Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Democratic Insurgents ? According to this headline:

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 10:16 AM
Original message
Democratic Insurgents ? According to this headline:
In Connecticut race, insurgent left aims at Democratic hawk

By Linda Feldmann | Staff writer of The Christian Science Monitor

WINDSOR LOCKS, CONN. "I'm in a battle - I think you all know that," Joe Lieberman tells his supporters, gathered at the air museum near Hartford's airport.
If nothing else, the three-term Connecticut senator and 2000 vice presidential nominee has become a master of understatement. Indeed, the lineup of Democratic senators here to back their colleague said it all, as Sen. Lieberman fights to fend off a humiliating defeat in next Tuesday's primary at the hands of a wealthy, anti-Iraq-war upstart.

On Sunday, no fewer than four senators appeared at Lieberman's side. All that party firepower on the campaign trail probably did more to boost his spirits than actually sway voters.

But their presence suggests they know the stakes. Tuesday's primary is no longer just about one senator's career; it's about the future of the Democratic Party.

Cont'd...http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0802/p01s01-uspo.html
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
madame defarge Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 10:20 AM
Response to Original message
1. Apparently, anyone who goes against the Bush machine...
is a terrorist.

And Lamont is "a wealthy, anti-Iraq-war upstart"??? Looks like we need to write some letters to the editor of that paper! :mad:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totally Committed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 10:21 AM
Response to Original message
2. Joe is insisting on using the terminology of war...
Those who oppose him are "Jihadists", "insurgents"... this isn't an election, it's "war", "a battle".

With what is currently transpiring in the Middle East, it seems ludicrous, and even disrespectful for him to be using these words, not only to the voters, but to those who are suffering and dying in a real WAR.

Lieberman is a PUTZ.

TC
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mrs. Overall Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
3. Remember, the people who were angry, hungry and looking for
water in New Orleans after Katrina--they (media) called them "insurgents" too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
citizen snips Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 10:23 AM
Response to Original message
4. insurgent?
if lamont gets a landslide victory then they should consider renaming the headline.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calico1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
5. Anything that challenges the status quo
these days is "insurgent" and "far left." :eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 10:28 AM
Response to Original message
6. You bet party conservatives know what's at stake
If a man as powerful as Lieberman gets chucked out by the voters, even if his hissyfit and run as an independent splits enough of the vote to give the GOP a victory, they know their careers are vulnerable.

If Lieberman is ousted in the primary, we'll owe the people of Connecticut a great deal of gratitude for being the first to deliver the party conservatives a loud and clear message: your days are numbered.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zodiak Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 11:09 AM
Response to Reply #6
12. I would argue that we already do owe them thanks
I honestly thought that Lamont's chalenge might make Joe sweat a bit, and that might teach Mr. Joementum that he is accountable to the grassroots Democrats. I thought Leiberman 59% Lamont 41% would make a statement enough.

This primary has been successful beyond my wildest dreams, and it is all because Connecticut voters seem to want to vote with their heads and not with the wisdom of the beltway. If we had a country full of Connecticut voters, we wouldn't even be in this spot.

Thank you, CT, for giving progressives a chance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 10:28 AM
Response to Original message
7. Does CT have open primaries ?
That is both republicans and democrats can vote? Joe's comments will draw more 'pugs to the polls to "help".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calico1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 10:49 AM
Response to Reply #7
11. No. They are closed. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 05:37 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. Is that good or bad ?
Virginia has 'open' primaries, no party registration required, which is a joke when there are NO REPUBLICAN'ts running off :cry:

2004 was a nightmare in Virginia's Primary, there are more Republican'ts so they vote for the Dem they think they can BEAT...argghhhhh. Kerry won our primary. So my theory is correct ?

No offense to Kerry, I supported Kerry/Edwards 110%, but primaries are worthless IMHO.

How easy is it in CT to change registration for closed primaries? No offense to Lieberman, but the GOP loves him on the Senate floor. I rest my case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
calico1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-04-06 04:12 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. It's good!
It means that only registered Democrats can participate in the primary. Also, if you want to change from one party to another it takes 90 days to take effect. This means that any Republican that might have wanted to vote for Joe would have had to change their registration by May 8. They weren't worrying then. The only people who can register as Democrats and still vote in the primay are new voters and non affiliated voters. They have until noon on Aug. 7.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Deacon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 10:32 AM
Response to Original message
8. Damn Straight Its About The Future Of The Party
Will lobbyists or voters control the 94 Percenters (94% of all incumbents are returned to their seats.) Its time the "D" after a congressperson's name stood for something again. We are tired of de facto One Party Rule (The Incumbency Party.)
1. How long before blatant Election Fraud is investigated?
2. How long before No-Bid Contracts for politically connected companies is investigated?
3. How long before Campaign Finance Reform?
4. How long before the Fairness Doctrine is re-established?
5. How long before we join Canada & Mexico as North American democracies?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 10:38 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Well stated....it is our future and
...the whole world will be watching Connecticut on Tuesday :patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
last1standing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 10:47 AM
Response to Reply #8
10. It's time the "R" stood for something, too.
Other than corruption, that is. I don't mind principled conservatives who honestly work to find solutions and come up with different answers than me. What disgusts me is when the members of both parties belly up to the trough to choke down whatever the lobbyists are feeding them that day. It's gotten so bad that they don't even seem to want to hide it anymore.

When some people here go on about how Lieberman losing the primary would be a bad thing for the Democrats, I just keep thinking how much I don't really care. What damned good is a Democrat who sells us out at every opportunity? Does it help to have a pro-choice senator if only the wealthy can afford to have children? What good is clean air if only a few are able to enjoy it? That's truly what it's coming down to, a society of the many for the rich. We need people in office who can reverse this growing trend and Lieberman is just not one of those who'll help us. His record shows that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catchawave Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Aug-03-06 05:27 PM
Response to Reply #10
13. I'm married to an "R" who donates to the RNC :(
Other than that, he's perfect :loveya:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LWolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Aug-04-06 07:32 PM
Response to Reply #8
16. Applause!
:applause:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Jul 25th 2014, 02:51 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC