Rethinking Lieberman

[Ringo84]

Oh man, am I going to get flamed for this. But I want to say it because I came on DU to discuss politics with fellow Democrats.

I'm rethinking the whole "Lieberman is a traitor" and "Lieberman should leave the party" stuff.

I'm no DINO! I don't think I support anything the Republicans are currently doing. But I want to make sure that we don't become what we hate here on DU.

When we say, "Well, if you support the war, support x and support y, you're not a Democrat", we have the potential to become like fundamentalists, who say, "Well, if you don't believe that every comma, dot, dash, and phrase in the Bible is literal truth, than you're not a Christian".

There is room for latitude within our party. There are liberal Democrats, like us, and there are more conservative Democrats also. Whenever any RW journalist says "The Left" this and "The Left" that, I always say, "It's as if you think we all think alike. Do all Republicans think alike?"

And Do we really want to become dittoheads like the RWers?

On the other hand, Lieberman has supported almost everything Bush has proposed since 2000. No question that that is questionable at best. But I just want to make sure that we don't become so entrenched in our views that we become fundamentalist Democrats - dittoheads.

So I'm not so sure that I can keep up the "don't let the door catch you in the ass" stuff that I've been posting here.

I'd appreciate it if you all thought about what I wrote here before writing a knee-jerk post about how I'm a "DINO" and a Freeper. It's something to think about.
Ringo

[samdogmom]

1. Maybe it's the Lieberman/Bush kiss that gets to me!

http://www.wonkette.com/politics/funny-pictures/bush-kissing-lieberman-video-032091.php



On Edit: If this doesn't sum up his relationship with the present administration, what else could? And, if we want any chance of eliminating this administration, then Joe has to go!

[Gabi Hayes]

2. you did write the following, yes?

''On the other hand, Lieberman has supported almost everything Bush has proposed since 2000.''

you can work the rest out for yourself

[lonestarnot]

22. Not even a second thought. He's got to go.

[GodlessBiker]

3. Yawn. Joe should go because of his positions. That's all.

All candidates should be judged on their positions on the issues.

[Cocoa]

4. no harm in thinking, imo

nor in rethinking.

In my case, the more I think about Lieberman, the more I want to see him gone.

[smiley_glad_hands]

5. I agree

that we shouldn't box ourselves into some prescribed definition of what is democrat, but Lieberman has basically turned his back on the party these days, always siding with with rethugs & W in the name of bipartisanship. It seems he's always hedging his bets.

[Ringo84]

15. Re:

Yeah. I tend to agree. I mentioned it to my Dad today, and he basically laid out what I wrote in this thread. It's good to at least think about it.
Ringo

[LiviaOlivia]

6. Anyone Ann Coulter supports I don't.

Anyone who supports the war in Iraq I don't.

Ann Coulter Endorses Joe Lieberman
June 22, 2006
http://www.newshounds.us/2006/06/22/ann_coulter_endorses_joe_lieberman.php

[Ringo84]

16. Good point

For most Democrats, THAT'S the kiss of death.
Ringo

[Lochloosa]

29. hannity has also offered his endorsment...nuf said

[Redstone]

7. There's nothiing for me to think about. I live in Connecticut, and I'm

going to register Democrat for a day (I've always been independent) so I can vote against Lieberman in the primary.

No knee-jerk party-line repsonse here...

Redstone

[Ringo84]

18. Redstone

I didn't mean to imply that you were a knee-jerk for thinking that Lieberman was a DINO. I just wanted to express my point of view.
Ringo

[Redstone]

21. That's fine. I wasn't arguing your right to express your opinion at all.

Just supplying you with an opinion from someone who toes NO party's line.

Redstone

[napi21]

8. You know what I really think cooked Joe? That hug & kiss from Shrub!

Remember, after I think it was the SOU speech, Shrub met Joe on his way out of the House and hugged him and kissed him?

there are a lot of Dems who get a lot of criticism here for their votes, but NONE as much as Joe! Joe always seems to be on the opposite side when the vote is about something we Dems feel is very important!

Alito
The bankruptcy Bill
The morning after pill for rape victims
The SS reform


It's NOT just that he supports Shrub on Iraq, it's so many other issues that will have YEARS of impact on everyone's life!

Think Alito! He's a reasonably young judge. He'll be on SCOTUS for YEARS!!!!!

Many of the other votes can be reversed, but you can't reverse a SC judge!

I don't necessarily hate Joe, but he has chosen the WRONG issues to side with the Pubs on.

[GodlessBiker]

10. Nicely put.

[madaboutharry]

9. Lieberman has let down not just democrats

but all Americans by embracing this war in Iraq. Lieberman has allowed his hawkish views concerning the middle east to overshadow what is best for the American people. Is he entitled to have conservative views, absolutely. Is he entitled to exist at the fringe of the democratic party, I believe so. It is up to the people of Connecticut to accept or reject him. What I feel now is that Lieberman has a sense of entitlement to this senate seat. He has lost sight of the democratic process. He has made a grievous error in judgment by thinking that he is not held to the results of the primary. I may have not liked his political views, but this last maneuver is not acceptable.

[Ringo84]

20. Good point. And well put (nt)

[readmoreoften]

11. In better times, I think that Lieberman would be a Moderate Republican.

The political spectrum has swung so far to the right, that is isn't close-minded to demand that our candidates don't do certain things. For example: back the war in Iraq. No one even criticized (not many anyway) the war in Afghanistan. But Iraq is an groundless war designed by fascists. I'm not using the word frivolously either. The PNAC are concerned with American Empire by any means necessary. A democrat should not support this war. Particularly when there are so many dems who are standing up and saying no to the administration.

The Bush Regime is not a presidency. It is crony fascism, extreme right-wing. The people who call themselves "moderates" today are actually conservatives. Many people who call themselves moderate democrats are actually moderate republicans. And, honestly, a good portion of people who call themselves liberal or progressive are mainline democrats: pro-choice, pro-worker, affordable health care, separation of church and state, pro-education. That's really mainline stuff.

To be a "conservative" democrat right now is almost like being a disgruntled republican. There are, in fact, many disgruntled republicans becoming democrats. But I don't think we should race to the right in order to keep them. Bush got ahead by appealing to his base. We will not get ahead by appealing to his base. We will get ahead by appealing to *our* base.

[Faygo Kid]

12. Easy! You're no traitor. But Lieberman is a fraud, and not just the war.

Joe Lieberman never met a wealthy pharmaceutical industry donor he didn't love. Joe Lieberman has never, ever criticized the Republicans with the vehemance he has criticized his own party's leaders (see, Bill Clinton). Joe Lieberman doesn't go to the mat for his fellow Dems; he is too busy calculating his own reputation (see, his plans if he loses the Dem primary). Joe Lieberman will be on your television screen in 2008, no matter what happens, should we miraculously actually have an election in that year. He will address the GOP convention, endorse the Rove hand-picked candidate, and be the Zell Miller of his time. And he will be very, very well compensated for it. And that is what Joe Lieberman is all about. And so we fight back. Don't be fooled. Joe knows exactly where his bread is buttered.

http://www.alternet.org/images/managed/Story+Image_thumb_051006_story1.jpg

[madfloridian]

13. Why are people so upset over a primary opponent?

That is the way our system is supposed to work. We are supposed to have a choice in the primaries, that is when we decide.

If the leaders of the DSCC and the DCCC are going to keep picking our candidates for us, and they sound like they are....then we lose our way of choosing.

Our state party chair apparently passed the word to discourage primaries. I can see her reasoning (money), but I also see danger. When leaders keep picking leaders there is no new blood in the party.

When new people run, get experience, then run again...we start to build that farm team we need.

[papau]

14. I'll support Joe whole heartedly if he wins the primary - except for Bush

ass and cheek kissing. and VP 2000 debating Cheney like he wanted to lose (did you note the dif between 2000 and last night?), Joe is a solid Dem - and indeed it will be easier to pick up 3 currently GOP seats in Connecticut with Joe on the ticket.

But Man will I be pissed if he runs as an independent so as to please the GOP.

[BurtWorm]

17. Do Democrats want one of "their own" in the Senate enabling Bush?

That's the question CT Dems have to ask themselves. Do they want to send a Democrat back to the Senate who will make it that much harder to end the occupation in Iraq? How important, in other words, is the Iraq question to CT Dems (and ultimately, for the whole state of CT)? How important is it to the people of CT to end Bushism in Washington and the world? How important is to them to maintain the status quo, or to put an end to business as usual?

[sendero]

19. Gee..

.... there sure is a lot of rethinking going on here! How utterly charming!

No, there is nothing to rethink. Anyone still defending the Iraq war is either evil or stupid. Neither evil nor stupid people should be in our government.

It really is not that complicated.

[Bluebear]

23. 'Lieberman has supported almost everything Bush has proposed since 2000.'

Case closed.

[Sir Jeffrey]

24. So long as you're thinking, it can't be that bad...BUT

There are serious policy differences between Lieberman and the Dems. His act seems to be side with Dems to look good, then stab them in the back over the big stuff.

Example: "Yes, I agreed that Iraq was a just war, the right thing to do, but I disagreed with Bush over earmarking funds for a bridge in Alaska. See? I'm independent!" Insane.

He also decides to stab his fellow Dems in the back when it comes to staying on message as a party. He is always on TV and radio muddying the waters. Just listen to him going on Sean Hannity's show and smearing fellow Dems right along with Insanity Hannity.

It is okay to have differences of opinion. Dems have always been a coalition party. But Lieberman sides with Bush and the conservatives on so many issues, he really isn't doing much for the Dems in CT or anywhere else aside from taking Dem money, seats on committees, and being an enabler for a radical conservative agenda.

Besides, if the guy was a true Dem, he would honor the wish of the voters in CT's DEMOCRATIC primary. Anyone who has studied third party candidates knows that the two parties most closely aligned ideologically split the votes and enable the party on the other end of the spectrum to have a better chance at winning.

Joe's final act of enabling Republicans may cost us the Senate this fall. Screw him.

[autorank]

25. Ringo...

You said:

"On the other hand, Lieberman has supported almost everything Bush has proposed since 2000. No question that that is questionable at best. But I just want to make sure that we don't become so entrenched in our views that we become fundamentalist Democrats - dittoheads."

My primary response to this is as a citizen. What a nightmare Lieberman is. Then as a Democrat, it gets even worse.

How does calling Lieberman what he is makek us ditto heads?

He's a solid supporter of Bush. It's just a fact.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

26. You DO understand what Lieberman said this week, that has everyone's

outrage meter red lined, don't you?

Hint: It's not because he's a Bush lackey/buttkisser, or because he supports the war. Those things have put him in a precarious position with Dem voters in CT.

It's the thing that he did, in response to being in that position, that has everyone in an uproar.

You do know what that is, don't you? If you don't, search "lieberman", "joementum" etc. and read a few of the zillion threads from this week on the topic.

[skipos]

27. The Democratic Party is about the voters

and who they choose to represent. It works from the ground up. 99% of the time, Democratic politicians respect the will of primary voters and bow out when they are defeated. Joe announced that he doesn't care about the will of CT Dems unless they nominate him. He made it clear that Joe's #1 concern is Joe. That is when I switched from a Joe defender to a 100% Lamont supporter. If Joe isn't loyal to CT Democrats, why should Democrats be loyal to Joe?

[PWRinNY]

28. Good food for thought

I applaud your open minded and thoughtful post. You're absolutely right, that we do not EVER want to become what we despise. And on that note, may I never become Lieberman. :)

[Ringo84]

34. PWRinNY

Thank you, and...

may I never become Lieberman.

Amen to that. :beer:
Ringo

[RagAss]

30. You have a right to your opinions without being flamed....and

I have a right to continue steadfast in my belief that he is a traitor to the party.....and a power hungry, desperate assclown.......

Rags

[SCRUBDASHRUB]

31. Hey, Ringo.

:)

[Ringo84]

33. Hey, Scrub!

How are ya? Sorry if it seems that I haven't gotten back to you in the past few days.
Ringo

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

32. he goes on hannity-he barely acknowledges AAR exists

and when he cozies up to Sean, he listens to that same tired list of out-of-context or distorted comments by dem leaders hannity has to read every day. he chuckles and does nothing to counter it. he then takes it as hannity labels his party as evil and weak on defense. he likes being sean's exeption to the 'democrats-are trying-to-undermine-the-fight-against-bin laden' routine

a difference of opinionis fine. a lot of senators voted for the war from the democratic party. but only joe has went out of his way to appeal to the extreme right, while attacking the left and center.