand up for them, and, perhaps even more important, our unfailing demand for the election of loud mouthed representatives with the cojones not to back down on them are the only way to beat the unspeakably vile crapheads who have seized power.

We ARE the party of such ethics.
We refuse to be painted differently by anyone, especially uninformed morans.
We won't back off!
Say it loud! Say it often! Get others to say it with us. No compromise!

If 'ol Joe could find in his spirit to stand atop the pinnacle and declare the same with no reservations, and condemn the trash he has been trafficking with, I'd be proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with him. Every man needs the chance for a new beginning, if, and only if, he's willing to take it.

[ChiciB1]

54. You Surely Are Blessed To Some Extent

Obama is still feeling his way through though! I wasn't happy with his recent confirmation votes, but I'm willing to let him get his "legs!"

At any rate.... MUCH BETTER THAN LIVING in FLORIDA!!! NELSON is so LITE! I'm SO SO SO disappointed in him!!! Cozied right up to Mel Martinez almost as soon as he was elected. TURN COAT!!

I wrote and told him I would never vote for him again, and more importantly, I would work to keep him from getting re-elected. Sorry, but I feel there's not much daylight between him and the REPUKES! I've written him quite a few times, but have never received much more than the usual "auto-response." I thought if I got on his news update list that it would make some difference, but it didn't. I wish so many of the Dems in Congress would get some back-bone!

And how many of you heard about the Dem in the Virginia House who wants to ban "low-riders"? I thought it was a REPUKE who pushed this one and my jaw dropped when I found out it was a Dem!! Now we are going to try telling people WHAT TO WEAR???

What is happening in America?????

[EST]

56. You (perhaps unfortunately) sound a lot like me.

I, too, watched Nelson last year, particularly in re: the 9/11 hearings, and was favorably impressed. Suddenly he pulls a trick like that!
I must conclude that I have absolutely no idea what the game is in government.
I have taught young people, and believed, myself, that there are a few very important principles that must guide a person in this world. These are not strange attributes and I had always thought they were pretty universal. Particularly important among them are honesty, tolerance, charity,even temperedness, and maybe to a lesser extent, loyalty.

I have not always been a close follower of things political and, up until fairly recently, operated from the dictum of my parents-that all politicians are crooks and the best one can do is vote for the ones I judge the least likely to do serious damage. I had learned, by my late teens, that my parents had lied to me about religion, but I assumed that they simply didn't know any better and repeated what they had been told while, for whatever reason, being incurious about the truth of their beliefs. Circumstances had forced me to delve more deeply into the goings on in Washington (as well as locally) and imagine my surprise and total dismay on discovering that a person in the public eye can demonstrate what looks like integrity in one case and then turn around and show a total lack of said integrity in the next.

On top of the fact that these bastards can seem to blow both hot and cold on demand, they seem to take it for granted that somehow, we won't notice.
I just don't get it. In addition, these paragons of what appears to the lowest standard of morality on the planet don't seem to expect to be called on their shit. How can they show total incompetence in their jobs (ala C. Rice) and then fully expect to be hired for an even bigger responsibility the next time. They even have a cadre of admirers who, with totally straight faces, will get on national TV and brag on the job they did-as though they think we were just born an hour ago and have no memories at all.

I can only think, if I were the imaginary God, I would be tickled to death to see such an absolutely insane bunch of creatures ALL be handed a great load of atomic bombs and bomb ourselves clean off the entire planet. There is just no way I can hold onto the notion that the higher you get in managing the affairs of man the more you are expected, even demanded, to have less and less of the faculties that separate man from the lower animals. This bunch of crap is just totally insane. We have stepped through the looking glass.

[ChiciB1]

59. Given The Hour Of Your Response...

you must live on the east coast or maybe perhaps here in Florida. I wasn't still at it at 2:00 AM although that's not unusual.

Funny that you mentioned the "parents" thing. My father was in the military and I was raised as a Catholic!! Give you some implication here?? But it was only the religion thing that got my head screwed up. I was SOOOOOOOO Catholic, until a certain age... oh about the time when it was important to think about birth control!!!!

Bless my father though, he introduced me into politics at a very very early age, like 12 years old! Being a "boomer" those politics didn't seems as VICIOUS! Once bitten it's hard for some of us to wean ourselves away, regardless of HOW erratic our times become. Having said that, and I've made this comment far too many times of late, I've never seen the likes of what is happening today. I can only hope SOMEONE will appear on the scene to SHAKE THINGS UP enough to stop the madness!!

It's been said that politics of old were much more "dirty" and this may be so, but I don't think on the Global Level of today! Today scares me a lot! This idiot who wants to call himself president, and his cohorts SCARE me so much more! I've been all too aware of Saudi Arabia for more years than I like to think about. I had a relative who worked there for some years. Not to raise red flags, but we are going to have to deal with them SOME DAY!! But then as long as there are BUSHIES around this isn't going to happen. They go WAY back! I'm not sure, but maybe even the "Walkers" had a finger in the pie.

And that brings me to NELSON... has he been compromised??? Has he Sold Out?? Time will tell. I know I don't trust him anymore even though he was in attendance at both rallies I attended for Kerry & Edwards right before the election!!

[EST]

62. In point of fact, I'm in Illinois.

I, too was very involved in religion at an early age, did some divinity training and was pastoring a church before I was twenty. Apparently the brain worms were active, even then (1960s) and I was questioning nearly everything. The dawning of the ability to arbitrarily pitch out whole chunks of one's training that don't match up with reality seems to come late for some and not at all for far too many.
My fondest hope is that the "shakeup" will be appearing in the form of Howard Dean in a major position in the democratic party. His penchant for telling the truth, thinking on his feet, and being willing to beard the lion may be just exactly what this country, and not so incidentally the world, so desperately needs.
I'm not so clear that Nelson has actually sold out, but perhaps a stunning example of someone who stolidly refuses to sell out and actively works to avoid the appearance of such behavior will imbue those less well endowed with some much needed backbone. Or maybe I will arouse from my troubled slumbers and find it's all been a Wagnerian dream...

[ChiciB1]

64. I Can Only Hope You Are Correct

about Nelson! I've followed him for many many years and he seems to have been a "good" Democrat for many many years. But I HAVE detected a change. Perhaps, he's only reacting to the election and I KNOW he seriously wants to get re-elected. This is being told to me at local meetings.

On the 18th of this month our county is holding it's yearly Democratic Fund raiser and we will be having some important people attending so I will be feeling them out too! Our local FDA which I signed up with doesn't seem to have much teeth, but I will be going to the Fund Raiser.

And I as you, and only hope America will come to it's senses and start thinking about AMERICANS first once again! This Globalization that The Boy King Idiot keeps pushing is really SCARY!

And Whoopee for Illinois!!! I know there are tales of yore about the "machine" in Chicago, but it pales in comparison to the "machine" in D.C.!

Just one more comment... You really must burn the candle a bit, I know how it is though... there are times I wish I had a button to turn off my brain, and I hate taking Meds to accomplish what doesn't come naturally. But there are times!! Sorry for not replying earlier... I was out of town.

[EST]

65. Not a problem, good thing posts are retained for 48 hours,

however.
I seem to be constantly suffering from chronic eyestrain. The fraud of November,2004 was a bit of a blessing in disguise-I was so horridly depressed, I refused to watch anything on TV but light entertainment and only checked into DU infrequently to follow a tiny bit of what was going on.

The all engulfing anger and helpless outrage at the unconscious populace and the political mucky mucks (who should know better) when they all refused to even consider the possibility of total election fraud was irresistible. Physical inability kept me from doing something stupid.
I have always known that the majority of the so-called intelligent people were simply blind to reality, however I was able to ignore them, for the most part, by keeping away from crowds and pretty well isolating myself. Unfortunately, eventually one must come out and join the fight, again. At present, I have no answers to some of the most important questions confronting us, all of us, not just those of us who are willing to address reality head on.

The single most important, I think, is how does one get people to face the truth? I mean, as an interim definition of reality, how does one achieve agreement? How do you get mush brained politicians to agree on even a physical definition of real?

Can we start a class wherein we can sit people down and say, (there is going to be a quiz) "Here is real-it must have a beginning, a middle and an end. It must have physicalness. If it looks like a dump truck and you lie down in front of it and it runs over and kills you, that must be real. I am not even sure this would work (especially on "public servants" who only see life in the context of the next election.)

There simply has to be a way to get folks to understand they've been hoodwinked by their most trusted idols. Oh, well, forgive my rant and thanks for replying.

[Padme Amidala]

20. Only Kennedy of those three. Lieberman endorsed torture.

Both rewarded the woman responsible for 9/11 and both handed the Presidency to the loser and opposed fair elections on 1/6/05.

[theboss]

23. Kennedy voted to certify as well

It's amazing what we can convince ourselves to believe.

[Guaranteed]

37. Yes, but Lieberman did all three, didn't he?

Whereas Kennedy only did one- the hardest one to vote against, too.

Man, when Joe voted for Gonzalez, while THIRTY-SIX other Dems were voting against him, well....I gotta say, that was a SHAMEFUL day for Joe.

[theboss]

42. I agree on that one

He should have voted against Gonzalez.

But I'm getting really bored with everyone here living and dying on every vote that comes up as if it is the last hope for the Old Republic.

Lieberman's made about five votes over the last five years that piss me off. So have a lot of Dems. I really don't get the specific hatred.

[Guaranteed]

43. This is nothing new, with Joe. It's like clockwork.

It's a pattern- no! It's a POLICY!!

[Freddie Stubbs]

60. When did he endorse torture?

Did they take a vote on it, or did he just come out and say that he endorsed it?

[wuushew]

24. Lieberman fails on the Defense of Marriage Act (1996)

Grouped By Vote Position YEAs ---85
Abraham (R-MI)
Ashcroft (R-MO)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bennett (R-UT)
Biden (D-DE)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Bond (R-MO)
Bradley (D-NJ)
Breaux (D-LA)
Brown (R-CO)
Bryan (D-NV)
Bumpers (D-AR)
Burns (R-MT)
Byrd (D-WV)
Campbell (R-CO)
Chafee (R-RI)
Coats (R-IN)
Cochran (R-MS)
Cohen (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Coverdell (R-GA)
Craig (R-ID)
D'Amato (R-NY)
Daschle (D-SD)
DeWine (R-OH)
Dodd (D-CT)
Domenici (R-NM)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Exon (D-NE)
Faircloth (R-NC)
Ford (D-KY)
Frahm (R-KS)
Frist (R-TN)
Glenn (D-OH)
Gorton (R-WA)
Graham (D-FL)
Gramm (R-TX)
Grams (R-MN)
Grassley (R-IA)
Gregg (R-NH)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hatch (R-UT)
Hatfield (R-OR)
Heflin (D-AL)
Helms (R-NC)
Hollings (D-SC)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Jeffords (R-VT)
Johnston (D-LA)
Kassebaum (R-KS)
Kempthorne (R-ID)
Kohl (D-WI)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Leahy (D-VT)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Lott (R-MS)
Lugar (R-IN)
Mack (R-FL)
McCain (R-AZ)
McConnell (R-KY)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Murray (D-WA)
Nickles (R-OK)
Nunn (D-GA)
Pressler (R-SD)
Reid (D-NV)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Roth (R-DE)
Santorum (R-PA)
Sarbanes (D-MD)
Shelby (R-AL)
Simpson (R-WY)
Smith (R-NH)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (R-PA)
Stevens (R-AK)
Thomas (R-WY)
Thompson (R-TN)
Thurmond (R-SC)
Warner (R-VA)
Wellstone (D-MN)

NAYs ---14
Akaka (D-HI)
Boxer (D-CA)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Inouye (D-HI)
Kennedy (D-MA)
Kerrey (D-NE)
Kerry (D-MA)
Moseley-Braun (D-IL)
Moynihan (D-NY)
Pell (D-RI)
Robb (D-VA)
Simon (D-IL)
Wyden (D-OR)

Not Voting - 1
Pryor (D-AR)

[theboss]

26. So does Bill Clinton, who signed it...and our patron saint Wellstone

And Reid...and everyone's hero Byrd.

[Padme Amidala]

27. Do you see Lieberman's or Reid's name on this list?

from patrickhenrythinktank.org
Best Senate voting records of 2005: Boxer (way out in front), Akaka, Bayh, Kerry, Byrd, Dayton, Durbin, Harkin, Jeffords, Kennedy, Lautenberg, Levin and Reed (not Reid). )


Here's the rating chart. Note this 2005 chart started at 0 and those who opposed Boxer on 1/6 got a deduction so you have to look comparatively rather than by the overall score. Kennedy's score will probably be 100 or 200 by the end of the year.

Lieberman's at a -40 and Reid's at a -20.
http://patrickhenrythinktank.org/sen-scores.html

[Guaranteed]

35. Just tell me which Democratic Senator (not Zell) undermines our foreign

policy agenda more than good ole Joe Lieberman.

Foreign policy- you know, the make it or break it issue of our time?

[xkenx]

39. Because Lieberman is

Republican-lite. Ted Kennedy is our standard bearer. He has fought the progressive wars forever.

[dolstein]

49. Get your facts straight

Sorry, but anyone who calls Lieberman Republican lite hasn't done their homework. To be Republican lite, you have to vote like a Republican. Aside than Lincoln Chaffee (who most Republicans would consider Democrat lite -- a charge that's actually supported by the facts), there isn't a single Republican in the Senate whose voting record is anywhere near as liberal as Joe Lieberman's.

[CWebster]

45. Tom Harkin is

the purist of them all

[iwantmycountryback]

46. Supported the war. Supported nomination of Condoliesa.

Supported nomination of torture boy. And that's just in the last 2-3 years.

[greenohio]

48. It all comes down to the war.

I hate the war. I feel sorry for Dems who support it though.

[dolstein]

50. How the heck do you measure purity?

What's your standard. If you consider George McGovern the ideal Democrat, then Teddy's your guy. If you consider Henry "Scoop" Jackson the ideal Democrat, then Joe Lieberman's your guy. Reid is probably harder to pigeon hole than the others, given his Mormon faith and his geographic base.

Of course, nobody interested in growing the party would be obsessed with ideological purity. What good does it do to have an ideologically pure party if you hold only 25 seats in the Senate and 100 in Congress?

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

51. Kisses for Chimp

Joe Wins! Joe Wins!

[ElsewheresDaughter]

52. KENNEDY hands down

[ChiciB1]

53. JOE L Does Not Get MY Vote!

And furthermore, I find it unseemly that his name would be mentioned with Kennedy!!

Very Weird!

Of all the candidates that ran in the primaries last year, Joe L. was my very LAST choice! I was a BIG Gore supporter, but just couldn't DO the Joe thing! Go Figure?????

[MrSlayer]

55. Because he's a neo-con suckass. n/t

[RealDems]

58. It isn't about a voting record...

When a Democrat is openly more critical of his own party's grassroots than he is the radical Administration of the opposition, I stop considering that person a real Democrat.

[truebrit71]

61. Why? Because not only does he enable bush and his cabal..

..he DEFENDS THEM!!!

Is it REALLY that hard to understand?

[Gyre]

63. because he's a sycophantic shill.

But that's just our impression of him out here on the left coast. I'm sure Hadasa sees something other than a has-been in him.