Lowell Weicker wiping the floor with Lieberman...

[Cassandra]

on Kurtzman and Kramer, a local CBS news show.

[femmedem]

1. Any juicy quotes? n/t

[Cassandra]

3. He said something about how mean and nasty he was...

during the campaign.
http://wcbstv.com/video?cid=92
http://wcbstv.com/video?cid=82

Obviously, from the dates on these videos, it's going to be a while before today's video is up. I don't know where to find the transcript.

[femmedem]

5. Probably because of all the pundits

and Joe himself constantly saying what a great guy Joe is, many CT voters may disagree with Joe on major issues yet vote for him because they believe he is nice, reasonable, trustworthy, and moderate.

But the more voters see of Joe, the more that perception is changing. A lot of people were disgusted that he didn't even have the grace to congratulate Ned Lamont.

[saltpoint]

2. I don't think Weicker has ever lost the zip on his fastball.

Lieberman definitely has.

[liberalmike27]

4. Lieberman

Had better prepare for a pounding. It is just going to get worse. He'll eventually be compared to Nader in the 2000 race.

[opihimoimoi]

6. In the end, Lamont ganna kick Joe's Ass

Joe is the Loser Here.

[wiley]

17. Impotent Rage

There is a psychopathological process going on in Lieberman that is very ugly to watch. He has assured himself a place in international history as a backstabbing traitor; a demented, egomaniacal, once influentual but now just a shell filled with impotent rage. History, and the present, will record this as the saddest trajectory from once benign civic service to a malignant and bitter, rage that makes Nixon appear wronged.

[salin]

19. No offense, but your rhetoric is a tad bit hyperbolic.

international history as a backstabbing traitor...

This summer I spent time reading about the Norwegian resistance to occupation in WWII - and the very ugly role that Vidkun Kiesling played in that part of history. He indeed earned that tag.

Sen Lieberman is not known, nor cared much about internationally.

Per the bitter rage... he hasn't yet reached Zell's strange behavior.

I agree that what he is doing is self-serving, and ugly - and puts those who have screamed for 'party unity ...' (as in don't run as third parties) and 'let the primary process work' into the box of saying ... er... Let's SPlit the Party Yee Haw! I also agree that it appears that his ego has gone into overdrive for awhile now, and that he doesn't seem to step back and have any perspective (he could have made corrections along the way - strategically speaking - to have won, had he not been so blinded by his self-righteousness). But when put into hyperbolic rhetoric, the point rather gets lost.

[wiley]

20. Until I know the full extent of his current and future collaborations,

I stand by my post, however much you perceive it as rhetoric and hyperbole. I appreciate your response, however.

[LaPera]

7. You know, I have never voted for anyone but democrats...

(except for a Green now and again) but I never ever would even consider voting for a republican, I despise them with all my being.

Since I've lived in San Francisco and N CA (Humboldt, Tahoe, Berkeley, etc...)my whole life...I've always watched national politics...

And I must say years ago, if I ever voted for a republican (which is near impossible) it would be for Lowell Weicker of CT.

The man has scruples (which one almost never fines in a republican)I don't know what he's doing today, but Weicker used to blow me away with his convictions of what was right and didn't seem to care what other's said.

[calico1]

8. That's probably because Lowell Wiecker is a

60's "Rockerfeller" Republican. He is much more Liberal than Lieberman and in fact, Lieberman beat him by going to the right. The GOP wanted to get rid of him because he was too much of a leftie to be Republican.

[sandnsea]

9. A leftie or a libertarian

Not the same thing, even though they do cross at some points on the political spectrum. I'd never vote for a libertarian either and hope our choices don't become Republican or Libertarian in the future.

[calico1]

10. I meant to say the Repubs thought him to be

too leftie.

[sandnsea]

11. I was genuinely wondering too though

Were Weicker's politics more left, or more libertarian which hadn't been really defined at the time?

[salin]

12. left.

at the time he was in the Senate there were several northeast republicans in the senate who believed in restraint in deregulation (as in the Reaganites wanted to deregulate everything to the nth degree whether or not it made any common or fiscal sense), and in a social welfare programs (as in - they served a purpose, and were not just a pot of taxpayer dollars to be privatized for cronies (corporatists), nor something that ought to be axed and killed all together (libertarians).

To some extent I would include Cohen of Maine, Rudman of New Hampshire, and Chaffee of Rhode Island (and later, Jeffords of Vt.) More Rockerfeller republicans with a slight left lean - which didn't really appear 'left of center' until the Reagan "revolution" which began the lurch to the right of the GOP.

All that said, I don't know how much weight Wiecker carries in CT (in terms of influence) - as he grew rather unpopular after creating the state's first income tax when he was Governor. Don't get me wrong, I liked (and still do Wiecker.) However, I just don't know that he really means much to the current race.

[sandnsea]

15. Thanks

I just didn't know, but do know it gets a bit fuzzy at times. Anybody who is hammering at Joe on his politics is a-ok with me. We need a lot more clear distinctions between Green, Democrat, moderate, neocon and right wing wackos.

[ReadTomPaine]

14. I think he leans toward more the left..

esp. given his eventual support of the state income tax in CT. Particularly lately, he's more liberal than libertarian. Seems very much a Rockefeller Republican type. The way the Bushes turned on him also fits the mold. Prescott's boys inherited their dad's hatred of that wing of the GOP.

[sandnsea]

16. Thanks n/t

[LaPera]

18. Your correct-I was just reading about how there were actually socially

liberal republicans from the north east("Rockefeller Republicans")...and how even with Goldwater's lost in 1964 (which I was only ten years old)...even with Goldwater's lost his ideology survived, and molded the party of Nixon, Reagan & Bush Sr The liberal republicans have vanished, are now have completely gone from the republican party for uyears. Of course Bush Jr. has even taken it a step further, with his complete irresponsibility fiscally, concerning the deficit & spending...the spending is almost all for the "military complex" and true to the Goldwater republicans, no increase spending, and crippling cuts for most social programs.

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/generic/VP_Nelson_Rockefeller.htm

Reputation as a Spender

Rockefeller returned to New York determined to establish his own political career. In 1958 he challenged the popular and prestigious governor Averell Harriman, in what the press dubbed the "battle of the millionaires." Rockefeller campaigned as a man of the people, appearing in shirtsleeves and eating his way through the ethnic foods of New York neighborhoods. His victory in a year when Republicans lost badly elsewhere made him an overnight contender for the Republican presidential nomination in 1960. Republicans who distrusted Vice President Richard Nixon rallied to Rockefeller, and Democrats like Senator John F. Kennedy considered him the most formidable candidate that the Republicans might nominate. Because Rockefeller's advisers were reluctant to have him enter the party primaries, however, he was never able to demonstrate his popular appeal or overcome Nixon's lead among party loyalists. Instead, Rockefeller used his clout to summon Nixon to his Fifth Avenue apartment and dictate terms for a more liberal party platform. Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater denounced this event as "the Munich of the Republican Party," the beginning of a long estrangement between Rockefeller and the Republican right.

Nixon's defeat in 1960 made Rockefeller the frontrunner for the Republican nomination in 1964. But between the two elections he stunned the nation by divorcing his wife of thirty-two years and marrying a younger woman, Margaretta Fitler Murphy, better known as "Happy." She was the recently divorced wife of an executive in the Rockefeller Medical Institute. The birth of their son, Nelson, Jr., on the eve of the Republican primary in California reminded voters of the remarriage and contributed to Rockefeller's loss to Goldwater. At the party's convention in San Francisco, Goldwater's delegates loudly booed Rockefeller when he tried to speak. To them, he embodied the hated "Eastern liberal establishment." Rockefeller sat out the election, an act that further branded him as a spoiler.

More>

http://www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/common/generic/VP_Nelson_Rockefeller.htm

[cali]

13. I happily voted twice

for Jim Jeffords. Never regretted my vote.