Letters to the Editor
-
ah, Holy Joe.
Nice to see Joe still firing shots across the Democrats' bow. What a pompous ass! I guess Joe knows where his bread is buttered. If it wasn't for the Republicans giving money to his campaign, he'd be another political has been, rather than a crazy man riding a chain-link fence.
Joe Lieberman is good at one thing and one thing only; protecting Joe Lierbman. That this man says he's devoted his life to "public service" just goes to show how warped our definition of public service has become.
-
jedimaster
Lieberman has devoted his life to public service. He just isn't very good at it, to the detriment of the country.
-
Joe L.- The most valuable Republican?
Joe Lieberman is easily the most despised Democrat in the party. As the running mate to Al Gore, he single-handedly cost the Dems the WH in 2000. The damage from that election can never be underestimated.
The GOP enabled him to get elected in 2006. By doing so, they have been able to sell the talking point that the Dems have done nothing in the Senate since January, 2007 and thus their poll ratings are in the tolilet. Too bad the fact is that the GOP along with Joe have stonewalled any initiative by the Dems.
He is not unlike the player on the other sports team who helps his team lose by dint of his incompetency. His legacy will not be a pretty one.
-
Don't you wish NOW that you had helped Ned Lamont?
When Ned Lamont won the Connecticut Senate Primary against George W's favorite "Democrat", the only national-level players to come to the state and help Lamont were Hillary Clinton (who gave PAC money & lent him her chief of staff for the campaign), John Edwards and Wesley Clark. Senator Chuck Schumer did a terrific job everywhere else in getting Democrats elected to the Senate, but he left Ned Lamont twisting in the wind.
Why didn't Democrats get behind Ned Lamont & rid ourself of Despicable Joe Lieberman when we had the opportunity? Hell, I live in New York and I sent Lamont money? Why wouldn't our Senate leaders do more?
-
Clueless Joe rules the roost, for the moment.
I just hope the Democrats widen their lead in the Senate, to render Lieberman a footnote. Right now, he's at his political apogee, where his fickleness can be most richly rewarded -- the Democrats have to kiss his ass or he'll join the GOP and royally screw the Democrats.
But if the Democrats can widen their lead in 2008 (assuming Bush/Cheney let elections occur, still kinda iffy, the way these people operate), then Lieberman will then have little recourse but to caucus with his remaining soulmates in the GOP, since won't have that catbird seat he's occupied since he bolted from the Democrats.
-
@Darrin
I understand how the Senate democrats were stuck in a delicate dance a year ago with Lieberman - if they pissed him off too much he could have decided to conference with the Republicans, thus denying them senate. One could argue that it's too high a price to pay - better to be in the minority than play nice with Lieberman, but they did see that as their choice. Now, however, things might be different. If Lieberman switched parties now, would democrats still lose majority status till the 08 elections? One can only hope Senate democratic leaders are promising the world to Olympia Snow and Susan Collins to get them to switch, then we could give Joe the heave-ho.
-
Lieberman
If by, "our country" he means Israel, then he's being honest.
-
Is there actual data?
I know that there's data on how often Supreme Court justices vote together - is there comparable information for Senators? I'd be interested to know how often Lieberman votes with, say, Teddy Kennedy vs. how often he votes with Sam Brownback. I would bet, in the aggregate, that he does vote far more often with the Democrats than with the Republicans.
-
What could it be?
What could possibly explay the way Wolf Blitzer and Joe Lieberman interact with each other? What is it they share that motivates them to perform for us in a Vaudeville kind of way? They seem to each know what the other is thinking, what they should say to each other, as if they have some kind of hidden agenda in their macabre tete-a-tete.
-
He'll vote for whomever...
Israel tells him to vote for. He'll vote for continued war in the Mideast, continued occupation of Iraq so that our forces are installed permanently in the area, increased defense spending at the detriment of domestic programs.
-
One more Democrat in the Senate
and the Dems can give this guy what he deserves -- strip him of seniority and boot him out of his committee positions.
Anonymous, I hope you're a parody poster, but if you're serious you sound like a Nazi, and if not, your implication that anyone who opposes Holy Joe must be a Nazi is disgusting and unfair. I don't notice that born-again Christian neocons were any less disastrously wrong about Iraq than Jewish neocons. Therefore, our disastrous foreign policy blunders in the near east can be blamed on ideology more than on religion. A few naifs like Bush may still think it's all about God, but the cynics like Rumsfeld and Cheney are just pouring religious perfume on a skunk.
-
idiot
If the Democrats can get but one more seat in 2008, they should kick Lieberman's sorry ass out of the party.
-
When it matters.....
Lieberman will vote with the Democrats when his vote does not matter. When the vote matters, he will vote with the GOP, like during SCOTUS confirmations. So comparing how many times he votes with Democrats and how many times he votes with Republicans will not give a true picture. When the chips are on the line and his vote will make a difference, he always votes with the GOP and Bush.
-
where to go to see how Lieberman is voting
There is a site which records votes of the various senators. Lieberman's included. It is very interesting to see the pattern of his votes. Personally, I find him a "has-been" already. You can't have your head positioned where his is and not be discounted as no longer a player. The site is:
http://www.vote-smart.org/
Thank goodness for the internet or we wouldn't know any more than Wolf Blitzer.