• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Joe Leiberman (1 Viewer)

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I just saw Joe Leiberman being interviewed.........I love seeing that big (I) next to his name........It really has to torque the jaws of the democrats and Liberals who stabbed him in the back.........
 
I just saw Joe Leiberman being interviewed.........I love seeing that big (I) next to his name........It really has to torque the jaws of the democrats and Liberals who stabbed him in the back.........

Can you explain to me where the debate here is?
Or what the point of this was??????
 
Can you explain to me where the debate here is?
Or what the point of this was??????


I would say the debate might be as to how Leiberman might vote as and Independent........
 
I would say the debate might be as to how Leiberman might vote as and Independent........
Good luck talking sensibly about how he will vote with that kind of OP.
 
I just saw Joe Leiberman being interviewed.........I love seeing that big (I) next to his name........It really has to torque the jaws of the democrats and Liberals who stabbed him in the back.........

The liberals and democrats who stabbed HIM in the back? Whoa, that's an interesting view of the situation.

When I looked at it, the situation went more like this: Lieberman claims to be a Democrat, claims to be a Liberal, and gets elected on that. Then when he gets to Washington he does the opposite of the ideas he was elected to represent. Voting for the war in Iraq and all things attached to it, splitting with the Democrats and voting with the Republicans on key issues, and all that stuff that he did. The Democrats had every right to kick his arse out of the party and off their ticket, because he didn't do what he was elected to do in Washington. I say bravo to the Democrats in Connecticut who showed him that you can't claim to be a Democrat and then go to Washington and not be a Democrat when voting.
Am I a big fan of the Democratic Party - no. In fact, I loathe it. But I'll tell you that what they did in Connecticut could have only been better if they had elected the guy the Dems picked to replace Lieberman - finally showing those fat cats in Washington that when you don't represent the ideals of the people who put you in power, you get booted out - even if you are a part of their political party.
 
The cons dumped on their own Republican candidate to back Lieberman. :doh :lol:
 
The cons dumped on their own Republican candidate to back Lieberman. :doh :lol:
Better chances for a Neo-con who finally came out of his disguise as a Democrat to win. Because not everyone had figured out his leanings yet apparently...
 
Joe Leiberman is probably one of a very select group of Politicians who are pragmatists.
 
The liberals and democrats who stabbed HIM in the back? Whoa, that's an interesting view of the situation.

When I looked at it, the situation went more like this: Lieberman claims to be a Democrat, claims to be a Liberal, and gets elected on that. Then when he gets to Washington he does the opposite of the ideas he was elected to represent. Voting for the war in Iraq and all things attached to it, splitting with the Democrats and voting with the Republicans on key issues, and all that stuff that he did. The Democrats had every right to kick his arse out of the party and off their ticket, because he didn't do what he was elected to do in Washington. I say bravo to the Democrats in Connecticut who showed him that you can't claim to be a Democrat and then go to Washington and not be a Democrat when voting.
Am I a big fan of the Democratic Party - no. In fact, I loathe it. But I'll tell you that what they did in Connecticut could have only been better if they had elected the guy the Democrats picked to replace Lieberman - finally showing those fat cats in Washington that when you don't represent the ideals of the people who put you in power, you get booted out - even if you are a part of their political party.

What the hell are you talking about? He voted with his caucas 90% of the time and as did the majority of his caucas voted to invade Iraq.............Now because he is a man of principle and wants to finsish the job we started in Iraq and the rest of his Caucas want to "Cut and Run" in Iraq they deserted him......I guess you can't have a different opinion if your a democrat, if you do you get stabbed in the back...
 
Better chances for a Neo-con who finally came out of his disguise as a Democrat to win. Because not everyone had figured out his leanings yet apparently...

Do you truly think Leiberman is a Neo Con?
 
What the hell are you talking about? He voted with his caucas 90% of the time and as did the majority of his caucas voted to invade Iraq.............Now because he is a man of principle and wants to finsish the job we started in Iraq and the rest of his Caucas want to "Cut and Run" in Iraq they deserted him......I guess you can't have a different opinion if your a democrat, if you do you get stabbed in the back...
No, you don't get 'stabbed in the back' - that's an absurd term. Lieberman doesn't represent CT Democrats, and they booted him. You can have a different opinion, but don't pretend like you agree with the reigning party line if you don't - it's that simple.

Do you truly think Leiberman is a Neo Con?
I was exaggerating. No, I don't think he's a Neo-con. He is significally further right on the spectrum than the rest of his party though, and CT Republicans were jumping at the opportunity to support him.
 
No, you don't get 'stabbed in the back' - that's an absurd term. Lieberman doesn't represent CT Democrats, and they booted him. You can have a different opinion, but don't pretend like you agree with the reigning party line if you don't - it's that simple.


I was exaggerating. No, I don't think he's a Neo-con. He is significally further right on the spectrum than the rest of his party though, and CT Republicans were jumping at the opportunity to support him.


24% of the Dems in Ct. Voted for Leiberman plus the majority of Independentsand Republicans.........They are the people he represents as and Independent.........If you think that one day Senator Dodd standing behind Leiberman and the next he is standing behind Lamont is not stabbing him in the back then you live in a fairy land my liberal friend.........
 
So, clearly, he doesn't represent the views of CT Dems... that's what I said already. If only 24% voted for him, that means that 76% DIDN'T, meaning the vast majority of CT Democrats think he doesn't represent their values.
And did you expect independent Republicans to vote for someone else? That was their only chance to get someone close to their political leaning in office.
 
Re: Joe Lieberman

I have a lot of respect for Joe Lieberman, he is a true maverick with his party. That's more than I can say for that half-witted John McCain that lurks within the bowels of my party.

Lieberman votes his values, and despite being pushed out of his party by anti-war leftists in the primary, was re-elected as an independent who ran on those values.

Despite disagreeing with him on most issues, I am glad that he will remain a senator. I shudder at the thought of Ned Lame-ont in the senate.
 
Re: Joe Lieberman

I have a lot of respect for Joe Lieberman, he is a true maverick with his party. That's more than I can say for that half-witted John McCain that lurks within the bowels of my party.

Lieberman votes his values, and despite being pushed out of his party by anti-war leftists in the primary, was re-elected as an independent who ran on those values.

Despite disagreeing with him on most issues, I am glad that he will remain a senator. I shudder at the thought of Ned Lame-ont in the senate.

Don't agree with you on McCain but am with you on the rest......I disagree on almost every issue with Leiberman but the most important one the war in Iraq and on terror.......He unlike most democrats is not a Monday Morning QB but a man of principles..........
 
Re: Joe Lieberman

Don't agree with you on McCain but am with you on the rest......I disagree on almost every issue with Leiberman but the most important one the war in Iraq and on terror.......He unlike most democrats is not a Monday Morning QB but a man of principles..........

Yes, because its not wise to review our actions and determine if they are justified...Lets just ignore the thought of whether or not we sent Americans to die for a just cause.. :roll: Very Principled of you NP....
 
Re: Joe Lieberman

Yes, because its not wise to review our actions and determine if they are justified...Lets just ignore the thought of whether or not we sent Americans to die for a just cause.. :roll: Very Principled of you NP....

You damn right and in spite of "Cut and Runners' and Bush haters like you we will prevail in Iraq...............
 
Re: Joe Lieberman

You damn right and in spite of "Cut and Runners' and Bush haters like you we will prevail in Iraq...............

Will we do that by "staying the course" or changing our plan?

And, if we changed our plan... Why? Was it due to looking back and seeing what worked and didn't work?

And if so... What do they call that in football terms?????

:lol:
 
Re: Joe Lieberman

Don't agree with you on McCain but am with you on the rest......I disagree on almost every issue with Leiberman but the most important one the war in Iraq and on terror.......He unlike most democrats is not a Monday Morning QB but a man of principles..........

My beef with McCain rests in the fact that he is nothing short of a panderer and an oppertunist. However, we will save this debate for another thread. :cool:

Caine said:
Will we do that by "staying the course" or changing our plan?

And, if we changed our plan... Why? Was it due to looking back and seeing what worked and didn't work?

And if so... What do they call that in football terms?????

Frankly, I don't think success in Iraq could be any more feasible through withdrawal time tables and exit strategies than through our current plan. It is hard, there have been casualties, but this is war. It sucks, but it's the truth. On the bright side, we have killed terrorist leaders, removed a tyrant, and weakened the islamofascist movement.

Pulling out now would leave nothing but a brown stain on the underpants of historical record. Perseverance however, may leave the world with something positive in the long run.

I wont say that Iraq has been a well-managed war which has displayed the significant power of the American military, because let's face it, it hasn't. What I will say though is that we are making progress, progress that will leave the world a better place when you and I are both put in the ground.
 
So that's what it is called when you lose a primary election, being stabbed in the back by your party. Interesting.
 
So that's what it is called when you lose a primary election, being stabbed in the back by your party. Interesting.

Judging by the General election The primary was actually a joke and if you don't find it strange Senator Dodd standing behind Leiberman one day and the next standing behind Lamont.......
 
You go with the winner, he is your party's candidate. This is old news, Joe Lieberman lost the primary and so Democrats went with the man who won.

Can it be argued the opposite? Idaho's newest rep Bill Sali, only won the primary with like 30%. A majority of republicans voted for another candidate, yet he is now their representative. Is he able to say that people stabbed him in the back? Maybe you can blame the electoral system.
 
You go with the winner, he is your party's candidate. This is old news, Joe Lieberman lost the primary and so Democrats went with the man who won.

Can it be argued the opposite? Idaho's newest rep Bill Sali, only won the primary with like 30%. A majority of republicans voted for another candidate, yet he is now their representative. Is he able to say that people stabbed him in the back? Maybe you can blame the electoral system.

I blame the whacked out left wing democratic party base in Conn. for nominating a far left lib like Lamont..................I just hope Leiberman burns the *** when he votes on bills........
 
Re: Joe Lieberman

Frankly, I don't think success in Iraq could be any more feasible through withdrawal time tables and exit strategies than through our current plan.
Where did I mention time tables and withdrawls?
And, what IS "our current plan"? If one watched the news, they would realize that the plan is being changed and they are working on ways to change it, How are they doing that? By looking back and seeing what worked and what didn't. In football terms that could be called "monday morning QBing".
It is hard, there have been casualties, but this is war. It sucks, but it's the truth.
What do you know about war?
On the bright side, we have killed terrorist leaders, removed a tyrant, and weakened the islamofascist movement.
Yes, Yes, and No.
Exactly how have we weakened the islamofascist movement? It appears we have pissed more islamic people off and turned them into little insurgents to me. But then again, I only spent 16 months in Iraq, I don't know what the hell im talking about. :roll:

Pulling out now would leave nothing but a brown stain on the underpants of historical record. Perseverance however, may leave the world with something positive in the long run.
Again... where did I mention pulling out???!?!??!?

I wont say that Iraq has been a well-managed war which has displayed the significant power of the American military, because let's face it, it hasn't. What I will say though is that we are making progress, progress that will leave the world a better place when you and I are both put in the ground.


Where is the progress?????

I always hear all this crap about progress and making the world a better place, But what I SEE is violence and murder and destruction. (not caused by us). Our boys and girls are sitting over there in a friggin' civil war, and are being used as practice targets for training terrorists and death squad members. Both things that didn't exist in Iraq prior to our arrival.
 
Quote
(I wont say that Iraq has been a well-managed war which has displayed the significant power of the American military, because let's face it, it hasn't. What I will say though is that we are making progress, )

Iraq war is how not to fight a war in order to win it.
But I concur with your thought that we are making progress.

Quote
(progress that will leave the world a better place when you and I are both put in the ground.)

The above remains to be seen.

It would be the utmost stupidity for the US and Allies to unilaterally withdraw leaving Iraq in the throes of a civil war, the picture that would give those few nations that still trust us, would be that when the going gets tough, the US gets out.
That is not what those of our friendly allies would wish to hear.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom