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

[Eugene]

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-bc-ct--pryor-lieberman0810aug10,0,4366885.story

[sinkingfeeling]

1. Guess the 'Gang' has to stick together. Does anyone know a rich,

progressive that would like to run against Mark Pryor in Arkansas?

[endarkenment]

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.

[MessiahRp]

3. Yeah we need MORE moderate voices..

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

[Cha]

31. That's just disingenous to de max.

lieberman is not moderate he is Failed Policy.

[Vinca]

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.

[Norquist Nemesis]

7. The RW Echo Machine would be eating him/her for breakfast

for a MONTH!

[Jack Rabbit]

5. We're talking names

There's a Ned Lamont in every state.

[Norquist Nemesis]

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?

[SaveElmer]

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.

[fujiyama]

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.

[SaveElmer]

28. What I am saying...

Is that none of those things would have passed in a Democratic Congress...

[Jack Rabbit]

11. An unjustified colonial war in Iraq

Let's not forget that.

[KaptBunnyPants]

9. Our leaders need to nip this crap right now!

If they won't abide by primary results, the Democratic Party will fall.

[Rose Siding]

10. Don't look now, Mark, but 3 incumbants got booted on Tuesday.

Unprecedented. What part of "new direction" doesn't he understand?

[Norquist Nemesis]

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'.

[movonne]

15. Anything can happen with diebold.....

[fujiyama]

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.

[SaveElmer]

13. The best way to prove Pryor, Salazar, and Carper wrong?

Make sure Lamont is elected...that is not yet in the bag...

[movonne]

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....

[Spirochete]

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.

[IChing]

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.

[Cha]

34. Looks like some of the dinos

are stickin' together like the glue they must sniff.

[RB TexLa]

38. And in Arkansas, it would be replacing him with a Republican

I'll pass on helping to do that.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

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

[krkaufman]

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.

[dolstein]

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.

[Doremus]

20. Really? How do you explain his 50% voting record on Dem issues?

http://bushwatch.com/demwatch.htm

[dolstein]

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.

[Doremus]

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.

[Tesha]

40. 48% not real Democrats? 'Sounds just about right. (NT)

[SaveElmer]

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.

[fujiyama]

29. No he's not liberal

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.

[Cha]

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.

[fujiyama]

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?

[Cha]

37. Yep! n/t

[leesa]

22. Harry Reid better get his Senators in line.

[bigwillq]

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.

[Cha]

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?

[Placebo]

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.

[last_texas_dem]

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.