0
   

Lieberman Forms Pro-McCain Group

 
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2008 08:56 am
gosh cj that's too bad... because we're just thrilled to have you
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  0  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2008 09:05 am
Too bad you didn't hang out with some of the hippies I knew. They used to throw .22LR's into fires for fun. At least as a kid who grew up around guns, I knew what they were up to and knew enough to get the hell away from them.
0 Replies
 
Gala
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2008 12:29 pm
cj, you clumped Bush in their with the left-wingers and are saying because of Bush we are screwed? well i'll be darned.
0 Replies
 
cjhsa
 
  0  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2008 12:51 pm
He's way too liberal for me. I support him on most of the issues that the haters here bash him for though.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2008 02:20 pm
I was born in sixt five, think I missed the hippie stage. Hippies have nothing to do with Lieberman choosing to go along with the administration on Iraq and other such issues; nor do radical lefties. He is simply a hawk on foreign matters and a liberal on other matters. It makes it hard for him to fit. However, he chose the side who manipulated the American people into war. Better to have stayed a hippie radical leftist pinko commie.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2008 08:28 pm
engineer wrote:
Liberman is an interesting character study. He's really become a one issue candidate. He's generally with the Dems on social issues, but when it comes to Israel issues, he is with whoever is the most militant (the Republicans currently.) That issue completely defines him. At least he's a willing to lay it on the line for his beliefs,


That sounds a lot like me, except it is the Second Amendment that trumps the DNC in my case.



engineer wrote:
but I think it is reducing his effectiveness since the Republicans will never embrace him and his alienating the Dems.


I think it's more a matter of the Dems alienating him than the other way around. When a party lets their radicals abuse their 2000 VP candidate to the point where he is willing to openly campaign for the 2008 presidential candidate of the opposing party, it is a sign that someone needs to rein in the radicals before they destroy the party completely.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2008 08:31 pm
cjhsa wrote:
some of the hippies I knew. They used to throw .22LR's into fires for fun.


Could put your eye out that way.....
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2008 08:43 pm
Which Democratic priciples do you believe in, oralloy?
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2008 09:49 pm
snood wrote:
Which Democratic priciples do you believe in, oralloy?


In general, higher taxes on the rich and more social spending on the poor.

In particular, I'd like to see a single-payer health care system.

I liked Hillary's 1993 health care plan (but wasn't impressed with her 2008 plan, or Obama's -- though I liked Kucinich's 2008 plan).

Canada's health care system would be a good model for America to follow.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Fri 6 Jun, 2008 09:53 pm
I see the first round of anti-Obama gun control talking points are out.

Think I'll start a thread on them before I go to bed.
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2008 08:26 am
oralloy wrote:
I think it's more a matter of the Dems alienating him than the other way around. When a party lets their radicals abuse their 2000 VP candidate to the point where he is willing to openly campaign for the 2008 presidential candidate of the opposing party, it is a sign that someone needs to rein in the radicals before they destroy the party completely.

I think the opposite is true. Most members of Congress supported him in his independent run for the Senate, even though he lost the local Democratic primary. He has not been "punished" in any way for his actions and still has all his plum committee assignments in the Senate. Of course, the Dems need his vote in their caucus, but he's seen very little backlash so far for his rebellion against his former party.
0 Replies
 
rabel22
 
  1  
Reply Sat 7 Jun, 2008 09:43 am
A lot of that could because this congress seems to be weak and ineffective.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/02/2024 at 10:31:54