Democratic Party picks Republican for their senate minority leader!

[tedzbear]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/11/16/politics/16cnd-reid.html?hp&ex=1100667600&en=3d9f456bd1ae4f15&ei=5094&partner=homepage

"On some matters of principle, Mr. Reid has seemed more like a Republican than a Democrat. He opposes abortion and co-sponsored a constitutional amendment that would have banned flag-burning."
---NYT


This is the last straw! I have officially registered Green Party and will no longer vote Democrat ever again.
:bounce:

[aquart]

1. Buh bye.

[LSparkle]

2. I feel for you

Just because he was "in line" for it is no reason to elect him! There are plenty of others who would do a better job -- Russ Feingold, Dick Durbin ... It's almost as bad as having elected JOEMENTUM!

[Mike L]

48. Maybe Reid can pull another one of these:

"Mr. Reid has demonstrated an ability to reach across the aisle. In the spring of 2001, he played a big part in persuading Senator Jeffords to leave the Republican Party."

[JohnKleeb]

52. thats what Ive been trying to tell people!

but they dont listen, its just Reid is a republican blah blah.

[lancdem]

3. So you don't agree with Harry Reid on a couple of issues

and you leave the Dem Party? Did you agree with Bill Clinton and John Kerry on every single issue?

Give me a damn break.

[montanacowboy]

4. I am with you

I am done with the Democratic Party - I am sick and tired of the wishy washy piss poor Democrats who still think they need to be like * in order to get elected. Have these idiots learned NOTHING YET?

I have been a member of the Dem Party for many many years, but this is it - no more. I will work for the Greens, the Socialists, the CrabGrassers or whoever, but that's it. Screw them and the horses they rode in on.

[Kilkenny5]

35. Have fun financing your new political party

As they say money is the mother's milk of politics and neither of those parties have any money.

Not even George Soros would fund your new party.

[DuaneBidoux]

64. You'll make many a Republican very happy.

[Lone Pawn]

5. Leaving the Dems?

So when it's a tight race in 2008, and it's, say, Jeb vs. Hilly...you'd rather throw away your vote than keep a Bush out of office?

[Freddie Stubbs]

6. Just because he doesn't walk in lockstep with your views

doesn't make him a Republican. An arguement could be made that your attempt to exclude him is a Republican-like action.

[tedzbear]

7. Bullshit.

Pro Choice is a very important issue, not a minor complaint. Mark my words, this will result in millions of women leaving the Democratic Party for the Greens...

[pmbryant]

18. Read this

Read this and tell me if you really believe "this will result in millions of women leaving the Democratic Party".

http://reid.senate.gov/press/01/09/2001910A35.html

From Harry Reid's own website, back in 2001:

Statement by U.S. Senator Harry Reid
Senate Committee on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Hearing on Improving Women's Health: Why Contraceptive Insurance Coverage Matters

September 10, 2001

WASHINGTON - Thank you for inviting me to testify about insurance coverage for prescription contraceptives. At its most fundamental level, this issue is about little more than discrimination against women.

I have said time and time again that if men suffered from the same illnesses as women, the medical research community would be much closer to eliminating diseases that strike women.

The issue before us today is similar. If men had to pay for contraceptives, I believe the insurance industry would cover them. It was hardly surprising that less than two months after Viagra went on the market, it was covered by most insurance plans. Birth control pills, which have been on the market since 1960, are covered by only thirty-three percent of indemnity plans.

The health care industry has done a poor job of responding to women's health needs. According to a study done by the Alan Guttmacher Institute, 49 percent of all large-group health care plans do not routinely cover any contraceptive method at all, and only 15 percent cover all five of the most common contraceptive methods.

Ironically, most insurance companies routinely cover more expensive services, including abortions, sterilizations and tubal ligations.

Apparently, insurers do not know what women and their doctors have long known: contraceptives are a crucial part of women's health care. By helping women plan and space their pregnancies, contraceptive use fosters healthy pregnancy and healthy births by reducing the incidence of maternal complications, low birth weight and infant mortality.

Sadly, financial constraints force many women to forgo birth control all together, leading to 3.6 million unintended pregnancies every year. Almost half of those end in abortion. If we are committed to reducing the number of abortions in this country, we need to eliminate the barriers to effective and affordable birth control.

That is why the legislation Senator Snowe (R-ME) and I have sponsored the Equity in Prescription Insurance and Contraceptive Coverage (EPICC) is so important. In short, our bill would require health plans that provide coverage of prescription drugs to include the same level of coverage for FDA-approved prescription contraceptives. Our bill does not ask for special treatment of contraceptives only equitable treatment within the context of an existing prescription drug benefit. EPICC will increase fairness, promote women's health, and reduce unintended pregnancies.

Since Senator Snowe and I first introduced this legislation in 1997, we have made some progress that is worth noting.

In 1998, Senator Snowe and I, along with Congresswoman Lowey (D-NY), fought to pass a provision that requires health plans participating in the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program the largest employer-sponsored health plan in the world to cover FDA approved prescription contraceptives. The Office of Personnel Management, which administers the program, reported in January that this benefit did not raise premiums "since there was no cost increase due to contraceptive coverage." In spite of this, President Bush proposed eliminating this benefit in his budget.

Just this past June, US District Judge Robert Lasnik handed down a landmark decision when he ruled that a Seattle company's policy of excluding prescription contraception from employee health benefits violated Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. The Judge ordered the company to cover all available methods of prescription contraception in its employee health plan.

I am pleased that the plaintiff in this case, Jennifer Erickson, is here to share her story with us today. Ms. Erickson is the first woman in the nation to initiate sex discrimination charges against her employer based on the company's policy of excluding prescription contraception from employee health benefits.

Jennifer Erickson's case builds on momentum from a separate ruling this past December by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC). In that case, the EEOC also ruled that denial of coverage for female contraceptives, if an employer offers other preventive medicines or services, is sex discrimination under the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

In spite of these important advances, women will not have the contraceptive insurance coverage they deserve until Congress passes our EPICC legislation.

An estimated 16 million Americans obtain health insurance from private insurance other than employer-provided plans. Only the enactment of EPICC will ensure that contraceptive coverage is offered by insurance providers.

Women who receive their health care through work should not have to take their employers to court. We want to make family planning more accessible. We do not want an explosion in lawsuits.

Equity in prescription contraception coverage is long overdue. Our bill has 42 cosponsors from both sides of the aisle and from both sides of the abortion debate. Senator Snowe and I are committed to moving this legislation. Promoting equity in health insurance coverage for American women while working to prevent unintended pregnancies and improve women's health care is the right thing to do.

[tedzbear]

21. Not good enough...

Progressive women want bills like 42 AND the right to choose abortion.

[pmbryant]

23. There is nothing on Reid's website about outlawing abortion. Nothing.

This is obviously not a big crusade of his. So I think this is a big red herring.

--Peter

[JohnKleeb]

25. seems to me he has a middle of the road record on that issue

There are many republicans who often get complete 0's from NARAL and 100's from NRL, I disagree with Reid's position but the man is a democrat.
Abortion Issues
(Back to top)

2003-2004 On the votes that the National Right to Life Committee considered to be the most important in 2003-2004, Senator Reid voted their preferred position 55 percent of the time.

2003 On the votes that the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League considered to be the most important in 2003, Senator Reid voted their preferred position 29 percent of the time.

2001-2002 On the votes that the National Right to Life Committee considered to be the most important in 2001-2002, Senator Reid voted their preferred position 33 percent of the time.

2001 On the votes that the Planned Parenthood considered to be the most important from 1995 to 2001, Senator Reid voted their preferred position 50 percent of the time.

2001 On the votes that the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League considered to be the most important in 2001, Senator Reid voted their preferred position 100 percent of the time.

2000 On the votes that the National Abortion Reproductive Rights Action League considered to be the most important in 2000, Senator Reid voted their preferred position 30 percent of the time.

1999-2000 On the votes that the National Right to Life Committee considered to be the most important in 1999-2000, Senator Reid voted their preferred position 66 percent of the time.

1999 On the votes that the Planned Parenthood considered to be the most important in 1999, Senator Reid voted their preferred position 57 percent of the time.

1996-2003 On the votes that the Planned Parenthood (Senate) considered to be the most important, Senator Reid voted their preferred position 56 percent of the time

[ohioan]

74. Reid also has an excellent record of voting against Bush's anti-choice

judges - Owen, Pickering, Pryor, Brown, Kuhl, etc., etc.

[Freddie Stubbs]

39. Apperently it's good enough for the Democrats in the Senate

No else gets to decide.

[ohioan]

24. Reid's personal view about an issue does not make him unfit to lead

Do you have any evidence that he plans to force an anti-choice agenda onto the Senate Democrats?

If not, what's the problem?

[President Jesus]

8. Is there a greenunderground.com?

If there is, perhaps they'd be interested in continuing the thread.

[Name removed]

13. Deleted message

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

[Zhade]

58. Just so you know, Greens are welcome here. Read the "About" section.

This is NOT a Democratic Party website. This is a "small d democratic" website.

[President Jesus]

92. Just so you know...

...it was a joke.

Oh, and read THIS!

[Padme Amidala]

9. Let's focus on getting Dennis the minority leader position in the House

Time to kick out Pelosi and have a Democrat lead the Democratic Party in at least one House.

[Zhade]

59. Man, that'd be AWESOME.

Which is probably why it won't happen. :(

[paulk]

72. you do realize that Kucinich was anti-abortion

until recently?

And Pelosi is one of the most liberal members of the house.

So what exactly are you trying to say?

[sandnsea]

83. And voted for the flag burning amendment too

I'm not thrilled with Reid either. But not quite ready to jump ship just yet.

[President Jesus]

93. seriously? Dennis voted for that p.o.s.?

He's definitely a strange one, little doubt about that.

[paulk]

96. Reid's politics kind of suck

but I don't see the job of minority leader as idealogical - it's more about organization and building party unity. Robt. Byrd gave him a thumbs up for being our best parliamentarian. Reid understands how to use the Senate rules to fight from a minority position, and that might be just what we need right now.

I'm a lot more excited about Dick Durbin as minority whip. That is an idealogical position, and he's just the guy for the job.

jumping ship might be more of an option if the third party was more than a leaky raft

[pmbryant]

10. Oh you are so wrong

Democratic Party picks tough, hard-nosed Democrat for their Senate Minority Leader. Not someone who picks up his marbles and goes home when something doesn't go his way.

Reid is a fighter, unlike some.

--Peter

[tedzbear]

12. Reid will fight for Republican values, obviously...

I am fighting, but not for a party who is anti-abortion. Bye, bye.

[pmbryant]

14. Again, you are so wrong

You are "pro-abortion"?

Fighting does not mean turning tail and running at the first sign of adversity.

--Peter

[Zhade]

60. Question: is Reid in a safe state?

Politics aside, I'm uncertain if this will be a repeat of the Daschle Problem - being compromised by needing to appeal to Republicans in conservative states.

[Justitia]

77. NO, he's from Nevada - only supported in Vegas & Reno - eom

[pmbryant]

84. LOL. He got over 60% of the vote on Nov. 2

Vegas & Reno are practically the whole state.

--Peter

[pmbryant]

82. Reid isn't running again until 2010.

He just won re-election on November 2.

Reid won 61.0% of the vote (494,803 votes)
Bush won 50.5% of the vote (418,691 votes)

Nevada was barely in Bush's column, as he only beat Kerry by 21,000 votes.

Also, note that next time Reid runs for re-election there won't be a Bush (or any other Republican) on the national ticket.

Finally, note that Reid was already the #2 Dem for the entire Bush administration. That didn't seem to hurt him this year, did it?

--Peter

[quoi]

88. Reid has plenty of support

Believe it or not, a lot of Nevada is Mormon (they were there before the gamblers), and Reid is one of them. And yes, there is such a thing as a Democratic/Progressive Mormon.

[Reality Not Tin Foil]

11. LOL!

Oh FUCK IT! Why even try? SOMEONE is bound to cry and take their ball home.

I need a fucking break!!


GEEEEZE!!!



Ps...You know that if you're a Green, you'll lose EVERY TIME, right? You'll NEVER win...And you know there is NO arguing that simple fact, correct??

No need to reply...We both know the answer.

[Fleurs du Mal]

15. With the way the dems are going

you may get a "win" but it will be a hollow victory when the person you just elected starts pushing a conservative agenda. BUT...you'll have that oh so precious "win".

[tedzbear]

17. They won't win nada with someone like Reid for a leader...

They are only fooling themselves. Many progressives will see this as the "green light" to stop voting for the lesser of two evils and start voting for the party that will stand up for their causes (Green).

The days progressives like me say, "Anybody but..." are over.

[Reality Not Tin Foil]

40. No...You just say: "Anything but a win".

Welcome to Loserville, Greenie.

[Reality Not Tin Foil]

41. Yeah right...That's what this nation wants...A BIG LURCH TO THE LEFT!!

Yes...That's what I took away from the last election!!


Wake up!!

[Mike L]

55. you'll have that oh so precious "win".

I'll take it.

[Walt Starr]

16. At least wait until after the DNC chair is chosen

The Senate Minority position is based upon the Peter Principle. Wait until the DNC decides the direction they will take.

[QC]

19. Bye Bye! n/t

[leftie96]

20. How about we give the boy a chance?!

It's his 1st day in the job!

He'll have to work with Shrub from time to time or turn voters off the Dems even more. It's not an act of betrayal to work with the Republicans - it's what the public expects of mature politicians.

[Bush was AWOL]

22. Adios!!!!!

I'm very pleased with Reid. I'm not in favor of Abortion on demand, either. You either take care of it right away (first few weeks), or you have the kid unless you face a death.

[ohioan]

26. Whoops - there goes your chance to be a Democratic leader!

I thought only Republicans browbeat their members into lockstep obedience to one view and one view alone.

[GOPBasher]

27. Over a couple issues?

Wow, there's a good way of looking at democracy. You won't vote for someone who's a little different than you on a couple of issues. Okay then.

[Senator Lamb]

28. isnt it a double standard

we critcize the right wing neocons for attacking moderates and centrists like olympia snow and arlin specter and then we do the same?

[JohnKleeb]

31. listen to this proverb

"As we eat our own, we gradually become extinct"
Yes, we do, and this is double standard I agree. I hear people talking about making the democratic party like the party it was under FDR too, but that party was a big tent party of all kinds of people of different backgrounds, beliefs, etc.

[Reality Not Tin Foil]

42. Hypocricy...Thy name is SINGLE ISSUE VOTER!!

Screw them!! It's not like they'll win anything by leaving and becoming a Green. They'll all be back, crawling on their bellys. I just hope there's a bit of a nation left by then.

[JohnKleeb]

29. I dont know too many republicans who get 93's from the NAACP frankly

or 16's from the Christian Coalition.

[pmbryant]

30. Exactly

This entire anti-Reid hysteria is embarrassing.

--Peter

[JohnKleeb]

33. its been bugging the hell out of me

We like Jeffords do we not? I believe it was Reid who helped sway him to switch sides.

[ohioan]

32. Doesn't matter. He's not perfect, so let's stone him.

Of course, we'll do it for the right reasons, so that makes us different from Republicans.

[JohnKleeb]

34. hah oh man you guys made me think of the irony of this

In order to stop the party from being repub lite in people's views, some people actually act like republicans by damning those who aren't in agreement on one or two issues. I dont like Reid's not full pro choice record but I heard the man's speech at the DNC, I didnt hear no republican, I tell you that much.

[ohioan]

36. What's sad is that

Republicans really believe that their goals are noble, so they think that any means they use, regardless how draconian, ham-handed or evil, are justified.

And then we turn around and insist that WE have every right to engage any draconian, ham-handed or evil tactic because, after all, OUR goal is a righteous one.

Hmmm.

[JohnKleeb]

38. right

Lamb is right though, its a double standard.

[President Jesus]

44. they're called radicals

...and there's absolutely nothing new about them over the past 5000 years. They live on every side of the spectrum.

[JohnKleeb]

49. I am a radical

just have a more moderate rhetoric and I dont believe the moderates are the enemy, we need help to stop Bush's agenda, and if that means having people join us who don't always agree, then let it be so.

[President Jesus]

91. then you're a *reasonable* radical?

you're a rare breed, my friend.

ps GO STILLERS!!!

[Zhade]

66. John, I think it's far more complex than that.

Many of us dislike what we call "DINOs" or whatever, not simply because they disagree with us, but because of what they disagree about and how that differing stance affects the rights of others.

I'll give you an example. Suppose a Dem votes to confirm a known anti-abortion judge. We are all aware that most Republicans would like to outlaw abortion entirely (and would do so if it wasn't such a great lure for their Christian Right base).

The Dem in question, voting for such a judge (say, one who had stated in the past his or her intention to overturn Roe v Wade), would not be criticized by me for believing differently than I with regard to abortion (I go for the "safe, legal, rare" ideal). The Dem would most assuredly be criticized for voting in a way that endangers a women's right to choose.

I'm not saying that's the case with Reid (I am not very familiar with his record). What I am saying is that there does come a point where even Dems MUST be criticized for endangering others' rights.

It's how I feel about Dems voting for the Patriot Act. Bad move that took away some of our rights. They deserve criticism for that vote (and Feingold deserves a medal for being brave enough to vote NO).

A lot of the time, what goes on here is acrimony without discussion of why such acrimony exists. I'm guilty of that myself. But it must be admitted that there are some here willing to risk losing rights in order to win. While I understand their motivation in part (winning to enable the Dem agenda), a breakdown occurs because we simply cannot know how a Dem will vote once in office.

There's also the fact that we are stuck with two choices: Dem or Repub. Both sides have a pretty solid lock on their base. Kerry voted for the IWR against the majority of his communicative constituents' wishes, but it's not like his base was going to vote him out for not representing their will (what the will of the uncommunicative constituents actually was can only be guessed at, and thus is probably not very helpful to the discussion).

Sometimes Dem leaders need to be criticized, and just because a certain faction of Dem voters claims another faction is demanding lockstep behavior does not mean it is true. Sometimes one faction or the other simply does not see the danger in a Dem leader voting a certain way.

It would be much more helpful for those of us criticizing such leaders when necessary by explaining why we oppose the action, rather than just slamming the guy or gal as a DINO, I'll admit. The desire to "one-up" each other on DU makes this hard sometimes, though.

Cheers! :toast:

[JohnKleeb]

69. of course its more complex than that

Of cousre they deserve criticism but must we eat our own at every single oppertunity just because they're less liberal than us. I hear progressives talking about a party of FDR, hell I want that too, but that party was a big tent one where we respected people who thought differently and didn't call them republicans. Course Feingold deserves praise, I am not saying he doesnt, but must we damn people who sometimes don't vote our way, its hard enough to get dems here in Virginia, purism doesnt help. Sorry but you guys go too far sometimes for me, Reid has been called a DLC DINO for no good damn reason that I can see, he's not even a member of the DLC, we just throw the DLC title at anyone who displeases us, I am sorry but thats wrong. I dont mean to be pissed but I believe sincerely there is a third way out of this mess other than the my way or the high way and the bullshit that says move to the centre at all cost, sigh it pisses me off man when I see good democrats called traitors.
Can I give you a prime example of this stuff that has me upset?
Ok, my governor Mark Warner has been mention for the presidential candiacy, some people hear that and immediately cast judgement on him, and thats gonna piss me off, aint a perfect guy but when are we gonna have a nominee who agrees with us on everything, well if you yourself run yes.

[President Jesus]

43. Whoa a sound, rational argument based in fact. That dog don't hunt...

...on threads where John Kerry and Harry Reid are called Republicans.

[JohnKleeb]

54. nah I am just giving facts

BTW he got a 100 from the AFL-CIO in 2003, I dont even know of any republicans who got a 50.

[demwing]

37. seeya!

On some matters of principle, Reid seems more like a Republican.

So, because he diverges from the liberal Dem ideal, you'll completely leave the Dem party. Am I understanding you correctly?

At some point, there will be no one left to fight for the Democratic party.


Is that what you want?

[Mike L]

45. Need to pick Nancy Pelosi

She has a safe seat and can flame the repugs.

[JohnKleeb]

51. umm

shes not a senator.

[American Tragedy]

46. Co-sponsored a flag-burning amendment?

My God. Even our Senator Mitch McConnell opposes that.

And yes, that is important to me. I find it utterly unacceptable for the government to devote time and tax dollars to punishing people for harmless personal behavior using their own private property. It is also a grotesque abuse of the Constitution that would have been strongly rejected by the founding fathers of this country.

[Mike L]

53. Flag burning-- a red herring issue.

Who cares? Reid is from Nevada. Give him a break. He needed this knee-jerk, non-issue bill to win over the Neanderthals in his state.

[ohioan]

70. A knee-jerk, non-issue bill with no hope of passing

[AP]

47. I'm not going to let the NYT tell me how to see Democrats.

[LittleClarkie]

50. Enjoy your ivory tower

Aren't you just removing yourself from the system for the most part. Go Green, and you can then say you didn't vote for either one, so don't blame you.

But it seems to me you will have disenfranchised yourself, as your vote will mean diddly squat from now on.

[Democat]

56. Our Party still hasn't learned - the Republicans will remove Reid

If you don't like Reid, just wait a few years until he's up for re-election and the Republicans will take care of him like they did Daschle.

Could our party be any more fucked up? They just don't learn, no matter how many times we lose.

[Reality Not Tin Foil]

63. You don't know what you're talking about.

Reid has been popular for YEARS at home. Daschle never was.

Get a grip. The pukes are NOT the Boogie Man.

[zulchzulu]

65. I will work to remove Reid when he's up for re-election

Get a Green in there...fuck these DINO assholes.

If you disagree, tell me why an anti-choice, anti-1st Amendment charlaten is a "good" thing.

[Reality Not Tin Foil]

67. LOL! Get a Green in there?

Are you KIDDING me??

A Green can't even win a congressional seat in California (Or ANYWHER, for that matter), let ALONE a senate seat in Nevada!!

Yeah...Go get a Green in there. Even if those clowns DID run a candidate against Reid, it wouldn't hurt him...He would STILL cream the puke in the race...Regardless of the 3% the Green candidate pulls.

[zulchzulu]

68. A Green Senator from Nevada...it's possible

It would depend on the candidate...obviously...perhaps someone with some moxy (good front, f*cking big mouth as per W.S. Burrough's "Old Man Bickford) who does a lot of work on Yucca Mountain's peril and has a couple wishy-washy opponents.

I know it's a bit of a dream, but hey...

[DemocracyInaction]

57. Perhaps Reid is Rockey in disguise---but who fucking cares about the

disguise. He comes across as someone who would be offended at Daschle's "loud" (sarcasm) voice. Can these soft spoken losers!!...no one listens to them. And the republicans go into their states and depose them! Get someone with a goddamn voice and mouth and presence. Reid has NO presence. He's a Daschle clone. I don't care what he does or cannot do behind the scenes. IF we are even going to win a position as "dog catcher" in '06 we have to lose these wall flowers who are totally unimpressive.

[zulchzulu]

61. WTF

I really don't understand having Reid as senate minority leader.

Two issues that prove to me that not respecting a woman's right to not have the government control her body and having utter disrespect for the Bill of Rights with the jingoistic reptilian flag-burning amendment make me think that the Democrats really don't FUCKING CARE.

Anti-abortion, pro-flag burning amendment...that's a fucking Repug no matter how you look at it. It's an absolute dealbreaker. Who was asleep on this decision? McAuliffe?

Reid's policies make me sick. Thank Whoever that I'm not a registered Democrat.

A flag burning amendment is going to be the next Big Wedge Issue in 2006 and 2008. So we have some numbnut who is for a Repug "issue" at the helm? Are we nuts?

[tedzbear]

85. Thank you!

"Anti-abortion, pro-flag burning amendment...that's a fucking Repug no matter how you look at it."


I agree with you, zulchzulu. If these DLC lovers here want Reid to lead them to their promised land, then I say go for it. But I ain't joining them while they follow him off the cliff.

Meanwhile the Green Party will continue to grow and grow as ex-Demo people like me nurture it along...

I wouldn't be surprised if Kucinich goes Green if things keep unfolding like they are.

:bounce:

[Malva Zebrina]

62. Oh swell

DNC/DLC has lost me . I just wrote to Donna Brazille and expressed that opinion.

I am a newbie to politics and will have to review the various alternatives now, but I am certain that this party does not represent me any longer if it continues on this path.

I cannot support a party that has a leader that is against abortion and whatever else goes with it.

This is really depressing.

[ohioan]

71. In other words, Reid doesn't pass your litmus test . . .

You have a lot in common with the braying mob trying to keep Specter from becoming chair of the Judiciary Committee because he's not a pro-life nut. You all want your party held hostage to one narrow view - yours. Everyone else be damned.

Yup - we should drive out every Democrat who is against abortion. That will leave a nice tiny number of Democrats to represent your point of view since we'll be hard-pressed to find too many Democrats who are FOR abortion.

Perhaps you should learn the difference between being pro-life - which many Democrats, even liberal ones (including me) are and believing that one's pro-life view should be forced down everyone else's throat. Harry Reid has never forced his view on other members of his party. You, on the other hand, seem all too willing to do just that - an approach that Democrats can certainly do without.

Good riddance.

[Clarkie1]

75. "Politics is the art of the possible" - welcome to the real world

"If you can do good, you should" - Wes Clark

[NightTrain]

73. That makes two of us! Well, sort of.

Since Kerry's premature concession, I've seriously considered flipping off the spineless Democratic Party and registering Green. Haven't done it yet, but I just might!

[CreekDog]

76. Let TedZBear Go

Nobody asked Ted to compromise his own position, just to accept that others might have a different one on something like abortion and that somebody can be a good leader with a different point of view.

But if one party leader is not allowed to disagree with Ted on this issue, even if that leader does not actually take steps to act on that disagreement, then he's asking everyone in his party to agree with him on this, and that's not reasonable.

Reid has been in leadership for quite a while and has not pushed an anti-abortion agenda.

Reid is a strong Democrat who fights and nobody doubts it. He has as strong a record on women's rights as most Democrats.

Our party is made up of all the people who want to be a part of it. If we want to actually rule, we have to accept that not everyone will be full supporters of the party platform --and for that matter, you may not always support the party platform. Parties that win are parties that have big disagreements.

We can kick everyone who disagrees with Ted out of the party. As it is, we are not winning. We need to add people to the party. In fact, we need to add pro-life people to the party. It is a point of view and it is legitimate, just like our point of view is legitimate.

[bling bling]

78. I'm getting more frustrated by the day.

The democratic party is representin' me less and less anymore both literally and figuratively.

Since November 3rd I've been waiting and waiting for a democratic leader to emerge and rile us all up and get us mobilized. We were all left hanging, and it seems like nobody in a leadership position has spoken to us.

This was the "VOTE OR DIE" election, it was "The Most Important Election of Our Lifetime." I voted. I got other people to vote. I lost sleep over it. I spent my hard earned money and volunteered my free time for the democratic party.

Women's reproductive rights and freedom of speech are among the issues closest to my heart. I won't support someone who feels differently. I don't care if they have a dash R or a dash D next to their name. My principles are unconditional.

If the democratic party doesn't move more to the left than I'm going to vote for the green party too next time.

[tedzbear]

87. You took the words right out of my mouth, bling bling.

"Women's reproductive rights and freedom of speech are among the issues closest to my heart. I won't support someone who feels differently. I don't care if they have a dash R or a dash D next to their name. My principles are unconditional."


I am not telling the DLC to change their platform for me. I am leaving their party because their platform has left me.

[pmbryant]

89. We are the party of the people

Why are you "waiting for a democratic leader to emerge and rile us all up and get us mobilized"? It's the Republicans who sit around waiting for their anointed one to tell them what to say and do. Democrats can act on their own.

So let's do it.

--Peter

[Justitia]

79. His vote against the rights of WOMEN in the MILITARY disturbs me

We already know he is anti-choice, but has a good rating from some women's groups, but this one really disturbs me:

He voted to keep the ban in place which bars women in the military from obtaining abortions when they are stationed overseas.

We even had the repub women cross the aisle in favor of the women in the military and Reid voted to keep the ban in place - WHAT IS UP WITH THAT POSITION???

[dorktv]

90. I guess having a uterus helps in making those votes.

[chaska]

80. I'm with you, Dean.

I've had with this pug lite shit. This Reid guy better work some effin' miracles or I'm out too.

Note to all you newbies: When a person says they're leaving, saying good riddance, etc. makes it much harder for that person to come back. When you do that you hurt our party and 1) I don't appreciate it and 2) it makes me want to hit the alert button on your posts. You upstarts better learn some manners.

[arcos]

81. Kucinich supports the flag burning ammendment too... n/t

[EST]

86. Again and again I hear this sad refrain.

On cspan, recently, were the representatives of of some organization or another made up of people whose fur was some color other than mostly white. They were pretty pushy, wanting to know what concessions were to be granted to keep them from leaving the "democratic" party. So many folks somehow believe their views have to be the essence of an entire group's or else they don't fit.
May I say to you all, "How the hell are you going to leave the democratic party when you are the democratic party?" If you want to leave, the party goes with you, leaving the rest of us where we are. Seems to me there are really only two parties- the fascist disrupters, whose views are so obviously anti government by the people, and everyone else. If you leave, and I leave, and all the Islamic faith leave, and the folks with dark brown fur leave, and so on, there ain't agonna be anybody in the damn democratic party!

Listen to me, you people in the NAACP-you are the dem party! You can't leave 'cause you're it! Now, just how much of my own belief system are you going to demand I give up just so I can join your party? I want to help America become what we think it should be, and I sure don't think the neocons have the proper slant on things-I don't wanna be like them at all!- but what are you, sir or ma'am going to demand I be like so you will let me play with you?

The first battle, IMHO, is to defeat the obvious disrupters and jail them and their evil-They are just too different from us to play with us, and they want to hurt any of us who aren't mean and aggressive enough to bully them back. Until that battle is won, you can't really afford to take your party away, and not let me play, too-unless you are sure you don't need me and you can do the job all by yourself. Look at it, people-right now we have to band together and fight the people eaters. Later, when it's more safe, we can settle the smaller issues, like who you want to marry, and who you like to hang out with!

[CreekDog]

94. Staying in the party, despite disagreements is the progressive way

The Democrats had big majorities and provided nearly all of the progressive reform of the 20th Century while they were essentially a divided party.

Heck, a third of our party didn't even believe in Civil Rights in the 1960's, and yet we got it passed. Ideological purity didn't accomplish Social Security, Civil Rights, Voting Rights, Women's Rights or any of that great stuff.

It was all horse-trading and political dealing because that is the way our system doles out progress. If you don't want to play this game, then forget about changing the country as a whole, because you will not in the way the Democrats in their heyday did.

Even Lincoln, only freed the slaves in the non-union states. Imagine that, Lincoln was a politician? Aren't we all so ashamed that he was our president? My gosh.

You folks have to wake up and read these history books. There was no great pastor FDR and LBJ spouting platitudes and watching the Democrats fall behind them to do what's right. It was strategy with many highly moral goals, but it was strategy nontheless.

Be idealists if you will, but at least be realistic about the system.

[CreekDog]

95. Here's the other hypocrisy of leaving the party now

Why now?

Did Wellstone ever leave, despite Harry Reid's elevation to majority whip in 2001? Are you more pure than Paul Wellstone?

Did George McGovern, Hubert Humphrey, Henry Wallace, Ed Muskie, Phil Burton, Bobby Kennedy, just to name a few? Did any of them leave the party, even when it was rife with avowed segregationists? (all those Southern Senators and folks like Lestor Maddox, and worse)

Nope they didn't leave. Why does that mean you should stay?

Well, they all stayed and look at what was accomplished. The party did address civil rights and they eventually did take a stand and those people, the bad folks, lost. Without their majorities, the Democratic party could not have forged those accomplishments.

Let's face it folks, we have Civil Rights and many other rights thanks to the votes of some very bigoted people (voters or congressmen) supporting candidates in our party --candidates that gave us majorities! If you can't handle that progress sometimes comes in strange ways, then you can't produce that progress in our system either. A party that stands for something, but can produce none of it, moves none of us forward.

I'm struggling to think of what Democratic losses have done for the USA. Sure, we have lost at times because we did good things. Those things, however, were almost all accomplished for the country while we had power and so much power that we could risk and deal to make progress. That's how it's done.

Stay in the party. Our day will come again, but not without you. Future generations are counting on you, just as we benefited from progressives tolerating the party when it held all those bigots.