Who are the Democrats that voted for cloture?

Barack Obama was quoted earlier today lamenting the fact Democrats did not have enough votes for a filibuster and reflecting on what he believes needs to be done :

''There's one way to guarantee that the judges who are appointed to the Supreme Court are judges that reflect our values. And that's to win elections," Obama said.

Does this mean he is willing to work with the grassroots to rid the Democratic Party of these Republicrats?

Akaka (Hawaii)
Baucus (Montana)
Bingaman (New Mexico)
Byrd (West Virginia)
Cantwell (Washington)
Carper (Delaware)
Conrad (North Dakota)
Dorgan (North Dakota)
Inouye (Hawaii)
Johnson (South Dakota)
Kohl (Wisconsin)
Landrieu (Louisiana)
Lieberman (Connecticut
Lincoln (Arkansas)
Nelson (Florida)
Nelson (Nebraska)
Pryor (Arkansas)
Rockefeller (West Virginia)
Salazar (Colorado)
Harkin (Iowa) abstained from voting.

Since winning his seat Salazar has consistenly demonstrated he is anything but a Democrat in name. And this guy was supposed to be the best the net and traditional grassroots could get elected in Rocky Mountain state?

I can't believe Colorado Luis is still making excuses for this guy.

I updated this article for a NYC perspective at The Daily Gotham | Should we call them Republicrats?

Bookmark/Search this post with:

Submitted by liza on 30 January 2006 - 7:32pm.

» printer-friendly version | email this book | s5 slideshow | 2440 reads

Visit our sponsors

culturekitchens

The Publisher
Liza Sabater

Daily servings of political dissent
culturekitchen

Grassroots News and
Activism for New Yorkers
Daily Gotham

Feminist Bloggers
Network
BlogSheroes

A new kind of vouyerism
Voogling

Art + Code + Philosophy
Potatoland.blog

Got any dirt, tips, leads or money for us? Then drop us a line or two at editors [at] culturekitchen [dot] com or use our general contact form to reach everybody in the editorial team ASAP.

Words to live by

Let's begin with capitalism, a word that has gone largely out of fashion. The approved reference now is to the market system. This shift minimizes --indeed, deletes-- the role of wealth in the economic and social system. And it sheds the adverse connotation going back to Marx. Instead of the owners of capital or their attendants in control, we have the admirably impersonal role of market forces. It would be hard to think of a change in terminology more in the interest of those to whom money accords power. They have now a functional anonymity.

But most of the people who use the new designation --economists, in particular-- are innocent as to the effect. They see nothing wrong with their bland, descriptive terminology. They pay no attention to the important question: Whether money "wealth" accords a special power. (It does.) Thus the term innocent fraud.

— John Kenneth Galbraith: Free Market Fraud | The Progressive