Comments on: How Much Do We Dislike Joe Lieberman? Let Me Count the Ways.

By: montag

montag — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 23:40:43 +0000

Maha, your visual is too unkind to snakes. Many snakes lead useful lives dining on vermin. Unfortunately I know of no snake species that preys on vermin like the Whore of Bridgeport.

By: erinyes

erinyes — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 17:28:49 +0000

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/11/01-1

By: Maru

Maru — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 17:08:39 +0000

Join the Facebook group “Joe Lieberman is a Douchebag”!

http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=162150099156

By: Crazy About Urban Planning

Crazy About Urban Planning — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 05:12:11 +0000

Joe Lieberman? I clearly can’t really begin to express my outrage for the little snake like others have – but let me just point out that he was one of my misgivings about the Gore campaign in 2000. If you think about it broadly, and Connecticut is home to the most insurance companies in the country (isn’t that true?) you can see that he is looking out for his boys. It isn’t just the corporations, but I think it may be true that lots of jobs in Connecticut may be reformed or changed as a result in changing this crazy system/economy we have. I hope it is changed… but hell who knows? It could be Joey’s state could see some lost jobs and he could argue he is representing Connecticut’s status quo by doing this.

By: Chief

Chief — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 18:46:05 +0000

Kill the filibuster.

By: joanr16

joanr16 — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 12:52:33 +0000

Simply put, if you have enough money to buy [JL], he’ll dance your dance, too.

Absolutely right.

I see Lieberman as a religious fundie, in the way Michele Bachmann is a religious fundie. It’s a personal problem on his part; nothing to do with any “conspiracy.” For instance, if you want to rid yourself of a snake, who do you call? The mongoose. In this case, a mongoose named Rahm could do the job very well, I believe.

By: Kevin Hayden

Kevin Hayden — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 03:42:50 +0000

Other than his eagerness to kill Middle East Muslims, his other positions don’t strike me as partisan or principle. Simply put, if you have enough money to buy him, he’ll dance your dance, too.

So I don’t expect anything we do will change him in any positive way. I proposed to someone else that we should run a month long contest and reward the best putdown/rant of Lieberman with something like a free trip to DC.

The intent would be to draw massive publicity – not to impact him – but to give other Dems pause about how far they want to go against a sizable majority will. (Plus sometimes, I think it’s plain healthy to vent and rant about truly stinky people with all the aplomb of a middle schooler).

By: Swami

Swami — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 01:25:21 +0000

A Canadian Reader …I think you are mis-characterizing with the Jewish conspiracy description of the fifth column. My objection is not with Judaism, or the people of Israel. It’s more an objection to the blind allegiance to a proclaimed friendship by many American politicians to the State of Israel without regard to upholding traditionally proclaimed American values. Like human rights?

If Lieberman wants to nail a mezuzah to his Senate office door post, or have a Succah on the front lawn of the Whitehouse, then that’s fine with me. My feeling is that with a friendship— either personal or national— an assessment of, and an adherence to common values is crucial to maintaining that friendship. I don’t have friends who beat their wives, or molest their own children, or commit murder or participate in atrocities … behaviors contrary to my values. So I don’t think we should be so eager to have an unquestioned friendship and alliance with the State of Israel when their conduct as a nation needs to be questioned.
If I remember correctly 9/11 was a direct result of our turning a blind eye to the State of Israel in their treatment of the Palestinian people.

By: uncledad

uncledad — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 00:34:46 +0000

Step 2. Reintroduce the bill and do it by ‘reconciliation’

I’m no parliamentarian but I don’t think they can introduce the “bill” as written with reconciliation rules. (I think this crap is purposely complicated so we mere voters can’t understand it fully) Reconciliation I think can only be used for budget items. They could G-rig and rewrite the legislation to meet reconciliation rules but much of the reform would have to be stripped, I believe it would get real messy real quick.

I don’t get the liberal hand ringing, put the god dam bill on the floor, let Loserman, Landrieu and any other DINO’s join the publicans in a filibuster, let them commit political suicide right on C-Span! It’ll be fun! If the polls that Howdy doody Reid keeps citing are correct it will cost them both dearly.

By: Doug Hughes

Doug Hughes — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 22:44:31 +0000

Let’s consider this in 2 steps. First let JL know that he WILL be stripped of everything but Senate bathroom privileges if he helps a fillibuster. Then put it to a vote and make him declare. Make sure any other Democrat/Ind who joins is known and get’s his just reward this side of eternity.

Step 2. Reintroduce the bill and do it by ‘reconciliation’, the procedure that blocks a filibuster. The measure will go to an up-down vote ANYWAY. But the turncoats have has to fly their true colors, lose any seniority AND lose on the measure. Plus they will face the national (not regional) wrath of voters who contribute.

I see no reason to expect that the public option won’t be included in the Senate, House or FINAL bill – and no reason not to run over the opposition to get ‘r done!