itsrobert
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-10-08 09:37 PM
Original message |
Get the word out: Lieberman is one of the MOST liberal members in the Senate |
|
Edited on Mon Nov-10-08 10:30 PM by itsrobert
Senator Reid said that Lieberman is to the extreme left of him. He voted more on the left than most anyone else.
Edit: I was trying to be sarcastic and at the same time trying to paint him useless to the Republican Party. But I guess he has already been proved useless.
|
jobycom
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-10-08 09:39 PM
Response to Original message |
1. There's truth to that, but he still supported Bush, McCain, and the war. |
|
It's like finding out your altruistic neighbor is a serial killer. The nice doesn't make up for the evil.
|
peruban
(888 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-10-08 09:41 PM
Response to Original message |
|
And is it as good as what I'm smoking? :smoke:
|
liberalhistorian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-10-08 09:46 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
7. I don't know what he's smoking, but |
quiet.american
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-10-08 09:42 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Thanks for the laugh. Get the word out to who exactly? nt |
DJ13
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-10-08 09:42 PM
Response to Original message |
4. Lieberman is so far to the left |
|
.....he ended up on the right.
He's one big circle jerk.
|
liberalhistorian
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-10-08 09:45 PM
Response to Original message |
5. Really? Is that why he campaigned so |
|
aggressively and proudly for McSame? Is that why he trashed Obama with outright lies at the repub convention and praised Bush? Is that why he didn't even attend the Dem convention at all? Is that why he trashes Dems for every little trivial sin, but lets repubs off the hook for big ones for, say, like, oh I don't know, lying about and promoting an illegal war? Is that why he's a proud Bush-kissing warmonger? Is that why he trashed Obama with lies during the campaign? Is that why he said on election night that he "fears the country won't survive a 60-seat Dem majority?" Please. He's a back-stabbing lying warmongering two-faced hypocritical arrogant egomaniacal opportunistic pond scum-sucking lowlife shitbag.
|
Libertyfirst
(583 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-10-08 11:04 PM
Response to Reply #5 |
Eric J in MN
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-10-08 09:46 PM
Response to Original message |
6. If Lieberman believes in liberalism, then he'll keep voting that way... |
|
Edited on Mon Nov-10-08 09:46 PM by Eric J in MN
...whether or not he's chair of the "Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee."
So let's give the chairmanship to someone else.
|
GodlessBiker
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-10-08 09:52 PM
Response to Original message |
itsrobert
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-10-08 10:32 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
TankLV
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-10-08 09:54 PM
Response to Original message |
9. WRONG! maybe YEARS ago, but most if not all of his votes have been to the RIGHT of ATILLA... |
|
and those were the IMPORTANT ONES...
|
Truth2Tell
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-10-08 09:58 PM
Response to Original message |
|
if you disregard foreign policy, trade and civil liberties. But aside from those minor areas, he's one hell of a librul.
Bernie Sanders is laughing at you.
|
salin
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-10-08 10:19 PM
Response to Original message |
11. *falling down on myself laughing* |
|
this guy, on election night, went to the media to state that a 60 majority seat dem. would be a "dangerous" situation.
Dude has been denigrating Obama and the dem. party for months with the fox type folks.
I understand the desire to keep him in the caucus from a numbers stand point. But if the position he has stymies (or worse, thwarts) the new administration, than he needs to be ousted from his current seat - and give a chairmanship that matches his supposedly dem. leaning positions where he can make a difference, rather than intentionally causing havoc (which his agressive anti-Obama speeches on behalf to McCain suggest that he would continue to do (wreak havoc) if he were allowed to keep his current position.
Per the OP "one of the most liberal" members of the senate... Please look at the sitting senator that he ousted in 1988 - by all records, Lowell Weicker was more liberal than Lieberman. That was one of the very few races over the past several decades where I was rooting for the republican over the democrat. We now know why - Lieberman, by his own actions has disavowed the democratic party (per his choice to ignore the voice of the people when he lost the party's nomination.)
Given his public pronouncements denigratin Obama, and his professional actions as the chairman of THE committee that is charged with oversight over government operations - (track record = NO hearings into ANY problems in bushco) - there is no reason to believe that he wouldn't suddenly start acting in his role s chairman - to play Ken Starr (a gazzillion investigations until we find one that might stick) after years of holding not a single hearing to question the bush admin.
I trust Lieberman to work for an Obama administration as opposed to work to thwart an Obama administration as much as I would trust the proverbial scorpian who wants to cross the river.
|
itsrobert
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-10-08 10:31 PM
Response to Original message |
IndianaGreen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Nov-10-08 10:40 PM
Response to Reply #12 |
14. Sound of flying rocks |
|
You should have used the sarcasm smiley!
:P
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Fri Apr 26th 2024, 03:36 AM
Response to Original message |