Reply #58: The Senate Dems put a poison pill in that bill that they knew would keep [View All]

[AP]

it from getting passed in the house.

I presume that Edwards voted for that bill in committee to make sure that that version got out to the floor and then, to be consistent, voted Y againt to get it accross the hall into the house where it could be defeated.

Edwards probably did get a low vote from the league of conservation voters because in America since 1974, single interest liberal groups have been played off one another, and the environmentalists are in direct opposition to labor, and Edwards has built his career around making sure that wealth flows down to people who work for a living.

If there's any single interest that he's not going to look good against, it will be environmentalism -- but that's only if you reduce the measure to the most black and white view. Because, one of the reasons Edwards has given for voting against free-trade bills is that he won't vote for a trade bill with country that doesn't protect workers' rights and the environment (because he's not going to force Americans to compete with other countries which set the bar too low on those two issues). The LoCV should give Edwards a ton of credit for that, but they don't. They pick five bills that have to do with the environment, and if Edwards voted to fund the expansion of a runway in NC so that Fed Ex would give more jobs to NC'ians, the LoCV says he's bad.

Maybe he'd do better with them if he were less loyal to the interests of labor, like so many other Dems?

Do you see how the world is a little more complicated than your extreme reduction to "Lieberman:Bad/Nobody Good Enough" view of politics?