Why hasn't Lieberman officially become a Republican yet?

[Rocknrule]

Do they need him as a plant in our party to screw us over? What's the deal?

[Avalux]

1. Lieberman is quite liberal on social issues.

Unfortunately, he's also a big hawk, which is the part that seems like a betrayal to the party. I can't stand the guy myself but he'll never change parties.

[dubya_dubya_III]

9. I just can't see how this guy can sleep at night

hasn't anyone explained about the nukes to him?

[BillZBubb]

10. I keep hearing that, but Alito was THE social issue and

Lieberman screwed that one all the way around. Alito's influence will be felt for decades on choice, consumer protection, criminal law, executive power, the environment, etc. If Lieberman was a true social liberal he would have LED THE FILIBUSTER on Alito, not scuttle it.

Yes, Lieberman is liberal on a few issues. But he's mostly just a Repug in a Democratic suit.

[Laelth]

30. Liberal on social issues?

I'm not terribly familiar with his record, so I'll have to take your word for that, but as for the 4th amendment (right to privacy and abortion) and separation of powers (the unitary executive theory), I remember his vote specifically:

Mr. Lieberman of Connecticut: Aye (for cloture on the Alito debate, i.e. for Alito).

:mad:

-Laelth


Edit:Laelth--spelling. Darned homonyms!

[leesa]

36. He's 'liberal' on things that either won't pass or will eventually be

swallowed up by big corporate decisions anyway. Makes his voting record look liberal, but really doesn't mean too much. In the important stuff...he flips right and corporate.

[The Backlash Cometh]

2. Because Connecticut is a Democratic state.

[sallyseven]

31. Not only that it is all about Israel. That is why he is

kissing the dictators butt.

[The Backlash Cometh]

32. Bingo.

Is there a large Jewish constituency in Connecticut? If so, I can almost understand his position. Otherwise, he's abusing his position.

[Catshrink]

3. Zell Lieberman should be voted out of the party...

At least Zell Miller didn't run again. Do you think Liebs is trying to position himself to be McCain's running mate in '08?

[kenny blankenship]

6. Yeah...let's make it even harder for us to recapture the Senate

that would be a good plan.

[Catshrink]

7. Sarcasam aside, what good do DINOs like Liebs do for us?

Can't trust them any more than we can the repugs.

[Selatius]

11. "DINOs" as you call them have just as much right as I do to be a Democrat

You keep forgetting that the Democratic name belongs to everybody who is a Democrat. It is a big-tent party, and while you may find it apt to call them "DINOs," they could just as easily label you as a "DINO" for being an ultra-leftwinger or a socialist and not of the mainstream.

[dubya_dubya_III]

21. But they both are certainly a bit too prehistoric to run

against a younger ticket.


....Kids, dogs and Bill!!

[MrBenchley]

29. John Murtha is not only right wing, but far right wing

Of course, you'll notice our Kool Kidz are too cowardly to speak out against him, though.

[kenny blankenship]

22. A Democratic butt in a Senate seat excuses many an ass

Control over the Senate is what it does for us. Would I rather that my Senator were still Zell Miller instead of Saxby Chambliss or Johnny Issakson?
You BET I do. Would I vote for him? Hell YES, I would. (Would I expect Miller to vote contrary to my wishes as much as 98% of time? Well naturally!)

The retired Zell Miller may be a demented redneck zombie but his mere presence in the Senate would bring the Democrats closer to regaining control there. That means control over committee chairmanships--and that's crucial leverage and control over the national agenda. The loss of Miller's seat to the Republicans (which looks permanent) has made regaining control over the Senate one seat more difficult, and when it comes down to it, ONE SEAT MAKES ALL THE DIFFERENCE. There simply aren't any seats that can be considered expendable in the Senate when you're on the stinky end of the stick like we are.

Please learn more about how the present system works until such time as a better one can be put in its place.

If you can replace Joe Lieberman with a better Democrat please do it; but if not, make sure he's reelected instead of a Republican. Don't tell me he's a Republican I DON'T GIVE A DAMN. For the purposes that count, which is counting heads in the Senate, he's a Democrat (until maybe he's finally insulted by blowhards into the R. Party) and we need to keep his seat Democratic at all costs.

[Selatius]

25. Now YOU know how the system works. Bravo! n/t

[BillZBubb]

12. That approach worked for the Repugs.

After the Goldwater defeat, they circled the wagons and actively worked to elect only people who really believed in their philosophy. They didn't want any fence straddlers. They have done a remarkable job at creating a cohesive party. They are wrong on virtually every issue, but they are united and that helps them immeasurably. They can always present a unified, easy to understand position to the public. Then they pick up a few DINO votes from guys like Lieberman and claim to be bipartisan.

So, short term getting rid of traitors like Holy Joe might be painful, in the long run it would really, I mean really, help the Democratic party.

[Selatius]

16. That's too authoritarian an approach

The last thing we want is an authoritarian Democratic leadership that actively tries to purge Democrats at the ballot box who won't obey what the leadership wants them to do. That's a recipe for one-party oligarchy, which is pretty much what we're heading towards with the current situation. Authoritarianism is a problem with leftist and rightist groups as history has shown, and I won't tolerate that kind of authoritarianism in Democratic side. I'd sooner leave the party than go along.

I consider myself a moderate libertarian socialist, and I agree with every criticism of Bush and the government I've seen here, but I will not be a party to the same methodology the damn corporatists use on the Republican side. Sorry, but I'd walk long before the leadership begins exhibiting authoritarian tendencies with respect to keeping people "in line" like the Repubs do. My kind have been persecuted in the past by authoritarians who also called themselves Democrats for having the wrong ideas.

[Crunchy Frog]

24. Lieberman himself is a product of that policy.

The Repugs wanted to get rid of liberal Republican Lowell Wiecker, and they ended up being willing to sacrifice a Republican held seat in order to get rid of him. Hence, Senator Lieberman, who had Jerry Falwell's endorsement in that race by the way.

From the standpoint of the interests of their party, and of the conservative movement, I think they probably did the right thing.

[dubya_dubya_III]

17. Never happen,

Nah not a chance. But the thought is terrifying'

[C_U_L8R]

4. Maybe someone needs to

"officially" make him NOT a democrat any more. ???

[sellitman]

5. I am a Connecticut, Liberal, Democratic Jew and.....

I will never ever pull a ballot leaver for Joe again. He lost my respect years ago when he sold his friend Bill down the river. I held my nose while voting for Gore for that reason alone. I'd love to remove LIE-berman.

[Selatius]

8. You only have two parties, so get used to it

Lieberman is liberal on social issues as others have said. That automatically prevents him from being a Republican anyway because he'd be running into the Christian right.

The Democratic Party is a big-tent party. Anybody is free to join, including Joe Lieberman. That's the nature of the two-party system we have today.

[Onlooker]

13. Hate to provide this link, but ...

I'm not fan of Lieberman, but neither are freepers. Near the bottom of the link are Lieberman's ratings from various liberal and conservative groups. Surprisingly, based on the ratings alone, Lieberman looks better than I thought.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/822016/posts

[BillZBubb]

14. Others are exaggerating.

Lieberman is liberal on some social issues, but even then he's not much of a force for any of them.

There are plenty of Repugs who are as socially "liberal" as Joementum, particularly in the Northeast. Chafee and Snowe for example. The Christian right hasn't stopped them.

As far as being a big tent, I hope you are incorrect. I don't want "anybody" to be a Democrat. I want people who believe in what the Democratic party is supposed to stand for and who will fight for that.

[Selatius]

18. Nothing prevents anybody from registering as a Democrat

There is no litmus test for being a Democrat or running for Democratic office. You may have your ideas as far as who you want to run or be a Democrat, but ultimately, the choice is never yours except the individual who may make such a decision. That's free will.

[cali]

15. Bravo.

Great reminder that people don't have to hew to any particular party line. Having said that, I hope like hell Ned Lamont beats Lieberman in the primary. LIeberman's sucking up to the adminstration and his unconscienable support for the Iraq war have made him anathema to me.

[Cleita]

19. He would lose the Jewish vote. n/t

[saltpoint]

20. There had been some talk about Holy Joe taking over DOD when

Rumsfeld either quit or was fired, and that might -- might -- explain Lieberman's betrayal of basic tenets of the party.

I'm more comfortable with the idea that he and Zell Miller are traitors. If they vote like Republicans they should have the courage of their convictions and switch parties.

I hope Ned LaMont rolls Lieberman but good in the primary in Connecticut. Barring that, I hope Weicker runs and beats him.

[dubya_dubya_III]

23. Wouldn't even trust him with a firecracker

[Nutmegger]

26. Hannity endorses LIEberman

If this isn't reason to challenge him, then I don't know what is.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=384058&mesg_id=384058

Though Lieberman votes with us some of the time, his Iraq war talk is harming our mission. Every Dem who makes statements such as these should be challenged in a primary. The only way we're going to stop this "war" is if we get anti-Iraq war Dems in office. And it'll be so difficult to corral LIEberman and the others into anti-Iraq war legislation. I'm not going to support a Dem just because they're running as a Dem. I vote on issues, important issues, that I want to see resolved and not just talked about.

Go Ned Lamont!

[Crunchy Frog]

27. Lieberman endorsed by his buddy, Sean Hannity.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x384058

Apparently is also claiming that he would still run, even if he loses the Democratic senate primary.

[jaysunb]

28. He will be...as soon as Ned

Lamont hands him his ass in August. He'll get a job in the current administration, and declare a change of party.

Mark my words. !

[entanglement]

33. He's a useful idiot

(for the repubs)

[robcon]

34. The reason he won't register as a Republican...

is that he wants to win.

[applegrove]

35. Lieberman is only a Repuke on Israel. Everything else he is a dem.