revel wrote:real life wrote:ossobuco wrote:They are expecting Dems to listen to Lieberman?
They should.
He won his race and didn't even have the support of his party.
If you want a man who knows how to draw from the political center, he's among the top 3 IMHO.
But I really hope that they don't listen to him. Crash and burn.
Considering that Lieberman has bascially been a parrot for this administration the "dems" wouldn't listen to him on a platter even if it did cost votes. At least this dem wouldn't. We may as well become neo-cons ourselves.
I think it was past loyalty to Lieberman in his own hometown that won him the re-election. On the whole most liberals did better in 2006 than did republicans or democrats acting like republicans.
Lieberman is one of the few Dems who has not played politics with the war.
He doesn't come from the al Jazeera wing of the Democratic party.
Would you have preferred that Saddam were still in power , filling mass graves with the bodies of his political enemies, financing and harboring terrorists, building himself palaces while denying basic human rights to his people, and violating the terms of the ceasefire of the Gulf War?
The present action in Iraq is simply the result of Saddam's calculated deception.
He was afraid of Iran and set out to deceive the world into thinking he was actively developing WMDs.
Saddam lied, people died.
Dems won't admit this because then they'd have to be loyal Americans and back American foreign policy.
Partisanship used to end at the water's edge. Not any more.
Dems have actively sought to undermine American interests at every turn.
They are a disgrace, and Joe Lieberman is one of the few exceptions, a Dem with integrity.
