Comments on: WE’RE WITH JOE http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/ Big Teeth. Huge Ass. Surprisingly Reasonable. Fri, 05 Sep 2008 15:47:45 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: Dyre42 http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-60867 Dyre42 Sat, 12 Aug 2006 08:06:55 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-60867 To many what Lieberman represents is bipatisanship. For example i am aginst the war on moral grounds however I strongly believe that pulling out now will only increase Iran's power and embolden islamofacisists. Radical Islamists strongly believe that America has no stomach for a real war and given the results of Korea and Viet Nam I can see their point. Lieberman also sees that point. I personaly don't care for Lierberman, he strikes me as being smarmy. However I am convinced that he believes that our withdrawing prematurely from Iraq will benefit our enemies far more than it will strengthen the U.S.A. To many what Lieberman represents is bipatisanship. For example i am aginst the war on moral grounds however I strongly believe that pulling out now will only increase Iran’s power and embolden islamofacisists. Radical Islamists strongly believe that America has no stomach for a real war and given the results of Korea and Viet Nam I can see their point. Lieberman also sees that point. I personaly don’t care for Lierberman, he strikes me as being smarmy. However I am convinced that he believes that our withdrawing prematurely from Iraq will benefit our enemies far more than it will strengthen the U.S.A.

]]> By: Meredith http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59948 Meredith Thu, 10 Aug 2006 13:51:48 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59948 Good point ChrisO. A few days ago, Joe was a Democrat. Now, he's an independent and wants to be above all the partisan politics. Oh, and he also supports the Bush administration. Why wouldn't we all want to be behind a candidate like that? BTW - I don't see anyone calling him names like "flip-flopper." I guess we just call people that if they change their minds as a result of learning more facts about something. That makes total sense. Lieberman needs to go away. I heard an interview with him on the radio yesterday, and it occurred to me that he sounds just like the dad from the TV show, "Alf". Good point ChrisO. A few days ago, Joe was a Democrat. Now, he’s an independent and wants to be above all the partisan politics. Oh, and he also supports the Bush administration. Why wouldn’t we all want to be behind a candidate like that?

BTW - I don’t see anyone calling him names like “flip-flopper.” I guess we just call people that if they change their minds as a result of learning more facts about something. That makes total sense.

Lieberman needs to go away. I heard an interview with him on the radio yesterday, and it occurred to me that he sounds just like the dad from the TV show, “Alf”.

]]> By: ChrisO http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59943 ChrisO Thu, 10 Aug 2006 13:14:35 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59943 I fail to see how Lieberman represents a third way. The only reason he's running as an independent is because he lost in the primary. Since I assume his principles would have stayed the same if he had won the primary, would you be pushing for "I'm With Joe" buttons if he was the Democratic candidate? Or is your third way only reserved for opportunists? I fail to see how Lieberman represents a third way. The only reason he’s running as an independent is because he lost in the primary. Since I assume his principles would have stayed the same if he had won the primary, would you be pushing for “I’m With Joe” buttons if he was the Democratic candidate? Or is your third way only reserved for opportunists?

]]> By: Gray http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59868 Gray Thu, 10 Aug 2006 10:26:28 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59868 Lieberman 2006 is just like Chamberlain 1938. You're on the wrong mission. This isn't about Center vs. Left, this is about resistance against Bush policy. It's a simple, ethical question: Do you believe Bush is leading the right way? If your answer is NO!, than there can't be any excuse for enabling his policy by stomping for bipartisanship in a situation where this is a cul de sac. Bush and Rove don't allow any compromises, there are no bargains, there won't be anything in return. Lieberman may like to be in the bright spot of republican sympathy, but where are the successes of his centrist policy? Where are the moderate judges, for instance? No, bipartisanship is just a nicer word for capitulating to the right right now. One can be a moderate or centrist without bending for the right wing policy of the Bush gang. But it takes ethical ideals and good judgement, characteristics that Lieberman lost under the corrupting effect of power. And all who are following him on his way are just collaborators, poor exploited souls who don't see they are simply enabling the worst president of modern times and his gang of neocon crooks. That's nothing to be proud of. Lieberman 2006 is just like Chamberlain 1938. You’re on the wrong mission. This isn’t about Center vs. Left, this is about resistance against Bush policy. It’s a simple, ethical question:

Do you believe Bush is leading the right way?

If your answer is NO!, than there can’t be any excuse for enabling his policy by stomping for bipartisanship in a situation where this is a cul de sac. Bush and Rove don’t allow any compromises, there are no bargains, there won’t be anything in return. Lieberman may like to be in the bright spot of republican sympathy, but where are the successes of his centrist policy? Where are the moderate judges, for instance?

No, bipartisanship is just a nicer word for capitulating to the right right now. One can be a moderate or centrist without bending for the right wing policy of the Bush gang. But it takes ethical ideals and good judgement, characteristics that Lieberman lost under the corrupting effect of power. And all who are following him on his way are just collaborators, poor exploited souls who don’t see they are simply enabling the worst president of modern times and his gang of neocon crooks. That’s nothing to be proud of.

]]> By: kilroy http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59748 kilroy Thu, 10 Aug 2006 01:35:58 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59748 Amba I understand your point about Career pols. The standard should reach reach both ways. Has'nt Lieberman been a guest of the 700 club ? Lieberman may have good ideas, He may be a great guy, I don't really know. I truly believe that if you want to hold someone to a higher standard it must go all ways. The pickin's might be pretty slim though. Amba I understand your point about Career pols. The standard should reach reach both ways. Has’nt Lieberman been a guest of the 700 club ? Lieberman may have good ideas, He may be a great guy, I don’t really know. I truly believe that if you want to hold someone to a higher standard it must go all ways. The pickin’s might be pretty slim though.

]]> By: Lit3Bolt http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59747 Lit3Bolt Thu, 10 Aug 2006 01:35:40 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59747 Oh, how delightful! How droll! We'll support ANY maverick, party traitor, goofball, wingnut loon as part of the CENTRIST UNITY movement as long as they're an INDEPENDENT, UNRELIABLE, arrogant SOB. We stand for UNITY! And UNITY means supporting any canidate who opposes partisan politics. Oops. Seems like Unity 08 is doomed from the start with bloody martyrs like Ol' Joe at its stead. Dig up Ralph Nader and Ross Perot while you're at it. Or how about Jesse Ventura? While it's tremendously exiciting to dream of the eternal dream of the legendary 3RD CHOICE, American politics as it is will not allow it. Oh sure, maybe Joe will win. Lamot seems as inconsistent as the rest of the Dems at large, true. But as for his alternative, just because you're a Democratic Bush-enabler does not mean you're a free thinking maverick. For crying out loud people, even BILL BUCKLEY has turned against this president, but Joe Lieberman, his favorite pet Dem, is the answer to UNIFY the nation? The problem lies in what we want: independence. But that means troublesome little things like freedom of thought, expression, skepticism, you name it. And already from this post I see signs of demanding a certain kind of gumption, what-have-you, INDEPENDENCE from people...but eventually, that will turn into a new party which will expect everyone to toe the party line. Methinks the current partisan troubles in this country will not be cured by simply creating a new party. And in the meantime, I'm cheering for Lamot, for if anything, hopefully he'll stop the Democratic party to STOP convulsing like headless snakes for the first time in five years. I don't care WHAT they do, since they're so powerless, but as long as they DO SOMETHING, I'll be happy. Oh, how delightful! How droll! We’ll support ANY maverick, party traitor, goofball, wingnut loon as part of the CENTRIST UNITY movement as long as they’re an INDEPENDENT, UNRELIABLE, arrogant SOB. We stand for UNITY! And UNITY means supporting any canidate who opposes partisan politics.

Oops.

Seems like Unity 08 is doomed from the start with bloody martyrs like Ol’ Joe at its stead. Dig up Ralph Nader and Ross Perot while you’re at it. Or how about Jesse Ventura? While it’s tremendously exiciting to dream of the eternal dream of the legendary 3RD CHOICE, American politics as it is will not allow it. Oh sure, maybe Joe will win. Lamot seems as inconsistent as the rest of the Dems at large, true. But as for his alternative, just because you’re a Democratic Bush-enabler does not mean you’re a free thinking maverick. For crying out loud people, even BILL BUCKLEY has turned against this president, but Joe Lieberman, his favorite pet Dem, is the answer to UNIFY the nation?

The problem lies in what we want: independence. But that means troublesome little things like freedom of thought, expression, skepticism, you name it. And already from this post I see signs of demanding a certain kind of gumption, what-have-you, INDEPENDENCE from people…but eventually, that will turn into a new party which will expect everyone to toe the party line.

Methinks the current partisan troubles in this country will not be cured by simply creating a new party. And in the meantime, I’m cheering for Lamot, for if anything, hopefully he’ll stop the Democratic party to STOP convulsing like headless snakes for the first time in five years. I don’t care WHAT they do, since they’re so powerless, but as long as they DO SOMETHING, I’ll be happy.

]]> By: DosPeros http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59679 DosPeros Wed, 09 Aug 2006 21:59:45 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59679 Bob - thanks for REAL ID heads-up. Three years for states to conform or no official federal business without adequate, federally approved state drivers' license. Ummm....really....I wonder if that would include military recruitment. Bob - thanks for REAL ID heads-up. Three years for states to conform or no official federal business without adequate, federally approved state drivers’ license.

Ummm….really….I wonder if that would include military recruitment.

]]> By: amba http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59673 amba Wed, 09 Aug 2006 21:47:47 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59673 Kilroy, Pointing out the tableau of Lamont flanked by Sharpton and Jackson isn't cheesy -- it's just saying what I couldn't help but see. He has chosen his political bedfellows, and they're entrenched career pols of another stripe. Kilroy,

Pointing out the tableau of Lamont flanked by Sharpton and Jackson isn’t cheesy — it’s just saying what I couldn’t help but see. He has chosen his political bedfellows, and they’re entrenched career pols of another stripe.

]]> By: amba http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59672 amba Wed, 09 Aug 2006 21:45:13 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59672 <i>Also Bush beat Kerry by a similar margin and his win was called a ‘mandate’ by some.</i> Not by me, that's for sure. <i>Only 4 incumbant senators have lost a primary in the last 25 years</i> Now that's shocking. And I can see that anti-incumbent, anti-entrenched-pol, throw-the-bums-out sentiment is also coming into play against Lieberman. No doubt we need more political turnover and more "citizen legislators" (though it would be pretty sad and ironic if they were all billionaires). However, I am glad to see Lieberman running as an independent because partisan politics seems to me almost completely bankrupt. Also Bush beat Kerry by a similar margin and his win was called a ‘mandate’ by some.

Not by me, that’s for sure.

Only 4 incumbant senators have lost a primary in the last 25 years

Now that’s shocking. And I can see that anti-incumbent, anti-entrenched-pol, throw-the-bums-out sentiment is also coming into play against Lieberman. No doubt we need more political turnover and more “citizen legislators” (though it would be pretty sad and ironic if they were all billionaires).

However, I am glad to see Lieberman running as an independent because partisan politics seems to me almost completely bankrupt.

]]> By: Ron Platt http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59669 Ron Platt Wed, 09 Aug 2006 21:21:35 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59669 I have been interested in Unity 08 but if they decide to support a candidate like Joe Lieberman they can count me out. It seems to me like the Unity 08 movement is a populist revolt and I consider Lieberman an entrenched, self serving pol. I have been interested in Unity 08 but if they decide to support a candidate like Joe Lieberman they can count me out. It seems to me like the Unity 08 movement is a populist revolt and I consider Lieberman an entrenched, self serving pol.

]]> By: CTPatriot http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59643 CTPatriot Wed, 09 Aug 2006 19:02:53 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59643 Anyone who believes that Joe Lieberman, now the darling of Ken Mehlman and K-K-Karl Rove, is a centrist either hasn't been paying attention to his actions over the last 6 years, or is "catapulting" the GOP propaganda. Anyone who believes that Joe Lieberman, now the darling of Ken Mehlman and K-K-Karl Rove, is a centrist either hasn’t been paying attention to his actions over the last 6 years, or is “catapulting” the GOP propaganda.

]]> By: Bob Aman http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59628 Bob Aman Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:48:58 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59628 As a centrist of sorts, for obvious reasons I don't really care for Lamont, but I dislike Lieberman even more. Besides being actually unpopular enough to get voted out of incumbancy, Lieberman has a tendancy of being on the wrong side of the issues that really matter. National ID cards for example. Congress should not be constitutionally allowed to mandate them because it doesn't fall under any of the powers of Congress and is thus reserved as a power of the States or as a power of the people. Lieberman and McCain sneakily skirted around this restriction by mandating that Federal Agencies aren't allowed to accept a State driver's license or ID card as a valid identification unless it meets certain standards. So they managed to create a de facto National ID card by having it continue to be issued by the States but simply not accepting it as valid unless it meets the Federal guidelines. As far as I'm concerned, pulling that kind of stuff, even if it's legally legitimate, I think it's underhanded and runs counter to the spirit of the law, and I certainly won't be voting for either McCain or Lieberman as a result, even if they are in the middle. As a centrist of sorts, for obvious reasons I don’t really care for Lamont, but I dislike Lieberman even more. Besides being actually unpopular enough to get voted out of incumbancy, Lieberman has a tendancy of being on the wrong side of the issues that really matter. National ID cards for example. Congress should not be constitutionally allowed to mandate them because it doesn’t fall under any of the powers of Congress and is thus reserved as a power of the States or as a power of the people. Lieberman and McCain sneakily skirted around this restriction by mandating that Federal Agencies aren’t allowed to accept a State driver’s license or ID card as a valid identification unless it meets certain standards. So they managed to create a de facto National ID card by having it continue to be issued by the States but simply not accepting it as valid unless it meets the Federal guidelines. As far as I’m concerned, pulling that kind of stuff, even if it’s legally legitimate, I think it’s underhanded and runs counter to the spirit of the law, and I certainly won’t be voting for either McCain or Lieberman as a result, even if they are in the middle.

]]> By: Meredith http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59618 Meredith Wed, 09 Aug 2006 16:04:30 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59618 I'm not really a centrist, so . . . . In any event, I would be all for an independent candidate, but I would not support Lieberman because of several of his positions on certain issues. I guess I will be centrist, as long as the person is mostly liberal. So, I'm not really a centrist. I’m not really a centrist, so . . . . In any event, I would be all for an independent candidate, but I would not support Lieberman because of several of his positions on certain issues. I guess I will be centrist, as long as the person is mostly liberal. So, I’m not really a centrist.

]]> By: Blue Neponset http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59591 Blue Neponset Wed, 09 Aug 2006 14:23:49 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59591 Saying that Lieberman lost "by only about 3 points" is total and complete spin. Only 4 incumbant senators have lost a primary in the last 25 years. For you to minimize this loss like you do makes me think you don't realize how rare Lamont's victory is. Dislike Lamont all you want but don't pretend that his victory is an everyday occurance. Also Bush beat Kerry by a similar margin and his win was called a 'mandate' by some. Saying that Lieberman lost “by only about 3 points” is total and complete spin.
Only 4 incumbant senators have lost a primary in the last 25 years. For you to minimize this loss like you do makes me think you don’t realize how rare Lamont’s victory is.

Dislike Lamont all you want but don’t pretend that his victory is an everyday occurance.

Also Bush beat Kerry by a similar margin and his win was called a ‘mandate’ by some.

]]> By: Kilroy http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59512 Kilroy Wed, 09 Aug 2006 11:42:29 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59512 I have to say be careful tying a national centrist movement to Sen. Lieberman. I don't know either Lieberman or Lamont, but some perspectives from people I know in Connecticut are: Lieberman is a career politician with ths baggage that carries. Lack of any kind of leadership on Iraq (e.g. asking for Rumsfeld's resignation etc.) Supporting the Terry Schiavo mess. Possibly if the country were doing well he would be percieved as a statesman, but his enabling of this administrations greatest blunders lead many to see Lieberman as a lackey. Again I don't know either candidate. I have heard (last night) that Lamont wants to investigate (along with removing troops) Universal Health care. I agree with that, it's a big issue to me and my family. What is Liebermans position on this issue? Having served for 18 years what has he done regarding this issue? These are things I don't know (and in all probability my folks in Connecticut don't either). Possibly Lieberman will be the candidate that you're looking for. If the rece is run and won on ideas I can't see a down side for either the state or the country. Be careful you don't turn into what you want to fight against, That last paragraph is a little cheesy and I thought I was on another blog there for a second. May the best man and ideas win. I have to say be careful tying a national centrist movement to Sen. Lieberman. I don’t know either Lieberman or Lamont, but some perspectives from people I know in Connecticut are:
Lieberman is a career politician with ths baggage that carries.
Lack of any kind of leadership on Iraq (e.g. asking for Rumsfeld’s resignation etc.)
Supporting the Terry Schiavo mess.
Possibly if the country were doing well he would be percieved as a statesman, but his enabling of this administrations greatest blunders lead many to see Lieberman as a lackey.

Again I don’t know either candidate. I have heard (last night) that Lamont wants to investigate (along with removing troops) Universal Health care. I agree with that, it’s a big issue to me and my family. What is Liebermans position on this issue? Having served for 18 years what has he done regarding this issue? These are things I don’t know (and in all probability my folks in Connecticut don’t either).

Possibly Lieberman will be the candidate that you’re looking for. If the rece is run and won on ideas I can’t see a down side for either the state or the country. Be careful you don’t turn into what you want to fight against, That last paragraph is a little cheesy and I thought I was on another blog there for a second.

May the best man and ideas win.

]]> By: Dyre42 http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59370 Dyre42 Wed, 09 Aug 2006 03:50:09 +0000 http://donklephant.com/2006/08/08/were-with-joe/#comment-59370 KOS called it a major earthquake. I'd call it a hiccup. What's weird is that the WaPo had posted that Lieberman had conceded on their front page when 92% of the votes were tallied but the article it linked to at the time never mentioned that. Then half an hour later the article was changed. With a 3% loss I doubt that Lieberman will lose if he runs as an indepedent. KOS called it a major earthquake. I’d call it a hiccup. What’s weird is that the WaPo had posted that Lieberman had conceded on their front page when 92% of the votes were tallied but the article it linked to at the time never mentioned that. Then half an hour later the article was changed.

With a 3% loss I doubt that Lieberman will lose if he runs as an indepedent.

]]>