Liberals angry at Boxer for supporting Lieberman

WASHINGTON - Liberal activists, including some California Democrats, are furious with Sen. Barbara Boxer -- a leading critic of the Iraq war -- for her active support of Sen. Joe Lieberman, a Democrat who staunchly defends the war in Iraq.

Lieberman is fighting for his political life in Connecticut, facing an anti-war opponent, cable magnate Ned Lamont, in an Aug. 8 Senate primary. Lieberman, his party's nominee for vice president in 2000, has already announced he will run as an independent in the fall if he loses the primary.

That decision has divided his Senate colleagues and Democrats nationwide. And the Lieberman race has ignited a fiery debate among Democrats, now raging on political blogs, about loyalty, political principles and whether the three-term senator has betrayed his party and should be tossed out.

Boxer, a California Democrat, said she decided to support Lieberman, and campaign for him in Connecticut, even though ``we have no common ground surrounding the issue of the Iraq war.''

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/local/15051421.htm

Sometimes, Liberals can be TOO tolerant.

:eyes:

Too much PC stops serious debate. Learn from the mistakes.

I think it is obvious.

She has to support the incumbent. If the incumbent loses in the primary she has to support the winner.

THEIR decision. I'm disappointed in her choice. Lieberman's done more than his share of undermining our party.

The fight is truly raging here in CT over this race

according to some on here. Will the same be said of Boxer?

self-interested and self-sustaining politicians.

That's my Senator and she rocks! Glad she's got some good sense.

Why do Hannity, O'Reilly and Coulter like Joe so much?

Sammon: So people like Lieberman are getting squeezed out and he's thinking about running as an Independent now because there's no room for him in the moderate Democratic Party...

O'Reilly: He shouldn't.

-----

COULTER: No. I would admire a politician, not as much as basically your run of the mill garden-variety Republican, but as far as Democrats go I like Lieberman, who apparently does want to defend America and fight the war on terrorism. He is the one facing a primary fight.

CAVUTO: You know, there is talk about him maybe bolting to a third party. The seeds are there for a third party movement. Do you buy that?

COULTER: I think he should come all the way and become a Republican. He wouldn’t be our best Republican but at least he’d fit in with the party that wants to defend the country.

-----

Hannity:I need to know, do you want my endorsement?

Lieberman: Well, it's good that you asked me in private like this . I appreciate your friendship and I appreciate your support.

Hannity: If you want me to do it, then I'll do it.

They only say they like him to annoy liberals, nobody should fall for what they say.

He can take his "Party of one" and shove it where the sun don't shine.

They hope Lamont wins? I am just making sure that you are serious about this.

is one of them.

They're goal is to cause problems for the Democratic Party, what better way than to cause dissention in the party by claiming they like Lieberman.

they are trying to further hurt the Dem Party. This furthers their argument that the Dem Party is too liberal and out-of-touch, blah blah blah.

significantly higher approval ratings than Democrats in Connecticut? Are they trying to cause dissention too?

The truthful answer is that Republican pundits often support Joe Lieberman for the same reason that Republicans in Connecticut support him. For the same reason that the Sierra Club endorsed Chafee. There is no hidden motive, they have common ground.

Why does he go on Fox to treat Sean Hannity better than he treats the Democratic base? Can you answer that one?

who the hell cares what Hannity, Coulter and O'Reilly say?
Think maybe they have ulterior motives? Split the Dems, get a Repug in? Honestly, do you really believe they would be supporting Lieberman if there were no chance of muddying the waters?

Ooooooooooo, Coulter supports Liebermann. Like we should really believe that. :sarcasm:

Mz Pip
:dem:

they like Lieberman because they think he is a "sensible" Democrat, and they can relate to many of the things he stands for. They like him because he is a big fan of the war and other conservative agendas. Just like Bush or Santorum and other Republicans have praised Joe for all the qualities they like about him, Hannity and company praise Joe as well. There is no hidden agenda.

If one thing the righties are totally without flexibility on is choice. No way do I believe that the RW wacko cable crew would support anyone who voted against the Partial Birth Abortion bill. Unless they thought it would benefit them in some way.

This is all about "divide and conquer'

The bottom line is they want this seat to go Repug. Praising Lieberman is a tactical move. Turn off the left. Defeat Lieberman in the primaries and work to defeat Lamont.

I am not a huge Lieberman fan but this 'support' from Hannity, Coulter, etc is damn transparent and disingenuous IMHO.

Mz Pip
:dem:

It has nothing to do with Lamont or splitting the vote. Did they know Lamont was going to run back in 2003?

and that is ALL. iraq. they HATE him on the environment, women's rights, civil rights, etc.

Coulter and Hannity don't love Joe Lieberman. They'd support his Republican opponents in a heartbeat and they'd be vicious to him just as they are to other Dems. (remember 2000? I don't recall Coulter and Hannity supporting Lieberman for VEEP).

If it weren't for the current CT squabble, Coulter would be calling Joe a babykiller, tree-hugging hippie, and whatever other insults they normally throw at Dems.

They're just using the CT Dem primary to paint Lamont supporters (and hence a large faction of the Dem party) as hyper-liberal since they can't support joementum because of his views on iraq.

Don't buy into the Hannity-Coulter lies!!!!

think her support of Lieberman is a big mistake...I figure she is doing it as a "colleague" and a fellow Jew. The reason I say this: Because for the most part, Lieberman and Boxer have nothing in common and don't vote very different on issues and certainly their position on Iraq and the Bush Administration are very very different. She has more in common with Lamont - except for the fact that he isn't Jewish and isn't her colleague - yet.

Is that like a whities only club?

What a weird response...."A fellow Jew" is a very common term, especially among Jews who if you are Jewish and you know the Jewish culture is more than just a Religion, its a tribe. That kind of reference is used commonly amongst Jews. You imply its an insult. No such thing. Interesting that you would interpret it as such.

Is Boxer Jewish - Yes, and she's a neighbor of mine. Is Lieberman Jewish, Yes. Are they "fellow jews" - Yes they are. So is Feingold. So are all other Jews.

"Whities only Club"? :wtf: No, I wasn't calling anything a "club"...By the way, there are Black Jews.

And at that moment, I promise you, ALL democratically-elected officials will vote MY way, with no exceptions.

That's how it's going to be, so you just better get ready for it. Disparity of opinion, indeed discourse itself, is over with forever.

And that includes Barbara Boxer! If she OR ANY OTHER PUBLIC OFFICIAL votes or speaks contrary to MY PERSONAL BIAS then by god unspeakable torments await her.

___________
One-issuing U.S. Senators is horseshit.

Were I registered to vote in California, Senator Boxer would still have my vote. We disagree on Joe Lieberman, but we agree on a shitload of everything else.

It's my way or the highway.

onto uncharted soil.

You have to make a decision about all these things.

<tease!> ;)

It could be that a democratically-elected official forges alliances we are unaware of, either because of the nature of Senate protocol, or financial or political concerns we just don't have info on.

It's hard to rule out things like that.

But also hard to allow the entire trajectory of a publicly-elected official to be one-issued.

I think there is a point in patience, in that over the course of long years, we need the allies we need. If they're dismissed, we lose our strength in the say-so.

I'm unwilling to burn bridges with Boxer over one endorsement when I rely on her clarity and bravery for so many civil-rights-related pieces of legislation. I've been a volunteer for her and will be again if she chooses to seek re-election.

The Senate, and the Democratic Party, are far better with Boxer in the Senate than they would ever be without her there.

"One who lies down with dogs gets up with fleas." :P :eyes:

Now Master Po asks that you either snatch the pebble out of his hand (let it go) or continue to beat that poor dead horse, i.e., we get your point but do NOT agree. :hi: ;)

Not a soul.

want to PM me.

:hi:

care less if that means Boxer loses support and even has trouble in her elections.

Boxer is insane for doing this.."we have no common ground surrounding the issue of the Iraq war."

:headbang:

Is Ned Lamont a true Democrat?

the best job in getting this * maladmin. investigated and hopefully, its top officials impeached?

Lamont will be voting to investigate, stop the war and impeach. :applause:

Lieberbush will be voting to stay the course and support *. :puke:

End of subject, IMO.

Don't think for a minute Lamont will sit back and be the good little silent boy in the back of the room. That is NOT why he's running or what he's running for.

Bush and Lieberman sitting in a tree
K-I-S-S-I-N-G;

I want Joe kicked out on his ass.

But I will continue to support Barbara despite her support for him, since I suspect it is a matter of conscience from her point of view, and I doubt it will save Joe's ass; and she has done yeoman work for the "count the votes" and anti-war efforts.

Nice to bump into a cool brow now and then.

:hi:

this is one of the very very few things i disagree with barbara on.

Someone needs to tell her that apparantly!

Bu$h said he would support a few things before the 2000 election, too. It didn't turn out that way.

Boxer, a California Democrat, said she decided to support Lieberman, and campaign for him in Connecticut, even though ``we have no common ground surrounding the issue of the Iraq war.''

Lieberman has been one of her ``staunchest allies'' on the environment and reproductive rights, two issues very important to her, Boxer said in a statement. ``I will be campaigning with him to let the voters know about his record on those issues.''

that if they end up at a catholic hospital and wanted emergency birth control they should go to another hospital? Does she KNOW he said that? How the hell does that square with reproductive rights? eh?

Man's a sanctimonious humbug.

Let the nuns, the priests, and the preachers in the faith based hospital prevent a rape victim from taking a morning after pill. Save the fetus!

That he enables federal judges who will work tirelessly for the rest of their lives to ensure women are dis-empowered on every level.

Boxer had a serious lapse of judgment here- and the longer she fails to admit it and back off, the worse it's going to get for her....

voice? Is he hoarse? A little man like him should be able to carry his own water.

... and how does facilitating the packing of the SCOTUS with 2 new wingnuts help on the environment or reproductive rights?

and xenophobe Alan Schlesinger, I'll take Lieberman. I live in CT, so I get to decide this one.
I will be supporting Ned Lamont in the primary.

She would be better off talking to Lamont about the issues of importance to her. Make sure he's on board. And if he is, campaign for him.

Either that or "no comment". Actually, I like "no comment" best.

she's my Senator and I know she is smart enough to know what she's doing.

I do ferverently disagree with her especially if Joe's going to run as a 'petitioning democrat' if Lamont wins.

If Lamont wins the primary I expect the Dems and Boxer to support him 110%

I don't to agree with Babs or any politician on every single issue.

But I like Boxer because she's been consistent on the Iraq war.

She grilled Condi and voted against her confirmation.

She voted against confirming the 2004 electorial college vote.

She voted against Alito.

She backed Fiengold's censure.

I hope she runs for Calif. Gov. or President I'd vote for her in a hearbeat

here in CT so I guess it would be kind of hypocritical to bitch about Boxer yet say nothing about Waters.

he has a right to his opinion and she supports his right to express that opinion. She doesn't have to agree with him and she doesn't on the war issue. He has supported her on other issues and she is returning the favor.

Lieberman 06!!

Being a good Dem. But one day I guess they might think asking themselves what they really stand for. Because by enabling those that are in direct opposition to your belief, namely that the Iraq war is a sham pulled on a nation, a crime against that nation, and many different crimes now against Iraq itself, WHY is that not more important than loyalty. Getting Lieberman re-elected means more of the same. More war. More ass kissing of the worse president ever. Sometimes, you actually have to stand for something that means more. But as many tell me and I do understand they are just politiicans, and my abiltity to worship ANY of them like so many do around here-Kerry or Feingold or insert your favorite name is impossible. I can't do this game shit, no more. It's just a game. I think it means more than that.

I've grown to DESPISE politicians. That's what a few years on DU will get you.

:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

I <3 BARBARA BOXER.

:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*

"I'll support you before the primary if you promise not to run as an independent if you lose". That's the best face I can put on it. She would never cop to it - but her support of Lieberman doesnt make sense otherwise.

On the whole, Lieberman is a liberal, with a couple of glaring blind spots: Israel and the Iraq war, as well as dumb censorship crap. I hope he loses, but blaming his friends for helping him out is really a punk thing to do. It's up to the voters, and the voters only.

whoever she damn well pleases. That's her right. Our right is to replace her, if we see the need to do so.