Lieberman wins the Golden Jackboot Award...

Joseph Lieberman was one of the co-authors of the Gulf-War Resolution in 1991 and was a sponsor of the 2002 legislation "authorizing the use of force," ie. giving the green light for the invasion of Iraq. He has also worked hard for increased US military spending, the expansion of NATO, and for new legislation that would increase the availability of federal funds for religious groups.

Lieberman has served, alongside Lynne Cheney, on the National Council of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA). ACTA, among other things, has launched the Defense of Civilization Fund. Under the guise of "Defending Civilization," ACTA is compiling a list of "anti-American statements" that have been made by speakers on American college campuses. The following is a sample of some of the people currently on the list:

The Rev. Jesse Jackson for remarking to an audience at Harvard Law School that America should "build bridges and relationships, not simply bombs and walls."

Wasima Alikhan of the Islamic Academy of Las Vegas for saying "Ignorance breeds hate."

Joel Beinin, a professor of Middle Eastern history at Stanford University, for his opinion that "If Osama bin Laden is confirmed to be behind the attacks, the United States should bring him before an international tribunal on charges of crimes against humanity."

Lieberman has also served as Honorary Chairman of the Center for Jewish and Christian Values. This group was founded, in part, with donations from the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, that is the same Bradley as in "Bradley Fighting Vehicle." The Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation has been described as the country's largest and most influential right-wing foundation (after all, how many foundations have their own "fighting vehicle"?).


http://www.dawndc.net/jackboot/nominees/lieberman.php

Warts and all.

:shrug:

And if he is the nominee, I go to Greener pastures.

Are you saying Green Party ? :hi:

John

Why vote for a DINO when you can have the real thing?

And as far as I can see at this point in time he is the only one who has a chance to beat Bush.

joe is a repub in dem clothing.

why vote for joe when they can have the real thing?

Bush and Lieberman's policies are EXACTLY the same? I don't think so button.

lieman doesn't have chance, so Sorry!

beating bush.

what new form of optimism is this?

It took him a while, but eventually he spoke against that "defense of civilization" report and withdrew his support.

If those are the criteria, and Aschcroft and Rumsfeld are in the running, I'd say Lieberman would be like 4th runner up for a Bronze Jackboot.

too late, Joe. We know what you are.

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

You do realize that a WEEK is a long time in politics, don't you?

Lieberman is the farthest right wing candidate of the democratic party, if that's what floats your boat then support him. Just don't expect a majority to!

read my post?

My point is that he has no chance, so all this vitriol is simply uniting people here in negativity. Let it go. It would be different if he had any chance, he doesn't!

My dream ticket would be Wellstone/Kucinich; my reality choice would be Kucinich/Harkin or Kucinich/Mosley-Braun, ok?

Jeez!!!!!!!

to have joined Lieberman in Mississippi.

Lieberman was 22 years old in 1964.

Howard Dean was born in 1948. Dean was 16 years old in 1964, a freshman in high school.

John Kerry was born in 1943. Kerry was 21 years old in 1964, a sophomore at Yale.

Dick Gephardt was born in 1941. Gep was 23 years old in 1964.

Dennis Kucinich was born in 1946. Dennis was 18 years old in 1964.

John Edwards was born in 1953. Edwards was 11 years old in 1964.

Bob Graham was born in 1936. Graham was 28 years old in 1964.

It seems to me that the only two candidates old enough to have been involved in the Civil Rights movement in 1964, as Joe Lieberman was, are Dick Gephardt and Bob Graham.

Work on your math, dude

You can do better than that.

Lieberman goes on national television and uses a quote from Donald Rumsfeld to DEFEND the Iraq war, and you want the kid glove treatment for him?

Sorry. Joe is a punk and a shill for the * administration. I am embarrassed that he is a democrat.

I don't care what he did 40 years ago. He sold out. Shame on him.

Holy Joe was born in 1942, and he went to Mississippi after his graduation from Yale.

Interestingly, Lieberman does not mention his Mississipi experience on the bio he has posted on his Senate website:

http://www.senate.gov/member/ct/lieberman/general/newsite/biography.cfm?lowsrc=true

Howard Dean was born in 1948. Dean was 16 years old in 1964, a freshman in high school.

John Kerry was born in 1943. Kerry was 21 years old in 1964, a sophomore at Yale.

Dick Gephardt was born in 1941. Gep was 23 years old in 1964.

Dennis Kucinich was born in 1946. Dennis was 18 years old in 1964.

John Edwards was born in 1953. Edwards was 11 years old in 1964.

Bob Graham was born in 1936. Graham was 28 years old in 1964.

It seems to me that the only two candidates old enough to have been involved in the Civil Rights movement in 1964, as Joe Lieberman was, are Dick Gephardt and Bob Graham.

Wars are just only if there is a connection with Israel.If he finds this war so just, let us ask Joe if any of his children, relatives or friends have volunteered to fight there.

put it!

I never even think of him that way. I'm too busy raking him over the coals for loving the murdering of innocents in Iraq and the murder of our Soldiers because it was a bogus lie filled mandate for the attack on Iraq.

joe has come out of the '60s as a changed person. There were a lot of people who did good in the past that stink now.

And if you're "sick of it" ..don't click on the thread! Simple!

Why do we all have to support the war or oppose the war? This IS a Democratic board I'm on isn't it?

I would recommend that ALL refrain from bashing.

Go ahead, bash everyone who doesn't toe the line with you and take the party down in flames.

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

Why not refrain from bashing ANY of the Candidates and just extoll the virtues of your favorite?

would bomb innocents in Iraq and send our Soldiers to their death for a lie!

I believe the war was just. You and your opinions do not have a corner on the Democratic party my friend.

the d/l/c democrats/constantly/lose

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

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

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

More Iraqis were being killed by the sanctions according to the U.N. Many more.

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

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

My bad. You're right, now that I think of it that way, who cares if Lieberman helped George Bush kill innocent Iraqis, and THEN put our troops out in harm's way to be walking targets. Yeah, this war is really just.

but you and your warmongering opinion are in a very tiny minority on the board.

Holy joe doesn't stand a chance at the nomination, unless the voting machines are rigged.

He has a very, very brown nose.

It takes ACTION for him to become a warmonger, and he's shown none, unless bending over counts.

The topic is a man that not only supported a pre-emptive slaughter, but is still supporting the bloodshed!

I'll bet *'s ass cheeks have a permanent indention from holy joe's nose!

If so, NONE OF THEM, because he's a lying pimp for oil barons, and neither of his bullshit wars were "just". And before you go off on the "The Taliban was harboring terrorists!" crap, read up on the war. You'll find that the issue was a lot muddier than Bush and Co would have you believe.

Do you think your subconscious anti-Semitism is showing?

He has backed every fucking war he's gotten a chance to back, and you are trying to accuse people who point this out of Anti-Semitism?

:puke:

I just got here, so don't shoot me and as far as I can see at this point in time he is the only one who has a chance to beat Bush.

I didn't hear a lot of negative comments about Lieberman in 2000. Was that because the Dem establishment hid stuff about Lieberman, or was it because people didn't care because he was the VP candidate? I'm not trying to be sarcastic or anything, I just wonder.

And if he's the prez nominee this time they will support him or they are really not Democrats to start with.

I pledge to support and work for the Democratic nominee, can you say the same thing?

even if it is the candidate I like the least .

is basically a republican?

That's exactly why Democrats lost the congress in 2002. They didn't give the voters a choice.

Why would voters vote for rethug lite when they can have the real thing?

Liberman will be out of the race before December 1st...he's a loser. He can't raise money. He'll be gone.

I can't wait.

face reality

I was wondering when you'd come out.

You mean backing Liebermen isn't allowed on here? Were you on the Politburo?

I wouldn't expect much support for Joe here, though...

in 2000. Many people were disppointed in Gore's choice.

Lieberman's anti affirmative action position didn't sit well with many people...

Funny, I met Lieberman during the 2000 campaign. He is as obnoxious in person as he is on CNN...

What does that mean 5, 6 15? Come on! You didn't say anything.

or not i do not like him and i dont because orthodox anything (christian jew muslim hindu etc) is rotten to my nose, you will have to admit his vp debate against cheney is all we need to disqualify him, even bush will knock him on his butt in a debate.

or not i do not like him and i dont because orthodox anything (christian jew muslim hindu etc) is rotten to my nose, you will have to admit his vp debate against cheney is all we need to disqualify him, even bush will knock him on his butt in a debate.

I get the feeling that ANY religion frightens you.

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

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

Or is "workersunite" only a cover.

Just asking, I believe in neither.

But many people didn't vote for Gore because of the far
right vice presidential candidate Lieberman. Had 1% of
the green voters in Flordia voted for Gore then the
nightmare of the Bush year would never have started.

So saying Lieberman is our best way out is untrue.

He is and was part of the problem and will never be
the 2004 Democratic candidate no how much his supporter
whine that to win we must move to the right of Bush.

It will not happen, quit crying in your tea cup over
his rejection by the people

.

We are only talking about opinions here, yours and mine, not "truths" or facts.. You are welcome to yours and I respect that. I expect you to respect mine as well.

I always get nervous when someone starts talking to me about the "truth".

Respected but not belived.

Your opinion, that is.

"Huh?"

Yes, that was my feeling after you comments
about religion and the fear of it.

Believe what you want but that is what I
was responding to.

Your post. And what you feel you need to
drag into a discusion of Lieberman.

My point his right wing politics is the problem,
not his religion and certain fervor he brings to
issues like film, art, media, and video games.

He is on the far right of american politics.

He advocates values based censorship.

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

if it was Bush Vs Lieberman

because of his enviromental votes.

But that is about it.

He should have fought for the rights of the
voters struck from the voting rolls in Flordia
in 2000.

A public statement on vote suppression by the
Bush forces in 2000 might make me feel like voting
for the guy.

Really, I think he is right of Bush on several key
issues including being the advocate for creating
the DHS.

I can not except that any supporter of liberty would
desire the creation of such a super agency.

I said desire not vote for, he wanted it more.

I don't consider myself on the "extreme leftwing"
in anyway.

I judge that he has not supported key issues like the
right to free expression.

Perhaps you can tell me otherwise?

We want a victory, not a massacre with us on the bottom!!

Why was it a just war?

It saved lives and ended torture and murder. At least as just as Kosovo/Serbia.

Wow! Talk about Orwellian bullshit!

200+ American soldiers killed (none of them would have died if we had not invaded Iraq)

Thousands of Iraqi soldiers killed (none of them would have died if we had not invaded Iraq)

Thousands of Iraqi civilians killed (few if any of whom would have died if we had not invaded Iraq)

Then there are the nasty unreported (in mainstream media) epidemics that are occurring because we bombed the hell out of their infrastructure which the Pentagon called "fair game".

If you still believe that bullshit about this sham of a war being "just", then I've got a ski resort in the Sahara Desert to sell you. Cheap.

Got an answer for how many Iraqis were dying becaise of the sanctions over the last 13 years? The U.N said 500,000. That would mean that lives were saved, yes.

Prove the U.N figures wrong or shut up.

Come on, say it, because of those awful horrible WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION that NEVER EXISTED.

If the UN had actually done its job, those sanctions would have been lifted long ago because Iraq was never a threat to anyone after the end of Gulf War 1.

The war stopped the sanctions. You are not going to argue that are you? I am not saying anything else, just that the war ended the sacnctions and that means that over 100 people a day, everyday, were not dying according to the U.N.

The sanctions have been extended by executive order.

The war stopped the sanctions.

Not!!!

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/07/20030731-6.html

You might want to wake up to the fact that this
war is a disaster.

You are operating on incorrect information about
the war and sanctions.

You should accept that Bush lied to you and you
believed it and move on.

The sanctions should have been lifted years ago
so the Iraqi people could have been empowered to
free them selves from tyranny.

Instead they live under occupation.

I am not debating anything else with that statement. YOU need to wake up.

I support the war, I am proud to support it and I am proud of our military.

You are welcome to your opinion.

Support a real "massacre" in Iraq, No.

I think americans will vote for a more traditional
view of the US roll in the world.

And vote for people who oppose preemptive war,
and support the roll of the UN in the creation
of a world that nations don't wage unilateral
warfare, anywhere or any country.

I will vote against Bush in 2004.

Like it or not, 9/11 changed things.

Certainly you don't suggest that fine american
traditions like being an empire of the mind but
not an empire of war , have changed?

Cronic television watchers say things like because
that is where "9/11 changed things" is usually heard.

What in the long history of a war torn world that
for centuries has been bathed in blood, changed?

Not deaths of the innocent.

Not hate and fear driving people to kill.

If anything 9/11 has made the world more like it
always has been.

We are behaving less like civilized people more now than
ever.

Take the anti-modern ghoul show of the dead enemy last
week, I am suprised a person who can speak out against
violence in video games can let that freak show pass
without comment.

If the originator posts more like this, I will place them on ignore.

This man is just too right wing for this party! Isn't there anybody in Connecticut that can challenge him? A Green or some liberal Democrat.

John

If he has a good democratic opponent.

I would send a check.

In order to exercise my right to "free" speech.

liberal parties...in the New Zealand poverment...

It would seem that certain members of the U.S. Democratic Party could easily be "operatives" for the ultra-rightists. Their job is to carry the rhetoric of the Democrats and then in key issues vote along with the Bush administration. Just carry on with being spineless and let the Republicans win. To those who may not disagree with me. What would you call it? Think about it! I have a strange feeling that Tony Blair is a Conservative operative within Britain's Labour Party as well. I cannot speak for New Zealand though but yes. Something worldwide is afoot among the ultra-right. The ultimate destruction of the left and those who are progressive.

John

if I could only take a cyberpiss...