Joe Lieberman's Unforgiveable Sin

[Adam's Apple]

Kiss of Death?
By Matthew Continetti, The Weekly Standard
07/17/2006

Article is too long to post, but it is a good read and an interesting report on the Lamont-Lieberman senatorial contest in CT.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/content/public/articles/000/000/012/417qzbtn.asp

 

[theHawk]

Thats amazing, he is one of the most liberal democrats yet is being hung out to dry by his own party simply because he doesn't jump on the Hate-Bush Bandwagon.


Dems:duh3:

 

[Bonnie]

Lieberman's biggest sin is that he has integrity and character..very big no no's for many in the Democrat world.

 

[acludem]

The primary reasons some Democrats (myself included) have problems with Lieberman is because of his blind support for the war and because of his blind support for the Bush-Cheney energy bill which was loaded with giveaways to big oil and stripped environmental protections, including allowing for drilling in environmentally-sensistive areas off the East coast.

However, if I lived in Connecticut, I would likely vote for Joe Lieberman in this primary. I do think he's a good man, has generally been a good Senator, and is a good Democrat despite his poor record on the war and on this energy bill.

acludem

 

[green lantern]

Lieberman's biggest sin is that he has integrity and character..very big no no's for many in the Democrat world.

lieberman is one of the few democrats who 'gets it' in regards to the war on terror.

 

[Abbey Normal]

The primary reasons some Democrats (myself included) have problems with Lieberman is because of his blind support for the war and because of his blind support for the Bush-Cheney energy bill which was loaded with giveaways to big oil and stripped environmental protections, including allowing for drilling in environmentally-sensistive areas off the East coast.

However, if I lived in Connecticut, I would likely vote for Joe Lieberman in this primary. I do think he's a good man, has generally been a good Senator, and is a good Democrat despite his poor record on the war and on this energy bill.

acludem

So if you oppose the war you are enlightened, but if you support it, you are "blind". Yeah, right.

 

[acludem]

By "Blind" support, I mean that Lieberman has continued to support the war despite evidence that shows that Bush lied about it. And the fact that he voted for the energy bill (the only New England senator Republican or Democrat to do so) despite the massive implications for the environment and the massive giveaways to big oil and energy producers.

acludem

 

[theHawk]

I never new Bush lied about ....what is it he lied about? You don't really say...



Silly me your just being full of shit again.

 

[Adam's Apple]

Lieberman's biggest sin is that he has integrity and character..very big no no's for many in the Democrat world.

 

[5stringJeff]

The GOP could learn something from the Dems in CT, namely that in the primaries, party voters should elect someone who best fits their ideology. Lieberman is losing support because he doesn't stand for the same ideals that many CT Dems stand for; the Dems are a left-wing party, and rightly demand left-wing candidates. In the same manner, Republicans should elect people who stand for the party's conservative ideals instead of settling for people like McCain, Chafee, or Snowe.

 

[Adam's Apple]

By "Blind" support, I mean that Lieberman has continued to support the war despite evidence that shows that Bush lied about it.
acludem

You must not have read the recent reports about WMD and Saddam Hussein that have come out of captured documents in Iraq. No wonder every intelligence source in the world--and all the Democrats in the Clinton Administration-- believed that Saddam had WMD. Bush told the truth about Saddam and WMD as he knew it from the information & materials he had been given. Wasn't it Clinton's Director of the CIA (George Tenet, Democrat) who told Bush it was a "slam dunk"???????

Maybe Bush's biggest mistake was keeping Tenet at CIA when he took office as President. We seem to be doing a better job of intelligence gathering since Tenet's departure and since the wall that Jamie Gorlick built between the FBI and the CIA was torn down; i.e., we're catching the bad guys now before they can cause us major harm.

 

[Abbey Normal]

By "Blind" support, I mean that Lieberman has continued to support the war despite evidence that shows that Bush lied about it. And the fact that he voted for the energy bill (the only New England senator Republican or Democrat to do so) despite the massive implications for the environment and the massive giveaways to big oil and energy producers.

acludem

Even if Bush had "lied" about the war (and there is no evidence that he did), there are sound reasons it support it now. Premature troop withdrawal is a serious concern, for one. There is no evidence that Lieberman's support is blind.

 

[CharlestonChad]

Even if Bush had "lied" about the war (and there is no evidence that he did), there are sound reasons it support it now. Premature troop withdrawal is a serious concern, for one. There is no evidence that Lieberman's support is blind.

But there is evidence that Rumsfeld lied.


I think that we should start withdrawing troops. Not all at once, but at a linear rate.

 

[Abbey Normal]

But there is evidence that Rumsfeld lied.


I think that we should start withdrawing troops. Not all at once, but at a linear rate.

Maybe we could start, if the leftist newspapers would stop publishing our WOT secrets.

 

[CharlestonChad]

Maybe we could start, if the leftist newspapers would stop publishing our WOT secrets.

They'll stop publishing those WOT secrets immediatly after the Bush Admin. stops telling them those "secrets".

 

[Abbey Normal]

They'll stop publishing those WOT secrets immediatly after the Bush Admin. stops telling them those "secrets".

If your friend tells you he is cheating on his wife, do you run and tell the wife all about it? Or do you say to yourself, just because he told me this, doesn't mean I should blab it to her and cause trouble. I will be discreet.

If th eleaker is the bad guy as you say, and the NYT actually had good motives, they would have let the admin. know who the leaker was, and kept the sensitive information secret.

 

[CharlestonChad]

If your friend tells you he is cheating on his wife, do you run and tell the wife all about it? Or do you say to yourself, just because he told me this, doesn't mean I should blab it to her and cause trouble. I will be discreet.

If th eleaker is the bad guy as you say, and the NYT actually had good motives, they would have let the admin. know who the leaker was, and kept the sensitive information secret.

If you're a friend of the wife, is it right to go along with a smile on your face knowing her husband is unfaithful.

What do you mean "if the leaker is a bad guy"? Are you implying that the NYT is the only party at fault?

 

[Bonnie]

lieberman is one of the few democrats who 'gets it' in regards to the war on terror.

And see therin lies his "problem". Democrats really dislike any liberal or Democrat that gives the war any validity because it aims the spotlight on the the socialist part of the Democrat party that has taken over the moderate wing. Why do you think Hillary is distancing herself from Lieberman? She has no idea how to play her part in the Presidential election, should she pretend to be moderate (lie) should she actually embrace the radical wing (much more her speed, but dangerous for getting elected). It's a real dilemna for them, which way to play it and still grab power.

 

[Adam's Apple]

...and the NYT actually had good motives...

Someone, please, give me just one example of the NYT's having good motives when it comes to reporting politics. I'll wait with baited breath for the multiple examples that will surely be forthcoming from this board's libs. Should I check back next year at the same time?

 

[green lantern]

And see therin lies his "problem". Democrats really dislike any liberal or Democrat that gives the war any validity because it aims the spotlight on the the socialist part of the Democrat party that has taken over the moderate wing. Why do you think Hillary is distancing herself from Lieberman? She has no idea how to play her part in the Presidential election, should she pretend to be moderate (lie) should she actually embrace the radical wing (much more her speed, but dangerous for getting elected). It's a real dilemna for them, which way to play it and still grab power.

anything that gets hillarys pantys in a bunch, imo, is a good thing.