Lieberman is a soulless sleaze

Tags: Politics, Joe Lieberman
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Read Discussion
Reply to All

Yes, I've did that in this election too (though, mainly with my local politicians).

0 Replies

I suppose if I vote based on party affilation it would be much better in the U.S.. Or so you seem to think. I still let my pols know that I am not happy with thier decisions. It would be much better if we could vote on thier decisions more often than every 4 years or so. However I am happy for you because you seem to think that everything is rosy as long as the controll goes to the dems. Let us see how you think in 2 0r 4 years from now. If you dont mind though your majesty I will continue to be unhappy with all the politicians both dem and rep. By the way you use the term democratic for our government. It isent.

1 Reply

http://images.huffingtonpost.com/2009-10-30-dancart4149.jpg

0 Replies

@rabel22,

Just out of curiosity (and I know this is a big hypothetical).

What would you do if you were ever happy?

1 Reply

@ebrown p,

The only time I am not happy is when I am talking about politicians and thier supporters who arnt smart enough to realize that that a majority of them are screwing thier supporters blind. The politicians take political contributions from them so they can run for office and become richer. They almost always become shills for big business after they have done the big business peoples business in congress. Its all about money except of course people like you who like the dems because you think that open borders will become the norm to keep the illegals coming across the border. And before you start on what a raceist I am I still think that legal immagrents are a good thing.

1 Reply

@rabel22,

Currently my money is going to get a decent health care plan with a public option. The political contributions of individuals like me are actually thwarting the money from the corporations, Harry Reid (someone I am not always thrilled with) is putting the public option, the big corporations don't want, into the mark up.

Recently I was happy that my contributions to the Democrats helped pass the Lily Ledbetter act which ensures fair pay for women in the workplace (against the interests of big business).

Most of the Democrats support increased rights for labor and protections for organizers. The EFCA has significant support in the Democratic caucus (over the strong objections of big business).

Then there is Net Neutrality and Credit Card reform.

You can always look at the negatives, or you can seek out and support the positive things that the Democrats are doing.

1 Reply

@ebrown p,

Quote:

You can always look at the negatives, or you can seek out and support the positive things that the Democrats are doing.

I agree.
When I look at who has hurt or helped the most people in this country I find the Democrats to be the better of the parties. My biggest complaint is they tend to be wimps and are willing to cave in on their best ideas to so called bipartisanship (read: Republican bullying). Clinton was the King of Wimpyness. I'm hoping Obama will put up a better fight and I will try to vote for people who will support him in his efforts.

PS- I think both sides think Liberman is a hypocrite and a jerk even within the allowances of being a politician.

0 Replies

@rabel22,

rabel22 wrote:

I have taken to voting against the incumbent. If I have to vote for a crook than I think we should spread the wealth among many crooks.

I quite like this approach. Definitely something to consider in those elections where none of the available candidates seem sane or trust-worthy.

1 Reply

@ehBeth,

That's a fine attitude in any state but my own.

If people in other states always vote for incumbents-- that is fine. It means that my representatives from my state will get the power that comes with seniority.

I figure that stronger of a voice I have in Congress the better-- if other people want to weaken their own representatives out of spite, it's fine with me.

0 Replies

Quote:

Now Lieberman the committee chairman says he’ll oppose the health care bill if it has a public option, because that will add too much to the deficit. That makes no sense to me, since the public option is actually a vehicle to control health costs. But there you are. Connecticut is a state full of insurance companies, and maybe it should come as no surprise that he’s caving in to their concerns.

.But now he’s running around on the Sunday talk shows announcing that he’ll support a filibuster — keep the whole plan from coming up for a vote unless the public option goes. And he says he’s doing this as a matter of conscience. He wants the world to admire him for stopping the Senate from having an opportunity to vote on a health care plan the president campaigned for and a majority of the chamber supports.

If Lieberman had just said “look, this is bad for a big industry in my state and I’m going to use whatever tools I can get my hands on to stop it in its tracks” I would still be in despair, but not in my current state of door-pounding, head-banging rage.

But he wants us to admire him! As if he was risking his career to save puppies or fight unemployment!

http://theconversation.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/11/11/awed-and-depressed-by-a-health-care-bill/

RIGHT ON......

0 Replies

Read Discussion
Reply to All

Lieberman is a soulless sleaze

Related Topics