PDA

View Full Version : Joe Liebermann, The DLC, and The Iraq War



Nbadan
12-10-2005, 06:03 AM
Lieberman's Iraq Stance Brings Widening Split With His Party
By RAYMOND HERNANDEZ
and WILLIAM YARDLEY
Published: December 10, 2005


WASHINGTON, Dec. 9 - Five years after running as the vice-presidential nominee on the Democratic ticket and a year after his own presidential bid, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut has become an increasingly unwelcome figure within his party, with some Democrats seeing him more as a wayward son than a favorite son.

In the last few days, the senator has riled Democratic activists and politicians here and in his home state with his vigorous defense of President Bush's handling of the Iraq war at a time some Democrats are pressuring the administration to begin a withdrawal.

Joseph I. Lieberman has angered fellow Democrats, in one instance by reminding them that President Bush is commander in chief.

Mr. Lieberman particularly infuriated his colleagues when he pointed out at a conference here that President Bush would be commander in chief for three more years and said that "it's time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that."

"We undermine the president's credibility at our nation's peril," Mr. Lieberman said.

Much of the open criticism has been from liberal groups and House members. But his comments have also rankled Democrats in the Senate. Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the minority leader, phoned Mr. Lieberman this week to express concerns with his views, Mr. Reid's aide said.

"Senator Reid has a lot of respect for Senator Lieberman," said Jim Manley, a Reid spokesman. "But he feels that Senator Lieberman's position on Iraq is at odds with many Americans."

An aide to another leading Democratic senator who insisted on anonymity said the feelings toward Mr. Lieberman could be summed up as, "The American people want to hold George Bush accountable for the failed policy in Iraq, and Senator Lieberman doesn't."

Mr. Lieberman, who remains immensely popular in his home state, is aware of the hornet's nest he has stirred.

"Some Democrats said I was being a traitor," he said in an interview on Friday, adding that he was not surprised by the reaction, "given the depth of feeling about the war."

Although some Democrats are upset with Mr. Lieberman, Republicans are embracing him, with President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld singling him out, and his support for the war, for praise in speeches this week.

"He is entirely correct," Mr. Cheney said on Tuesday at Fort Drum, N.Y. "On this, both Republicans and Democrats should be able to agree. The only way the terrorists can win is if we lose our nerve and abandon our mission."

Concerns about Mr. Lieberman's coziness with the administration grew this week when he had breakfast with Mr. Rumsfeld at the Pentagon. Later, rumors spread that Mr. Bush was considering asking Mr. Lieberman to join the administration to succeed Mr. Rumsfeld next year as defense secretary.

"It's a total fantasy," Mr. Lieberman said. "There's just no truth to it."

In the interview on Friday, he said the two sides were making too much of his comments, and he argued that the overreactions reflected how politically polarized the debate over the war had become.

Mr. Lieberman noted that his positions on Iraq had not changed over the years, dating from 1991, when he supported the first Persian Gulf war. In 1998, he and Senator John McCain, Republican of Arizona, proposed the Iraq Liberation Act, which made the overthrow of President Saddam Hussein official American policy.

"The positive and negative reactions may have less to do with the substance of what I said than with the fact that a Democrat is saying it," Mr. Lieberman said. "It reflects the terribly divisive state of our politics.

NY Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/10/politics/10lieberman.html?hp&ex=1134190800&en=a05a3618d4469a01&ei=5094&partner=homepage)

From the DLC website:


There's currently an orchestrated effort underway to make Sen. Joe Lieberman into some sort of a pariah because of his views on the Iraq War. That's wrong. Republicans may try to impose strict litmus tests, but an inclusive Democratic Party should not.

There's plenty of room for debate on how to succeed in Iraq and in the war on terror. We should be a party that leads that debate, not stifles it.

Joe Lieberman is a man of utmost integrity who speaks and governs by his values and principles, even when they lead him against the popular tide. He is a man who always puts his county above his party or his personal interests. Those are qualities we should cherish, not disdain, in today's far too polarized politics.

We need more, not fewer, people with Joe Lieberman's character in the Democratic Party, and I'm proud to call him my friend.

DLC.ORG (http://www.dlc.org/)

The corporate-controlled DLC would like nothing better than to see this war continue, and Liebermann has his eyes set on the Sec. of Defense position when Rummy retires early next year. None-the-less, it is very damaging for Democrats for Liebermann to side with the WH while Republicans are running away in droves even though Liebermann has been a DINO, or democrat in name only for a long time. Reid, Pelosi, and other party leaders should not put up with this betrayal. It's time to expunge the Democratic party of politicians like Liebermann who think that the WH should not be held accountable for its actions in Iraq.

Vashner
12-10-2005, 07:38 AM
Bush would NEVER make him Sec Def. Now if he wants to switch parties and keep his senate seat.. well that's fine.

Also this is bullshit

while Republicans are running away in droves
That's just bogus shit.

boutons
12-10-2005, 01:31 PM
http://images.ucomics.com/comics/jd/2005/jd051210.gif

xrayzebra
12-10-2005, 02:12 PM
boutons, finally got up did you? Mad at Lieberman for not towing the line? Mad at
Hillary for not towing the line. Well you still have Cindy. Think postive. Bush
will be gone in three years.

Murphy
12-10-2005, 03:50 PM
lol, what makes me laugh is that 90 percent of the people criticizing liebermann voted for him alongside Al Gore in 2000,lol.

SA210
12-10-2005, 04:27 PM
boutons, finally got up did you? Mad at Lieberman for not towing the line? Mad at
Hillary for not towing the line. Well you still have Cindy. Think postive. Bush
will be gone in three years.
And Bush is still a liar.

xrayzebra
12-10-2005, 04:33 PM
And Bush is still a liar.

Yes, yes, I know. But WE still have him for three more years. How come
you aren't out shopping? Getting close to Christmas.

boutons
12-10-2005, 04:42 PM
I see XZ posts only in quotes.

He's got shit for brains, NEVER posts anything of substance or seriousness, just knee-jerk bullshit and attacking the messenger, because he can't refute or discuss anything.

Were you this stupid when you went into the military or did the military, as is typical, dumb you down to a small pile of a few twitching neurons?

xrayzebra
12-10-2005, 04:48 PM
I see XZ posts only in quotes.

He's got shit for brains, NEVER posts anything of substance or seriousness, just knee-jerk bullshit and attacking the messenger, because he can't refute or discuss anything.

Were you this stupid when you went into the military or did the military, as is typical, dumb you down to a small pile of a few twitching neurons?

I wonder if you would ask that question to my face? Computer's are so brave. Especially when you have no command of the English language.
And I see you once again are supporting the troops by putting them down.
Most G.I.'s do more work and use more brains in two minuets than you will
ever do in your utterly useless life.

SA210
12-10-2005, 05:26 PM
Darn Boutons, how can you criticize xrays idiocy? Don't u know that means your against the troops?

xrayzebra
12-10-2005, 06:18 PM
no, sa210, he is for the troops as witnessed by his little remark:

"Were you this stupid when you went into the military or did the military, as is typical, dumb you down to a small pile of a few twitching neurons?"

I would say he is really for the troops when he "typically" refers to them as dumb.

SA210
12-12-2005, 02:46 AM
No, i think he meant u, but, i don't wanna speak for him.

xrayzebra
12-12-2005, 09:55 AM
No, i think he meant u, but, i don't wanna speak for him.

But you just did. :lol

:elephant :elephant :elephant :elephant :elephant :elephant :elephant

Mr. Peabody
12-12-2005, 10:12 AM
It seems as if every thread in this forum ends up with personal attacks going both ways. :pctoss