Lieberman - WTF? - U2 Feedback

Go Back   U2 Feedback > Lypton Village > Free Your Mind > Free Your Mind Archive
Click Here to Login
 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
Old 07-05-2006, 02:35 AM   #1
Blue Crack Addict
 
deep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: A far distance down.
Posts: 28,501
Local Time: 06:34 PM
Lieberman - WTF?

Lieberman May Run As Independent

WASHINGTON, July 4 (UPI) -- Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut has said that if the Democratic Party does not support him in the upcoming primary, he will run as an independent instead.

The Los Angeles Times reported that with Lieberman losing support of party members over his backing of the war in Iraq, the former vice presidential nominee decided to guarantee himself a spot in the November general election with the proposed petition drive.

'I am a loyal Democrat,' Lieberman said, 'But I have a loyalty higher than that to my party. That is to my state and my country. I`m essentially taking out an insurance policy.' the 64-year-old senator added.

Lieberman, who has held his Senate seat since 1988, may loose his party`s support in the Aug. 8 primary to fellow Democrat Ned Lamont, who has publicly criticized the senator`s support of President Bush.
__________________

__________________
deep is offline  
Old 07-05-2006, 10:05 AM   #2
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,492
Local Time: 09:34 PM
close association with George Bush will kill you dead in many blue states, and even some red ones.

when your approval rating is *still* in the mid-30s, even after the month-long full court press by Rove (bash the gays, "cut-and-run," throw a tantrum about the NY Times), you know you're political poision.
__________________

__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 07-05-2006, 11:57 AM   #3
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 08:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511
close association with George Bush will kill you dead in many blue states, and even some red ones.
Remember when "close association" with Bill Clinton cost the Democrats control of both the U.S. Senate and, for the first time in 40 years, the House of Representatives? Good times.

Seriously Joe, the orthodoxy of the Left is settled and written-in-stone. Come over to "the dark side"; the tent of ideas is bigger and debate still flourishes.
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 07-05-2006, 12:08 PM   #4
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,492
Local Time: 09:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500
Remember when "close association" with Bill Clinton cost the Democrats control of both the U.S. Senate and, for the first time in 40 years, the House of Representatives? Good times.



as usually happens in the first mid-term elections after a new president is elected.

point to me a time when Clinton's approval ratings were as low as George Bush's for as extended a period of time? where were Clinton's ratings at this point in his 2nd term in comparison to Bush's?



Quote:
Seriously Joe, the orthodoxy of the Left is settled and written-in-stone. Come over to "the dark side"; the tent of ideas is bigger and debate still flourishes.

debate? on the Republican side?

all they've been doing is marching in lockstep with the administration since day one, and their idea of debate on Iraq is to scream "CUT AND RUN! CUT AND RUN!" whenever anyone points out the fact that, well, there *is* no plan for Iraq nor has there ever been one. in fact, one thing Republicans slam the Dems for is lacking a "clear vision" (whatever that means) on Iraq precisely because Democrats are actually having a debate about what to do in Iraq.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 07-05-2006, 12:40 PM   #5
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 08:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511

as usually happens in the first mid-term elections after a new president is elected.

point to me a time when Clinton's approval ratings were as low as George Bush's for as extended a period of time? where were Clinton's ratings at this point in his 2nd term in comparison to Bush's?
The 1994 elections were of historical proportions. A fifty-some seat shift ending a FORTY year run of Democratic control. A sitting Speaker, Tom Foley, defeated for the first time since the Civil War. 8 seats won by Republicans in the Senate. And this is all pre-Monica mind you. Presidential approval numbers can be a little misleading. For instance, in Bush's case they are low because so many people on his RIGHT are not happy with him.

As far as debate, there are issues other than the war in which Senator Lieberman finds himself out-of-step with his colleagues. I couldn't agree more about "Cut & run" by the way. Everytime I hear focus-group-tested-talking-point drivel like that I'm tempted to toss something at the TV.
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 07-05-2006, 01:05 PM   #6
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,492
Local Time: 09:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500
The 1994 elections were of historical proportions. A fifty-some seat shift ending a FORTY year run of Democratic control. A sitting Speaker, Tom Foley, defeated for the first time since the Civil War. 8 seats won by Republicans in the Senate. And this is all pre-Monica mind you. Presidential approval numbers can be a little misleading. For instance, in Bush's case they are low because so many people on his RIGHT are not happy with him.



which is why his approval numbers are so low and he is political poison to anyone, right or left -- everyone hates Bush.

as for 1994, which was as momentous as you described (and Republicans deserve credit for a billiant campaign while the Dems slept), if anything, this speaks to how beloved Clinton became over the next 6 years -- no one cared about Monica, and his approval ratings remained very high, especially in comparison to Bush.


Quote:
As far as debate, there are issues other than the war in which Senator Lieberman finds himself out-of-step with his colleagues. I couldn't agree more about "Cut & run" by the way. Everytime I hear focus-group-tested-talking-point drivel like that I'm tempted to toss something at the TV.

what issues does Lieberman disagree with Democratic opinion?

(i'm genuinely curious, i don't know -- and i'm from CT, originally, and generally think Lieberman to be a terrific guy, and i'd probably still vote for him if i were still registered in CT despite my disagreements with his stance on the war)
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 07-05-2006, 01:49 PM   #7
BVS
Blue Crack Supplier
 
BVS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: between my head and heart
Posts: 40,684
Local Time: 08:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500

Seriously Joe, the orthodoxy of the Left is settled and written-in-stone. Come over to "the dark side"; the tent of ideas is bigger and debate still flourishes.
__________________
BVS is online now  
Old 07-05-2006, 06:58 PM   #8
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 09:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500
Seriously Joe, the orthodoxy of the Left is settled and written-in-stone. Come over to "the dark side"; the tent of ideas is bigger and debate still flourishes.
Give me an example of the "tent of ideas" and "debate" within the Republican Party. Any examples where the "debate" ends in Bush getting his way don't count.

On the contrary, it has long been noted that the strength of the Republican Party has been in the stark uniformity of its ideas, where intraparty dissent is not tolerated. As such, splits are avoided, and party unity is maintained.

I will agree that the Democratic Party has proven to be a terrible opposition party. They should be ashamed of themselves. However, the stagnancy of the Democratic Party is second only to the stagnancy of the Republican Party. The annual parade of frivolous constitutional amendments are certainly a testament of that.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 07-05-2006, 07:03 PM   #9
Blue Crack Addict
 
verte76's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: hoping for changes
Posts: 23,331
Local Time: 02:34 AM
In politics, "insurance policies" are always a good idea.
__________________
verte76 is offline  
Old 07-05-2006, 07:43 PM   #10
Blue Crack Addict
 
nbcrusader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Southern California
Posts: 22,071
Local Time: 06:34 PM
Perhaps we could some better context by the “WTF” addition to the thread title. Is this a comment on Lieberman running as an independent? A comment on Connecticut Democrats’ rejection of Lieberman?

Since this involves a democratic primary (people presumptively against GWB anyways), perhaps we should ask what the democrats in Connecticut are saying by rejecting Lieberman. Do they have constructive leadership that is better than Lieberman? Are they taking a clear step to the left with Ned Lamont? Is crossing the isle on certain issues acceptable in today’s political environment?

The “cut and run” discussion raises a much different point. If a group has developed and articulated a strategy that can be so effectively diminished by a sound-bite label, was it much of a strategy in the first place?
__________________
nbcrusader is offline  
Old 07-05-2006, 07:45 PM   #11
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 09:34 PM
Lieberman's decision isn't particularly sinister, IMO. It's based on the very peculiar statistics he found on his popularity, which suggested that he'd win the general election even as an independent, but lose the primary.

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 07-06-2006, 12:44 AM   #12
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: The American Resistance
Posts: 4,754
Local Time: 08:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Irvine511


as for 1994, which was as momentous as you described (and Republicans deserve credit for a billiant campaign while the Dems slept), if anything, this speaks to how beloved Clinton became over the next 6 years -- no one cared about Monica, and his approval ratings remained very high, especially in comparison to Bush.

what issues does Lieberman disagree with Democratic opinion?

(i'm genuinely curious, i don't know -- and i'm from CT, originally, and generally think Lieberman to be a terrific guy, and i'd probably still vote for him if i were still registered in CT despite my disagreements with his stance on the war)
Clinton became "beloved" after 1994 only by moving to the center--triangulation I think Dick Morris called it--distancing himself from the left-wing of his party while taking advantage of the demonization of Newt Gingrich. As a centrist he passed balanced budgets, welfare reform and the Defense of Marriage Act.

I remember Joe Lieberman working with Bill Bennett about the issue of violence in movies and music a long time ago. He has always believed that we should have "Freedom of religion, not freedom from religion", a view not shared by all on the Left. Besides defense (he was 1 of only 10 Democrats to give Bush I authority to use military force in the first Pursian Gulf War), he has often been at odds with Democrats over affirmative action, school vouchers, tort reform and capital gains tax cuts. I believe he also voted for NAFTA.
Bush vs Lieberman in 2004 would have been very interesting.
__________________
INDY500 is offline  
Old 07-06-2006, 08:07 AM   #13
ONE
love, blood, life
 
melon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Toronto, Ontario
Posts: 11,781
Local Time: 09:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by INDY500
I remember Joe Lieberman working with Bill Bennett about the issue of violence in movies and music a long time ago. He has always believed that we should have "Freedom of religion, not freedom from religion", a view not shared by all on the Left. Besides defense (he was 1 of only 10 Democrats to give Bush I authority to use military force in the first Pursian Gulf War), he has often been at odds with Democrats over affirmative action, school vouchers, tort reform and capital gains tax cuts. I believe he also voted for NAFTA.
Bush vs Lieberman in 2004 would have been very interesting.
In other words, he's a Republican in a Democrat's clothes. That's why Republicans love him. But hey...it's similar reasoning as to why Democrats love people like Sens. Lincoln Chafee, Susan Collins, and Olympia Snowe.

And that whole "Freedom of religion, not freedom from religion" line gets funny, particularly when it's just an excuse to thrust religion on people in rather unnecessary environments, such as courtrooms and schools. Is it really necessary to have a monument to the Ten Commandments, particularly since it has zero legal standing and, contrary to all the bluster, absolutely no historical relevancy to the start of the legal system? You'd be better off erecting a monument to Hammurabi's Code from ancient Babylon, because the Bible even ripped off of them for one of their most famous lines: "An eye for an eye."

School prayer? I can just imagine trying a stunt like that at work, where you'd try to sue your boss, because he won't let you lead the building in daily prayer over the loudspeaker. And I can just imagine the uproar if that daily prayer was in Arabic.

There needs to be common sense somewhere, and when I think about all the controversies in schools lately involving religion and "freedom of speech," I think about what I could get away with at work. Goodbye public prayer and goodbye to all the controversial t-shirts across the political spectrum. But I digress...

Melon
__________________
melon is offline  
Old 07-06-2006, 09:56 AM   #14
Blue Crack Supplier
 
Irvine511's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 30,492
Local Time: 09:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by nbcrusader
The “cut and run” discussion raises a much different point. If a group has developed and articulated a strategy that can be so effectively diminished by a sound-bite label, was it much of a strategy in the first place?


i think when you have genuine debate within the party -- and they really do, contrast Finegold to HRC and then try to find me two Republicans with the same level of disagreement -- it's much more difficult to get out a coherent soundbyte, and it becomes that much easier for the opposing party to then describe your position in the simplest, most convenient term possible. so it's almost as if the Democrats are hurting themselves politically for being nuanced and for actually discussing an issue rather than following the talking points, which Republicans do so well -- i noticed Mitch McConnell tossed "cut and run" out onto the table whenever he possibly could on Meet the Press last Sunday.

ultimately, i think it says less about one party's strategy -- and what is the Republican strategy? more of the same? no one has ever described what "victory" would look like in Iraq -- and more about the nature of politics in a culture that only has time to digest a three word soundbyte (like "flip-flop") and a legislature that has come to value loyalty over logic.
__________________
Irvine511 is online now  
Old 07-06-2006, 11:46 AM   #15
Rock n' Roll Doggie
Band-aid
 
80sU2isBest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 4,970
Local Time: 09:34 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by melon


School prayer? I can just imagine trying a stunt like that at work, where you'd try to sue your boss, because he won't let you lead the building in daily prayer over the loudspeaker. And I can just imagine the uproar if that daily prayer was in Arabic.
As you know, I'm a Christian, but to the dismay of many of my Christian brethern, I'd have to agree with you about prayer in public schools. I think the way they handle it now in many schools - moment of silence - is perfect. That way, the individual teachers and students can pray if they want, and not if they don't want. Heck, you could even get together with a buddy and say something like "at the moment of silence let's both pray for so and so in the hospital", and you're praying together.

My stance is actually in protection of religious rights, not against it. If you open the door to one, you must open the door to all, since the US is not a theocracy. I would be insensed if my child came home one day and said the teacher made him pray to the god within himself or anything outside Christianity.

Now ... private schools? Different subject altogether.
__________________

__________________
80sU2isBest is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Design, images and all things inclusive copyright © Interference.com