Letters to the Editor
-
Joementum Lieberthing
The man, to use the term loosely, is an utter sellout, a classic thirty pieces of silver turncoat. He is the prototypical DINO, and needs to go away and shill full time for Israel on his own damned time. Go away, Joementum. You were a key element in the pissing away of the 2000 erection (yes, it was a coup, but Joe helped keep it close enough to steal), and he's gone downhill from there. Juck you, Foe.
-
Beltway nonsense, Mr. Shapiro
Boo-hoo for Holy Joe. But tell it to the families of our 2,500 dead.
Lieberman voted to end debate on Alito, the only vote that mattered. It pains
me to see you accept the nonsense that he voted "against" him. Given the fact
that Alito was a sure thing without a filibuster, Lieberman's final vote was
meaningless, as bad as those "moderate" hand-wringing Republicans Chafee, Snowe
and Collins, who talk a good game then bow to their master Rove.
Apart from that issue, the liberal blogosphere "forgives" Byrd and others
because unlike Joe, they will never be found yukking it up with SEAN HANNITY,
for God's sake ... kissing that disgusting Bush ... being the FIRST SENATOR OF
EITHER PARTY to rise during the State of the Union as Bush lied about Iraq ...
going on Fox to tell the country what's wrong with ... the DEMOCRATS.
It's not about voting records. It's the fact this man simply doesn't fight for
the party, and often attacks it, furthering the GOP spin at every turn.
And let's not forget his "short ride" comment about hospitals, rape victims and
the morning-after pill. A short ride. How dare he utter such a thing.
-
the writer just does not get it
It's not just that Lieberman supports the Iraq war. It is that he believes, and states frequently, that anyone who opposes the president on any security matter is a danger to the nation. He and those who think like him are a danger to the Republic. He must go.
-
How do I donate to the challenger?
After this boob lost the recount by running his mouth on national television, allowing the military to vote after the fact, I loathed him. Making out with George Bush was the last straw for me. I can only imagine what he would do to "Dick" Cheney if he gets back in. Where do I contribute to the challenger? Web site please?
-
Holy Joe has Got to Go
Joementum ain't worth a bucket of warm piss. And neither is the man himself.
He is a smooth self-preservationist. He is a classic take-no-sides kind of guy. And right now we are in the midst of a war, and I don't mean Iraq.
Reminds me of another famously traitorous guy named Joe: Josephus, to be precise.
Josephus, the one-time general of the Jewish revolt against Rome, somehow turned up as a landed and pensioned Roman citizen -- and advisor to the Roman emperor -- after Jerusalem was destroyed. Seemed the emperor really took a shine to the fellow. Something about religion and a vision from God. Sound familiar?
Anyway, this is not a guy we want on our side anymore.
So bye bye, Joe. Give my best to the Lord.
And the Emperor.
-
How to Contribute to Ned Lamont's Campaign
There's the undeniable fact that Liebermouth has gotta go -- and I was all set to vote for anybody but Joe.
Then I got the chance to meet Ned Lamont, ask him questions, express my views to him. He impressed me and I believe him, and his positions on issues are truly Democratic positions. At last, a candidate I can vote FOR, whom I can actively and even eagerly support.
I've already contributed to his campaign, and my husband and I are doing what we can to support his campaign and hope to do even more.
It's a pity Shapiro didn't outline Lamont's positions on issues such as health care and education -- his campaign is way beyond one issue.
To learn more about Ned Lamont, and contribute to his campaign, go to http://www.nedlamont.com/
Lee Fleming
Norwalk, CT
-
style and substance
When it comes to Lieberman, there are two interelated problems. The first is the war, and the extent to which his unapologetic stance precludes the development of a more coherent, combative message from within his party. The second is simply his tone, where his commitment to 'reasonable' dialogue across parties has gone a long way normalizing republican extremism. By consistently firing upon his own, Lieberman's version of 'moderation' places social democracy at the political margins, while tacitly legitimating an extremely radical administration. In many ways, his problem is less to do with substance, and eveything to do with style, but it is a style which has substantive political implications.
-
Where the hell did you get Shapiro, The New Republic?
The tonedeaf perspective he puts forth has the faint stench of a DLC/Insider.
"As a punching bag for left-wing activists..."
Who the hell do you think we are Walter, the Weathermen!?
"Liberals","Progressives" or just plain "Democrats" would have sufficed. Karl Rove appreciates your help, BTW.
Other Democrats are forgiven their ideological transgressions, but never Lieberman. In Pennsylvania, Senate challenger Bob Casey has overwhelming party support even though he is antiabortion and supported Samuel Alito for the Supreme Court. (Lieberman, in contrast, is pro-choice and voted against Alito). It is almost forgotten that California Sen. Dianne Feinstein supported all of Bush's deficit-creating 2001 tax cuts. (Lieberman voted against them.) And Hillary Clinton, the winter-book favorite for the 2008 nomination, has not exactly been marching in antiwar demonstrations.
Bob Casey is viewed as an upgrade over Santorum, nothing more. Feinstein is held in much lower regard than her superlative colleague, Barbara Boxer. Hillary? Walter obviously doesn't bother to look at the responses to his own articles. Hillary is perhaps the only person in America that could utterly demoralize her own party's base while inspiring foaming at the mouth hatred from the opposition. If she is the 2008 nominee, the Democratic Party will suffer a 50 state defeat and proceed to implode.
There is no simple explanation for why Joe-mentum (what Lieberman hoped for in the New Hampshire primary where he finished a dismal fifth) has turned into Joe-mad-at-him.
While Feinstein and Hillary are the living, breathing definition of ineffectual, Lieberman is in a class of his own. Walter seems to be genuinely perplexed at the level of contempt millions of Americans have for Lieberman. Let me explain it to you, Walter.
Lieberman's neo-conservative worldview is a combination of breathtaking naivety, insufferable, self-righteous arrogance and willful deceit. It's a worldview that is, correctly, viewed with abhorrance by pragmatists of all stripes.
Lieberman did vote against Alito, but by also opposing the filibuster, he helped ensure the eventual reversal of Roe v Wade. His unwillingness to challenge the robber barons of Enron and the like showed his true allegience to the moneyed class.
Beyond this, what makes Lieberman so repulsive is the way he consistantly provides political cover for the Bush administration and the conservative (O'Reilly, Hannity, etc.) media, giving each the veneer of bipartisanship.
Likewise, Lieberman provides the veneer of character, while his actions reveal a man whose loyalty invokes memories of Fredo Corleone.
As one of the foremost enablers of this abortion of a government, Lieberman is a malignant cancer that must be excised from public life. I hope and pray the voters of Connecticutt are up to the task.
As for Walter, I have to ask Salon: Is this the best you can do for a Washington Bureau chief? If I wanted Matthewsesque Washington-Insider-Beltway-conventional wisdom bloviation, I can watch Matthews. No thanks.