Lieberman Lost In The Primary BUT

[Bobbieo]

won the in the General as an Independent- and it sure as hell wasn’t the Democrats who got him re-elected

SOOOO – where should his party obligations be????? Think about it and let’s keeps our mouths shut – for the time being!!!

[blm]

1. No. Voted in by GOP majority and he'll get the same treatment he showed Dem voters.

.

[Orsino]

8. But he can get a lot richer for the next two years.

Imagine what MBNA will offer him to switch parties and throw the majority to Cheney.

[niyad]

2. sweetie, we don't have to keep our mouths shut about ANYTHING, EVER,

and that includes joe and his shifting party affiliations.

gosh, one would think you were a repuke or something, telling us to shut up. what gives?

[Deep13]

4. 49 + 49 + 2

Language is the lumber of this political trade. Sure we all have the right to speak. It just might be a good idea not to swing that particular hammer while the Senate is in the balance. I agree with Lieberman on about 80% of the issues. I'm not going to change his mind on the war. Do we want him being pro-war and voting with us or being pro-war and voting against us?

[Jon8503]

5. Dam sure agree with you niyad. That has been the problem of

the dems for some time now, keeping quiet. As far as I am concerned the traitor can go to the repukes & the party would be better off for it. Also, probably would piss off, I would think the CT voters who voted him in as a Independent. Regardless, he is worthless to the party and not to be trusted. Lieberman is out for the one and only Lieberman, nobody else. Good riddance if he goes.

[Bobbieo]

6. Sweeite and that is why we lose when we do!!!!

[Deep13]

13. oops--self-delete

[TechBear_Seattle]

9. HAH! Try saying something positive about the Greens

:eyes:

[Deep13]

3. Welcome back Joe. I sure missed him.

Look, we have a comfy recliner ready for you so you feel comfortable caucusing with the Ds.

[TayTay]

7. Why, so Joe can still go out and support a losing war

and the effort to do nothing in IRaq and keep our troops over there?

I don't friggin think so.

[Deep13]

11. He's going to do that anyway.

Republican Lieberman would be as much of a hawk as Democrat Lieberman. The difference is that Dem. L. will vote for Harry Reid and D. committee chairs and subpeona power. Repub. L. will vote against those things. If we want to hold Bush accountable for the war, the Senate Ds need subpeona power.

Politics is not about what we want. It is about what is possible.

[TayTay]

15. Exactly

and it is possible to shut Joe Lieberscum up so that he won't think he's a powerful little bastid when he isn't.

After 3 terms in the Senate, the Democratic Party rejected him. I think we should honor that. If he wants back, let him come to us on bended knee.

[graywarrior]

10. You're telling DU'rs to keep their mouths shut? Bwahahahahahahahahahahahahah!

...snort....

[rep the dems]

12. He ran his campaign on the idea that even though he planned

to switch to Independent if he lost, he was still a Democrat. He claimed he had been loyal to the party and that he always considered himself a Democrat. It's only fair that he votes as he promised he would. But we'll have to wait and see if he does.

[Deep13]

14. Right. CT indies assumed that.

If they thought he was going to tip the balance to the Rs, they would have voted for Lamont. They only supported J.L. because they thought it was a vote for his seniority and for a D majority. RI threw out their R Senator even though he was more liberal than many Ds.