Some interesting Huffington Post comments on Mark Warner...
<<...While some DLC supported candidates are downright despicable (Lieberman, Clinton, Vilsack) Mark Warner really is a little different. It seems like he has a bit more going for him in the progressive world than any of the above. One of the indicators that I see as a clear reflection of his character is that of his private life. As a venture capitalist, he sponsored a number of investments Wall Street dubbed "silly" because they focused on renewable energy and offered unusually high employee compensation. He used his clout to make them profitable and sustainable.
As governor, he sponsored raises for teachers (a hard sell in one of the most backward states in the country) and was given a 94 point rating by the Sierra Club.
Warner is hardly the right-of-center candidate he has been made out to be by his handlers. When he talks about taking a pro-business stance, he consistantly does so without stepping on the toes of relating safety and environmental policy; and most importantly like Bill Clinton's only major achievement, he balanced Virginia's budget while doing so.
I'm not his biggest fan or anything, but the more I've learned about Warner, the more I like him as a decent, serious progressive. He is no Barbera Lee (our awesome congresswoman in Oakland), but Warner is only considered a centrist because he hasn't taken a stance on the war.
While I might see things a little different, Warner doesn't have any foreign policy experience, so he may not want to seem like a crackpot. But he has floated the idea of making Jack Murtha Secretary of Defense. Given the current makeup of the party, does anybody here believe he'd be a hawk?
I didn't think so...>> |
