Lieberman makes the Zell Miller transition final: '...the Democratic Party changed'
By John Amato Saturday Mar 29, 2008 11:30am
On ABC's THIS WEEK, they played a clip of Joe Lieberman saying he wanted a Democratic Congress and President in the White House back in '06. ( h/t Nedheads for the clip on TW) When Stephanopoulos asked him why he's backing St. McCain, he said some very interesting things---
Download | play 
Download | play (Heather)
LIEBERMAN: I want Democrats to be back in the majority in Washington and elect a Democratic president in 2008.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
STEPHANOPOULOS: And Senator Joe Lieberman joins us now. You're now an independent senator from Connecticut. But no one in your position has ever crossed over like this. You ran for vice president as a Democrat in 2000, ran for president as a Democrat in 2000. And now you are backing John McCain. What do you say to Democrats who say that that shows you've abandoned a lifetime of commitments?
LIEBERMAN: Well, I say that the Democratic Party changed. The Democratic Party today was not the party it was in 2000. It's not the Bill Clinton-Al Gore party, which was strong internationalists, strong on defense, pro-trade, pro-reform in our domestic government.
It's been effectively taken over by a small group on the left of the party that is protectionist, isolationist and basically will --and very, very hyperpartisan. So it pains me.
He responded like Zell Miller because bloggers and activists made him lose the Democratic primary in CT over his warmongering. Zell Lieberman then was caught in a bunch of distortions by George. As he's questioned on St. McCain's right wing agenda, the agenda that he's been opposed to for his whole career, here's his response:
LIEBERMAN: No, I'm saying two things. First, as a matter of fact, George, John McCain is not for the private accounts to take the
place of Social Security. He's for what Bill Clinton used to call "Social Security-plus."STEPHANOPOULOS: He disputed that in The Wall Street Journal this month, though.
LIEBERMAN: Yes. I think that's right. But let me -- there are two reasons why I support John McCain, when I did in December and I announced it, and I feel even more strongly about it today.
Well CT, here's your man. He's lying when his lips move today because he's a warmonger through and through. And Zell is supporting this war with Iraq while pushing for another war with Iran as hard as he can..(Yes, that's an old joke.) St. McCain fills the bill for him on this issue completely. He throws out the bipartisan theme he talks about all the time now since he was ousted from the party. You know---reach across party lines to fix health care and what-not. OK Joe, the right wingers will NOT work with McCain on immigration---they shut him and the bill down so he had to flip flop on his position. Oh, and forget about health care reform for this country if McCain is elected. The economy you ask? Hahahaha! The mortgage crisis maybe? Hahaha. The Social Security gaffe was a major, major problem for Joe, but he just blew it off as if the question wasn't asked. I guess Zelieberman missed Lindsey Graham whispering in his ear the correct answer...(updated the post)
Login or Register to post comments.
Joe Lieberman doesn't like the fact that the entire democratic party isn't owned by AIPAC like he is.
Hey, don't blame me. I voted for Ned Lamont. Twice. All I can say is I'll betcha this will be his last term, flying spaghetti monster willing....
Lieberman today is just as bad as he was in 1999 when he was a Democratic darling. Then, when questioned by Patrick Buchanan on NBC's Meet the Press on April 25, 1999 about the morality of bombing civilian targets in Serbia, Lieberman said: "I hope the air campaign, even if it does not convince Milosevic to order his troops out of Kosovo, will so devastate his economy, which it's doing now, so ruin the lives of his people, that they will rise up and throw him out.”
One doesn’t need to be an expert in international law or the Geneva Conventions to know that terrorizing civilians, destroying their economy, ruining their lives so as to get them to change their government is a war crime.
Welcome to the future of Iran, Iraq and anybody else who gets in "their" way.
LIEberman:
Translation:
Joe, a true republican, has mastered the art of projection.
Zell LIE-berman (I-LIE) is a pathetic warmonger who lied to the people of CT to get re-elected. He is a perfect fit for Bomber McCain. The I stands for Israel, not independent, and we all know what the LIE stands for....
Good riddance, Joe...where will you be next year at this time?
i had the unfortunate timing of watching lieberman while trying to eat breakfast. not recommended. the sound of his voice sickened me and his answers made it far worse than i would have thought possible. like a true repube, he was full of distortion, revision, fear mongering and war mongering.
Yes, Joe, join with the Republicans because for the last 7+ years that party, its members, and the entire Republican Bush/Cheney administration have been so very bi-partisan. There is only one reason Joe is a McCain supporter and that is his preferrence for more war, no matter how much it costs this country in blood and treasure.
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
The most interesting moment in the show was when George Will called "fair" a four-letter word and that he had to teach his kids to never use it. Says a lot about conservatives that fairness, and hence justice, is anathema to them.
The whole fu*king top 1% left-right-middle whatever is corrupt to the core.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFqYf-ID5oY&feature=related
He warmongered on Iran again today.
If he wants to maintain any kind of power he doesn't have much of a choice than to back McCain. This isn't about ideology at all as much as it is about Lieberman trying to keep a hold on power.
See, he has power now because by choosing to caucus with the Dems in the senate, he give them the majority they need to control the committees and name the chairpersons. The Dems have to repay him by making him a chairperson of a powerful committee. IF however the Dems gain a somewhat larger majority in the Senate in 2008 which is looking very likely, then the Dems will have NO reason to acquiesce to him and he'll just be the junior senator from CT, with no authority or power. Thus his only hope is to kiss McCain's ass and hope for a high powered position in his admin if he wins.
In other words, he's all in.
someone, anyone, should apply a 'liberal' dose of preparation h to repiglican hemmroids head ........ that would in fact solve the problem
getalife @ 13:
He's an equal opportunity war mongerer. He was the principal cheerleader for the Clintons when the decision was made to bomb the entire civilian infrastructure of another sovereign nation that posed no threat to the United States.
Ted @ 9:
Joe Lieberman was Obama's mentor when he started in the US Senate. That makes no sense.
I'm Jewish and I support Obama.
Joe's Zionisme demonstrates that is patriotisme is not with America but with Isreal.
There is nothing anti-semetic in calling someone a zioniste. It's two different things.
Joe is not fighting for America, he is fighting for Isreal and this is where his priorities lie.
And people with half a brain can see this for themselves.
Bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran......... common people. use your ears and your eyes.
I still don't believe he beat Ned Lamont legitimately. Doesn't past the smell test...
I saw this segment.............I also couldn't help but notice that Lieberman has very bad teeth.........at least the ones on the bottom because when he speaks, you can't see his upper teeth.
Strange..........oh, and the things he was saying we're disgusting. He has no credibility whatsoever.
arjay8 @ 10:
George Will - another Bush-enabler who was wrong about pretty much everything (except a couple of his baseball columns). He should be sent to Iraq to help those poor people.
Eric Jaffa @ 17:
Lieberman was the favorite of every Democrat when he was toting baggage for the Clinton war machine in the Balkans. It wouldn't surprise me a bit that if Hillary were able to win the nomination, the scum-bag Lieberman would come running back to the Democratic fold, and Hillary would welcome him back with open arms. Count on it.
Joe is just determined to make it into the administration one way or the other. He knows he doesn't have a snowball's chance with the current Democratic contenders.
I'd guess he's going for either Defense Secretary or DoS. Either way, he'll be able to keep up the bomb, bomb the middle east campaign.
The party changed? it pains you?
Come on down to my street Joey, I'll show you some pain.
Little weasel puts the "con" in "Connecticut"
Wanna see something funny? Watch for this: When (not if) Lieberman speaks at the Republican Convention in Minneapolis, he will drop the "-ic" from Democratic. Suddenly it will be the "Democrat Party has changed..." [Cue wild applause]
Yet Joe Lieberman has remained the same. That's right, all along he was a Republican.
The Social Security gaffe was a major, major problem for Joe, but he just blew it off as if the question wasn’t asked.
and george just LET him...
and that wasn't the only time... i could only listen from another room as LIEberman's smushy smarmyness is just too ugly to watch...
Ted @ 9:
Hmmm. I think you should ask these folks what they think about your comment.
Oh...and by the way, you gave yourself away with your misuse of a noun as an adjective. It's DemocratIC party, or do you approve of Sen. Joe McCarthy's use of the term (and his behavior)?
so in two short years, the party totally changed????
eff him
Filthy Harry @ 14:
No no no...it *IS* about ideology...the ideology of Joe.
There is only one issue for lieberman: Israel.
From Oct. 2004:
"Lieberman, with just three weeks left before the election, praised Bush strongly for his support of Israel, America’s lone democratic ally in the Mid-East.
"We are dealing with a president who's had a record of strong, consistent support for Israel. You can't say otherwise,” Lieberman told an audience of 600 near Delray Beach, Fla, the Palm Beach Post reported in editions Thursday.
Lieberman also added that any criticism of Bush vis-à-vis Israel would be “unjustified.”
After the speech, the paper said Lieberman spoke to reporters and suggested that “Bush appears to have made inroads with Jewish voters, who voted Democratic by an estimated 4-to-1 margin in 2000.”
But Lieberman indicated Kerry’s support among Jews may be softer, and he chided the Democratic nominee for not coming out more strongly for Israel.
“And I think John Kerry, to reassure people, has to himself be explicit" rather than having surrogates deliver the message, the Post quoted Lieberman as saying.
Lieberman alluded to worries among Jews about Kerry’s position on Israel. Lieberman bluntly revealed that he has asked the Kerry campaign to have John Kerry himself discuss his views on Israel because "only John Kerry can eliminate those doubts."
Lieberman made clear he is still staunchly supporting Kerry for president.
"I am here to tell you that John Kerry has also been a strong and consistent supporter of Israel and will continue that fight as president," Lieberman said, noting Kerry’s commitment to health care, the environment, education and his position on Supreme Court appointments."
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/10/14/141645.shtml
lost_nacf_gop @ 24:
The only pain I've feeling right now is the one in my ass from listening to this lying fuckhead. LIEberman knows he hasn't got a chance outside of kissing McCain's ass; I pray that Connecticut will either impeach or recall this sorry sack of shit.
if he's not trying to start a flame war, sure sounds like ted @9 is forgetting that joe himself left the democratic party...
Lieberman has always been such a sack of shit - The real CRIME is that the demParty didn't throw his ass out YEARS AGO. They let themselves be used and abused and swiftboated to irelivency.
AND NOW for somthing really different we have Obama who just can't wait to work with the republicans!!
I say take the silly, distracting and FRAUDULENT little horse race off the table and focus on somthing more reality based.
All this while they 're-organize' the countries fanancial masters...
And I am sure it is just a coincidence that Spitzer just got taken out of the game....
Let Liberman run as Oldstains VP - Hell yeah!! That's a true bypartisan.
Impeach 1st
Hang 2nd
Before it is too late!!!
Of course Dick too.
One of the greatest pleasures that would be bestowed upon us by a major Democratic victory in November would be to see this ratfink mother-fucker kicked to the curb and having to join his beloved rethugs for good. I think it's about time the Dems start treating guys like Joe the Ho the same way the rethugs handle traitors to their party - kick the bastards out!!!
Bush is Ossama @ 33:
I guess you missed today the praise and love that Joe still has left in his heart for the young Bill Clinton. Trust me when I tell you that a Hillary nomination would have him back in the Democratic fold in a heartbeat. It would be a joyful reunion of the war wing of the Democratic party: the Clintons, the Albrights, the Holebrooks, the Wesley Clarks, and the Liebermans.
And to think the Democrats chose to support this loser over the qualified candidate Ned Lamont is sickening. I hope they all know what a mistake that was and make an effort to not allow for this in the future. Damn.
For him it is all about Israel and being an Israeli agent. That is all.
Now, come on! I don't agree with Joe on anything except for Israel when it comes to national security, but he actually DOES hold progressive positions on many issues including health care and the environment. He's certainly a moderate, but he's no Zell Miller.....he was a true DINO that agreed with the Republicans on damn near everything. Joe is just on their side with foreign policy and trade. I heartily disagree with him, but let's not sit here and flame the hell out of him and act like he's an evil man. He's misguided on foreign policy.
makes me ashamed to be a jew...
ashamed to be from CT...
ashamed to be about the same height...
COULD WE PLEASE REMASTER LIARMAN AS A MUCH SHORTER ALMISH WOMAN...
.....
I WONDER IF CT HAS CONSIDERED A RECOUNT!!!!
He is for Israel first and all at the expensive of the US. That makes him a traitor.
...oh and "Islamist Facist" makes no sense dumb ass.
Oh Joe aren't you special.
After 7 years of an iron fisted utterly uncompromising Republican Tyranny in which regardless of the issue or bill,the Republicans have consistently,steadfastly refused to budge one single inch you decide that the Democratic Party have become "hyper partisan".How DOES that work Joe?
Who is he kidding??? JFK would laugh wth his comparison to McCain by this Sell-out!!! We don't need people like him in the Democratic Party...Don't let the door hit your sorry ass on your way to the republican party.
Lieberman, come November, will be totally and completely irrelevant. It won't matter which party he graces. He'll be invisible.
I do not appreciate (like) Lieberman but I can appreciate someone who stands up for what he believes irrespective of political party. We will never achieve our greatest democracy if we all take party line positions and there are only two parties of consequence. So let Lieberman, flip-flop or evolve, whatever, as he is inconsequential. But we can benefit from assessing his independence and support for positions important to him.
Well, I'm just glad that Ralph Nader was able to single-handedly prevent Joe from becoming Vice President. Thanks Ralph!
How did the foks in CT get bamboozled into voting for this joker? What a waist of taxpayer money.
Joe Lieberman; he put the "Con" in "Connecticut”
Seems to me the Democratic party of the great state of Connecticut ought to begin a RECALL of their junior Senator. It may not happen, but it would go a long way toward restoring their reputation.
To put it in a words even Joe can understand; what a schmuck.
cadaverdog @ 47:
He's no longer a member of the Democratic Party, because he lost in the Democratic primary in 2006 and ended up winning the general election as an independent.
JasonS @ 45:
Really? So you're happy that we ended up with 8 years of
DictatorPresident Bush? Seems to me that we would have been better off with a Gore presidency.mcliberdouches voice sounds like he ate a bunch of bushshit and it ate him up!!!!!!!!!kick the son of a bitch to the gutter!
helloworld@19** I believe you are right, all of a sudden all those people choose to give him a 2nd chance? Has anyone heard of gop dirty tricks in that race? Smells like a big skunk from here. Maybe the only thing the people of Conn have to be sorry for is not watching the ballot boxs and gop close enough on election day. After all it is a fact that lieman got big money from bush crime family circle. I just can't see all those voters, gee I'll give the little war monger another chance.Breaking from the party was a big hail mary play, its success guaranteed by the whitehouse.
tyree @ 50:
Or maybe he's just sick......
JasonS @ 45:
First, that's operating under the false assumption that Gore/Lieberman lost Florida. They did not. Second, ask yourself if Lieberman is right or wrong about the direction of the party since 2000... he says it's tipped more to the left since 2000, when he was apparently satisfied with the party. If Lieberman was right and the party WAS more what he wanted it to be then, sure Gore would've been a better president but in November when it came down to vote the difference was not as pronounced as it is now. If you DON'T agree with Lieberman, you think the party was as progressive in 2000 as it is now and it's Lieberman who changed. Unfortunately, we all knew he wasn't the most liberal back then and the party probably isn't as progressive as any of us would truly like it to be now. They ran a weak ticket, don't blame Nader.
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
And just to clarify my "weak ticket" statement: it was obviously strong enough to win. The Supreme Court gave the presidency to Bush, not the voters. However, it was not strong in its left wing credentials for my liking. I just find it hard to believe Lieberman had to actively speak against his own party before people finally saw what he was about.
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
tyree @ 55:
What a lovely antisemetic comment, Tyree.
[Deleted. You, Megalomania (or zorro, or whatever you're calling yourself today) just don't get it, do you? You just have to troll for reactions to that crap. Your comments will no longer be moderated because I'm finally going to do what I should have done long ago....You are no longer welcomed to comment here. Site Monitor.]
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
This wet noodle makes a perfect repug...he lies with a straight face, even though he is going in circles. They are so damned full of shit, they are tripped up by what they are saying, the they don't even see the logic.
"hyper partisonship"?......you make me laugh joe, you idiot.
JasonS @ 45:
ha! that may be the first and only positive i've heard come
out of that mess...
This is just my genuine lack of complete knowledge about the events (as I was about 17 when it happened, not completely aware of the politics of the time but not as ignorant as some classmates)... didn't the Supreme Court step in to stop the recounts? I thought it was a recount issue, Gore wanted them done by hand. Are you saying the Reps would have voted on whether or not to continue recounts, or they would have actually voted on the president?
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
Lieberquisling is always ready with the handy, self-serving rationalization. I'll give him that.
Anonymous, it would have gone to the Congress to decide the Pres and VP, under the consitution.
the GOP officially welcomes Joe 'NoMomentum' LIEberman to the party of traitors.
Congrats
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
Lieberman sounded old and tired. Maybe he and McCain will run as the Old and Tired ticket. Please, Maverick, please pick Jester as your running mate. You guys will crash and burn even bigger than Dole and -- does anyone even remember Dole's running mate? -- in 1996.
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
[Deleted. Off topic. And Newsmax is akin to the Moonie (Washington) Times and Drudge, source-wise. Please get back on topic. This thread is about Joe Lieberman and the Democratic Party, not Rev Wright-Sitemonitor]
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
oh and i was just snarking about muslims and indians!!
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
Never mind what George Will says, FAIR is preferable. Some people above lambasted Nader for Gore's lose in 2000. Well that is not a fair assessment. If Gore had won his own state, Ohio and/or a few other's carrying Florida would not have been important. So stop blaming Nader and stick to the issue at hand; Lieberman.
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
Cheney and McCain in Iraq at the same time last week...wonder what they were discussing?
Possibly the illegal invasion and occupation of another middle-east nation, namely 'IRAN'?
Yes, indeed.
Be warned Americans, the Neocons will try to steal the prez'dntl election again in 2008.
you can bank on it!
LIEBERMAN: Well, I say that the Democratic Party changed. The Democratic Party today was not the party it was in 2000. It’s not the Bill Clinton-Al Gore party, which was strong internationalists, strong on defense, pro-trade, pro-reform in our domestic government.
Now, what I find ironic is that, were you to ask ANYBODY in the GOP what they thought of the Democratic Party throughout the Clinton years, I doubt "strong internationalists, strong on defense, pro-trade, pro-reform in our domestic government" would be in their description. I don't recall any Bush ads that referred to the Dems as "strong internationalists, strong on defense, pro-trade, pro-reform in our domestic government."
So was the Republican Party wrong about Dems then, but right now? Coincidentally at the same time the Dems were on the right side of issues in 1999, but wrong now?
Or is Lieberman de-volved into a lying warmongering sack of crap?
(b)
[Deleted-Off topic-Sitemonitor]
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
Ted @ 85:
that's what happens when newsmax is your source...
Ted @ 77:
Hey, Ted, could you possibly link to anything even more right wing than Newsmax? Chris Ruddy makes the folks at Faux News look like Michael Moore.
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
[Deleted. Off topic]
Joe calling the Democratic party hyperpartisan!?
WTF?? The Bush administration and Republicans have made it their job to ignore Democrats from day one. They have attacked Democrats like rabid dogs since Bush got elected.
Fox news, Rush Limbaugh, the WSJ, Laura Ingrahm, Karl Rove and the rest of the attack dogs have made it a mission to destroy Democrats at every turn with every dirty trick in the book.
PARTISAN, the only rabid partisans were the destructive divisional politics of the Bush administration and the Republican party. When the republicans were in control they forced Democrats to hold meetings in the damn basement, threatened to take away every minority right they had.
Old Joe must be taking too many green pills or something... calling Democrats hyperpartisan as the reason for joining the Republicans is like joing the KKK because of too much discrimination in the NCAAP.
Freaking unbelievable.
In a way, Liebermann is right, but only up to a point.
We are more isolationist because we don't believe we should illegally propagandize, attack and occupy other countries who didn't attack us.
We're more protectionist because NAFTA hasn't worked out as planned. It's not creating new foreign outlets for markets, but new foreign manufacturing bases at our expense.
The DLC was the non-traditional Democratic change, and it worked for awhile, but now the scales are rebalancing.
Michael @ 38:
And cuddling up with the religious-right loons (and condemning secularists), and on their side with corporate toadying, and on their side with spouting the "far left" meme crap, and on their side when they condemned Clinton for a blow job but also on their side in sucking up to the Shrub.
Oh, and on their side when it comes to delusions of grandeur coupled with a persecution complex.
[Deleted. That's it. When you realize what 'Off topic' means, you can come out of the corner-Sitemonitor]
I get regular updates from Newsmax, and I don't know how I got on their list, unless it was clicking onto news stories at Yahoo's main site.
So the Republican party is the party of "internationalists"?
I think that's gonna come as news to a lot of Republicans.
...
I couldn't watch the whole clip. Does this guy actually think people believe him. This guy only wants war; it is so blatant and clear. War is profitable: "In Greed We Trust". God bless you Mr. Lieberman; you give honorable people of your faith a bad name.
how do you get so freaking deluded and incompetent and hold onto a job?
[Deleted. That's it. When you realize what 'Off topic' means, you can come out of the corner-Sitemonitor]
Otay @ 93:
I never said that I supported Lieberman, I just said let's not forget who the real problem here is: the true neocons. Even though Joe has a lot of positions I don't agree with, at least he's not a far-right bible-thumping zealot with no regard for the poor or the environment (kind of ironic, I know ;)
Michael @ 98:
Sorry, I just wanted to prove Ted wrong..... what's so bad about the conversation taking on a life of its own though? That's what happens all the time in political debates.
[The thread has a topic. If you want to waver a little, fine. But you two were off in a whole other universe. If you want to have long rambling discussions like that, we have open threads. BTW, Ted was playing with you. You'd have never proven him wrong in his mind-Sitemonitor]
Ted @ 89:
Ted, you're way off topic here. Look back up-thread and you'll notice the delete-a-thon.
Nowhere is Israel mentioned. Nowhere are Obama or Wright mentioned. Lieberman cites Gore and Clinton, saying that this isn't the Party of old- but if that's the case, why are Clinton and Gore still Democrats, rather than- like Joe- independents.
And it's not if Lieberman became a Democrat in '92. He was a Democrat when McGovern ran for President, when Carter WAS the President. The biggest shift this Party has seen was when the Clinton/DLC camp took control of it back in the early '90's. And he's complaining about it now?
Lieberman has the nerve to refer the the Democratic party as not being strong on defense.
You can have him Republicans. He can fit right in with the rest of your war mongering, chicken hawk draft dodgers.
Otay @ 93:
And on their side when it comes to projecting the Repugs hyper-partisanship onto the spineless Milquetoast Dems who give them whatever they cry for, and on their side when it comes to dismantling the rule of law and the constitution (retroactive immunity and FISA).
Andy "George W. Bush has never been elected. The ‘Machine’ took it and gave it to him." K Jong Il @ 102:
Haha, I guess I got what I deserved for biting on to his bait too....
Michael @ 101:
All right, won't happen again :)
Andy "George W. Bush has never been elected. The ‘Machine’ took it and gave it to him." K Jong Il @ 102:
Fixed.
The reason he won his seat back in 2006 was simple name recognition. He had been a CT Senator for sooooo long that anyone who wasn't really watching politics voted for him without a second thought. He also picked up CT's conservative vote (parts of CT are surprisingly red, in fact as I recall, CT has New England's only Republican representitive, crazy Chris Shays, in CT's 4th.
As tempting as it is to rag on CT, at least we never voted for Bush.
Michael @ 100:
LIEberman has supported faith-based funding, has appeared with far-religious-right fundamentalists and used the occasion to condemn secularism. He is also a "true neocon", in every practical sense of the word.
Yeah, the foriegn policy of the Dems has not been much to be proud of.
When we get our shinny new AirCraft Carrier - The USS Iraq, perhaps we can abandon our ties to the horrible criminal/terrosist/UN ignoring/Murdering Thug ZIONIST state of Isreal.
If Lieberman is a Zionist Dupe or just another NEOCON Coup player I don't care. I just don't like him.
And you do have to wonder about Gore taking him as VP - How counterintuitive...
When we talk about 'judgement' of our current 'hopefuls' and thier preechers and administrators...
Can we think about judgement of the one most here would love to see as President - Gore/Lieberman???
And now you look to Hillory or Barrack (or god forbid - McCain) for change...
The Audacity of intractable stupididy...
REMEMBER a few years ago..?
'If we can only take the house back...' then we can fund the war, fund a bail out of failing banks, re-organize private/National Bank, continue illegal wire taps, ignore global clymate change, insecurity of food supplies everywhere, and
TAKE IMPEACHMENT OFF THE TABLE!!!
Boy, think of how bad it would have been if Republicans had maintained control of congress...
Scarey stuff!!
Impeach
[Deleted. Please don't advocate violence at this site. Site Monitor]
Before it is too late!!
Dick too, of course!
Otay @ 109:
http://senate.ontheissues.org/Senate/Joseph_Lieberman.htm
"Day 1: Repeal the Bush restrictions on stem cell research. (Jan 2004)"
"Flag burning is abhorrent, but not a constitutional issue. (Jan 2004)"
"Allow driver's license for immigrants. (Jan 2004)"
"Sunset the Patriot Act. (Nov 2003)"
"Marched with Martin Luther King in 1963; keep dream alive. (Sep 2003)"
"Marched with MLK, fought for voting rights in Mississippi. (May 2003)"
"Opposes laws against gay sex & sodomy; focus on real crime. (May 2003)"
"Support Equal Pay Act for women; plus loans & lawsuits. (Oct 2000)"
"Equalize pay for women; it’s unfair and unacceptable. (Oct 2000)"
"I do support, and will support affirmative action. (Aug 2000)"
"Expand “Hate Crimes” to include women, gays, and disabled. (Jun 2000)"
"Raise CAFE standard from 27.5 mpg to 40, including SUVs. (Jan 2004)"
Joseph Lieberman is a Moderate Liberal Populist.
Click here for explanation of political philosophy.
Click here for VoteMatch quiz.
For an admirer of the good old days under Bill Clinton, Lieberman sure was quick to stick a knife in Bill's back when the Lewinsky scandal broke. Dick Gephardt had his differences with Clinton and so did others but when the shit went down, you knew exactly where they stood. Fuck Joe Lieberman and damn Al Gore, an otherwise fine man, for putting Lieberman on the '00 ticket.
Michael @ 111:
YES on preserving habeus corpus for Guantanamo detainees: Strongly Favors topic 14
YES on requiring CIA reports on detainees & interrogation methods: Strongly Favors topic 14
Michael @ 111:
Is it: Joseph Lieberman IS a Moderate Liberal Populist.
OR:
Joseph Lieberman WAS a Moderate Liberal Populist.
Because looking at those positions you posted, I'm not seeing anything past '04.
Michael @ 111:
Lieberman a liberal populist?
ROFL!
He is a social conservative, turning also into a fiscal conservative. And refusing to hold the government accountable for actions against the true poor (such as the Katrina victims).
Besides a few vote outliers, meant to confuse the gullible, he votes with the Repugs on many issues. And what Lieberman was in the sixties has nothing to do with what he is now.
Andy "George W. Bush has never been elected. The ‘Machine’ took it and gave it to him." K Jong Il @ 114:
And several of those '04 references actually go back much further in time.
Joe tells it like it is, The democrats have lost national security, I think you guys need a history lesson on the party...
Andy "George W. Bush has never been elected. The ‘Machine’ took it and gave it to him." K Jong Il @ 114:
Provide emergency contraception at military facilities. (Apr 2007)
Voted YES on expanding research to more embryonic stem cell lines. (Apr 2007)
Rated 89% by the HRC, indicating a pro-gay-rights stance. (Dec 2006)
Rated 86% by the NAACP, indicating a pro-affirmative-action stance. (Dec 2006)
Voted YES on adding 2 to 4 million children to SCHIP eligibility. (Nov 2007)
For the record, there are plenty of better Senators out there, and I vehemently oppose Lieberman's stances on foreign policy and free trade. I think we have to realize though, that he's not a total villain.
chris @ 117:
Care to elaborate? I think going to war in Iraq on faulty intelligence and in turn, by having all of our troops there, making us less safe at home hardly qualifies as good national security in my book
Michael @ 118:
Few people are "total villains". But that is not the point here. The point is that he is a Repug lackey. He promised to investigate the administrations actions in Katrina, so he could get the chair, and now look where he has taken the investigation now that he has the chair (nowhere). He convinced the Conn voters to vote for him by saying he would support the Dems in '08. Now look at what he is doing. He told the Conn voters that nobody wanted the Iraq war to end more than he did. Yeah, and now look at him and what he wants to do to Iran.
The guy is nothing more than a sniveling little disingenuous (correction: outright lying) douchebag. Who looks like Droopy Dog on sedatives.
Just kick this ass clown out of the party.
I'd be willing to lose the majority in the Senate for a few months just to get rid of this jackass.
After the Democratic Party has a some cushion in their majority in the Senate, they better boot his sorry ass from the party.
He is a completely useless tool of the Repugnicans.
sophiedog @ 121:
You're missing the fact that he's no longer a member of the party.
He may as well be a member of the Democratic Party, considering all of the perks Reid gives him. Unfortunately, now that Reid has granted it, he cannot be kicked out of his chairs without a large vote taking place.
His voting record is irrelevant. He is supposed to put party before issues. He has abandoned his previous commitment to the Democratic Party. He is, therefore, now clearly the enemy, to be treated (politically) as such.
Bob Roberts @ 124:
I really sincerely hope that you are being sarcastic....
Bob Roberts @ 124:
I disagree, here. I would love it if Lieberman were a man of principle and integrity. Unfortunately, his lies and double standards when it comes to Repub Party crimes versus Democratic Party impropriety prove he is not -- in fact, they support the notion that he is actually partisan on behalf of the Repub Party. He puts the Repub Party above principles.
Otay @ 126:
No politician is a man of principle and integrity the way you probably mean the terms. It's not that principle and integrity cannot survive in politics, its that they have specific value and can be exchanged for higher value issues/items/agreements/power.
I did not know what a two faced hypocrite lieberman was when he was running for the vice seat. He has proven to be a true neocon and no one should ever take what he has to say seriously again!
Michael @ 125:
'Fraid not. Assuming you believe that the GOP is occasionally right on certain issues, then abandoning your party's position to support whichever issue you think the GOP got right is just giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Of course, if you believe that the GOP is never right, then the issue is not likely to arise.
Oh ... and to preempt someone's argument, voting for Nader or another so-called independent is just another way of assisting the GOP.
Bitter man trying to play otherwise.
Though he was within his rights to vote any way he wanted on the war. He certainly wasnt the only dem to vote for it either.
Bob Roberts @ 127:
No man is perfect and every man has his price, particularly if he thinks he is trading for something better. I see that in the better pols, even in people like Feingold. And when they do so, they do so with honor and integrity. But Lieberman is a different beast altogether.
Bob Roberts @ 129:
You're treating political dialogue like a war.....have you had a chance to listen to Barack Obama's speeches about reaching out to Repulicans and moving away from such partisanship in Washington?
[Deleted. Feel free to re-post this once you toggle your Caps Lock off. All Caps and All Bold comments are considered shouting. Site Monitor]
Michael @ 132:
Yes, I have. I'm concerned that he might be sincere about that, which is one of the reasons I've been supporting Senator Clinton. Reaching out to Republicans is usually one the of the Democrats' first mistakes. It's not as though the Republicans are going to reach back. (Umm ... sorry about the imagery).
On the other hand, if Senator Obama is merely trying to position himself with the electorate as the "reasonable" candidate who wants to work with the Republicans and is, in fact, planning to oppose them at every possible turn, then I'm completely behind that strategy.
Fil @ 18:
Isn't that really something which the Zionistes should decide?
I suppose those silly black people just didn't understand, back in the 1700s, when whitey invented that new word to call them "nigger", he didn't mean nothing anti-african about it, no, not t'all. In fact, I believe it was one of them white eurpeans who said "There is nothing anti-african in calling someone a nigger."
(apologies for being slightly off-topic - slightly)
Bob Roberts @ 134:
I'm sorry that you're so cynical and pessimistic about uniting the country. I think that it's important.
Lieberman: an example of what you get when the ease and convenience of political pandering and maintaining the status quo is more compelling than having the courage to take risk and do what is right.
I hope the Democratic party learns a lesson from this slimy, treacherous schmuck.
Orangutan. @ 36:
I may be mistaken - someone with the numbers please speak up - but I recall that about 2/3rds of Democrats went for Lamont in the general election. It was the conniving 90% of Republicans who voted for Lieberman who won him the election. The GOP candidate won something like 10% of the vote, he was abandoned by his party so they could screw with us by voting for Lieberman.
Dire Lobo @ 138:
And it helped no one but Lieberman that the GOP nominee for the seat was unchallenged in the primary...And that nominee was a card counter!
And yet the Democrats keep him in his powerful committees. With oversight so important, they let Bush Cheerleader Lieberman head the Senate Oversight Committee. Strip him and send his Judas butt to the curb. What I find damnably offensive about Lieberman is that he is willing to put Israeli interests ahead of US interests at every turn. I am not anti-semetic AT ALL, I am anti-Israeli policy. In light of all the middle east warmongering policies Lieberman supports, it is my suspicion that he is probably an anti-Arab racist.
Bob Roberts @ 134:
Michael @ 136:
The politics of reconciliation and unity are in the long run, far more powerful than the Rovian paradigm of confrontation, rigidity, and division. The Republicans will get what they deserve in November by losing the Presidency because they adopted this model. Let them ignore reconciliation and cooperation at their own peril. The voters have had enough of their slimy poilitics which have turned America into a laughingstock.
Let me at his throat!
Let me at him!!!!!
That's right, Joe. The Democratic Party left you. Just not fast enough. There are parts of the country where, I am sure, you cost Gore lots of votes. So, thank you, Joe, for eight years of Bush and Company. As soon as the Dems have a clear majority in the Senate, don't let those big double doors at the back of the chamber hit you in the butt.
Michael @ 58:
thats what i like everybody gets a label!!!!
the democratic party did not change, joe lieberman changed by standing still
WHAT. Kennedy = McCain. What drugs do they think we are on? Probably the ones they allow onto our streets everyday.
Rico @ 22:
And you don't think Sen Obama wouldn't welcome his 'mentor' back with open arms as well?
I'm from CT. This guy's a joke. There are demonstrators outside his Hartford office all the time. He sucks. What is nice though is that there seems to be some backlash to his and other CT representatives unwillingness to hold the administration accountable to their deception and lies. Several Green party members are starting to gain momentum in preparation for November.
http://hartfordimc.org/blog/2008/03/13/green-mike-green-steve-to-run/
you say warmonger like it's a bad thing.
Michael @ 122:
Yes, but he keeps pretending to be a part of the party so he can supposedly caucus with the Democrats. And the Dems have been too chickenshit to just tell him to go away and let him play in the Repugnican sandbox. Let him go. I would rather have gridlock than have this guy blackmail the Democratic party anymore with his 'independent' swing vote. He's nothing more than a toady and shill for the Repugs.
Login or Register to post comments.