(D) Zell Miller bends over and whores for Bush

U.S. Sen. Zell Miller, Georgia's rebellious Democrat, said Tuesday he will campaign at President Bush's side throughout the year.

Miller's first task in trying to seal the Republican president's re-election grip on his crucial Southern base will be to introduce Bush at a $2,000-a-head fund-raiser Thursday in Atlanta.

The lame-duck senator is to be accompanied by "other Georgia Democrats" who also will endorse the president, according to the Bush-Cheney campaign. But Bush officials would not identify the other Democrats.

Miller first endorsed the president for re-election in October. High-ranking Republicans said discussions about an active campaign role for the former Georgia governor proceeded from there.

"I think it was more or less understood. I'm not very much of an inactive person," Miller said Tuesday in a telephone interview. "I have said and strongly believe that the next five years will be crucial for the America my children and grandchildren will inherit. I want a commander in chief like George Bush. I want a man who doesn't suffer from analysis paralysis."
www.ajc.com...

This is part of the reason why the Democratic party fails.We have turn coats. Look at this whore Zell. BETRAYING THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY TO THE REPGUNANTS!

What needs to happen is that he should be stripped of all his dutyies in the senate. He should be kicked out of the Democratic Party. But, wil Daschle have the cajones to do it? No.

That's why we need a guy like Dean.

The Democratic Party is all inclusive both conservatives and liberals allowed. I agree it needs to change, no more Lieberman�s, Miller�s, etc.

you see, there ARE a few good democrats out there!

And, Dirty: No more Miller's or Liebermans? Are you kidding? Time will tell but in the '02 elections the people spoke, and voted, voting in a lot of republicans. Not to mention the Dems who did win ran more to the right of the dem party. Moving to the left, by excluding moderate dems like Joe and Zell, isn't what people want and probably isn't good for the DNC. You see, tax cuts and defense, in the past, were part of the Dem agenda too you know. So, it doesn't surprise me that Miller would back Bush, despite being potential political suicide. He's going with what he believes. And, speaking of democrats who believe in strong defense and tax cuts, I'd say what Miller is doing is definitely a profile in courage



[Edited on 15-1-2004 by Bob88]

DEMS AND REPUBLICANS BOTH BEND OVER AND WHORE FOR THE SPECIAL INTERESTS. Bamned dastards cannot suck it in fast enough!:bash:

Originally posted by DiRtYDeViL
The Democratic Party is all inclusive both conservatives and liberals allowed. I agree it needs to change, no more Lieberman�s, Miller�s, etc.

This kind of thinking is what is killing our party. I don't know how long you have been a democrat, but I've been registered as one for damn near 20 years and I can tell you that if we try to turn this party from the people's wants nationally to some sort of "liberal left only" elitist club then that, my friend is all we're going to have. This party once had backbone and a direction that didn't end in the toilet..and if you think I'm alone in this thinking, let me clue you in to what your most important supporters think. We've seen the republican beat our asses and fundraising not because they got more from the super-rich (actually we won that one) but because they got more donations from the middle class in the thousand dollar range.

Democrats far outpaced Republicans among deep-pocketed givers." Among donors who gave more than $200 but less than $1,000, Republicans enjoyed a substantial $68 million to $44 million edge over Democrats. The margin was closer among those individuals who gave $1,000 or more: The GOP took in $317 million, compared to the Democrats' $307 million.

But among the fabulously wealthy, the Democrats cleaned house. Donors of $10,000 or more gave $140 million to Democrats, while only $111 million went to Republicans. Among those individuals who gave $100,000 or more, the Democrats raised $72 million compared to the Republicans' $34 million. And when it comes to the millionaires' club - those kicking in $1 million or more - the Democratic Party skunked the GOP, $36 million to $3 million. Needless to say, despite the near-parity in overall amounts - $384 million to the Republicans vs. $350 million to the Democrats - the number of individual donors to the GOP exceeded those to the Democratic Party by more than 40 percent.

This, if nothing else should tell we have fallen out of touch with the people that matter..the people that pay the damn bills. Why did I choose this indicator..simple because talk is cheap and anyone can rattle off BS endlessly but when people are willing to put their money where their mouth is, you can bet thats where they're loyaltys are.

...Add several HUNDRED more million to the coffers for the GOP, because the companies to which they own or are senior executives & CEO/CIO/CFO'S, are making those contrubutions to Republicans.
This "small man" contributor argument is such bulls***t. It's the same perspective that has people saying they won't support some bum in the street crying Liberal hand out, yet turn a blind eye to the multi-billion $$ welfare money thrown at corporations that are moving that "small man's" job overseas for pennies on the dollar, taking retroactive rebates over years they paid no tax to begin with, and shifting their corporate registry to avoid paying taxes all together.
Sheer Lunacy married to blind ignorance.
Wonder who gets invited to the captains table, thus directly influencing the politician, that modestly wealthy self mad businessnman giving $10K, or that Pfizer executive who's bringing a $10K check from his own pocket & all the corporate donation - prior to that prescription drug bill vote?