The Week That Was

A week ago yesterday, the tectonic plates beneath the political landscape in North Carolina shifted dramatically - and irreversibly. Our regular readers will be forgiven if they took the changes in stride, but make no mistake: we are living in a different political world than the one we lived in eight days ago when Jim Neal spent an hour live-blogging here at BlueNC.

The aftershocks have been profound and far reaching. From the DSCC to the NCDP, from the mainstream media to the mainstream blogosphere, the deck has been reshuffled and all bets are off.

Here in North Carolina, the introspection has been fascinating to watch. Ted Vaden at the News and Observer has this to say about how his newspaper covered the story. (He didn't mention that his ace political reporter got our name wrong, and still hasn't corrected it.)

Neal's candidacy as a gay man is as significant -- because of its uniqueness -- as the election last week of the nation's first Indian-American as governor, in Louisiana. The N&O didn't "out" Neal. He made it public himself. And it didn't glorify his lifestyle by putting the story on the front page. The man is running for the U.S. Senate. He is openly gay. That's a story.

The interesting story now is the fallout. The discovery that their only candidate is gay reportedly has Democrats scurrying for alternatives, and at least one candidate who had passed on the race, Sen. Kay Hagan of Greensboro, was taking another look. Maybe that tells us something about how much North Carolina has grown up as a state.

A deeper analysis was delivered today by Paul O'Connor at the Winston-Salem Journal. I agree with Paul's take on the issues almost completely. His closing paragraphs nail the central point nicely.

Finally, and maybe most potentially damaging for the Democrats, is the question of what happens in the state’s gay community if the Democratic Party does enlist a high-profile, or at least a medium-profile, straight candidate to seek the nomination? Will this infuriate gay activists? Will they see this as a slight to their participation and loyalty to the party? My guess is that they would.

At first glance, Neal’s orientation would appear to be the lock for Dole should they face each other in the general election. But it raises many questions, and the election is still a year away. Don’t count on anything.

I've spoken with many progressive Democrats over the past week and there is remarkable unanimity in their views. Progressives are sick and tired of being used by the mainstream Democratic Party. It doesn't matter whether they're gay or straight, many have that uneasy feeling that the Democratic leadership wants progressive votes and progressive money - but not progressive voices. They think we'll sit still and take it while they continue to bungle on the parliamentarian front, as well as on the policy front. They think we'll fold our hands and accept their milquetoast efforts to end the war in Iraq, and still help fill their campaign coffers. They think we'll tolerate their back-room deals without a whimper of protest.

They are wrong.

Comments

Vaden got it wrong

It tells us how little North Carolina has grown up....and it won't just be gay activists getting pissed off. I don't consider myself a gay activist....maybe more of a sympathizer....I'm not happy. There are many more out there like me who simply want our party and its groups and organizations to act with a sense of decency.

The DSCC has had a long time to recruit someone to run and they should have cast a wider net to begin with. Make the same offer to everyone who indicates an interest and then sit back and let them duke it out in the primary.

Robin Hayes lied. Nobody died, but thousands of folks lost their jobs.



***************************
Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.

I was giving him the benefit of the doubt

thinking that "we'd see" how much North Carolina has grown up. Otherwise, you took the words right out of my mouth.

More than wrong! Stupid and Dumb and Republican?

Progressives are sick and tired of being used by the mainstream Democratic Party. It doesn't matter whether they're gay or straight, many have that uneasy feeling that the Democratic leadership wants progressive votes and progressive money - but not progressive voices. They think we'll sit still and take it while they continue to bungle on the parliamentarian front, as well as on the policy front. They think we'll fold our hands and accept their milquetoast efforts to end the war in Iraq, and still help fill their campaign coffers. They think we'll tolerate their back-room deals without a whimper of protest.

They are wrong.* A

Right on! I am backing Neal period. The Democrat neo-con establishment in this state hates losing his power when they can't control the election process and ends up promoting Republican neo-con establishment causes and candiates.

Give Neal credit, he step up to the plate when everybody else was heading for the showers when the Democrat establishment coach said the game was over.....

The past few years

Has seen the beginnings of a realignment in this state. The established powers hold a lot of sway in this state right now, but there are some serious efforts to change that. Jerry Meek was elected party chair because actual activists were annoyed at the power structure. Some of our pick ups in the state house and senate came from hard working challengers fueled by their own passion and not by the power structure in Raleigh.

I really believe that our US Senate race and our Lt Gov race (if not a few more) will be a chance for people to demand change in how things work in this state. We might as well show them that not only can we win a primary, but we can win a general too, and damn the torpedos.

"Keep the Faith"

"Keep the Faith"

The Democratic leadership had best begin the process of

understanding the advocacy of we progressive minded voters is turning inward towards local candidates and issues because they, the leadership, will not move forward on the national issues that affect all of us. We are not giving our time and money to the DSCC, DCCC, DNC or any of their national offshoots. We are backing our local progressive candidates with our money, our time, our efforts and our hope that as these candidates are elected and sent to Washington DC, they will be the change that is needed to overcome the lack of effort that is now put into national issues. They need to begin to understand that the direction we have taken is one that will not only change the national debate, one district at a time, but in the end will change the leadership one position at a time.

For whatever reason, they don't seem to think this could happen to them. They don't seem to understand that there is a revolution coming and they are not going to be invited to the party if they don't get with the program.

North Carolina. Turning the South Blue!

North Carolina. Turning the South Blue!

The people who are scared of Jim Neal's candidacy

are the same people who defended Jim Black to the bitter end. They have no problem making excuses for corrupt officials who raise lots of money but are willing to throw a competent, intelligent and articulate candidate overboard because of his personal life. We have a serious case of misplaced values when rampant corruption is considered less of a political liability than a person being honest, with himself and the public, about who he is.

Before I get all riled up ...

... by "people" as in ..

... same people who defended Jim Black to the bitter end

are you refering to NCDP leadership in Raleigh or posters at BlueNC?

Person County Democrats

I actively oppose gerrymandering. Do you?

Anyone would be pretty hard-pressed to find pro-Black

comments on this blog. He was very unpopular.

One of the pitfalls of childhood is that one doesn't have to understand something to feel it. - Carlos Ruiz Zafon

Jesus Swept ticked me off. Too short. I loved the characters and then POOF it was over.
-me

Easy with the allegations folks...

The powers that be have been recruiting better known and better qualified candidates than Jim Neal before he was in the race, before he was "outed", and now after. It is not as if he has been abandoned. He was never supported before or after he said he was gay. If I remember correctly, it was one of the more prominent members of this community who said, in response to his announcement, "I'm not sure if I'm ready to support someone just because he's a "warm body" yet" during Grier Martin's deliberations.

Last year in Illinois, Tammy Duckworth won a bitter primary against a more progressive opponent. The fractures that appeared in that fight did not magically disappear after the primary and were a big reason behind her loss in the general election. Let's not bring this mess down here. Defeating Liddy Dole is too important.

With that said:

1) The NCDP, DNC, and DSCC have not done anything to hurt Jim Neal. They have not given anything other than words of encouragement to Martin, Miller, Easley, Moore, Hagan, or anyone else.
2) Accusing any of these groups and especially Kay Hagan of homophobia in any shape is WAY off base. All of these groups are trying to send the best candidate possible to go up against Dole, including the good people of NCBlue. Making these baseless allegations only serves to further divide our party and the progressive movement.
3) The NCDP obviously respects the progressive wing of the party. Doesn't anyone remember the leadership battle in 2005? Didn't I see Jerimee all over the infamous liveblog with Jim Neal? Isn't he a paid staff member of the NCDP?

The race is the same today as it was two weeks ago. I think that's the way Jim Neal would like to see it too. Sure, now we know he's gay. So what? He's still the same candidate and he's still running the same campaign. It is worth noting too that Hagan was, by her own admission, reconsidering a Senate run for weeks now and Neal's "outing" had nothing to do with her choice to stick her toes in the water this week. Hagan has served NC for many years now and I think she deserves to be taken at her word. The same goes for the party who has invested millions of dollars in this state and improving it's political infrastructure to help us, the grassroots, make a difference.

Tammy Duckworth

Last year in Illinois, Tammy Duckworth won a bitter primary against a more progressive opponent. The fractures that appeared in that fight did not magically disappear after the primary and were a big reason behind her loss in the general election.

As I recall, those fractures were mainly the result of Major Duckworth being recruited in Washington with no input from the local Democratic party. Her military service should have given her a huge advantage but it didn't for that reason. I do agree that we don't need to bring this mess down here.

I , for one, certainly wasn't accusing Kay Hagan

of homophobia. She's a terrific state senator.

I'd love to see her become a US congressman. She passed on the Dole gig. Now DSCC is recruiting her. They've got every right to do that, but damn. They do it after someone comes forward? They couldn't convince her before? I mean, she said no before. We've all seen the clip. We've all read the news stories.

And, she's in a US congressional district that sorely needs a strong democrat to whip the incumbent's ass. What's up with that?

I'm supporting Jim Neal in the primary because he came here, to my community, first, and asked for our support. Because he came here, and made damn good sense as to why he'd be a good senator.

I'm not supporting Kay Hagan, because in my opinion, she ought to be running against Howdie Doodie Coble, not the Empty Wig.

And it doesn't have a thing to do with anyone's sexual orientation. Not even Coble's.

:)


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

All great reasons for supporting a good candidate

Party elders recruited Hagan before anyone, Neal included, was running. She was putting out feelers for this race even before Rep. Miller backed out.

But to be fair, I think the overwhelming support for Grier Martin discouraged her from running. Now that Martin is out of the race, the dynamics are completely different. But I see your point :)

Sorry...

but the comments in insider circles have been both ugly and homophobic--a gay candidate will be an unmitigated disaster, Neal will bring down the whole ticket, etc., etc. The same rhetoric surrounded Harvey Gantt's candidacies. None of it proved true, but Gantt was forced to raise most of his money out of state because the establishment shunned him, but they weren't racist.

Jim Neal looks a lot like the candidates that North Carolinians usually support--fiscally conservative, socially progressive, a proven ability to raise money, smart and articulate--a white guy, no less. With a profile like his, the committees would normally have suspended their candidate search and reached out to him to find out more about him. But there were no phone calls, no emails. Nothing. They already knew who Jim Neal was--he's well known in national fundraising circles--and, in their minds, he is unelectable for one reason--he's gay. So, they showed up here looking for another candidate, making the same promises they always make, offering financial support, a team of consultants, DC fundraisers, etc.

I certainly don't think Kay Hagen is homophobic. I think she got back in because a lot of powerful people told her they would make it easy for her, which is the wrong reason to run for U. S. Senate.

why would the DSCC support Hagan over Neal

Lets see

1. Hagan has held office, defeated an Incmbent state Senator to get there and has become a power broker in Raleigh. Neal has never run.

2. Hagan's unlce was former US Senator Lawton Chiles, who himself was a very good fundraiser and allows her to tap into a money pool few can, not to mention right or wrong the DSCC is full of nepotism. Jim Neal, honestly until I heard about him bieng gay I had never heard of him.

3. She is female, if she is the nominee there is a ge\reat possibilty the Presidentatial, Gubenatorial and Senatorial nominees will be female, that would be interesting.

Finally I was with the Easley for Senate campaing in 1990 and yes some subltle and not so subtle charges of racism were lobbed at us. The fact that Gov Easley had a law degree from NC Central seemed not to matter to those throwing the charges, the fact that using being the mayor of Charlotte has been a loser position to seek state office from, didn't matter. All that seemed to matter is those throwing the accusations saw that anyone for any reason who would oppose them was a raccist. And now it seems anyone opposing Neal is simply a homophobe, I wonder if these are the same folks.

MODERATE...now you're just making shit up

And now it seems anyone opposing Neal is simply a homophobe, I wonder if these are the same folks.

You need to read comments instead of making stuff up and putting words in our mouths. I lobbed that at Shumer and Shumer only....he's a big boy and a major asshat...I think he can take being called a name or two, but to stretch that one example into your comment above is simply lying.

Robin Hayes lied. Nobody died, but thousands of folks lost their jobs.



***************************
Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.

oh come on.

And now it seems anyone opposing Neal is simply a homophobe, I wonder if these are the same folks.

Who the hell said that?

I don't think you're "moderate". I think you're full of shit.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Let's cool it with the homophobia allegations

I simply said that we should all watch what we say in order to prevent a situation like 1990 or Tammy Duckworth from happening again. Yes, Duckworth was the favorite of DC insiders against a candidate with better progressive grassroots support. But when she won the primary, the activists on the left were bitter and never got behind her campaign, ultimately bringing down her campaign in an otherwise stellar year for Democrats.

I just don't want to see that mess in North Carolina. So let's all think about the effect of our words before we lob allegations. It will take all of us to defeat Dole and we can't do that if we tear each other apart like some other primary candidates I can think of.

Now, I'm just going to get right down to it. Kay Hagan is a much better qualified candidate on paper, in "real" life, and in raw political terms. She has a lifetime of service to North Carolina and has good Democratic credentials. In terms of electability she's solid. She has lots of money and access to much more given her position as one of the chief check-writers in the legislature. She's also a VERY good candidate. I used to live in her district and have spent a good deal of time with her. Anyone who underestimates Kay Hagan does so at their own risk.

Also, what's this us against them talk with Jim Neal? Like I said before, I like the guy and might support him. But let's take a step back. Neal is a big-money Democratic Party bundler. One of the guys who court big business and help them buy politicians. He was for John Kerry, Wes Clark, and Erskine Bowles what the Pioneers were for Bush. Remember them? The only folks who got the invite to the VP's energy task force meeting?

Now look, I think raising money for political campaigns is a fine thing to do, but let's be real here. Jim Neal is not Mr. Smith goes to Washington.

That's nonsense

There are 6 openly gay elected officials in North Carolina alone. There are over 500 out homosexual politicians in America... elected in all but six states. Nearly all of them are Democrats. The Democratic party is the home of homosexual activists and politicians. To say that the powers that be are anti-gay or against gays running for office is ridiculous.

the comments in insider circles have been both ugly and homophobic

And where are you hearing all this "insider" homophobic ranting? From whom?

there were no phone calls, no emails. Nothing

.
Did Jim Neal call the NCDP? The DNC? The DSCC? Why wait for a call? Why not ask for the party's support? And how do you know that Neal didn't get any calls or e-mails?

I do agree with your take on why Hagan is running. But I don't think that's a bad reason. Democrats in North Carolina are asking her to run, what better reason to run is there? No one is saying that this will be easy for her or anyone. Taking down Dole is going to be brutal and expensive and anyone who's ever been involved in a challenger campaign against a powerful incumbent knows this.

On the Gannt issue, I hate to bring this up because I love the man with all of my heart, but he lost, twice. The naysayers were right. The rhetoric was true. A black man couldn't win in North Carolina back then. I only hope a gay man can win in NC now. Also, the "insiders" shunning Gannt is garbage. He was nominated not once, but twice and is still a power player in NC Dem politics.

I've talked with the Neal campaign about this

Sadly, the comments are true.

As to your other questions: Yes. Jim Neal has called or visited every organization you're asking about.

Just to be clear, I don't work for Jim Neal or any other campaign. I'm just a blogger who talked with him after Grier Martin declined to run - and then got enthusiastic about supporting him.

And at the risk of being too blunt, this statement you made is either extraordinarily naive (I hope) or intentionally misrepresents the hard reality of politics in North Carolina. In either case, it is simply not true.

To say that the powers that be are anti-gay or against gays running for office is ridiculous.

Good to know he's out there working the powers that be

I can see how you might interpret my comments as naive. I don't claim that North Carolina politics is some bastion of egalitarian progressive sentiment. But I don't think that the "party insiders" are recruiting Hagan just because Jim Neal is gay. For the third time, Hagan was recruited before Neal was "outed" and after.

So what's with millstone's comment about there being no calls and no love? I'm just confused as to what he wanted from the party? Hugs and kisses? Perhaps the leadership isn't supporting him because he's a political unknown with no record of public service to speak of. Perhaps it is because Jim Neal hasn't lived in North Carolina for more than 15 months out of the last three decades? Perhaps it is because he's a big money wealthy Chapel Hill liberal that won't appeal to the rest of the state?

the hard reality of politics in North Carolina.

I don't doubt that homophobia or at least the (valid) concern that electing an open homosexual would be a difficult task in this state is playing a part in many people's decision to look for other candidates. But people thought Jim Neal was a long shot before he was "outed". To act like everyone was lining up behind him before they found out his penchant for men is dishonest and will only serve to widen the divide in our party in our most important election year in recent memory. Thus; my repeated calls for a moratorium on the homophobia slur.

Just to be clear, I don't oppose Mr. Neal. There’s a good chance he may earn my vote. I'm simply trying to look at this man and his candidacy critically. I'm also asking everyone to cool it with the slurs and gossip.

If you know of someone in the NCDP leadership who has made any disparaging or homophobic remarks about Jim Neal, then you should “out” the bastard. We should not tolerate that kind of bigotry in our party. This community is about change right? So how about we step up and stand up for ourselves and our candidates. If not, then let’s let the gossip slide because it will hurt us in the long run.

Well said.

I will don my "outing" gear and get to work.

would that include

some sort of special hat?

Sure

Or perhaps I should have said "Sure-lock"

Ugh.

I am not sure what you accuse me of making up

but in most observations on paper Sen Hagan would be a better candidate than Neal would and that was before his sex life became an issue. My guess is many democrats feel that way, I also thought 18 years ago that Mike Easley was a superior candidate to Harvey Gantt, yes to the progressive activist an Easley victory may not had the same "feel good" quality a Gantt win would have had but Easley, who has never seemed to be much of a fan of the "progressive community" had a very good chance of winning that election, I thoght it then and I thought it now, and it was not about race, it was about the fact that being the mayor of Charlotte was a loser of a sring board position. I have no evidence that Gantt was part of this but the raccist allegation were thrown at us in the Easley campaign and many of them were not even sublte. And they began exactly the way this campaign did. It will be interesting to see if by the May Primary if the primary looks to be close and Sen Hagan's people are using the reaons I stated above as why she should be nominated, winning track record, the niece of a highly respected former Senator, will those who want Neal throw out the homophobe accusation, and Betsy where will you be when it happens.

hmph.

the niece of a highly respected former Senator

I'm the daughter of a highly respected attorney. That doesn't mean I know my way around a courtroom, pal.

And has Hagan said "yes" to DSCC yet, or again, is this all speculation and wanking?


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

wanking, for the most part

And let's remember that Hagan will not be saying yes to the DSCC. She will be saying yes to the people of North Carolina.

You're good, Isabelabadone

and persistent. Nice to have you around . . . hope you'll stick no matter what happens.

J

PS As one of the people of North Carolina, I want to clarify a small point. Among all the things Ms. Hagan might do, saying "yes" to me will not likely be among them. I haven't asked her for anything since I asked her not to cut taxes on the richest North Carolinians during the most recent legislative session.

(She said "no" to that request, by the way.)

I'm less worried about predicting the future than . . .

understanding the present state of affairs.

Two weeks ago, Kay Hagan clearly said she would not run for US Senate. If she does run, that will bring into question her integrity. It's not very complicated.

Can she overcome that issue? Of course she can. Sue Myrick lied to voters and said she would term limit herself out of office by now. So did Howard Coble and dozens of others. Most voters didn't care - but some of us do.

And if it comes to a primary between her

and someone I believe in, I'm going to make very sure that integrity is called into question.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

This seems a bit harsh

that will bring into question her integrity

The conditions changed (Martin said no) due to circumstances beyond her control, and she isn't allowed to react to the new reality? Come on. That's rather rigid thinking, don't ya think? Certainly not worthy of making her integrity an "issue" over.

Person County Democrats

I actively oppose gerrymandering. Do you?

I'm old fashioned in this regard

Sure conditions changed. That's what conditions always do. Nothing is ever the same one day to the next. Ever.

But in the final analysis, all we have is our word. I really believe that, which is the reason I spend so much time cleaning up my many messes.

We all make mistakes. We all say and do stuff we don't mean. The measure of success is in how gracefully and honestly we recover and set things straight. That's why I invited Senator Hagan to join us here, whether she decides to run or not. We the pesky people deserve straight answers.

Flipper Hayes changed his mind on CAFTA a couple of years ago. I suppose he would say conditions changed too. But the truth is, he lied about what happened and why. That's not acceptable to me.

Ok, but if I recall correctly Hayes

stated that he would vote aginst CAFTA and then caved when it came time to vote. I am not sure what conditions changed.

Flipper Hayes changed his mind on CAFTA a couple of years ago. I suppose he would say conditions changed too. But the truth is, he lied about what happened and why.

Are implying that Hagan's (probable) decision to run is in the same league as Hayes' flip-flop? Would seem to be apples and oranges to me.

If Hagan's initial declining to run included some sort of statement to the effect that she wouldn't run under any circunstances, then you would have a valid point, but I don't recall that being the case. But then I didn't read any first hand accounts of her statement from that time.

Person County Democrats

I actively oppose gerrymandering. Do you?

Well said Anglico

She better have a good reason why the people of Guilford County, North Carolina will be better served by her running for Senate than serving her role as a legislator, as she used to believe. I look forward to seeing her here.

The people of Guilford County

(and Moore, Randolph, and parts of other counties) would be better served by her kicking Howdie Coble's warty old ass.

Yup. Same song, different verse. Little bit louder, little bit worse.

There are two relatively unknown people running for the NC 06 democratic nomination for 2008. Hagan could cake walk to that nomination, and have a guaranteed seat in the US House for however long she wanted it.

In my opinion, that would be the best use of her political capital.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Not integrity

I dont think anything has changed. Because I dont believe that Hagan said no because of Martin. Ultimately I believe that she said no because she is cautious. There is a level of political calculation that goes on in the state legislature that leads to decisions being made based upon polling and guesses about what people will support. The legislature has been a place of caution and calculation. Hagan is a product of that.

I dont believe her to be unprincipled, and I dont question her integrity. I will always question her agressiveness, and her ability to throw caution to the side in an effort to do something truly transformational.

Courage is a trait that is often overlooked in politics. Courage is why Jim Webb won in 06. Courage is why Paul Wellstone will be remembered as one of the great Senators of this country. Courage and not calculation is the only way we will win this race.

I would never question Kay Hagan's integrity.

"Keep the Faith"

"Keep the Faith"

Courage and polling are not mutually exclusive

Jim Webb and Paul Wellstone both polled extensively. They moderated and shifted their policies and rhetoric as they and their political advisers saw necessary. It's what politicians do. It's what anyone has to do if they want hope to have millions of people support them.

Kay Hagan does it, sure. But so will Jim Neal. Jim Neal has consultants telling him what to do and say the same as every other politician. I'm sure he will begin polling soon as well. At least, I hope he will if he wants to win.

Courage and polling are not mutually exclusive.

scuse me.

It just hit me that you were saying that Wellstone didn't show courage, he just reacted to polling.

Is that what you're saying? Really? I want to be clear on that before I respond to that.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Even the best of us bend a little now and then

I prefer not to speak in absolutes, so I did not say that he "just" reacted to polls or that he "didn't show courage".
Paul Wellstone was a good man and a great Senator. But he engaged in extensive polling and media strategy just like everyone else in politics (including Kay Hagan and Jim Neal).
Paul Wellstone made politically expedient decisions as well. After winning one of the biggest upsets of 1990, Paul Wellstone promised in no uncertain terms to limit himself to two terms. When his time was up, he went back on his word and ran for a third term.

Would you challenge Senator Wellstone's integrity?

Nope.

Mainly because he's not here to give us his reasons. Nice - pulling the dead guy card.

I simply want to hear Hagan's reasons for reconsidering this run, and for ignoring the potential cakewalk into the NC-06 congressional seat.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

and sometimes

you ignore polls. Wellstone's biggest issues were things that no one else card about. Single payer would still poll horribly, and he was talking about it throughout the late 90s. When no one cared about mental health parity he was talking about it and pushing it. He stood against all sorts of things such as Welfare Reform and the Iraq War because he had the courage to do so, in spite of the polls.

But hey, why let facts get in the way.

"Keep the Faith"

"Keep the Faith"

Wellstone was a great leader

No doubt. But you said that Kay Hagan didn't have the type of courage needed to make a difference, like Wellstone or Webb, because she uses polling and shifts her stances on issues. Paul Wellstone was courageous, sure. But he was also a politician. And politicians are, by their very nature, calculating. Do you think Jim Neal won't poll?

Wellsone going back on his promises is one example of the calculation of politicians. When you're always on the record, you're help to every proclimation and sometimes, circumstances change and you need to adapt. That's what happened with Wellstone and I think that's the case with Hagan. That doesn't take away from Sen. Wellstone's legacy as it should not count against Sen. Hagan. I think that's reasonable, right?

I don't think that Hagan has done anything worthy

of comparing her to Wellstone.

So, no, it's not reasonable.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

That's not what I asked

Who among us is comparable?

What I asked was that you hold Hagan and Wellstone up to the same standards. Why belittle her for something that all politicians, including the great ones like Wellstone, do?

Because some do it so they can be responsive to the people

others do it simply to get elected

Robin Hayes lied. Nobody died, but thousands of folks lost their jobs.



***************************
Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.

Same thing

It's two types of spin on the same concept, going back on your word. Also, both Hagan and Wellstone changed their positions specifically to get elected to office.

I was just speaking specifically to polling

and your question about belittling Hagan for doing it.....I have no idea what you're referring to.

Robin Hayes lied. Nobody died, but thousands of folks lost their jobs.



***************************
Vote Democratic! The ass you save may be your own.

lcloud questioned Sen Hagan's integrity

I brought up Paul Wellstone because A) someone mentioned him earlier and B) He is rightfully thought of as a man of utmost integrity. He engaged in polling. He flip-flopped when he saw it was necessary. He did the same thing Kay Hagan is thinking of doing. Would anyone judge Wellstone so harshly?

Different situations.

Totally different situations.

Wellstone was already in office; had already been elected. He saw that he had more work to do.

Hagan is not in office. I'd like to see the poll that she's paying attention to, and if it's being taken in NC or DC. And yes, I am questioning her integrity because she said she wasn't going to run, and then she said she would. Until she gives me a satisfactory answer as to why she changed her mind, I'm going to question that.


Be the change you wish to see in the world. --Gandhi

Pages