In his re-election bid, Sen. Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., is thinking of adopting a campaign strategy similar to that of some Kansas moderates. With his primary challenger gaining ground, Lieberman is considering collecting signatures to get on the November ballot as an independent. If Lieberman loses the primary to Christopher Kukk, he would then have one day to turn in 7,500 signatures to enter the general election as an unaffiliated candidate. Although collecting signatures before the primary would be a sign of weakness and could alienate Democrats, Lieberman may consider it a risk worth taking. He may know what the Republican-turned-Democrats in Kansas know: You can’t win if you aren’t on the November ballot.
Posted by Melissa Cooley
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Skeptic on Jail consultants straining patience
- Chas on Health care reform would save state money
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Politico on Health care reform would save state money
- Politico on So they said
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
- Rage on Open thread 11/22
27 Comments
“Considering” and “doing” are two different things. Lieberman takes so long to make decisions, he makes Mario Cuomo look like an impulse thinker.
He is a good Democrat. I actually really like Lieberman, he’s a good man.
But too bad the radical left hates him, just because he supports the troops. But it is a sign that the radical left has hijacked the Democrat Party. You are seeing the emergence of the Socialist Party in America with the radical left taking over the Democrat Party and that’s bad news for them.
The reason is because you cannot win a majority as a socalist leftist in America. In the high welfare pockets of America you can, but not the nation as a whole.
See how fast the radical left took over the Democrat Party? Lieberman was the vice president pick in 2000, now he is an enemy. WOW!
If Joe Williams likes Lieberman, that’s a sure sign that he sucks.”But too bad the radical left hates him, just because he supports the troops.”Blah, blah blah, blah.”But it is a sign that the radical left has hijacked the Democrat Party.”Ding dong, ding dong!Joe Williams, you’re permanently stuck on stupid.
I might be brash against leftist and you are certainly entitled to your opinion as am I.
But can you defend your ideology? Or are you going to wage attacks against me?
Who the hell is Opey, did we pick up another troll?
Morning Joe, even if we don’t agree on things I’ll try to be polite.
Joe…I wouldn’t worry too much… you would think that “Opie” from Mayberry would be old enough by now to be able to spell his own name…….. ;)
Opey……………you keep it up man (woman?). The “long timers” in this blog hate it when new people come in and challenge what appears to be a predominately RW mind-set. There a few progressives here, but it seems the bushbots abound!
Joe likes Lieberman because he votes with Bush on every anti-America bill which goes against the grain here in America.
Anything which helps Bush shred the constitution is fine by Lieberman.
Bush and Lieberman are in lockstep with the Project for the New American Century { PNAC }.
Endless wars from a defacto American dictatorship.
And that’s why Lieberman, like the rest of them, are all in trouble.
They don’t put the American People first, and the American People have caught-on.
The only way they can win an election is to steal it.
Ed, you pre-empted me, and with many words fewer. But I’ll post my bit anyway.
I’ve enjoyed Joe Williams tender encomia for Joe Lieberman for some time. However, I’m going to get out the cheese grater because Joe Williams has said something that is, frankly, begging for it.
So Leftists “don’t support the troops,” eh Joe Williams? I hear you say that a lot. But what does that mean?
Does it mean a) that we personally despise military personnel and all they stand for, b) that we personally feel respect for troops but not for military activities in general, or c) that we’re personally fine with the troops and the need for a military, but we disagree with the mission to which the military has been sent?
Now, you’ll probably say “ah ha! Not possible! If one respects troops and the need for a military, then one CAN’T be supportive of the troops while not supporting the mission upon which they have involuntarily been sent!”
To that I say, bullshit. One can think something is necessary and a good thing without unqualifiedly endorsing it in every case. Ask yourself a question: when the isolationist Senators of the GOP opposed America’s entrance into W.W.II., and the efforts of the Commander in Chief, FDR, to go to war against Nazi Germany, were they “failing to support the troops?” No. They were disagreeing with a proposed use of American military power. They weren’t being disloyal. They were having a policy disagreement.
You, however, Joe Williams, by swallowing whole this ’support the troops’ framing, are buying into a frame: that disagreement is disloyalty, and that Democrats who oppose the war are traitors. In this frame, Joe Lieberman counts as loyal and, in your book, a moderate.
To which I say, nonsense. One can disagree without being disloyal, and Joe Lieberman is no moderate Democrat. He serves as an enabling Republican by voting with and lending moral support to the Bush Administration, and the GOP in general (remember his attack on Bill Clinton?) Joe Lieberman has not only stabbed his fellow Democrats in the back, time and time again, he’s made it acceptable to sell out.
Finally, Joe Williams, I’m going to help you use the word ‘fascist’ correctly. Here’s the definition from Websters’:
“A system of government characterized by rigid one-party dictatorship, forcible suppression of the opposition (unions, other, especially leftist, parties, minority groups, etc), the retention of private ownership of the means of production under centralized governmental control, belligerent nationalism and racism, glorification of war, etc.”
Fascism is a right-wing phenomenon, Joe Williams–it is defined IN OPPOSITION to Leftist politics. And more to the point, read through the description: it’s a nice capsule of Bush II’s Administration, and of what Lieberman has helped to legitimize.
In my book, that not only makes Joseph Lieberman a bad Democrat: it makes him a bad American.
Oh, and Melissa, it’s NED LAMONT who is challenging Lieberman. Christopher Kukk is a Political Science professor quoted in the Boston Globe story.
At present, Lamont is polling at 40%, and Lieberman at 46%. Sounds like someone has tacked too far to the right and has gotten out of touch with his state. Funny what all that time in D.C. will do to a suck-up to power like Joe Lieberman.
The thing that galls me is that Chuck Shumer, head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, looks ready to support Lieberman EVEN IF HE BOLTS THE PARTY to run as an independent.
The war within the Democratic Party isn’t between right and left; it’s between the DC insiders and the rank and file Democrats in the state parties. The fact that party leadership wants to get to pick the candidates in top-down fashion might play just fine in the fascist GOP, but that shit ain’t gonna play in the Democratic Party.
CF
I used to be a good Republican. They kind that doesn’t hate poor people or America’s workers.
I can’t even find the pieces of my broken x-party. Not one single piece, thanks to that G-d Bush and the horse he rode in on.
Bush and Lieberman can go take a FF.
Very well said CF.
I’ll second that motion.
Ditto
Great posts CF.
Can you get frankie to draw a better picture of you?
Ya know, one suitable for framing?
:)
Melissa, you took the bait.
WHEN did anyone call joementum moderate? He was put on gore’s ticket BECAUSE he is one goose step away from wingnuttia.
And you dont know NED LAMONT after all the “support ned” comments?
Has values boy been chosing your reading materials? :)
On second thought CF, maybe a framed picture of you isnt such a good idea.
You might end up over the mantle at crawford just like the framed picture of that dead arab guy :)
Joe – we all support the troops; it’s the idiots running the debacle we don’t support.
Gee, with a quarter-million now in the ARI and only a few thousand insurgents when do we start drawing down our numbers?
CF you have hit the nail on the head, I support the troops not this ill-fated invasion. I once said that support comes in many ways. One is that they can not question where they are sent, so we must! They can not question the right or wrong of the missions, so we must! When they die they can not cry out how much of a waste it is, so we must!
This country failed over thirty years ago to separate the warrior from the war, a national shame fell upon us.Never again should that happen, everyone whether they were alive at the time or not should shake the hand of the Vietnam veteran and thank them and welcome them home. And those that have served in this and all wars. But also not spurn your duty to try and see that we do not waste they service or lives for a less then worthwhile cause.
As to Joe, I actually like to read what he has to say. I believe him to be gentle in his push to express what he believes. I do not away agree, but that is not necessary. To find someone honest in their believe, it just require you to listen to what they have to say.
Note to self . . . mail a check to Christopher Kukk.
Buh buh, Leiber-sellout.
Oops, make that Ned Lamont.
And CF, don’t bother arguing with Slow Joe, facts don’t matter to him, words mean whatever he wants them to mean.
Just ring his bell.
DING DING DING DING!
“One is that they can not question where they are sent, so we must! They can not question the right or wrong of the missions, so we must! When they die they can not cry out how much of a waste it is, so we must!”
Damn writerdog, that’s GOOD!
Check out this bizarre, animated Joe Lieberman campaign ad.
http://69.56.129.130/~joe2006//index.php?option=com_zoom&Itemid=30&page=view&catid=8&PageNo=1&key=2&hit=1
The best part is that it’s TOTALLY indebted to the classic Rove strategy: Lieberman’s biggest negative is that he’s a closet Repuke, so what does the ad do? Accuse his challenger, Ned Lamont, of being, that’s right, a REPUBLICAN.
If we needed any further evidence that Joe’s all about gobbling GOP cock, this would be it.
Thanks for that mental image CF!!
Now it will be like an annoying song stuck in my head.
I hope Lieberman becomes Loserman.
SUPPORT NED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Ben, when cheney gets thrown under the bus by the rovester, do you think holy joe will be the next veep?
Then the next preznit?
yikes
Maybe he will just be the next Secretary of Defense when they cut rummy loose.
Arafat was poisoned by Ariel Sharon who bragged: ” He { Arafat} should be taking out some life insurance” as the poison, which baffled doctors was destroying his blood platelets.
Arafat’s wife refused to authorize an autopsy {threats to confiscate Arafat’s billions as “terror money” if she did }.
Makes you wonder if Al Gore would met the same fate.