Reply #6: I think the above post is just asking you to say what you mean... [View All]

I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume you're talking about Joe Lieberman, and that you're saying that, just because Lieberman is progrssive on most things, his support for the war makes him unsupportable.

I think the above poster is correct in saying that you can't equate support for the war with racial apartheid. That said, I do see your point.

I disagree with the political purists who say a candidate must be entirely progressive. For starters, I think "political purity" is an oxymoron. There is nothing pure about politics. As for Joe, as long as he's not in a leadership position in the party or the senate, and his inclusion in the senate means a Democratic majority, I'm all for him.

Democratic control of the Senate is far more important than the personal politics of any individual member. Stopping the Bush agenda two years early in the election of 2006 means far, far more than re-electing one or two DINOs.