Joe Lieberman Shills for McCain

Is anybody watching this charade? He even has the nerve to call himself a Democrat.

Update: He says Obama isn't right for the job because he has no record. And Sarah Palin, who would step into the Presdency should anything happen to John McCain? Please.

Now Lieberman is praising Sarah Palin, calling her a great lady. She's a reformer. She is a leader we can count on to help John shake up Washington. What about counting on her if she has to take over as President? He can't address that. All he can do is steal Obama's message of change.

Update: Now Lieberman steals Obama's red states/blue states meme: "What we need is not more party unity but national unity."

While I dislike the change meme and the unity meme on both sides, it's ridiculous that the Republicans are just mimicking Obama.

< Fred Thompson Attacks Barack Obama | Court Upholds NY Recognition of Out-of-State Same-Sex Marriages >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft

  • Display: Sort:
    I am in awe (5.00 / 0) (#2)
    by nrglaw on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:49:39 PM EST
    His betrayal of the party is total.

    Global warmed over (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by pixpixpix on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:50:45 PM EST
    "John McCain led the fight to do something about global warming."

    I must have missed that

    nope, not watching (5.00 / 0) (#4)
    by andgarden on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:50:51 PM EST
    I've got recorded Emeril Green.

    Your picture is missing what Joe is cleaning up. . .

    Is that show any good? (none / 0) (#9)
    by SueBonnetSue on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:53:22 PM EST
    I watch the filming all the time at my local Whole Foods.  I must say, that Emeril is consistently nice to everyone, even at the end of a long day.  Look for me in his commercials and background in his interviews.  

    Amazingly, it is good (5.00 / 0) (#12)
    by andgarden on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:56:45 PM EST
    You get the impression that he got tired of "BAM!" and he knows that everyone else did too. His new shtick is that he refuses to say the word.

    Here he's a quiet, patient, teacher.


    He's a good guy (5.00 / 1) (#23)
    by Redshoes on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:04:29 PM EST
    when last in NOLA I eat at one of his places (can't remember the name) and I always chat up the wait staff -- his folks were pre-Katrina and talked of how he continued to pay them post-Katrina until everything back back up.  Pretty loyal and had nice things to say.

    So BAM or no BAM he's cool.

    That said, my favorite restaurant in NOLA is August.  Food just melts in your mouth....


    It's my favorite too, (none / 0) (#37)
    by SueBonnetSue on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:10:20 PM EST
    We ate there twice in the same week, because it was the best.  The name of the one where we ate was NOLA.  Fantastic.  

    Really? (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by skuld1 on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:05:26 PM EST
    I didn't know that, thanks for the heads up.  That whole BAM! thing really annoyed me :P

    Listening to Him (5.00 / 2) (#6)
    by glanton on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:52:11 PM EST
    Makes flossing with cardboard seem an appealing proposition.

    No Joe (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by domerdem on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:57:08 PM EST
    I am angry and frustrated with you

    Posted this on the prior thread before I knew (5.00 / 3) (#17)
    by litigatormom on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:00:08 PM EST
    this one was up.

    McCain is more bipartisan than Obama! It shouldn't take a natural disaster to make Democrats and Republicans work together!
    McCain is not like Bush! He is not a partisan Republican! Democrats are lying when they say that!  (Was McCain lying when he said that?) God only made one John McCain and he is his own man. If John McCain is a partisan Republican, then Liebertoad is Michael Moore's favorite Republican.

    So he's not just supporting McCain on national security. And keeps calling himself a Democrat.

    On Obama: talented but too young. Times too perilous for someone lacking accomplishment.  Obama has not reached across party lines to accomplish anything significant.  Contrast to McCain's record  of bipartisan accomplishment. Contrast Obama's record to Clinton, who got important things done like welfare reform, balanced budget!  {The crowd gives muted applause; Liebertoad does not address the fact that McCain wants to ape Bush economic policies.)

    Now Liebertoad talks about Palin as a leader who can help McCain shake up Washington.  Real ticket for change is McCain-Palin ticket.

    Others wanted to withdraw in defeat from the battlefield.  Some like Obama wanted to cut off funding for troops on the battlefield.  Thanks to McCain's courage, troops are coming with honor.
    (Alas, also without adequate medical care, which Liebertoad does not mention.)

    Oooh, McCain is popular among foreign leaders!  But our enemies will fear him!  (But I thought it was not good for foreign leaders to like our president?  That's what Fred Thompson told me.)

    Liebertoad wants to speak to independents and fellow Democrats.  You are angry and frustrated with politics.  You may have never voted for a Republican before.  But this is no ordinary election.  Because these are not ordinary times.  McCain is no ordinary canadidate.  You may not agree with McCain on every issue, but you will always know where he stands. You can trust him to be what he is naturally, a restless reformer.

    So I want to ask you if you are various kinds of Democrats, vote for the person you believe is best for the country, not for the party you belong to.  Because the guy who supports everything you hate is best for the country.  McCain always puts America first.  (That's why he chose Sarah Palin to be vice-president.)

    Can we throw him out of the Democratic caucus now?  This is really unconscionable.  


    not bipartisan? (5.00 / 2) (#44)
    by A DC Wonk on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:15:03 PM EST
    Is Lieberman unaware of the Obama-Lugar Act (hint: Lugar is (R)), or Obama-Coburn (hint: Coburn is (R)).

    True, there is McCain-Feingold, but McCain says he'd vote against it now.

    True, McCain voted against Bush's tax cuts (as did Lieberman), but McCain says he wants to make them permanent now.

    Sheesh . . . .


    Obama has one law with his name on it? (2.00 / 1) (#55)
    by SueBonnetSue on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:21:24 PM EST
    And McCain has how many?  I don't think we want to go down this road.  

    I named two (5.00 / 0) (#56)
    by A DC Wonk on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:22:35 PM EST
    and my point was not how many...

    That's Flip-Flop not bipartisan. ;-) (none / 0) (#54)
    by themomcat on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:19:51 PM EST
    If we throw him out, (none / 0) (#34)
    by SueBonnetSue on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:08:37 PM EST
    Doesn't that flip the Senate?  Some democrat committee chairs might object to that.  

    Not when we throw him out (5.00 / 0) (#36)
    by Pegasus on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:10:08 PM EST
    next January.

    No, it wouldn't flip the Senate (5.00 / 2) (#39)
    by litigatormom on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:11:53 PM EST
    There was an agreement after the 2006 election that a Dem would be majority leader even if someone switched parties.

    And if we don't toss him now, he MUST be tossed in January.


    Good synopsis of his speech (none / 0) (#95)
    by wasabi on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 11:53:21 PM EST
    What will the Democrats say tomorrow?  I guess it's a good thing for Joe that Congress is on vacation.

    I don't like charades (5.00 / 1) (#10)
    by themomcat on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:54:13 PM EST
    Except maybe the movie with Audrey Hepburn and Cary Grant. Filmed in Paris, great thriller/ romance and loved the music.

    "for the party you happen to be in..." (5.00 / 1) (#21)
    by Oje on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:03:29 PM EST
    Wow, Joe, you mean being a Democrat just happened to me?

    Oh, good, Donna Brazile. I wonder what role she had in picking Joe to be VP 8 years ago...

    This is not the Joe she knew (5.00 / 2) (#33)
    by litigatormom on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:07:44 PM EST
    she says.  But then she says, "Maybe we should have given him more red meat in 2000."  WTF? then she limply points out that Liebertoad agrees with Obama 90% of the time.  Can we get her out of the party leadership? Please?

    At least Gergen notes that Democrats will think that Liebertoad has gone over the line by attacking Obama directly. Duh.


    "This is not the Joe I knew..." (5.00 / 2) (#89)
    by Grace on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 11:17:25 PM EST
    "This is not the Bill I knew..."
    "This is not the John I knew..."
    "This is not the Reverend I knew..."

    Sigh.  It seems like the standard answer this year.  

    That was not the Donna I knew...  



    The DNC is not the party I knew (5.00 / 2) (#96)
    by Prabhata on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 11:54:28 PM EST
    Party I saw at the DNC 2008 convention roll call is not the party I knew.

    Rate! (none / 0) (#43)
    by Oje on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:14:15 PM EST
    (But I don't like the "toad" part...)

    yes, no more (5.00 / 0) (#50)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:18:29 PM EST
    Liebertoad references, we don't do name-calling here.

    Sorry (5.00 / 1) (#53)
    by litigatormom on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:19:31 PM EST
    It's a nickname I've used for a long time.  Won't use again.

    Yeah, McCain has a record (5.00 / 2) (#24)
    by litigatormom on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:04:39 PM EST
    A record of being wrong.

    your disagreement has been noted (5.00 / 2) (#49)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:17:42 PM EST
    and I strongly disagree. Please stop repeating it multiple times in a single threed. We heard you.

    Yes, thank you (5.00 / 1) (#75)
    by Gabriel on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:50:19 PM EST
    I wish McCain supporters would stop pretending they stand for Dem ideals.

    Not 'may' be true (5.00 / 0) (#78)
    by Gabriel on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:51:48 PM EST
    IS  true.

    McCain has terrible judgment and when you have terrible judgment no amount of experience can compensate.


    He doesn't call himself a Democrat (5.00 / 0) (#38)
    by txpolitico67 on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:11:40 PM EST
    He's an Independent.  Wonder how all those fine, er, I mean duped voters feel about Schmokin' Joe now?

    He referred to himself several times (5.00 / 1) (#40)
    by litigatormom on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:12:46 PM EST
    in this speech as a Democrat.  "You may be wondering why a Democrat like me is here...."

    I will defer that (none / 0) (#52)
    by txpolitico67 on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:19:05 PM EST
    since I didn't hear him speak.  I was referring to the initial after his name: Lieberman (I), CT.

    And he'll keep on calling himself a Democrat (none / 0) (#77)
    by nrglaw on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:50:54 PM EST
    as long as the Democrats let him caucus with them. The Dems in the Senate won't wade into that thicket now, though. They don't need to make him a GOP martyr just now. There will be time enough shortly after Election Day.

    He ain't no Democrat (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by shoephone on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 11:29:24 PM EST
    He's a "Connecticut for Lieberman".

    We who supported Ned will not forget.


    You sound (5.00 / 0) (#102)
    by txpolitico67 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 12:23:10 AM EST

    (Sigh.) Clingy too. n/t (none / 0) (#103)
    by shoephone on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 12:51:11 AM EST
    they act like (5.00 / 0) (#45)
    by TimNCGuy on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:15:47 PM EST
    if Palin became president, she wouldn't get to pick her own version of Biden as VP to back her up.

    "national unity, blah, blah, blah" has (5.00 / 1) (#46)
    by tigercourse on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:16:08 PM EST
    been going on for 250 years. Obama's hardly the first pol to chuck that ball around.

    I especially like McCains' (5.00 / 1) (#60)
    by themomcat on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:25:26 PM EST
    solution to the health care crisis. His adviser, a guy named Goodman in an OP-Ed in the WSJ, said that since everyone has access to an Emergency Room everyone has health care coverage. So there is no longer a need for the Census Bureau to count the uninsured. Problem Solved.

    I read that (5.00 / 2) (#67)
    by connecticut yankee on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:33:35 PM EST
    Part two of the plan involves something called Soylent Green.

    Gee (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by litigatormom on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 08:28:33 AM EST
    I didn't know you could go to the emergency room to get chemotherapy or bone marrow transplants!

    BTW, McCain's advisor isn't the first person to make that argument.  Bush himself said it several years ago.  The press -- and the Democratic candidates -- didn't make much of it at the time.  Surprise surprise.


    Words, these days, mean nothing anymore. (5.00 / 1) (#73)
    by Gabriele Droz on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:47:49 PM EST
    Biden was your bottom line, until you decided he was not.

    Promises made, and speaking truth to power, no longer are trustworthy of the words spoken.  And now you are included with the rest of folks who say one thing and do another.

    My love for the Native American culture is based on their most important groundstone of their functioning societies.  Telling the truth at all times were the glue that kept them together, and, amongst many tribes (where no prisons ever existed), the highest form of betrayal was to not speak the truth.

    Our society is filled with so many words, so many interpretatins of words, and so little adherance to actual truths.  We, nowadays have to spend hours on end to FIND the truths amidst all the thousands of words and advertisements being tossed our way every single day.

    Native Americans, on the other hand, felt that silence and contemplation on FEW words were worth far much more.  I agree.

    Chief Joseph, Nez Perce, "It doesn't take many words to take the truth."

    So sorry Jeralyn, that you too got caught up in the million words game, where no one can keep track any more as to what is the truth and what is just words.

    The "Country First" slogan (5.00 / 0) (#94)
    by shoephone on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 11:34:39 PM EST
    is easily debunked, considering the billion$ in debt to China the Republicans have saddled us with.

    Lieberman always ... (5.00 / 1) (#98)
    by Robot Porter on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 12:02:34 AM EST
    reminded me of Henry Gibson.

    When did Joe start peppering his comments (5.00 / 0) (#99)
    by wasabi on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 12:03:27 AM EST
    When did Joe start peppering his comments with "my friends"?  I never noticed that before tonight.  He's annoyingly sounding like McCain.

    He started when he no longer had any... (none / 0) (#116)
    by andrys on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 10:01:55 AM EST
    My impression after hearing (5.00 / 1) (#101)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 12:19:22 AM EST
    Thompson and Lieberman on C-Span:  don't discount the Republicans' ability to communicate.  

    please tell me this is sarcasm (5.00 / 0) (#107)
    by ChuckieTomato on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 01:06:35 AM EST
    It isn't actually. Did you watch their (none / 0) (#121)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 12:46:48 PM EST
    speeches w/o benefit of media commentary?  Quite direct.  Seemed sincere.  Reaching out to all.  To me, much more effective than many of the speeches at the DNC.  

    I want my BTD (5.00 / 2) (#104)
    by facta non verba on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 12:52:45 AM EST
    Where's BTD? It isn't TL without him.

    don't worry the earth is still turning (5.00 / 0) (#108)
    by ChuckieTomato on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 01:08:36 AM EST
    and the sun will rise. Talkleft will go on.

    I think he is coming back


    He's Reviewing the Situation. ;-) (none / 0) (#106)
    by themomcat on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 01:05:49 AM EST
    For Gosh sakes (none / 0) (#109)
    by shoephone on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 02:09:34 AM EST
    He's just taking a few days break. Think of it as his end-of-summer-last-hurrah.

    Bill Bailey, won't you please (none / 0) (#122)
    by oculus on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 12:52:07 PM EST
    come home?

    Don't let the door hit you in the......... (5.00 / 0) (#112)
    by mmc9431 on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 06:21:27 AM EST
    I have to believe Lieberman made this speech realizing that his political career is over and he had nothing to lose. Reid will be pressured to remove him from his committee's after the election. I think that without a national microphone and no Senate power, Lieberman will resign. Polls in Con. show they didn't want him before this. Now, I'm not sure he's going to be welcome to make too many public appearances, even in his home state.

    I like that he says (5.00 / 0) (#114)
    by Jlvngstn on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 09:22:00 AM EST
    she is a reformer.  Because that is what we need in Washington.  What we need is for her to demand that our students in grade school and high school are taught the truth.  According to Palin, mother Earth is approximately 5000 years old and I find it rather distressing that our kids are being taught that the Earth is 4 billion years old.  We need Sarah Palin and our kids need her too.  We also know that the liberals think the Iraq war is all about oil, Sarah knows better.  She knows that this war is sanctioned by God and it is a war for Christianity versus Muslimism, and we need leaders who will take the strong stand for god in our wars and schooling.  Gosh darn I hope she wins, it is about time we got rid of junk science like climate change and evolution and brought back real science like creationism.  How about asking her these 3 questions:

    How old is mother Earth?
    Is evolution junk science?
    What role does god play in the Iraq war?

    Experience Arguments (2.00 / 0) (#110)
    by T X P on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 03:47:42 AM EST
    Instead of having silly rhetorical battles about an issue that makes BOTH Obama and Palin look bad, why can't we just accept an obvious fact and move on to something else?

    The experience issue is a wash. They're either BOTH prepared or BOTH unprepared to be president.

    2 years as a state governor = a short time in a top-level executive position

    6 years as a small-town mayor = irrelevant (it's a small town!)

    4 years as a U.S. senator = a short time in a top-level legislative position (more time, but less similar to the presidency).

    7 years as a state legislator = irrelevant (Illinois' legislature is a den of corrupt party hacks!)

    Furthermore, a lot is being made about Palin's small constituency. So what? Biden's constituency isn't significantly larger. Are we now prepared to say that this fact diminishes what Biden's done? Of course not.

    And lastly, the entire issue pits a WILL against a MIGHT. If the electorate chooses Obama/Biden, Obama WILL become president. Whereas if the electorate chooses McCain/Palin, Palin only MIGHT become president. This poses a potentially HUGE political problem for Obama. Because if these arguments continue to equate inexperience with incompetence (as most of them seem to), undecideds could very well -- and quite rationally -- choose to vote for the lesser of two evils. And who would the lesser of two evils be in an "inexperience equals incompetence" scenario? Palin, because she's only a MIGHT.

    Hopefully, this post doesn't offend anyone. Because that's not my intent. I'm just saying that this line of attack is an exercise in futility -- and a possibly self-defeating one at that. Because it's something that could very well turn out to be a boomerang that comes back and hits the thrower square in the face.

    Since these are being itemized ... (none / 0) (#120)
    by andrys on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 10:11:15 AM EST
    Obama's state-legislature time was part-time

    Obama's, if you count only the time before he started running for President (as we're counting for her) his was 143 days or almost 5 months.  After that he didn't have much time for his Senate duties, as he explained when asked why he didn't hold subcommittee meetings.

    In your comparison of Palin's and Biden's constituencies,
    true.  Few mention the distinction between governing a state and representing it.  There's a lot more day-to-day attention to mainly small but some large details of running everything, which means running a huge organization.  700,000 is a lot in that case and the state covers a lot of ground as has been pointed out.  Senate duties require a lot of time sitting in committees listening (or not), reading, and focusing on 2-3 issues at a time instead of a myriad of them as a Governor must.  So they don't do well to shortshrift her experience as a governor of that state.

      Biden, no one running can match as far as TIME and Range of experience and knowledge built up.  That doesn't help him on Georgia vs Russia I was sorry to see.   I think Obama will be more open to a less b&w approach to that.  Not to mention the dangerous situation with Poland/Iran/Russia, on which we are not innocents.

      I agree with you totally, as far as Dems continuing to compare Obama to Palin!  That is just so obviously going to look weak.



    Can't watch the (none / 0) (#1)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:49:18 PM EST
    sanctimonious little jerk.

    Love the pic!

    I mostly dislike his mouth (5.00 / 0) (#97)
    by Prabhata on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 11:59:55 PM EST
    When Lieberman talks, his mouth looks like the mouth of a fish.

    He's no Fred Thompson (none / 0) (#5)
    by SueBonnetSue on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:51:29 PM EST
    Fred was at least humorous.  Lieberman always looks so sad, but I suspect he does appeal to a few moderate democrats, particularly Jewish voters.  

    Oh gosh, Lieberman is praising Bill Clinton!  


    He always looks (5.00 / 1) (#20)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:02:51 PM EST
    just incredibly self-satisfied to me.  I find such deep self love repulsive in anyone, but particularly in a politician.

    He knows that he's holier than thou (5.00 / 2) (#42)
    by litigatormom on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:13:59 PM EST
    and thou. And thou. And thou too.

    Chuckles the Clown? (none / 0) (#7)
    by domerdem on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:52:50 PM EST

    Mary Tyler Moore? (none / 0) (#25)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:05:17 PM EST
    Now I know why... (none / 0) (#8)
    by santarita on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:53:11 PM EST
    Gore couldn't capture the White House.

    I can't believe what a hack this guy is.  And I don't like that little laugh that he makes at his own witticisms.

    Did you catch the little whining (5.00 / 1) (#22)
    by litigatormom on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:03:54 PM EST
    bit at the beginning, when he said, you don't know how much it means to be to be welcome?

    Hell hath no fury like a toadie scorned.


    Whining and Smirking... (5.00 / 0) (#65)
    by santarita on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:32:06 PM EST
    not a winning combination.

    The nicest thing that I can say about Lieberman is that just maybe he feels such personal affection for McCain that he has lost any sense of perspective.  

    I just continue to wonder who thought that Lieberman was right for the 2000 ticket.  The guy was probably a Republican mole back then, too.


    LIEberman has always reminded me (none / 0) (#87)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 11:05:46 PM EST
    of Doug and Wendy Whiner....but I've got diverticulitis....

    And it does beg the question, if we are upset with joe now, what were we to think when it was thought that McCain would be a good VP for Kerry?
    Kinda bizarre....


    A Mistaken Understanding of a National... (none / 0) (#90)
    by santarita on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 11:19:08 PM EST
    Unity ticket, I guess.  The concept of a national unity ticket works if the nominees of both parties join forces for the ticket, with the backing of both parties.  To try for a national unity ticket in a two party election is probably a loser ticket from the beginning.  If Kerry had picked McCain, McCain would have been vilified by his own party and Kerry would have someone who he couldn't agree with or trust on the ticket.  

    I wonder what Al Gore thinks of his running mate after tonight.


    Gore may have known (none / 0) (#111)
    by Fabian on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 05:12:39 AM EST
    that Lieberman always was a total suck up.

    Al Gore picked Lieberman for a reason: to win (none / 0) (#123)
    by bridget on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 02:27:12 PM EST
    the 2000 election. I doubt by now Al Gore is surprised about anything JL does. He would have to be in deep denial otherwise.

    In 2000 Al Gore picked JL as his running mate because he had the "Mr. Morality and family values" reputation. What a huge disappointment Al Gore was in that department. It ruined the whole 2000 election for me.

    Lieberman was already a v. popular Dem in his party but relatively unknown to the voters. He put himself on the map Big Time when he jumped on the Senate floor and maligned President Clinton who was out of the country at the time. Proudly he gave the "morality" lesson to President Clinton. I was speechless. But the media loved it. And as it turned out, so did the Dem leaders. Lieberman's career was made. They practically handed him the power on a silver platter.

    So As always Dems fell into the GOP trap and showed the usual insecurity of the Dem party when it comes to morality, "family values" (THE talking point at the time), patriotism.

    Family values in 2000, patriotism and national security in 2008. Nothing has changed. Right now McCain and Obama are outdoing themselves with war talk and it this is especially terrifying because nobody seems to find anything wrong with it.

    The next four years are the most dangerous times we can find ourselves in together with the rest of the world.

    Yet the pregnant teen daughter of VP is the talk of the day. Unbelievable.


    Remember that Kerry wanted (none / 0) (#115)
    by andrys on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 09:49:56 AM EST

     (he was a different McCain then.)


    No he wasn't. (none / 0) (#124)
    by bridget on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 02:46:25 PM EST
    People just decided to change their perceptions of McCain.

    Like with Obama today, the McCain admirers heard different things when he spoke his lines. For eight years straight McCain just couldn't do no wrong.

    Dem pundits absolutely loved him and wrote that he had to talk rightwing stuff in order to win. Once he was elected ... blahblahblah. In the meantime Pundits and Journalists disappeared all the negative stuff that would have made him look bad. Bob Somersby wrote the book.

    Deep in his heart McCain was more like a liberal pundits like Michael Kinsley wrote. This socalled liberal fellow wrote the ultimate McCain love letter about McCain AFAIR. Worth a google for sure.


    He sure does drone on............... (none / 0) (#11)
    by SueBonnetSue on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:54:14 PM EST
    He's going to put the nation to sleep!  

    Heh (5.00 / 0) (#16)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:58:59 PM EST
    If McCain had picked him, it would be no more Ambien!!

    At least the turncoat Zell Miller had (5.00 / 1) (#29)
    by PssttCmere08 on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:05:44 PM EST
    more pizazz...

    Ok, you take over now (none / 0) (#15)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 09:58:53 PM EST
    Big Brother 10 is starting. It's a "power of veto" night on the show.

    Don't go Jeralyn! (none / 0) (#18)
    by FoxholeAtheist on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:01:47 PM EST
    It could get weird around here without your oversight.

    I'll come in during commercials (none / 0) (#48)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:16:29 PM EST
    to clean the thread.

    Hozzie's comments were deleted for Obama bashing and chattering, he's advocating for McCain/Palin. No more than four comments a day and no insults. He's banned for now.


    BB 10 Pre-empted here in the East (none / 0) (#30)
    by themomcat on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:06:55 PM EST
    for you know what. But "The Daily Show" is good perspective.

    Elephant In The Room (none / 0) (#59)
    by txpolitico67 on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:23:28 PM EST
    (pun intended).  Wasn't Lieberman OBAMA's mentor or something like that?  Obama DID support Lieberman's election.

    Irony is just to the hilt on that!

    And for those who will be screaming for a LINK:


    The harvest.... (none / 0) (#62)
    by Oje on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:30:37 PM EST
    This is what post-partisanship reaps. Without party, individual politicians switch allegiances, engage in cross-party endorsements that seem petty and   personal (wrapped in fine packaging, called "America First").

    Lieberman, I have a messge for you (none / 0) (#66)
    by themomcat on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:32:40 PM EST
    Tell this to the Republican Senators that vote in lock steo with GWB:
    Update: Now Lieberman steals Obama's red states/blue states meme: "What we need is not more party unity but national unity."

    What about public protests today? (none / 0) (#68)
    by EL seattle on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:35:49 PM EST
    Were there any arrests, marches, pseudo-riots, etc. outside the convention?

    CNN had a report (none / 0) (#81)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:55:42 PM EST
    I only got in on the end of, showing protesters being gassed.  CNN Chyron at the bottom of the screen said something like "chemical weapons used on protesters."

    That was about an hour ago, and I haven't seen a thing about it since.

    Back in the '60s, we got gassed in peaceful protests all the time, and mostly it wasn't reported at all.  Once after it happened to me at a big demo in Washington where there was a police riot, I stood in line for a long time to use a public phone to call my folks and reassure them I was OK, and was stunned to find out they knew nothing about it because it hadn't been reported.  Never was after the fact, either.

    And so it goes.


    I could go for that! (none / 0) (#82)
    by gyrfalcon on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 10:56:06 PM EST

    thread cleaned of non-political comments (none / 0) (#88)
    by Jeralyn on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 11:14:18 PM EST
    Stay on topic please, this is not an open thread.

    Thoughts on RNC tonight.... (none / 0) (#91)
    by Oje on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 11:28:59 PM EST
    Democrats have lost the personality battle for the past two elections. In this past primary, as a Clinton Democrat, the effort to get out Democratic votes for a personality over policies or party was certainly one takeaway for me. In this year, the winning personality is obviously on the Democrats' side.

    The "Country First" signs... kind of a not-too--subtle nod to the way they want to package their candidate. I do not know if they continue to do this through the next few nights, and even for the next few months, but this could be an effective way for conservatives to get behind a candidate with which they can not wholly and personally identify. So, in my area, I expect to see far more "Country First" bumper stickers rather than "McCain / Palin" stickers (I saw many "W "stickers well into 2007, so I regard this as substantive symbolic change in how conservatives are being asked to identify with their party).

    From a Democratic perspective, Lieberman was vile. But, the "issues" he raised in the RNC must have grated on the leaderships' nerves. Global warming, corporate profits, etc. A shot out to Bill Clinton (which was for media hacks like Borger who implied something unseemly about Clinton's support of Lieberman in 2006 without mentioning Obama's support in 2006 - those Clinton's always plotting against Obama, as far back as 2006!). I suspect McCain's campaign plans to use bipartisanship as a winning issue at the end of the stretch. The Congress will be Democratic in 2009 and the extent of Democratic control will become evident in the final few weeks of the campaign. That may be when McCain exploits the notion of bipartisanship (currently being sold by both candidates) as a means to leverage voters' perceived inclinations this year.

    Lastly, the Democratic wedge. Obama is still a promising politician, but his time is not now. Rather than ask swing voters to evaluate Obama's experience, they are asking voters to consider Obama's destiny. It is possible to be both for and against Obama's march to history... and it is okay to defer that history for four years. After the past primary, nothing would thrill Republicans more than to see Obama defeated with the media walking away shaking their heads, muttering that voters thought "now was not Obama's time." If such a media narrative formed among the political or 'creative class', an Obama campaign in 2012 would be in the works almost immediately. This might (if PUMA survives) create an incredible wedge in the Democratic base, half of whom perhaps regard 2012 as Clinton's turn should Obama lose. Republican wet dream: primary 2012, redux 2008.

    translation (5.00 / 0) (#100)
    by hitchhiker on Wed Sep 03, 2008 at 12:14:08 AM EST
    country first = please forget that we are republicans until after the election.

    Correction for Obamaphiles.... (none / 0) (#93)
    by Oje on Tue Sep 02, 2008 at 11:31:45 PM EST
    Last paragraph, intended meaning of second sentence; "Republicans want to sell the notion that "Obama is still a promising politician, but his time is not now."