Can we all agree about Lieberman now?

[Robb]

Man, I got mad this morning when I heard what Joe said on Meet the Press:

"If Howard Dean had his way, Saddam Hussein would be in power today, not in prison."

I'm not a "Deanie", I haven't picked my horse yet. But can we all agree that Joe represents only the horse's back end? :grr:

[kath]

1. Screw you with a rusty fork, Liebershit.

[Hawkeye-X]

2. Amen. Amen. And Amen.

and as a Deanie, I got a crap I/P e-mail from the Jewish community directly attacking Dean. See my post in P/C for that one.

Hawkeye-X

[KensPen]

3. He's becoming a little Zell Miller

in his willingness to give rightwingers soundbites.

[The Backlash Cometh]

4. I wonder if Lieberman realizes we're looking for Dem leaders who will

bring the Dem party together and not continue to rip it apart?

[KFC]

5. Did he create a MEME?

Meme Meme Meme Meme. Can't get enough!

[robbedvoter]

24. Didn't create it. Broadcasted the memo he was handed.

Memo. Memo. Memo.

[NewGuy]

6. I thoiught Dean's policy was...

that we should have stayed out of Iraq. Wouldn't that make Lieberman technically correct on this issue?

I realize it comes across as bashing a fellow Democrat, but I think staying out of Iraq would have been fine even though I realize it would have left Saddam in power.

[Robb]

11. Lots of "technically correct" statements

...in an election season.

"When you play tennis, you beat your wife, don't you? You beat your wife!!" :)

[realFedUp]

12. technically as correct as the US supplied Saddam the mustard gas

that killed the Kurds...

Joe isn't using his platform to be technically
correct here and that's pretty obvious.

[ElsewheresDaughter]

7. fuck joe

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Monte Carlo]

9. You don't have to like Lieberman, but you can't deny him.

Or what he says as mere drivel. There is a strong hawkish element to the Democratic Party, which Joe tends to represent. Any candidate that want to make it into office would be wise to adapt their campaign to it.

[aquart]

13. There is already a hawk candidate: George.

We're looking for someone who represents the rest of us.

Well, I am, anyway.

[Monte Carlo]

15. You're missing my point - he represents part of OUR party.

And this causal dumping of Joe from all consideration whatsoever strikes me as hasty and ill-advised. There are Democrats that do support him as their candidate, Democrats who will be voting in the coming election. They shouldn't be looked-over.

[mrgorth]

31. Sadly, Monte is right

and it creates a massive dilemna for us. I know of several dems who favored the war and like Lieberman. That said, these same "dems" quote from Fox News a lot and get upset whenever anyone says something about Bush. They may have found their king. I've told them "if you want Joe vote for Joe. Come next Nov. if you don't like our guy, vote for Bush". That's how democracy works. I also know a lot of republicans who will vote against Bush. This election may not be so much a split in the dem party but perhaps a realignement of it.

[HereSince1628]

19. What. . . Where???

"There is a strong hawkish element to the Democratic Party,..."

Hawkish as in pro-Iraq war? Do they have a website or do you find them at the "I support Bush and the Troops" rallies?

or

Hawkish in wanting a fight with the Republicans over the future of the nation? I know where to find this group. The candidates have come to understand it isn't about being a traditional liberal or moderate. It is about the reality that there simply can be no moderation in the face of growing right wing authoritatiansm.

[Monte Carlo]

20. Hawkish as in Kosovo, or Haiti, or even Iraq.

Or for terrorist organizations like al-Quida and Hamas. Clinton was prudent when it came to war, but he was no dove.

[HereSince1628]

26. Your arguments on Clinton admin policy seems off and maybe

dated a bit...

I'm still wondering about where all the hawkish democrats are at present.

Hawkish implies a posture on foreign policy biased toward military action. What democratic leader or party sub-group is there that would support the notion that there is a _strong_ group of democratic hawks whose voices/votes must be heard/courted?

I don't see the Clinton admin as hawkish. I am not sure that any or all the Balkin actions were undertaken from the position of preferring military to diplomatic solutions.

Clinton's administration reacted to al-Qaeda after that group committed attacks on Americans and American property.

I would agree that there are democrats that aren't strictly speaking dyed-in-the-down never-use-the-military doves. Personally, I think I am one of those. I don't believe that equates being hawkish.

I believe, based on published polls, that the dominant movement among democrats is away from the Bush doctrine of military unilateralism and interventionism validated not on international opinion but on the basis of US military hegemony. The proportions of those identified as democrats polling against neocon hegemonic policy are so large that very little room is left for what could be called a numerically strong hawkish group of democrats.

[msmcghee]

25. Hawkish in wanting a fight with . .

. . the Republicans over the future of the nation?

We could possibly bring many Republicans over to our side (along with a big chunk of the middle). You seem to want to destroy any possibility of doing that.

It is about the reality that there simply can be no moderation in the face of growing right wing authoritatiansm.

Which is exactly what the RNC are depending on us to show in the coming months. Most Republicans are not neo-cons nor members of the PNAC.

Many Republicans are not too sure about the direction those guys are taking us. Most of them are probably having at least minor second thoughts. I think we should be talking about what we have in common with those Republicans - not how we think they are all zealots and warmongers.

[OneTwentyoNine]

10. Hell,he's parroting what Fred Barnes said yesterday....

Crap Joe,getting your talking points from Media Whores now?? He's finished,through,done,kaput...


David

[GainesT1958]

14. Neither Lieberman's "finest hour", by a long shot...

Nor John Kerry's...and striking as well that he would make this his first unequivocal defense of his pro-IWR vote, too!x(

The best "positioned" pro-war voting Dem. candidate? John Edwards, by virtue of his consistent defense of that vote: "I thought that taking out Saddam was the right thing to do." No PNAC complicity, no believing Dub's lies about WMD or al Quaeda connections; just voted for it in order to get rid of Saddam.

Of course, as we shall see, "getting him" does nothing to get rid of Iraq's problems...or the active resistance to our troops. And, as that continues, the arguments become all the stronger to bring our troops home sooner, and against Dub's rationale for keeping them there.

Two candidates remain who can now best make the argument about what the "right" course of action is going foward, in both Iraq and in the "war on terror", due to their records and experiences: Gen. CLark and John Edwards. Hence my feeling is reinforced about why that should be our ticket next year.

B-)

[robbedvoter]

16. Did we ever disagree on Joe? Way before slandering my candidate?

Se here for a satisfying smackdown:
http://bestofblogs.forclark.com/story/2003/12/14/131042/70
I almost went Nader in 2000 because of his preaching, and it was downhill from there.

[NewJeffCT]

17. I'm from CT

And I don't like him very much anymore. I was shocked he got picked for Gore's VP when CT was already a solidly Democratic state.

[demnan]

18. Lieberman could get a new job

as a writer of campaign ads for Bush. He does the job so well.

[msmcghee]

21. He didn't create a meme as much as . .

. . articulate a meme that many Americans already own.

We need to learn that there is a difference between . .

a) educating average American voters as to what values Americans should hold dear (and what policies those values should support) and . .

b) appealing to the values that average American voters already have (and what policies those values do support) and will take into the voting booth with them.

This wouldn't be so important if we had a parliamentary system where a spectrum of values can be part of the process. We don't. We have a winner-take-all system where the party that wins the election - gets all the marbles.

I don't like Lieberman (because of his seeming desire to mix his religious views with my government among others) but he probably did us a favor by making us seem more centrist on the war in Iraq (as far as our ability not to condemn him for it) - than the press is currently trying to portray us.

I'll keep putting out this idea (the difference between a and b above) in the hopes that what happened on the WSJ editorial page today becomes less likely in the future.

[evil_orange_cat]

22. Lieberman is a Rove-mole!

He must be! He's trying to sabotage Dean, and it's quite possible he sabotaged Gore (okay maybe not, but still ;) )... I won't vote Democrat if Lieberman is the nominee.

[robbedvoter]

23. Lieberman is the common ground of all DU-ers - more than W unfortunately

I know a few of you who want W in office "cuz it's cool to be the opposition". But on Lieberman, everyone agrees.

[ma4t]

27. Wow, why is everyone so upset w/ Lieberman?

Based on what he said and the comments posted on this thread it appears that Joe has committed the most grevious of all sins, actually telling the truth. Does anyone here think that his comment was not a accurate representation? Were Dean the president rather than Bush would Saddam not still be in power? Based on Dean's own comments, one would have to say so. Why then is Lieberman to be faulted for pointing out the obvious? He is doing nothing more than the little boy who said that the emperor had no clothes.

Frankly, the shrillness of the condemnation seems to indicate that those upset with Joe are upset, not because he is wrong, but because they know that he is right.

[Robb]

33. Yeah, right.

...Actually, it's like your mom said, we're just making fun of him because we're jealous. :eyes:

[eissa]

28. I cannot tell you

how absolutely pissed-off I was when I heard that. The repuke gloating is bad enough, but listening to Joe's stupid-ass comment, which is being replayed 24/7 is REALLY aggravating. I hate him :grr:

[the_boxer_]

29. I wish Lieberman would join the Repubs and get it over with.

:eyes:

[Myra]

30. I will be glad when we don't have to pretend about Holy Joe.

And I don't have to footnote my ABBs w "except for HJ".

[adriennel]

32. go home, Joe!

and quit yer whining...I never understood why Gore selected you as his 2000 running mate in the first place...plus this is not the seven grade student council election so stop whining about Gore's "betrayal". Had Gore not selected you as his running mate in 2000, you wouldn't have gotten this far in the 2004 campaign, so you actually owe him one. You're way too conservative for my tastes and I'm not entriely sure why you want to be president. I haven't made my final decision but I have effectively dropped Liebermn from my short list of candidates. As time progresses, Lieberman just keeps whining and bitching more and more,and I just can't listen to it anymore.