Joe Lieberman for President

[Herschel]

I see much criticism of him here. I suugest all consider supporting him. The Democratic party will need to be strong in foreign affairs, defeating terroism, the Middle East, dealing with Muslim and Arab nations. Lieberman has a strong stand. He and Gore beat Bush in 2000.

http://www.joe2004.com/site/PageServer

"Joe Lieberman: Fighting for a Strong US-Israel Relationship

Joe Lieberman believes that America and Israel share a unique bond built on our shared values, shared commitment to freedom and democracy, and shared interests in defeating terrorism and promoting security and stability in the region. Lieberman has been a national leader in fostering ties between the US and Israel. He believes that supporting our ally is integral to US national security interests.

Putting Pressure on the Palestinians. Joe Lieberman believes that Yasser Arafat is no longer a credible partner for peace. He has called for Arafat's removal and his replacement with leadership willing to stop terrorism, to recognize the right of a Jewish state of Israel to exist in security, and to build a democratic Palestinian state. For more than a Decade, Lieberman has led efforts to pressure the Palestinians to follow this course. In 1989, he cosponsored the PLO Commitments Compliance Act that called for the PLO to end its call for the destruction of Israel and to abandon terror, and has consistently urged Democratic and Republican presidents alike to pressure the Palestinians to renounce terrorism before negotiating with them.

Rallying Support for Israel. Joe Lieberman has rallied bipartisan support for Israel during his 15 years in the United States Senate. He has consistently supported increased foreign aid to our ally, including Israel's recent request for $12 billion in new aid, and opposed efforts to cut this wise investment in security. More than that, Lieberman has led his colleagues in offering support for Israel during difficult times. In the spring of 2002 when Israel launched Operation Defensive Shield to root out Palestinian terrorists, President Bush insisted that Israel withdraw "without delay." Joe Lieberman, in contrast, led the Senate in passing a resolution expressing solidarity with Israel."

"Joe Lieberman: Standing Firm to Disarm Saddam Hussein

For more than 12 years, Joe Lieberman was unwavering in his belief that Saddam Hussein should be disarmed and removed from power in order to protect our national interests and safeguard the security of the American people. He has been deeply critical of the Bush Administration's arrogant and unilateral foreign policy, yet believes that despite the President's serious mistakes, it was a matter of national security to demand that Saddam declare and destroy his illegal weapons of mass destruction -- weapons that, according to the United Nations, had been hidden from the world for over a decade. Senator Lieberman believed that after 17 unenforced UN Security Council Resolutions, the time had come to confront the danger Saddam poses to the safety of America, his people, and the world with conviction and force."

"Developing a Long-Term Strategy to Move the Muslim World Toward Democracy. Joe Lieberman believes that to win the war against terror and tyranny, America must use plowshares as well as swords -- and has criticized the Bush Administration for lacking a constructive, long-term vision. He has outlined his own broad, bipartisan strategy of how America and our allies can work together to bring about economic and political reforms that will export hope, increase opportunity, promote human rights, and improve the lives of ordinary men, women, and children throughout Arab and Muslim nations."

[bahrbearian]

1. Your Funny!

Did you just say BUSH in 2004?

[GOPBasher]

24. "You're funny," not "Your funny."

Proper grammar always helps.

[Township75]

2. Lieberman is wasting my air!

His campaing is going nowhere, and he is using money that someone like Dean could use to beat Bush.

I would like to see Liebermann drop out.

[mmm]

3. Lieberman is one sick fuck

Your proof is beyond redoubt

[Josh]

16. Look what you just said -

what the hell is wrong with you? The guy is just trying to post his opinion and ask others to share it. That's what this is about here.

"Lieberman is a sick fuck"? "Your proof is beyond redoubt" (is that even a sentence?)

Grow up. If you don't want to have an honest debate, then don't post - what you are doing is intellectually dishonest and it's shameful.

[Fovea]

4. I am simply not impressed with his stands or his record.

I disagree with his vision of the middle east almost as much as I do Bush's. And I felt his support of Gore was insufficient.

[onehandle]

5. Whoever has the D next to his name in Nov 2004....

....Gets my vote. Joe is not my first choice and I doubt he'll get the nomination, but I'll work my ass off for him.

[CMT]

6. I respect your views

but just don't think that Joe Lieberman has what it takes to beat George W. Bush. I think we need to nominate a candidate who is more of a fighter and less of an accomodator. If nominated, Joe has my vote but in the race for the nomination I'm with Howard Dean and Joe L. isn't even in my top five.

[unfrigginreal]

10. How can you respect those views? Did you read his post? n/t

[jiacinto]

14. No Democrat is going to run against Israel

Frankly every other Democrat running is pro-Israel. Why are you singling Lieberman out on this issue when every other Democrat has virtually the same position?

[Josh]

17. Because he's Jewish, Carlos -

it makes him an incredibly easy target. There are Democrats out there who are much cosier with Israel than Lieberman (Lieberman is often condemned by members of the Israel lobby for being too cosy with the Palestinians because he - shock and horror - has called for a Palestinian state). Lieberman, however, is Jewish, so he MUST be a slave to Israel, right? (Which of course must be a sin)

I've seen so many posts here where they call Lieberman "Sharon's puppet" or say that he'll be taking his orders from the Likud Party. I wouldn't even bother responding to these people. Their hatred for Israel knows no bounds and they would just as soon condemn anyone for supporting Israel's right to exist as a nation - only Lieberman is the most obvious (to them, anyway) target.

[RogueTrooper]

21. Indeed

There are shades of JFK and "don't vote for a catholic" in how some people relate to Joe.

[jiacinto]

30. I fully agree with you

And it really angers me that Lieberman gets singled out for his views on the Middle East when almost every other Democrat shares the same position on Israel.

[AnAmerican]

19. I am not looking for an "Anti-Isreal candidate"....

You are right, they do not exist. What I am looking for is someone with a "balanced view". Someone who realises that BOTH parties in the Isreali/Palestinian conflict share responsibility for what has occured in the past 50 or so years.

Dennis Kucinich is the candidate who does that.


"The same humanity that requires us to acknowledge with profound concerns the pain and suffering of the people of Israel requires a similar expression for the pain and suffering of the Palestinians. When our brothers and sisters are fighting to the death, instead of declaring solidarity with one against the other, should we not declare solidarity with both for peace, so that both may live in security and freedom?

If we seek to require the Palestinians, who do not have their own state, to adhere to a higher standard of conduct, should we not also ask Israel, with over a half century experience with statehood, to adhere to the basic standard of conduct, including meeting the requirements of international law?"

(snip)

"When this Congress enters into the conflict and takes sides between Israel and Palestine we do not help to achieve peace, but the opposite."


Full text at http://kucinich.us/issues/issue_middleeast.htm

A balanced viewpoint.......That is what this country and it's citizens need.

[jiacinto]

31. I'll leave it at this

I tend to avoid I/P debates because you really can't say anything without angering both sides.

I will say this. Maybe if the Palestinian Authority finally renounced terrorism unequivocally, became a secular government, functioned as a democracy with fair elections, gave civil/political rights to women, and was no longer corrupt, it might get a more sympathetic ear here in DC.

To be blunt the current leadership of the PA needs to change. Arafat et al have done very little for their people with the few resources they have had.

That is not to say that I support Sharon and Bush. I think they both need to go too. Until you get rid of Sharon, Bush, Arafat, and Abbass, you are never going to make any progress on the I/P conflict.

[caledesi]

7. I am underwhelmed by Mr. Lieberman <Bush Lite>

[Kahuna]

8. Er.........

Don't make me :puke:

[UnapologeticLiberal]

9. It is nice to see someone here who is not anti-Lieberman

I am a Dean supporter, but I get disturbed by how much hatred there is toward Lieberman here. I'm Jewish, and i know this sounds silly, but sometimes the attacks on Lieberman here make me paranoid and I start to take them personally.

[Cha]

12. Do Not And I repeat Do Not take them personally! For one

thing and a second thing, too; it's not because lieberman is Jewish that I don't like him~ He could be wasp for all I care!

It's his whole sucking attitude towards bush and his stab in the back of Al Gore...I mean "go figure"!

Please don't think it's because of his religion!

[jiacinto]

13. Well I sometimes wonder

Especially when it comes to the issue of Lieberman and Israel. Almost every other Democrat running for the nomination is pro-Israel, yet only Lieberman gets attacked for his position here at DU. Edwards and Kerry voted for the Iraq resolution, yet Lieberman gets attacked more for it.

[tameszu]

15. Those are 2 separate issues

"Especially when it comes to the issue of Lieberman and Israel. Almost every other Democrat running for the nomination is pro-Israel, yet only Lieberman gets attacked for his position here at DU. Edwards and Kerry voted for the Iraq resolution, yet Lieberman gets attacked more for it."

On Israel: Certainly, no mainstream Dem could run and claim to be "anti-" Israel. But some are significantly more hawkish than others--those who take the Clinton line would argue for cutting the Palestinians more slack and leaning harder on the Israeli gov't, esp. Sharon, instead of the other way around. No one who is honest can really argue that they *know* for certain which strategy will be/would have been more effective.

On Iraq: People on DU are not so fond of Lieberman because he's the only one of the candidate who is unrepentent about his vote and on his website in fact attacks the other candidates for not sticking with the war more resolutely. He also seems to be the least critical of Bush's foreign policy, or at least the not terribly passionate when engaged in this criticism.

[UnapologeticLiberal]

28. I don't like his stance on the war, but i respect him for sticking to it

Obviously, I don't agree with Lieberman on Iraq, but at least he has taken a position and stuck to it. He has been unrepentingly for the war and he has not tried to change that stance on the campaign trail. So I have more respect for him than I do for candidates who voted for the war but then speak out against it on the campaign trail while still standing by their vote.

I think members of Congress were lied to, and I think if Kerry or Edwards or Gephardt were to say "I was lied to, and I regret my vote" I would have a lot more respect for them.

The war is not a big issue for me anyway, because the only question I have in that regard is whether each of these candidates would have started this war had they been in office. But while I disagree completely with Lieberman, at least he has been consistent, and I respect him for that.

[UnapologeticLiberal]

27. Exactly

And I have said repeatedly that if you want a president who will be harder on Israel, you have got to elect a Jew because a Jewish president would have to try harder than anyone else to convince the world that he or she was an objective arbitrator and dedicated to the peace process.

[UnapologeticLiberal]

26. I know it's not

It's my paranoia...I feel like some people here (and I am not totally coming from out of the blue - a few people have posted things to this effect) oppose him because they think he is more loyal to Israel than to the US, and that is what upsets me.

[jos]

22. I'm Jewish

And I can't stand the guy. The supposed "hatred" is based on his stands on issues and his sanctimoniousness, not on his religion.

[CatholicEdHead]

11. If he would back Labour not Likud he would be better

My chief problem is his blind backing of Sharon/Likud. Not all Jews are bad, but I cannot stand the far right govt Irael has right now. How can you be a Democrat/progressive and still back a far right foreign government? Both sides are at fault over in the Middle East but it does not make it any better.

Among other things Lieberman is "GOP lite". Not worth my time.

[Josh]

18. "Not all Jews are bad" - listen to yourself -

if it's not about Lieberman being Jewish then why would you say that?

Lieberman is heavily out of favour with the far right in Israel because he has been TOO MUCH like Clinton in proposing a Palestinian State AND (and this is something Clinton never did) he visited the West Bank and Gaza Strip and when he came back he said they lived in horrific conditions and something had to be done about it from both sides.

I've never seen John Kerry do that, or John Edwards... You don't know how close Lieberman is to the Likud - you have nothing to support your assertion; rather you make the assumption that because Lieberman was in favour of a war with Iraq (as apparently ALL of Israel was, if you listen to people here) and because he's Jewish, he must property of the Likud.

"How can you be a Democratic/progressive and still back a far right foreign government?" Who's backing ARAFAT in this whole mess, sir? Who's backing foreign dictatorships just because you don't happen to like the US wanting to remove them? I was against the war as much as anyone here but I was HAPPY when Saddam was removed. There are people here who were secretly wishing that he would remain in power. So what kind of Democrats are some of the people here to be backing some of the people they do...?

"Not all Jews are bad"? What does that mean?

[UnapologeticLiberal]

29. Any American president would rather work with a Labor PM

Even Republicans, who are generally more ideologically aligned with Likkud, prefer to work with Labor because they are more receptive to the peace process, which American presidents have to push due to world pressure regardless of how they feel.

So it is not a question of backing Labor or Likkud...American presidents and senators and other politicians tend not to publicly get involved in internal Israeli politics. As far as I know, Lieberman has never expressed a preference for Likkud over Labor (if I am wrong feel free to give me a link). But Likkud is in power, and as much as I hate Sharon he was reelected in a free and fair election by a large margin, which is more than we can say about our own illegitimate president. So we can support Labor over Likkud all we want, but Likkud is in power and that is who our leaders have to work with.

[gottaB]

20. Liberman has a strong stand

Unfortunately it's arm and arm with Bush. Newsflash. Democrats don't much care for Bush, you know, the Republican. Democrats want a candidate who will stand against Bush on domestic *and* foreign affairs. Lieberman is not that candidate.

[Larkspur]

23. Lieberman has priority problems and a disorganized campaign

The flap over him missing the NAACP convention on Monday last week is a hint how much Lieberman, like Kerry, Edwards, and Graham, take for granted the Democratic base. While Howard Dean appeared at both the NOW and NAACP conventions, these guys intentionally bypassed them.

When Lieberman should have attended the NAACP convention, he was fundraising in New York City and taping an interview with Bill O'Reilly, the conservative talk show host. Priority problems, Joe? I think so. He did go on Thursday and eat humble pie, but his plea for forgiveness would have been more convincing if he had shown up dressed in sack cloth and ashes.

On top of this flap, he lost his campaign finance manager and his top fund raiser. Lieberman also publicly admitted that his campaign was disorganized. Well, that should tell you what kind of Presidency he would run. If he's disorganized, the Republicans are not and they'd eat him alive.

[GOPBasher]

25. Well he's not my candidate in the primaries.

Joe's actually near the bottom of my list, because of his very hawkish foreign policy. But he's definately got my vote if he wins the nomination. I'd donate to him as well.

[genius]

32. Lieberman doesn't have a chance

He didn't make a mistake with his war vote. He knew what he was doing. Personally I think he's a racist. However, on other issues I think he's more liberal than Dean. I hope they both lose the primaries. I think it's time America had a good leader and not just someone who is slightly better than Bush.

[Josh]

34. How is he a racist?

That's a fairly large accusation you just leveled. Care to point to something to back it up?

[Fleshdancer]

33. I've been suprised at Lieberman's campaign

It's as if his own campaign manager doesn't want the guy to win. For someone who has the most name recognition and initially the highest numbers in national polls, his campaign is just sitting by and watching Kerry and Dean roll right over him. Is there any method to this madness??

[DrFunkenstein]

35. The Other Jew On Israel

"Without demanding unilateral concessions, the United States must mediate a series of confidence building steps which start down the road to peace. Both parties must walk this path together - simultaneously. And the world can help them do it. While maintaining our long term commitment to Israel's existence and security, the United States must work to keep both sides focused on the end game of peace. Extremists must not be allowed to control this process."

Kerry is the only major candidate that I am aware of that calls for parallel concessions in the Mid-East process.

---

On Kerry's Jewish ancestry:

"For the past 15 years or so, Kerry says, he knew his paternal grandmother was probably Jewish, and he also knew the Kerrys came from the former Austrian empire. But he said he did not know, until informed by the Globe earlier this year, that his grandfather was a Czech Jew named Fritz Kohn who changed his name to Frederick Kerry to escape a violent strain of anti-Semitism.

Kohn and his wife, Ida Lowe, who was born Jewish in Budapest, changed their name to Kerry, were baptized as Catholics in 1902, and immigrated to the United States in 1905."

http://www.boston.com/globe/nation/packages/kerry/061503.shtml