How dare Lieberman use the word "partisan" as a dirty word?

[saracat]

It was the fact that he and his fellow Senators were not "partisan" enough to vote together to get anything done that caused the roadblocks in the Senate. It wasn't that they were too partisan. And as far as not wanting himself to be "partisan" , he is a DEMOCRATIC Senator. He was elected as a Democrat and that requires him to have allegiance to that party.If he thinks supporting the party that elected him is such a bad thing, he should resign NOW. I was sickened by his GMA appearance. He actually said there was no one in the Democratic Party he would listen to.(Hint Joe, that includes the voters.that is why you lost!)Lauer asked the right question for once. Yes, it does appear that Lieberman puts his own career ahead of his party , his country and his state! How dare he say he will not "allow" this decision by the voters of Connecticut to stand? Who the hell does he think he is/ I was actually sad to see a long career thrown down the toilet but no longer. I will actually donate to Lamont to ensure Lieberman's defeat .

[MrCoffee]

1. Spoken like a true Republican

He'll accuse Ned of wanting to cut-and-run, just you wait.

[Mist]

2. And why is it that "partisan" has come to mean "Dems who take

a Dem position, instead of caving to the Repubs"? Why is "partisan" never applied to any Repubs?

[Igel]

6. It is.

"Partisan" is like "patriotic". It can be a perfectly fine word, but it can also be "my party right or wrong," with the implicit suggestion that 'my party' is never wrong.

Many DUers here have no trouble dissing some of the planks in the party platform. No trouble at all. They take a principled stand against them.

The question is, What to do when it's time to take a public stance? Do you support the parts of the platform you loathe (in which case partisan ranks above principled, or makes partisanship into a principle), or do you support the platform regardless of how you view some planks? Or is it possible to shave corners on principle in order to preserve the party's power for planks that are important? Reasonable people differ, but frequently unreasonably.

When people denounce the party for a plank that *I* like, they're not being good dems or they're being traitors, and which they are has everything to do with how important I think the plank is. When they denounce the party for a plank that I think is bad, they're leaders, fiercely fighting for the heart and soul of the party--or brave dissenters, if it's not an important plank, in my view.

And if a majority of the party disagrees with me, they're sheeple.

[KurtNYC]

3. well now that he is an independent

he can tell us all how Washington needs an outsider like him, an outsider with 18 years experience and a wife who is a lobbyist

[MrCoffee]

5. LOL

tehehe. good one.

[KKKarl is an idiot]

4. ..

Listen to the voters. That will be a new concept for this rag tag bunch in DC.

[Sequoia]

7. Oh, he won't "allow" it?!!!!

Loser Liberman. Your party no longer wants you tratior.