Its from Talking Points Memo but its short on substance. If true it would be an interesting and disasterious end to his political life.
Of course, it couldn’t possibly be rumors disseminated by the rabid anti-Liberman group…
Linoleum… toe the line bro. Democrats are honest people who would never spread rumors.
what is the sound of one hand clapping, bart?
Why do you fight Joementum?
I think “career” is a misnomer. I would categorize Lieberman’s run in politics as more of a “grim spectacle” or at best, “shameful debacle.”
I distinctly remember the Republican opposition to Jeffords wasn’t called “rabid”…
You probably couldn’t hear it over the whooshing sounds of all the wreaths being tossed in his general direction in Democratic circles after he left the GOP…
If - and at this point it’s hardly certain - he loses the nomination, it will simply be a realigning so that senator’s reflect the ideologies of their constituencies.
It’s what killed Tom Daschle in South Dakota - how the leader of the Democratic party managed to hang on as long as he did is the truly amazing part of the story and not that he lost. Now South Dakotans get their reactionary conservative leadership like they wanted; and so too will Connecticut shift as well.
I personally disagree with Lieberman on the war.
But agree with Lieberman on:
- choice (he’s po-choice)
- the environment (green as they come)
- education (he and Ted Kennedy are buds on the issue)
- economy (voted for EIC, raising the minimum wage, against deficit spending, against the Bush tax cuts)
- energy (lead the fight on fighting Republicans on drilling in ANWR)
- labor (pro working man)
- health care (guaranteed coverage for kids and if you lose your job, you DON’T lose your health care coverage)
And so while he’s irked me on the war, I don’t understand it when anyone says that he’s not a “real” democrat. I also don’t understand why anyone would support Lamont over Lieberman… when they don’t know jack about Ned Lamont’s positions on most of these issues.
Jakub, I don’t think it’s just “the war.” On economics, he voted for the bankruptcy bill and is continually in the pocket of the insurance companies. Most importantly, he cares more about sucking up to Republicans than doing his job as a Democrat.
Atrios (Duncan Black) has a better explanation of why he’s so awful in the La Times.
The war is certainly a reason — and given how events continue to devolve in Iraq, a perfectly sufficient one — but those who focus only on that miss the broader opposition to Lieberman and the kind of politics he represents.
For too long he has defined his image by distancing himself from other Democrats, cozying up to right-wing media figures and, at key moments, directing his criticisms at members of his own party instead of at the Republicans in power.
Late last year, after President Bush’s job approval ratings hit record lows, Lieberman decided to lash out at the administration’s critics, writing in the ultraconservative Wall Street Journal editorial pages that “we undermine presidential credibility at our nation’s peril.” In this he echoed the most toxic of Republican talking points — that criticizing the conduct of the war is actually damaging to national security.
Lieberman has a long history of providing cover for the worst of Republican actions while enthusiastically serving as his own party’s scold. After the Senate acquitted President Clinton on all impeachment charges, Lieberman called for his censure. More recently, he rejected a call by Sen. Russell D. Feingold (D-Wis.) to censure Bush over the National Security Agency’s warrantless wiretapping program, calling the attempt “divisive.”
Lieberman looks happiest when playing a “Fox News Democrat,” as he did in a February appearance on Sean Hannity’s radio program, during which the two exchanged compliments and expressions of friendship and Hannity offered to campaign for him. The senator seems to enjoy Sunday talk shows more than actually doing his job. New Orleans could have been spared the hacktastic performance of Michael Brown, the unqualified former director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, had Lieberman not shooed him through the confirmation process in a breezy 42-minute hearing.
So? The GOP is loving Leiberman in a complete mirror image of that. By contrast, surprisingly few people called GOP members out for Jeffords “rabid.”
There’s a strange media/rhetoric gap I can’t figure out.
And c’mon this is not true.
Basically a blogger who has a beef with Lieberman came up with a question and decided to send an email to stir the pot.
I may disagree with joe Lieberman on the war, but I recognize that:
- he has been a life long Democrat (he literally risked his life and went down to Mississippi and registered African Americans to vote)
- he was on the Democratic ticket in 2000
- he ran for the Democratic nomination in 2004
- he’s running as a Democrat if he loses to Lamont - but as write-in Democrat
What I don’t understand:
Where’s the blogger outrage on the guys who actually voted for this idiotic war for purely political reasons and then flip-flopped back now that it’s gone south. If bloggers want to punish anyone, it should be those idiots.
Joe Lieberman hates videogames so I hate Joe Lieberman.
I like to pretend I have opinions about war, death, abortion, taxes, segregation, women's suffrage, free speech, the environment, separation of church and state, gun control, the war on drugs, and welfare, but at my heart I am as much a one issue voter as any kneejerk flagwaving dipshit.
And Biden is in the pocket of the credit card companies. And Edwards was beholden to the trial lawyers. All of these guys have in-state interest groups.
As for Lieberman’s style - I think he’s guilty as charged. He is comfortable criticizing Democrats. And while I think he’s tone deaf in some cases, I again don’t think that’s any reason to say he’s not a democrat. Lieberman’s voting record is more in line with Ted Kennedy than most people realize. And yet voters condemn him and champion neo-con John McCain?!? I just don’t get it.
Don’t forget Hillary Clinton.
I can address this one off the top of my head.
Voted for Cloture on Alito (the would be climatic battle between Pro Life/Pro Choice that never came to pass.) Suggested Catholic Hospitals not be required to dispense emergency contraceptives to rape vicitims. “In Connecticut, it shouldn’t take more than a short ride to get to another hospital”
Lieberman was endorsed by NARAL and Planned Parenthood. Why? Because he has one of the BEST records in the U.S. Senate on choice, hands down.
He was the only 04 candidate to come back from campaigning when Republicans were trying to limit choice in '04. Kerry and Edwards stayed on the road.
And by the way, if anyone is interested, this site has been updated. The response?