I Told Ya Lieberman Sold Out

[Nbadan]

Senator Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut — the leader of the hawkish "Scoop Jackson" wing of the Democratic Party — is responding positively to the suggestion that President Bush offer him a post in his Cabinet.

On Sunday, asked by interviewer Chris Wallace on Fox News whether he would accept such a position, Lieberman replied, "I'd certainly think about it."

Lieberman added that, discussion of himself aside, "it would be very good for the country to have some Democrats in the Cabinet" in order "to make clear to America and to the world that George Bush's policy in the war on terror is not just his policy, it's American policy."

The speculation that Bush might tap Lieberman, who flopped in the Democratic presidential primaries, for a Cabinet post has been advanced by his friend, Senator John McCain, an Arizona Republican, as well as by the neoconservative commentator William Kristol and by New Republic writer Lawrence Kaplan. Kaplan wrote in the magazine's November 16 online edition that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld "and the neoconservatives around him will be departing soon enough — replaced, in all likelihood, by a senator, perhaps even Joe Lieberman.">

Forward (http://www.forward.com/main/article.php?ref=staff200411171119)

Zell Miller didn't have Lieberman's back when Joe was running for President. In fact, the main reason I feel justified in calling Zell every name I can imagine--including a liar and a coward--is because he DID have a conservative Dem who shared his views on American security matters that he could've backed in the Presidential primary race, and he still didn't.

Perhaps Zell and Lieberman can have a duel for the cabinet position?

[Spurminator]

You should be happy about this. Instead, you're dragging Lieberman through the mud.

[Nbadan]

What's to be happy about? Lieberman selling out to the Neocons? If W wanted a loyal democrat named Joe in his cabinet it should have been Joe Biden.

[Spurminator]

Why is he selling out? Because he's a conservative Democrat who may be appointed to a Cabinet position? Isn't that better than a neoconservative Republican being appointed?

You guys scream for a bipartisan cabinet, then you trash any Democrat who becomes a part of that cabinet. It's like saying Republicans need to be more inclusive to blacks, then calling any black Republican an Uncle Tom.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

So now that Bush is trying to work with the Democratic party, anyone he works with is a sellout?

Dan, this nation will achieve greatness the sooner that people on both sides realize they need to work together, and do what is necessary to make that a reality.

The election's over, it's time to get some shit done in this country.

[JoeChalupa]

I think it is a good thing.
I believe that republicans and democrats and conservatives and liberals can work together if they stop being so partisan.

[exstatic]

Uh, Joe L never trashed the party, nor promoted their candidate at the GOP convention. There's only one ZELLout.

[jalbre6]

I think it is a good thing. I believe that republicans and democrats and conservatives and liberals can work together if they stop being so partisan.

Totally agree. I'm not a big Bush fan, but this would be a big first step into the healing process. I hope W does offer Lieberman a spot, and then I really hope Joe takes it. This would also mean to me that the president is seriously intent on reaching across the aisle. There is a lot of Americans that don't like the guy and can't believe he's still in office. The man's on the clock, with no third term possible. If he feels Lieberman is the best guy for a job, and it shows bipartisanship simultaneously, by all means this ought to happen.

What do Republicans think of this? This isn't an act of party treason or anything, right?

[Hook Dem]

I would fully support Lieberman in a cabinet position. It is time to come together for the sake of this great country. The likes of Dan will never conform to such an idea and that is very sad indeed. I think he is going to get left behind because of his agenda. That being ..anything Republican is bad.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

jalbre,

I think it's a good move. Joe's probably one of the more level-headed people left in the Democratic party.

[dcole50]

Uh, Joe L never trashed the party, nor promoted their candidate at the GOP convention. There's only one ZELLout.
Bingo. Joe has always been a conservative democrat .. I don't get the outrage ..

[jalbre6]

We can either bitch about losing or get on board and try to help. I wonder what the world ridicules more...the fact that they don't like our Chief Executive or that us Demo's spend all our time talking about how much we don't like him. My boss at work is an asshole, but that doesn't stop me from working for him.

I'm over it. Others need to as well.

[Hook Dem]

We can either bitch about losing or get on board and try to help. I wonder what the world ridicules more...the fact that they don't like our Chief Executive or that us Demo's spend all our time talking about how much we don't like him. My boss at work is an asshole, but that doesn't stop me from working for him.

I'm over it. Others need to as well.
Kudos to you jalbre 6

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I think I figured it out. Dan thinks the real war shouldn't be America vs. radislam, but Demos vs. Republicans.

It's the only thing that makes sense.

[travis2]

Make that its view of Democrats vs. its view of Republicans.

[JoeChalupa]

We can work together because not everything has to be this or that. If a pro-choice guy like Specter can still be leader in the conservatie republican party so can conservative democrats such as Joe Lieberman.
I think quite a few conservatives have so called "liberal" views.

Bill Clinton made a great statement yesterday about how republicans and democrats can work together. "Our differences do matter, but our common humanity matters more."

[Useruser666]

We can work together because not everything has to be this or that. If a pro-choice guy like Specter can still be leader in the conservatie republican party so can conservative democrats such as Joe Lieberman.
I think quite a few conservatives have so called "liberal" views.

Bill Clinton made a great statement yesterday about how republicans and democrats can work together. "Our differences do matter, but our common humanity matters more."

Who is this Clin-ton? He should run for president!

[gophergeorge]

Dan,

Why is it when a Republican crosses party lines, he is a "man of convictions" honorable, etc, etc.... Can't remember his name, but when that Senator switched parties in 2000, the Democrats were just praising his name...

But a Democrat crosses... he is a sellout?

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

gopher, you know the answer to that one already. Demos want it both ways, and expect to have it both ways.

[JoeChalupa]

Some Republicans want it both ways too....that's why some marry Democrats.

[Nbadan]

Dan,

Why is it when a Republican crosses party lines, he is a "man of convictions" honorable, etc, etc.... Can't remember his name, but when that Senator switched parties in 2000, the Democrats were just praising his name...

But a Democrat crosses... he is a sellout?

The answer is really simple. Normally, your right, bi-partisanship would be welcome, especially by a administration who has used every means possible, some legal and some not, to push its agenda, but this adminstration is different than others befrore it. Cabinet positions don't mean much to this White House since decisions seem to come from the top down. Therefore, any member of this cabinet is basically just a "yes" man.

Progressives have always been kinda ify in their relationship with the Hawkish Lieberman. Some admire his convictions, while others are suspecious about his true colors. Joining this administration kinda seals the deal in some minds that Lieberman has always been a democrat in name only. Not anything that is surpising really, just confirmation of long held suspecions.

[jalbre6]

Joining this administration kinda seals the deal in some minds that Lieberman has always been a democrat in name only.

I disagree. If it wasn't for 600 or so people in Florida and some iffy ballots four years ago, Lieberman would be the VP of the United States right now.

[Nbadan]

I disagree. If it wasn't for 600 or so people in Florida and some iffy ballots four years ago, Lieberman would be the VP of the United States right now.

No thanks really to Lieberman though. He added very little to the Gore campaign. Gore would have had more success with Gephart or McCain, who may have been convinced to cross party lines back then given his strained relationship with W over the 2000 primaries, but since this was pre-911, the Democrats were thinking moderation, so they went with Lieberman.

[JoeChalupa]

I don't buy into the "true" republican or democrat because even I, as a democrat, do agree with some republicans and some of their views.

If I were not pro-choice can't I still be a democrat?
If I am pro-choice can't I still be a republican?
If I am for gay rights can't I still be a republican?
If I am against gay rights can't I still be a democrat?

I don't know too many people who don't think outside the box.

Come on man...even former President Bush and President Bush gave praise to Bill Clinton yesterday. It can be done.

Stop the partisan BS and let's all have a group hug.

[Nbadan]

If I were not pro-choice can't I still be a democrat?
If I am pro-choice can't I still be a republican?
If I am for gay rights can't I still be a republican?
If I am against gay rights can't I still be a democrat?

That's alright to about 60% of Americans Joe, but there is about 20% of Americans with a right-wing agenda to push and compromise isn't part of their plan.

[2pac]

That's alright to about 60% of Americans Joe, but there is about 20% of Americans with a right-wing agenda to push and compromise isn't part of their plan.

Completely made up and BS numbers.

[2pac]

a administration who has used every means possible, some legal and some not, to push its agenda

Statement without substance. Show one illegal move made by the administration to push its agenda.


No thanks really to Lieberman though. He added very little to the Gore campaign.

No one votes based on the VP canidate. They have little to no effect. Cheney has horrible negative numbers as well as poor health. No one cares. Quayle was ridiculed to no end, Bush still made it in. Bush's loss had nothing to do with Quayle. Liberman generally had higher positive numbers than Gore did. He is more likable than Gore and a much better speaker.


Working with the administration in a bi-partisan manner doesnt make you a sell out. Refusing to do so makes you a sellout - a sellout of America. It means you put the democratic party above the United States of America - something I wouldnt put past an idiot like you.

[jalbre6]

Can't remember his name, but when that Senator switched parties in 2000, the Democrats were just praising his name...

Senator Jeffords of Vermont switched from Republican to Independent in '01, but conferred with and supported Democrats then. If I remember correctly, it was to break a 50-50 stalemate in the Senate. Since then, he's never really sided with one party over the other.

I think he's still the only Independent in the Senate.

[jalbre6]

No one votes based on the VP canidate.

I agree, but saying that Lieberman is a lukewarm Democrat pisses me off. Just because he's not a far-leftie doesn't make the guy a dog turd. With the male half of the Clinton tag team duo out of the running, he's probably my favorite Democrat in office. Pro-security? Check. Pro-health care reform? Check. Pro small-business? Check. Pro school reform? Check. Pro-choice? Check.

I'd be even a bigger fan if he wound up in a Republican president's cabinet. That just means that people with different political views than I have are smart enough to let one of ours sit at the table. Maybe both sides would learn something from this.

[JoeChalupa]

I Concur.

[Nbadan]

I'd be even a bigger fan if he wound up in a Republican president's cabinet. That just means that people with different political views than I have are smart enough to let one of ours sit at the table. Maybe both sides would learn something from this.

Then he should run as a Republican because its obviouse that Progressives are headed in a different direction than Mr. Lieberman. The Right is being blinded by the light of Hillary Clinton. There are other formitable Democrats coming up the pike.

[Nbadan]

Statement without substance. Show one illegal move made by the administration to push its agenda.

dup

[Nbadan]

Statement without substance. Show one illegal move made by the administration to push its agenda.

5 words - Valarie Plame and Joe Wilson.

[JoeChalupa]

No, he should run as the moderate democrat that he is.
Just like Henry Cuellar did.

[2pac]

Then he should run as a Republican because its obviouse that Progressives are headed in a different direction than Mr. Lieberman. The Right is being blinded by the light of Hillary Clinton. There are other formitable Democrats coming up the pike.

You are an idiot not to claim Liberman. The man is popular, and a moderate Democrat. I would be proud to have him in the Republican party.

If the democrat party is to ever regain power, it will be because of moderates that appeal to the American people like Lieberman. A smart party would be pushing him to the front, not alienating him.

But then again, a smart party wouldnt have been whipped like they were in the elections of 2004.

In four years, Hillary is going to seem too moderate for you Dan.

[Spurminator]

Lieberman would have beaten Bush.

[2pac]

Lieberman would have beaten Bush.

I dont know how the world would have responded to hiring a Jewish president while we are in a war with Muslims.

[jalbre6]

Lieberman would have beaten Bush.

Just my opinion, but I don't think he (Joe) would have been elected. It would have spun into a Christian vs. Jew campaign, and Lieberman wouldn't have stood a chance. That doesn't mean I don't wish that could have happened.


I dont know how the world would have responded to hiring a Jewish president while we are in a war with Muslims.

As far as this goes, most of the world hates Bush anyway. The US would just be accused -repeatedly- of having some sort of Zionist agenda with Lieberman in power. They'd still hate us, just with a different reason.

[Spurminator]

It would have spun into a Christian vs. Jew campaign, and Lieberman wouldn't have stood a chance.

Christians may vote en masse on issues like abortion and gay marriage, but they're not anti-Semites. If the campaign had had any trace of antisemitism, it would have been very bad for the Bush campaign.

[Nbadan]

Just my opinion, but I don't think he (Joe) would have been elected. It would have spun into a Christian vs. Jew campaign, and Lieberman wouldn't have stood a chance. That doesn't mean I don't wish that could have happened.

As far as this goes, most of the world hates Bush anyway. The US would just be accused -repeatedly- of having some sort of Zionist agenda with Lieberman in power. They'd still hate us, just with a different reason.

Yeah, I don't know how many of you saw that documentary on HBO that followed the Democratic Presidential candidates in the primaries, but Joe came across as a likeable enough guy, but well, he was kinda dry and I'm not talking dry like John Kerry dry either, I'm talking that I don't think Lieberman connected well with people. Someone you'd wanna work for, but as your President, pass.

The U.S. sends billions in foreign aid every year to Middle East countries. Israel is by far the largest recepient but in secound place is the home of the Islamic Jihad, Egypt. The U.S. also sends millions to Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Pakistan and even the PLO gets a cut among other places. Most of this money falls through the cracks and into the hands of corrupt politicians so common Arabs rarely see any of the benefits.

What Arabs do see in their Press and perceive from gossip is Israel, who is getting the biggest piece of the Middle East pie from the U.S. (although as a percentage of their GDP it's only 3%-5%) using their billions to purchase modern U.S. military equipment too, as they see it, counter the infada and protect illegal settlements. This is why I have always said that solving the Middle East puzzle starts with first solving the Palestinain-Israel question. Only by gaining the trust of Arabs first should the Iraq/Saddam problem been handled. Doesn't mean that Saddam and his sons didn't need to go, just that we went about it the wrong way.

[2centsworth]

Nbadan,

Most conservatives ignore your type of rambling, but I'm going to sink down and fight back a bit.

9-10 democrats can't name one policy either Kerry, Leiberman, or any one else has ever sponsored. True meaning of stupid.

9-10 democrats are in favor of a welfare state.

That's the agenda that has lost and will continue to lose in the future. You don't know it, but you and Michael Moore are Godsends for the Republican Party. KOOKS!

[Nbadan]

9-10 democrats can't name one policy either Kerry, Leiberman, or any one else has ever sponsored. True meaning of stupid.

As Governor of Texas W was more of a diplomat than anything else since the power to set the legislative agenda rests with the Lieutenent Governor. Name one significant piece of Legislation W sponsored or promoted as Governor of Texas, bet ya can't.

I have written extensively about how John Kerry was instrumental in closeing down the number one terrorists bank - BCCI. One that had Bush family ties. What did Bush do as Governor of Texas to secure our borders? Did he increase funding for the border protrol? No. Did he make sure that Texas skies were protected? No. Did he have a civil emergency plan laid out in case of a WMD terrorist attack on a major metropolitan area? again No.

[Nbadan]

-10 democrats are in favor of a welfare state.

Republicans are the party of fiscal responsibility - Nope. Noninterventionism? nope. States Rights? Nope. Less Government? Nope.

I guess molds are meant to be broken.

[2centsworth]

KOOK!

The legislature has the power but Bush was very influential in getting things done like tort reform, education reform, SBC to SA etc...

[2centsworth]

Republicans are the party of fiscal responsibility - Nope. Noninterventionism? nope. States Rights? Nope. Less Government? Nope.

I guess molds are meant to be broken.

Valid, unfortunately for you and michael moore people see through the democratic party.

[Marcus Bryant]

Lieberman would have been a tough matchup for Bush. Lieberman never changed his mind on the Iraq invasion nor had an indecipherable position on it and the "war on terror" unlike Kerry. With the Bush campaign unable to differentiate itself on those issues, then the campaign would have fallen into the domestic realm. Also, Lieberman's faith would have only been a plus in the campaign.

But the Democrat base was far too bezerk to nominate Lieberman and they paid the price.

[whottt]

I think I figured it out. Dan thinks the real war shouldn't be America vs. radislam, but Demos vs. Republicans.

It's the only thing that makes sense.

Wrong, Dan thinks the real war should be against America and the far left of the Democrats come closer to fitting his warlike needs.

I can pretty much figure out the slant of any article Dan posts without actually reading it.

Basically if an article or view casts America in a negative light he likes it...regardless of it contradicts any of his other negative views.

Just take a look back on his threads...he pretty much is willing to post anything, even if it contradicts or invalidates other posts and statements he has made...as long as it's a negative view of America.

You will not see Dan post or say anything positive about this country. Not one single thing...and if he has then someone please direct me to that thread and I will admit I was wrong.

By the way...major props to Joe Chalupa for coming around now that the time for election partisianship is over....Meanwhile...Dan continues to be trapped in a maze of his own making...