Letters to the Editor
-
The Trouble with Joe
So he tells me to shut up and face the fact that the man who started a war under false pretenses will be in office for three more years. Funny, when the guy in the White House got a blow job, Joe was all for impeachment hearings. I think one is far more important than the other, but not Joe.
Joe wants us to shut up about it already, drink the Kool-Aid, and join the Bush team. I guess he hasn't noticed the stew of corruption, incompetence and malice they're all soaking in. You see it's because of Bush and his criminal cronies that I belong to the opposition party. Technically, Joe belongs to that party too.
And yet Joe thinks the president is doing a heckuva job. He supported Bush's tax cuts, the vile bankruptcy bill, the Patriot Act, and this stupid, mindless, deadly war. Instead of asking why Democrats might want to challenge Joementum, the real question is why does Joe want to be a Democrat since our party's values, platform and members seem to piss him off so much?
-
Goldberg vs. the Left
I see a pattern developing. When Michelle Goldberg was writing about the antiwar movement, she was all about how the leftie-leftists were a bigger threat than the warmongers. Now she's telling us that the liberals are going to alienate more people by criticizing Joe Lieberman than Lieberman will by sucking up to Bush.
Little things like that could make me suspect that Michelle Goldberg thinks "leftist" is a synonym for "bogeyman".
-
At what point does the pro-war camp's self-proclaimed monopoly on 'common sense' and 'rationality'
get discredited by the fact that, unlike much of the anti-war camp, they've been 100% wrong on Iraq at every step of the way.
-
Jolting Joe has no relevance
Who cares what Joe Lieberman thinks? He is obviously out of touch with reality in SO MANY ways, not the least of which are his views on Iraq and the moron in the Oval Office. You have to question anyone’s credibility or intelligence if they can find ANYTHING positive about this administration. Seriously, name one thing they have gotten or done right - most rational people can’t, but Joe finds LOTS to support and be cheery about.
Joe has never been very realistic… I mean he actually thought he had a chance at the Whitehouse? The fact is Joe Lieberman cost Al Gore the 2000 election (it never should have been close). But you were never going to get enough moderate or conservative “Red Staters” to place their confidence in a wimpy, whiney schlemiel like Joe Lieberman. If Gore had picked ANYONE else, he’d have won. Lieberman is the only person on the planet that could have made Bush and Cheney look palatable to a substantial portion of the public. The sad fact is Lieberman still looks worse than they do - they may be idiots, but Joe is their lackey boy.
-
Actually, it's a lot simpler than all this
You can see it in all of the letters, who can't see the hostility in both side's words? This issue is much bigger than Lieberman's support of the war, and anyone claiming liberals want Lieberman out just becuase they disagree with him are being more than a little dishonest.
The different "wings" of the Democratic party have been at each other's throats for awhile now, and the biggest problem the party faces is not confronting that issue and taking care of it (Goldberg's article is a case in point, she seems to present the problem as little more than anger with Lieberman).
Both sides of this intra-party war must stop attacking, and this includes taking responsibility for their part in propigating it. All of this fighting is probably the biggest hinderance to the party going forward, and anyone interested in getting the party moving again need to do their part to end it. And I'm not just talking ot the liberals of the party (since the conservatives are so fond of blaming absolutely everything on the liberals), the attack politics must end.
-
"Jolting Joe"
"Jolting Joe" is very well written and insightful. While Marshall says he believes Joe Lieberman has been "misconstrued as protecting or defending Bush," it is difficult to believe. Lieberman has been in politics long enough to know how to parse his words if that were the case.
Under different circumstances I would agree Lieberman on the most part is being statesman like, but it is an entirely different game today in Washington. Moreover when Lieberman was campaigning for president he used some harsh words against the war and Bush. I realize candidates say what they think voters want to hear, but that is no excuse. It is normal to do an about face after receiving different information, but this is different. His manner seems indicative of dishonesty theretofore it leaves many to question where he really stands and whether he is just brown-nosing or is genuinely supportive of the war, now.
All wars are ugly, especially this one. Much of the progress in Iraq seems to be mostly within the Green Zone. The Iraqi citizens are still without security, still without utilities on a regular basis and unemployment is still high. Oil companies are about to buy the rights to Iraq oil and 99% of the Iraqis want us to leave. Meanwhile Lieberman parroting the GOP talking points -- "painting a sunny picture of Iraq" -- coupled with admonishing his party for criticizing the war and Bush makes it even less convincing. Like I said, he has been in politics long enough to know how to parse his words.
-
Jolting Joe...
One learns something new everyday! So Lieberman in his first election got the endorsement of Jorge Mas Canosa, that exile Cuban bastion of right wing opposition to any modification to a policy that has shown that it does not work and actually increases foreign sympathy to the regime in Cuba! Well, I guess that there is truth in sayings such as "birds of a feather flock together". It all makes sense now: Lieberman was always a right wing Republican in Democrat attire. It is just that now after a few years his teeth and ears are showing... Looks like a Republican, walks like a Republican, smells like a Republican ergo must be a Republican. So who cares about the lable is is hiding under?...