Time: Why Joe Lieberman is Fighting for his Political Life

[kskiska]

With bloggers, his constituents and Connecticut Democratic officials still angry about his support for the Iraq war, the moderate Senator could be headed for a shocking fall

As Joe Lieberman was criss-crossing Connecticut last Friday, picking up endorsements from labor unions and being greeted with applause at diners, it seemed like nothing had changed for a man who has long been one of the state's most popular politicians. Then, in the small town of East Lyme, Joe Barry, a retired Vietnam veteran and local Democrat, literally got in Lieberman's face.

"Senator, that was the plan, to get rid of Saddam," Barry said, sitting with about 12 people in a senior center that Lieberman had stopped at. "We got rid of Saddam, now let's get out of there. What are we looking for, Vietnam, where 50,000 people died?" Lieberman calmly responded, "We have a plan," but Barry shot back, "Who has a plan?" "The United States Military, the United States Government," Lieberman said, naming General George Casey, who leads American forces in Iraq.

Lieberman was standing right in front of Barry, and as the discussion continued another minute, the burly veteran stood up face-to-face with the Senator to emphasize his point. "I'm not going to let it go," Barry said, adding, "I would love to see your plan." Lieberman didn't give any ground either. "I'm not for an open-ended but I don't want to leave like that," he said, snapping his fingers. Barry can't even remember the name of Lieberman's opponent, but still he says that Lieberman's strong support for the war has left him unsure if he can vote for him. "I would probably vote for Donald Duck right now," Barry said.

(snip)

Connecticut party officials were particularly incensed when President Bush kissed Lieberman on the cheek following his 2005 State of the Union address. In meetings with state Dems, Lieberman tried to assuage their concerns, but also kept reminding party officials he had a 70% approval rating. Even so, the attacks on the kiss became so vocal that an exasperated Lieberman told one group of Democrats "I didn't kiss him back," a response that didn't exactly hearten them. (The incident has become so radioactive that Lieberman now denies Bush actually kissed him, telling TIME last week "I don't think he kissed me, he leaned over and gave me a hug and said �thank you for being a patriotic American.")

more…
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1207783,00.html

[mike_c]

1. I wonder why none of the DLC apologists have noticed the irony...

...that they've argued vehemently that dems in Congress HAD to support the invasion of Iraq back in October 2002 because it would be "political suicide" to oppose it. In fact, many did oppose it, and the only folks who've come under heavy criticism are the ones that heeded that "conventional political wisdom." The war against Iraq is poison. It's a crime against humanity. Everyone who supported it will eventually rue the day they did so.

[Warpy]

15. I think the decline and fall of Lieberman has another root cause

and it's that damning picture of him playing kissyface with Stupid.

That just isn't playing well in Peoria. Or Harford, New Haven, or Bridgeport, or even tiny, touristy Mystic.

The only place it might be playing well is the section of Newport that hasn't gone to the historical society for public tours.

[depakid]

24. I predict to NO ONE who supported or voted for the war

will get the Democratic nomination in 2008.

[kaygore]

2. The fact that Lieberman has not said he would back Lamont but

might run as an independent says it all.

What 70% approval rating?

Joe needs to be honest and change parties.

And, yes, Bush did kiss him and he has been kissing Bush's ass since day 1.

[Tom Joad]

3. Joe does have powerful friends.

Pro-Israel Donors Rally For Joe, as Left Takes Aim

http://www.forward.com/main/printer-friendly.php?id=7999

With Senator Joseph Lieberman facing an increasingly tight primary fight, pro-Israel interest groups are stepping up their support for the former vice presidential candidate.

Lieberman will face Ned Lamont — a Greenwich, Conn., multimillionaire backed by party liberals unhappy with Lieberman's support for the Iraq War and perceived coziness with Republicans — in Connecticut's August 8 Democratic primary. While polls still predict that the three-term senator will win the contest handily, Lamont's steadily rising poll numbers, as well as the low turnout projected for a midsummer election, has Lieberman supporters rallying to his defense.

"Given the recent turn of events, we have decided to become further engaged in this race," Dr. Ben Chouake said. Chouake is president of Norpac, a nonpartisan, New Jersey-based political action committee that supports pro-Israel candidates. "We're going to contact our membership in the area, see if they can organize some voting drives on the ground, as well as do additional fund raising for his campaign."

Dr. Mandell Ganchrow, the head of the pro-Israel New York-based Hudson Valley Political Action Committee, told the Forward that "people are taking this race very seriously." A former president and chairman of the Orthodox Union, Ganchrow added that he thinks Lieberman "understands that he's in for a very tough race."
_________________________________

Though most jewish voters in the U.S. are opposed to the Iraq war, it is groups like this that get things done. We need to stand against organizations that support war.

and support groups like this:
http://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org

[Behind the Aegis]

8. like a day without sun...

:eyes:

[iconoclastNYC]

69. Right.

The Isreal lobby is just a myth people! And it's antisemetic to claim otherwise.

[Behind the Aegis]

70. what a clever statement...

...not really...

Why act as if I said something I didn't? Oh that's right...because there is no REAL point!

[iconoclastNYC]

71. Reading between the lines.

[Behind the Aegis]

72. Then keep reading...

...because you missed the point by a mile!

[iconoclastNYC]

73. All this becuase of a roll of your eyes

lol...yeah i missed the point.

[Behind the Aegis]

74. perhaps if you knew the history...

...then you'd actually understand. To be honest, I don't give a rat's hairy ass that you don't get the point. I just don't find it amusing when others claim to know what I am saying without saying it, especially when they have no fucking idea and know nothing about me.

[Erika]

4. Joe's in a tough spot with his unquestioning support of Israel

as his first concern. That being said, he is not a peace maker. He's a war monger...spinning his wheels.

This country has had it with wars that exist on lies and are killing our troops and accomplishing nothing with many innocents dead. Joe doesn't seem to realize he's part of the problem rather than the solution.
The situation in the mideast, including Israel and Palestine, needs peace makers not the likes of W and Joe. That kiss by W planted on joe said alot.

[Behind the Aegis]

7. Says you?

"Joe's in a tough spot with his unquestioning support of Israel as his first concern." Any proof to back up that bullshit?

[AndyTiedye]

18. Please Help Us Out Here

We could fill pages here with examples of Lieberman's support of Israel and wars that only benefit Israel.
(Or at least Israel's hawks think they do).
That would not prove that his support is unquestioning. It is difficult to prove a negative.

Please help us out with some examples of Senator Lieberman questioning or criticizing Israel's actions.
I can't think of any right now.

[Behind the Aegis]

22. Try again.

Let me help you out as to WHAT I was questioning...""Joe's in a tough spot with his unquestioning support of Israel as his first concern."

[AndyTiedye]

41. That Should Make It Even Easier For You

Then your counterexample could be any case in which ANY other concern
trumped his support for (the right wing of) Israel and caused him to
vote against their wishes.

You only need to come up with one.

Edit:
Is all you are trying to say that the war isn't really good for Israel?
I think all of us would agree. Obviously, the Israeli right wing does not,
and it appears from here that Senator Lieberman is more closely aligned
with them than with the Democratic Party in the USA.

[Behind the Aegis]

43. I have NOTHING to prove.

I was NOT the one who made the claim that his policies are trumped by his desire to serve Israel first! The onus is not on me!

So why don't you prove that his "allegiance" to Israel has ever changed his vote? See, that is a "positive," so you should be able to "prove" the allegation!

I am so sick and tired of this bullshit charge that he is more loyal to Israel than the US and that is exactly what the original statement implied! I am sick and tired of every self-proclaimed "progressive" attacking his position on Israel. I am really fucking sick and tired of hearing how all the wars we fight in the ME are because of or for Israel!! And, I am even more sick and tired of people discussing Israel as if they have the slightest clue about the situation there!

[liberalhistorian]

58. Sometimes the truth really

hurts to hear, doesn't it? :eyes:

[Behind the Aegis]

59. Almost as much as blatant propaganda.

:eyes:

[liberalhistorian]

60. You mean the propaganda that

automatically labels anyone who criticizes Lieberman and/or Israeli policies is anti-semitic? :eyes:

[Behind the Aegis]

63. No...I mean the bullshit in this thread.

I also mean the bullshit like your statement. Has anyone called anyone else anti-Semitic for questioning Lieberman or Joe in this thread?! NOPE! That is your bomb-throwing!

[liberalhistorian]

77. Maybe not in this thread,

but those of us with legitimate criticisms of Lieberman and Israeli policies sure hear it all the time, even on here.

[Behind the Aegis]

80. And THAT is the point!

You threw out a charge that was NOT accurate in this thread. And I hear, all the time, how know one can say anything about Israel or Lieberman without the charge of anti-Semitism, yet no can back that up. I have seen PLENTY of threads about both with NO charges of anti-Semitism. What I find more mystifying is why some here cannot accept that SOMETIMES anti-Semitism IS the motivation for the anti-Israeli "criticisms." Bury your (collective, not you personally) heads, but we will not! We will not be laid silent by charges of actions we haven't done!

[Voltaire99]

83. Anti-Semitism?

What I find more mystifying is why some here cannot accept that SOMETIMES anti-Semitism IS the motivation for the anti-Israeli "criticisms."

I suspect you're right, ultimately. But would you care to cite some proof for this? Can you point to such a pattern in DU posts--or, at least, even one such post in which anti-Semitism is the motivation for criticizing Israeli policy?

[Behind the Aegis]

88. I would if I could.

Surely you know the moderators delete anti-Semitic posts, yes? There was one such post, I am still trying to find it, where the poster posted another's work because he felt it was so good. His post was locked after two hours because the post he cited as being "so good" was deleted for being anti-Semitic and was a critique of Israel. Although not about Israel, I will show you that others are aware that anti-Semitism exists here...Why is an anti-Semitic baiting thread still up?

As for a pattern, I cannot show that, because when I see it, I alert and, hopefully, the bigot eats granite!

[Erika]

20. Joe was picked by Gore because of his Jewish backing

Joe has said many times that he backs Israel 100%.

What's good for Israel is what he will back. It's not exactly a secret. The war to kill Muslims is good for Israel.

[Behind the Aegis]

23. Oh brother!

:eyes:

I NEVER said he didn't support Israel. I asked you to prove your bullshit assertion that he places Israel first...but considering your statement..."The war to kill Muslims is good for Israel." I think I already know the answer!

[Erika]

27. If Israel had wanted peace, they would have worked for it

Just like if W wanted peace he would have worked for it, rather than finding fighting and killing Muslims to be the answer. Don't blame me for Joe being a mouth piece of the Zionist Israel.

[Behind the Aegis]

31. Yes, it is just that easy.

:eyes:

I don't blame you for anything other than spreading propaganda. You obviously know little or nothing about the I/P situation; therefore, it is pointless to discuss that with you, especially when I see the "buzzwords" pop up!

I wonder what the reaction would be if people started saying that Gonzales was a "Mexican-firster?" Or I wonder if attacks on Kerry taking orders from the Vatican would be tolerated here?

[Erika]

35. Please read about my son's observations

As a young guy wanting to do right.

[Behind the Aegis]

38. And what does that have to do with anything?

I don't support the war in Iraq. But I also don't support propaganda that says Israel and the US are responsible for all the ills of the world, including the Middle East. Many of those countries are in abject poverty, because like the US, they have governments that don't give a shit about them.

[Erika]

40. And under W we're headed that way

Sorry, but have funded and supported this abomination of a war on Muslims. Whether by us or the Israelis against Hamas. Joe momentum was the biggest supporter of war against Muslims and remains such.

[Heywood J]

54. You guys wanna keep it down?

Take it to PM or something. The rest of us are trying to have a discussion here.

[Chulanowa]

42. Silly argument

At least, if I'm reading it right. It seems to me you're saying people who criticize Leiberman's policy only do so because he's Jewish? While that's a great meme to shut someone up with, it does ignore the facts of Joe's voting record and his actual actions on the subject, which in fact DOES put Pisrael ahead of his own state's contituents. Perhaps if Gonzales acted as relentlessly pro-Mexico as Joe is relentlessly pro-Israel, such a statement about him would in fact be correct.

[Behind the Aegis]

44. Prove it!

"It seems to me you're saying people who criticize Leiberman's policy only do so because he's Jewish?"

You understood incorrectly. But, you go on to prove exactly what I was talking about! "it does ignore the facts of Joe's voting record and his actual actions on the subject, which in fact DOES put Pisrael ahead of his own state's contituents." PROVE IT! Prove that he has ever voted against his constituents BECAUSE he placed Israel first!

[Chulanowa]

86. It's a matter of public record.

AIPAC has given Joe Lieberman a 100% rating on his voting record.
Now on the other hand, Americans for Democratic Action gave him a 70% rating, regarding how liberally he votes.

So we have a guy that will vote on the side of Israel no matter the issue - I'm sure you realize what may be good fir Israel is not necessarily good for the US, and vice versa - but will take a position counter to his democratic constituency fairly regularly.

I'm glad I misunderstood you - your phrasing about the "mexican first" Gonzalez, or a "Catholic first" Kerry is what gave me the impression that you believed Joe was only getting criticism on this point because he's Jewish.

[Behind the Aegis]

87. That proves nothing!

So what that AIPAC gave him a 100% rating? That doesn't prove he places Israel before the US or that any of his votes were changed because of a conflict with Israeli intrests!

[Chulanowa]

90. No, it doesn't mean he "changed votes"

But then you can't go back and change your vote after voting in the senate, so that criteria is worthless.

AIPAC favors israeli interests over American interests. They're quite open about it. The Iraq war was definately not in America's best interest, but AIPAC was for it - Because it would knock out a competitor for regional dominance. And now, we have AIPAC cheering for war with Iran for the same reason. Obviously a war with Iran is not in America's best interest. Yet AIPAC is rooting for it.

Joe Leiberman has never broken lockstep with this group's ideas and policies when it comes up to vote. That's what his 100% rating from them means. When it comes time to vote, he will undoubtedly take whatever position AIPAC favors, he always has. Since AIPAC is not out there for America's best interests, it can be surmised that Joe isn't, either.

[Behind the Aegis]

91. More worthless propaganda

"The Iraq war was definitely not in America's best interest, but AIPAC was for it - Because it would knock out a competitor for regional dominance." The war wasn't in anyone's best interest! The GOI supported whatever the American government wanted to do, but was hoping more for sanctions. Why? Because the last time a Bush invaded Iraq, Israel was paid in SCUD missiles! This bullshit of "the Iraq war was fought for (or because of Israel) borders on anti-Semitic swill! It is definitely anti-Israeli crap, and it's not true!

As for Iran, there are MANY countries not happy with that situation, so do not lay it at the feet of Israel! Of course, Israel is the only country recently "threatened" by Iran.

"Joe Lieberman has never broken lockstep with this group's ideas and policies when it comes up to vote. That's what his 100% rating from them means. When it comes time to vote, he will undoubtedly take whatever position AIPAC favors, he always has. Since AIPAC is not out there for America's best interests, it can be surmised that Joe isn't, either."

The aforementioned is just stupid on principle. It is nothing more than a thinly-veiled remark that the Jewish senator is more loyal to Israel than the US. I think we both know what that is called!

BTW, where did you find that Lieberman has a 100% voting rating with AIPAC? I can't find it.

[Chulanowa]

93. I do apologize

I gathered the 100% from an article I found - Upon rereading it turns out that it was Lieberman speaking aobut John Kerry's voting record. Perhaps I should restrain my political intake immediately after work ;) Like yourself, I've had no luck finding Sen. Lieberman's rating - Or for that matter, Sen. Kerry's. Or anyone else's.

So please consider that withdrawn, on the basis that Sen. Lieberman may have just been pulling a statistic out of his ass.

However I do need to question your invective. You have convinced yourself that I'm saying "He's a jew therefore he's more loyal to Israel than America!". If I in fact, WERE saying such a thing, you'd be right to call antisemitism. However, it's the fact that I believe he's bought and paid for by a non-American interest that gets my gopher. I don't like the fact that a certain methodist politician has been bought out by Saudi Arabia any more than I like Sen. Leiberman raking in cash from AIPAC.

Does this mean I'm an antimethodist? Anticaucasian? No, it means I'm antiduplicitouspoliticalasshole.

While I'm reasonably certain that you and I would likely never see eye-to-eye on an issue such as the Israel / Palestine conflict, I assure you that for me it has nothing more to do with the jewishness of Israel than your own position has to do with the Arabness of Palestine.

If I wanted to receive mindless bullshit and halfhearted insults, I would go register on FreeRepublic, where every critic of Condoleeza Rice is a misogynist Klansman.

[Behind the Aegis]

94. I also apologize.

It appears I misunderstood your example. I will explain how I reached the conclusion I did. You said:

Joe Lieberman has never broken lockstep with this group's ideas and policies when it comes up to vote. That's what his 100% rating from them means. When it comes time to vote, he will undoubtedly take whatever position AIPAC favors, he always has. Since AIPAC is not out there for America's best interests, it can be surmised that Joe isn't, either.

I read that as: Joe always votes as AIPAC wants. (forget the rating thing since you have explained that) AIPAC is more loyal to Israel than the US; therefore, Joe, who always votes as AIPAC, is more loyal to Israel. As for your example of a Methodist being bought out by Saudi Arabia, I have never heard about Methodists being more loyal to Saudi Arabia. The closest thing would have been from the 60's, when JFK was accused of being a problem because he might be more loyal to The Vatican. It was a charge leveled against many Catholics, then and, not as often, now. However, the idea that Jews are more loyal to Israel than their home country is still very active (30% of Europe, and 33% of the US). Hell, tonight I was attacked because of my avatar and I posted a story where the alleged attacker was from North Africa (there was no mention of his religion). It didn't matter that it was listed as a top story on my homepage website (iwon.com)...no, the very fact that I had a Magen David avatar was enough for my motivations to be called into question and was viscously attacked.

If you search the pages, you will find a number of threads about Lieberman. However, you will generally only find my name there when he is attacked for being more loyal to Israel, there is an attack on Israel as a puppeteer of our foreign policy, or an attack on his religion. Other than those three things, I usually steer clear because I don't really care for him because of his stubbornness about the illegal war in Iraq.

While I'm reasonably certain that you and I would likely never see eye-to-eye on an issue such as the Israel / Palestine conflict, I assure you that for me it has nothing more to do with the jewishness of Israel than your own position has to do with the Arabness of Palestine.

I am reasonably certain of this, as well. I also agree with the rest of that statement. Oddly enough, I had this discussion tonight as well! Just because I say someone is anti-Israeli or pro-Palestinian doesn't mean s/he is anti-Semitic. However, the new game is to attack pro-Israeli/anti-Palestinian posters as Islamaphobes/Anti-Arabic or claim the pro-Israeli has already leveled the "anti-Semitic card," even when it is clear it has not happened!

Therefore, I apologize for my misunderstanding.

Peace!

[Chulanowa]

95. Alrighty then

The methodist in question would be Bush, by the way.

[BeyondGeography]

29. Read Haaretz every now and then

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/PrintEdition.jhtml

It's more enlightened on the topic of Israel and the Middle East than any newspaper in this country and it will help you with your thinking.

[Behind the Aegis]

32. Do you know me?

I am guessing you don't, otherwise you would know that I read Ha'aretz often, sometimes daily.

[BeyondGeography]

34. Nope; helluva paper though

and that statement above was very unfortunate.

[Behind the Aegis]

36. Egg meet face...

I thought your post was to me...I followed the dotted line the wrong way. Sorry for the snippy remark.

[BeyondGeography]

39. No worries

[Erika]

33. Thanks but my son served in the military

in the Sinai. He traveled into Cairo, Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, etc.

In his travel into the Muslim countries he found abject poverty, women and children begging the patrols for food and money. He said that was his first real experience with that kind of poverty.

He loved Tel Aviv, fast and beautiful girls, with all the holiness and glitz of a big American city.

He hates the thought we are killing the poor Muslims, village by village, province by province, bombing the little they have into oblivion and violating their religious beliefs.

He's a very serious young man and finds the Iraqi war deplorable.

[Demeter]

48. Considering How Much Money the US Poured Into Isreal

they ought to have something to show for it. Of course, when Dubya pours money into something, like Iraq, for example, he's only pouring it into friendly pockets who stuff it into numbered accounts, or pour it back into Bush's campaign funds. That is why there's nothing to show for it in Iraq (except the monstrosity of a US embassy, multiple permanent military encampments, and civil war).

And I'm not the least impressed with the rising enrollments of students in Iraq.

[yurbud]

53. they can get away with things that would called anti-Semitic if said

by an American.

Which is too bad since they are just allowing a healthy range of debate.

[BeyondGeography]

62. Exactly right

The intellectual level of the I/P discussion in this country is totally depressing.

[yurbud]

76. critics have to be thick skinned or preface every comment saying

we should treat Israel as we do all our friends and allies, that no one is above criticism.

[LibDemAlways]

5. Holy Joe is learning the hard way that if

you mingle with turds, you start to smell like shit.




Bye, bye Lieberman.

[cliss]

37. There you go. I was hoping that 'radioactive'

photo would turn up on this thread.

Kissed him on the cheek? I'm looking real close, and.........

[Arugula Latte]

55. Joe was probably hoping Bush would slip him some tongue.

:puke:

[BeyondGeography]

6. What a wimp Schumer is

<Schumer has told colleagues he thinks that if Lieberman lost the primary, it would send a bad signal to moderate voters and might hurt the party's chances of winning Senate seats in places like Montana and Missouri in November.>

Like voters in these states give a flying fuck about Joe Lieberman's political fate.

On the other hand, it sounds like Lamont needs to brush up on the issues. If he doesn't show some substance, he could blow it in that July 6 debate.

[Tom Joad]

9. Schumer does not care about voters in Montana, he cares about

protecting the war from opposition.
He is protecting the war. No matter how unpopular.

[BeyondGeography]

11. Then he should come up with a better spin

There are few things Chuckie from Brooklyn knows less about than Montana and Missouri.

If you're correct (and I think you're in the right neighborhood), I think it's more about a perceived need to protect a staunch supporter of Israel than it is about protecting the war.

[Tom Joad]

16. Joe is not even protecting Israel, anymore than bush is protecting

the United States. He is protecting policies of war, occupation, dispossesion of both the US and Israeli regimes. Not doing shit for the people of either country.

[BeyondGeography]

17. Which is why I said "perceived," Mr. Joad

[Tom Joad]

21. okay. Just wanted everyone to know what i thought.

[depakid]

25. He's totally clueless

New York needs to dump his ass, too.

It'll send a message alright- that's it's no longer whiny sell out business as usual within the Democratic party.

That would be EXACTLY what the doctor order for what ails this party.

[Rose Siding]

10. Joe's lead is 6pts, not 15. Thanks, Time

:thumbsdown:

Other than his opposition to Lieberman's war support, Lamont doesn't have much of a campaign platform: his stump speech is largely devoid of anything beyond the jobs, health care, and education boilerplate that Democratic candidates always offer.

Oh, dear. Just health care, jobs and education? I'd TAKE it!

[Tom Joad]

12. Joe's platform is not "cut and run" but Stay and kill, and kill some more

and die for no damn reason.

[marmar]

13. RIP

:nopity:

[rpannier]

14. Interesting how crime...uh...time magazine left out

the anger on the left towards joementum over his support of Catholic hospitals not wanting to dispense the pill to prevent rape victims from getting pregnant. Or, his tacit support of prayer in the public schools, or how he games his vote on controversial issues.

[robinlynne]

19. I loved reading "I didn't kiss him back". I will always remember that line

way forward in the future when one of our kids asks who joe lieberman was......

[mike_c]

26. "well, I kept my tongue in my mouth..."

"...so it wasn't, like, a passionate kiss or anything...."

[Erika]

28. Just a flirtatious thank you kiss n/t

[orleans]

81. lol--the perfect lieberman excuse

"So it is that only six years after Lieberman was picked by the Democrats to be their vice-presidential nominee, he and his party could be headed for a divorce."

maybe because us dems don't kiss joe that special way bush does
good. bye joe! go stand in front of bush and let him kiss you again. but look out--you know how jealous karl & condi get

[Tom Joad]

30. "I didn't kiss him back" sounds like a good line for a funny song.

now if i were more creative, maybe i could make it up. any songwriters out there?

lieberman's lament:

the liberals are after me, Cindy Sheehan too.
They hate my support for the war on Iraq.
Those weirdos that came out of a zoo.
oh bush kissed my cheek, but i didn't kiss him back,
why don't' they listen to that?

I said it was okay if a hospital said "No"
to a woman who has just been raped,
she could find somewhere else to go,
i said, why don't they listen to that?


um, i tried. Maybe someone could do better.

[bklyncowgirl]

45. You must remember this. A kiss is just a kiss.

You must remember this.
A kiss is just a kiss.
A sigh is still a sigh
The fundamental things apply
So Joe goodbye.

My advice, Next time you want to make out with someone your constituents despise, please get a room.

[Sadie5]

47. Bush kissed Joe

then Joe turned around and kissed Bush where the sun don't shine. And he's still kissing Bush's ass.

[Demeter]

46. Joe Liebermann's Defeat Will Set A Shining Example

for all corporate Democrats, starting with Hillary and working right down the line.

The lesson might even be received by the GOP voters, who will start to press for change, or just change over.

This is a turning point, and I don't think Kkkarl is smart enough to realize he has to save Joe's bacon, if he wants to keep power in his masters' hands.

(Did I say bacon? Sorry, Joe!)

[TheCowsCameHome]

49. I was in CT last week - Lamont signs were everywhere I looked.

Lieberman is not going to do well against Lamont.

[Arugula Latte]

56. That's great news!

:woohoo:

[lebkuchen]

50. I recently donated to Lamont

and got a friend to do so as well.

The YearlyKos Vegas meeting and articulate interviews with the press helped to mount negative attention on Lieberman that he was already so successful in attracting to himself.

[Lerkfish]

51. Lieberman is NOT "moderate".

but he continues to be characterized that way.

[Tom Joad]

57. Moderate War Criminal? Right, i don't think there is such a thing.

[Voltaire99]

82. True. "Moderate" is code for pro-war, pro-corp, pro-puritanism.

And by that standard, we could do with a hell of a lot fewer Democratic "moderates."

[yurbud]

52. Is it too early to piss on his political grave?

I hope not.

[Voltaire99]

84. Way too early, alas.

The Democratic Party is famous for little rebellious flare-ups before the elites chillingly return the party to business-as-usual. Cf. the McGovern era, early Clintonism, etc. Lieberman is a DLC stalwart, and they very much run the show, and have no intention of giving up.

So we may spend many more years listening to Holy Joe's lemony sermons. (At least the diehards may; I find almost no American politician tolerable beyond the 15-second mark.)

[yurbud]

85. it won't help, but we should write DSSC & tell them not to save Joe

So at least it's on the record.

Maybe we could remind them that the Whig party died when they no longer had represented anyone and was replaced by the Republicans.

[jwirr]

61. You might want to look at Greg Palast's newest article

"Was the Invasion of Iraq a Jewish Conspiracy?". That might explain why Lieberman is so confused about the war. By the way Greg says if they ever were they got beat out of their victory by Texas Oil.

[formercia]

64. The 'Boys' played Joe for a Chump

Got caught with his fly down, methinks.

[IndependentVoice]

65. But to turn on him

because of a stupid kiss? Even if it was from chimpy, its not like he asked for it

[Lerkfish]

66. The kiss was just a symbolic gesture of the larger betrayal

its his votes and electioneering for the chimp.

[IndependentVoice]

67. Then get mad when that happens

not when he gets kissed

BTW that had to be utterly revolting

[Lerkfish]

68. don't recall I've ever mentioned the kiss, myself

I was explaining why it was symbolic.

:shrug:

[cyr330]

75. Here's the link to contribute to his downfall

I just gave $$ to Ned Lamont's campaign. If you're interested go to:

www.moveon.org

[Crunchy Frog]

78. Bwahahahaha!

"I didn't kiss him back," :rofl:

Well, I appreciate him giving me my sig picture anyway. Just donated another $50.00 to Lamont.

[Raster]

79. lieberman is a bush* collaborator. That is reason enough for him to

lose his seat. His time has come. Viva Lamont!

[Cha]

89. "Moderate" Senator? LIE-

berman is a freakin' nazi on the War On Iraq.

ANd now he's living up to his sorbriquet, Lie-berman. "bush didn't exactly kiss me"??

[katty]

92. Joe's time is over