Call LIBERMAN - I know, I know, but I have cracked the code

[debbierlus]

Liberman is a holdout on the filibuster. Here is a way we might just get through to him.

People here have been getting a rather chilly response by the Liberman staff, but I didn't and here is why...

In my sweetest - nicest - voice I said this:

Hello,

I am a moderate Republican but I have always supported Senator Liberman. I have appreciated his sensible positions. I am calling because I am concerned about the Alito nomination. Like I said, I am a moderate Republican and I am prochoice and for checks and balances within our government. I am very concerned about the Alito nomination because this nominee supports expanded presidential power. Could you tell Senator Liberma I am for a no vote on this nomination, I would even go so far as to support as filibuster which is extreme for me....

Thanks so much

I did not get a chilly response. I got a warm response. Thank you soooooo much mam'm for your call response. I will certainly pass that along and we appreciate your support response.

Took my name and my CONNETICUT address and that was it.

Lieberman's number - 1 202 334 2921

[Coexist]

1. Oooh - a mole!

But I don't have a Connecticut Zip code to hand them

::hint, hint:::

[Coexist]

6. but that would be soooo wrong... don't follow this link

http://www.411.com/10744/search/Find_Zip?city_zip=new+haven&state_id=CT

[debbierlus]

7. Of course not...we would NEVER do that

Cough....cough....

[pstokely]

8. here's some

http://whitepages.addresses.com/zip_codes_by_state/CT/A.html

[mmonk]

2. The lack of a chilly response

makes one wonder if the democratic party has been infiltrated and flipped.

[K-W]

27. Flipped? When were Dems not acting like this? EOM

[Tesha]

29. There's no need to wonder. (NT)

[pacalo]

3. I'm impressed!

The reaction you got says a lot about Lieberman, too, doesn't it.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

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

[stop the bleeding]

5. this bears worth following, very interesting indeed n/t

[jsamuel]

9. while I get a little laugh out of this, I don't think it is in our best

interests to be trying to mislead them.

Lieberman may be the only exception to that though... not really sure.

[buff2]

10. If you called that number it is the wrong number

I called it....the guy said his name is Rick and it's NOT the senator's office and he's been getting a lot of calls. Please....if you're going to post phone numbers,make sure you have the right one. Long distance calls are not free unless it's a toll free No. :hi:

[Sapphire Blue]

11. Capitol toll-free number: 1-800-426-8073

On edit: Number provided courtesy of AFSC

[buff2]

13. Thank you!

I appreciate that. :hi:

[Sapphire Blue]

16. Please also consider calling your Rep to oppose the budget cuts bill...

***** URGENT **** Call Your Representative Toll-Free at 1-800-426-8073:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x236666

[sandnsea]

22. I called, staffer was very nice

He said Lieberman has not decided yet. But I impressed upon him that I don't think the people truly understand everything that's at stake. Labor, safety, environment, handicapped rights, etc. That the court wouldn't take the country rightward, but BACKWARD. The guy was very nice, listened, and said he would pass the message on.

So don't give up. CALL!!!

[helderheid]

12. Some have suggested calling on the R line on c-span too.

[Coexist]

14. I would never do that - it is too much fun listening to their

paranoid rants.

[debbierlus]

15. Of course.....we ARE republicans aren't we....:)

[helderheid]

18. I'm sure it was suggested as a joke...

;)

[CrackpotAmerica]

17. I'm not sure that this little fib is the answer..

... I think it's a minor fib, however, it is a fib nonetheless.

Who cares if you receive a "chilly" response? Sen. Leiberman has an OBLIGATION to represent the voice of the people. It is YOUR RIGHT to call him. and so, in this matter, I feel that it is the SHEER VOLUME of our calls that that count..

I'm nominating this page because although I don't totally agree with the tactic, I am very proud of you for trying your best!

:)

[Coexist]

19. I liken it to sending pencil shavings to Ken Blackwell...

Lieberman has already made up his mind - we are just funnin' him.

[CrackpotAmerica]

20. lol! nt

[debbierlus]

21. He won't care unless he thinks you are a vote for him

That is the fact.

If not, he does not care what you say...

Period.

[CrackpotAmerica]

23. so it's ok to lie then? |not to be a meanie... NT

[Nutmegger]

24. I must have gotten lucky...

when I phoned LIEberman yesterday. I detailed my case against Alito and for a filibuster and the male staffer was very kind of concerned.

Must have been "off" day.

[WI_DEM]

25. Are we sure he is one of the hold outs? he has said that the

filibuster was on the table.

[Wordie]

26. K&R

[pat_k]

28. He's already feeling the heat of a primary challenge. . .

. . . CT residents or Out-of-Staters can let Lieberman know that the fight against Alito is definitive. You are with us (anti-fascists), or against us.

And if he chooses to be against us, we WILL make him our prime target. (Actually, he's vying for the position with Feinstein. Perhaps he would like to know he is in a neck and neck race with her for "biggest weasel." Alito could be the tie breaker! Where's that Joe-mentum!)

His challenger, Ned Lamont may be a millionaire, but I'm sure he'd appreciate all the support he can get, from in or out of state.

It's Not Shaping Up To Be A Party For Lieberman
January 22, 2006

Greenwich millionaire Ned Lamont is strongly considering a challenge against Lieberman for the Democratic nomination to the Senate. …
At 52, Lamont is tan, fit and possessed of an easy confidence that often comes with being born into a fortune and making it bigger. He understands the long odds against succeeding in a primary against an incumbent senator. His interest in making the race springs from issues, not burning personal ambition. . .

Iraq, however, is the issue that will drive Lamont's race. He was inspired when hawkish Democratic U.S. Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., called for a withdrawal of American troops late last year.

That provided a stark contrast to Lieberman's stalwart support of the war, particularly his optimistic assessment of it in a Wall Street Journal piece in November. Lieberman's chummy relationship with President Bush has added to the "groundswell of anger" that Lamont detects.

…
The prospect of a challenge from Lamont is already changing Lieberman - who's reinvented himself more often than Madonna - back into a partisan Democrat.Lieberman even hinted to a group of liberal state legislators last month that he just might vote against Supreme Court nominee Samuel Alito. Don't expect any State of the Union kiss from Bush this month.
…

The clear and compelling reason to block Alito's nomination is the man's refusal to put ANY limit on executive power

Alito told us everything we need to know to reject him when he offered his standard response -- that he couldn't offer an opinion; that he'd figure it out if it came to the Supreme Court -- to the hypothetical case Sen. Biden posed. (If We the People, through our representatives in the Senate and House, passed a resolution prohibiting the President from ordering any sort of attack on Iran, could the President ignore our will and order Bombs to be dropped on Iran?).

It is lunacy to think the constitution gives (or even might give) the President the power to flagrantly violate the collective will of the people codified in the acts and resolutions passed by our Congress.

No matter how muddled their thinking is with faulty legal logic and fascist fantasy, the truth is not hard to see. Even a former Dean of the ultra-conservative University of Chicago Law School gets it http://www.huffingtonpost.com/geoffrey-r-stone/why-the-senate-should-not_b_14229.html"><link>

...
Whatever else Judge Alito may or may not have made clear about his views on such issues as abortion, federalism, and religious freedom, he has certainly made clear that he has no interest in restraining the acts of this commander-in-chief. That, in my judgment, poses a serious threat to the nation, and is a more than adequate reason for the Senate -- Republicans and Democrats alike -- to deny his confirmation to the Supreme Court of the United States.