Why do some "liberals" seem to hold outspoken Republicans in higher regard than uncorrupt Democrats?

[w4rma]

Why have so many "liberals", like Robert Scheer, gone fanboy/fangirl over Sen. Hagel? Are you really that giddy that we've been able to pry a Republican from the fold, on this issue, that you've lost your mind?

Get a grip, people.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. Is the Democrat you're talking about Lieberman?

If so, kindly remember that he is an Independent now. If it is another Dem, who?

As for swooning over Hagel--a certain amount of positive reinforcement always helps when one needs to correct another's negative behavior. Making a fuss over Hagel may, indeed, encourage other Republicans to come into the light. We'll need them come impeachment/conviction time.

[w4rma]

5. No. Lieberman most likely doesn't like Hagel much at all. (nt)

[Warren Stupidity]

2. Well we should of course encourage defections.

Hagel is very conservative on almost all other issues. If he wants to join the antiwar coalition we should of course make that easy for him, heap accolades on him, etc. etc. and use him to completely fracture the Refuglican Party.

[BoneDaddy]

3. I can't speak for Robert Scheer

but it certainly is refreshing and a cause for some celebration when we can see the republican party beginning to fracture (as they typically walk in lock step) and some free thinkers emerge.

[Gato Moteado]

4. personally, i think all repukes are human garbage

to stay in that party after what's gone on since the reagan years, one would have to be a complete boot-licking fascist lover.

[w4rma]

7. I think most Republican voters are brainwashed or ignorant of GOP policies.

I agree on the politicians and the folks who support Republicans for economic or racist/sexist reasons.

[mmonk]

6. Because I'm an American first and will give him his due

for standing against his party (as ruthless as they are) in order to do the right thing about Iraq.

[w4rma]

9. All I'm saying is that I think some folks are taking the adoration a little too far. (nt)

[mmonk]

12. I haven't read all the threads so I can't say

or comment on what the nature of that support is but I support what he is doing. Are people saying they support him in his office or support him if he runs for president or something?

[w4rma]

13. Yes. Over people who have fought against the war (and warmongering) for much longer.

And over people who have a much better history of being incorruptible (and who don't own a voting machine company and who didn't get into office on their own company manufactured DRE voting machines).

[mmonk]

14. Well, I don't support him over a democrat (unless it's a Zell Miller)

and I wouldn't support him for president or anything but I support and give him kudos for standing up.

[Lerkfish]

8. Why do some people put "liberals" in quotation marks?

and start flamebait threads?

one wonders.

[w4rma]

11. I use quotes around words that when taken in context may not mean what the word usually means. (nt)

[Lerkfish]

17. in other words, flamebait.

you're accusing DUers who disagree with you of not being liberals.

[bigtree]

10. with issues of life and death, sometimes folks distinguish themselves

Hagel is arguing on the right side of the issue and may help save some lives. He deserves to be given credit and support for that effort.

[TZ]

15. politicians

Personally I think all politicians are corrupt whatever party. I of course tend to like Democrats (or should I say hate Republicans) but if someone behaves in a rational, honorable, open-minded, intelligent way than I have admiration for that person, no matter what party.

[w4rma]

16. "All" politicians aren't corrupt. (nt)

[LeftishBrit]

18. Perhaps because rebellion from one's own party is often crucial to ending a leader's power?

Thatcher was removed as PM by her own party; Blair is being forced to step down by his.

I would never want Hagel to become president; but I am glad that he and others are rebelling against Bush. It may stop the war, or at least prevent further escalation; and, even if Mad King George does not have to step down prematurely, it may help to stop him having the 'Divine Right of Kings'.

It's worth remembering that, for Bush to be successfully impeached as so many here want, there would need to be 16 Republican senators voting for conviction - and that's if the Democrats vote unanimously. I don't think it's likely to happen unfortunately - but if it does, it will require 16 outspoken, rebellious Republicans.

IMO, the world would be safer if both American political parties moved somewhat to the left. (And both main British parties too, of course!)