Lieberman: "they should have thought about that during the primary"

[madfloridian]

I don't see too many ways to take his statement in this video clip...when he is questioned about whether he will hurt other races in CT.

"they should have thought about that during the primary...and well, here we are."

The video at You Tube..a little over a minute in. Watch all of it though, it is short.
Lieberman video clip

I hope the people of CT are better than he is, and see through a power play. If they don't then it is not a blue state after all. Listen to the "they want to kill all of us" spiel at the start of the video.

Here is more on this from MyDD
http://mydd.com/story/2006/8/30/114143/325
By Chris Bowers

"I have watched the video, which is difficult to stomach and which I will not reproduce here since it is Faux News, and there seem to be two ways to read this quote. One reading would be that Lieberman thinks that instead of voting their conscience, Democratic primary voters should have instead capitulated to his threats to leave the party. The other reading is that the party establishment, which gave their complete support to Lieberman during the primary, should never have allowed the primary to happen in the first place. Either way, Lieberman clearly views his run as revenge against Democrats for actually engaging in party democracy."

[don954]

1. what part of the word DEMOCRATIC does he not understand?

[Dhalgren]

7. Come on! Joe is just a good, solid, moderate Democrat who

just doesn't want HIS party moving to the left! We have to support the President during a time af war! Even if (hopefully) the war last forever! Zell (another moderate Democrat), after all, was right!

:sarcasm:
:puke: :puke: :eyes: :eyes: :puke:

[Zhade]

15. I wonder of dolstein and his few friends have changed their mind?

Can they still not see what a selfish prick lieberman is?

[Cassandra]

2. We should have assumed he was lying about...

staying a Democrat? He is a nasty piece of work, isn't he?

[Demeter]

3. The Man Has Got To Be Insane

How much Koolaid does one have to drink to totally lose it forever?

[wtmusic]

4. What a prick

Toss out the party and the money that got you in the Senate in the first place, to further your own aims.

This is war.

[wicket]

5. Amen to that!

:grr: :grr: :grr:

[tularetom]

6. This creep is worse than crazy Zell Miller

because at first glance he appears normal. He doesn't run around challenging people to "dewels" and the veins don't stand out on his neck when he speaks anddhe doesn't frighten people. It's only after you examine his behavior during this entire campaign season (and before) you begin to discover he's just as fuckin wacko as Zell. And his overdeveloped sense of entitlement indicates that he is in fact delusional. He should be under treatment not in the US Senate.

[gratuitous]

8. Do I understand this right?

If Lieberman can't be the nominee, he'll work to elect Republicans. Is that it?

How does this translate to being a "loyal Democrat" as Joe is trying to portray himself? I'd hate to have had Mr. Lieberman as a general during the Revolutionary War: If I don't get to command this army, I'll hand the country back over to the British. Benedict Lieberman, anyone?

[Cha]

10. I call the leech..

traitorjoe. he's such boil on the ass of America..It would be so nice to send him packin' back to wherever he came from in Nov.

[madfloridian]

9. Correction.

In the part where I said he said they want to "kill" all of us....I should have said he said they "hate" all of us, no matter what our party.

Yeh, Joe, we know. Terror terror, terror, terror, and so on.

You should be ashamed of yourself for not respecting Democracy. I hope your state voters are better people than you and your campaign bunch are.

[sutz12]

11. Typical FAUX "News Reporting"

"The far left, anti war Democrats."

:shrug:

[SoCalDem]

12. Quite a snotty little "Terra-ist" he turned out to be, eh?

Sour grapes, sore Loserman..

[madfloridian]

13. Now the Republicans who called him Sore Loserman, embrace him.

How hypocritical.

[madfloridian]

14. Cheney blames "Dean Democrats" for Lieberman's loss.

Ok, this is officially crazy. It was the people of CT who voted for Lamont. I guess Dick feels better when he gets his little jabs in.

This is just so overboard. No wonder Joe is acting so nasty, he has the VP egging him on.

http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/news_theswamp/2006/08/cheney_vs_the_d.html

Cheney vs 'the Dean Democrats'

"Vice President Dick Cheney doesn’t come out in public often, but when he does, he comes out swinging. And, now, with Democrats revving up criticism for the war in Iraq, Cheney has come out throwing punches.

Cheney, accusing Democratic war-critics of “defeatism,’’ has been getting a lot of mileage out of longtime Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman’s loss of the Democratic Party’s nomination for reelection to the Senate. The anti-war candidate who defeated Lieberman, Cheney said this week, is simply a new warrior in the old clothes of Howard Dean. “The Dean Democrats have defeated Joe Lieberman,’’ Cheney said. “What these Democrats are pushing now is the very kind of retreat that has been tried in the past.’’

This is hardly the first time that Cheney has invoked the name of Dean, the former Vermont governor who campaigned for president on an anti-war platform in 2004 and now serves as chairman of the Democratic National Committee. Cheney wrapped Dean around Democratic rival John Kerry's neck in the 2004 reelection campaign."

Tom Hughes sent a letter out from DFA if you want to talk to Cheney about it....there's a link to send a message.

http://www.blogforamerica.com/archives/008269.html

[CollegeDUer]

16. He's blaming the voters who kicked HIM out for the upcoming election?

He doesn't get any lower, does he?

[Canuckistanian]

17. How DARE mere mortals challenge him?

Don't they know that Holy Joe marched with MLK?

[FiveGoodMen]

18. Joe wasn't nearly this mad about the 2000 election...

...hmmmmmm.

[adamuu]

19. campaining by blackmail?

what is this... campaining by blackmail?

"they should have thought about that during the primary...and well, here we are."

okay, so, the voters are supposed to anticipate that if you lose, you will go on a rampage, sabotaging democracy for everyone? And they're supposed to vote for you to prevent your irrational acts of revenge? They have a name for that... what is it... i heard it only recently oh yeah, APPEASEMENT.

[calimary]

20. My, my, my. Vindictive little pissant, isn't he? Kinda like his kissin'

cousin, georgie. No wonder they always seem to be on the same side. Birds of a feather, I guess...

:eyes:

[Jacobin]

24. More like "irrelevant", even if he manages to 'win' for himself:See below

[Supersedeas]

21. calling the Dem constituents "THEY"????????????????

[progressoid]

22. Yeah, I noticed that too. There's a humongous chip on his shoulder

[N90ATC]

25. He's a loser!

I can't believe he won't accept the primary results. How can Harry Reid promise him anything at this point? I hope more Dems speak out in favor of Lamont. Joementum is vile.

[ima_sinnic]

23. oooooohh, now he's gonna "get even" with the voters!

what a huge turd this guy has turned out to be.
little crybaby loserman, take your bat and ball and go run and cry on *'s shoulder!

but first, keep talkin, Joey, let everybody see what kind of crybaby self-centered dumbass person you really are.

creep.

[Nightjock]

26. I hate him

Lord help me, I REALLY DESPISE the weasel.

Please Ct. voters get him out!

[LoZoccolo]

27. Strategy is always a consideration in getting more of what you want. n/t

[madfloridian]

29. When you lose, you step out graciously.

If you are a true Democrat you care about your party and your country.

Joe lost the primary. He needs to accept it graciously.

[LoZoccolo]

35. Says who?

Some random people on a message board from out of state? History rarely responds to the mere force of "should" and "needs to".

I'm not for Lieberman now (please do your due diligence and search my posts before you accuse me of that), but I have no idea why he'd be compelled to drop out at this point. You have to solve that problem if you expect him to not be in the race.

[madfloridian]

36. Touchy touchy...the "you" referred to Lieberman...

"when you lose you step out graciously"...refers to Lieberman. He was the one who was running for office, and that was a reference to his loss.

I did not accuse you of anything.

[LoZoccolo]

38. I did not think you were referring to me. n/t

[CTLawGuy]

41. I question whether anyone who condones usurping the results of

a Democratic primary is actually a Democrat.

Imagine if Bradley had stayed in the 2000 presidential race as an independent.

Imagine if Dean, Kucinich and Clark stayed in the 2004 presidential race as independents.

People step aside gracefully for a reason... That is so we don't LOSE EVERY TIME to the Republican nominee due to a vote split.


Joe is no longer a Democrat and I HIGHLY DOUBT he will actually caucus with Dems again were he to win.

[madfloridian]

28. Lamont heads to DC, doesn't mind crossing paths.

http://www.newsday.com/news/local/wire/connecticut/ny-bc-ct--connecticutsenate0830aug30,0,70278.story?coll=ny-region-apconnecticut

"Congress returns for business Tuesday, and Lieberman, the Democrat now running as an independent, will be back for committee assignments, defense legislation and perhaps party meetings.

Close by will be Lamont, who upset Lieberman in the Aug. 8 primary, seizing the Democratic nomination for the Connecticut seat. Lamont plans to meet Wednesday with party leaders, union leaders and business groups.

I'm not spending much time in Washington, but I think it's important I at least get introduced down there," Lamont said. "A lot of people down there have a certain interest in this race so I figured some of them are saying stuff about me and I might as well meet them.

"I'm always happy to cross paths," Lamont said. "I'm not doing anything to avoid any of that."

[VOX]

30. Where was Joe's self-righteous pissed-offedness in 2000?

Where was all his energy and vituperation six years ago? Why wasn't he willing to do battle back then? :shrug:

What a miserable right-wing quisling Joe has become. :puke:

[FiveGoodMen]

32. Kinda makes you wonder who's side he's been on all along, doesn't it?

[tom_paine]

31. There is more than a 50% chance, IMHO, Lieberman is a Bushevik Mole

This is speculation for which I have no proof, I admit.

However, Joe's actions at every turn, from his disgraceful, cowardly performance during the Stolen "Election" of 2000 to everything up until this moment, are a puzzlement unless one views it from the angle of a Bushevik mole who casts his votes as a DEmocrat and behaves (sort of) as a Democrat.

But with every step he weakens the Party, and I am talking about far more than the primary. I wonder at the Bushevik cover story for abandoning their own candidate. I wonder if they are trying to protect that wonderful stream of information from Democratic councils that Lieberman would give them if he is a Bushevik Mole.

Does any of this make it true? No, but it is more than past time to consider the fact.

And yeah, if Lieberman was a Bushevik Mole, he would also loudly proclaim that he will continue to caucus with Democrats. Of course he wants to caucus with us, and then give the info to his Bushevik Masters.

[madfloridian]

33. Sam Seder just covered it, played the audio.

It sounds worse everytime I hear it.

[tbyg52]

34. Who's this *they*, jerk man???

You were beat in the *DEMOCRATIC* primary fair and square. Get over it and go away.

[Red Knight]

37. Ooops on the Shays hug

Ol' Joe had to remind Shays not to give hugs and kisses until after the election. My God, if any Dem doesn't see through this worm they shouldn't bother voting. He's playing them like a fiddle.

[madfloridian]

39. Joe's role in getting Michael Brown appointed....he really pushed him.

http://connecticutblog.blogspot.com/2006/08/stupidity-of-michael-brown-and.html

"The stupidity of Michael Brown and the arrogance of Joe Lieberman

As I promised, this week I'm going to talk about Joe Lieberman's role in the Katrina disaster and how his lack of leadership as senator ultimately cost people their lives.

You see, Joe Lieberman should carry a great amount of the blame since he chaired the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee when Presedent Bush nominated Michael Brown. Lieberman (in hooking up his best Republican friend) held a cute 42-minute love feast interview with Brown before he offered his full support."

"Now, since Lieberman chaired the committee, he obviously had access to Brown's resume, you know the resume that was full of lies that Time magazine picked apart in a matter of days (if not hours). It was Lieberman's responsibility to make sure that Brown qualified for the job but not only did he fail in his responsibility, he had the arrogance not to criticize or even question Brown or FEMA as the disaster unfolded right before our very eyes and millions of people around the world were watching Brown, the Department of Homeland Security. (I'll come back and talk about Lieberman's role in creating this department later) and the entire Bush administration fall flat on their face."

[Pachamama]

40. Chris Shays says Lieberman is a "Nat'l Treasure"?

Yeah, to the effing GOP he is a treasure....

I thought I was going to throw up when he said that about Lieberman and then was hugging him in the end.

Hello, Connecticut voters :hi: Can you all see what this guy is all about? HIMSELF, not CT.

How meanwhile the Democratic party can call him one of their own still is unbelievable to me...Looks like the little terd may be the one to help bring down the democratic party and help the GOP to another majority in the Congress and Senate....

Please, please CT voters....please get out the vote and make sure this terd stops floating on the surface and is removed from sight soon!

[Cha]

42. I've read chris shays is in trouble

himself in Connecticut. All those losers are sticking together.

lieberman is a National embarrassment who just needs to get beaten by Ned Lamont and go whining in the sunset.

[madfloridian]

43. Begala said Lieberman is "the war's strongest opponent." Baloney, Paul.

Paul Begala was on CNN yesterday, and he said this about Lieberman.

They were speaking of Rumsfeld:

KING: Let me ask you a political question. You don't really want him to go, do you? You want him there?

BEGALA: No. That's right. As an American, as a political strategist, the Democrats are benefited by Rumsfeld being there. Why? Because Democrats can turn to Republicans in elections and say, I want to fire Rumsfeld. You won't. You won't stand up to George W. Bush. That hurts the Republicans. Because then they're linked to this very unpopular president and this unpopular war.

Now, I'll say as an American, I've stood on this set for over a year now and said honestly the president ought to fire him and actually replace him with Joe Lieberman from my party, who's the war's strongest opponent. It would have been a very good move for President Bush and the Republicans.

I am constantly amazed at how so many of our politicians and strategists simply don't know what reality is.

Joe Lieberman...the war's strongest opponent??

[MurrayDelph]

44. I think it is a misquote

That what he must have said is that Lieberman is the war's strongest PROponent.

[madfloridian]

45. I would hope so, but that is from the transcript.

I forgot the link in the post above.

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0608/30/sitroom.01.html