Lieberman refuses to debate Maddow on health care because she has a ‘point of view.’
Lieberman refuses to debate Maddow on health care because she has a ‘point of view.’
MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow has repeatedly tried to get Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) to come on her show and debate health care. However, he and his office have refused to even respond to her requests for statements. Last week, Mike Stark caught up with Lieberman and asked him whether he’d go on Maddow’s show. The senator declined, saying the tv host has “a point of view”:
STARK: You’ve expressed an interest to have a serious policy debate instead of all the invective and that. And I think one of the best folks from the progressive side is Rachel Maddow —
LIEBERMAN: (LAUGHTER)
STARK: — and she’s been trying to get you on her show for a really long time.
LIEBERMAN: She’s got a point of view. I think we’re going to have this debate on the floor of the Senate. And I look forward to it. In other words —
STARK: There’s no chance you’ll do her show?
LIEBERMAN: I don’t think so.
Watch Maddow’s segment on Friday:
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
In other words, Rachel scares the piss out of me.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:02 pmI think we’re going to have this debate on the floor of the Senate.
Of course, when he said this Leiberman was still intending to filibuster bringing the bill to the floor of the Senate.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:03 pmLIEBERMAN: She’s got a point of view.
Yet the snivelling shill for corporacare has no reservations with constantly booking FOX News in order to safely express his POV. What a pussy Trader Joe is.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:04 pmShorter Lieberman: “It would be political suicide to go on Rachel Maddow’s show.”
She’d mop the floor with him.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:05 pmAnd DAAAAYYYAAANNNNGGG, Who doesn’t have a “point of view” about health care at this point?
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:05 pm“I won’t debate her because she has a point of view. And a mouth. And might be alive”
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:06 pmThis is because Lieberman has no position but what he’s told to have by lobbyists!
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:06 pmSo, how does you debate someone who has no point of view? don’t you kind of need a point of view in order to debate?
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:06 pmIsn’t that what a “debate” is? A constructive argument between opposing points of view?
What a hoser.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:07 pmhe’s a coward…she might just talk common sense and he can’t have that
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:07 pmShorter Trader Joe, “No thanks, I’ll stick with my daily interviews over at FOX, they like what I have to say.”
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:08 pmAt least hes smart enough to know that she will hand him his ass. She does her homework and he knows that he is full of sh!t, so why would he go on her show and get smacked down.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:08 pmFcking lying POS.
But Fox News doesn’t have a pint of view, so he goes on their programs? This tells you all you need to know about Lieberman…
http://www.political-buzz.com/
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:10 pmLieberman refuses to debate Maddow on health care because she has a ‘point of view.’
– - Sen Joe Lieberman (I-mskeered)
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:10 pmThe proper translation is “I don’t want to be on TV where I will be confronted with the facts about my campaign contributions from insurance companies because my constituents might see the program.”
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:11 pmCONTACT, CONTACT, CONTACT his offices and tell him, if he’s so DAMNED sure of his position, then he can debate it with Rachel…Ooooo, I’m SO mad:
http://lieberman.senate.gov/contact/
or
Washington
706 Hart Office Building
Washington, DC 20510
(202) 224-4041 Voice
(202) 224-9750 Fax
For TTY Call 711
Connecticut
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:11 pmOne Constitution Plaza
7th Floor
Hartford, CT 06103
(860) 549-8463 Voice
(800) 225-5605 In CT
All you Connecticut citizens…
Time to hold Lieberman’s feet to the fire.
Call or email him and ask him to defend his postition with someone who might have an oppostite postition.
It would be enlightening, both for him and for you all.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:11 pmCould it be rather than Madow having views, Lieberman doesn’t have any views and can only pretend he has a plan without revealing any details ?
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:12 pm“Debate on the floor of the Senate”????
Sure, one side gets up and says his piece, then the other side gets up and says his piece. Neither side making the other take responsibility for their position, or calling them out personally.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:14 pmPerhaps Mr. Lieberman might consider sending one of his close aides in the insurance industry to his place. I’m sure Ms. Maddow would be agreeable to this. Why interview the puppet when you can interview the puppeteer?
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:14 pmThe lying little corporate pig Liberman has a point on his head. He is just another little creep with a very weak ego, like Bush, who can’t stand to be within range with anyone who differs from his stupid fascist viewpoints. Another gutless coward, afraid to go toe-to-toe with Rachel… Pathetic.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:14 pmI sure hope rachael is all over this “POINT OF VIEW” crap
jeeze, if quick on the feet it would have been nice to offer
“are you saying you don’t have a point of view or are you saying you will only debate someone with the same point of view as you”
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:15 pmIt is pretty pathetic that a man who once stood in line for VP, a man with decades of political experience, is afraid of being confronted by a real journalist. I could understand a reluctance if Rachel was a nasty type but the lady just doesn’t go there. Even if she totally disagrees with a guest on her show, she treats them with respect.
Granted it doesn’t stop her from gutting them and putting them on a spit for a slow roast but she is always respectful and nice about it.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:18 pmSomeone should ask Lieberman’s wife if she has an opinion regarding healthcare regulation. Didn’t she work for a health insurer lobby firm?
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:19 pmDifferent Lieberman: I don’t want to debate it with anyone smarter than I am, so I will debate it on the Senate floor.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:22 pmRachel Maddow has a point of view
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:23 pmOne that for Joe Lieberman is something new
He looks at things like a spinning top
Sometimes he’ll flip and sometimes he’ll flop
Whereas Ms. Maddow looks at what is true.
He saids She has a point of view and hell she knows what shes talking about. not like went i go on fox where they dont know sh!t and its easy to buffalo them.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:23 pmand they give me ice cream.
What Mr. Lieberman means by saying Rachel has a “point of view” is that she has a functioning brain. Joe prefers talking to retarded Zionists.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:23 pmSniveling coward. I wish Karma would step in and break his jaw or drop something heavy on him. Sorry TP people, I have just had enough of this piece of feces.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:27 pmThis will probably find its way to a Holy Mackerel Moment. The fish is flopping, the mouth is moving and nothing intelligible is coming out.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:28 pmI’ve seen “debates” on the senate floor… prewritten speeches, not really debates at all… just position papers being read into the record…
A debate with RM would be real and effectual.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:28 pmChickensh** Joe.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:29 pmNo surprise there.
Awww, no shredded Joe for salad bar in our immediate future.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:32 pmWhat he really said: “I don’t want to go on a show that does not agree with my point of view.”
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:34 pmLOL>>> I see Joe has as much balls as DickLiz as well. She will not debate Rachel as well. What with these big bad tuff people on that side. they all are yellow striped chicken hawks cowards.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:34 pmBut, but, but, she’s a lesbian!
Joe is much more comfortable reminding McCain where he is & what to say.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:36 pmThis is a sniveling old coward awarded a powerful place in the Senate by the clowns in Conn.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:38 pmAvoid the storm you cannot weather, and weather the storm you cannot avoid.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:40 pmPoor Joe would be had with a 40mm bore brush.
What a twit he is! Maybe Rachel should have extended an Invite to Graham too. Are they ever apart?
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:41 pmIf any so called “journalist” on fox invited him on their show joe would be all for it. Im sure that he would have a meeting with the producers to go over the BS softball questions that he can expect. Then they would figure out a strategy on how to bulls!t the bozos that actually watch fox noise. If lieberman wasnt full of sh!t than he would be more than willing to go on Rachels show to debate his position.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:43 pmHe knows that one of the questions rachel would ask would be how much money has the insurance industry contributed to his office. He is scared of Rachel. Fcking wussy.
And Joe doesn’t have a point of view, just a PAC that full of insurance industry $$$$s.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:43 pmIt speaks volumes that so few of the staunch, hard core, conservative types lay down on their bellies and pee all over the floor when confronted with the idea of appearing on the Rachel Maddow Show. I’ll give Ridge some credit.
Maybe she should offer a free T-shirt that says “I survived a Rachel interview.”
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:44 pmOops, so many.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:44 pmIt’s because Lieberwocky has NO SPINE!!! He LOVES to lie to the cameras but when it actually comes down to talking about FACTS – HE’S DUMB AS A POST.
Great representation for the dweebs in Connecticut….
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:47 pmCan’t wait for Rachel to offer to donate all the ad money for that episode to AIPAC, betcha Joe’d show up for that!
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:49 pmBetter check his underpants. Being the coward that he is, he may have soiled them. What a wuzz… afraid of Rachel Maddow.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:50 pmI understand Smokin’ Joe’s position here. After all, Steve Doocy, Gretchie Carlson, Limpballs and Little Seanie Vanity are more his speed and they throw their great big softballs right over the center of the plate.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:51 pmHoodathunk, thats a great idea. Can you picture lieberman wearing a “I survived a rachel interview” with that big head of his.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:53 pmWell, that’s our Joe (I-Invertebrates for Israel) for ya.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:57 pmJoe would never survive a Rachel interview because her point of view is probably that he is a bought-and-paid-for media whore who will agree with whoever comes up with the most mazuma.
His T-shirt would read ‘I’m bought and proud of it. Make me an offer,’
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:59 pmBefore all his election victories, he told the voters that he was strongly FOR public healthcare!
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:00 pmDoes the requirement to purchase health insurance violate the Constitution in anyway?
What do you care? When did you start reading toilet paper, aaronk?
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:02 pmMost states have laws for mandatory auto insurance.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:07 pmLovely little sidetrack our FullaVenerealNY would have us go down, eh?
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:08 pmoooo, nice one RUC.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:09 pmWe the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
How about that clause FullaVeneralNY?
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:09 pmOoopsey, not a clause, just the goddamned pieceapaper preamble.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:10 pmJoe whimperman knows she will expose him as the total POS scumbag that he is.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:11 pmAhh, there it is, good ole Article One Section Eight
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;
Well, dufus>? Got VD?
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:12 pmNowhere does it say that the feds can compel you to buy health insurance.
So then it makes more sense to go to a single payer plan, funded by ‘The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States;’ rather than to have said Congress dictate the purchase of said insurance from a private, for-profit entity.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:18 pmFVNY,
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:21 pmIf we have single-payer, it would save $350 billion every year.
FullaVeneralNY, just where in the Constitution is the word profit? I see lots of mention of common defense, general welfare, things referencing the benefit of society but I don’t recall profit ever being mentioned.
Why is that?
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:24 pmI’m forced to pay for wars I don’t want for the past forty years.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:25 pmI’m sure the word “corporation” is not in the Constitution.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:26 pmI don’t think Americans should be forced to buy health insurance if they don’t want to.
Health insurance is a for-profit game that has absolutely nothing to do with Americans getting health care. The US is the last industrialized nation playing that game. Life and health are not a purchasable item except tin the US.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:27 pmAnd the US’s healthcare is 37th in the world.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:29 pmThe Constitution is about limiting or regulating government, not business.
I see, business is not part of America. It is its own entity, not subject to laws, regulation or controls.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:30 pm“She’s got a point of view. … And I only talk to people with a point of view if (like industry lobbiests) they are paying me to espouse it”.
He’s a real piece of work (or something).
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:32 pmNowhere does it say that the feds can compel you to buy health insurance.
Nor does it say anywhere that we must own camels.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:32 pmI see, business is not part of America. It is its own entity, not subject to laws, regulation or controls.
Can I open up my casino/opium den/cathouse now?
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:34 pmKeith, only if I get comped in.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:35 pmall right, you’re comped. :)
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:36 pmThank God for people like Mike Stark.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:37 pmFVNY says:
The Constitution is about limiting or regulating government, not business.
Wrong Jeffy. Corporations were severely limited for the first 100 years, until the Whigs and Republicans undermined the constitution and our way of life. You anti-american putzes never change.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:37 pmThe Constitution is about limiting or regulating government, not business.
Wrong. The Constitution is about regulating the United States of America. It is about providing an environment to promote the general welfare of the country. Since the country is made up of citizens, that is the first priority. That said citizens would choose to indulge in business practices that would be the second priority. The people come first. Business comes second.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:40 pmFVNY says:
I don’t think Americans should be forced to buy health insurance if they don’t want to.
Why not? Americans are forced to buy security insurance through funding the military, police and fire departments. You taliban freaks are all the same. Cheap, Cheap, Cheap, Stupid, Selfish, Cheap, Cheap, Greedy, Cheap, Religious Zealot, Cheap, Cheap, Greedy, Greedy, Cheap…. ZZZzzz…
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:41 pmThe Constitution is about limiting or regulating government, not business.
Cool, I can finally start up my dream business, RUC~Annoying-Neighbor-Eradication Inc.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:42 pmI know I’ll make a killing, as I won’t be regulated.
Lieberman is the biggest coward out there!!!! And Rachel certainly does have a point of view and she will run rings around him with it!!!
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:43 pmFVNY says:
The Constitution is about limiting or regulating government, not business.
Then why does Article I of the constitution grant the government the right to regulate business? LOL! Jeffy Bovine you’re as stupid and uninformed as always! LOL! ;)
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:44 pmOf course he won’t.
Rachel is way smarter than lieberman. He can’t afford to look any dumber.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:44 pmWhy is droopy dog such a p*ssy again? He has no problems appearing on Faux News with their “point of views”, but is afraid of Maddow? LOL! What a p*ssy.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:45 pmFVNY says:
The Constitution is about limiting or regulating government, not business.
Really? LOL! You could fill libraries with you don’t know jeffy bovine…
“There is an evil, which ought to be guarded against in the indefinite accumulation of property from the capacity of holding it in perpetuity by … corporations. The power of all corporations ought to be limited in this respect. The growing wealth acquired by them never fails to be a source of abuses.” James Madison
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:49 pmLieberman is a dooshbag,plain and simple. Why cant politicians put themselves in the average Americans shoes?
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:58 pmI know the answer, they dont give a sh!t.
I would love to smack that ridiculous hairdo off of liebermans fcking head.
lemmie see if got i got this straight. my media-whore of a senator will only go on shows where he’s allowed to spew his opinions unchecked. but when it comes time to debate, he’s got nothin’ and pussies out.
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:00 pmLieberman sure does live up to the Yiddish epithet ‘putz‘.
There are a few more descriptive epithets in Yiddish that could be applied to him also.
The mods would scrub those in a NY minute!
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:07 pmMaybe Rachel could promise not to hurt him? ;)
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:38 pmLieberman is playing a game so that he can dictate the terms of the bill. He needs two or three conservaDems to go along with his plan to tie up the bill unless he gets what he wants. His problem is that if all the other Dems vote to invoke cloture, he will be alone and out on a limb. If he goes it alone and the bill fails, he will pay in blood for his vote. The Dem caucus will toss him out and remove him from chairmanships. This is why the other conservaDems need to stay on board for at least the cloture vote. They will be free to vote against the bill because the Dems have the votes to do it by a majority vote. But cloture needs 60 votes.
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:44 pmYes she has a point of view, a liberal point of view which we all know is the wrong point of view.
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:59 pmhmmmm, pathetic or lame? I’m torn, cg. I guess I have to go with both.
November 23rd, 2009 at 5:03 pmUnlike conguy’s delusion – Rachel’s ‘point of view’ is related to getting at the TRUTH of the matter.
Lieberman and truth do not mix too well.
People like conguy and Lieberman shy away from the light of truth.
November 23rd, 2009 at 5:03 pmW
H
A
T
A
P
November 23rd, 2009 at 5:08 pmU
S
S
Y
Hoodathunk – let’s market a right-wing-talking-point doll. When you pull the string it says things like:
Liberals are always wrong!
Liberals don’t like to work!
Liberals want the government to run their lives!
and other such nonsense. I bet it’d sell well. Let’s see, what should this ‘doll’ look like? Plastic eyes will work just fine – gotta have that glazed-over look. Should we make the doll look angry? Or just stupid?
November 23rd, 2009 at 5:08 pmYes, the sniveling, mealy-mouthed, self-righteous, falsely pious, disloyal, self-serving megalomaniac knows he is incapable of surviving a well-thought-out, researched interview as is the type delivered by Maddow.
November 23rd, 2009 at 5:10 pmFVNY – do you cover your 30 employees’ health insurance payments?
November 23rd, 2009 at 5:24 pmOh and btw, thanks for reminding me of some of the rightie talking-points I’ll need to include to make it really authentic FVNY.
Btw, have you found a better accountant yet? I hear Goldman-Sachs only pays about a 1% tax rate.
November 23rd, 2009 at 5:25 pmLieberman refuses to debate Maddow on health care because she has a ‘point of view.’
The lesbian point of view.
November 23rd, 2009 at 6:05 pmCan I open up my casino/opium den/cathouse now?
Can I apply for a position? :D
November 23rd, 2009 at 6:24 pmRUCerious, is your concept anything like this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2he2eF2L_SE
November 23rd, 2009 at 6:28 pmLieberman:
November 23rd, 2009 at 8:32 pm” As a ’spoiler’, I have no business going to Maddow’s show to debate, my job nowadays is to obstruct”.
Can’t really blame the little wuss. She would take him apart.
November 23rd, 2009 at 10:50 pmRE: 70 and 72:
Maybe if we DID enshrine banking regulations in the Constitution, it would prevent entities like Goldman Sachs from hijacking our economy.
November 24th, 2009 at 2:03 amconservative guy says:
Yes she has a point of view, a liberal point of view which we all know is the wrong point of view.
If by “we” you mean the ignorant “opinion” of dum bass rubes – that’s not what you “know” it’s the b*llsh*t you repeat because you aren’t smart, competent, intelligent moral or honest enough to face the truth… ZZZzzz…
November 24th, 2009 at 2:10 amFVNY says:
Great idea. And then the government could tax and regulate your new business out of existence!
We keep telling you that selling underage boys from the Dominican isn’t a “business” Rush. And you should stop whining about all of the sexual predator laws. It’s really b**chy limpbutt.
November 24th, 2009 at 2:11 amWhat a despicable coward Joe Lieberman is. Rachel is firm, but never rude, to her guests on air. And the way he and his staff are behaving is both petty and tactless. Whadda nice Man!
November 24th, 2009 at 4:12 amAnd yet in Senator Droopy Dawg’s beloved Israel, Healthcare is universal. And he’d never, ever speak out against it.
November 24th, 2009 at 6:24 amhidflect says:
And yet in Senator Droopy Dawg’s beloved Israel, Healthcare is universal. And he’d never, ever speak out against it.
Ninety-five percent of general care hospitals in Israel are public. There is no wait for diagnostic examinations such as MRI and CT or for procedures such as open-heart surgery. Payment for hospitalization is the responsibility of the HMO, and there is no deductible or co-insurance payment required of the patient.
http://www.jewishjournal.com/opinion/article/israel_has_rx_for_us_health_care_20040820/
November 24th, 2009 at 9:12 amDear Joe,
How much money would it take to put you on a one-way plane to Israel? I would think that your friends, and enemies, would be happy to contribute.
November 25th, 2009 at 12:02 am