Senate Democratic leaders will likely kick Lieberman out.
Senate Democratic leaders will likely kick Lieberman out.
On Thursday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) refused to close the door on the possibility that he and other Democratic leaders would kick Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) out of the party’s caucus next year. When asked about the future of Lieberman’s chairmanship, Reid told reporters, “Next year will be next year when we get there.” Today, Robert Novak reports that Democratic insiders are “certain” that Lieberman will be out:
Despite assurances to the contrary from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, Democratic insiders are certain that Sen. Joseph Lieberman will be kicked out of the party’s caucus next year and lose his Senate chairmanship if he addresses the Republican National Convention in St. Paul, Minn., as planned.
Lieberman’s Democratic colleagues willing to accept his support of Sen. John McCain for president consider his speaking to the GOP convention as the last straw. Lieberman was re-elected from Connecticut as an independent in 2006 after losing the Democratic nomination because of his support for the Iraq War.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Well, maybe, uhh, we might, uhhh, make this the very next to last straw.
Don’t want to act too quickly here.
July 13th, 2008 at 10:20 amIt’s well past time to send Smokin’ Joe packing. He will soon find him on the trash heap of history along with Zell Miller after quietly serving out the rest of his last term in the Senate. I doubt that he could be re-elected dog-catcher after his embarrassing performance over the past two years.
I will never understand why Gore chose him as a running mate in 2000.
July 13th, 2008 at 10:27 amHow many slaps in the face does it take to wake up these dummies?
July 13th, 2008 at 10:28 amThis is too much like the Democrats are suffering from “abused wife” syndrome.
“He promised not to beat me again, so I took him back. Maybe I will leave him next year if he beats me again”
Nucking futz
July 13th, 2008 at 10:35 amI can understand the tough position Harry Reid is in with this particular matter. If they kick Lieberman out of the Democratic caucus, he will vote with the Republicans and they will control the Senate. This, in turn, will mean that Bush’s horrible nominations to the federal court system would sail through and the constitution would be rendered even more meaningless than Reid and his Democratic cohorts (like Speaker Pelosi) have already made it. As exaggerated as this sounds, stripping Lieberman of his chairmanships now could be the final nail in the coffin of the Constitution. But come first week in January next year, Lieberman might as well be in the Whig Party for all the good his “seniority” will bring him..
July 13th, 2008 at 10:42 amWhat would have happened had they stated their intention to strip him of his leadership posts after he lost the Democratic primary in 2006 to Ned Lamont? They might have a Senator Lamont, and wouldn’t have this problem.
July 13th, 2008 at 10:44 amWe should always remember the power of our grassroots efforts.
They work. Ask Obama. Ask the Republicans voting Democratic in November. And now, ask Joe Leiberman.
This issue probably would have been ignored had it not been for the organizers and over 34,000 people who signed the online petition to cut Lieberman’s Democratic leadership power.
Bye bye Joe!
Power to the People.
July 13th, 2008 at 10:45 amLieberman’s Democratic colleagues willing to accept his support of Sen. John McCain for president consider his speaking to the GOP convention as the last straw. Lieberman was re-elected from Connecticut as an independent in 2006 after losing the Democratic nomination because of his support for the Iraq War.
I find it odd that Lieberman’s support for McCain is acceptable but not his speaking at the Republican convention. McCain clearly stands to be Bush’s third term if elected. How is that acceptable?
Lieberman is a bad joke in and of himself but the notion of him being an “independent” is particularly repugnant. Lieberman personifies herd mentality.
http://progressiveworldreview.com
July 13th, 2008 at 10:56 am5. Wayne A. Schneider Says:
I can understand the tough position Harry Reid is in with this particular matter. If they kick Lieberman out of the Democratic caucus, he will vote with the Republicans and they will control the Senate. This, in turn, will mean that Bush’s horrible nominations to the federal court system would sail through and the constitution…blah, blah, blah…
Yes, as if bush doesn’t already get everything he wants and we need to prop up this gullible fantasy that the poor dem leadershi(t) needs to walk that tightrope “for us” so that we can win, etc.
Or, harry Reid and the other 9%-ers…NINE PER CENT approval congress can grow some cojones, kick Lieberman out and impeach bush, imprison Rove for failure to respond to the subpoena, etc.
No…we need to keep alive this asinine fiction, replete with contorted, serpetine logic, that “poor Harry Reid” is doing his best.
A better start would be to kick Pelosi and Reid out, put Kucinich in the house leadership position and Feingold in Reid’s position. Strip Lieberman of his committee assignments and block future war funding. Obama’s screwed us on telecom immunity, so “grassroots” efforts obviously are a sham, failing to outweight the $360,000 Obama got from the telecoms.
Stop believing that this system is still anywhere close to a working system. It isn’t. We need to reform this “government” by refusing to support this mockery of a political system. The dems are a joke, not an object of support. The republicans are cockroaches.
Stop cooperating with this system. Just stop.
July 13th, 2008 at 11:10 amWhat I want to know is why any Democrat is willing to even support Lieberman supporting John McCain. Can you imagine what the Republicans would do if one of their own were to come out and support Obama.
July 13th, 2008 at 11:20 amObama’s screwed us on telecom immunity, so “grassroots” efforts obviously are a sham, failing to outweight the $360,000 Obama got from the telecoms.
I have done an internet search and can find no mention of Obama taking that kind of money from the telecoms. So, I suppose you can back up that statement with proof. So do it now or STFU.
July 13th, 2008 at 11:25 amclb72 Says:
What would have happened had they stated their intention to strip him of his leadership posts after he lost the Democratic primary in 2006 to Ned Lamont? They might have a Senator Lamont, and wouldn’t have this problem.
That is not necessarily true. Lieberman won the election because a majority of the Republicans voted for him. A majority of the Democrats voted for Lamont. The problem was, just enough Democrats did vote for Lieberman so added to the Republican votes, it was enough for him to win.
July 13th, 2008 at 11:29 amThrow the bum out! He’s an embarrassment to Democrats and Connecticut as well as a skande vir die goyim.
July 13th, 2008 at 11:38 amWhat’s the hurry, hell this bunch of dem’s is just an extension of the rep’s anyway..The last little diddy, FISA was proof posative…..The house and senate is full of lieberman’s that claim to be dem’s, or independent’s….And let us not forget Obama who is definetely not a dem…
This morning my buddies and I came to a conclusion, all 6 of us are dumping the dem’s and going GREEN…4 of us have been dem’s and voted since JFK, worked all our live’s for civil right’s, helped stop Nam with marche’s, been bleeding heart libral’s all our live’s…
The turning point’s came slowly at first and with a bang we shifted over the FISA mess…You all have a nice day…..Blessings
July 13th, 2008 at 12:02 pmYep, just like you did in 2000. Thanks for supporting the bush administration and the republicans. You nearly did destroy our nation.
reps and dems are not the same!!!!
July 13th, 2008 at 12:05 pmWith all due respect Fred, I beg to differ…..There are only a hand full of true patriot’s and Dem’s in office now…Kucinich, Feingold and a few other’s….The present candidate’s and even the last set are trying to move the populace a tiny bit at a time more right…The present leader’s,palosi, reid and other’s have not just been enabeler’s they have become defender’s of the reich winger’s…
After all we faught so hard to achieve and maintain the present majority of dem’s have been joining the reich winger;s to distroy it…Don’t blame the voter’s for loosing to the rep’s when it’s well documented the rep’s stole the election’s and the dem’s in office let everything slide..
To my last breath I will defend my country and the constitution…I will not vote for any one ever that vote’s against it…Blessings
July 13th, 2008 at 12:21 pmHi Witch, I respectfully disagree.
going GREEN = new republican adminsistration
That is unacceptable. You must think of the damage that will be continued if the republicans retain power. You cannot possibly think that green has a realistic chance and so your vote is a protest vote.
I would never tell you that you are a traitor as you have implied that I am but I must counter your message when I can.
I must think of the good of our country at large. There is no ground swell for a 3rd party right now…..at least it is not going to happen in this election cycle.
sad reality is that it is either the dems or the reps. Please do not throw all dems in your pile of trash….there are some good ones……however, there are no good republicans.
July 13th, 2008 at 12:28 pmThe fisa mess was not as bad as you think. Sure the telecoms got immunity and that is bad. Lot’s of people’s privacy was taken away and bush has gotten away with that. You must add it to the list of crimes of this administration.
We will never get the justice we all want if you give the republicans the power to continue.
The same fisa changes that included immunity for the telecoms reinstated strict rules that bush must follow in using fisa in the future…..because of the democrats. How does that make them the same?
July 13th, 2008 at 12:37 pmReid and Pelosi should be kicked out too.
July 13th, 2008 at 12:47 pmThey’ve done more for the GOP than any Republican.
Maybe the nation would be a whole lot better off if the Dem’s would forget all about lieberman and take up the issue of why Harry Reid, and Nancy Pelozi for that matter, should retain their Congressional leadership positions.
Hell, just call for a vote of “no confidence” Monday morning and put people in place who actually believe “to protect and defend the Constitution” is more than meaningless words you have to speak on your way to becoming a paid Washington lobbyist.
I nominate Dennis Kucinich to replace Pelozi.
July 13th, 2008 at 12:49 pmyawn
In what way does this make any difference? 98% of congress are Israel-firster, pro-war machine, pro “full spectrum dominance”, pro “free market” fundamentalist Plutocrats with nary two synapses firing simultaneously. They are about as removed from reality as one can be.
The whole lot of them are on the payrolls of AIPAC, big oil, pharma, Wall Street, and GMO purveyors of poison. The media trumped-up “differences” between them are at best cosmetic.
ALL of them are all too willing to throw anyone who rocks the boat under the bus at the drop of a hat – O’Backstabber is especially adept at this.
It’s clear to me that Americans are unwilling to educate themselves about politics, and have abdicated the right of “people power” by continuing to vote for these clods, cycle after cycle. Every election you hear the exact same bleating: “this election is too important to lose”.
Since you are clearly incapable of pulling the trigger for some “radical” like Nader, why can’t you, for once, do the right thing and just freaking ABSTAIN. It would be pretty hard for the media to spin a 18% turnout of eligible voters…
July 13th, 2008 at 12:52 pmOnly have a few minute’s then must leave for the day..Will respond, Fred in kind..I understand where you are coming from, it’s the same old stuff I have heard over and over for 20 year;s and I baught into it every voting cycle, not this time…
Nothing change’s because all these representative’s know they have us all by the short hair’s…..We have been sold out to big corp by the reich, supported and backed by the pretend left…What we have now is the bad guy’s running the show with their little hit men and women pretending to be left running interferance for them…..Even if my vote help’s start a revolution it is what this old witch must do..I can not and will not vote for any one who vote’s against the constitution or country…It would make me a traitor,,If I have offended you I am sorry this is my personal opinion…Alway’s has been….Country, constitution, the people of my country, enviroment, wildlife and anti war….
I found it mind boggeling when a poster put up all the name’s of the dem’s that voted infavor of the FISA bill, declared we needed to vote them out of office, Obama was on that list and then in the next sentance said they were withdrawing fund’s to support him but still going to vote for him….Jeebos…This kind of stuff is lunacy…..
I like your post’s, rather I agree or not but for this once and probably last vote of my life I must do what I believe is best for my country the constitution and the people…Blessings and have a good day.
July 13th, 2008 at 12:55 pmI understand Witch. Just offering a different opinion. I respect yours and others who are fed up with our situation. It is depressing.
July 13th, 2008 at 1:02 pmOne last big thought of why I am the way I am..For 232 year’s our country has been trying to maintain the law of the land by using the constitution as our guide..I have not ever broke the law’s of the constitution nor will I..An employee of mine should atleast be able to do that…..I am their employer after all even though they have forgotten I am….This boss woman will not hire someone who vote’s against the law’s of my country or vote’s to diminish the constitution and it’s law’s to suite gangster’s and big business….Blessings
July 13th, 2008 at 1:07 pm11. Bilbo Hussein Baggins Says: I have done an internet search and can find no mention of Obama taking that kind of money from the telecoms. So, I suppose you can back up that statement with proof. So do it now or STFU.
BHB looks like an @ss in 3…2…1…:
Lookie here!
Obama’s $360 large. Next time you want to tell anyone to “STFU” Dildo, make sure you know what the hell you’re talking about. You suck at internet research, btw. I’ll hold my breath for your fawning apology…
July 13th, 2008 at 1:10 pmI could have sworn Joe is an (I) not a (D). Maybe my coffee hasn’t kicked in yet.
July 13th, 2008 at 1:11 pm15. Fred Says: Yep, just like you did in 2000. Thanks for supporting the bush administration and the republicans. You nearly did destroy our nation.
Drinking and typing don’t mix, Fred. WTF are you on about? (or just wtf are you on?) This is 2008…2-0-0-8. I voted against bush in 2000. Lotta good that did when the system was ignored and bush was installed.
Hey, great system there…..
July 13th, 2008 at 1:17 pmThank’s for the link hanshiro,,,Blessings
July 13th, 2008 at 1:22 pmhanshiro Says:
You say you voted against bush….does that mean you voted democratic?
I won’t insult you. I respect your opinion, I just disagree. You guys seem intent on throwing out the dems…..that’s what happened in 2000. The republicans are the criminals who are responsible for where we are. They are the ones we need to throw out.
The elections have to be close for the republicans to steal them…..if we have a huge majority of people wanting change by voting then they will not have that advantage.
reality….a dem or a rep gets elected in november. Who do you want in charge?
July 13th, 2008 at 1:27 pmOdd, you seem to be criticizing someone for being rude.
July 13th, 2008 at 1:44 pmbtw, You suck at internet debating.
29. Fred Says:
You say you voted against bush….does that mean you voted democratic?
I won’t insult you.
Won’t insult me?? So this comment: “Yep, just like you did in 2000. Thanks for supporting the bush administration and the republicans. You nearly did destroy our nation.” Was supposed to be a compliment?
Fail!
You guys seem intent on throwing out the dems
Not what I said. The dems are enablers, refusing to impeach the biggest war criminal in US history, voting for every war funding bill, passing telecom immunity, what is the difference if the dems give bush everything or the republicans give bush everything?
Dump the cowards and replace them with real leadership.
if we have a huge majority of people wanting change by voting then they will not have that advantage.
Still deluded enough to think the ’system’ works, eh? After Katrina, after 911, after bush’s failure after failure after lie after lie…you believe he got a majority of the votes and we shouldn’t arrest him.
Frankly, you’re giving away our country by believing in fairytales until there is no Constitution left.
reality….a dem or a rep gets elected in november. Who do you want in charge?
Kucinich/Feingold ‘08
War Is Over If You Want It
Obama was selected by the media and he just voted to cover up bush’s crimes and violate the 4th amendment. No, I don’t believe he’s very different from the republicans. The corruption will continue until congress becomes afraid of the people. They clearly are not, otherwise Obama would’ve been terrified to vote to cover bush’s crimes and take $360,000 from the telecoms.
He wasn’t the least bit afraid of what we’d do because he knows we are powerless. The system has been rendered moot and the moneyed interests decide the outcomes. MSNBC baldly proved that by going to court to block Kucinich’s participation in the debates.
Basically, the congress and the media are simply saying, “So? wtf are you gonna do about it?”
The deluded run back to their congressional race grassroots numbers, demographics and political polls and cook up some arcane theory about how we’ll get ‘em this election…provided the exit polls are consistent, blah..blah…
Meanwhile, the moneyed interests pull another fast one; and the same deluded will repair to their charts and try to figure out where they lost in a rigged system, forming more arcane excuses and starting the “grassroots” thing all over again so we’ll get ‘em next time. D’ohh. Lather, rinse, repeat, lose.
And the elections will remain secret and corporate-owned.
July 13th, 2008 at 1:48 pm30. Fred Says:Odd, you seem to be criticizing someone for being rude. btw, You suck at internet debating.
That wasn’t a debate Fred, that was a slapdown. Smell the difference.
July 13th, 2008 at 1:52 pmFred said: We will never get the justice we all want if you give the republicans the power to continue.
The same fisa changes that included immunity for the telecoms reinstated strict rules that bush must follow in using fisa in the future…..because of the democrats. How does that make them the same?
July 13th, 2008 at 2:03 pmI strongly suggest you read a little more about what the FISA bill gave away. You could start with Senator Feingold’s article in Counterpunch, and move to the L.A. Times article, about how reporters/journalists overseas are likely to be monitored, and how that stifles sources of information who fear reprisals once they are identified. You cannot have confidential sources when the Government is spying on those sources. So, potential confidential sources will not be able to get assurance that the journalist is not under surveillance.
There is so much more, and your point that we have to vote Dem. is well taken, but misses an important point.
Obama intentionally courted progressives with his “I am standing by Senator Feingold on FISA” speech during the primaries. His about face spurned those very progressives he courteed, and it was a political calculation that he would gain more votes than he would lose.
It’s that ’same old politics’ position of ‘it’s more important to win than to stand on principle’. That assumes, however, that taking a strong position against FISA was a vote loser.
It could have had the opposite effect (like ‘thank god; a politician who does what he says he will do’)
As to the first sentence, just drop the second half, and replace it with:
We will never get the justice we all want if you keep electing leaders who are afraid to confront the powers that be.
hanshiro Says:
I don’t consider questioning your reasoning to be an insult….I do consider calling someone a dildo to be an insult. I’m not here to compliment you.
It’s called throwing the baby out with the bathwater.
Yes, but we must all be more involved. Do you really think there won’t be more people going to the polls this cycle just because of the economy if nothing else. There is a good chance that record numbers of black people will vote this election also….who will they vote for.
If you think the system is beyond saving then what’s the point? Why would you push for a 3rd party if you think the system is broken? What’s the point?
Great idea and I would support it 100% but it’s not real. It won’t happen, sorry.
I voted for Obama.
No, the republicans are doing this and now is your chance to do something. You can support what will be a tremendous change in the way things are being done in the US by electing new dems and a dem president or you can help the republicans stay in power.
If America had given the dems a supermajority in 06 you would be seeing a completely different result.
July 13th, 2008 at 2:03 pmAssurances from Reid have roughly the market value of used condoms.
July 13th, 2008 at 2:05 pmOh, I see, you are here to exercise your superior mental powers over the rest of us. I found it to be a pathetic attempt to put someone down just because they questioned something you said.
July 13th, 2008 at 2:07 pmGreat post #31 hanshiro….Look’s like we are of the same mind set…All my buddies and I were for Kucinich first…Now look’s like we will go green, still have 3 plus month’s to write in our guy Kucinich, just know we wont support the other two…Blessings
July 13th, 2008 at 2:09 pmIf America had given the dems a supermajority in 06 you would be seeing a completely different result.
Maybe. The Repugs had a pretty good majority prior to Nov. 2006
July 13th, 2008 at 2:09 pmand they were unable to get retroactive immunity passed. It took the Dems to do that.
What does that tell you?
Wonder how the black’s will vote.? Someone posed that question..Well I can’t say how the majority of the black’s will vote or the latinos either but I can tell you 3 black’s and two latinos along with me will not vote for Obama…My fishing buddies and I have been in the trenche’s and we vote..All of us are well informed and livid…We have had enough and aren’t going to take any more, not only are we ready to throw the baby out with the bath water we are going to throw the tub out as well….
Good post’s Funky P…….Blessings all
July 13th, 2008 at 2:24 pmTells me that it was a big secret and they saw no need to try for immunity until the changes in 06 and some degree of oversight was restored. You wouldn’t even know about it if it weren’t for the few good dems that we do have.
Look, I agree that the dems have dropped the ball, actually since Carter but to blame them for current events is just wrong.
Consider this:
Would we be in Iraq now if Gore had been elected?
would we be in the financial crisis we now face?
would 9/11 even have happened?
would the stock market in 08 be in the same place it was in 01?
would we have two or three more regressive supreme court justices?
Would our health care be in the dire shape it is in now?
I submit that the answer to all of those is no. The dems did not get us here and they are the only chance we have to turn things around.
We have a bunce of dems that should be run out of office by better progressives but our only choice to change things is to elect Obama. That is just the way it is. It aint great and it definatly aint the best we could do but it is what it is.
July 13th, 2008 at 2:25 pmTO Wayne A. Schneider:
I USED to believe all that politically strategic logic too.
But, I prefer that WE-THE-PEOPLE begin to set the agendas, and stop playing-along with conventional political-wisdom (oxymoron?). Instead of being spectators (the dog who is being wagged by our collective tails) and Monday morning QBs, let’s get off the sideline, and onto the field of play. I don’t mean we all run for office. I mean we become proactive in recognizing and telling it like it is … BEFORE the politicians and the pundits tell US how we should interpret things (’if he does this, she’ll do that, and we’ll lose something’, yadda, yadda, yadda). No more mental-masturbation.
TO ‘HANSHIRO’: WHOO-RAH!
Agreed.
I am going to vote for Obama. But, after his bending-over on FISA it is a vote against McCain rather than a proactive support.
Here in Oregon I will actively support Merkley (D) against Gordon Smith (Incumbent R). I will also actively support Dems versus Repukes everywhere in HOPES of an outcome which provides DEMS with such a Super-Majority as to eliminate ANY/ALL PLAUSIBLE EXCUSES moving forward. Secondarily, it will FEEL-GOOD to see Repukes crushed like cockroaches.
Once the PLAUSIBLE EXCUSE factor has become nil for DEMS, WE-THE-PEOPLE can apply a different form of leverage because there simply won’t be anymore excuses for the DEMS spineless behavior. THEN, if the Pelosi-Reid types are retained THEN that will call for a different tact. November is only a few months away now … and I’m gonna give it through January.
TO DuncanIdaho: Idaho, where the men are men, and the sheep are nervous, oh no, that’s Montana, sorry! Nader??? I had you pegged as a Ron Paul type, all the way! SOO-PRIZE, SOO-PRIZE!
Yo’DuncanIdaho, riddle me this Batman, how is a vote for a guy who has run for Prez about 47 damn times and lost each time a so-called ‘radical‘ play? Sheez! It is more like, same-old, same-old! Catch a clue. Geezus, isn’t Nader older than McGrandPa? They are both old enough to fart dust. Yeah, that’s some real serious ‘radical‘ you got goin’ on IdaHO. Gimmie a break. Throwing your vote away … yeah, that ‘radical’ all right … radically friggin’ STUPID, anyway. And Idaho, you speak about ‘Americans’ as though you are not one yourself, whattsup wit’ dat, IdaHO?
July 13th, 2008 at 2:28 pm36. Fred Says: Oh, I see, you are here to exercise your superior mental powers over the rest of us. I found it to be a pathetic attempt to put someone down just because they questioned something you said.
You seem to take bilbo’s slapdown uniquely personally there, fred, for ’some reason.’ *cough*multipleprofiles*cough* I do owe you an apology, though, fred; I somehow gave you the impression that I give a rat’s @ss what you think.
Terribly sorry.
(P.S. Thanks Witch1!)
July 13th, 2008 at 2:30 pmFunky P is wrong simply because Chimpy didn’t start seeking retroactive immunity until May 2007. That was after Karl’s math was proven wrong. There was no need for retroactive immunity with a republiscum congress that did no oversight and gave Chimpy everything he wanted. Bush returned the favor by not vetoing any bills until after the Democrats gained the majority.
So what does that tell me? That tells me that the republiscums figured that with the caging of voters and the DOJ falsely charging Democrats with crimes and the rigged voting machines and who knows what other illegal dirty tricks would keep them in control of Congress.
July 13th, 2008 at 2:41 pmAlthough I take it as a compliment to be compared to bilbo it just makes it more clear that you are new here. Bilbo’s posts are usually very much to the point, unlike your ramblings about a revolution that you wish would happen but won’t.
Who do you guys hope to enlist into your disasterous move this time? It was tried and it failed miserably in 2000. We wound up with bush.
Insanity is doing the same thing time after time while expecting different results.
July 13th, 2008 at 2:43 pm36. Fred Says:
hanshiro Says:
That wasn’t a debate Fred, that was a slapdown. Smell the difference.
Oh, I see, you are here to exercise your superior mental powers over the rest of us.
Nah, just you & your smarter sister bilbo; though I get more metal stimulation from the decision, “paper or plastic?”
July 13th, 2008 at 2:48 pmSure you’re not a republican? Sure sound like one.
July 13th, 2008 at 2:48 pmTells me that it was a big secret and they saw no need to try for immunity until the changes in 06 and some degree of oversight was restored. You wouldn’t even know about it if it weren’t for the few good dems that we do have.
First; the N.Y. Times revealed the program in 2005, not the dems. Second; they Reps tried to pass retroactive immunity when they controlled congress but were unable to. The Dems fought the program at that time. Why did they acquiesce after they had control? What leverage was used to get them to come around. It wasn’t that the ‘revised’ program was an improvement or a compromise (according to Feingold, Constitutional Law Professor Turley, and many others)Just as Pelosi took impeachment off the table, the Democratic election strategy appears to be to ‘appear strong on terrorism’. Appearing strong here meaning capitulation to the neo-con agenda.
In essence, the spying constituted (no pun intended ) a felony; Bush also said he would continue the (illegal) program, at the time. Since the ‘Gang of eight’ were the only members of Congress who knew about the program, and since the program itself was illegal, the were complicit in the commission of multiple felonies, so immunity for telecoms is in a sense immunity for them as well.
Would we be in Iraq now if Gore had been elected?
July 13th, 2008 at 3:03 pmwould we be in the financial crisis we now face?
would 9/11 even have happened?
would the stock market in 08 be in the same place it was in 01?
would we have two or three more regressive supreme court justices?
Would our health care be in the dire shape it is in now?
Gore was elected; I know it’s only a minor point, but there it is.
Financial crisis is how the Republican party functions. All major recessions of the modern era came under Republican Presidents.
You cannot justify neocon agenda with 9/11. Even the telecom spying PRECEEDED 9/11. Did you know that?
Look, you are preaching to the choir if your argument is we would be better off under a Democratic Prez, but a whole lot of people are really sick of voting for ‘the lesser of two evils’
Obama held out hope that he was different.
He isn’t. That’s just fine with you, but some people are pretty pissed off.
Have a good day, I’ve got a gig :>)
I agree with this statement and it explains a lot. bush would have villified them as traitors, remember this was right after 9/11 and everyone was willing to cooperate with this administration……too much if you ask me.
July 13th, 2008 at 3:15 pm46. Fred Says: Sure you’re not..heehaw..heehaw..
look, bilbo, or fred or whomever you’re pretending to be: You challenged, childishly, a source of information and got your @ss handed to you. Baiting me with “you must be a (fill in blank)” or some other taunt to salve your bruised ego doesn’t make you sound smart, just desperate.
Obama’s in the telecom’s pocket. I understand completely why people like you would advocate for the status quo: It works for corrupt dems like $360,000 Obama or “impeachment off the table” Pelosi or “We’re trying” Reid. Unfortunately, “better than McCain and the republicans” ain’t much of a rallying cry. The dems are a collective failure and, yes, we need to reject this perpetual fraud that masquerades as a “just” system. Corporations own the vote results. bush loses $$$billions. 9-11 money trail remains uninvestigated. In fact, none of the truly imperative crimes have been investigated under the dems. They gave bush plenty of warning to shred evidence. (Remember the shredding truck outside the Cheney compound?)
Fact is, the dems are defending the status quo because they are up to their necks in it too. It’s unsurprising that, like the weasels before the Revolutionary war who wanted to remain loyal to the crown and status quo, people like you want to remain loyal to the idiots who’ve overseen the suspension of Habeas Corpus and the suspension of the 4th amendment. The rise of torture (Pelosi knew of waterboarding in 2002 and didn’t speak up, preferring a “me too” afterthought on someone else’s memo.)
Read Glen Greenwald. The dems are, by and large, a fraud and a money-first-Constitution-last group of spineless whores. Remember Conyers before the ‘06 elections? “Constitution In Crisis!” Remember Conyers after the ‘06 elections? “er…nevermind…”
Everyone knows the republicans are America’s Nazi party, replete with torture, semantics to excuse their crimes (which the Nuremberg trials didn’t tolerate, but our congress is just dandy with…) and yet, the b*stard dems sit around and give bush all he wants to the tune of a 9% approval rating.
Translation? The dems leadershi(t) sucks, and sucks @ss. They are not our only hope because they are not an alternative, just a different breed of corrupt. Please, explain Obama’s FISA cave-in and his $360,000 FU to the Constitution. Sounds exactly like Colin Powell’s conscience-salving 1995 Jaguar that was presented to him by Bandar bush.
Meet the new boss, same as the old boss…
July 13th, 2008 at 3:33 pmhanshiro Says:
your mantra seems to be hopelessness and anger. Try to contribute to moving us forward instead of helping them take us backwards.
maybe if you had helped conyers have the majority he required to do something about it we would be in a different place. But you didn’t so here we are.
please suggest a replacement for conyers oh know it all.
I tire of your whining about how bad things are and how there is nothing we can do or offering shooting ourselves in the foot again as a solution….
July 13th, 2008 at 3:42 pm50. Fred Says:maybe if you had helped conyers have the majority he required to do something about it we would be in a different place. But you didn’t so here we are.
Fraud,er, Fred….projecting patently false statements in order to make an irrelevant point doesn’t bolster your position, it makes you desperate to be an apologist for the failure dems.Conyers can’t seem to find a reason to arrest bush, but he can arrest Cindy Sheehan for presenting him with a petition and demanding he act. The dems are cowards.
Replacement for Conyers? Dodd, Feingold, Wexler, Waxman. (Not too many to choose from, unfortunately.) Or anyone else willing to unrelentingly go after bush.
I tire of your whining about how bad things..heehaw..heehaw…
Things are bad and the dems are sitting with their thumbs up their @sses allowing it and voting for it. The 9%…NINE PERCENT CONGRESS is a dem majorty. Record low.
Wake up bilbofred! The Constitution is aflame and while the republicans are holding the torch, the idiot dems are bringing the marshmallows. Only a rube would believe this game isn’t rigged.
Time to boot, then reboot. America 2.0.
July 13th, 2008 at 4:12 pmCorrection: Replacement for Conyers? Waxman, Kucinich, Wexler, Robert Scott. (Not too many to choose from, unfortunately.) Or anyone else willing to unrelentingly go after bush. (Dodd & Feingold are Senate)
July 13th, 2008 at 4:28 pmtom @ 2 Says:
I doubt that [Lieberman] could be re-elected dog-catcher after his embarrassing performance over the past two years.
Not Democratic dog-catcher, certainly — but what if he were to run for Republican dog-catcher?
July 13th, 2008 at 4:46 pmLet us not forget palosi by her own admission knew about the wire tapping long before 9/11…Guess she had been listening to some phone call’s with bush as well…Blessings
July 13th, 2008 at 5:09 pmBloggerRadio.com I really don’t give a shit who you “vote” for. Please, knock yourself out.
And NO, I am NOT an American, thanks.
You seriously need to investigate modern pharmaceuticals, dude.
July 13th, 2008 at 7:09 pmI hope the dems don’t think I’m are as dumb as the repugs.
This should be a no brainer.
July 13th, 2008 at 10:56 pmForTruth is correct–Lieberman isn’t a Democrat, though he caucuses with the Ds (whatever that means). He *technically* is an Independent, though it makes mockery of that label. I’m surprised that he wasn’t identified as R-CT, which is more realistic.
July 14th, 2008 at 8:08 amWhat was Connecticut thinking?
This guy is an Isreali.
A war-monging one at that.
July 14th, 2008 at 9:56 amLieberman is not a democrat. SO how could he be outed? Bob Novak messing up his facts again I guess.
Well I guess they could strip him of his chairmanship but they cant kick him out of their party if he’s not even a member of it.
July 14th, 2008 at 1:10 pm