I support the Democratic party and all its candidates, but Harold Ford concerns me

[NNguyenMD]

He's what, some 36 year old kid who inherited his daddy's seat and he thinks that he's got the balls to publically demand an apology from Kerry?

Who the f--- does he think he is?

The representative may have the big blue "D" that comes before his name, but as far as I'm concerned thats all that he's got going for him.

[blm]

1. I don't hold it against any candidate, but DO hold it against their DC "strategist"

.

[nini]

2. I thought you were going to talk about his stance against gay marriage and..

anti choice. That's what scares me about him.

[dsc]

16. You are flat out wrong about his position on abortion

He does favor some restrictions on abortion but to call him anti choice is utterly false. Under the rules he favors well over 90% of all abortions would still be legal (he favors parental consent laws and laws banning partial birth abortion). Parental consent is an issue in maybe 5% of all abortions and in most of those the abortion would likely still occur and partial birth abortion is a miniscule percent, not even 1/10 of 1%.

[Casper]

24. Watch your choice language, please

"Partial birth abortion" is a provocative term that the choice community works hard to eliminate from the debate. It's similar to "pro-life", "death tax", and "tax relief". You may want to consider using the phrase "late term abortion", instead.

Thank you.

[dsc]

28. I used the term by which it can be looked up on the internet

which is presumedly needed by the poster to whom I responded. Incidently late term abortion isn't any more accurate since only one type of late term abortion is covered by the bans. edit to remove insult.

[Crowdance]

56. The term is a lie, and its use simply spreads the lie

It is a term born of bigotry and misogyny, and its usage perpetuates those evils. Democrats should know better than to volunteer to be tools of the right. It's important that we all say what we mean, and not duck behind ugly phrases as if they shield us from the truth. The truth is that late term abortion saves women's lives and health, and that making the procedure illegal is done in total disregard for the human rights of women.

[Guaranteed]

69. Ford uses it.

I heard him say it on CNN.

[nini]

47. uh... he restricts some choice - it might as well be all in my mind

you can play with percents all you want but when I saw him talking on Maher I didn't like what he said one bit.

I'm sure he has to play to the fundie base down there..but he said what he said.


also.. I'd much rather see him in office than his opponent - he's not all bad, but he certainly can be better.

[dsc]

52. under that standard, are there any pro choice politicians?

I don't know of any politician who says that there should be no restrictions on abortions whatsoever. Though I do appreciate you stating you would vote for Ford over Corker. To call someone who would permit 95% or more of currently legal abortions to remain legal anti choice is a true misapplication of the word which renders it nearly meaningless.

[Crowdance]

57. Plenty: Henry Waxman, Maxine Waters, Loretta Sanchez, Carolyn McCarthy,

Gary Ackerman, Charles Rangel, etc., etc., etc. The list is too long to be reproduced easily.

Facts are such an important part of any discussion. You can find some here: http://www.vote-smart.org/issue_rating_detail.php?sig_id=003432M

[dsc]

59. They would seriously permit abortion one day before term

if a woman just wanted to? I really, really don't think that is true. That is the standard enunciated by the poster.

[Crowdance]

61. One of us is having reading difficulties..... n/t

[dsc]

65. These are her words

uh... he restricts some choice - it might as well be all in my mind

Now I will admit that I am not an English major, but last I checked any bill that restricted any choice including what I sited would constitute restricting some choice. Maybe some means a different thing to you than to I.

[nini]

68. let me clarify my view

I do believe in some restrictions also when it comes to how far along so because I didn't spell out my view completely, I can see you thinking that I don't believe in any restrictions due to my short post. I believe in choice but I also believe it is a woman's responsibility to take care of it as soon as possible. Waiting until the fetus is viable is not ok with me.


However, I will say again my initial post was based on what I heard him say in his interview. He came off being much more anti choice than you say and his votes in Congress show. He really seemed to be taking the fundie views on it if I go by his interview.

[dsc]

71. fair enough

I wasn't intending to take your words out of context but did want to explain what I was saying.

[nini]

58. It was his support of the parent notification thing that really got me

My impression of his view was from his interview and the way he talked about it concerned me. If he was saying all that to appeal to the Tenn. base then that's another story.

Yes, I would vote for him with no problem. One issue voters make me insane.

[bluestateguy]

3. He had to be elected first.

So to say that he inherited the seat is a little unfair. It was not his father's seat to give him. Only the voters can give him the seat.

As for badgering Kerry to apologize, yes that was a disappointment, but dozens of other Democrats piled on as well, so Ford should not be singled out. In Tennessee you have to say certain things to get elected.

[ecstatic]

4. 36 year old kid?

Gee, Bush sure has set the bar pretty high on what's considered an adult these days?

[dorktv]

10. Tell me about it. I am 27 and I still get told I am a baby.

[NNguyenMD]

15. I guess I was inferring that he's a relative political novice when compared to

a 3 (soon to be 4) term senator like Kerry. And that he failed, or chose not to, understand that Kerry was making a stupid joke, not berating the troops.

I thought it was very inappropriate for young wannabe-senator Ford to ask of anything from a decorated statesman like Kerry.

[dorktv]

44. Well even I think what Kerry said was stupid. Read the joke, the joke was

funny!

[Pithlet]

51. This 34 year old appreciated it.

:)

[SharonAnn]

53. He's more experienced than Corker. Plus National Security knowledge.

Way more experienced than Corker.

[SharonAnn]

29. JFK was a young senator. Just sayin'.

[NNguyenMD]

32. haha well...

no offense to TN Dems, I am young myself but Rep. Ford is no JFK.

He only wishes...

[otohara]

67. 36 is the new 26

many of today's men are ten years behind in the growing up process.

He concerns me also, he's too pretty, too cocky and is he really that religious? I have this feeling he's using the religious thing to win votes, just like the fake Christian in the White House did. When he spouted off about Kerry, what little enthusiasm I had for him, plummeted.

[partylessinOhio]

5. We need Democrat Ford in the Senate. He makes me uneasy too but

we need to gain control of both the House and the Senate then the White House.

[NNguyenMD]

6. agreed...I just hope in time Sen. Ford doesn't pull some "Joementum" crap

over our heads.

[applegrove]

7. Good grief. He is running in an election. Kerry wasn't all that clear.

[never_get_over_it]

70. Kerry was perfectly clear

as was the manufactured outrage at what Kerry supposedly said - NOBODY with an ounce of intellectual honesty could have thought that Kerry was calling the troops stupid and therefore Harold Ford and all the other Dems who demanded Kerry apologize are a bunch of pathetic ass holes who went along with the Tony SNOW job on Kerry....

and not only are they pathetic ass holes they are pathetically STUPID - the Dems had a PERFECT opportunity to address the Kerry issue by saying it is unfortunate that Senator Kerry messed up the punch line of his joke - but not nearly as unfortunate as how much the idiot in chief has messed up Iraq and then gone to town ripping the current admin a new one

but its so much easier to stab John Kerry in the back way to go Harold, Hillary, Barack and all the other weak kneed Dems - hec of a job....

and for the record I haven't actually been one of John Kerry's biggest fans - so don't think I'm one of those John Kerry no matter what defenders because I'm not even close to that....

[volstork]

8. I grew up in surburban Memphis

and always equated the Fords with crooked politics, BUT-- I am a yellow dog, and believe a pug majority in the Senate is MUCH worse h
than anything Ford could cook up. He got my vote.

[NNguyenMD]

11. and I'm glad you will vote for him

[mrreowwr_kittty]

9. I'm sick of his line about liking "girls and football"

Hey Harold, guess what? Women are people, not hobbies. :grr:

[ecstatic]

12. I agree with you there... the "girls" line definitely has to go

I cringed when I heard him say that.

[billbuckhead]

13. Harold Ford has a better chance of being president than John Kerry

even if he loses on Tuesday. Furthermore, if we can start getting black DINO's/blue-blackdogs elected in the south, it spells the end of Lee Atwater's southern strategy. Once the racial firewall collapses, we can have candidates actually having progressive positions in Dixie. One step at a time.

[Hippo_Tron]

49. You have a good point about the racial firewell

But I think that Harold Ford's only chance at the presidency is if he is selected as VP or he moderates his views on school prayer, gay rights, etc. Al Gore certainly did this in his 8 years as VP and perhaps Ford would do the same.

[DefenseLawyer]

14. Seems like a smart move to me.

In a tight race in red state, the Republicans suddenly get handed this gift of a gaffe from Kerry, it was smart for Ford to keep that from becoming an issue in his campaign. He doesn't have the luxury of trying to defend Kerry in the last week of the campaign when doing so will only lose him votes. That's politics. I think any campaign in his spot would have done the same thing.

[blm]

23. I understand, and don't begrudge it one bit from Ford - I do begrudge it

from Hillary.

Many Democrats defended Bill Clinton for YEARS for dropping his pants, yet Hillary Clinton condems Kerry for dropping a PRONOUN?

[DefenseLawyer]

25. That, my friend, is blind ambition

And doesn't seem a bit out of character for her. Or Bill for that matter.

[blm]

27. Well, then she'll have the opportunity to display it on stage with Kerry throughout

the series of debates. I'm sure blind ambition will be an enormous asset there when she's standing next him.

[DefenseLawyer]

33. It's moves like that

that will keep her from ever making it to that stage. Unlike Bill, who had GHWB's Iraq War approval ratings keep all the strong candidate out of the 92 race, she will have to gain traction against a tough field of legit candidates, not Jerry Brown and Paul Tsongas, may he rest in peace.

[blm]

36. Ironic, since Clinton was ABLE to win thanks to the efforts of a Dem congress

who kept pounding at Bush1 throughout his term. Kerry uncovered IranContra and BCCI which kept bad headlines out there for Bush's entire four years, even with the Iraq war approval, and then Henry Gonzalez started pounding Bush with Iraqgate. Those headlines helped break the trust factor. Pat Buchanan did the rest.


Then when Kerry was running he had to face a president lifted into a heroic figure, protected by the presscorps, and with the LAST Dem president publically supporting Bush on major policy decisions throughout that time.


And still he won. BushInc had to work overtime to suppress votes, purge voter rolls and rig machines all over the country to stay in power.

[DefenseLawyer]

38. All true.

Although in my opinion Ross Perot has to get most of the credit for Clinton's victory in the general election.

[blm]

42. Point being that Clinton didn't take the country by storm as some to seem to

recollect though he was a very good speaker.

People think that is what it takes - but at what cost? Why have a charming competent who will also continue the coverups of BushInc? We need a Dem presidency driven by someone who believes in Open Government and will open the books on BushInc.

I believe a Hillary presidency would coverup for Bush2 just the same way Bill's covered up for Bush1. And I think that would be the worst thing that could happen to this country. If Bill hadn't closed books for Poppy Bush, and had pursued the outstanding matters in IranContra and BCCI, there would have been NO Bush allowed near the White House ever again, and certainly a 9-11 event would have never occurred.

[blm]

43. Robert Parry - Hey Democrats, Truth Matters.

http://www.consortiumnews.com/2006/051006.html

Hey, Democrats, the Truth Matters!
By Robert Parry
May 11, 2006

My book, Secrecy & Privilege, opens with a scene in spring 1994 when a guest at a White House social event asks Bill Clinton why his administration didn’t pursue unresolved scandals from the Reagan-Bush era, such as the Iraqgate secret support for Saddam Hussein’s government and clandestine arms shipments to Iran.

Clinton responds to the questions from the guest, documentary filmmaker Stuart Sender, by saying, in effect, that those historical questions had to take a back seat to Clinton’s domestic agenda and his desire for greater bipartisanship with the Republicans.

Clinton “didn’t feel that it was a good idea to pursue these investigations because he was going to have to work with these people,” Sender told me in an interview. “He was going to try to work with these guys, compromise, build working relationships.”

Clinton’s relatively low regard for the value of truth and accountability is relevant again today because other centrist Democrats are urging their party to give George W. Bush’s administration a similar pass if the Democrats win one or both houses of Congress.

Reporting about a booklet issued by the Progressive Policy Institute, a think tank of the Democratic Leadership Council, the Washington Post wrote, “these centrist Democrats … warned against calls to launch investigations into past administration decisions if Democrats gain control of the House or Senate in the November elections.”

These Democrats also called on the party to reject its “non-interventionist left” wing, which opposed the Iraq War and which wants Bush held accountable for the deceptions that surrounded it.

“Many of us are disturbed by the calls for investigations or even impeachment as the defining vision for our party for what we would do if we get back into office,” said pollster Jeremy Rosner, calling such an approach backward-looking.

Yet, before Democrats endorse the DLC’s don’t-look-back advice, they might want to examine the consequences of Clinton’s decision in 1993-94 to help the Republicans sweep the Reagan-Bush scandals under the rug. Most of what Clinton hoped for – bipartisanship and support for his domestic policies – never materialized.

‘Politicized’ CIA

After winning Election 1992, Clinton also rebuffed appeals from members of the U.S. intelligence community to reverse the Reagan-Bush “politicization” of the CIA’s analytical division by rebuilding the ethos of objective analysis even when it goes against a President’s desires.

Instead, in another accommodating gesture, Clinton gave the CIA director’s job to right-wing Democrat, James Woolsey, who had close ties to the Reagan-Bush administration and especially to its neoconservatives.

One senior Democrat told me Clinton picked Woolsey as a reward to the neocon-leaning editors of the New Republic for backing Clinton in Election 1992.

“I told that the New Republic hadn’t brought them enough votes to win a single precinct,” the senior Democrat said. “But they kept saying that they owed this to the editors of the New Republic.”

During his tenure at the CIA, Woolsey did next to nothing to address the CIA’s “politicization” issue, intelligence analysts said. Woolsey also never gained Clinton’s confidence and – after several CIA scandals – was out of the job by January 1995.

At the time of that White House chat with Stuart Sender, Clinton thought that his see-no-evil approach toward the Reagan-Bush era would give him an edge in fulfilling his campaign promise to “focus like a laser beam” on the economy.

He was taking on other major domestic challenges, too, like cutting the federal deficit and pushing a national health insurance plan developed by First Lady Hillary Clinton.

So for Clinton, learning the truth about controversial deals between the Reagan-Bush crowd and the autocratic governments of Iraq and Iran just wasn’t on the White House radar screen. Clinton also wanted to grant President George H.W. Bush a gracious exit.

“I wanted the country to be more united, not more divided,” Clinton explained in his 2004 memoir, My Life. “President Bush had given decades of service to our country, and I thought we should allow him to retire in peace, leaving the (Iran-Contra) matter between him and his conscience.”

Unexpected Results

Clinton’s generosity to George H.W. Bush and the Republicans, of course, didn’t turn out as he had hoped. Instead of bipartisanship and reciprocity, he was confronted with eight years of unrelenting GOP hostility, attacks on both his programs and his personal reputation.

Later, as tensions grew in the Middle East, the American people and even U.S. policymakers were flying partially blind, denied anything close to the full truth about the history of clandestine relationships between the Reagan-Bush team and hostile nations in the Middle East.

Clinton’s failure to expose that real history also led indirectly to the restoration of Bush Family control of the White House in 2001. Despite George W. Bush’s inexperience as a national leader, he drew support from many Americans who remembered his father’s presidency fondly.

>>>>>>>

[Laelth]

63. Excellent argument.

I had never seen that before. Thanks for posting it.

:dem:

-Laelth

[Hippo_Tron]

50. Saying "I don't give a shit about what Kerry says I'm focused on Tennessee..."

Would've been a smarter move because it would've distanced him from Kerry without putting Kerry in an awkward position. He should've done the same thing when asked about the Lieberman race, IMO.

[WilliamPitt]

17. Someday, when the world is sprinkled with magic dust,

we will get all the candidates we want, exactly how we want them, perfect and pure in every way.

Until then, we need 51 seats to put good, strong, senior Democrats in charge of the committees that have subpoena power and conduct critical oversight. That means swallowing conservative Southern and Western Democrats from time to time.

So...ideological purity or checks and balances in government?

No-brainer for me.

[NNguyenMD]

19. its more than that though, This guy could easily be another Joe Lieberman

Someone to keep the chair warm, but who's support you can't always count on.

[WilliamPitt]

20. I don't care

He has a (D) after his name, which means we get the committees if he wins with six other candidates.

The country and the world cannot even begin to afford hemming and hawing about shit like this right now. We just can't.

Can we please...PLEASE...just win. 2000, 2002, 2004 and now 2006.

Just win. We will deal with the rest of it in January, when Nancy Pelosi is standing behind Bush at the SOTU, and when there are more Democrats than Republicans in the room.

[DefenseLawyer]

21. As long as he caucuses with the Democrats

and helps to give us a majority I don't care if he votes with the republicans every time. Having the majority, and the committee chairs and controlling the agenda is far more important that any individual senator's votes. I'll take a conservative Democrat over a "liberal" republican every time.

[AtomicKitten]

30. as long as it is magic fairy dust

... count me in for the long haul.

[SharonAnn]

31. Friend of mine says "ideological purity always leads through a death camp."

"Ideological purity always leads through a death camp."

Yes, the minute someone is less than what we consider perfect, we throw them overboard. When actually, the richest, best, most democratic society is one full of people with varieties of views, experiences, and ideologies.

It's messy that way, but it's good.

[longship]

18. If Ford concerns you, Corker ought to frighten the Hell out of you.

Enough said?

[blm]

55. AMEN, longship.

Even I overlooked Ford's gaffe - I think he handled it better than most.

[QC]

22. I would love it if Bernie Sanders could be elected Tenn's senator.

But, in the real world in which we are stuck, Ford is the only kind of Democrat who can get elected there. Sucks, but there it is.

I live in the Florida panhandle, one of the most conservative places in the country. My congressman is a DINO who has had his head up Bush's crack for five years. I'm no fan of Alan Boyd's, but when the leadership elections come around, he does vote for our side. If we had a Republican rep here, he or she would be voting for the goosesteppers to run the House. So, this Tuesday, I will vote for Boyd, not with joy in my heart but knowing that he does help push us toward a majority.

[deacon]

26. In the state he is running in- i don't think he could have said anything

else.

[talk hard]

34. whatever it takes for a democratic majority

quit whining

[NNguyenMD]

35. when the Sen from TN starts threatening to cross party lines in a

51 (D), 49 (R) Senate, because he's not happy with the lowly committee seat he's stuck with. There will be a whole lot more people whining.

I guess I should just say it straight out, I just don't plain trust the guy.

In 2008 we'd better pick up some more seats because the (D) after Sen. Ford's name could very well switch over to an (R).

[DefenseLawyer]

37. Your choice isn't between him and someone more liberal

it is between him and a REPUBLICAN, who will be guaranteed to vote republican (duh) and also vote to put fellow republicans in charge. The only people who will be whining are people that don't live in political reality.

[AtomicKitten]

39. excellent point

thanks

[Laelth]

64. Ben Campbell?

Could be ... but I doubt it.

-Laelth

[JI7]

40. leave Ford alone for now, he told Kerry before he publicly demanded the apology

he comes from a right wing state. i disagree with what he did. but he himself is a victim of the right wing attack machine with those racist ads against him.

i know Ford did not enjoy doing that but it's Tennessee. he needs some very conservative votes if he is to win. and it's very important that he win.

[Clark2008]

41. Sadly, he's going to lose anyway, saddling me with another

rubber-stamping, rich-only Republican who won't represent even a small percentage of my interests.

I'm very sad, inside, tonight. I had such high hopes for my state. Ford may not be a staunch liberal, but he is so very much better for me, for my family and for the state of Tennessee than that millionaire ass who uses his powerful position to fill his pocketbook.

:cry:

Please remember when you bitch about Ford, that there are actually some real people on this board - real people from Tennessee - who wanted a real change and are set to be stuck for another six years with no representation, no change at seeing our state progress and no hope.

Ford was our chance. He may not be 100 percent liberal, but he is so much more so than this shit we're about to be strapped with.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

62. I Ignore It....

These people have never lived in the south and have no idea what it takes for a Democrat to be elected in the South...

Maybe they should stop to think that there's a reason why out of twenty six senate seats in the south only six are occupied by Democrats and four of those Democrats are to the right of their party...

[wakemeupwhenitsover]

45. I'm not sure why you're bringing this up

now. Why don't you wait until Wednesday? Why don't you wait & see if Ford wins or not? Here's the choice: vote for Ford & get a Dem and worry later if he switches or vote for cooker, already an r. And watch cooker do absolutely nothing for us. Doesn't seem like a choice to me.

[NNguyenMD]

46. Wanted to see if anyone else shared the same feelings about him...

but as I said in the first post, I support his candidacy as I support all Dem candidates.

I'll further add that a vote for him is a vote for a Dem majority, and thats what all of us are truly voting for on Wednesday, regardless of the areas we may disagree with the candidates.

I trust the Dem leadership, and as other posters have mentioned, I wholehearedly agree that we need them in the committee chairmanships and to set the agenda.

[Clinton Crusader]

48. ALL that concerns me right now is that he WIN n/t

[mdmc]

54. Well, here in NYS, we should be concerned on how

Spitz and Hill can coattail us some congress seats (Reynolds, Sweeney, Kelly).

I could care less about some rat worm dem... I am sure he is much better then the neo-con that the GOP is runnin against him.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

60. Whatever

At 36 Christ was already dead three years and Fidel was president of Cuba for three years as well...

[Gabi Hayes]

66. and Ford was a soon-to-be-forgotten also-ran

so much for him

Tennessee is still mired in Jim Crowland, as is much of the south

when is this going to change?

ask Cynthia McKinney

[AZBlue]

72. He inherited nothing, he won fair and square. Also, you judge others on one

action or statement only? Must be great to be the only perfect person in the world. Great and lonely too.