The Democratic Majority Project Part 2 - Claire McCaskill
It's time to introduce a second practical progressive candidate who is aiming to tack back a GOP seat and add to the Democratic majority. Claire McCaskill is currently running for the Misourri Senate seat currently held by Jim Talent. Talent took the seat in 2002 from Jean Carnahan, wife of the late Gov. Mel Carnahan, thanks to money raised from 5 campaign trips by Dubya.
Talent has been a consistently backed the most hardline elements of his party. He voted against a resolution recognizing a woman's basic right to choose, voted to let the Energy Department waste $37 million on bunker-busting nuclear bombs, voted to make it harder for workers to get overtime pay, and co-sponsored the Constitutional amendment banning equal rights for same-sex couples. He received a 100 from the Christian Coalition, and a zero from the League of Conservation Voters. He has also been woefully ineffective for Missourians - other than non-binding resolutions, he has not introduced a single piece of legislation that has been passed by the Senate.
Worst of all, Talent has been the Equivocator-in-Chief on the vital issue of stem cell research. Last year, he co-sponsored Sam Brownback's bill to ban stem cell research, but then withdrew his support for the bill after McCaskill began criticizing his disgraceful position on the issue. After the press slammed him for the election-year 'change of heart', Talent reversed himself again. He announced his opposition to a Missouri ballot initiative which would have allowed the state to fund stem cell research within the bounds of federal law, and then voted against the stem cell bill that passed the Senate this week.
Claire McCaskill has served as Missouri's State Auditor since 1999, and has been "one of the most active and effective auditor's in Missouri History" according to the Columbia Daily Tribune. As she says on her campaign website, she has "exposed faults in employee background checks for workers helping vulnerable people, including nursing home caregivers and school bus drivers." You can read more about her impressive record as State Auditor here.
In the Senate, she will fight to expand Medicare benefits for seniors, protect our environment and free us of our dependence on foreign oil by investing in alternative energy and more fuel-efficient vehicles, and fully fund No Child Left Behind (the underfunding of NCLB has been one of the most underreported travesties of the Bush administration).
This is a close and very winnable race - recent polls have had McCaskill tied with Talent or even slightly ahead of him. But Talent has raised nearly $20 million compared to just $4 million for McCaskill, and has more than three times as much cash-on-hand. Talent will be able to distort his record all the way up until election day, and we need to make sure Claire McCaskill has the resources to set the record straight.
Help Claire take back the Senate seat that was once held by Harry Truman, and end GOP control of the Senate!
Talent has been a consistently backed the most hardline elements of his party. He voted against a resolution recognizing a woman's basic right to choose, voted to let the Energy Department waste $37 million on bunker-busting nuclear bombs, voted to make it harder for workers to get overtime pay, and co-sponsored the Constitutional amendment banning equal rights for same-sex couples. He received a 100 from the Christian Coalition, and a zero from the League of Conservation Voters. He has also been woefully ineffective for Missourians - other than non-binding resolutions, he has not introduced a single piece of legislation that has been passed by the Senate.
Worst of all, Talent has been the Equivocator-in-Chief on the vital issue of stem cell research. Last year, he co-sponsored Sam Brownback's bill to ban stem cell research, but then withdrew his support for the bill after McCaskill began criticizing his disgraceful position on the issue. After the press slammed him for the election-year 'change of heart', Talent reversed himself again. He announced his opposition to a Missouri ballot initiative which would have allowed the state to fund stem cell research within the bounds of federal law, and then voted against the stem cell bill that passed the Senate this week.
Claire McCaskill has served as Missouri's State Auditor since 1999, and has been "one of the most active and effective auditor's in Missouri History" according to the Columbia Daily Tribune. As she says on her campaign website, she has "exposed faults in employee background checks for workers helping vulnerable people, including nursing home caregivers and school bus drivers." You can read more about her impressive record as State Auditor here.
In the Senate, she will fight to expand Medicare benefits for seniors, protect our environment and free us of our dependence on foreign oil by investing in alternative energy and more fuel-efficient vehicles, and fully fund No Child Left Behind (the underfunding of NCLB has been one of the most underreported travesties of the Bush administration).
This is a close and very winnable race - recent polls have had McCaskill tied with Talent or even slightly ahead of him. But Talent has raised nearly $20 million compared to just $4 million for McCaskill, and has more than three times as much cash-on-hand. Talent will be able to distort his record all the way up until election day, and we need to make sure Claire McCaskill has the resources to set the record straight.
Help Claire take back the Senate seat that was once held by Harry Truman, and end GOP control of the Senate!
Click here to go to the Claire McCaskill for Senate website
and
Click here to contribute to McCaskill's campaign
UPDATE: One of our readers made a good catch - Talent also voted against a minimum wage increase last month.
UPDATE II: For the first time, I've decided to highlight the comment of one of the readers of this blog - our resident troll, who goes by the sarcastic moniker "liebermanforlieberman." This is what he said about stem cell research:
The Lieberhaters' singleminded focus on Iraq is absurd if it comes at the expense of research with potential to save lives worldwide, long after the Iraq War ends. I sincerely hope "liebermanforlieberman" doesn't speak for all of Lieberman's opponents when he calls this vital research "frivolous."
Update III: That troll cleverly deleted the comment from the string. However, I would be more than happy to email a saved copy of the comments page to whoever wishes to read the callous post for themselves. In any case, this is the first and probably last time that I will negatively highlight a reader's comment, but the issue of stem cell research is both germane to this post and vital to the country.
This also is just further proof that for all the claims of Lieberman's detractors that their opposition isn't just about Iraq, their words and actions prove that some of them can't even look past Iraq long enough to help save countless lives.
and
Click here to contribute to McCaskill's campaign
UPDATE: One of our readers made a good catch - Talent also voted against a minimum wage increase last month.
UPDATE II: For the first time, I've decided to highlight the comment of one of the readers of this blog - our resident troll, who goes by the sarcastic moniker "liebermanforlieberman." This is what he said about stem cell research:
I wonder if people care that much care about something like stem cell research right now, when our troops are being wiped out in Iraq and our Constitution is under attack by Lieberman/Bush/Cheney. To me, worrying about stem cell research right now seems pretty frivolous.I agree that Iraq is a vital issue and the loss of thousands of lives there is tragic (believe it or not, I oppose the war), but such a complete lack of understanding of the promise of stem cell research and the seriousness of the issue is incomprehensible. This research holds the promise to save quite literally hundreds of millions of lives, and improve the quality of life for many more. Stem cells may hold the potential for providing revolutionary treatments for cancer, muscular dystrophy, ALS, Parkinson's disease, paralysis and countless other life-threatening illnesses.
The Lieberhaters' singleminded focus on Iraq is absurd if it comes at the expense of research with potential to save lives worldwide, long after the Iraq War ends. I sincerely hope "liebermanforlieberman" doesn't speak for all of Lieberman's opponents when he calls this vital research "frivolous."
Update III: That troll cleverly deleted the comment from the string. However, I would be more than happy to email a saved copy of the comments page to whoever wishes to read the callous post for themselves. In any case, this is the first and probably last time that I will negatively highlight a reader's comment, but the issue of stem cell research is both germane to this post and vital to the country.
This also is just further proof that for all the claims of Lieberman's detractors that their opposition isn't just about Iraq, their words and actions prove that some of them can't even look past Iraq long enough to help save countless lives.
posted by Matt Smith at 6:52 PM
33 Comments:
Lord Lieberman is the Dean Scream of 2006
why can't lieberman be a real dem like mccaskill?
Gave $100 last cycle.
Isn't it amazing those anons are more focused on tearing down a Democrat than retaking the Senate from the GOP majority?
Eye on the ball, folks...SENATE MAJORITY.
"To me, worrying about stem cell research right now seems pretty frivolous."
Tell that to people who are suffering from cancer, L4L. Or to the Christopher Reeve foundation for people living with paralysis.
Here's a link so you can tell them yourself that their cause is frivolous:
http://www.acscsn.org/
http://www.christopherreeve.org/
Except for the fact that he was one of its most vocal backers in the Senate and promised to make it his first act as President to end Bush's restrictions on stem cell research.
Or do you disregard facts that are inconvenient to your argument? To say that Lieberman has been anything but one of the strongest allies of the movement for stem cell research is amazingly, blantantly dishonest.
You called it frivolous to talk about it now. You can't take that back. That's all you do - lie before you think.
So why did you call it frivolous? That's unforgivable, man. You just lost all credibility to talk about saving lives.
And your statement that stem cell research can't be funded alongside the Iraq War is absurd. The U.S. government is hardly spending all its money on ammunition. The government pays for literally millions of things at once. To say we're spending it all on Iraq and that WE CAN'T FUND STEM CELL RESEARCH is just plain idiotic.
Yeah, man...that's just plain wrong.
"How much money would have to be invested in stem cell research, and for how long, to save even a fraction of the number of lives that we could save just by pulling our military out of Iraq?"
50,000 people have died in Iraq in the past 3 years. Even three times that number would be less than ONE QUARTER the number of people that have died of cancer during that period.
And how many people suffer from all those other diseases that stem cell research could help treat? So what if it takes 10 years? Isn't that worth it?
Why is it frivolous to talk about it WHILE talking about the situation in Iraq, which is exactly what we're doing now.
If the only lives you care about are the ones in Iraq, you have a serious problem.
Oh and that one quarter is in the US alone. Worldwide, it's probably more like 1/75 the number of people who've died of cancer in that period.
I gotta go to bed.
Good luck defending the indefensible.
You sound just like a Republican on stem cell research...equivocating on how likely it is to work, and saying there are more pressing matters.
It's the same GOP attitude that leads to delay on global warming. There will always be more pressing priorities; that's why it's important we start NOW.
What a disgusting, Republican outlook.
Hahahaha....this is fun. You called it frivolous, buddy. Sorry, but no amount of changing the subject will get you out of this
You just sound like an idiot when you try to say say that Lieberman is somehow hurting the cause of stem cell res, especially since you're the one who called it frivlous
Hahahahahaha...you just can't help changing the subject, can you!
liebermanforlieberman: Deriding stem cell research as frivolous since 2006.
If I hadn't mentioned it yet, McCaskill is a great Democrat, and she definitely needs more financial support...
Nice lie - that was in one case, from an isolated group of soldiers. And it was a claim they made in court, not a fact. Although you've already proven you can't seperate speculation from fact.
Maybe you should check your facts before you smear our entire military for a claim that involves a handful of soldiers. In any case, stop insulting our intelligence.
liebermanforlieberman: Deriding stem cell research as frivolous since 2006.
Hey Joe - Remember when Lamont flip-flopped on his Iraq position? Me neither.
why can't joe leaverman be a good democrat?
A damned good use of this blog, I think.
Okay, I admit (though many of you have gathered) that I'm a Lamont guy when I think about Connecticut.
However, divisions wihtin our party aside, our real struggle is, indeed, with our right wing opponents, nationwide. For a lot of reasons, I'd really like to see Lamont win the CT primary (without listing everything, I think it'd be good for Democrats to challenge their own incumbbents) but our larger battle should be waged against the national right wing.
For my part, Lieberman has strayed too far right on social and economic issues to earn my support.
But, I have no trouble realizing that there are folks out their vying for national office who are pushing views that are so far right that they are truly dangerous.
So far as Lieberman vs. Lamont goes, I'm pulling for Lamont.
But, on the national stage, I think we're all on the same side.
How could Lieberman think campaigning with Bill Clinton could help him? All I can think about when I see that poor man is how Joe-Joe helped destroy his career.
Stil doesn't matter how much you try to chenge the subject. We won't let people forget that you're still...
liebermanforlieberman: Deriding stem cell research as frivolous since 2006.
Actually, I have invited a pro-Lamont reader who posts here to come and contribute for my site in the near future (he can reveal himself if he chooses, but I won't "out" him).
I can appreciate the comments of people who disagree with me as long as they are thoughtful, insightful, at least minimally researched, and don't report speculation as fact. You should try it sometime.
Yeah, Joe's a neoconservative. Do you even know what a neoconservative is? Unless you're just making the anti-Semetic comment that any pro-war Jew is a neoconservative (and I don't think you are), you're not fooling anyone.
sadly l4l looks to be right, this was in connpost
Lord Lieberman is the Dean Scream of 2006
They both look like hypocrites with Halliburton, which is why it's so funny that L4L is trying to excuse Lamont's "I'm against the war, but don't mind profiting from it" position. Lieberman's accepting money from the defense industry is hardly objectionable since the man serves on the Armed Services committee. He's also gotten money from veterans groups. He supports their causes. So what?
Lamont's a hypocrite for criticizing the war while profiting from it. Lieberman's campaign is hypocritical for criticizing Lamont while they had stock too.
They're both hypocrites, but L4L doesn't care about pointing out Lamont's hypocrisies. That's because he's...
"liebermanforlieberman": Deriding stem cell research as frivolous since 2006.
hell, the lieberdems are the trolls on this site
Why don't any of you talk about the topic of the post? You know, Claire McCaskill. The woman who could actually help the Dems get a majority.
Talent just released a really pathetic ad:
"Most people don't care if you're red or blue, Republican or Democrat," the announcer says. "They don't use words like partisan or obstructionist. They care about getting things done, knowing the difference between what's right and what's wrong."
Wow. He's not legally insane. That qualifies him to be a Senator.
http://www.kentucky.com/mld/kentucky/news/politics/15085778.htm
Is anyone really surprised that Ned Lamont's supporters (or should I say the "anti-war movement") is so callous? After all, didn't their great heroine Cindy Sheehan complain that the hurricanes that devastated the Gulf Coast states last summer were just "bad weather" and not deserving of air time?
Lord Lieberman is the Dean Scream of 2006
We don't hate democracy. We want all CT voters to have a chance to send Sen. Lieberman back to office.
Besides, it's laughable to listen to advice on the value of life from...
"liebermanforlieberman": Deriding stem cell research as frivolous since 2006.
Lord Lieberman is the Dean Scream of 2006
If Republicans keep the Senate and the House, Dailykos - and all those who support it - will be to blame. By placing so much emphasis on CT - a safe Democratic seat - over seats where we can defeat Republicans, they show themselves as Bush's favorite Democrats. Thank you for this site, and for trying to restore some sanity. I hope it's enough.
<< Home