Paul Begala said on Crossfire that Joe Lieberman should

[Auntie Bush]

be ousted from the Democratic party if he helps Bush pass his S.S. plan . Yeah! for Paul.

[elshiva]

1. Boot Lieberman, now, already! Please!

[fob]

2. I agree. All the good Joe has done prior will be more than wiped

away if he enables bush*co on this one.

[Paul Dlugokencky]

5. sad but true

Where have you gone, Joe?

[CottonBear]

8. Do you think that he'll change his view on SS

if he is threatened with expulsion from the party? How would we go about getting rid of him if that were the option?

[fob]

26. Question 1 answer: I sure hope so!!

Question 2 answer: Fund a Democratic opponent in the 2006 primaries

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[applegrove]

4. I don't think Liberman cares. Stop it with the focus on Liberman. He is

one person with an agenda taken over by legitimate worries of his own regarding peace in Israel. Wave good-bye. And I think that it would be good for Democrats to talk about that.

[Obviousman]

30. How does Isreali security influence American Social Security?

[applegrove]

32. It doesn't. It influence Libermann and nothing else matters. And if

you knew anything about victimization - you would understand that the man is on another planet right now. All the reasons why he was elected & reelected go out the window. Like I said - he will follow a frog to the moon if it keeps people he loves safe. If you live in his district, fight to get a new candidate out there. But he is lost to you and it doesn't make him a bad human being it just makes him a bad Democrat. And that Bush WH & neocons are ever the manipulators and know how to use people's fears against them.

Once again we do not know the itty - bitty details of SS. Bush seems to be imparting that information one by one. Liberman may think he knows something about SS that we do not. An assumptions, a give by the elites, a prediction about the American economy growing on average by 1% in the next 50 years while the World economy will grow by 6% - so duh - you would want to be in a world market. Perhaps the deal is as simple as promising to keep Rice & Bush as far away from Israeli politics in the next 4 years as possible. We don't know.

The facts are not out on SS. Yes if we use assumptions based on the past 20th Century growth of the USA SS is not in crisis. But it is hard to do anything but spit blood when you don't know the details of the Bush plan. That is why Rove made the proposal and then gave no details. So we would spit blood and catastrophize, and get ridden with anxiety. I would guess that that is the real payoff at this time. Perhaps they are hoping it will create apathy or hatred within the Democratic ranks.

Perhaps Liberman is Rove's big plan to lure the Jewish vote away from Democrats in a public way & cause an angry mob to develop. Perhaps Rove is convinced he will win New York (the focus election has been named as Hilary Vs. Rudy). So let Liberman go. Don't let his personal issues sidetrack you or your anger. Libermann's actions are quite predictable seeing as how Arafat finally lost power and Peace has a chance. Let us hope for peace in Israel/Palestine and not loose focus on your fight (with the sociopaths in the WH). Libermann is one person. Don't make him any more important than that. And leave the door open to his return when peace succeeds and he can vote with his heart about what is going on inside the US. There may be many more like him who would do just about anything for peace. Let them go and do what they have to do.


Rove makes a big show of publically courting the 'black vote' but he is dam quiet about the Jewish one. Don’t let them be separated from you permanently. Be human. Politically Libermann has been separated from you. You were a fan. Use your empathy & let him go. He is just being himself. He has no choice. And you never, ever attack anyone for being themselves or having no choice.

[dameocrat]

54. I am not sympathetic with his support for the settlers

and I have a right to try and find someone different. If Bush wins on Social Security because of him, I will axe him. You can't fight Bush if he won't fight him. Israeli settlers aren't people who would make good dems if they lived in the states. they are more like republicans in gaited communities that red line blacks. Why is his love for settlers in another country more important than my love for my Grandma?

[CoffeeCat]

6. Any Democrat...

who swaps spittle with Bush (aka, the kiss) needs to be catapulted out of the Dem party, soaked in honey and lowered into a pit of fire ants.

[Wilms]

7. Lieberman IS a DEMOCRAT???

Somehow forgot that.

[AntiCoup2K4]

50. That's okay...

...so did he.

[AP]

9. Al Gore thought Lieberman was a good VP. Does anyone have a problem

with that?

I've seen a lot of people at DU say they'd love it if Al ran for president again. I've seen a lot of DU'ers hate on Joe.

But I've never seen anyone at DU say that the fact Al picked Joe to be his VP should make one very skeptical of Al.

Comments?

[lastknowngood]

10. The DLC pushed Looserman on Big Al

n/t

[AP]

14. Give me a break.

Al picked Joe because (1) Al was running on moral superiority over Bill, and Joe fit the bill, (2) he thought Al would have pull in Florida snr citizens homes, and (3) there wasn't much light between them policy-wise.

[JaneQPublic]

44. Yet in 2004, Al passed over Joe to endorse Dean in the primaries n/t

[AP]

45. If Gore won, would he have given Joe the boot?

Doubt it.

You'd have VP Joe Lieberman. And he probably would have been your candidate in 2008.

Chew on that.

[wtmusic]

12. Al was trying to buy conservative votes

all there is to it. Al and Joe have nothing in common. IMO it was Joe who drove a lot of Democrats to Nader.

[AP]

17. Read Stiglitz's Roaring Ninetees -- Gore comes off as pretty conservative

economically-speaking.

I don't think Joe drove any voters to Nader. Nobody really knew anything about Joe's policies back then (although Al must have).

Most liberals gave Al points for picking a guy who wasn't a WASP.

[Metrix]

13. It was poor judgment on Gore's part

The day the announcement was made that Lieberman had been selected I was on the phone with a client who said he thought Lieberman was picked only because he had publicly criticized Clinton.

Post-election I was discussing Lieberman with another client and said that he had added nothing to the ticket. The client went farther, saying he hated Lieberman, that he was weak, etc.

Both clients are Jewish, by the way.

[AP]

19. I don't think Joe hurt the ticket at all prior to election day.

He hurt the ticket when he said Gore wasn't going to challenge unfrancked military ballots which showed up after election day. That definitely hurt the ticket (or it could have if Gore had a better post-election strategy).

I think Gore was actually comfortable with Joe's economic policies, which nobody really appreciated in 2000 because Gore wasn't really running on those issues.

I think Joe's conservatism was always there, but subsequent events have shed light on it, and it amazes me that people are so reluctant to impute Joe's values on Gore.

[vi5]

15. I've said it any number of times....

I voted for the gore/leiberman ticket because I am a dem and I loathed/feared bush. But i think the fact that he picked leiberman was a total pandering move to distance himself from clinton was a net negative with regard to my opinion of Gore. And it made my vote for the ticket a total and complete "hold your nose" vote.

I've said it on here quite a few times that I think Gore picking Leiberman was the ultimate move on his part that gave credence to his detractors as pandering and distancing himself from Clinton rather than embracing him.

Joe's actions in the past few years have proven that my instincts were right.

And I'm nowhere near the only person who has expressed this sentiment so I'm not sure where your'e coming from or going with this assesement.

[AP]

20. Gore actually did lose the votes of many Democrats who said they preferred

Gore to Bush on the issues, but hated Clinton personally and so it as more important to cast a vote against the Clinton legacy in 2000 than to vote in their best economic/policy interests.

So, Gore had a choice to make: either spend a lot of time rehabilitating Clinton, which might distract from his own campaign, or run against Clinton.

Gore made so many strategy mistakes that it's hard to blame any one, so I'm not prepared to criticize his selection of Lieberman as the thing that caused his loss. It was perhaps a hamfisted attempt to deal with a very real problem his campaign faced. So, good thing he noticed and tried to do somethign about it.

In any event, the bigger and more interesting issue is that I do think the choice of Lieberman reveals that Gore feels a way about the proper relationship between the government, big business and consumers/employees that is way out of step with the way most DU'ers feel on those issues, yet nobody is willing to see that, and they go so far as to completely loath Joe Lieberman without imputing any of Lieberman's values onto Gore. It seems kind of silly to me.

[vi5]

24. I guess I'm the wrong person to address that since....

...to be honest with you I was never a fan of Gore from the start.

Personally I'm totally glad that Gore didn't run in 2004 with or without Leiberman. And I was never fooled by his sudden return to the stage as a populist defender of the liberal wing of the democratic party. He always struck me as conservative back in the 80's when he was a senator, and even more so than Clinton. I know a lot of people on here swooned over his "I'm a liberal again!" routine and maybe they're the ones in the right and I'm in the wrong on this one. It's all conjecture at this point. I also didn't buy the "Gore surged in the polls when his campaign took on a more populist tone at the end." either so maybe I'm just a natural skeptic.

But since I have no problems voting for the lesser of two evils he got my vote. And would have if he ran in 2004. That doesn't make me a fan of his though. Other than on the environment which is the one area I think he was sincerely liberal on and deserved credit for.

[Cha]

37. I totally agree with

your analysis!

I've also forgiven Al Gore for it.

[BeyondGeography]

16. Cynical choice by the Goremeister

But I don't hold it against him. He was trying to disassociate himself from Clinton's immorality. Lieberman was the Democrat who used the harshest language to criticize Clinton's (ahem) indiscretions, which was the primary reason why he was picked. He also helped in Florida, which we actually won, remember?

Lieberman also wound up losing the debate to Cheney and implicitly criticizing Gore's tactics in Florida regarding absentee military ballots that were received after the deadline. Gore wound up despising Lieberman, whom he repaid by endorsing Dean without so much as a heads-up phone call in Dec. 2003.

Reportedly, the other potential choices in 2000 were Kerry (added nothing in terms of geographic or demographic appeal), your boy Edwards (2 years experience at the time), and...I don't know, help me out. There was an argument for Lieberman at the time; there is none now, as I'm sure Gore would agree.

[AP]

21. I'm starting to wonder if Joe criticized Clinton because he didn't like

Clinton and Levitt trying to regulate Wall St more effectively. Maybe he was using morality as a cover.

[BeyondGeography]

41. Interesting angle

You imply Lieberman is not as pure as the driven snow. I wholeheartedly approve. Count me among the Lieberman loathers. I'm looking forward to an aggressive primary challenge for his seat next year, with Howard Dean leading the charge. Won't that be fun?

[Rooktoven]

23. Lieberman was a strategic pick

For the moralizing crowd and to shore up "moderate" credentials. IIRC he backed Dean over Joementum earlin in the game (late 2003).

I think Joe's actions weren't as reprehensible then, either...

[Blue Wally]

28. Joe also

Joe also gave Gore a lot of cover on the Arab-Israeli issue.

[ArtVandaley]

25. Good issue to raise

One a lot of people ignore.

I am consistent. I think Gore ran a terrible, spineless campaign and doesn't deserve another shot. Sure, he grew some balls after he lost, but too little too late. We already were stuck with Bush.
I think Lieberman is essentially a pro-choice NeoCon, with the exception of a few other issues. To Gore's credit, I think Lieberman has gotten A LOT worse over the last 5 years. But still, picking Joe was a bad bad call on Gore's part.

I'm tired of both of them.

[RealDems]

40. The two have moved in completely opposite directions since 2000

Not only that, but the issues are so much larger now. Then, it was simple. Lieberman was to the right of Gore, but not on anything major. Both were fairly centrist, and Lieberman masked any disagreements during the campaign.

Now... Gore is one of the most outspoken people on the Left -- Lieberman is making out with Bush, and the whole world is falling apart because Florida can't count their votes.

[Crunchy Frog]

46. I think I've said it before,

but in case I haven't, I'll reiterate it now. I'm very sceptical of Al, and part of the reason is that he picked someone like Lieberman as his running mate.

[Norquist Nemesis]

58. But would Al pick him again?

And if no, why not?

[no_hypocrisy]

11. Let Lieberman and Zell Miller start their own party.

[Skidmore]

18. Yeah, the Lieberzell Party--

or the Zelleiber party. Maybe they would have a duel over the naming process, old hawks that they are.

[ArtVandaley]

22. Alright, nice

Glad to hear a partisan hack like Begala finally is taking a hard line against these so called Dems.

[karynnj]

27. AS long as he caucuses with the Democrats we need him

Some one posted that he is popular with both the Democrats and the Republicans in Connecticut. Pushing him out of the Democratic party will make it that much harder to take back the Senate and he's likely to win as a Republican.

[beyurslf]

29. I agree.

[Clarkie1]

31. I agree.

There comes a certain point when you just have to say enough is enough.

I am sure the good voters of Connecticut could find a number of better democratic nominees for senate.

[cidliz2004]

33. Can he be?

How can Lieberman be thrown out like NOW!??

[Morose]

34. Joe Must Go

nt

[autorank]

35. You go Paul. I had this thought today. Don't let the door hit you Joe if

you eff with us on this one. What a great point to make...just like Trump does at the end of his show.

[THUNDER HANDS]

36. Lieberman gave more votes to Gore than Edwards did to Kerry

....just sayin'.

[cestpaspossible]

39. How did you quantify that?

...just wonderin'

[cestpaspossible]

38. nt

i read the transcript

[PROGRESSIVE1]

42. If Lieberman backs Bush, then Lieberman should be...

ousted in 06'!

[2diagnosis]

43. First off, you can't oust someone

from a political party. And B- is this what the plan should be? Anyone who disagrees on a policy should be cast out? How about Hillary and her current views on the war? etc..etc..

[cire4]

47. Missing the message....

Of course you can't oust someone from a political party. Begala wasn't being serious in the sense that the Democratic Party will prsent Lieberman with a letter of dismissal. What he was doing is primarily rhetorical. He was trying to convey the message that privatization of social security is not something that the Democratic Party stands for and that supporting it is hardly consistent with Democratic principles and values. If you agree with the Republicans on this particular issue, then you may as well switch your party affiliation because the Democratic Party obviously doesn't fit your mold.

[opihimoimoi]

48. Bingo, sending beer and ribs...............................How astute.....

Ever since the 2000 loss and the 2004 endorsement of Dean... Joe has been leaning right..... is it revenge/etc ?

[John_H]

49. You can oust an elected from your caucus at any time but that's

a moot point. I'd bet Joe Lieberman, after helping chimp on SS, will be a high ranking cabinet official in the bush administration before the midterm elections.

[Beer Snob-50]

51. Chill people!!

We are an open and inclusive party who do not always walk in lock step. Debate is good and we should embrace all factions.

[dameocrat]

55. No it is a make or break issue and Joe and his friend Zell

had no reservations what so ever about recruting a candidate to run against McKinney.

[MNAZ]

52. I'm sure the GOP would be glad to have him....

It would increase their majority.

[dameocrat]

56. not if he loses in the primary.

and Connecticut ain't going to elect a repuke unless it is a good one like Lowell Weiker who was actually more progressive and preferable to Joe.

[erpowers]

53. Crossfire

When is the show going to end?

[Telly Savalas]

57. When CNN can get the rights....

for Fuck You with Pat Buchanan from the writers of America: the Book, so they can use it to replace Crossfire.