Letters to the Editor

Letters posted here are associated with the following article:
In a Salon interview, the super-hawk senator talks about his "liberation" from the Democratic Party, John McCain's campaign nosedive, and why Clinton, Obama and the other Dems are wrong on Iraq.
The letters thread is now closed.
  • Ahhhhh

    Salon's favorite Boogeyman.

  • IT IS NOT EASY TO WATCH LIEBERMAN!

    Mr. Lieberman may have good verbal skills, which certainly can benefit a politician, but false eloquence is a very dangerous trait.

    We should be reasonable towards Mr. Lieberman because so far he hasn't needed to pay a price for his phoney and false eloquence in advocating a war and defending an indefendible commander-in-chief. As a result, why should we expect him to behave or sound differently? In biology lab, when mouses change behaviors, it is because they are either punished or rewarded. Since our electoral process so far hasn't punished Lieberman for his false judgment and phoney intelligence, so it is natural that he stays unchanged. Why should he? Mr. Lieberman has taught us that pretending you are right is certainly a way to boost a person's ego, even though it does hurt a person's morality.

    Mr. Lieberman's credibility should be suffered by now for supporting a war, which is waged for false pretense, fought wastefully in terms of human capitals and tax dollars. It has ruined our status as a world leader. It has not made us safe but created a new battle front for terrorists and stimuli for anti-Americanism in the middle east or arabic world. Above all, we have seen no end in sight but a country, which is not our own, being ruined and divided by the war we waged. If this is not a colossal failure or colossal mistake, I don't know what we should call it.

    It pains me to see Mr. Lieberman and his alikes can get away from this colossal mistake. Our democracy must be dysfunctional to allow politicians to get away from such misjudgments. It is even more painful to watch Lieberman keeping insisting his vision of truth when common sense rings differently.

  • Confounding the Caveman…

    In answer to Shapiro’s question about his NO vote on the Gonzales “No Confidence” resolution, Lizardman answers:

    “Let me reconstruct that. It was earlier in the year. I think I thought that it was essentially a political vote. And the question on Gonzales was ultimately -- he serves at the pleasure of the president. And that there was nothing but political intent to the resolution. Forgive me, I should go back and look that up.”

    When I read that, anyone within earshot may have thought I was rehearsing for the role of the GEICO Caveman in his response to the psychiatrist’s request for reaction to her psychobabble.

    WHAT????

    Shapiro let him off the hook. No problem. But why even interview this unctuous dipstick?

    The only positive thing I can think of that resulted from the SC appointment of a president in 2000 is that this sad excuse for an “independent” would probably be as bad a VP as the incumbent.

    Okay, Okay!! Maybe not…. Sorry!

  • a few questions missing, frankly

    1) his repeated statements during the campaign that he wanted to end the war in Iraq

    2) his reprehensible abandonment of NOLA

    3) his conversion on filibusters, which he used to oppose on "principle"

    His weaselly tap dancing on Gonzales shows him to the disingenuous little weasel that he is. The no confidence vote was "political"? What was your flip-flop on filibusters, your cave in on Katrina hearings, and your pious grandstanding on Terry Schiavo, you hypocritical, self-serving, egomaniacal little scumbag?

    Bill Clinton went to Connecticut to save his weaselly little ass, and supported him after he lost the primary in a desperate attempt to secure mythical swing-voters for HRC's presidential run. If she gets the nomination, he'll repay them--with a knife to Hillary's back--so fast it'll make the Clintons' heads spin.

  • What is wrong with Conneticuit?

    Joe Lieberman was born a shmock, a putz and an opportunistic sanctimonious creep and he stayed that way for the last 65 years. WQhat the hell is wrong with the Conneticuit voters that they sent this creep back to the senate? Are they that gullible and dumb?

  • embarassed to be from CT

    What can I say, other than Liberman makes me embarassed to be from CT the same way Bush makes me embarassed to be from the US. He certainally doesn't represent the average CT resident any more than our grand commander in cheif represents the average american.

    I can only sit back and blame the blue blood republican-lite polo-with-pearls-wearing morons who must have voted for him. I also blame the lack of stateside media coverage about how he was different from Lamont. I think the majority of people who aren't Salon/Blog readers were left in a lot of confusion as to why Liberman was suddenly an independent, and why the CT Democratic party had (quite rightly) jettisoned him. Personally I view it as tricking long-time democrats into voting for him, when he does not represent the democrat ideology at all. It disgusts me that in the lead up to the election the local media in CT didn't see fit to expose him for what he is- a republican masquerading as a democrat.

    His resembelence to Senator Palpatine of Star Wars fame is ironic and accurate. He'll stab the whole party in the back in order to get ahead personally. I'm definately bummed out that we're stuck with him for another 5 years.

  • He is only a Senator?

    He is also an American, an American who is one hell of a lot better placed to do something about the Gonzalez travesty than I am. Doesn't this guy give a shit about the difference between right and wrong?

    You folks from Connecticut - what is it with you?

  • our senator from isreal

    the real reason holy joe will never turn republican is that 2008 is coming. What? give up his chairmanships and be in the minority? Although you can count on this self-serving prig to always know which way the wind is blowing, parse lieber as loser.

  • Two Thoughts

    1. An awfully light weight interview. Where were the tough follow up questions? Several have been suggested already, but many more are fairly obvious. What's the problem? Afraid to ask a tough question for fear that you won't get another interview later?

    2. That being said, Lieberman's time will come. In January of 2009, when the Democrats have picked up some Senate seats, we can start treating this quisling like he deserves to be treated. And if Harry Reid and the other Democratic senators don't have the balls to do it, shame on them. Holy Joe will retreat into his corner, hold his breath until he turns blue, and then change parties. But he'll then just be one of the members of the minority party whose time will be up when he has to face the electorate again.