WHO dislikes the Lieberman/Hillary Clinton faction of DEM party?

I am so sick of Lieberman ranting and going on about how we need to "succeed" in Iraq which somehow means we need to stay there forever and ever.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/23/liberman.iraq/index.html

upon hundreds of thousands.

but of course bourgeois capitalist parties do eventually reveal their true colors.

The DLC single-handedly turned the Party of the People into a party of corporate special interest. PDA (Progressive Democrats of America) is becoming more, and more attractive everyday.

These are DINO's only. Hope everyone sees that at election time.

Add Nelson of Florida. I'm about sick of his rhetoric. There's a BUNCH of em still droning on.

and MILITARY first. They are not standing up for fair treatment of American people first.

They should be driven from the positions of power.

What ever happened to the wonderful legislative work that happened in the 60's and 70's? JUST GONE. They want to erode and destroy point blank all that the Democrats have accomplished to raise this country up.

We have to remember that the DLC is not moderate - they don't represent, necessarily, moderate Democrats.

The DLC is corporist - a product of the military industrial complex.

A Democrat can be moderate and still be for the people and not corporations.

says it looks good that old Ben will be re-elected. I guess that they only dems in the state are posting on DU. He's not one.

DINOs is all they are.

I guess it's going to take Michael Moore to readjust the political landscape, 'cause the DINOs surely won't.

Ben Nelson is like Holy Joe.

Check Hillary's voting record, it's pretty much the SAME as Barbara Boxer's and John Kerry's.

Just because Hillary says ONE thing, and it's about Iraq...and we get these blanket statements that Hillary is a DINO.

Well she's NOT a DINO, and if you want proof of that...check her VOTING record out.

repeated ad infinitum. Especially when the GOP try to paint her as some uber LIB who's agreeing with Bush on the troops staying to keep being killed for a lie.

To portray her as an Uber Liberal in 2006. Maybe that's why she's distancing herself. It's all about being re-elected and political survival.

Does Hillary GENUINELY believe what she's saying? No, I don't think she does. But she must feel she NEEDS to say this to get re-elected. New York ISN'T just NYC, she needs to win Upstate New York too, which she did in 2000.

If saying things like this gets Hillary re-elected then fine. She's 100% better than any Repuke getting that seat.

Hillary will continue to vote FOR saving Social Security, vote FOR saving Medicare, vote AGAINST Junior's extreme Right-Wing reactionary Judicial nominees, vote to KEEP the Filibuster, vote AGAINST any more Trillion dollar tax cuts, vote FOR our Senate Leader for Majority Leader, vote FOR a rise in the Minimum Wage, vote FOR policies that are good for Labor Unions...I could go on. These are NOT the actions of a DINO and I wish people would stop bashing Hillary, she's a damn good person and she's a damn good Senator.

If people want a DINO, I give them Ben Nelson of Nebraska, he's a REPUKE and he needs to go to the party he supports 99% of the time.

moy a "DINO" as far as I see from her overall voting record and stance on important "Dem" issues. As you said "She's 100% better than any Repuke getting that seat". Unlike so many in the past she actually comes up to the north country on a fairly regular basis, meets with and listens to her constituents.

I tend to think that maybe one of the reasons Hillary is being cautious is because the Fort Drum Military base is in NNY and she's walking a fine line trying to come across as supporting the troops, not wanting to belittle the sacrifice many are making (by both the troops & their loved ones) and wanting to bring them home alive. Also NY is not as "liberal" as so many seem to think... other then fairly blue NYC it's actually more "purple". Those folks are her constituents as well and so she needs to walk a fine line and reach out to them as well if she wants to win again.

with the "secret info" baloney? Chopped liver?

And would be harmful to the Iraqis. This war is not, at its heart, about politics. Bush spun it that way, but once we were there, we owed the Iraqis more than anarchy. It's not their fault for the mess these neonazi punks made of things. Even if it helps SmirkCo, we have to on some level fix things before we leave. My idea would be to pull out of urban areas and run REAL training camps for Iraqi soldiers and police.

posters realize that the repugs DON'T want Hill to run.

I was just in my car and caught Sean Insanity spouting off saying exactly that.

So, they might want to think about the implications here, before posting that Hill is a DINO.

Any moment NOW. You know:

"Should we fear McCain in 2008?"

"The GOP will pick McCain in 2008"

"McCain's gearing up to run in 2008, should we be afraid?"

"McCain's gonna be the GOP 2008 nominee, he going to be DIFFICULT to beat"

And so it goes on and on...and on and on...:boring:

I can find sufficent cause to reject the DLC simply on its promotion of political elitism.

Individual positions of the DLC are ever so much more fucked up than that, but an organization built of, by, and for the politically elite really deserves no support from the base of the Democratic Party.

My message to the DLC--Your elite position ultimately depends on getting my vote and the votes of other like me, despite all the corporate money you court and spend. Until you understand that the party _IS_ the base you can kiss my ass in front of tens of thousands in Yankee Stadium and not win my vote.

We need to court and spend money to win elections...

important than representing the interests of the people that actually vote rather than the money that bought a candidate's media adverstising.

The DLC is an elite group primarily interested in maintaining elite membership. Their elite positions can ONLY be maintained by winning elections.

But, why win? What is more important? The issues the candidate hopes to promote to in an effort to improve governance and the human condition or the status that a win confers to the candidate?

In my own opinion, and clearly I only speak for myself, the DLC as an organization with its attitude of winning before everything else has directed its membership into the wrong choice.

YES on:
7/01/05: This was the vote on H.R. 2419. The last vote before passage was a vote to reject an amendment to prohibit the use of funds for the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator and instead utilize the amount to reduce the National Debt This has billions in funding for nuclear weapons activities. It contains full funding for Yucca Mountain, a project designed to make California a radioactive wasteland, to irradiate the Colorado River and to make much of the nation's food supply dangerously radioactive. It also uses billions of taxpayers dollars to fund nuclear weapons activities. This is perhaps the coldest, most inhuman bill voted upon this year.


YES on:
6/28/05: This was the vote to pass HR 6, a sellout of the environment to the nuclear, coal-burning and automotive industries. The emphasis on nuclear and coal facilities could leave the United States a radioactive, mercury-ridden deserted land. A couple hundred million or more children and adults could be killed by nuclear meltdowns and/or mercury poisoning. The bill sells out to those who want to make inefficient cars and thereby will continue to subject millions of Americans to the risk of death and serious health conditions, aside from the risks of mercury-poisoning and radiation-poisoning..


YES on:
7/01/05: This was the vote on H.R. 2419. The last vote before passage was a vote to reject an amendment to prohibit the use of funds for the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator and instead utilize the amount to reduce the National Debt This has billions in funding for nuclear weapons activities. It contains full funding for Yucca Mountain, a project designed to make California a radioactive wasteland, to irradiate the Colorado River and to make much of the nation's food supply dangerously radioactive. It also uses billions of taxpayers dollars to fund nuclear weapons activities. This is perhaps the coldest, most inhuman bill voted upon this year.


Yes on:
6/09/05A: This was the confirmation vote on Richard Griffin for a lifetime appointment to the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. Richard Griffin has a history of taking extreme positions harmful to the environment, civil rights and the rights of workers, strikers. and consumers.


Yes on:
6/09/05B: This was the confirmation vote on David McKeague for a lifetime appointment to the Sixth Circuit. McKeague has a judicial activist history of being a strong opponent of the environment and of privacy rights. The approval of both Griffin and McKeague places the future of the natural resources and the health of the residents of the area covered by the 6th Circuit in grave jeopardy.

YES on:
5/24/05: This was the cloture motion on Priscilla Owen for the 5th Circuit. Torture-proponent Alberto Gonzales even called Owen extreme. Her record shows that she is anti-environment, anti-employee, anti-civil rights, anti-human rights, pro-discrimination and pro-polluter. This was the critical vote - the confirmation vote was a sure thing once this passed.

YES on:
5/10/05: HR 1268/HR418 involved two bills re-combined in committee. Since these bills both are catastrophic to human rights and human life and were originally two separate bills, though they were voted on together following the conference report, each of the two bills is being counted here. HR 1268 is an appropriations bill which gives profits to contractors who benefit from wars and which acts as an excuse to continue the war and the killing in Iraq. HR 418 presumes to override Articles I,II and III of the U.S. Constitution and to give the power to commit acts of terrorism, murder, torture, etc. to Michael Chertoff, a man connected with individuals involved in financing 9/11. It also eliminates political asylum in the United States by requiring the victims of persecution to obtain written proof of the persecution from the governments that are persecuting them. It also sets up the basis for a Nazi-style national ID Card while making the highways more unsafe and terrorism more likely.


YES on:
4/21/05B: This was HR 1268, the appropriations bill which took funds away from veterans injured in Iraq and from education, heath care and services for children, the elderly and the needy in America and gave approximately $81 billion dollars to those who were profiting from death.


AWOL on:
3/10/05: This was the actual vote on the bankruptcy deform bill, guaranteeing that credit card issuers can now steal homes from veterans, laid-off workers and people with serious medical conditions.


YES on:
2/15/05: This was the vote to confirm Michael Chertoff, a proponent of water-board torture, an individual connected to the financing of 9/11 and the man behind the round-up of thousands of people of Middle-Eastern descent following 9/11. By confirming him the Senate, in effect, endorsed terrorist attacks on America, water-board torture and racism.


Refused to stand for:
1/06/05: This was the opportunity for Senators to stand up for democracy and honest elections


The above information was mined from The Patrick Henry Democratic Club
http://patrickhenrythinktank.org/sen-score5.html

This is only a look at the last 8 months, and this list ONLY looks at the votes where she abandoned the Democratic Party principles. In other votes, she voted with the Democratic values.

If you look at her overall performance, she generally supports the social values of the Democratic party, but not the economic values. She never votes against increasing Defense Appropriations, War Money, and seldom votes to limit the Power of BIG Corporations, or seldom opposes judges KNOWN to support Corporate Management over LABOR.

Senator Clinton DID vote against CAFTA which passed with the help of other DLC defectors from the Democratic Party. Since the Corporatists had already ensured they had the votes for passage, her vote AGAINST CAFTA is not really significant.

This is the reason that "looking a the voting record" can be misleading. Politicians "swap votes" every day. A vote against CAFTA (or whatever) was meaningless once the PTB had the necessary votes for passage. The Powers that buy votes don't demand that each bought politician vote "their way" every time. They ONLY demand that their anti-LABOR legislation PASS every time. After that point, "their people" are free to "Cover Their Asses".
The votes "in committee" and the positions advocated from "the floor" are more significant than a quick look at the voting record.

For comparison,
Patrick Henry rating for:
Senator Clinton= +32

Senator Kerry= +75

Senator Kennedy= +110

Senator Boxer= +130

Senator Lieberman= -235

positioning themselves for the next election. Forget about governing. We have no government. If we had that darned Medicare Drug bill would never have been passed. We would never have had the Iraq war. The tax cuts would never have made it. I realize Dems are in the minority but some played along to get along to our detriment. If only we could throw Washington to the wolves and start all over again. With DUers filling all positions.

They are from the liberal northeast, FCOL. There is no need for them to pander to the wingnuts. None whatsoever. I wish they could take a clue from neighbors Corzine and Lautenberg. My NJ senators make me extremely proud. I think they are the absolute best.

I don't like Lieberman, but I don't necessarily associate him with Ms. Clinton is some kind of factional cabal.

I have heard, so as to believe it, that Ms. Clinton is a fine woman, hard working and bright. This does not mean I want her to be President, but I expect that much of her negative image, left and right, is more media hype than anything else. I believe she works hard to find her way. Neither she nor her husband dawdled at some ranch aimlessly repeating one dangerous lie after another while the country being permanently undermined. They kept their noses to the grindstone. They obviously made mistakes, as does anyone who is actually in the ring, but mostly they have done their best to make the United States a better place than it was before they arrived on the scene.

I certainly prefer Ms Clinton in the Senate to any Repuke, and that includes the much inflated Rudy Guliani.

I don't agree with her on many things, in particular this horrible war, but I really would rather spend my time focusing negative energy on Mr. Frist and Mr. Lott and Mr. Bunning and Mr. Hatch and Ms. Hutchinson and a thousand other Repukes than on Ms Clinton. She has her flaws, but I don't think they are any where near as bad as advertised.

When I think of the Clintons I am inclined to quote Roosevelt, albeit the Republican one, Theodore:

here shared your pragmatism.

very reasonable......

Have a nice day!

:puke:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

If we were talking about one or two differences of opinion I wouldn't mind but it seems that there trying to do things because it's politically convient. Thats how senator biden lost my support.

I never was a fan of Lieberman, because he always seemed to be a DINO for the most part. Hillary, I used to be a fan of but since she got into the Senate, many of the choices she made were not what I expected from her, and I hate it when the media acts like she is so liberal, but in reality she is not. These two don't represent my views, they are senators from the northeast, which is made up of people who mostly share my views since I'm a new york state resident and hopefully soon people will start to pay more attention to what they say and how they vote, then their names.

No, no, no, no, no. :hi:


edit spelling

Hillary (I think she is returning to the party of her youth).

Why would anyone think Hillary is a liberal? Wasn't she on Wal-Mart's board of directors or one of their lawyers?

I WILL NOT support Hillary if she makes it through the primaries. I will simply not vote for president.

I am tired of voting for the least worse candidate. Just as I earn my paycheck, so, too must the Dems earn MY vote, which is precious to me. Simply having a D after your name does not entitle you to my vote. EARN THAT BABY!

Dislike? No. Have contempt for? Yes.

EVER!

...count me in.

Or it may be Hillary-Vilsack.