REPORT: Joe Lieberman — The Progressive Who Lost His Way
REPORT: Joe Lieberman — The Progressive Who Lost His Way
Despite his strong endorsement of Sen. John McCain’s (R-AZ) right-wing policy platform in the 2008 presidential election, a number of prominent Democratic senators are now defending Sen. Joe Lieberman’s (I-CT) position of leadership in the Democratic caucus, arguing that he is a key ally in furthering the progressive agenda.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV), for instance, argued this past weekend that “Joe Lieberman is one of the most progressive people ever to come from the state of Connecticut.” Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) added, “I think we had to just let bygones be bygones. We’re going to need him on healthcare and energy independence and education and a whole lot of other things.”
While Lieberman has supported progressive policies in the past, including advocating on behalf of the environment and civil rights, his recent record demonstrates that he’s a progressive no more.
In a new report, ThinkProgress documents Lieberman’s significant shift to the right in both foreign and domestic policy. Some examples from the report:
– Said Investigating Response To Katrina Would Be Playing ‘Gotcha’: Lieberman said he was not interested in “looking back, and assigning blame would be a waste of Congress’ time.” Lieberman said he was reluctant to mount an investigation of the failures of the initial response, saying “We don’t want to play ‘gotcha’ anymore.” [Chicago Tribune, 1/20/07]
– Claimed That A Progressive Economic Stimulus Would Lead To A Depression: Speaking at Dartmouth University, “Lieberman compared Democratic presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama’s economic plan to former president Herbert Hoover’s approach, which he said ‘turned a recession into a depression.’” [The Dartmouth, 10/24/08]
– Supported Attorney General Alberto Gonzales To The Bitter End: Reacting to Gonzales’s resignation, Lieberman commented, “The Attorney General’s resignation removes a distraction from the important work of the Department of Justice,” but added, “As he leaves public service, the Attorney General deserves our appreciation for his work for our nation.” [Senate Website, 5/14/08]
Read the full report HERE. Download a PDF version of this report HERE.
Sort Comments By: Top Rated | Date
125 Responses to “REPORT: Joe Lieberman — The Progressive Who Lost His Way”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Sen. Joe Lieberman (Traitor-CT)
Fixed it for ya, TP.
November 11th, 2008 at 10:03 amJoe must Go
November 11th, 2008 at 10:04 amToss him, Reid. If you don't, then we truly know you are useless...acutally we already knew that.
Let Kennedy do it. Not only would Lieberman deserve it but it would be fun for the rest of us to watch.
November 11th, 2008 at 10:04 amNo one in their right mind thinks Lieberman is a progressive.
November 11th, 2008 at 10:05 amI've got my fingers and toes crossed that Obama's progressive side starts coming to the fore, and soon.
Joe apparently knows where some bodies are buried....
November 11th, 2008 at 10:08 amWith all the other things that need attention, I say let Lieberman make up his own mind. I think that Reid should tell Joe that he will be removed from chairing any committee related to homeland security or military affairs. Period. Based upon his seniority, he may be considered for other chairmanship assignments in education, technology or whatever.
Based upon those cold, hard facts, Lieberman could then decide whether he wants to stay in the democratic caucus and play nice or whether he wants to castrate himself, join the republican caucus and kill his political career.
I really don't think it serves the democrats' interests to do anything more than this.
November 11th, 2008 at 10:10 amI can understand that the dem majority is narrow. And lets face it, the dems don't vote in lockstep blocks, so having a few extra votes on your side is a good idea.
So I can understand flattering Lieberman to keep the door open. I could see the ridiculous statements of dem senators toward Liebermman as politics. After all, politics is doing what you have to.
But how far do you go ?
Is Ronald Reagan the next Liberal icon ?
November 11th, 2008 at 10:11 amIt seems like the only people who are going to make Joe Lieberman go away are the voters of Conneticut.
We're counting on you guys to get of this person once and for all.
November 11th, 2008 at 10:15 amThe LOBBY says he stays....the end.
November 11th, 2008 at 10:16 amSen. Joe Lieberman (Traitor-Israel)
Fixed it for ya, Zooey.
November 11th, 2008 at 10:18 amSuggested That Obama Could Be A Marxist: When asked if Obama is “a Marxist as Bill Kristol says might be the case,” Lieberman replied, “Well, you know, I must say that’s a good question.”
No, it's not a good question. It's a stupid question (yes, there are stupid questions).
I wish you Republicans would go read some non-fiction books on History, Political Science, General Science and Logic.
You're all afraid of Karl Marx without having one sigle clue as to who he was or what he and Engels wrote about the death of Capitalism. It wasn't 'totalitarian dictatorships', but rather socialistic (owned by the people) Democracies.
If you think Socialism is such a bad thing, then why aren't you fighting against to privatize our military? Couldn't you just imagine what would have happened to your War on Terror in this last stock market crash? Silly little ignorant boys.
November 11th, 2008 at 10:22 amIt's an interesting academic question whether he actually believes the crap he's spouting, or whether he was just doing it to support his good friends the Republicans.
November 11th, 2008 at 10:22 amIt's a question best contemplated with him out of office, however.
Maybe Joe threatened to spill the beans about the jubilant judaic moving men dancing on top of their van across the river from Manhatten, or the mob of art students living in the same apartment complex as some of the plotting passengers, or what Dick Cheney was doing at Norad that morning.
November 11th, 2008 at 10:23 amRevision: If you think Socialism is such a bad thing, then why aren’t you fighting to privatize our military?
November 11th, 2008 at 10:24 amSimilarly, Sen. Evan Bayh (D-IN) said, “I think we had to just let bygones be bygones. We’re going to need him on healthcare and energy independence and education and a whole lot of other things.”
__________________________________________________________
Wrong, Evan. We don't need Lieberman on health care. Not if his solution is McCain's solution.
We don't need Lieberman on energy independence. Not if his only solutions are to "drill, baby, drill", and to bomb Middle East countries.
We don't need Lieberman on education. Not while he supports private school vouchers that will only serve to suck money out of public schools and let them erode.
It's hard for me to figure out what "whole lot of other things" we need him for. Perhaps you can give some more examples? On issues where he's actually progressive?
November 11th, 2008 at 10:24 amMy inside the Beltway sources are telling me RAHM is twisting arms behind the scenes to keep Lieberman onboard.
November 11th, 2008 at 10:26 amMay I rescind my 2004 vote?
November 11th, 2008 at 10:26 amThat strip of photos at the top of the thread...
Is just me, or does the first one on the left look like it came from "The Godfather"?
'Course, the 3rd one, from the left, DEFINITELY came from a flick titled "The Kiss".
November 11th, 2008 at 10:28 amhttp://thinkprogress.org/lieberman-not-progressive/
Excellent job, TP. Well done. That report should be sent to every Democratic Senator AND Congressperson. Everyone needs to be reminded that LIEberman is not part of the Left, the Democratic Party, or a Progressive. Good riddance...
November 11th, 2008 at 10:29 amOne big difference between Republicans and Democrats is that if Joe was a Republican, he would be long gone!
"Get rid of that fu(ker now!" - Joe Scarborough
JOE MUST GO!!!
November 11th, 2008 at 10:30 amI hope his Joementum rolls him right out of the Democratic party. If for nothing else, he deserves to go for coining "Joementum."
November 11th, 2008 at 10:31 amNo Think Fast to start the day today? Oh, well.
Happy Veteran's day to my fellow vets. Speaking of which, do any of you Vietnam era vets recall what the mileage and comrats allowance/day was? I can't remember. Trivia, but I had jury duty last month and the mileage rate was $0.05/mile, which brought to mind what was the mileage allowance/mile the military alloted back then.
November 11th, 2008 at 10:33 amI am not as knowledgeable as most of you I'm sure, when it comes to our government.
November 11th, 2008 at 10:41 amSo, in my uneducated opinion, this, along with other actions or lack of action from the democrats in recent years, is further proof that this is not a two party system.
The senator from Tel Aviv should be thrown out, he only backed McCain because he was the most likely to unleash a nuclear holocaust upon all of Israel's regional enemies.
November 11th, 2008 at 10:42 amfixed another one TP:
Emanuel (Isr.)
November 11th, 2008 at 10:43 amEven with the overwhelming results of our recent election the Democrats still have no balls. If they let that disgusting two-faced dolt back in the fold I guess it means that playing politics is more important than showing and exercizing the strength they've won. Idiots.
November 11th, 2008 at 10:43 amThe Dims aren't gonna dump Loser Joe...
For all incumbents, incumbency is the highest value.
No incumbent wants to see any other incumbent suffer reverses, no matter the ostensible partisan differences...It challenges their own security...
November 11th, 2008 at 10:51 amKay Says:
May I rescind my 2004 vote?
move around much?
btw, how did cynthia do in massachusetts?
November 11th, 2008 at 10:52 amOh, I get. The only viable explanation is..
He was a plant, a mole, a spy for our side.
Either that, or our reps have seriously lost it.
November 11th, 2008 at 10:53 ammove around much?
November 11th, 2008 at 10:54 amwhat does this mean?
Morning Uncle Ho,
Tip of the Hat to you and others that have served or are still serving our Great Country.
Thank you!
November 11th, 2008 at 10:55 amAre you all aware that Obama has come out in support of Lieberman staying with the Democratic caucus? Bill Clinton is making calls on his behalf as well.
The Politico) President-elect Barack Obama has expressed support for keeping Sen. Joe Lieberman (ID-Conn.) in the Democratic Caucus, although it's unclear if Obama favors Lieberman still remaining chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. Obama served on Lieberman's committee during the last two years.
Huffington Post first reported today that Obama "has informed party officials that he wants Joe Lieberman to continue caucusing with the Democrats in the 111th Congress,' although the report added that it was "unclear whether Obama would be comfortable with Lieberman maintaining his current committee post."
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/10/politics/politico/thecrypt/main4591108.shtml
November 11th, 2008 at 10:58 amkay - have you forgotten that you live, and vote, in the safe blue state of massachusetts?
so, how did cynthia do?
November 11th, 2008 at 11:00 amDidn't it say it voted for Cynthia in Minnesota?
November 11th, 2008 at 11:01 amRandomChaos; Thank you for your sentiment, but the REAL thanks should go to my local draft board- after all, it was THEIR idea.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:02 am6,528 people voted for Cynthia McKinney in Massachuettes in this election.
I guess everyone now can make fun of me for voting for her.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:03 amI really don't care.
There's a level of coyness in the Reid comments that allows me to believe that there's an effort to establish an atmosphere receptive to potential 'crossovers'. Collins and Snowe would, I'm guessing, be more likely to make the step to a party that can demonstrate real 'inclusiveness'.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:05 amRight back at ya, brother. I served 90-94 and I don't remember what mileage and comrats were. I do remember it wasn't squat.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:06 amTime for Conn. voters to throw this bum out.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:06 amHe's a mole, alright. A GOP plant, probably a turn-coat since around '94. There's no way that the Bush power base in Conn would have tolerated a 'real threat' to go unopposed, which "Jaffa" Joe was, for all practical purposes, in all his re-election campaigns. Conn GOPukes NEVER ran a serious candidate against him...
He's been passing information tot he Pukes for the past 15 years...
November 11th, 2008 at 11:06 amWhen Mann Coulter said she would welcome LIEberman, it's a sure sign he's not party of the Democratic Party.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:08 amUnca Ho: re your query, viz mileage. Iirc (I was in from '64-68, and usually caught hops when traveling stateside), it was about $.03/mi...food per diem, for my rank (e-4), was about $12/day, iirc...it's been a LONG time...
November 11th, 2008 at 11:08 amPLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE Democrats... by all means toos him out of his leadership roles!
We will welcome him with OPEN ARMS.
You dopes, it only helps us if Senator Lieberman gets the axe!
November 11th, 2008 at 11:09 amI don't mind if Joe stays in the caucus, the dems can always use someone serving fresh coffee, but to give him the chair of a significant committee is self abuse. If he isn't punished for ACTIVELY campaigning against the party leadership then what keeps anyone from going against party policy or leadership and then claiming the "Leiberman exception" when it comes to consequences? Having authority (chairmanship) always includes responsibility and consequences. Lieberman has not shown responsibility and now refuses to accept the consequesnces of his action. Great work if you can get it.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:11 amI wish the Democratic Party would make a stand on Lieberman. Endorsing the opposition party candidate is not a big problem. Campaigning for the opposition party starts to get into risky territory. Blatantly SMEARING your own parties' Presidential candidate AND down-ticket candidates is the height of political betrayal.
Lieberman knew damn well what he was doing. He gambled and lost, and now needs to face some kind of punishment. I don't think stripping his committee chairmanship is even that harsh compared to what Lieberman has done. Boot him from the Democratic Caucus, or you are sending a message to the next Joe Lieberman that there will be no punishment for blatant betrayal. Do nothing, and you'll invite this every election year.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:11 amReich-wingers always welcome in trash.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:11 amThe good Senator from Conn. has more integrity in his pinky than Senator Harry (Pinky) Reid!
November 11th, 2008 at 11:12 amIf Lieberman survives Obama will look like the biggest fool in Washington.
I disagree. We have entered a new era -- it's called separation of powers. It's a very unique idea where the Executive Branch is accountable for its own organization and performance. Likewise, the Congress.
Personally, I think it would be silly for Obama to meddle in the Lieberman mess. I say Reid should just give Smokin' Joe an opportunity to shoot himself in the foot. Given his past performance, he will.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:13 amTim Vaculik Says:
The good Senator from Conn. has more integrity....
Anyone that kisses the arse of the biggest failed presidency in US history in herr dubyah and biggest failed bid for presidency in McGrampa has zero integrity and zero credibility.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:14 amWould that be his stinky pinky?
November 11th, 2008 at 11:16 amThere's a great job waiting for Joe (I-Israel) Lieberman in Tel Aviv. Go getum Joe, or you might wind up in an unmarked wooden crate unloading in the Tel Aviv harbor.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:17 amTim Vaculik Says:
The good Senator from Conn. has more integrity in his pinky than Senator Harry (Pinky) Reid!
Oh, you mean the GOOD Senator, Christopher Dodd.
Why didn't you say so?
November 11th, 2008 at 11:18 amI don't have a problem with them allowing LIEberman to caucus with them as long as they strip him of the chairmanship of Homeland Security. There is that saying about keeping your enemies close.
But, I am hoping that Obama's conciliatory attitude towards LIEberman isn't going to roll over to the Bush Crime Family. If the Democrats don't establish the fact that there has to be accountability in government, I will be sorely disappointed in them to say the least.
My only worry about allowing LIEberman to caucus with the Democrats is that he may be operating as a mole for the Republicans. I think that LIEberman knows he is NOT going to be re-elected and he may have a sweetheart deal for retirement with the Republicans.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:22 amIn 2006 The Dems stabbed Ned Lamont in the back!
In 2006, in his re-election campaign for Senator, Lieberman lost the Democratic primary bid to Ned Lamont, but ran as an Independent in the general election …
Five Democratic Senators maintained their support for Lieberman, and Lieberman also received the strong support of former Senator and Democratic stalwart Bob Kerrey, who offered to stump for him.[111] Democratic minority leader Harry Reid, while endorsing Lamont, promised Lieberman that he would retain his committee positions and seniority if he prevailed in the general election.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:23 amTim Vaculik,
Like he's not helping you now??? His attacks on Obama and other Democrats have even more credibility if he's still in the Democratic Caucus. Removing that makes Lieberman just another in the long line of Republicans attacking Democrats.
Imagine if Colin Powell (you know, the honorable war hero your side now calls a racist and traitor) for example had never been a member of any Republican administration, and then endorsed Obama. Noboby would have cared if a longtime Democrat endorsed the Democratic candidate. His message carries more weight if he's criticizing members of his own party.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:23 amDidn’t it say it voted for Cynthia in Minnesota?
So, now I am referred to as an, it?
November 11th, 2008 at 11:26 amThe good Senator from Conn. has more integrity in his pinky than Senator Harry (Pinky) Reid!
HAHA! That's a good one.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:26 amIf Senator 'integrity' truly has any, he would still vote for the progressive agenda, no matter who he caucuses with. The fact is, he's for sale to the highest bidder. If he doesn't get what he wants from the Dems, he'll go over to the dark side (Republicans) and vote with them.
That's integrity?
...that's not very nice. You got what you wanted : Obama as President. What more do you want?
November 11th, 2008 at 11:27 amLieberman: Palin Will Win "With God's Help"
"She's so strong, she's so capable, she's so competent," Lieberman told the cheering crowd. Emphasizing her "faith," he added that she is someone who "with your help--and God's help--will be the next vice president of the United States."
November 11th, 2008 at 11:27 amThey're just toying with the rat. He's not getting the chair of DHS. This is good politics by Obama, kind of a reverse concern troll. He comes out like the patriarch forgiving the wayward brat, while Durbin and Schumer take straignt razors to him. I can here the theme music from Godfather I in the background....
November 11th, 2008 at 11:28 amTim Vaculik Says:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE Democrats… by all means toos him out of his leadership roles!
We will welcome him with OPEN ARMS.
This is rich. The Republicans now realize that they cannot win new seats in Congress through election. They are salivating over picking up one measley seat in the Senate through defection of a traitor.
A bit of advice, if you allow Lieberman into the Republican caucas, don't turn your back on him.
What a gang of losers. The GOP is history, they just haven't realized it yet.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:30 amIntegrity Joe thought McSame was going to win, and had a Cabinet position with his name on it.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:31 amI say, let Obama appoint integrity Joe as Ambassador to Israel and let Ned Lamont take Joe's seat!
kay = freeman = RHF?
November 11th, 2008 at 11:34 amHow's that veto-proof majority in the U.S. Senate coming, folks? heh, heh, heh
November 11th, 2008 at 11:34 amHoover was a marxist, who'da thunkit.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:37 amWe don't need a veto proof majority dumbass. Barack Obama is President.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:37 amTim Vaculik Says:
How’s that veto-proof majority in the U.S. Senate coming, folks? heh, heh, heh
__________
Dunno... I'll have to check.
How's that Permanent Republican Minority doing, Timmeh?
BTW... help yourself to a fresh pair of Depends, Li'l Feller. You look like you could use 'em. Don't worry... we stocked up before the election. Figured we'd need 'em for trolls like you. We were right, huh?
November 11th, 2008 at 11:41 amDr. Hussein Matt Says:
Didn’t it say it voted for Cynthia in Minnesota?
Dearest Dr. Hussein Matt,
I know you consider me a troll because I do not subscribe to your political political views - lock and step. But, at last look we were still living in a Democracy. So to refer to a human being as an "it" in my opinion is reprehensible. I feel so sorry for you. You cannot even allow for varying degrees of opinion. So, in your wee little brain, troll equals "it" status.
love,
November 11th, 2008 at 11:41 amKay
Tim Vaculik Says:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How’s that veto-proof majority in the U.S. Senate coming, folks? heh, heh, heh
How is Karl Rove's Permanent Republican Majority coming, loser?
November 11th, 2008 at 11:41 amTim Vaculik,
We need a veto-proof Senate majority with Obama in the White House???
You must mean a FILLIBUSTER proof majority. I think Dems should call that bluff. Let the Republicans spend the Obama Presidency trying to fillibuster Democratic proposals. They'll lose even more seats in 2010 and 2012. Let the American people, who are in need of major help right now, sit and watch the Republican obstruct everything that can help them.
I'm not afraid of those tactics at all.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:42 amJoe has his snout deep in the bunghole of that fat jesus-weasel, Hagee.
'Nuff said.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:42 amFDR's policies prolonged Depression by 7 years, UCLA economists calculate
"President Roosevelt believed that excessive competition was responsible for the Depression by reducing prices and wages, and by extension reducing employment and demand for goods and services,"
"High wages and high prices in an economic slump run contrary to everything we know about market forces in economic downturns," Ohanian said. "As we've seen in the past several years, salaries and prices fall when unemployment is high. By artificially inflating both, the New Deal policies short-circuited the market's self-correcting forces."
Huh oh!! Looks like Liberal-Socialist policies aren’t good for the economy. What a freaking surprise. Hahahahahahaha
November 11th, 2008 at 11:43 amTim Vaculik Says:
We will welcome him with OPEN ARMS.
Just like when Nixon and the Republican Party embraced all the racists who left the Democratic Party when the Civil Rights Bill was passed?
You can have him.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:44 amBrianFL Says:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Vaculik,
How’s that veto-proof majority in the U.S. Senate coming, folks? heh, heh, heh
We need a veto-proof Senate majority with Obama in the White House???
You must mean a FILLIBUSTER proof majority.
Tim doesn't know the difference. Republicans are people who failed 8th grade Civics class.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:45 amShayne Says:
kay = freeman = RHF?
Not at all. Kay has been around awhile and is clearly neither freeman or RHF. He's been pretty consistent in his viewpoint and has, IMO, put up with a lot of abuse because he intended to vote third party.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:45 amHuh oh!! Looks like Liberal-Socialist policies aren’t good for the economy. What a freaking surprise. Hahahahahahaha
Even better, it happened during a Republican presidency!!
November 11th, 2008 at 11:48 amHey Kay. Okay, we get it. You're a rugged individualist for voting Green. Congrats! Nice going! Good job! Woo hooo!
Is that what you're looking for?
November 11th, 2008 at 11:48 amuhhhbama Says:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...the New Deal policies short-circuited the market’s self-correcting forces.”
Yeah, we know. The universities are full of Milton Freidman supply-siders. Big deal. The market's failure to "self-correct" caused the Great Depression, and the market's failure to "self-correct" has caused this catastorphe.
The problem with right-wing economics is, and always has been that it ignores labor and worships capital. It is a pyramid scheme that always comes crashing down after the wealthy rape the system.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:51 amXisithrus Says:
How does that change the fact that the policies you support are some how any different than FDR’s?
November 11th, 2008 at 11:51 amIt's an old boys club. Liverworst must have something on Reid and Bayh in order to get such stroking comments.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:51 am#79: love the sarcasm. Just would like the lurking "Dr." to come back and face the ever menacing "it"
November 11th, 2008 at 11:51 amgummitch Says:
Kay...put up with a lot of abuse because he intended to vote third party.
not from me, today...
my questioning regarded this comment:
Kay Says:
May I rescind my 2004 vote?
guessing that meant kay (he/she/it?) voted in connecticut in 04... recently arguing about voting mckinney in, and because, massachusetts was a safe blue state...
i just wondered - "move around much?"
that's all...
November 11th, 2008 at 11:52 amI would at least like them to strip Lieberman of his committee chairmanship. I don't mind if they think they can use him in their caucus. That's politics. On labor, civil rights, environmental and most healthcare issues, Lieberman votes with the Dem majority. I can't stand the guy. I think he's an absolute snake. But I'm not going to waste time being angry with Senate dems for being pragmatic. We need legislation.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:53 amshoeless Says:
Tim doesn’t know the difference. Republicans are people who failed 8th grade Civics class.
_____________
Take that back, shoeless... you know it's not true. Our Li'l Timmeh didn't fail 8th grade Civics class becuuse he NEVER made it to 8th grade.
He had already dropped out by 6th.
So there... see, Timmeh? I'm speakin' up fer ya.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:54 amHow does that change the fact that the policies you support are some how any different than FDR’s?
It was (R) Hoover that started the social programs - and no, I havent told you what policies I do or dont support. FDR is your bias talking.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:54 amoops.
I meant the 2000 presidential race.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:56 amI'd like to rescind this vote with lieberman on the ticket.
shoeless Says:
Tim doesn’t know the difference. Republicans are people who failed 8th grade Civics class.
Timmy made it to the 8th grade?
November 11th, 2008 at 11:57 amtokin lib; sorry about the delayed response bro, but I had to take a work break at the office. I think you're about right on the numbers, and it HAS been a long time. I seem to recall about $0.03/mile and $0.10/day for comrats. Unbelievable that Uncle Sam figured 3 square meals a day for 10 cents.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:57 amLet Joe's political career live or die on it's own. Just don't let this treacherous traitor stand behind you, be you Jewish, Christian, or agnostic. Joe is for Joe, and nothing, or no one else!
November 11th, 2008 at 12:01 pmDid I miss Tim Vacuous?
Damn.
November 11th, 2008 at 12:01 pmXisithrus Says:
It was (R) Hoover that started the social programs - and no, I havent told you what policies I do or dont support. FDR is your bias talking.
____________
And it's also irrelevant. Read the article Dum-dum links to. It's a bunch "contending" and "theorizing" over 70 years after the fact.
November 11th, 2008 at 12:02 pmuhhhbama Says:
Xisithrus Says:
How does that change the fact that the policies you support are some how any different than FDR’s?
How about you go back to the GED classes you dropped out of?
High Schools usually offer evening adult classes in English too, while you are at it. Please take one of those classes.
Then maybe, just maybe, you can learn to possibly post a full coherent sentence to convey your simple thoughts.
November 11th, 2008 at 12:03 pmKay Says:
oops.
I meant the 2000 presidential race.
I’d like to rescind this vote with lieberman on the ticket.
that's better...
i'm proud to have voted for GORE though...
and, just occurred to me, lieberman/lamont race was 06, not?
can't believe i've had this addiction for so long...
November 11th, 2008 at 12:03 pmi could use a life... after january... i can breath then...
Wayne Says:
Timmy made it to the 8th grade?
__________
No. Like so many other right wing talking points, it's been debunked.
Timmeh dropped out in the 6th grade.
November 11th, 2008 at 12:04 pm"Keep your friends close and your enemies closer."
November 11th, 2008 at 12:06 pmralph the wonder llama Says:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Did I miss Tim Vacuous?
Damn.
Yeah, too bad. It was pretty funny. He was gloating over the Democrats not having enough votes in the Senate to override Barack Obama's vetos.
November 11th, 2008 at 12:07 pmI concur.
November 11th, 2008 at 12:08 pmAny current active-duty care to post what today's allowances for mileage and comrats? I'm just curious.
November 11th, 2008 at 12:08 pmDang katy i thought that Lieberman ran in 2004 and we only had two more years left. Now I'm depressed.
November 11th, 2008 at 12:09 pmAll this trying to be nice stuff is BS...he diss'd the Dems, diss'd Obama and now he wants to act like it never happened...
Phuck that, kick him to the curb...traitor Joe must go.
November 11th, 2008 at 12:11 pmuhhhbama
November 11th, 2008 at 12:19 pmWhere do you find all those lame pics? Did the little white guy afraid of th black guy point you there?
me too shayne...
i had to check:
http://www.google.com/search?q=lieberman%2C+lamont&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a
November 11th, 2008 at 12:19 pmi'm calling it an OPEN THREAD:
White House denies quid-pro-quo on trade, autos
NEW YORK, Nov 11 (Reuters) - The White House on Tuesday said on Tuesday President George W. Bush did not link potential support for economic stimulus measures or further aid to U.S. automakers to congressional passage of free trade pacts in a meeting on Monday with President-elect Barack Obama.
"The president did not suggest a quid-pro-quo," White House spokeswoman Dana Perino told reporters, noting, however, that Bush did speak to Obama about the merits of free trade.
The New York Times, citing people familiar with the discussion, reported that Bush indicated he might support further aid to struggling automakers and a broader economic stimulus package if Democrats in Congress dropped opposition to a free-trade pact with Colombia. (Reporting by Jeremy Pelofsky)
http://www.reuters.com/article/privateEquity/idUSN1152234820081111
didn't know there WAS a "quid pro quo"...
November 11th, 2008 at 12:25 pmBottom line is that if McCain had won, Leiberman would have either been awarded with some kind of position within his administration OR switched parties and been given the chairmanship of an important committee. Now he knows that he's not going to be reelected as either a Democrat or an Independent in Conn. in 2012 unless he can redeem his relationship and reputation among Democrats. But he's a traitor to the Democratic platform..the belief system of Dems. He did all he could to get McCain and other Republicans elected this year. That was no principled "stand." That was betrayal. He'll be a spy and a mole for the Republicans if he's allowed to stay in the Dem caucus, and he will use a chairmanship of the Homeland Security and Government Policy committee to interfere with Obama as much as possible....not for genuine oversight reasons, but to deliberately undermine him.
November 11th, 2008 at 12:28 pmP.S. Lay off Kay, guys. He has the right to vote for whomever he wishes, and to his opinions. Lately, it seems like there's been an awful lot of arguing between commenters on the board, and doesn't represent Progressives in a very positive light. Tolerance, remember?
November 11th, 2008 at 12:30 pmPalin presses her case
Boston Globe - 2 hours ago
Sarah Palin's PR offensive continued this morning, with a bottom-line message: The sweeping Republican loss last week isn't her fault.
Why McCain lost Kansas City Star
Palin Blames 'Status Quo' for Republican Loss in Election Voice of America
CQPolitics.com - eFluxMedia - Wall Street Journal - Huffington Post
all 762 news articles »
http://news.google.com/?ncl=1269086464&hl=en&topic=h
did anyone see the matt lauer visit to the palin home on the TODAY show this morning? i watched part of the 2nd part...
todd has a surprisingly high voice... or not surprisingly...
November 11th, 2008 at 12:31 pmI've seen part of it on MSNBC katy. And I remember the video of her lambasting Hillary for "whining" about her treatment. It's also important to remember that Palin is a pathological liar and so we shouldn't believe anything that comes out of her mouth.
November 11th, 2008 at 12:39 pmLiebermand should have the moral courage and integrity to resign. Does he not understand that he is a traitor to his supposed compatriots?
ON the other hand, he is a politician, and probably knows little about morality.
November 11th, 2008 at 12:53 pmGuido the Loving OBGYN Says:
If Lieberman survives Obama will look like the biggest fool in Washington.
Not necessarily. My first choice would be to see him gone. But, after listening to Rachel Maddow last night and the guy who was "talking her down", I can see some sense in what they are doing. First, if they let him stay because Obama has asked it, Obama is off on a foot of being conciliatory and magnanimous. But, they must strip him of his Homeland Security chairmanship because there he can do harm. It was suggested that he be given something like Education where he can do no harm. Then if Joe throws a fit and defects to the Republicans (where he will have zero power), Obama can say, "Oh well, I tried".
I am torn on whether it is better to have him close as an enemy or to get rid of him. My fear is that if he caucuses with the Democrats he will be a mole for the Republicans.
At this point I am going to give Obama the benefit of the doubt.
November 11th, 2008 at 1:09 pmHow mixed up do you have to be to head RIGHTWARD at this moment in American history?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aypMFARJW84
November 11th, 2008 at 1:28 pmKay, I consider you a troll because you're an arshole....and a troll.
November 11th, 2008 at 1:29 pmAll three of them combined have the cumulative worth of pond scum and have the cumulative IQ of -8.
November 11th, 2008 at 1:30 pmI think McCain and Lieberman are lovers. Just look at the way McCain smiles at his wife, then look at how he smiles at Lieberman. McCain never looks happy with his wife around either.
November 11th, 2008 at 2:06 pmTim Vaculik Says:
PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE Democrats… by all means toos him out of his leadership roles!
We will welcome him with OPEN ARMS.
You dopes, it only helps us if Senator Lieberman gets the axe!
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
My GOD you are ignorant. You already get the votes and support from him you are going to get and WE dont need him. He isnt going to suddenly start voting any differently the only difference is where he caucuses and that hurts Dems in no way. You really do think your stupidity defines reality dont you?
November 11th, 2008 at 2:40 pmTim Vaculik Says:
The good Senator from Conn. has more integrity in his pinky than Senator Harry (Pinky) Reid!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You are a moron Timmeh. A Limborg deluded idiot. I doubt anyone with any sense cared beans what YOU think of anyones integrity since I have never seen a shred of it from YOU.
November 11th, 2008 at 2:44 pmTim Vaculik Says:
How’s that veto-proof majority in the U.S. Senate coming, folks? heh, heh, heh
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
You are laughing because YOUR Party only went from a majority to us having 57 or 58 Senators losing what about 17 or more Senators in two short years? I really cant believe how stupid you are. Laugh your way into insignificance. We will just smile wave as you circle the porcelain drain
November 11th, 2008 at 2:47 pmuhhhbama Says:
Xisithrus Says:
How does that change the fact that the policies you support are some how any different than FDR’s?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Hey IDIOT Roosevelts policies are generally credited with ENDING the depression. Just because a few rightwing economists have pet theories doesnt change that.
Here is what CURRENT NOBEL PRIZE WINNER FOR ECONOMICS has to say about such prattle
http://www.businessandmedia.org/articles/2008/20081110122504.aspx
Krugman openly attacked economists who blame FDR’s New Deal for prolonging the Depression. “Now, there’s a whole intellectual industry, mainly operating out of right-wing think tanks, devoted to propagating the idea that F.D.R. actually made the Depression worse,” Krugman wrote.
November 11th, 2008 at 2:53 pmVaculik = vac-u-suck
November 11th, 2008 at 2:53 pmMaybe Lieberman is getting Alzheimer's? It's a distinct possibility. Look at Reagan, Sinatra and Chuck Heston. All New Deal liberal Dems at one time who went to the Right as they aged and as their disease progressed. There must be a correlation. So...Have pity on old Holy Joe. Pity...
====
November 11th, 2008 at 3:39 pm"Dr.Hussein Matt,
There you go again, showing your true intelligence.
Show-off.
November 11th, 2008 at 4:41 pmUncle Ho @12:08:
I'm retired AF (72-94). They have changed the calculation method a lot since I first went in. Here are the current numbers:
Mileage: $.0585/mile by car or $1.26/mile by air
Per Diem: This is now based on food and lodging is dependent on where you travel. EX: Las Vegas (where I live) is $61.00/day.
Hope this answers your question at least somewhat.
November 11th, 2008 at 5:14 pmYeah, I know I made a slip there about VETO proof, duh...
Anyway, it will be interesting to see how Obama governs: center-right, which is what he ran as in the latter stages of his campaign OR (shudder...) far left, which is where he seems most comfortable.
Can any of you name any of his close associates that AREN'T far left or just outright Marxists?
November 11th, 2008 at 5:58 pmBack on topic.
What I'm really hoping for is for Senator Stevens to resign his Senate seat. Then we have a good chance of SARAH PALIN herself filling the remainder of his term!!!
hahahahahahahaha
November 11th, 2008 at 6:01 pmBut because Joe was a powerful, threatening Jew, he escaped punishment.
Pass the Torah.
November 11th, 2008 at 8:20 pmTim Vaculik Says:
Yeah, I know I made a slip there about VETO proof, duh…
Anyway, it will be interesting to see how Obama governs: center-right, which is what he ran as in the latter stages of his campaign OR (shudder…) far left, which is where he seems most comfortable.
Can any of you name any of his close associates that AREN’T far left or just outright Marxists?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Sure all of them. There ARE no Marxists among his close associates you are just really REALLY stupid and dont know what the terms mean you like to toss around. The Cold war is over, you could look it up. Well not you but find a reasonably bright third grader and they could look it up for you. By the way the demented laughter is kinda creepy. I think its time for you to increase your medication.
November 11th, 2008 at 11:17 pm