What possible reason could Lieberman have for his vote of NO re: Gonzales

[BigBearJohn]

Somebody, PLEASE explain it.

As far as I am concerned, he might as well
just switch parties. I shutter to think
he almost became vice president in 2000.
:puke:
YUCK :puke: :puke:

QUESTION: When the Dems take on a greater
majority in the Senate in 2008, will the
Dems THEN strip Leacherman of his chairmanship?
I think he disgusts me "almost" as much as the Chimp.
As an aside, his face reminds me of that of a lizard.

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

1. The Fact That He's A Republican?

:shrug:

[BlooInBloo]

9. This is one of those threads where it's only worthwhile to chime in if you're *first*.

[salin]

2. perhaps he thinks he is taking a "principled" stand against partisanship...

which is what he "ran" on - of course he doesn't mind (and often engages in) hostile partisanship when it is done by the GOP and targets dems.

I would be interested to know what the independents who voted for him last fall think about him now.

[spotbird]

7. Naw, he wouldn't know a principle if it slapped him in

the face. He's bought and paid for, he did as he was told.

[salin]

13. that is why I used to quotation marks - to note his rhetoric

he seems not to be bothered by the "principle" when republicans are divisive towards dems... I would bet there are some folks with 'buyers' remorse in Connecticut these days.

[Richard Steele]

3. Because he's a treasonous little quisling repub-boot-licker?

Just a guess.

[TwilightGardener]

4. Revenge.

[BlueStater]

18. That's no excuse

Several Democrat senators campaigned for him even after he became an independent. And when he won, they welcomed him back in their party with open arms. The little piece of shit has stabbed them in the back with this one and I hope this opens a few eyes (though I'm sadly not counting on it).

[TwilightGardener]

20. Not an excuse, but there's definitely some hostility there against his old party--

it was present during the Clinton years, and it's downright blatant now. That Dems in the Senate even give him the time of day is pathetic--Harry Reid pulls the knife out from between his shoulder blades and hands it back to Joe, and then turns around for another jab. Disgraceful.

[spotbird]

5. The Republicans likely

wanted a full 40 votes, so Joe had to do as he was told.

[fooj]

6. He's a prick with no ethics or principles. Rule of Law? HA!

[anotherCTliberal]

12. And yet the majority of the idiots in CT

chose to "stick with Joe"! URGH!!

[mohinoaklawnillinois]

8. Dick Steele nailed it upthread.

Lieberman is a quisling, nothing more, nothing less. He doesn't give a shit about the Constitution, it's all about him....

To be quite honest, the fact that I voted for him as vice-president in 2000 is the only vote that I have cast in my life that I regret.

[11 Bravo]

10. Because he's a slimy shitweasel?

Just a guess.

[Nimrod2005]

11. A religious fanatic made in Ahmadinijad's image!!!

[A wise Man]

14. He's a rethug in disguise

The only good thing about Gore having the election of 2000 stolen from him is that we didn't get Joe ass hole as vice pres'd.

[jannyk]

15. Sheer Spite!!Even the mod repubs voted Aye. nt

[bobbolink]

16. He can't figure out how to take down that waving thumb he has at his nose.

He's on a roll standing up against the Dems. Surely you wouldn't want him to change horses in midstream?

I agree with your :puke: and raise you a :nuke:

[slowry]

17. He has equal or greater drive to do evil than *.

I swear, even * gets sick of his own bullshit once in awhile, but Liebenbush is out of control 24/7 ready to nuke everyfuckingbody.

[Marr]

19. Lieberman needs to be stripped of his seniority.

The little worm won't switch sides. It'd be the end of his relevance.

Call his bluff, and watch the little putz cave.

[BigBearJohn]

21. Oh, God, please make it so in 2008. Or will we STILL kiss his ass?

[LeftishBrit]

22. That he's a right-winger?

Elected in the first place by running to the right of his Republican opponent, with the support of the National Review. And by now even further up Bush's rear end than Tony Blair - if such a thing is even possible.