Urge Joe Lieberman to help Democrats - From Wes Clark

[helderheid]

On Tuesday, the message sent by Connecticut voters was loud and clear. They want change, and they want Ned Lamont to represent them in the U.S. Senate, voting for Ned by a 52% - 48% margin over Senator Joe Lieberman in the Democratic primary.

You see, despite what Joe Lieberman believes, invading Iraq and diverting our attention away from Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden is not being strong on national security. Blind allegiance to George W. Bush and his failed "stay the course" strategy is not being strong on national security. And no, Senator Lieberman, no matter how you demonize your opponents, there is no "antisecurity wing" of the Democratic Party.

Indeed, Connecticut Democrats recognized all of this, and yesterday they chose Ned Lamont as their nominee for the U.S. Senate. Now, I hope you'll join me in supporting Ned as he heads into the general election this November.

Stand with Connecticut Democrats. Send a message to Joe Lieberman to end his Independent campaign for CT Senate.

http://ga4.org/campaign/joelieberman/

As a Democrat, I respect the will of the Connecticut Democratic voters and their decision to make Ned Lamont their nominee. Even before the election results came in on Tuesday, Ned Lamont showed his respect for the voters by committing to abide by the Democratic primary result and support whoever won.

Joe Lieberman, on the other hand, began collecting petition signatures to run as an Independent several weeks ago while concurrently running in the Democratic primary. In short, he wanted to have his cake and eat it too.

Despite his efforts to appear on the November ballot as an Independent, I held out hope that Joe would withdraw from the Connecticut Senate race after the primary votes were counted. Unfortunately, Joe has announced his candidacy as an Independent candidate, running against Ned, the Democratic nominee.

Today, I ask you to email Joe Lieberman. Urge him to respect the will of Connecticut Democrats and end his Independent candidacy for CT Senate.

http://ga4.org/campaign/joelieberman/

In 2000, the presence of a third party candidate, Ralph Nader, no doubt played a role in the defeat of Vice President Gore and Joe Lieberman. Now Joe Lieberman is risking our party's claim on his Senate seat by running as a third party candidate himself. Recent news reports detail the GOP's interest in supporting such an effort. It's time to draw a line.

I committed myself to supporting the Democratic nominee for the US Senate in Connecticut, and I ask you to do likewise. Because too much is at stake with our troubles abroad and at home, we cannot play games this Election Day. That's why I call on all loyal Democrats to join me in urging Senator Lieberman to drop his bid for the Senate as an Independent and endorse the duly nominated Democrat.

We should thank him for his service and invite him to stay active, or even run again someday, but as a party we cannot let Joe Lieberman be this year's Ralph Nader.

Email Joe Lieberman. Encourage him to do the right thing, withdraw from the Connecticut Senate race, and focus his efforts on electing Democrats across America.

The 2006 elections represent a real crossroads for America. We must unify our efforts to stop George Bush's radical agenda and end this one-party government. I hope Senator Lieberman will join us in this critical fight for our nation's future.

Sincerely,



Wes Clark

PS: After you send your message to Joe Lieberman, please take a moment and forward this message to every Democrat you know.



Send a message to Joe Lieberman today!
http://ga4.org/campaign/joelieberman/

[AX10]

1. k&r

[helderheid]

2. sent my note

On Tuesday, the message sent by Connecticut voters was loud and clear. They want change, and they want Ned Lamont to represent them in the U.S. Senate.

In 2000, the presence of a third party candidate, Ralph Nader, no doubt played a role in the defeat of you and Vice President Gore in your run for the White House. Now you are risking our party's claim on the Connecticut Senate seat by running as a third party candidate yourself.

As a Democrat, I have committed myself to supporting the Democratic nominee for the US Senate in Connecticut, and I ask you to do likewise. Because too much is at stake with our troubles abroad and at home, we cannot play games this Election Day.

I strongly urge you to drop your bid for the Senate as an Independent and endorse Ned Lamont, the duly nominated Democrat.

[Clarkie1]

3. "There is no antisecurity wing of the Democratic Party."

I especially liked this part:

"You see, despite what Joe Lieberman believes, invading Iraq and diverting our attention away from Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden is not being strong on national security. Blind allegiance to George W. Bush and his failed "stay the course" strategy is not being strong on national security. And no, Senator Lieberman, no matter how you demonize your opponents, there is no "antisecurity wing" of the Democratic Party.

Indeed, Connecticut Democrats recognized all of this, and yesterday they chose Ned Lamont as their nominee for the U.S. Senate. Now, I hope you'll join me in supporting Ned as he heads into the general election this November. "

[pacalo]

25. Democrats aren't weak on national security - it's Bush's perverted version

of national security we are against. (Read something similar in NYTimes editorial today & isn't it spot on.)

Also in the same editorial was a point made about the current political discussion in Washington: it has become a captive of the Bush agenda:

Now considered extreme are traditional beliefs such as every person's right to a day in court, or the conviction that America should not start wars it does not know how to win.

The middle becomes a place where senators struggle to get the president to volunteer to obey the law when the mood strikes him.

Attempting to regain the real center becomes a radical alternative.

Excellent editorial: Revenge of the Irate Moderates

[zcflint09]

4. Tell em Wes!

K-R and I sent in my note. This is why I love Wes--he's a true democrat in every sense of the word. We are truly lucky to have a guy like him on our side.

[CornField]

5. I really like Clark

And not just for this stance. :)

[citizen snips]

6. Democrats UNITE!

thanks Clark.

[Crunchy Frog]

7. Wes, my man!

What a wonderful statement. Thanks for posting.

[Bretttido]

8. Great statement by Wes Clark

I've honestly never know a TON about him, but this piece has turned me into a big fan of his. Not afraid to tell Lieberman how it is and what he's doing wrong. I've had enough of politicians dancing around people who are definitely in the wrong; and Joe Lieberman is definitely in the wrong here. Way to go Wes!

[PegDAC]

34. Go to Clark's website

www.securingamerica.com.

[dbackjon]

40. Wes rocks!

I wanted him in 2004, want him in 2008!

[FrenchieCat]

9. Now......

That's what I'm talkin' bout! :thumbsup:

[Amonester]

10. From (a peace craving majority of) the rest of world: Thank You!!

"Blind allegiance to George W. Bush and his failed "stay the course" strategy is not being strong on national security."

Thank You Mr. Clark! May the real moderates prevail soon (or B4 it's too late)!

[acmavm]

11. Way to go Wes!

[angus]

12. Thank you, Wes!

Another one on board!

[newyawker99]

39. Hi angus!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[helderheid]

13. Wes - you're so damned yummy.

[longship]

14. Done.

Rewrote letter and sent it to Boltin' Joe.

[Nothing Without Hope]

15. The SECOND PARAGRAPH is extremely important - we are NOT anti-security!

"You see, despite what Joe Lieberman believes, invading Iraq and diverting our attention away from Al Qaeda and Osama bin Laden is not being strong on national security. Blind allegiance to George W. Bush and his failed "stay the course" strategy is not being strong on national security. And no, Senator Lieberman, no matter how you demonize your opponents, there is no "antisecurity wing" of the Democratic Party. "

We have to push this truth very, very hard, because the GOP and the so-called "centrist" Democrats who back the status quo and corporate power are going to push the lie very, very hard. This is what we will be seeing: the "liberal extremist wing" of the Democratic Party is "against National Security" because they oppose Bush's war. It's being painted as though the war is the only difference and that those like Lieberman who support it are the only ones bravely protecting the security of the country.

Even in the Wash Post's announcement of Lamont's victory last night we see these elements:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/08/08/AR2006080800596.html?referrer=email

The Senate primary was closely watched around the country as a barometer of antiwar sentiment that could shape the November midterm elections, particularly in Democratic-leaning states.

Beyond that, the Lieberman-Lamont contest carried implications for a Democratic Party that long has been split over national security and whose congressional leaders and prospective 2008 presidential candidates have struggled to find consensus on the war.

The campaign of lies is revving up. Wes Clark sees that clearly and we can all be grateful that he is working to show the public the truth.

[Tom Rinaldo]

37. Exactly, and Clark sees that very clearly.

What he has done from the moment he started campaigning against Bush in 2003 is offer his 4 Stars as a shield to all Democrats against Chicken Hawk attacks on the Democratic Party as "not being strong enough to lead America." Almost every Statement Clark makes returns to the point of how the failed foreign policy of the Bush Administration made America less, not more, secure, and from there he embraces the Democratic Party as the Party of both Peace AND Security. Clark never lets the Republicans get away with equating looking for alternatives to armed conflict as weakness. Here Clark put Lieberman on notice that he will not stand by and let Lieberman get away with Dove baiting Lamont.

[yellerpup]

16. Already sent my letter to Joe

because Wes made it so very easy for me to do. I love this guy!

[Ilsa]

17. Done. Thanks! nt

[lukasahero]

18. Woohoo!!!

Thank you, sir!

[Synnical]

19. Just did this. Great letter.

:kick:

[bigwillq]

20. Done

:bounce:

[renate]

21. leading by example

When Clark dropped out of the race in 2004, he worked his Democratic ass off for John Kerry. The man was absolutely tireless in his support of the party, and still is.

It's an example Lieberman should follow.

[phylla]

22. So brilliant, brave and wise. I would trust Wes Clark with my life.

Wes-- yesterday, today and tomorrow.
He is truly my hero.

[harry t]

23. sorry to rain on the parade but....

I hate to spoil the fun , but Lieberman losing could be bad for us. Since the vote was sooooo close, and since repukes know their guy cant win, Liebers 48% plus the repukes vote guarantees a Lamont loss in November. I hate to say it, but I think its true. Then Lieberman, with no ties and only malice towards democrats, will caucus with the repukes. Then WE LOSE> bleech !

[louis c]

27. The largest block of votes is unaffiliated (40%) in Conn.

They break down as anti-Bush as much as the rest of us. only repukes like bush in any numbers. That break down favors Lamont 3-1. The repukes represent 22% in Conn. and more than half will vote for Slesinger or stay home. add to that the regular dems who will come over and lamont wins big. don't be discouraged, we did the right thing and we'll do it again.

[MoJoWorkin]

24. Done. n/t

[helderheid]

26. !

[helderheid]

28. !!

[BreweryYardRat]

29. Done.

[judy from nj]

30. That was a great statement

I particularly liked how he showed up Joe Lieberman's nasty remarks about the Democrats postion on national security.

[UCLA Dem]

31. Sent mine and another directly to his senate office.

[Joe Chi Minh]

32. I think it's very naive. You should BEG him to RUN as an

independent.

He's not shown a marked inclination to share Democratic positions or ideals up to now, but mostly voted against them, if they were of any significance, so why would he try to please you all now?

[returnable]

33. K & R, although...

...Joe has climbed so far up his own ass, I doubt it'll make much of a difference.

[DanCa]

35. Wes can fix this mess

All's I gotta say is Clark in 08.

[bobbie]

36. Clark is the real team player here

Yet during his campaign many felt he wan't a real Dem.

He's a more genuine Dem than Holy Joe anyday.
And a class act.
The kinda man who is likely too good a pure to ever be elected president in this country.

[wiley]

38. Done!

[Texas_Kat]

41. Kick

'cos Joe's still there.