Reply #91: that's pretty easily proven [View All]

first of all, most House Democrats voted against the Iraq war.

Here's the vote

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2002/roll455.xml

82 voted for it and there are 50 some members of the blue dog coalition (some of them might have been elected in 2006 and thus not be part of the vote in 2002)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Dog_Coalition

See the over-lap there Berry, Bishop, Boswell, Boyd, Carson, Davis, Cramer, Ford, Gordon, Sandlin, Harman, Hill, Holden, Matheson, McIntyre, Moore, Peterson, Pomeroy, Ross, Schiff, Tanner, Taylor, Hall, Lampson, Lucas, Stenholm, and Turner all voted for the war.

What about Blue Dogs voting against the war

Condit, Baca, Davis, Sanchez, Scott, Thompson, Lipinski,

So 126 against, 119 of them non Blue Dogs. 82 for, 55 of them non Blue Dogs.

Blue Dogs voted for the war 27-7, and other Democrats voted against the war 119-55. What you said was true for only 31.6% of house Democrats and it was untrue for 68.3% of House Democrats. I call something that is 68.3% untrue, MOSTLY untrue. Blue Dogs made up 16% of all Democrats but they made up 33% of Democrats voting for the war.

Shall we look at the Bush tax cuts of 2001?

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2001/roll149.xml 153 Democrats voted against it and only 28 for it.

The names of the 28 look kinda familiar, I see Moore, Schiff, Sandlin, Carson, Cramer, Condit, Hall, Gordon, Turner. In the Senate I see 31 voting against it and only 12 Democrats voting for it. With 5 Democrats not present and 2 not voting it would appear that only 76% of Democrats voted against it - a vast majority.