So are moderate Democrats no longer welcome in the party?

[jerry611]

If so, I think we will lose a lot of votes. Most of my friends who are Democrats are mostly moderate in their views.

[MissB]

1. How did you come to this conclusion? Because Joe lost?

I wouldn't call him moderate.

[jerry611]

21. If Joe voted 95% with Democrats and he is thrown out by Democrats...

...it is just logical to assume that a Democrat that votes with the party 60% of the time will also be unpopular.

[Atman]

As well they should be.

Voting with the GOP 40% of the time is pathetic. How many Republicans vote with us 40% of the time?

[alarimer]

56. it's because of his support of Bush

and Bush's war. No other reason at all. And Lamont, from what I can tell, is not a flaming leftie, even if he is against the war.

[readmoreoften]

59. If Joe Lieberman voted with the Dems 95% of the time...

he'd still be the candidate.

If Lieberman voted with the Dems 95% of the time, the Republicans wouldn't like him as much as they do. And you certainly wouldn't have the PNAC's William Kristol sympathizing for him!

[Midlodemocrat]

74. I honestly believe it is the anti-war vote.

And this was the first chance that people had to speak their minds at the polls about how they felt about the war (s).

[Warren DeMontague]

92. You know, it's not the 5%.

It's WHICH 5%.

[Recursion]

151. Not all 5% are equal

It's the fact that he still to this day refuses to see that the war in Iraq is the biggest single threat to our national security.

It's also the fact that he still to this day refuses to see that George W. Bush's usurpation of illegal powers is the second greatest threat to our national security.

It's not that it's 5%, it's that it's the most important 5% out there.

[KoKo]

169. He voted 90% with Dems according to Congressional Quarterly and it's

the 10% that does matter plus his alliance with Bush and the Neo-Con's plus Lynn Cheney's views. 10% with Bush is too much.

[T Roosevelt]

2. No, just Republicans

that's what Joe's become...

[americanstranger]

17. Bingo.

You posted exactly what I was going to say.

- as

[bobbie]

108. Yup, I don't even like Repugs in the Repug party

Let alone Repugs masquerading as Democrats.

[NMDemDist2]

3. that's a pretty broad brush and today's "Moderate" was a

radical conservative only 20 years ago

Nixon would have been a moderate today

[speedoo]

4. Lieberman is no moderate.

He's a Bush supporter and therefore a radical.

[AX10]

5. I'm a moderate and I am sick and tired of Democrats...

who have this idea that being a "moderate" means that one must roll over and appease the GOP.
That's the way it's been since * came to power in 2001.

[Vidar]

69. Though a flaming socialist myself, I appreciate your stand greatly.

[splat]

6. What's moderate about enabling Bush?

[Lindacooks]

7. Of course they are welcome.

But we can't have 'Bush lite' Dems. Chimp and his ilk have to be taken down, or at the very least controlled so they can't do even more damage to the world.

It's just about time that liberal Dems had a voice and started having a say in the way this country is run.

[calimary]

62. Exactly. It's the PRIMARY reason we hear that nauseating complaint:

"...but the Democrats don't stand for anything..."

That's because they've not come out as the OPPOSITION party. And who wants to vote for republi-CON-Lite when they can have the real thing? I'd kinda like our party to ACT LIKE an opposition party for a change, not a rubberstamp invertebrate party.

Remember one thing that really resonated with a lot of people that bush kept hammering home during the last campaign: "you may not agree with me but you know where I stand." And, whether you agree with THAT or not, that just hit home like GANGBUSTERS with a lot of the mindless, apathetic, and ill-informed, who think even standing for shit is standing tall on principles. They're wrong, but that's the psychology behind it. And as a campaign ploy, it worked. Especially when our guy was the "I voted for the 87 billion before I voted against it" guy. Left us open to charges of waffling, weakness on the (fill in the blank here) issue and flip-flopping, while the bad guy "stood firm."

THAT'S WHAT WE NEED TO DO. And it's SO damned clear that bush is deeply unpopular, and his policies are worse, and their impact is worst of all, so why we're NOT standing firm on that - is just beyond me.

[133724]

84. The reason Dems' "dont stand for anything"

is because we (or at least I) beleive in DEBATE not preordained answers.

I want the Democraticparty to be diverse, and wide open in its discussions about what is best for the country. EVERYTHING is on the table EXCEPT an inherint respect for human dignity & life.

[DoYouEverWonder]

8. Not if they want to act like Repugs

I'm sick of the middle of the road. It's time to take a stand.

[DesEtoiles]

9. Moderates, sure. Lying hypocrites who are traitors to the party - NO.

[jonnyblitz]

10. delete dupe.

[TSIAS]

11. That's news to me

We still have a Senate full of moderates like both Nelsons, Evan Bayh, and many others. We are truly a big tent.

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

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

[aquart]

13. Thank you for your concern.

It's destructive, defeatist, negative, and useless, but thank you for your effort.

Demoralization is a fine art. I'm sure, with practise, you'll improve.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

30. I'm diggin' yer posts tonight!

[Canuckistanian]

63. That's all that needs to be said

I'm outta here...

[GalleryGod]

175. GO LEFT, Young Man ! In '06

Tack Back in 2008 :patriot: :rofl: :patriot:

[saltpoint]

14. It was the kiss-up Republican in Lieberman that rankled so many.

Not the moderate Democrat in Lieberman.

He seemed to suit up in the blue uniform but spent too much time in the red dugout.

It pissed people off.

The Democratic Party is still a big tent place -- far, far bigger a tent than the GOP.

[creeksneakers2]

15. If you look at polling on issues

the party is being brought back to the center. Joe Lieberman represents a minority right wing opinion of Iraq.

[IndianaGreen]

16. Do they kiss Bush? Are they are rubber stamps for Bush's wars?

Lieberman is not even a moderate, but a warmongering Bush enabler.

[pinto]

125. I hope Joe's loss is not all about Bush, to be honest.

Y'know? I hope it's as much about all the other stuff CT found lacking in Lieberman or at least not as attractive as Lamont. I'm sure there were some local issues going on as well, as usual. Interesting race, and an impressive win for Mr. Lamont.

We can't count on anti Bush as a national party, though. But that's for tomorrow :hi:

[DesEtoiles]

18. Lieberman is a MORAN not a moderate; he sold us out for HIMSELF

[charlie]

19. Still banging that drum

Thread after thread.

What's immoderate about Lamont?

[im10ashus]

20. So most of your friends are moderates?

You hang out with moderates. That means nothing.

[sendero]

22. Moderates are fine..

... Republican boot lickers can go elsewhere.

[msongs]

23. "moderate" is a code word, so why not tell us what it means to you?

does it mean, "the constitution says we have freedom OF religion, not freedom FROM religion", as Lieberman says?

doesnt sound so moderate to me.

Msongs
www.msongs.com/political-shirts.htm

[index555]

104. read the constitution

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibit the free exercise thereof.."
Actually there are legal interpretations that describe being an atheist as a religion.
Being an atheist I really don't care how the courts regard me.

[rpannier]

24. Let's see

Ben Nelson, Bill Nelson, Di Fi, Blanche Lincoln, Jim Webb, Mary Landrieu...Sitting Senators and/or running this year.

We will lose no one.
Learn from history. Go to HuffPo and read Joe Scarboroughs column.

[helderheid]

25. Of course they are. Just no Republicans in Dems clothing.

[WilliamPitt]

26. Of course they are

Moderate Democrats who cannot understand why the Iraq war was such a catastrophe, why Lieberman's enabling of Enron was such a screwing, and why telling fellow Dems that criticizing Bush puts the nation in peril, can pretty much go pound sand for all I care.

Be as moderate as you like. But see the forest for the trees.

[jonnyblitz]

27. I don't equate moderate DEMs with Lieberman.

It wasn't just his positions on issues that angered people. I am sure many moderate DEMS here at DU are cheering for Lamont tonight.

[hatrack]

28. Only Dems who applaud Bush with the Constitution between his butt cheeks

Any other questions?

[Warren DeMontague]

Define "moderate".

Anyway, they're welcome to support their local Democratic Nominee, or go elsewhere- the exact same choice which has been foisted upon us by so-called "moderates" for years.

[uppityperson]

29. What are you talking about?

[YOY]

31. Dude, if you think Joe's a moderate then you have no political compass

whatsoever.

Next thing you'll be telling me is that Hillary is a flaming liberal.

No, it's just that the right is so far fucking right that when we call them 'fascists' we're not just repeating rhetoric. The assholes really are fascists.

[BrotherBuzz]

32. It's still a big damn tent

but moderates need to stop pissing on on the progressives and understand the center has shifted to the right while they were asleep. Simple, no?

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

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

[DesEtoiles]

34. Do moderates publicy state Christ. hosp. need not provide Plan B? GET OUT

of the party, then. Bastards.

[whalerider55]

35. now, now

the point is, the old labels don't apply anymore, as much as the republicans would like to think they do. dems are running Jon Tester, Bob Casey and Ned Lamont as sentaors this year, primary winners all- that's a pretty big spread. ask your moderate friends not to see the world so black and white.

wait. that's what i thought moderation was all about-- balance.

whalerider55

[long_green]

36. We want to end a war

You cannot frighten us with moderate Democrats.

[Boomer]

37. On the contrary

A win for Lamont shows that moderate Democrats are quite welcome! He's the moderate; Lieberman is the right-wing Republican running as a Democrat.

[derby378]

38. Moderate Dems are welcome - Vichy DLC Dems are another story

No Dems who compromise with tyrants. Today, Lieberman - tomorrow, who knows?

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

Ned Lamont's Unofficial Fight Song

:headbang: :headbang: :headbang: :headbang:

[ScreamingMeemie]

Moderate Dems who say they will run as Independents if their

constituents don't vote for them in the Primary are no longer welcome in the Party, IMO... But that's just me. BTW, I am a Moderate Dem... and most self described "Moderate Dems" don't speak for me.

Hope that clears it up for you.

No more watching myself NOT being represented in Congress. :hi:

[PassingFair]

110. We FINALLY won one, Mrs. Grumpy!

I SO HAPPY!!

I sleep GOOD tonite!

Love all around!

[Name removed]

122. Deleted message

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

[blonndee]

132. Good riddance.

Libertarians are worse than Rethugs, IMO.

[Cha]

39. WTF?!

As buzzflash so eloquently states.."What lieberman represents is not Centrism but policies of Failure"!

http://www.buzzflash.com

Quit trying to perpetuate the joe lie.

[newsguyatl]

40. Moderates, sure.... CONSERVATIVES like Lieberman, no

not now... not EVER.

[Cleita]

41. Depends on what you consider moderate.

If you are right of center I doubt if you are moderates and should form a different party.

[Protagoras]

42. Moderates ARE the Democratic Party

it's the Corporatists and Conservatives who are calling themselves Democrats that aren't welcome.

So tired of people using the term Centrist and Moderate as a guise to hide behind overtly conservative views. Time to recenter the political compass. The range is NOT +75 to +100 Right and all to the left of that is Communist.

[Wonk]

43. IBTL

[milkyway]

44. Moderates yes, traitors no.

[UTUSN]

45. Of course they are. Here's what I sent to somebody who said that

The local radio wingnut talkshow host sent me an op-ed by Lanny DAVIS, calling us "liberal McCARTHYites" for wanting to ditch Joementum. I'm looking for the link (I deleted the e-mail). So I replied:


Re: the Lanny DAVIS opinion on alleged "liberal McCARTHYism".


Joementum has been endorsed by HANNITY, Ann COULTERgeist-of-the-Adam's-apple, and kissed by Shrub.


You yourself, regarding Catholic politicians who are pro-Choice, have said that Catholics should not be cafeteria-Catholics, picking and choosing policies at will and that the Church should excommunicate or withhold communion to pro-Choicers or other defiers of other Church policies.


For six years, the namby-pamby Democrats have walked a tightrope, afraid to be called un-American if they oppose Shrub on anything, have not behaved as an opposition party.

---------So, the questions: Why are supposed "Far Left" Dems to be castigated as full of hate and as McCARTHYites for wanting their loyal opposition respresented? Why should they support somebody who fits the 3 premises cited above?

And as for Lanny, after championing CLINTON on the FAKE impeachment, he then championed Shrub as being a fun dude at school and as, supposedly, NOT stupid. And now it's Joementum. The trend or drift of his championing makes me wonder. And as for his cherrypicking a handful of posts from liberal blogs--------MALKIN and other wingnuts do that all the time, finding the most attention-grabbing posts and quoting THOSE, while passing over HUNDREDS AND THOUSANDS of other, less attention-grabbing posts.

[BulletproofLandshark]

46. I think the big problem people have with Lieberman

is that he's more than willing to throw Democrats under the bus rather than disagree with the GOP on anything. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck... well, I'll let you fill in the rest.

[wisteria]

47. Moderates and those with opposing views are welcome. You

have been believing what the MSM has been promoting.

[stepnw1f]

48. You Feeling .... Ok? (nt)

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

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

[Joe Fields]

50. It's got nothing to do with being a moderate.

It has everything to do with siding with the enemy, in an illegal war.

[Warpy]

51. That way doesn't work. Choosing conservatives who call

themselves moderates has cost us all 3 branches of government.

Enough, already.

Gov. Brian Schweitzer of Montana showed the party that progressives can win the most GOP of GOP states. It's high time the people sent another message to the party that the age of conservatism and business as usual is OVER.

We want our country back and conservatives aren't going to help us get it.

[jerry611]

61. How can you say that when Joe votes 95% with the Democrats?

And don't give me the crap about the war. What about all the other Democrats in the congress that STILL favor this war today? Hillary favors the war and she's favored by half the party for the Democratic nomination in '08. Why isn't she in any danger of losing?

[Warpy]

121. Try 76%

http://www.progressivepunch.org

Check it out. His record on labor is not good. His record on denying corporations tax breaks and subsidies is not good.

His record on the war is downright bad.

He has been on the right side on many issues, though.

[bread_and_roses]

164. Oh, Right On, Warpy! and Anti-Labor, Pro-Corporatism, and War =

a meaningless 100% for "Education, Humanities, and the Arts." Where's the money to come from, when your giving away the people's $ to Corporations, squandering it on war, and voting against Labor Rights?

Even his record on the Environment, which I thought I remembered seeing lauded repeatedly, is pretty piss-poor, and when you look at the breakdown, even more so: woo-hoo for 100% on encouraging walking and biking when your score on "—Preventing Weakening of Environmental Protections by International Trade Agreements" is only 23.53. The pattern clearly shows his Corporatism.

It's a shell game and he's a shill for his Corporate buds; they get the nut, we get "you lose."

[KoKo]

170. He votes 90 of the time with Dems not 95%...

[4nic8em]

52. Ever since the election of 2000...

I have always been particularly impressed with the way Joe Lieberman moderately kisses the ass of that "shit for brains" neonut.

[Duncan Grant]

53. Here's what moderates tell me when I ask about liberals being welcome:

One can always vote for Republicans if one thinks one will do better with them.

Now, can we all get with the program. :eyes:

[politicat]

54. Depends on the definition of moderate.

Today's moderates tend to be slightly to the right of Richard Nixon. (Remember, the guy that went to China to try to make peace with them? The guy who saw the start of the EPA? The guy that was actually pro-choice and pro-privacy (as long as he could steal the tapes later?)) Not that I liked Nixon - he was a liar and a crank and would have happily shredded the Constitution - but those who are more conservative than Nixon are not Democrats.

My basic requirements are easy: a Democrat has to believe in one person, one vote, and that people are more important than businesses. S/he has to believe in Of the People, By the People and For the People. And s/he has to listen to what zer constituents say and want, not what looks politically expedient or (heaven forbid) zer own opinions.

Moderates who can live along those lines - including voting against or for measures that s/he does not personally endorse because that's what the constituency wants - are more than welcome in the Democratic party.

[spanone]

55. War has become the issue again, Lieberman is a Major Hawk.

[Fleshdancer]

57. I was moderate in 2000. My views have NOT changed.

now I'm pegged as an angry leftist extremist. Go figure.

[readmoreoften]

66. Excellent point!

And Ned Lamont is a representative of the FAR left according to some DUers! Because businessmen worth 1/4 of a billion dollars are often part of the vast left wing socialist conspiracy. Clearly he hates capitalism and wants to turn us all into communist revolutionaries who seek to abolish flyswatting because it's harmful to animals.

[Fleshdancer]

73. *snort*

:rofl:

Thanks for pointing out the obvious in such a humorous way. I needed the laugh after listening to Lieberman.

[flaminbats]

58. moderates are very welcome in our party..

sore losers are not! if not for his announcement in the primaries that he would keep running if he lost to Lamont, I believe Lieberman would be the nominee tonight!

The reason Lieberman lost, because even moderates can't accept a candidate who rejects the will of the voters.

[porphyrian]

60. Yeah, I have to agree with others here that saying Lieberman...

...is a "moderate" is euphemistic and insulting to real moderate Democrats. Don't give him a pass where he doesn't deserve it. Also, it's ridiculous to claim that calling Lieberman on his real stances somehow equates to "moderate Democrats no longer being welcome in the party." Lighten up, Francis.

[Vidar]

64. Moderates are fine. Bush whores are not.

[Zynx]

65. What? Because we booted that fucktard Loserman?

[readmoreoften]

70. Don't mince words, Zynx!

:)

[blonndee]

67. If you're talking about LIEberman, no, Bush-ass-sucking

Democrats ARE NOT WELCOME and they should leave the party immediately.

[Crunchy Frog]

68. What a pile of Repuke, corporate media talking points.

Loserman was NOT rejected for being a "moderate". There's LOADS of conservative Democrats who are not being challenged. He lost because he's a Bush buttlicker who constantly undermines his own party, and wouldn't even agree to abide by the results of the primary.

If you want to play the victim by pretending that the party is "rejecting" you for being "moderate", go right ahead.

[beltanefauve]

94. And conversely,

Bob Casey is anti-choice. So's John Murtha, plus his voting record is socially-conservative on a lot of issues. And Ned Lamont is hardly what you'd call a flaming Liberal. And yet they have been endorsed by MoveOn and Daily Koz. There's a difference between being "moderate" and a Bushco enabler. And, to reiterate on some of the other posts, the goalposts demarking the lines between "centrist" and "rightist" have been moved to the far right several years ago.

[NoPasaran]

71. I'm pretty moderate, and I don't feel unwelcome

[greenbriar]

72. stop listening to Hannity and company

we are all one under a very big tent.

loserman was not NOT NOT one of us

[Bob3]

75. Lieberman is not a moderate he's a tool, a useful idiot

Moderates do not pal around with *; they do not keep showing up on Fox News and telling them how bad the democratic party is, they don't write editorials for the Wall Street Journal saying Democrats should not critique the president; Moderates are not silent on torture; moderates are not comfortable with radical right wing nut jobs like Bennett and Hannity; moderates don't suggest rape victims take a cab to another hospital rather than disturb the delicate sensibilities of the catholic hospital that the woman was taken to; moderates don't f##king go along as a president tries to subvert the constitution with signing statements saying he won't obey the law he's signing if he doesn't feel like it, a moderate doesn't go along with the nonsense with Terry S.(i forget the spelling). That's not a moderate, that's a lackey.

I am sick and tired of this "moderate" bull. In foreign policy Lieberman is a neo-con pure and simple with the neo-con's inability to see reality of the failure chaos and death their empire fantasies cause, on the domestic front he's obsessed with 'smut' in movies and on video games; he's talked out of both sides of his mouth about gay rights, he tried to sell social security down the river and he's fond of playing holier than thou (the nickname holy joe ain't a complement)

Joe made his own disaster, this wasn't about being a moderate, this was about dealing with and trying to stop the agenda of a dangerously radical GOP and what its doing to the average america. Joe couldn't care less about that.

[LittleClarkie]

76. It wasn't because he's mod. He's a pro-war Democrat who smooched a very

unpopular Prez.

[Critters2]

88. Bullshit

He's a Republican.

[LittleClarkie]

98. But it was his stance regarding the war that was the catalyst

for where he now finds himself.

And no, he's not a Republican. He's still preferable TO a Republican in the seat. His rating are still reasonably liberal. But on national defense, he agrees too much with the Republicans, and that's gotten him into trouble.

It's not his "moderate" stances. It's his one far right one.

[Critters2]

99. The war was the biggest factor

but he's pro-corporate, anti-union, there's the Schiavo thing. "It's just the war" was his meme, but it isn't true.

[tulip]

77. I lean moderate &

don't feel unwelcome. I am liberal on several issues though so I can't say I am a full moderate. In the case of Lieberman vs Lamont I always felt it's up to CT. There are things I like about both men but I always support the Democrat candidate, irregardless of the outcome tonight. I am a Democrat first and I want a Democrat in the Senate. Unfortunately Lieberman's bid to run as an independent may cause problems but I suppose it's a free country he can do as he chooses. Now is the time to get to work on all of the other races in 06. I hope our attention will be as focused there. Take care and congrats to all the Lamont supporters. :)

[cool user name]

78. Define moderate?

Pro-war, pro-Bush, pro-triangulation and fake bipartisanship?

Fuck no.

[Iniquitous Bunny]

79. Primaries decide who represents our party in general elections.

Simple as that. CT Democrats were tired of having someone represent us who did not support the ideals of the majority of Democrats in our state.

Why the dramatic grandstanding? :eyes:

[Name removed]

80. Deleted message

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

[saigon68]

126. Au Revoir voyez-vous

[Name removed]

81. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Ouabache]

82. Moderate Dems are more than welcome and now they know

they don't have to kiss Republican ASS to win elections...

[SaveElmer]

83. Perhaps threads like this aid in that feeling...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1853046

[sproutster]

85. Not if they voted for Alito's confirmation, pro torture and gave away any

rights recently.

[jerry611]

87. Senator Byrd voted for Alito

Do you want him thrown out of congress for that vote?

[blonndee]

91. Did Byrd also do all those other things mentioned in the post

to which you are responding, along with other anti-democratic, Bush-ass-kissing, anti-constitutional behavior?

[mmonk]

140. I do if he is replaced by a dem.

The court fiasco will be with us a long time.

[Tsiyu]

86. If you want to be a warmonger, no

If you want to tell a husband when he can pull the plug on his brain-dead wife, no.

If you understand that sucking up to a very unpopular, dangerous president is not politically very intelligent, you're as welcome as anyone else here.

The American voting public is PISSED. Lamont offers a new voice and a new vision. That does not make him a radical. It makes him attractive to voters who might stay home if their only choice is between a Repuke and a Dem who acts like a Repuke.

You moderate Dems need to get with the program. Staying in your hidey holes and having no opinions on anything other than "Can't we all get along?" have done NOTHING for this party in years.

Why are you seeing this phenomenal event tonight?

Because some brave people got up off their asses and challenged that status quo that the moderates seem too deathly terrified to confront.

"Don't grow a wishbone where your backbone ought to be."

[Liberal Veteran]

89. A moderate who is supported by Hannity, Coulter, and other rw shills.

Is no kind of moderate at all.

[indie_voter]

90. Define moderate.

I consider myself a moderate and I feel welcome. Have you forgotten how Joe rolled over in the VP debate he had with Cheney? It was a vile display, then and there he showed his neocon colors.

[Rex]

93. Canard.

Oh man, watch this one get crazy. :eyes:

[boolean]

95. STOP DEFINING PRO-WAR AS MODERATE

You people are pissing me off lately.

[index555]

124. Republican=Anti -abortion. Democrat=Anti-war

According to your logic thats all there is.

[blonndee]

134. Wow, you got all that from that post? You must be psychic!

Or something.

[Orangepeel]

96. silly conclusion

of course, it isn't just you. the whole idea that this election was a referendum on anything national or global is silly. A slight majority of Democratic primary voters prefer Lamont to Lieberman. Great! I happen to agree with this slight majority, but even if I didn't, I'd still think that Connecticut voters had the right (even responsibility) to support and vote for whomever they want (as do voters in the Georgia district that will soon be represented by Johnson). I'm all for primaries and even in cases where I support the incumbant, I don't think they have some sort of inherent right not to be challenged.

But all that doesn't mean that the Democratic party doesn't have and welcome diverse points of view -- it means only that a majority of Connecticut Democratic primary voters don't agree with Lieberman's views on one or more issues they believe to be important. It doesn't have implications for say, Bill Nelson in Florida.

[tyedyeto]

97. It doesn't really matter what his voting record is...

if the voters of his state want him outta there, he should be gracious enough to say "Thank you for all the years I have served you, but I have lost and you don't want me to represent you anymore, so I endorse ___________ to be the Democtratic candidate in November."

[jerry611]

100. Lieberman and his supporters think he has been targetted by his own party

And 48% of Democrats in Connecticut are still behind him. Combine that with the independants and he may very well win the election.

What is so wrong about that? Didn't the voters choose him?

You are more interested in party loyalty than democracy.

[Bob3]

105. Lieberman and his supporters are living in cloud coo-coo land

if he thinks he was somehow targeted by evil Democratic party members - he made his own damn troubles.

I suspect that his 48% will shrink just a bit when he doesn't have the D next to his name when he runs. He's coming off as whiny and petulant, not the qualities you wish in a statesman.

And remember the first poll show Lieberman getting something like 80% of the vote in the primary. Need one say more?

[tyedyeto]

106. If you are interested in something other than Democrats...

find another board.

The Democrats of Conn. voted that they do NOT want Lie-berman as their candidate. If you want to support him in the future, go somewhere else.

[flaminbats]

111. conceding defeat when you are beaten is not loyalty..

its being a good sport and acknowledging the will of the voter. Something tells me Republicans wouldn't of been happier if McCain had started running as an independent in 2000 after losing the nomination to Bush.

The difference..McCain wasn't too proud to accept defeat. But Lieberman allows his vanity to hurt us all..including him, in November! If Lieberman thinks his opinion is more important than our votes, then why did he even run as a Democrat?

[blonndee]

114. Independents are statistically anti-war and disapprove of Bush's

performance.

So what if LIEberman has been "targetted" (sic) by his own party? It shows he doesn't represent them anymore and they realize that. He should get the hell out of the party, as he is doing, and flounder on his own, as he will. THEN we'll see how many Connecticut Democrats are behind him, once he abandons them de facto.

[Spirochete]

118. Well, this IS

Democratic Underground, not Lieberman Underground, right?

[fishwax]

136. without the party, lieberman wouldn't be where he is today

Without the democratic party and the democratic voters of connecticut, lieberman wouldn't have reached the heights that he has. And yet he apparently feels no responsibility to them at all. He didn't feel any responsibility to answer to them, and when they rejected his message he turned his back on them, despite all that they've given him over the years.

Clearly he has a right to run as an independent, but that action carries consequences. And it's far-fetched to think that the 48% who voted for him in the primary will necessarily vote for him in the general election.

[donheld]

163. Lieberman targetted by his own party by kissing up to Bush

he got just what he had coming to him.

[Pithy Cherub]

101. Moderates are welcome - they just don't get to choose the menu.

But if the moderate kisses Bush and makes excuses for sucking up to an incompetent administration then yeah - let the door hit 'em where the good Lord split 'em!

[Mr_Spock]

102. Joe was a weasel

It has nothing to do with moderate - deceptive argument there designed to cause trouble.

No thanks.

[omega minimo]

103. Could you be more-- or at all -- specific?

[leesa]

107. Not the ones who support illegal invasions of disarmed nations.

[deadparrot]

109. You don't have to be a flaming radical to support withdrawal form Iraq.

I don't think Lamont is particularly far-left. His anti-war stance, as far as I can tell, has been "his issue." I've seen nothing to suggest that he's radical in his other viewpoints.

[Ediacara]

112. I don't think that's the message at all

I think it's how you act on your moderate views that makes all the difference. I'm from Washington, but I've been living in Montana for the last five years. In both states fairly moderate Democrats voted for the war (Cantwell and Baucus respectively).

The reason that Cantwell and Baucus (and Nelson and Clinton and Biden etc) aren't vilified by the anti-war left is because they don't do things like equate opposition to Bush with treason:

Lieberman: "It is time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be Commander-in-Chief for three more critical years, and that in matters of war, we undermine Presidential credibility at our nation’s peril."

They're disliked for sure, but there has been no organized campaign to remove them like there was with Lieberman. I fully acknowledge that Joe Lieberman's voting record is better than Max Baucus', but when push comes to shove, and when it really matters, I don't hear infuriating garbage coming from Baucus in the same way I hear it coming from Lieberman.

I voted for Cantwell in 2000 and I voted for Baucus in 2002, and although I am extremely unhappy with some of their stances, I will gladly cast my vote for them again if and when I have the opportunity.

I would much rather have a Senate full of opposition moderates than a Senate full of liberals who tell me that dissent is treasonous.

[LSK]

113. no, WAR MONGERING DEMS are no longer welcome

What the media labels as extreme leftist is actually pretty moderate when you really dig down into it.

[Warren Stupidity]

115. Shouldn't there be the opposite of The Greatest Page?

Seriously Jerry, this post of yours might be an all time winner in that category.

Here's the rules. Fight like hell in the primaries. Fight as one in the general election. Got it?

[Wapsie B]

116. Hmmm........I think you got that backwards chief.........

It seems that Liberals are no longer welcome in the Democratic Party. DLC conquers all.

[Ms. Clio]

117. why do you think most of YOUR friends are representative of all Dems?

Most of my friends who are Democrats are not terribly moderate in their views.

I think that's simply a reflection of who our friends are, and says nothing about Dem voters in general.

[mmonk]

119. Karma.

[Superman Returns]

120. my friend

there are plenty of moderate Democrats that DU supports. The difference is, they don't view themselves superior to the rest of their party, they don't appear on Republican friendly outlets and lend their name to undermining their leadership and base, they don't use GOP and neocon talking points including patriotism and 9/11 to justify their position, they don't promote the atmosphere of a poisoned political dialogue in which liberals are portrayed in a negative light, and they don't proclaim themselves to be pro-security Democrats insinuiating that the rest of their party is the exact opposite.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

147. That's a pretty densely truthful paragraph. If I could nominate your post,

I'd do it.

[milkyway]

123. Lieberman is outside the mainstream, aligned with rightwing extremists

on many issues (and they love him for it). Soreloserman has no problem bitching about Dems, but he only has warm and fuzzy feelings for his rightwing extremist friends like Robertson and Hannity. Fuck him.

[gatorboy]

127. Siding with Bush doesn't make you a moderate.

It makes you a turncoat.

[mmonk]

128. I thought I was moderate. In the last few years, I've learned

I'm "left" or liberal if you will. You see, I support an independent judiciary whereby justices are determined by a concensus of 60 senators. I support the Constitution and all its amendments including the 4th. I support separation of church and state. I am against illegal aggressive war based on dishonesty. I support the Geneva conventions. I'm against illegal wiretaps on citizens. I believe leaders of this country should fall under our laws and not be above them. I could go on but I understand now that these ideals are left or leftist or out of the mainstream or extremely liberal. Whatever they are, they are my principles and if they are extreme liberal positions, I guess that's what I am.

[marions ghost]

159. yeah-- we need to forget the labels

they've been so skewed as to be meaningless.

Even debates about "moderate" and "liberal" seem so yesterday.

Hold to the principles.

[deacon]

129. Joe wasn't a moderate- he was supported by hannity for godsakes

[EFerrari]

130. I don't think this is about moderates or not moderates.

This is about the Party listening to their base.

And, it's a good thing.

:)

[T Town Jake]

131. We are - and we're usually right despite all the pontificating...

...of the so-called "stars" hereabouts.

As witness this thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=5443729

Notice the OP was rightly tombstoned; I was correct; and my detractor in that thread was, err, wrong. As usual.

Just ask his buddy Jason...

But the problem in Connecticut with this election is that Senator Lieberman, despite the fact that I was rooting for him, did not get the most votes. His opponent did. For the good of our party he should get behind the candidate Connecticut Democrats chose to go into the general election.

[fishwax]

133. there are no moderates left in the democratic party? news to me ...

Joe didn't lose because he's a moderate. Many moderates continue to thrive in the democratic party. In fact, even as Lamont beat Lieberman, moderates won important primaries in georgia and michigan.

The rejection of Lieberman wasn't a rejection of moderates.

[KingFlorez]

135. No

Some people want everyone to fit their ideology perfectly, if one vote doesn't fit with that, then they want to throw people out. What they don't realize is the last time Democrats controlled Congress, it was because of mix of liberal and moderate democrats. Same thing with the Republicans, they wouldn't control Congress without moderate Republicans. You need a mix and some don't get that.

[AZBlue]

137. I'm disappointed by any "party" that would welcome some and not others.

(jerry611 - this isn't pointed to you - I understand that's not what you were suggesting - instead I'm disappointed in anyone who would support that kind of notion)

[last1standing]

138. One loss and now any moderate is unwelcome?

I don't know if you supported Lieberman because you were "told" he was moderate or if you've looked extensively at his record and decided that's where the "middle" was. All I can say is that Lieberman didn't lose because of the war, he lost because he's Joe Lieberman, a nasty little man who took every disagreement with other Dems as an excuse to castigate the "far left" wing of the party. He never understood that most of CT was lumped in with that group and felt personally insulted whenever he called them traitors or partisan.

As for Holy Joe voting with Dems 95% of the time, that has been proven false time and again. When one takes his votes that helped make real policy decisions its found that he rarely voted with his party. Now he has seen the consequences of his actions.

In some ways I might be the most left wing person on this site, but I have no problem with real moderates being part of the party. In fact, I don't have much problem with conservatives like Ben Nelson. I do have a problem with anyone who insults me and my views just because they aren't theirs. Apparently, many others did as well.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

139. Iraq invasion/occupation justifying Bush appeasers apparently are no

longer welcome in the Democratic Party.

Is that what you meant by moderate?

[DanCa]

141. Joe left the party, the party didn't leave him.

Did you see his performance during the debates?
He was throwing every right wing cliche in the book at Lamont. I was on the fence about Lieberman until that spectacle. Joe screwed Joe. The party had nothing to do with it.

[Clarkie1]

142. Well, apparently people who oppose neo-con policy are most welcome.

Think that will lose us a lot of votes? Where is your head?

[WI_DEM]

143. Oh, Please! this is not about "moderates" it's about Bush suck-ups

and renegade democrats--the type who say that they don't respect the will of the people.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

145. Funny how people who post these threads never define "moderate".

Moderate like GWB?

Moderate like Hannity?

Moderate like Rush?

:shrug:

[LibertyorDeath]

144. Joe shit stain is a Corporatist Pig

if that's what you mean by moderate then
every last one of these motherfuckers has gotta GO!!!!!

[Douglas Carpenter]

146. "moderate" seems to be a euphemism for supporting forever war

" Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut reproached fellow Democrats for criticizing President Bush during a time of war.

"It's time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be the commander in chief for three more critical years and that in matters of war we undermine presidential credibility at our nation's peril," Lieberman said."

link:

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/12/08/democrats.iraq/?section=cnn_latest

and this interesting comment from Sen. Lieberman while in Baghdad

"Time magazine Baghdad bureau chief Michael Ware on Morning Sedition this morning:

I and some other journalists had lunch with Senator Joe Lieberman the other day and we listened to him talking about Iraq. Either Senator Lieberman is so divorced from reality that he's completely lost the plot or he knows he's spinning a line. Because one of my colleagues turned to me in the middle of this lunch and said he's not talking about any country I've ever been to and yet he was talking about Iraq, the very country where we were sitting."

link:

http://atrios.blogspot.com/2005_11_27_atrios_archive.html#113328407009752558



http://www.nedlamont.com

[Bluebear]

148. Yes, that's right. Moderate Democrats are no longer welcome in the Party.

:eyes:

Is that the answer you wanted?

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

150. LOL maybe these posts will go away now... NOT!

:rofl:

[Rex]

152. Said maybe in a more robotic tone.

Bzzbzzz. 'Moderate Democrats are no longer welcome in the Party.' bzzzzzzz. We need a robot emoticon.

[HuskerDU]

149. While I wanted Lamant to win because of the war, I liked Joe

until he went turncoat. I would have supported Joe 100% vs the Republican. You should do the same for Ned.

[Kickin_Donkey]

153. Lieberman wasn't rejected because he was a moderate ...

He was rejected because he fellated Bush, he loved the Iraq war, and did a great amount of damage to the Democratic Party by providing cover for the administration and Pukes. He was also a self-righteous, sanctimonious, egotistical, holier-than-thou putz who had lost touch with the electorate.

Moderates are welcome in the party, but if they kiss Bush and support the war in Iraq, they're not gonna like what we have to say -- but they wouldn't be "moderates" if they held those positions.

[phylny]

154. The local news (New York stations) were already giving dire warnings

that this "might push the Democratic party even FURTHER to the left, alienating many Democrats!"

Baloney.

I would think that moderates are more than welcome in the party, as long as we can differentiate them from Republicans who kiss *'s ass.

[B Calm]

155. Supporting an illegal invasion is considered moderate???

[Skittles]

156. what the F*** are you talking about????

that is a g.d. REPUBLICAN TALKING POINT

[depakid]

157. No- Republican enablers

Who bring us all far right policies ARE NO LONGER WELCOME.

Nor (hopefully) are the folks who've brought us 6 straight congressional election losses.

[JCMach1]

158. Lieberman was a Republican Enabler-- not a moderate

There is a big difference

[shadowknows69]

160. Moderate Dems are cool

but DINOs got to go.

[donheld]

161. By "moderate Democrats" do you mean DINOs?

If so out the door with them. There was little "moderate" about Lieberman. He became the biggest waterboy Bush ever had. If most of your democrat friends wanna carry Bushies water they're not really democrats.

[Ganja Ninja]

162. Bush Democrats are no longer welcome.

Moderate Democrats still have a home. I hope that clears it up for you.

[LeftHander]

165. Welcome still...just start listening for a change.....

Progessive Demcrats are sick of being ignored...we have the values, the ideas, and guts to stand up to the RW and WIN!

[datasuspect]

166. moderate, schmoderate

the shit's too deep for wishy-washy types in the democratic party.

you're either with "them" or against "us."

[Jacobin]

167. Joe is an extreme RW ideologue warmonger

If that is what is meant by a 'moderate democrat', then they are welcome to kiss my ass and go join the party they belong to.

No room for PNACing fools in this party

[CornField]

168. Are Democrats no longer allowed to pick their own priorities?

At the end of the day, that is what this entire mess boils down to: Are grassroots Democrats allowed to pick the person which they feel will best represent them?

Yes, Democrats are both allowed to pick their own priorities and to vote for the person who best represents them.

[Little Star]

171. Joe the traitor is no moderate. He is a warmonger.

Joe had to go. He has no loyalty, can't you see?

[BoneDaddy]

172. There is a HUGE difference

Joe was not removed from power because he thought outside the democratic box. Joe lost because he so ingratiated himself to a man who represents the exact opposite of democratic values, Mr. Bush.

It doesn't matter if Joe voted 99% with the Democratic vision, but to have supported president Bush on such important matters as the war at a time when the Democratic voice is slowly drowning is unforgivable.

Don't let the door hit you on the ass on the way out Joe.

[GalleryGod]

173. Jerry, WTH, would lead you to such a self conclusionary Question ?

Of course not.
We just abhor TRAITORS.
End of story morning glory.
"Go Left",Young Man.
"Tack Back" in '08.



BTW...Tom SWANN IS the 2nd Coming of
GENE POKORNY.:patriot: :rofl: :patriot:

[NotGivingUp]

174. another one who has been drinking the kool-aid!!!

[NewJeffCT]

176. If they call us traitors who undermine the president, then they are not

Joe singled out Democrats when he said that if we undermine the president's credibility, we do so at our own peril.

And, despite the spin by Lanny Davis (I think it was Davis), there is no honest way you could read or hear his words and know that he was singling out Democrats who criticized Bush over the war.

So, I guess it is okay for Chuck Hagel or Colin Powell to criticize the war? Or Lindsay Graham & John McCain to denounce the Bush Torture policy?

No other moderates have announced independent runs if they lost their primaries, either. Only Lieberman.

[GalleryGod]

177. How Does Lanny D. still make a living? Hummers by the dozen ?

He makes Pam Anderson look like Mother Teresa.

[bryant69]

178. Betrayers are generally not welcome anywhere

And Lieberman has betrayed his party. Small betrayels perhaps. But regular.

Bryant