He was a Reagan era Secretary of the Navy. From that era, there are charges that he was not supportive of women who reported to him. His anti-war creds come from having spoken of the dangers of invading Iraq in 2003.

Another reason I would never support him in the primary was that he smeared Kerry (at the SBVT level) in 2004 when he was already our nominee. He had known Senator Kerry and for 30 years refused to shake Kerry's hand because of Kerry's protests against the Vietnam War. To me, the worst thing was that when he ran for Senator, the Rolling Stone did a long story on him and he had used graphic Vietnam atrocities in his novels! His anger with Kerry was not because Kerry honestly testified that other soldiers at the Winter soldier hearings had spoken of atrocities, but because in his testimony, he spoke of the politicians continuing an unwinnable war just to shave their faces and for the President (LBJ and Nixon) not to be seen as the first American President to lose a war.

While I will never forgive him for what he did in 2004, Secretary Kerry not only did, but endorsed him in a close primary and gave him the money he needed to GOTV when he ran in 2006. Kerry's reason - more Senators who were veterans would be a good idea and Webb was much more likely to win in the general election. (That was not too likely for either - Allen, before the Macaca moment was strong and even a potential 2008 Presidential nominee.) Remember that he was our 51st Senator in 2007 giving us the majority.

He was a huge favorite on DU and Daily Kos when he ran - even with many people posting his sickening 2004 nonsense.

In the Senate, in the SFRC and on the floor, Webb STILL opted to speak of how the Vietnam War was popular in the US - in spite of protesters. Now, other than being annoyed that he often brought that up, the point was that he still believes we could have won and that it would have been for the better.

What is true is that he is not a neocon - and he is not a neo liberal. I have not read a huge amount of his writings, but from the 2006 election, he was said to be somewhat of a populist and someone who wrote a lot about the culture of the Scottish/Irish people in the US.

As a Senator, he was not one of the people you could assume would vote the "right" way on bills. He had after all been a Republican in the 1980s. It might be other issues - not war - that could make him not a top candidate here.