I would totally agree with this! And such a person has come along who fits your qualifications. His name is Ned Lamont.

And yet your “shinning light” is campaigning for a man who does have have his principles in the right place and who is not acting on them.

For me the true shinning light is one who has the courage to step outside the box and support other shinning lights.

I totally get and understand and appreciate the outrage that has been expressed here. It is healthy and invogorating.

It is time for all of us, in my opinion, to start to hold a higher standard.

Of course, I appreciate Boxer’s great votes and courage in specific situations. I do not doubt her qualifications as a Progressive and I have not seen others do that here either.

Yet, her active support of a very pro-war candidate, does not work for me, and I am going to speak up about that.

Where you see danger, I see opportunity.

I always thought of Boxer as the more principled Democrat. I guess both her and Feinstein are not worthy.

Boxer, you live or die politically on strength of character. You’ve lost so much with this endorsement that you’ll probably lose next time you’re up for reelection, regardless of your big money contributors.

fully agree… exactly what I would’ve said.

Michael T. @ 306:

I would ask you:

“Why slime and disparage the passioniate expressions that are here?”

Because “passionate expressions” alone are nothing more than that, and in this case most of ‘em false (lot of misrepresentations here on Boxer’s voting record).

We’ve had 5 years now of “passionate expressions”, yet if anything W’ & co. more emboldened than ever. News of just lack week alone floors me.

Given almost full time effort by good porting of net-roots blogoshpere working to get good dems elected, sliming our currently elected elite really sucks… not only plays into hands of Limbaugh type charactarizations of “liberals”, but sadly I’d agree with ‘em in this case.

Firstly we need people w/their principles in the right place, and 2ndly people who stand & act on the former. Currently, such meaningful dem representation is nearly void.

Boxer is one of few shining lights.

I’m rather disappointed FDL moderators have not intervened to clarify here.

Exactly. That’s a great question that Joementum simply can’t answer.

“And what road is that? You cannot demonstrate by reference to her votes in the Senate that she is on any “non-progressive” road at all. And that’s what matters, not whether or not you agree with her support of Holy Joe Lieberman.”

I think it’s pretty clear what road she’s on. She’s travelled to CT as a token lefty to provide a kind of liberal legitimacy to Lieberman. It’s nauseating to see her sell out whatever principles she’s stood for in the past to help a sycophant of the “unitary executive” get re-elected. Sure she has a voting record I’m grateful for, but that doesn’t amount to much when she’s essentially complicit in torpedoing one of strongest grassroots movements to involve Democrats in their political system. Her support for Lieberman puts her on a road completely at odds with the people who’ve done more for the Democrats at this time than anybody, namely us. It’s another betrayal in a long list of them and it’s time we starting holding these representatives accountable.

Re: Your post at 306

I have no respect whatsoever for anyone who falsely accuses and disparages a fighter like Barbara Boxer. You see the accusation dismissed in the posts above your own? Well, page through the thread, and you’ll find plenty of that sort of thing, and it is nauseating, disreputable, and deeply offensive, and no, I will not respect it or anyone who posts garbage like that.

I wish some of the passion directed against Boxer here (and elsewhere where she is being attacked on so-called progressive blogs) was being directed at Republicans — or at Vichy Dems — like Diane Feinstein who deserve it, but no.

Nobody wants to do that, they want to make up some sort of fight with Boxer, deny her cred as a progressive, get her out of office and falsely accuse her. All because of her support of Lieberman.

DiFi supports Lieberman, too!

Quite likely we will continue to talk past one another on this issue, because I believe it is fundamentally important to identify and support your real friends on the key issues. Barbara is our friend on most issues. And I am defending her. Not that she needs me to, she’s quite capable of doing it on her own.

Let me put it to you this way: How does trashing Boxer and lying about Boxer and calling her names do anything to unseat Lieberman? In my view, it doesn’t do anything to help Lamont, but it could do a great deal of damage to Barbara.

Now who benefits from that?

Not progressives.

I get your passion and upset in your posts, but you are not yet reaching me.

If you truly want to have a positive influence here and get posters to get your perspective, which I believe you do, I suggest you experiment with putting more attention on modeling what you are talking about.

You ask:

“Why slime and disparage Boxer, falsely accuse her, get worked up into a lather over her cluelessness and mistatements?”.

I would ask you:

“Why slime and disparage the passioniate expressions that are here?”

You write about your concern about all the “attacks” on this thread, and yet your posts, to me personally, read as the most attacking of all.

I feel talked at rather than talked with in your posts. If inaccuracies are posted on this thread, I would request that you respectfully point them out.

You would gain credibility for me if you were in ownership that you yourself are “getting worked up into a lather” here. I, myself, love the passion that is here. It gives me great hope.

You want “rational dicussion”. Show us what they looks like. Lead us. Be the change you want to see.

You seem to suggest that many are polarizing against Boxer here, but are you not polarizing against us in these comments?

You write: “This counterproductive behavior infests this and every other anti-Boxer thread I’ve seen here and on other sites like head lice.”

For me, this is the most productive and positive and encouraging thread I have read for a long time. It is total Good News!

Can you treat my perspective with the same respect and that you want us to show to Boxer?

Oh she did, did she? My mistake.

Oh, but what’s this I see: the Senate vote on HJ 114!
(Otherwise known as the Iraq War Resolution) and would you look at this:

She voted NAY.

And lookee here:

Senator Feinstein voted YEA

Enough of your foolishness.

Senate IWR vote

This is just one example of the kinds of false accusations that seem to creep into every anti-Boxer thread. Funny how that works, eh?