I watched Evan Bayh speak today at the hearings and like him for Veep

Well spoken

Eloquent

Intelligent

Telegenic

Presidential

Heartland

What's not right with him?

that could verify?

The people around here who are calling him a DINO are the very same people who'd vote for Nader at the drop of a hat.

If you want to know the truth about Bayh, you can always go to the Project Vote Smart web site. The fact that you have not already done so, however, gives me pause.

That's DINO.

Clinton, Gore, and Kerry are DLC.

...I support the work the DLC do and the work of the "Blue Dog Coalition" just dismissing the moderate wing of the party as "DINO" is just ridicules and illinformed... The DLC has been at the fore front of developing new and inventive polices for the party and has been behind some of our most impressive recent vicotires... and no the DLC did not condone Clinton's shift to the right after 1996, Al From was a leading critic of Clinton's shift... please be a little more tolerant... the Democratic Party is build on a belief in community and the fact that we owe a dept to more than just ourselves and the implementation of this basic, fundamental, principle is true from the likes of John Breaux and Ben Nelson on the right to Denis Kucinich and Hillary Clinton on the left... I think this diversity is good... i disagree with many liberals however i disagree with the republicans a whole lot more... please try and be a little more tolerant....

He's a moderate Democrat. There are a lot of Israel bashing conspiracy theorists around here who toss around the word "neocon" the same way Rush Limbaugh used to toss around the word "feminazi".

his father was.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/463ueeaa.asp


An Intelligent Democrat . . .
From the December 15, 2003 issue: on the Senate Intelligence Committee.
by Stephen F. Hayes
12/15/2003, Volume 009, Issue 14


A LEADING DEMOCRAT on the Senate Intelligence Committee has reiterated his support for the war in Iraq and encouraged the Bush administration to be more aggressive in its preemptive measures to protect Americans. Evan Bayh, a Democrat from Indiana and a leader of moderates in the Senate, responded to questions last week on the war in Iraq and a memo detailing links between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden sent to the committee in late October by Undersecretary of Defense Douglas J. Feith and later excerpted in these pages.

"Even if there's only a 10 percent chance that Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden would cooperate, the question is whether that's an acceptable level of risk," Bayh told me. "My answer to that would be an unequivocal 'no.' We need to be much more pro-active on eliminating threats before they're imminent."

Asked about the growing evidence of a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, Bayh said: "The relationship seemed to have its roots in mutual exploitation. Saddam Hussein used terrorism for his own ends, and Osama bin Laden used a nation-state for the things that only a nation-state can provide. Some of the intelligence is strong, and some of it is murky. But that's the nature of intelligence on a relationship like this--lots of it is going to be speculation and conjecture. Following 9/11, we await certainty at our peril."

The comments came days before several Democratic presidential candidates intensified their caustic attacks on the Bush administration's foreign and defense policies. Senator John
Kerry, in a speech last week to the Council on Foreign Relations, said that "the Bush administration has pursued the most arrogant, inept, reckless, and ideological foreign policy in modern history. . . . The global war on terrorism has actually been set back."

-more-

Noticed that wasn't on your list. Some people here say Kerry bores them to tears. If that's true, Bayh will put them in a coma.

How can he critcize Bush when he votes for everthing the guy proposes. And his anit-choice votes are disturbing.

but I wont make it a litmus test for the VP spot as I would for a SC Justice.

I kind of like his style. He would do very well on the international stage. Thats where we need a true ambassador. Our need to repair our standing on the world is our NUMBER 1 priority IMHO. I think he would be able to develop quality ties, especially with old europe.

But none of that will win any votes for the ticket. Euros won't be voting in this election, unfortunately.

How can Bayh criticize Bush? He has voted for all of his policies. And continues to support the Iraq war

...as far as the war goes....

then I've got the Veep for you!

I just dont want Kerry to be overshadowed.

...but Clark has a similar weakness in that he raised money for Bush and Co and was all for them only three years ago... now thats a pretty radical shift to where he stands now... at least Bayh can't be accused of flip flopping... Clark (however unjustly could)... Edwards would have to be the best pick...

Theresa Heinz Kerry was a registered Republican until a year ago.

Should we let her in the White House if Kerry wins?

...He is a moderate and thats good... but he can be at times very dull... but at other times he can frame argument in a clear and calm way, that can be very effective... but Edwards would be more effective in the Midwest is relatively moderate and has an appealing dash of souther populism that you gotta love :)

:puke:

he absolutely nailed Rummy.

But I think it was a show. He knew this would be extremely high profile, so he wanted to make the sale. Chi-ching, you got out your wallet.

my bad

for a democrat from INDIANA.

Otherwise, he's a bit to the right on many issues. Plus, I don't think he brings much else to the ticket - not much enthusiasm or excitement.

I also doubt he can bring Indiana to the dem column and much of an appeal in other midwestern states.

NT

and that is exactly why the Puke neocon asshole doesn't qualify.

If it wasn't for Lieberman's foul performance we would be talking about Bayh as the hands down scumbag of the day.

Feel the love:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x1549895#1550052

That way we will be rid once and for all of this anti-choice PPI imperialist DINO scum and we can get our own JK, Governor Joe Kernan, appoint a real Democrat to replace him.

Evan Bayh is the antithesis of everything his father, the legendary Birch Bayh, was and stood for.

...at least he has principles... your caricature bears no resemblance to reality... yeah he is a moderate (he really has to be) but he has been a loyal democrat and staunch support of our party... yeah he many be pro-life (so am i) but he has said that that is his PERSONAL belief not something that he would want to impose... and at least he's serious about the "war on terror" unlike Bush and Co...

That's what the law that Bayh signed as Governor required as part of the "counseling" for women seeking abortions.

Let Kerry pick Bayh as VP, and good riddance!

I'm gonna get pounded for this, but shouldn't women know the consequences of their actions? I could have sworn DUers were upset when the one broadcasting company wouldn't air the names of dead soldiers...

shouldn't women know the consequences of their actions?

That may be the case as far as some religions, but not all religions see it that way. Why should a Reform Jewish woman be forced to view pictures of aborted fetuses just because some fucken Xtian fundie wants to shove his/her idiotic religion down our throats?

In my view, abortion is a pretty radical step, just like a war. In a few cases, it can be the right course of action, but personally I think those cases are very few. I see it that way and don't apologize for it, and you can label me a "fundie" if you really can't come up with a decent argument. But for an action as serious as abortion, the consequences should be considered (which is the assertion I made, and the one you haven't addressed...). That hardly constitutes shoving religion down one's throat.

The US has gone to war before, and justly so. And it has gone to war again, and the President has tried to cover up the consequences by barring photography of coffins coming in. Many people are angry, rightfully so, that some in this country are trying so hard to keep away the dangerous truth. Is it not reasonable, then, to argue that the consequences be made known to a woman who considers abortion?

A woman's right to choose doesn't mean a woman's right to choose after she's been counseled. Granted I am all for providing counsel for women who WANT it.

Oh, like women don't know what's going to happen when they have an abortion? :eyes: Yes, let's be very patronizing and inform women about their lives, their bodies, their futures, because the silly little twits can't see the consequences of their actions.

Yes, you will be pounded for this. :)

I noticed earlier today that the conservatives (who are out of touch with America) like to hang out at the DU. You won't find anyone in real America supporting Bayh.

Charisma, he just doesn't have it... he is calm and eloquent when he speaks but not exciting like Edwards or Warner or Landrieu, or even Richardson and Gephardt...

He has loads of experience, he comes across as presidential and is from a GOP leaning state and has taken principled moderate stands while remain steadfastly loyal to the Democratic Party... he is a good man, but I am not sure he has the "pizazz" to be Kerry's VP, he just doesn't seem to address Kerry's weakness in that area...

No Thank You! Bayh is much too conservative.

critcize Chimpy?

Please point me to evidence that says I'm wrong.

his rating from planned parenthood is somewhere in the 80's.

snip.........

On September 23, 2002, Al Gore told an audience in San Francisco that plans for dealing with Iraq should be shelved because there's "no evidence" Saddam Hussein has given weapons of mass destruction to terrorists. Furthermore, said Gore, the preemption doctrine was just another effort by the administration "to please the portion of its base that occupies the far right." The very next day, on "Fox News," Bayh responded to Gore's assessment of the Iraq situation: "To wait until an attack is, quote, 'imminent'--well, our intelligence, as we found out, is not perfect, and we would run the risk of a real calamity. And that's why I think the case for moving forward now, before has the chance to disseminate , is compelling."

Nor does Bayh hold his tongue on the subject of Kim Jong Il, whom, he warns, may be "willing to export nuclear weapons materials to terror groups who target the American people." Such hawkishness is quite bold for a Democrat, especially one considered to be of presidential timber, because the party's base is dominated by antiwar activists. On top of this, Congressional Quarterly recently released a study on members' voting patterns since President Bush took office. It found that Bayh backed Bush 79 percent of the time, the eighth highest among Democrats.

MORE>..........

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/002/133ncnxw.asp

If he picked Bayh, I don't even think I could vote for Kerry.

I like Kerry because I admire what he did when he was younger, but he's been drifting rightward...

Our Governor Joe Kernan would pick a real Democrat to replace the puke Bayh.

Let Kerry pick Bayh!

Bayh will be less divisive than Gephardt!

We can do much better. This guy seems like a boring, semi-conservative Ken Doll.

... and wipe the laugh-spittle from my chin.

BAYH ?!?!? Those adjectives ?!?!

Oh my, you're confused ! Does the name Dan Quayle ring a bell ?

He is an empty headed, stuffed shirt, rich, pretty boy without an original thought in his brain, who is making a living off his daddy's name and an all-around establishment yes-man.

:puke: :puke: :puke:


:hippie: <- unfortunately, in Indiana ... where dear Evan didn't even bother to campaign for this year's primary.

He called Bush's Vanity War a "Noble enterprise"...


His pro-Iraq war banter is so...March 2003... that will probably be quoted extensively in Bush's campaign literature.

If he is selected VP, Nader will be right about there not being a difference between the parties.

Specifically on the assertion that torture is OK because no one apologized to us for 911?