LTTE in The Day: Lieberman The Kind Of Democrat We Need

May give you an idea on why some CT Dems supporter Lieber-bush.
http://www.theday.com/eng/web/news/re.aspx?re=1742A677-828A-4D6F-B813-2DEEA7E687ED

I was disappointed to read the letter to the editor in which the writer questioned Sen. Joseph Lieberman's credentials as a Democrat (“Is Sen. Lieberman still a Democrat?” Nov. 16).

As a former Democratic mayor, I can tell you from firsthand experience that Sen. Lieberman is exactly the type of Democrat we need: He cares about the issues we care about, he fights the other side when there's an important principle at stake and, maybe most importantly, he's a man of great integrity.

I don't mind when people disagree on issues —- that's what our democracy is all about. But they shouldn't question Sen. Lieberman's commitment to the Democratic Party. To me, he's the best kind of Democrat there is: a man who stands on principle and a man of his word.

I was not born in CT, so I don't share the same kind of loyalty to Lieberman that some CT Dems do. I will respond to this guy but since I had a LTTE published this month, I will have to wait til next month to send it.

When he wasn't engaging in meaningless rants about the video game industry. This is integrity? He still thinks the I war is the bee's knees and is prepared and even eager to kiss the ape's butt for the next three years. This kind of senator the democratic party does not need.

of democrat we need" any day.

Whick would you rather have a moderate Dem like Lieberman of GWB?

You are definitely entitled to your opinion but I respectfully disagree. In order for Joementim to win you would have to assume there where people who voted against the new England catholic librul, but would vote for the New England Jewish librul? I dont think there are a lot of people like that.

And yes, I would rather have Joe than W.

move the party farther and farther to the right and look at the result. the party has grown smaller and smaller and less and less relevant

simply because the progressive wing of the Democratic wing would have split off and backed a third party candidate in a heartbeat. And why not - Joe's campaign message was "i like * as president and I agree with everything that the GOP is doing, I just would do it nicer".

And there is still the fraud in Ohio and Florida which would have happened no matter who ran.

He inspires utter REVULSION in me, and I know I'm not alone -- from his let's-placate-and-suck-up-to-the-Republicans to his backstabbing of Gore to his hangdog, droopy, sleepwalking speaking style. I despise him, and I think that sentiment is widespread. He would have inspired Democrats to stay home.

when he supported Dean.

after the way Lieberman screwed him over during the 2000 FL recount, when he publicly declared Gore should just give up and he didn't support further recounts. And Gore recognized that it was a mistake to have had Lieberman as his running mate in the first place since he was far more conservative than he seemed and he likely drove away voters from the ticket.

To hell with Lieber-idiot; he can take his "joementum" (which turned into "nomentum" during the primaries) and shove it up his ass.

would probably be one of our favorite Dems, because he would have won.

He would probably be the favorite in 08 after Gore had served two terms.

a favorite at all if Gore had won (actually, he DID win, but that's another subject for another thread), because he still would have shown his true conservative colors as VP. And I really don't think that would have endeared him to Dems and other libs and left-leaning independents in 2008.

When he wanted it? Gore got it, Mondale got it, Humphrey got it, Johnston got it. OK, Johnson and Mondale weren't exactly sitting VP's, but you get the idea. If Gore had become President he would have saddled us with Lieberman running in 2008. VP's are careful not to sound too out of synch with their Presidents. They don't get many chances to become unpopular all on their own. Had Gore done well Lieberman would have been our 2008 nominee.

:rofl: :popcorn:

And remember he did vote against the IWR and is far more progressive than many people realize

Dem, he is a Republican in disguise and a shill for the GOP. And if he would have won last year, why is it that he barely got any votes in all of the primaries he ran in? He had such little support that he dropped out of the primaries far earlier than he had planned. How you think he could have won the election, then, is beyond me.

The war and the neocon agenda are my biggest issues. Joey is as much an enthusiast of both things as Junior is, but would approach their implementation in a more sober, more intelligent, and more coldly efficient manner than our current idiot. I'm not at all certain that we would be better off in that situation.

Had he been the nominee, I would have voted Green in the last election.

doesn't mean i'm itching to vote for Zell

Lieberman is an uber hawk who supported Bush 100% and still does. Kerry's 2.41% "loss" would have been a 10% loss for Joe. The base would have stayed home and swing voters would have split more evenly seeing that Joe offered few alternatives to Bush.

trying to "assure" everyone that John Kerry is moving to the same position as George W. Bush regarding the war in Iraq; like that was a good thing.

he may be better than an "average" Republican Senator, but only marginally.

his devotion to K-Street and to unfettered militarism is not integrity. it is immoral

if we want to know why many Americans don't think the Democratic Party stands for anything and has no values-- Joe Lieberman says it all.

"Fine Democrats like Senator Joe Lieberman share the view that we must prevail in Iraq."

://www.bergen.com/page.php?qstr=eXJpcnk3ZjczN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXkzJmZnYmVsN2Y3dnFlZUVFeXk2ODIwMjY3JnlyaXJ5N2Y3MTdmN3ZxZWVFRXl5Mg==

Can't argue with a man who knows how to open doors

It just speaks unsuppored platitudes.."he cares about the issues we care about"..yeah some of them, but ultimately the Iraq war is THE issue because it's draining so many dollars and resources from all social programs, is it not? and "fights the other side" uh..again he seems like appeasment central-but then why not for him? if defense is his raison de etre and he like the "Bush vision".

He either doesn't care or doesn't understand that the things Bush has tried to do-totally dismantle the new deal, pay off journalists so all we have is paid propapanda, allow TORTURE are just a few examples of things that are fundamentally destroying any values this country ever had. Bush is rotten to the core and appeasment of him, even by those that might "mean well" is killing America.

Cites nothing he's even done.

This is the pat speech, letter given for someone who has essentially done nothing but you have to figure out something nice to say about him/her.

Lieberman is in fact quite the contrary of all these things. It has become clear he DOES NOT care about the issues we care about, he wouldn't know principle if it hit him over the head, and he so CLEARLY has not commitment whatsoever to the Democratic party.

We are truly through the looking glass these days.

Could it have been written by Ed Koch? He's ostensibly a "Democrat", but endorsed and voted for * in the last election. I could see where someone like that would be approving of Lieberman.:shrug:

it all, doesn't it?

that's the kind of democrat we need?

No, Russ Feingold is the kind of democrat we need. A clean democrat.

of Democrat-the Republican kind! He should just switch parties and make it official already.

What does he do now?

William L. Satti Sr., director of public affairs for the Mashantucket Pequots

he is a hell of a lot better than some Repub Senator would be.

FU Joe! Eat me Joe! B-low me Hillary! YOU ARE THE ENEMY!