LAT op-ed by Atrios: Why the Left Is Furious at Lieberman

[DeepModem Mom]

Why the Left Is Furious at Lieberman
A blogger's blast at the embattled Connecticut senator. Hint: It's not just Iraq.
By Duncan Black, DUNCAN BLACK writes the blog Eschaton www.atrios.blogspot.com under the pseudonym of Atrios and is a senior fellow at Media Matters for America.
July 18, 2006

....The war is certainly a reason — and given how events continue to devolve in Iraq, a perfectly sufficient one — but those who focus only on that miss the broader opposition to Lieberman ....For too long he has defined his image by distancing himself from other Democrats, cozying up to right-wing media figures and, at key moments, directing his criticisms at members of his own party instead of at the Republicans in power.

Late last year, after President Bush's job approval ratings hit record lows, Lieberman decided to lash out at the administration's critics, writing in the ultraconservative Wall Street Journal editorial pages that "we undermine presidential credibility at our nation's peril." In this he echoed the most toxic of Republican talking points — that criticizing the conduct of the war is actually damaging to national security.

Lieberman has a long history of providing cover for the worst of Republican actions while enthusiastically serving as his own party's scold. After the Senate acquitted President Clinton on all impeachment charges, Lieberman called for his censure. More recently, he rejected a call by Sen. Russell D. Feingold (D-Wis.) to censure Bush over the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping program, calling the attempt "divisive."

Lieberman looks happiest when playing a "Fox News Democrat," as he did in a February appearance on Sean Hannity's radio program, during which the two exchanged compliments and expressions of friendship and Hannity offered to campaign for him. The senator seems to enjoy Sunday talk shows more than actually doing his job. New Orleans could have been spared the hacktastic performance of Michael Brown, the unqualified former director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, had Lieberman not shooed him through the confirmation process in a breezy 42-minute hearing.

Lieberman's relationship with the Democratic Party has been one of convenience, not principle, as was proved definitively in late June when he declared his intention to run as an independent if he loses the Aug. 8 primary. Proclaiming that he had loyalties "greater than those to my party," he decided he would deserve a do-over if rejected by Connecticut Democrats. In what could be the final tragic act of his political career, Lieberman might soon discover that Republicans don't love Democrat-bashing Democrats enough to actually vote for them....

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-black18jul18,0,7362225.story?coll=la-opinion-center

[skipos]

1. Lieberman looks happiest when playing a "Fox News Democrat"

And that is his biggest problem.

[gratuitous]

2. Ooh, blogofascism at its finest

Can't wait for our resident Lieberman apologists to come out and tell everyone what a swell guy Lieberman is, and please disregard anything he's actually said or done, because that's just whack.

Dee de-dee.

[dionysus]

6. BWA!!!!!

like, all 2 of em right?

[TankLV]

11. And we all know who they are!

A "mr." somebody is one prominent hack.

[Arugula Latte]

14. Oh, and also, "This is not the time for divisiveness blah blah blah blah"

:nopity:

[Totally Committed]

3. I have to say, as one who opposes Lieberman strongly,

that that Op-Ed in the WSJ was the absolute limit for me. It was the defining moment in my decision to oppose his re-election, even though I am not a voter in CT.

Late last year, after President Bush's job approval ratings hit record lows, Lieberman decided to lash out at the administration's critics, writing in the ultraconservative Wall Street Journal editorial pages that "we undermine presidential credibility at our nation's peril." In this he echoed the most toxic of Republican talking points — that criticizing the conduct of the war is actually damaging to national security.

If undermined Presidential Crdibility is so troubling to Joe, perhaps he should have a chat with his kissing cousin, Mr. Bush. Just this last G-8 Conference had out Preseident undermining his own credibility pretty darned good all by himself... "Yo, Blair!", talking to another world leader with his mouth full of food, grabbing the one female world leader at the conference from behind and "massaging her shoulders" until she managed to get him away from her, forgetting his mic was open and dropping the sh*t bomb for all to hear, and having WAY too much interest in that roasted pig. I would ask Joe, if he were here with me now, WHAT PRESIDENTIAL CREDIBILITY???

And, then I would remind him that censuring a sitting President from HIS OWN PARTY for lying about a private sexual act is pretty darned undermining in itself. Where was his indignation over such a thing then?

This sanctimomious, self-righteous, arrogant hypocritical PRIG just gets under my skin. The things he says about those in his own Party, the way he sides with the administration, some of the votes he makes against the welfare of the Democratic Party, and his disrespect for the voters of his own state just appall and disgust me. Did I mention he likes WAR way too much for my taste as well?

He has some effing nerve, is all I can say. I hope the voters of CT give him the kick in the teeth he deserves come this Primary, I really do.

TC

[Pithy Cherub]

4. The era of the Democratic Zell-out is over.

Paraphrasing Clinton. There is an even larger point that goes missed in this. The Democratic Party is no longer confined to Washington DC pols and the devolution of Power to the People is fervently showing up at the ballot box. The DC kool-aid adherents are deeply shaken at the amount of power, money and press coming from the Left/Liberal groups that are standing up to claim it. Gone are the fall in line days. The number of moderates that were DLC or centrist/conservative champions are trying to figure out how did this happen without so much as a by your leave - those slower on their feet and less intellectually gifted are whining about it a la Lieberman and the lapdogs in the press. It is the dawn of a new day in Democratic politics. The base is back and willing to work together for the common and collective good, but not for the individual political glory of the few at the expense of ideals.

Tough sledding ahead in August for Joementum - let's see who learns from that.

[Totally Committed]

5. Excellent point!

My fervent hope is, when this is all over, that not only is Joe gone, but that the DC insiders learn WE HAVE ARRIVED, and we have come to take our Party back. I would love to see this election serve them with notice that the days of ignoring the people for the benefit of corporations is over, and that they vote against our interests at their own peril.

TC

[Cha]

8. Hallelujah!!

I think people like Howard Dean have helped immeasurably in this ground swell ACTION.

[MarkDevin]

13. We Nutmeggers will do our best to get rid of Lieberman August 8th.

Thankfully, I don't think we'll have computerized voting machines in Connecticut for the '06 election.

[Cha]

7. Another reason for me

to support Ned Lamont!

"Lieberman has a long history of providing cover for the worst of Republican actions while enthusiastically serving as his own party's scold. After the Senate acquitted President Clinton on all impeachment charges, Lieberman called for his censure. More recently, he rejected a call by Sen. Russell D. Feingold (D-Wis.) to censure Bush over the National Security Agency's warrantless wiretapping program, calling the attempt "divisive."

Finally, a stand is being taken against this traitor to our country AND the Democratic Party.

Go lick hannity's fascist's boots you freakin' lover of all things tainted.

No wonder bush kissed lie-berman! Freakin' supports him from inside the guise of a democratic senator.

[welshTerrier2]

9. that's a devastating argument!

i can live with Lieberman's disagreement about censuring bush ... it should have been done but, in the grand scheme of things, it was DOA ... more important to me than the symbolism of censure would have been a strong and consistent push against the NSA wiretaps ... the issue was more important to me than punishing bush or scoring (or losing?) political points ...

but, ohhhhhhhhh, the hypocrisy ... Lieberman called for Clinton's censure ... well, excuuuuuuuuuuse me ... what kind of hypocritical crap is that??

some little sex no-no deserves censure but lying to the American people and Congress about wiretapping and pushing this abuse of our Constitution and its citizens does not???

outrageous ...

[TankLV]

12. And to all those LIE be3rman apologists here, if that doesn't prove he is

a TRAITOR to the Democratic Party, I don't know what else we could show as proof that would.

To the original OP: Thanks for the walk down memory lane - and to confirm how justified WE are for hating this piece of shit for over 6 years now.

[Cronus Protagonist]

16. He's a traitor to the country, not just Democratics

As are Bush, Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeld and others.



Educate Your Local Freepers!
Flaunt Your Opinions With Buttons, Stickers and Magnets from BrainButtons.com
>

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

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

[LincolnMcGrath]

15. Don't forget the Guckert-Gannon link to Joementum