http://www.boston.com/news/local/con...ching_parties/


--

Scott in Florida

"Scott in Florida" <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote in message
newsn2il299s3etgvbojngve2ptpeo2e4cgl3@4ax.com...
> http://www.boston.com/news/local/con...ching_parties/
> Scott in Florida
>

He switched parties about 4 years ago. Everyone knows that.

In article <on2il299s3etgvbojngve2ptpeo2e4cgl3@4ax.com>,
Scott in Florida <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote:

> http://www.boston.com/news/local/con.../lieberman_ref
> uses_to_close_door_on_switching_parties/

That would be a hoot, but I dare say I don't think he'll do it. I'd
like to see Joe run for president, I might consider a vote for him.
I've watch him on C-SPAN hearings. He's a decent person and worthy of
consideration.
--

On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 18:44:30 -0600, dbu' wrote:

> In article <on2il299s3etgvbojngve2ptpeo2e4cgl3@4ax.com>,
> Scott in Florida <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote:
>
>> http://www.boston.com/news/local/con.../lieberman_ref
>> uses_to_close_door_on_switching_parties/
>
> That would be a hoot, but I dare say I don't think he'll do it. I'd
> like to see Joe run for president, I might consider a vote for him.
> I've watch him on C-SPAN hearings. He's a decent person and worthy of
> consideration.


He is a very good person who does what he thinks is right and damn the
Party Line. He has actually been an 'independant' for a number of years,
not always voting the way he is told to. He also listens to his
constituants, something a LOT of our 'representatives' could learn from!

He has been pretty independant for some time - I was sure surprised when the
party picked him for Veep. Then dumped him so nastily so quickly.
I'd think a more fitting appellation would be "Independant Senator" which he
usually has been.
Ron



"Scott in Florida" <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote in message
newsn2il299s3etgvbojngve2ptpeo2e4cgl3@4ax.com...
> http://www.boston.com/news/local/con...ching_parties/
>
>
> --
>
> Scott in Florida
>

"Vash The Stampede" <Trigun@2AM.cn> wrote in message
news:g196h.2110$%U.1053@trndny07...
> On Mon, 13 Nov 2006 18:44:30 -0600, dbu' wrote:
>
>> In article <on2il299s3etgvbojngve2ptpeo2e4cgl3@4ax.com>,
>> Scott in Florida <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.boston.com/news/local/con.../lieberman_ref
>>> uses_to_close_door_on_switching_parties/
>>
>> That would be a hoot, but I dare say I don't think he'll do it. I'd
>> like to see Joe run for president, I might consider a vote for him.
>> I've watch him on C-SPAN hearings. He's a decent person and worthy of
>> consideration.
>
>
> He is a very good person who does what he thinks is right and damn the
> Party Line. He has actually been an 'independant' for a number of years,
> not always voting the way he is told to. He also listens to his
> constituants, something a LOT of our 'representatives' could learn from!
>

Lieberman is slime.

No one has played the role of that "winner" more enthusiastically, or more
often, than Joe Lieberman. He is everything a Washington insider loves in a
politician. He is pompous, pious and available. Routinely one of the very
top recipients of campaign donations from the insurance, pharmaceutical and
finance sectors, and a man whose wife, Hadassah, is a
pharmaceutical-industry lobbyist for Hill and Knowlton, Lieberman has
quietly become one of the greatest allies corporate America has in
Washington.



For example, Lieberman, who as chairman of the DLC in the mid to late
Nineties presided over an organization heavily subsidized by companies such
as AIG and Aetna (the latter of which also contributes lavishly to his
campaigns), sponsored a bill that limited auto insurance suits by permitting
the offering of lower rates to consumers who forfeited their right to sue.
He has fought for similar anti-lawsuit laws for tobacco, for HMOs, for
pharmaceutical companies. Victor Schwartz, general counsel for the American
Tort Reform Association, once bragged that "if it were not for Lieberman,
there would never have been a Biomaterials Access Act"-a 1998 law that
protected companies like Dow Chemical and DuPont (also big DLC contributors)
from lawsuits filed for the production of defective medical implants. Yes,
that's right: Joe Lieberman fought for the principle of manufacturing faulty
fake tits with impunity.



In a move that was perfectly characteristic of everything he stands for,
Lieberman in 2001 offered a piece of legislation, S. 1764, that purported to
provide incentives to companies that develop medicines to treat the victims
of bioterror attacks but, more important, extended the patent life of a wide
range of drugs for several years, delaying the introduction of more
cost-friendly generic drugs. Shilling for the socialist subsidy of drug
companies while masquerading as a Churchillian, tough-on-security Democrat
in the War on Terror age: That's Joe Lieberman, and the modern Democratic
Party, in a nutshell.



In the midst of all this whoring for business interests, Lieberman has
preposterously marketed himself to the public as a stern guardian of
"morality" and "traditional values," along the way taking some admirably
mean-spirited positions. He once supported a bill denying funding to public
schools that counseled suicidal teens that it is OK to be gay, a remarkable
position for a man whose response to the Enron scandal was to say that
"government will never be able to legislate or regulate morals."



Lieberman also signed the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, the
notorious organization founded by Lynne Cheney that published a baldly
McCarthyite list of "anti-American academics." In 1997, Lieberman pushed for
warning labels on CDs, getting the Senate to take up the issue under the
title "Music Violence: How Does It Affect Our Youth?" in the hopes of
snagging the votes of a few grandmas by wagging a finger at Marilyn
Manson-yes, Lieberman was one of those asshole politicians who tried to pin
Columbine on rock music. And rather than denounce Ken Starr for the most
egregious misuse of prosecutorial authority since the House Un-American
Activities Committee, Lieberman's response to the Lewinsky scandal was to
attack Bill Clinton in one of the lamest "O the children!" acts of all time,
saying, "It is hard to ignore the impact of the misconduct the president has
admitted to on our children, our culture and our national character."



A few years later, faced with a similar political choice, he chose to stand
fast by Bush on the issue of Iraq, saying, "We undermine the president's
credibility at our nation's peril." Apparently the president deserves
absolute loyalty only when his mistakes result in teenagers getting their
heads shot off.

JoeSpareBedroom, 11/13/2006,9:37:04 PM, wrote:

> Lieberman is slime.

Methinks thou are quite Anti-Jew. It has become apparent in your
recent posts that you aren't a fan of Israel. That's fine with me if
you feel that way, but just come clean on where you stand so we know
what we are dealing with.

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xn0etoktm7a8p5w001@news.readfreenews.net...
> JoeSpareBedroom, 11/13/2006,9:37:04 PM, wrote:
>
>> Lieberman is slime.
>
> Methinks thou are quite Anti-Jew. It has become apparent in your
> recent posts that you aren't a fan of Israel. That's fine with me if
> you feel that way, but just come clean on where you stand so we know
> what we are dealing with.

Warning! Binary Thinking! I am not "anti-Jew", as you call it. You've missed
two things because you don't read well:

1) I don't like Lieberman because he's involved with too much legislation
that favors his biggest contributors. You can check all this online via the
congressional records. You know how to do that.

2) I have problems with Israel because like other special interest groups*,
their claws are too much into the decisions our government makes. The
earliest such example would be the way our government completely whitewashed
Israel's intentional attack on one of our ships, and the murder of 30-odd
seamen. LBJ's first words upon hearing of the attack: "I will not embarrass
my allies".

Israel just happens to be a country founded by Jews. That doesn't matter to
me. They attacked us.

"badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:xn0etoktm7a8p5w001@news.readfreenews.net...
> JoeSpareBedroom, 11/13/2006,9:37:04 PM, wrote:
>
>> Lieberman is slime.
>
> Methinks thou are quite Anti-Jew. It has become apparent in your
> recent posts that you aren't a fan of Israel. That's fine with me if
> you feel that way, but just come clean on where you stand so we know
> what we are dealing with.



Missing footnote from previous post: The other small, but powerful special
interest group that's forced us into lame decisions would be Cuban
immigrants. After the missile crisis, Castro had made discreet contact with
our state department with the help of an American journalist. He indicated
that he was tired of being a Soviet satellite, and was interested in
normalizing relations. With JFK's blessing, the state department was working
toward a meeting. Then, Kennedy was shot, and LBJ said "no way". You know
the rest of the stupid history.

Cuba could've been a much different place.

JoeSpareBedroom, 11/13/2006,10:41:39 PM, wrote:

> "badgolferman" <REMOVETHISbadgolferman@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:xn0etoktm7a8p5w001@news.readfreenews.net...
> > JoeSpareBedroom, 11/13/2006,9:37:04 PM, wrote:
> >
> > > Lieberman is slime.
> >
> > Methinks thou are quite Anti-Jew. It has become apparent in your
> > recent posts that you aren't a fan of Israel. That's fine with me
> > if you feel that way, but just come clean on where you stand so we
> > know what we are dealing with.
>
> Warning! Binary Thinking! I am not "anti-Jew", as you call it. You've
> missed two things because you don't read well:
>
> 1) I don't like Lieberman because he's involved with too much
> legislation that favors his biggest contributors. You can check all
> this online via the congressional records. You know how to do that.
>
> 2) I have problems with Israel because like other special interest
> groups*, their claws are too much into the decisions our government
> makes. The earliest such example would be the way our government
> completely whitewashed Israel's intentional attack on one of our
> ships, and the murder of 30-odd seamen. LBJ's first words upon
> hearing of the attack: "I will not embarrass my allies".
>
> Israel just happens to be a country founded by Jews. That doesn't
> matter to me. They attacked us.

Perhaps you are right and I have misjudged you. Still the message I
perceive from your posts goes deeper than an incident that happened 40
years ago. I'll retract my statement in the hopes you are being
truthful.

I don't deny the Jewish lobby is extremely powerful in Washington. But
I also feel it is incumbent upon us to support Israel from the fascist
governments of the Middle East. They provide a sense of democratic
opportunity in that region that is an example to the rest of the world.