Lieberman: Asshole

Expect plenty of disagreement. Just keep it civil.
User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4591
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Lieberman: Asshole

Postby lukpac » Fri Aug 11, 2006 9:30 am

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/AP-L ... ref=slogin

He seized on the terror plot in Britain to criticize Lamont's opposition to the war in Iraq.

''I'm worried that too many people, both in politics and out, don't appreciate the seriousness of the threat to American security and the evil of the enemy that faces us -- more evil or as evil as Nazism and probably more dangerous than the Soviet communists we fought during the long Cold War,'' Lieberman said.

''If we just pick up like Ned Lamont wants us to do, get out by a date certain, it will be taken as a tremendous victory by the same people who wanted to blow up these planes in this plot hatched in England. It will strengthen them and they will strike again.''


http://empirezone.blogs.nytimes.com/?p=536#more-536

Asked by a reporter about warm praise that Mr. Lieberman received yesterday from Vice President Dick Cheney, the senator tried to underscore his independence in politics.

“I’m not saying we shouldn’t have healthy disagreement and discussion about national security, but to make it into a partisan political football, it’s just unacceptable and in my opinion un-American,” he said.

“How the heck can we be in a battle in which we are fighting as Democrats and Republicans against each other, when these terrorists certainly don’t distinguish based on our party affiliation?” Mr. Lieberman said. “They want to kill any and all of us.”
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD

User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Postby Rspaight » Fri Aug 11, 2006 9:50 am

Because, of course, our presence in Iraq is *so* effective at combating and deterring terrorism.

Ryan
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

User avatar
Jeff
Posts: 114
Joined: Wed May 17, 2006 5:54 pm

Postby Jeff » Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:28 am

Joe Lieberman is a whiny, centrist douchebag. In addition to sounding like that guy on ALF, his record shows that he's nothing more than a moderate Republican in Democrat's clothing.

He needs to accept the fact that he lost the CT primary and move on. If he runs as an independent this November, all he's going to do is split the Democratic vote and allow the Republican candidate to win. He cares more about continuing his cushy political career than the advancement of the Democratic party.

What a dick.

User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4591
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby lukpac » Fri Aug 11, 2006 11:59 am

Jeff wrote:If he runs as an independent this November, all he's going to do is split the Democratic vote and allow the Republican candidate to win.


Well, I doubt it. From what I've seen, the Republican running doesn't have a chance even if it is a 3-way contest.

I'm anxious to see new polls, though, as I think the latest one regarding the general election took place before the primary.
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD

User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Postby Rspaight » Fri Aug 11, 2006 1:19 pm

Correct. The Republican doesn't have a chance either way.

What very well could happen, though, is that Lieberman draws enough Republican votes to beat Lamont. That's why Republicans (like Rove and everyone on Fox News) are lining up to support him.

If that happens, of course, the Democrats lose a Senate seat, a seat that a Republican doesn't have a shot at winning. Thanks, Joe, you fucker.

Ryan
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4591
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby lukpac » Fri Aug 11, 2006 3:54 pm

Heh.

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/8/11/151158/734

More evil than the guys who gassed 6 million Jews?

More dangerous than the guys who had thousands of nuclear warheads pointed at us and could've snuffed out all life on the planet at the press of a button?

Lieberman has lost it. Completely and utterly. He is insane.
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD

User avatar
Patrick M
Posts: 1714
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2003 6:33 pm
Location: LukPac Land

Postby Patrick M » Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:34 pm

Jeff wrote:In addition to sounding like that guy on ALF <snip>

Excellent call. I wish I'd thought of that first.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCsKn-lLY7Y
Chuck thinks that I look to good to be a computer geek. I think that I know too much about interface design, css, xhtml, php, asp, perl, and ia (too name a few things) to not be one.

User avatar
Beatlesfan03
Posts: 582
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2003 11:45 pm
Location: Another red state :(

Postby Beatlesfan03 » Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:53 pm

But has Lieberman ever been involved in a gay porn/crack cocaine scandal? :twisted:

http://socialitelife.com/2005/08/29/alf ... candal.php
Craig

User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4591
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby lukpac » Mon Aug 14, 2006 1:28 pm

HAHAHA!

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/08/14/ ... index.html

Cheney spokeswoman Lea Anne McBride said Lamont was the one seeking to score political points with terrorism.

"Sounds like he's the one playing politics at a time the president is trying to build national unity and cooperation in fighting a determined and murderous enemy," McBride said.
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD

User avatar
lukpac
Top Dog and Sellout
Posts: 4591
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
Location: Madison, WI
Contact:

Postby lukpac » Tue Aug 15, 2006 12:40 pm

So, what about the Democratic party embracing the "centrism" of Clinton?

8/15/06

Clinton Sounds Off on Terror, Republicans

Taking a break from his work at the XVI International AIDS Conference in Toronto on Monday, former President Clinton warned Republicans not to politicize the London terror arrests, slammed Sen. Joe Lieberman, whom he campaigned for just a couple weeks ago, and tackled some of the controversies surrounding his work to fight AIDS.

"I don't think the thought in that London bomb plot has any bearing on our Iraq policy," Clinton said.

"The Republicans should be very careful in trying to play politics with this London airport thing, because they're going to have a hard time with the facts."

Clinton said that the London terror plot had raised two questions about the Republicans' political strategy.

"They seem to be anxious to tie it to al Qaeda. ... If that's true, how come we got seven times as many troops in Iraq as in Afghanistan?" he said. "Why have we imperiled President [Hamid] Karzai's rule and allowed the Taliban to come back into the southern part of Afghanistan? Why was Iraq deemed to be seven times more important than finding the al Qaeda leaders for the last five years?"

Secondly, Clinton asked why the administration and congressional leadership had opposed tighter security on cargo containers at ports and airports.

Clinton's AIDS Mission

ABC News spoke with the former president at the International AIDS Conference, where he was promoting the William J. Clinton Foundation's work on HIV/AIDS.

It is helping provide low-cost medicine to nearly half a million impoverished people with HIV/AIDS around the world.

"It needs doing, and it's both the right thing to do in terms of our national self-interest and on a purely personal moral basis," Clinton said.

"It's imperative. ... Too many people are dying, not only because there's not enough prevention, but also because we don't get affordable medicine out to them and we don't reach children early enough and we don't build health-care networks in rural areas. All these things require organization and systems that I know how to do."

Clinton, who will turn 60 on Saturday, praised President Bush's program to fight AIDS, though he acknowledged some concerns about the administration's requirements.

Almost a third of the prevention funding goes to abstinence and related programs, which Clinton said were often not effective.

"The fact that they require 30 percent of the money to be spent on abstinence education - that is a big chunk of money when you consider how expensive the medicine and other things are," Clinton said.

"On the other hand, you have to give them credit. They are getting $3 billion a year out there that wouldn't have been out there otherwise, and they have saved a lot of lives."

Clinton said that considering all the money the Bush administration was spending on wars while giving tax cuts, "they're still giving quite a bit of money to AIDS. That's good."

On Sunday at the conference, Microsoft founder Bill Gates - who has pledged almost $2 billion to combat AIDS - said that women and girls in developing nations needed to become more empowered in order for the fight against HIV/AIDS to succeed.

Clinton agreed, but said it was difficult to change cultures.

"It's much more likely for HIV to be spread in areas where women's and girls' role in society are weak and where they are not valued and not developed," he said.

"What we try to do is to send in role models that will change that. One of our representatives is a young woman who was infected as a result of a rape. And when people see her, they see she's not ashamed. She doesn't feel stigmatized. "

Clinton on Lieberman

Clinton also discussed Sen. Joe Lieberman's loss in Connecticut's Democratic primary last week to anti-war liberal Ned Lamont.

Lieberman has characterized his loss - and the need for his subsequent independent run - as liberals in the party purging those with the Lieberman-Clinton position of progressiveness in domestic politics and strong national security credentials.

"Well, if I were Joe and I was running as an independent, that's what I'd say, too," Clinton said.

"But that's not quite right. That is, there were almost no Democrats who agreed with his position, which was, 'I want to attack Iraq whether or not they have weapons of mass destruction.'"

"His position is the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld position, which was, 'Does it matter if they have weapons? None of this matters. ... This is a big, important priority, and 9/11 gives us the way of attacking and deposing Saddam.'"

Clinton said that a vote for Lamont was not, as Lieberman had implied, a vote against the country's security.


Clinton said other Senate Democrats who had voted to give Bush the authority to go to war - including his wife, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York - who may be weighing a 2008 presidential run, had hoped that the threat of war would force former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein to comply with U.N. inspections.

"They [Democrats] felt, frankly, let down that the U.N. inspectors were not permitted to finish, and they were worried that we were devoting attention away from Afghanistan and the hunt for [Osama] bin Laden and al Qaeda, which was a huge, immediate threat to our security in the aftermath of 9/11, as we saw [with] this foiled British plot continues to be," Clinton said.

Clinton did not discuss his wife's possible presidential bid in 2008, and said he was pleased with the work she was doing in the Senate right now.

Clinton said he campaigned for Lieberman because they had been friends for 35 years, and Clinton did not want the Democratic Party split over Iraq.

No matter how a Democratic congress member voted on Iraq, Clinton said that he or she was not responsible for the constant mistakes in judgment that had been made since the overthrow of Saddam.

"And no Democrat, no matter how much he or she was against it, can escape responsibility for the consequences of whatever we do now," he said.

"That is, what do we do now that's good for America's security, that's good for the world's security, good for the fight against terror?"

Source: ABC News
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD

User avatar
krabapple
Posts: 1615
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2003 4:19 pm

Postby krabapple » Tue Aug 15, 2006 1:10 pm

"They seem to be anxious to tie it to al Qaeda. ... If that's true, how come we got seven times as many troops in Iraq as in Afghanistan?" he said. "Why have we imperiled President [Hamid] Karzai's rule and allowed the Taliban to come back into the southern part of Afghanistan? Why was Iraq deemed to be seven times more important than finding the al Qaeda leaders for the last five years?"

Bingo.
"I recommend that you delete the Rancid Snakepit" - Grant

Bennett Cerf
Posts: 738
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 7:54 pm

Postby Bennett Cerf » Thu Aug 17, 2006 5:11 pm

Lieberman leads opponents in new poll


BOSTON (Reuters) - U.S. Sen. Joseph Lieberman, a three-term Democrat now running as an independent candidate, leads the man who beat him in last week's primary vote by 12 points in a three-way race, a poll released on Thursday shows.

The latest Quinnipiac University poll, conducted between August 10-14, shows Lieberman leads Democrat Ned Lamont, a wealthy businessman with little political experience who has played on anti-war sentiment, by 53 percent to 41 percent among likely voters in November's election. The Republican candidate Alan Schlesinger drew 4 percent, the poll shows.

Democratic voters selected Lamont as their candidate on August 8 with 52 percent of the vote after an increasingly bitter race dominated by Lieberman's support for the Iraq war.

Lieberman vowed to stay in the race as an independent candidate in order to face Lamont and Schlesinger in the general election in November.

The survey found that Lieberman polled best among likely Republican voters, leading the others with 75 percent of the vote compared with Lamont's 13 percent and Schlesinger's 10 percent.

"Senator Lieberman's support among Republicans is nothing short of amazing," Douglas Schwartz, the university's polling director said in a statement. "As long as Lieberman maintains this kind of support among Republicans while holding onto a significant number of Democratic votes, the veteran senator will be hard to beat."

Likely voters said by a 53 percent to 40 percent margin that Lieberman, the Democratic Party's vice presidential candidate in 2000 and once a presidential candidate himself, deserves to be re-elected.


I must admit Lieberman's strong showing in the post-primary polls (Rasmussen has Lieberman winning by five points) has taken me by surprise. I had thought the sore loser angle would really hurt him. I wasn't necessarily convinced he would lose in the long run, but I figured he had much more of an uphill battle than the first two polls suggest.

Hopefully I'm overreacting. Lieberman's still got a tricky balancing act ahead of him. But it's hard not to think that I'd rather have him as a Democratic senator than an "independent" senator.

User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Postby Rspaight » Thu Aug 17, 2006 6:26 pm

Told ya.

Ryan
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

User avatar
Rspaight
Posts: 4386
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
Location: The Reality-Based Community
Contact:

Postby Rspaight » Fri Aug 18, 2006 7:43 pm

The Republican Party isn't going to support the Republican candidate:

NRSC Takes Lieberman

It's no coincidence that a purposeful silence has replaced the well-publicized calls from Republicans last month for no-hope GOP Senate candidate Alan Schlesinger to make way for someone more credible.

The state and national party, it seems, have concluded that they can't succeed in Connecticut this year under any circumstance, and would rather see Joe Lieberman win -- which polls show he's likely to do, absent a credible Republican candidate -- than risk handing the election to Democrat Ned Lamont.

This morning, a source at the National Republican Senatorial Committee confirmed in a phone interview that the party will not help Schlesinger or any other potential Republican candidate in Connecticut, and it now favors a Lieberman victory in November.

"We did a poll and there is no way any Republican we put out there can win, so we are just going to leave that one alone," said the NRSC source.

Instead, the NRSC is pulling for Lieberman over Ned Lamont, who rode an anti-war message to a victory in the Aug 8 primary.

"Most Republicans would agree that he'd clearly be a better choice than Lamont," said the source.

--Jason Horowitz

UPDATE: An NRSC spokesman just called to make clear the distinction between actively and openly supporting Lieberman, which they're not doing, and merely opting not to support a Republican in Connecticut.

"The NRSC is not supporting Lieberman," said Brian Nick, a spokesman for the NRSC. "He is a Democrat who votes 90 percent of the time with the Democrats. The race isn't competitive at this point -- our resources will be used elsewhere."
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney

Bennett Cerf
Posts: 738
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 7:54 pm

Postby Bennett Cerf » Tue Aug 22, 2006 3:54 pm

Well, this is more encouraging. The new ARG poll has Lieberman 44%, Lamont 42%, and Schlesinger 11%, while Rasmussen has Lieberman 45%, Lamont 43%, and Schlesinger 6%.