Lieberman challenges Dean's vision for the Democratic Party

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/08/03/national0214EDT0422.DTL

"I share the anger of my fellow Democrats with George Bush and the direction he has taken this nation," Lieberman said in text prepared for delivery. "But the answer to his outdated, extremist ideology is not to be found in the outdated extremes of our own. That path will not solve the challenges of our time, and could send us back to the political wilderness for years to come."

har har :P

Seriously what is Lieberman trying to prove, I tell you this although I completely may disagree with Kerry, I think he is a bonafide dem and not only can he win but I think he would be damn good as president unlike Lieberman who feels we must become republican.

clone. He must feel the heat if he's already going negative. If this doesn't catch on, he'll be out of the race after the first couple of primaries, and good riddance.

The Republicans, the press and, not least of all, Dean himself are already doing that.

you'd know that he never mentioned Dean -- or any other candidate -- by name. It was the press that asked him about Dean afterwards.

I find it amusing that Dean supporters take great offense when somebody dares attack their candidate -- even when, in this case, it didn't actually happen they way the press would have you believe. Dean is no stranger to attacking his candidates -- he's had to apologize so many times I've lost count.

Just because he didn't mention him by name doesn't mean he wasn't attacking him. I've seen enough of your posts to know you are no stranger to innuendo, so spare me the attempt at disingenuous ducking.

By the way, I'm not a Dean supporter, as my sig line should have tipped you off. I am, however, anti-Lieberman, since he'd likely get his clock cleaned in a race against Bush, where he's running as little more than an improved version of Bush, and the public isn't likely to be buying that this election.

I'm laughing too much at Lieberman to be offended.

Gov. Dean is more centrist than Kerry and certainly no progressive, and the fact that some Republicans in his home state like him is beginning to get out. Aside from his opposition to the stupid non-rationales for this war (which proves to be more prescient every day), Dean shares little in common with a McGovern dynamic. He lost a bro in Laos during the turmoil of the mid-70s, so it's not like Dean has not suffered from the consequences of this nation's reckless foreign policy decisions.

And he is equally, if not more, determined to balance budgets than Joe Lieberman, since repealing (this does not = raising taxes!) these ruinous tax cuts for the wealthy will be necessary to do it. People all over the country are seeing the basic social contract unravel as the federal govt abandons the states to the fiscal crises created by Bush and Joe's answer is "big govt is bad"??? Hey, Joe, we just want to save SOME govt for the people, "big" isn't even an option at this point.

In the end, I think the American people will respect someone who says you can have a tax cut that's probably worth less than a couple hundred dollars for 80% of families, or we can have some of the bedrock amenities and services, like decent schools, that almost all Americans support.

And will someone PLEASE tell Kerry to stop riding the Harley without a helmet!! Those of us who have brain-damaged relatives due to helmet-less motorcycle accidents really don't appreciate the message being sent about what's sexy or cool. Helmet hair is cool.

I had no clue as to what that movie was about and everytime I see that movie, I think of Holy Joe...Wonder why?

is not going to get us anywhere either. Even if it did, it would be a very hollow victory. Not standing on Democratic ideals in order to win an election defeats the purpose of being a Democrat.

"Appeal to the party to win the primary; appeal to the public to win the election."

Now all he has to do is find a vision he likes.

Robert Matsui: "The DLC and even Lieberman would probably be best off by running their own positive campaigns rather than whining about other candidates or whining about unions or whatever," he said. "People in our party who critique us probably do more damage to us than the Republicans do."

that's all he's saying.

the little putz.

I'm starting to dislike him almost as much as Bush.

How can Leabmern share our anger when he backs Bush on the war, the errosion of our civel liberties, and tax cuts for the rich? This tells me he still dosn't have a clue of what we are angree about.


The Clue Meter
(L\..............H)
Yep, still reads zero.

His name to me now is Joe " No Chance in hell" Lieberman..

cuz i said so..

Sounds to me like he won't.

We should want Joe to make these comments, because the reaction to him gives us a good idea of where we need to be to retake the WH.
A true-liberal, i.e. truthful liberal, cannot be elected, nor can a republican-ized dem, so the answer is to appear in the middle (like WJC).
And I think Joe is right in his take that the country, as a whole, does not "hate" GWB.
His comment should be an alert that anti-GWB will not win this election.

Or do they have to appear to be in the middle too? Or do they have to lie?
If they are both in the middle, who wins?

Yes, all politicians in today's AmeriKa must because the pop has no majority-middle.

I think Joe's best shot is if Cheney decides not to run for veep and Bush needs someone to fill in.

But if he does get it somehow, I'm going Green too.

What a moron. Maybe Cheney will retire and Holy Joe can run for Veep as a Republican.

I think Joe's best shot is if Cheney decides not to run for veep and Bush needs someone to fill in.

I'm surpised that more people around here aren't saying the same thing.

But seriously, I find it interesting that so many people on the far left think it's more important to keep Lieberman out of the White House than it is to get rid of Bush. The anti-Lieberman hysteria certainly isn't based on fact -- Lieberman has a very liberal record on social issues, has strongly opposed Bush's economic policies, and, despite his hawkish tendencies, still favors a much larger role for the UN than does the current administration. The facts show that Lieberman at his worst is still better than Bush at his best.

Joe carries things that are worse than Bush on a number of fronts, as far as I know Bush hasn't been trying to get anything censored, I don't know what "social issues" he is liberal on but apparently that includes excecuting minor children, I don't see him as very different at all.

All true, but what you are missing is that some (perhaps most) don't want the top man of the democratic party to just be "better than Bush." Some, like me, hope for a democratic party that stands behind and wins on a progressive policy.

If Lieberman is the nominee, we progressives are left with the choice of supporting Lieberman at the expense of moving the democratic party farther right than it's been in, oh at least forty years, or more of Bush. Would the rejection of a candidate slightly better than Bush encourage the dems to move back to the left in 2008? That's the consideration if Lieberman is the nominee: Bush now and a liberal candidate in 2008, or no more Bush and a democratic party that's about as far right as it can get.

that he is better than a Republican?
What is his motto "I'm the guy who didn't put up a fuss when Republicans ripped off the Florida voters."
God bless Lieberman indeed.

my friend

here's the link:

http://www.joe2004.com/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5569

I watched the speech live on C-span. I thought it was pretty good, and I heard little that any supporter of Bill Clinton's policies (which I understand excludes around 95% of the people around here) could disagree with.

here's the link:

http://www.joe2004.com/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5569

I watched the speech live on C-span. I thought it was pretty good, and I heard little that any supporter of Bill Clinton's policies (which I understand excludes around 95% of the people around here) could disagree with.

I believe his speech was originally written in German!

Lieberman should feel right at home with Amerika Uber Alles!

I guess all your extracurricular reading activities have paid off.

read it. it's pure crap (how's that for an oxymoron?). he's pro-bush. he wants the war, he wants the tax cuts. he lies when he says he's angry at bush. he doesn't want us to oppose bush.

i've argued for "anybody but bush" but i will say that lieberman makes me think twice. i know i'm not alone. if you, dolstein, really want to get rid of bush, you should do your best to make sure lieberman isn't the nominee.

Because the speech I read criticized Bush for his handling of post-war Iraq, and called for greater UN involvement.

And the speech I read criticize Bush for pushing through tax cuts for the very wealty, but called for keeping tax cuts for the working poor and middle class (a relatively small portion of Bush's overall tax package.

Sure you read it. Next time try reading it without your hands over your eyes.

It sounds like an acceptance speech that he could give to the convention after they nominate him for President. Fortuntely, I am growing more and more certain that such a speech will never be delivered by Lieberman under those circumstances.

There was no real substance in it at all, just broad platitudes. Nevertheless, I thank Mr. Dolstein for providing the link.

"I share the anger of my fellow Democrats with George Bush and the direction he has taken this nation..."

Okay, fine. But just what is Lieberman angry about? Tax cuts for the wealthy; a war waged on a secret policy of military interventionism; the Patriot Act?

Seriously, where does Joe disagree with Bush? Any Lieberman supporters who can answer that?

but, looking at his record, he did oppose the most radical elements of Bush's tax cuts (cuts for the wealthiest, repealing the estate tax permantently, etc). He voted against the final passage of the tax cuts both in '01 and this past year. The main problem with Joe is I think he has forgotten the base of the party, and has not found a way to differentiate his proposed policies with Bush's policies (where they do differ).

His message is that the Democrats should mimic Mr. Bush if they want to win next year.
See how well it worked last fall??????

(satire)

:dem:

right now some Rep paid Madison ave ad agency is writing a script for campaign ads.....using Joe's words........

that is what bothers me about the candidates bashing each other...they are giving the Repub spin machine more and more amunition to use against WHOEVER gets the nomination

"they are giving the Repub spin machine more and more amunition to use against WHOEVER gets the nomination."

I understand your concern, but I don't agree with it. The repub spin machine is going to go full tilt against the eventual nominee no matter what the dems do to each other in the primaries. In fact, deflecting criticism among party members is good practice for building a defense against the eventualy repuke onslaught.

from simpering Joe- devoid of content or anthing that could remotely be deemed "vision." Once I see a well reasoned set of principles and contingencies- along with definitive actions a Lieberman addministration could and/or would take, then maybe I'll pay attention.

Heck, Joe, I'll even read a white paper put together by the "best and brightest" on your research staff. Assuming that you have any who are interested in domestic substance.

" I will work in concert with Rove if necessary, to prevent any dem being elected who will stand in the way of the coming invasion of Iran and Syria"

He is a fanatic on foreign policy, thats not debatable.

"Give the voters a choice between a Real Republican (Bush) and a fake Republican (Lieberman) and they'll pick the real Republican every time." HST

Indeed, Lieberman's speech addressed both of these issues. In case you weren't aware, Lieberman wants to balance the budget, which is why he thinks its irresponsible for Democrats to embrace massive new spending programs. And Lieberman does support working with allies in rebuilding Iraq -- he has criticized Bush consistently for shutting the UN out of the post-Iraq processes. But Lieberman isn't willing to pacify dictators who slaughter their citizens and destabilize the region. I hate to remind you, but the Democrats actually used to be the party that activiely and forcefully opposed fascism and tyranny, while it was the Republicans who shied aware from military engagement.

...the "national security" issue to to Lieberman, Bush, or anyone. He only opposed the Iraq war as the "wrong war at the wrong time".
Where was Lieberman & Bush when the facist dictator Charles Taylor exterminated 1 million Liberians?
Where were Lieberman and Bush when the Saudis furnished aid, comfort, money and organization for the 9/11 hijackers...the worst terror attack on American soil?

Lieberman's riding a pretty high horse, calling the Iraq war a "just" war while throwing the Liberians to the wolves, and letting the Saudis sit back and count their oil profits.

but, I must say that his extremely sanctimonious attitude drives me crazy...and I'm not one of those who will automatically will vote against a candidate that voted against the Iraq resolution (though I didn't agree with the war).

Lieberman has to stop kidding himself into believing that pandering to groups that won't vote for him, will all of a sudden change their mind and will. It won't happen. Bush has the religious right in his hat. He also should drop his cries against video game violence and other trivial issues. He's wasting his time. Even most republicans aren't wasting their time with that shit. I remember there was some bill, which him and Hillary were sponsoring and the funny thing is they couldn't find a single republican co sponsor.

As for the war, Lieberman has to make it clear to those like myself, why Saddam was such an imminent threat as to warrant a costly and lengthy war.

In the end I would definetely vote for any one of the democratic nominess over Bush, be it Dean, Kerry, or even Lieberman. That said, Lieberman clearly has a lot of work to do in stressing why he's not just "Bush lite". Bush lite is simply not what it takes to beat the real Bush.

Lieberman has to stop kidding himself into believing that pandering to groups that won't vote for him, will all of a sudden change their mind and will. It won't happen. Bush has the religious right in his hat.

I agree. As John Stewart said, "Leiberman's the candidate for people who really want to vote for Bush, but think that he's not Jewish enough." And that would be.... oh wait, no one.

But you've missed the point entirely. The majority of Americans did NOT support this invasion until Shrub sent our men and women into combat. Then, AND ONLY THEN, did support for this invasion solidify. And still it was far below the numbers supporting Gulf War I even.

How the heck was Hussein destabilizing the region? I am NOT saying Hussein was/is a good and honorable man by any means. But tell me please how he was the root cause of the problems in the ME?? If anything, he was actually a stabilizing force because he was SECULAR.

Do you have any doubt that when we pull out of Iraq that they will install a right wing (supposed) Islamist gov't? Or do you and people who support this war actually think that we should just stay there indefinitely? And do we now invade every country on Earth that has a dictator who oppresses his/her people? If so, you may as well go sign up for service now, b/c every man, woman and child will be needed to fight those invasions. Or are we only concerned with the dictators in the ME- the ones the Likuds tell us to invade maybe?

We've knowingly allowed slaughters to happen all the time in Africa, where whole tribes of peoples are wiped out in genocidal killings. Rwanda, the Congo, Sierra Leone, Algeria, now Liberia and others. Yet, your man does nothing to help. I wonder why?

showed an increasing majority of Americans supporting the war in the weeks leading up to actual hostilities. But hey, perhaps your memory is better than mine, and if you're right, I'm sure you'll have no probably providing the links.

...to put it politely. (and yeah, i did read the speech. see comment above)

lieberman wants his iraq war (and all its costs) which means the only "allies" he's worried about our england and spain and he has conveniently neglected how he's going to pay for that war and the others he has planned AND fund education and health care/prescription drugs, etc. to support insanely high "defense" spending while labeling education and health care as "massive new spending" is the height of disingenuousness, to put it politiely.

on opposition to fascism and tyrrany, you're all wet (this politeness is starting to get to me). the presumption that bush is about fighting fascism and tyrrany is absurd on its face, and is abject parroting of republican spin. if staying out of iraq is "shying away" give me the "shy" type any day of the week.

i'm really sorry you can't see exactly how utterly ridiculous your position is. it's incredibly bad for the u.s. you're treading in enemy territory as far as i'm concerned.

and he actually has the cojones to admit that repealing Bush's ruinous tax cuts may be necessary to do it.

for Lieberman to accuse Dean (and we all know who he meant) of being for Big Government is an out-and-out distortion.

Lieberman is also by inference, bashing ALL the other candidates. I think all 8 of them should come out with strong critiques of joe's vision of the party, which is, to put no fine point upon it, a loser.

"he thinks its irresponsible for Democrats to embrace massive new spending programs."

Hey newsflash, the war in Iraq is the biggest new spending program out there.

I don't want to hear one fucking word about liberal spending on social programs from these fuckheads who voted to support a war in Iraq with no way to pay for it.


To all those who supported a 100 billion dollar war... then try to blame our economic problems on social programs which cost a fraction of that ammount... FUCK YOU!

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article4326.htm


"After * was elected in 2000 a presidential study group authored "Navigating through turbulence : America and the middle east in the new century". The authors were guided by a steering group including Joe Lieberman, Paul Wolfowitz and Mort Zuckerman. The two main "targets" listed were Iraq and Syria".

Libermen sounds like a Far Right Democrat

and he needs to get his name in the paper. Since
Dean is emerging as the most talked about Democrat
he's going to also be the biggest target. I share
most of the posters dislike of Holy Joe but Deans
gotta be able to take the heat from people like him
because the Pubbies are going to be a lot nastier.

...that show Lieberman's deline?

...the war was a good idea. SCREW that. I don't care WHAT party you are.

Lieberman can officially fuck off now.

if he uses it to buy a clue! Gads, he is getting really annoying!

...
Meanwhile, Dean struck back at a primary rival, Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, who warned on Friday that Dean’s opposition to the war in Iraq and his push for complete repeal of the Bush tax cuts could be a “ticket to nowhere’’ for Democrats on Election Day 2004.

“I disagree with Joe,” Dean said. “He’s served this country well, but he’s been on the wrong side of a lot of issues and I simply disagree with his assessment. I think my policies are a ticket to the White House.’’
...
http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/Main.asp?SectionID=25&SubSectionID=377&ArticleID=85948
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=11856&mesg_id=11856

No way!

He should run on the repug ticket. Chenneys backup in case of a heart attack.

declaration of war by the desperate weasel, Littleman.

Rule number one should be don't blackguard your fellow Democratic contenders--you may have to support them against Bush.

For someone who manages to pander to Bush day in and day out, you'd think he could have been a little more diplomatic against his fellow Democrats. But, no, he fires both barrels . . . very brave, asshole.

It's time to pull the plug on this one.

Adios, douchbag, and don't let the door hit ya where the Lord split ya.

We should put an end to republican extremism by being exactly like the republicans. It makes so much sense now.