Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

AP: Pryor sticks with Lieberman despite senator's primary loss

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Eugene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 11:48 AM
Original message
AP: Pryor sticks with Lieberman despite senator's primary loss
Pryor sticks with Lieberman despite senator's primary loss

August 10, 2006, 12:09 PM EDT

LITTLE ROCK (AP) _ Sen. Mark Pryor says he still supports colleague Joe Lieberman
despite Connecticut Democrats on Tuesday rejecting their three-term U.S. senator
in favor of political newcomer Ned Lamont.

Pryor, D-Ark., said he supports Lieberman's effort to remain in the Senate by staying
in Connecticut's race as an independent.

"The Democratic Party needs moderate voices," Pryor said. "I'm for Joe Lieberman
whether he's a Democrat or an independent."

-snip-

Sen. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., did not take sides. She supported Lieberman in the primary.

-snip-

Full article: http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/connecticut/ny-b...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
sinkingfeeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 11:50 AM
Response to Original message
1. Guess the 'Gang' has to stick together. Does anyone know a rich,
progressive that would like to run against Mark Pryor in Arkansas?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
endarkenment Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 11:50 AM
Response to Original message
2. Wow.
This is why we are one disfunctional party. These folks just don't get it. It is not their party, it belongs to all of us Democrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MessiahRp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 11:50 AM
Response to Original message
3. Yeah we need MORE moderate voices..
Edited on Thu Aug-10-06 11:50 AM by MessiahRp
The fact that the party has been railroaded the last 6 years by those moderates and their attempts to be Republicans proves to me that we need more of those people and less of those liberals and their spines. :puke:

Rp
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 09:06 PM
Response to Reply #3
31. That's just disingenous to de max.
lieberman is not moderate he is Failed Policy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Vinca Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 11:51 AM
Response to Original message
4. Okay, say the scenario is reversed. It's a Republican primary
and a Republican candidate decides to run as an Independent. What do you think happens? Party loyalty, party loyalty, party loyalty. What's the matter with Pryor? If Democrats are going to support Indy candidates, we haven't got a chance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Norquist Nemesis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. The RW Echo Machine would be eating him/her for breakfast
for a MONTH!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
5. We're talking names
There's a Ned Lamont in every state.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Norquist Nemesis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 11:56 AM
Response to Original message
6. Let's take a look at where those 'moderate' voices have delivered
Outrageously expensive medicare spending bill
Credit Card Enrichment bill (bankrupcy bill)
Tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts
Justice Samuel Alito (not to mention the hundreds of other seats that were blocked by Cons during Clinton)

What else?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Republicans delivered those things...
With Democrats in power they would not have happened...

Keep the focus...the best way to prove Pryor wrong is to make sure Lieberman is defeated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 08:39 PM
Response to Reply #8
27. A republican president signed those things into law
which were passed by a republican congress.

But it's undeniable that they passed with the help of "Democrats" like Pryor and others like him. I'm not saying Dems could have effectively opposed everything repukes did (as a minority party, you can only do so much), but their willingness to do so little is what is so pathetic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 08:41 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. What I am saying...
Is that none of those things would have passed in a Democratic Congress...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 12:01 PM
Response to Reply #6
11. An unjustified colonial war in Iraq
Let's not forget that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KaptBunnyPants Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
9. Our leaders need to nip this crap right now!
If they won't abide by primary results, the Democratic Party will fall.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rose Siding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 11:59 AM
Response to Original message
10. Don't look now, Mark, but 3 incumbants got booted on Tuesday.
Unprecedented. What part of "new direction" doesn't he understand?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Norquist Nemesis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 12:05 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Unfortunately, the (R) that was defeated was beaten by a
RightWing 'approved' ideologue. But you're correct...the incumbent(R) was known as a 'moderate'.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
movonne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 12:25 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. Anything can happen with diebold.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 08:36 PM
Response to Reply #15
26. The RWer that won
had nothing to do with Diebold...and neither did McKinney...or Lieberman.

It's the way party politics works. Those that vote in primaries tend to be much more ideaological. They represent the most passionate of the party's members.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 12:08 PM
Response to Original message
13. The best way to prove Pryor, Salazar, and Carper wrong?
Make sure Lamont is elected...that is not yet in the bag...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
movonne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 12:24 PM
Response to Original message
14. The dem party should put great pressure on these assholes that
are deserting the party for a independent party NOW... PUT A STOP TO IT BEFORE IT BECOMES FASHIONABLE....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Spirochete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 02:45 PM
Response to Original message
16. Pryor needs to go too
as soon as we can boot him. He's up in 08, isn't he?
He's one of the absolute worst Dem senators.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IChing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 06:10 PM
Response to Reply #16
21. A view of his ratings can be seen here.
Progressive Action Score: 27

Regressive Conservative Score: 64

On May 18, 2006, Senator Pryor voted for Senate Amendment 4064 to S. 2611. Amendment 4064. Because Sen. Pryor cast a YES vote, the amendment passed. As a consequence, the Senate declared English to be the National Language of the United States of America, and that "no person has a right, entitlement, or claim to have the Government of the United States or any of its officials or representatives act, communicate, perform or provide services, or provide materials in any language other than English." This amendment did not pass

George W. Bush has put in place a new rule in which industrial plants will be able to purchase the right to spew as much mercury out of their smokestacks as they want. The trouble with this system is that, although mercury pollution could be reduced in some places, hot spots of excessive mercury pollution would appear throughout the country. Local residents would have absolutely no say when mercury pollution threatened their health and the health of their families. The only market-based solution that local residents would have would be to flee their homes, selling their property at drastically reduced rates. That's the kind of market-based solution that belongs in a Charles Dickens novel, not in America.

S.J. Res 20 would have overturned the Bush Mercury Hotspot Rule, but if failed by a slim majority of 51. Senator Pryor didn't vote for S.J. Res 20, allowing Mercury hotspots to proliferate across the United States of America. For shame, Senator Pryor.

By voting for S.256, Senator Pryor helped to make it harder for average people who run into hard times to keep even the most basic of assets when they run into already rich megacreditors who want just a bit more profit. Senator Pryor has moved to protect the high-profit, high-rate consumer credit industry against people struggling to get by. That's an inversion of any reasonable person's moral compass. Sen. Pryor has chosen corporations over people.


By voting to approve George W. Bush's choice of Alberto Gonzales as Attorney General, Senator Pryor has decided that it's acceptable for the top law enforcement office of the United States to be a man who put his stamp on memos approving the use of torture, and who says the Geneva Conventions don't have to be followed. In this vote, Senator Pryor endorsed an anything-goes, deeply amoral vision of America's future.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #16
34. Looks like some of the dinos
are stickin' together like the glue they must sniff.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RB TexLa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-11-06 07:53 AM
Response to Reply #16
38. And in Arkansas, it would be replacing him with a Republican

I'll pass on helping to do that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Name removed Donating Member (0 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 02:48 PM
Response to Original message
17. Deleted message
Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.
 
krkaufman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 05:52 PM
Response to Original message
18. Lieberman is not a "moderate"
His unflinching support of the Iraq war, in the run-up and to present day, makes him a Right Wing extremist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dolstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 06:00 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. He's a liberal
He's just not a leftist. He's also a hawk -- in the tradition of Truman and JFK. Both of these things drive the blogosphere crazy. But that doesn't make his a moderate, much less a right-winger.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doremus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 06:06 PM
Response to Reply #19
20. Really? How do you explain his 50% voting record on Dem issues?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
dolstein Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 06:22 PM
Response to Reply #20
23. According to that site, 48% of Democratic senators aren't real Dems
Pardon my skepticism. The better statistic to use is focus on votes that broke down on party lines. In those votes, Lieberman sided with the Democrats 90% of the time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doremus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 08:03 PM
Response to Reply #23
24. He sided with his party on DEMOCRATIC issues only HALF the time.
If you're willing to settle for a DINO, you're more than welcome to.

I trust you'll excuse those of us who think we deserve better. Thanks.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tesha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-11-06 08:32 AM
Response to Reply #23
40. 48% not real Democrats? 'Sounds just about right. (NT)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
SaveElmer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 09:08 PM
Response to Reply #20
33. That is not correct...
Those ratings are based on issues that Bush Watch has decided to rate Senators on...they say they are trying to rate each Senator on how Progressive they are...not how loyal they are to the Democratic Party in the Senate

In fact, Lieberman votes the Democratic party position in the Senate about 80% of the time. It seems many of these votes are not to Bush Watch's liking so they are not included.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 08:55 PM
Response to Reply #19
29. No he's not liberal
Edited on Thu Aug-10-06 08:56 PM by fujiyama
and he's not at all like JFK or Truman. That's an insult to both presidents.

Neither JFK, nor Truman were apologists for torture. They did not backstab fellow party members and undercut the party's message either. They would have recognized the administration for the extremists they are - unlike Joe.

Lieberman is condescending, arrogant, and sanctimonious. Part of the frustration here isn't even with his vote record - it's what he says when he goes to the media. He criticizes the Democratic party more than the other side...and not in a constructive fashion. What ever happened to not airing internal troubles to the public? If he were to have made it clear that he supported the war's initial goals, disagreed with the way it was conducted, and the lies of the administration, many may not have cared. If he had not constantly used RIGHT WING TALKING POINTS (like yourself) in chastising all of us that opposed a war we knew was NOT BENEFICIAL to National Security, I for one and many others would have simply ignored him. Instead he was a mouthpiece for the administration, giving them cover on many occassions. He constntly used the false RW theme that "war in Iraq = war on terror".

Dolstein, I really must wonder...Would you have behaved the same way if McKinney or a 'leftist' type candidate ran as an independant against the Democrat? What is your obsession with Lieberman? And do you truly believe we can still trust that he will caucus with the Dems? He's drawing resources from the party as well.

You may consider taking your Lieberman campaigning and defending to the TNR, where it seems is in constant defense of his lunacy. Unfortunately for you, many of those that contribute to the message boards there do not agree with you either.

Of course, I don't even expect a rational response from you. All I expect are more RW talking points, like the one or two other Lieberman supporters still on this board.






Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 09:15 PM
Response to Reply #29
35. Thank you for your
post..I thought since Ned Lamont is our candidate that we wouldn't have to hear from lieberman apologists? I guess I was wrong.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fujiyama Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #35
36. I must admit
I'm amused that some of the most vocal Nader bashers are now Lieberman's biggest apologists.

Ironic, isn't it?




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 09:31 PM
Response to Reply #36
37. Yep! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leesa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 06:11 PM
Response to Original message
22. Harry Reid better get his Senators in line.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bigwillq Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 08:11 PM
Response to Original message
25. It's too bad we can't be a united front
All these DEMS and their own personal agenda. Pryor has the right to support whom he chooses but I'm sure if a repuke incumbent candidate lost a primary and went third party, the pukes wouldn't support him.
Say what you want about the pukes, they always stand by each other.

Us DEMS need to start doing that more. If not, we will defeat ourselves.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 09:05 PM
Response to Original message
30. Which part of Democratic does mark pryor
not understand? And what happens when Lamont wins the General? Does pryor shun him in the Senate like an asshole?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Placebo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-10-06 09:08 PM
Response to Original message
32. Fucking ridiculous.
Any democrat (so-called) who doesn't support the winner of the DEMOCRATIC primary, whether they like the choice of the people or not, is no democrat at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
last_texas_dem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-11-06 08:26 AM
Response to Original message
39. So...
...I wonder if Pryor plans to support "moderate" Chafee's candidacy in RI over the "liberal" Whitehouse? Somehow I highly doubt it. But that's about as much sense as his "I support moderates, even if it mean's selling out my own party's candidate" argument makes.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Jul 30th 2014, 12:06 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC