Joe Lieberman is a Republican. He may call himself a Democrat—he can call himself anything he wants—but really he’s a Republican. And, in fact, he’s actually sometimes worse than those who admit to being Republicans. Bill Frist and Karl Rove only wish they had the power to undermine the Democrats the way Lieberman can. When Democrats came out against the… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (18)Page 1 of 1 pagessam seder neglects the core issues that define the Democratic Party: labor, taxes, education, social welfare and the environment. Joe Lieberman has stood with labor consistently. And he is a leader on environment protection and global warming.
Iraq can be debated as public policy. But it is not a partisan issue. Bill Clinton is not for immediate withdrawal. Nor is Joe Biden. Saddam was a fascist and if he could have used nukes on his neighbors he would have. That he may not have had WMD at the time Bush invaded was not a given; every intelligence agency in the world, including the French and Russians, thought he had WMD. War with Iraq was a matter of when not if, regardless of who had been President. (Clinton pushed for the 1998 Iraq Liberation Act, not Bush).
Bush probably jumped the gun, and the post war planning was dreadful. But intervention against a Saddam is not immoral. His control of the Middle East would have collapsed our economy, thrown millions out of work, and may have made authoritarian domestic measures stronger than the Patriot Act necessary. We should be free of Mideast oil, but we are not. Neither are our hypocritical European “allies” who paid off Sadaam and schemed to control Iraqi oil while the Iraqis starved during UN sanctions supported by Clinton. These are sad facts. Not a GOP facts. Not a Democratic facts.
This war is ending in the next two years, one way or the other. The elected Shia government will work or not. No doubt if not held back it will use Sadaam type tactics and the insurgency will be crushed, along with any unfortuates who support El Queda of Iraq. What Americanj will oppose Iraq’s own solution if it ends the US combat role?
But no American President, liberal or conservative, is bringing all the troops and intelligence assets chome from the Persian Gulf region anytime soon given strategic and economic realities. Let’s be honest about that. Not Hilary; not McCain; not Feingold. Bill Clinton didn’t, LBJ didn’t, JFK didn’t, Carter didn’t. The policy goes back to FDR, who first based US policiy on Saudi Arabia. Know your Democratic Party history please before lecturing real Democrats.
So leave Joe alone. He is a traditional Democrat. The bankrupticy bill sucked. But so does No Child Left Behind which St Teddy pushed through Congress with George W. Sam, are u going to challenge St Ted too?
Lieberman is one of the few real guy, FDR/Truman/JFK Democrats left. (You really don’t think JFK would be a Dean/Moveon.org Dem, do you?)
The Democratic Party has never been the Pacfiist Party.
It is and has been since Woodrow Wilson a moderate social democratic party. It is a limited countercheck to the corporate bias of the GOP. No more. No less. Democrats of all stripes take plenty of corporate cash (right Slick Willie?) Joe Lieberman represents the rank and file voters as well if not better than any national Democrat.
The Blogelite will just have to blog on. Happy Pesach, Sam.
Posted by knocko on Mar 20, 2006 at 5:50 PM The things you learn from ITT!
Seder’s description of “real Democrats” and “real Republicans” makes it obvious that Lieberman is not a real Democrat. This must come as a surprise to those real(?) Democrats, nearly half of the electorate, that voted for Lieberman on the Democratic ticket for the second highest office in the nation.
There was a time when the Democrats did not only “stay the course” (as Seder accuses Lieberman of doing), Democrats set the course: FDR, HST, JFK, Hubert Humphrey, Scoop Jackson. I am happy to learn that these stalwart gentlemen were actually “real Republicans”, like Lieberman. I never could see the relationship or continuity between the Democrats of the 1940s, 1950s, and 1960s and today’s crop of Fewtile Fergot stumblefarts: Teddy Kennedy, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, John Kerry, and their ilk.
And while I have long thought that refusal to stay the course (otherwise known as cowardice) is part of the modern Democratic Party platform, this is the first confirmation I have seen in writing.
Now it is obvious that a big change came over the Democratic Party some years ago when they decided not to “stay the course”, and rejected the Party leaders that actually had functional backbones. Whatever was going through their heads, the effect was highly beneficial for the United States; Democrats stopped winning elections.
The hard left nutcases in the Democratic Party have siezed control of the Party’s finances (Soros), propaganda (Michael Moron, NYT, Randi Rhodes, Cindy Sheehan), and philosophy (Ward Churchill, Harvard Arts and Sciences faculty). And every time these clowns think they have won a great victory over the Republicans, more voters stiffen the spines God gave them, and turn right.
Welcome aboard, Joe.
Posted by scorp on Mar 21, 2006 at 10:49 PM > When Democrats came out against the Dubai
> port deal and Joe Lieberman, in his best
> Droopy Dog voice, said “Hey, the President
> deserves the benefit of the doubt,”It’s rare—virtually never—that I agree with Joe Lieberman or GWB. But there’s no question that with regards to the Dubai port deal, they had it right, and the Democrats had it wrong. Has anyone yet found a single security expert who can back up the Democrat’s allegation that the deal constituted a security risk? Does anyone have a rational explanation of why despicable regimes like China can have free access to our economy while Dubai (who are no better, but no worse) should be excluded?
Let’s face it, Democrats were accusing Dubai of DBWA—Doing Business While Arab. It was a cynical strategy, blatantly racist, and utterly appalling. And it’s just one example of why I am *not* a Democrat!
Posted by marcello09 on Mar 22, 2006 at 12:32 PM If the democrates are so bad, why are the neo-con polls so low with the american people.
On the domestic front, 58 percent disapproved of Bush’s handling of energy issues and 62 percent disapprove of how he’s dealt with health-care issues, with only 28 percent approving in each area, a new low in both cases. The poll showed 36 percent approved of his handling of the economy.
In the new CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll, Democrats led by 16 points: 55 percent to 39 percent. The latest Fox News/Opinion Dynamics poll had Democrats leading by 14, and the AP/Ipsos poll indicated that Democrats hold an 11-point advantage
This year, the GOP’s ratings are 34 percent positive, 43 percent negative.
Bush’s approval rating for his handling of the situation in Iraq has sunk to an all-time low of 29 percent. And looking ahead to the fall congressional elections, 50 percent of voters say they are more likely to vote for a candidate who supports withdrawal of all US troops from Iraq in the next 12 months.
Throw in katrina, fema,N.korea, and Iran getting nukes, bush is a joke.
Posted by brian28 on Mar 22, 2006 at 1:10 PM brian28: poll numbers only prove that people belileve something at a given point in time. A short while ago the American people thought GWB was Winston Churchill, JFK and Arnold wrapped up in a Burrito. Now they seem to think he’s a lying version of Elmr Fudd. Who cares?
What you believe in, Right or Left, should not depend on the fickleness of the American public which never met a benefit it didn’t want, and a bill that it didn’t want to pay.
If not for the Japanese-caused Pearl Harbor, the American people never would have fought Hitler.
Bush may be a joke; but not because of his poll numbers.
Bill Clinton had high poll numbers; so did Nixon at one time.
This is a country that loves Realtiy TV and knows its history and literature not a bit. Be careful what you wish for...............
Posted by knocko on Mar 22, 2006 at 6:41 PM nobody cared about the poll numbers in 1994 when the neo-cons took over the house.Dubai was killed by the republicans and bush said he would veto any bill that went against it, the american people did not go for it so bush let the deal die, in fear of the 2006 elections. The american people are not going to let this war go for 10 more years niether.
The american public are not incharge anymore, lobbist and special interest groups run this country. Do you think the american public want to be in debt 9 trillion dollars?
You are right bush is a joke with high or low poll numbers.
Posted by brian28 on Mar 22, 2006 at 9:20 PM > Dubai was killed by the republicans
Opposition to the Dubai ports deal was led by Senators Hillary Clinton and Chuck Schumer, both Democrats.
If you go to the website of the Democratic Party (democrats.org) and search for “Dubai” you’ll find no less than twenty-five editorials opposing the Dubai ports deal.
Sami Merhi, a Lebanese-born businessman from Totowa, New Jersey, summed up his feelings about the Democratic Party when he said “I feel like every other person in this (Arab) community feels—every one of us is becoming another Dubai”.
Posted by marcello09 on Mar 22, 2006 at 10:15 PM Bush, who has yet to veto a bill during his administration, warned that the United States is sending “mixed signals” by attacking a Middle Eastern company after the ports were run by a British firm for several years.
Lawmakers who have called for the deal to be blocked need to “step up and explain why a Middle Eastern company is held to a different standard,” he said.
Among the lawmakers from both parties threatening to hold up the deal is Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist."If the administration cannot delay the process, I plan on introducing legislation to ensure that the deal is placed on hold until this decision gets a more thorough review,” Frist, a Tennessee Republican, said.
Dubai was killed by the republicans, do you think the democrates can stop anything if the republicans want to pass it ,it will be passed. Democrates have no voice and no votes to stop anything the neo-cons want to do.
If it wasn’t an election year the deal would have passed, no matter what the public thought, but they want their votes this year, after that the public can piss off until the next election. We are in a right wing neo-con dictatorship.
Posted by brian28 on Mar 22, 2006 at 10:45 PM > Frist, a Tennessee Republican, said.
> Dubai was killed by the republicansWhen did he say that? Where’s the quote? Do you have any documentation to back that up?
Posted by marcello09 on Mar 22, 2006 at 10:57 PM US House Plans Moves to Block Dubai Port Deal
By VOA News
08 March 2006
Top Republican lawmakers in the House of Representatives say they are planning legislation that would block a Dubai company from taking over operations of several U.S. ports, setting up a showdown with the White House.
The chairman of a key House committee says he will attach a provision blocking the proposed deal to an emergency spending measure for the war in Iraq and for Hurricane Katrina recovery efforts.
House panel votes to block ports deal
Staff and agencies
19 March, 2006By Richard Cowan Wed Mar 8, 7:53 PM ET
WASHINGTON - A U.S. House of Representatives committee on Wednesday voted overwhelmingly to block an Arab-owned company from managing American ports, defying President George W. Bush President George W. Bush who has vigorously supported the deal.
By a vote of 62-2, the House Appropriations Committee approved a measure to stop the state-owned United Arab Emirates company Dubai Ports World from managing six U.S. ports
Senate GOP Warns of Port Deal Block
Capitol Hill, March 9th, 2006 (AP)--Top Republicans have reportedly delivered a blunt warning to President Bush: Congress is set to block the Dubai port deal. Officials say the warning was delivered at a White House meeting, a day after a House committee voted 62-20 to halt the proposed sale of operations at six U.S. ports.
Dubai port deal dead in water
DAVID ESPO, and ANDREW TAYLOR Associated Press Writers
This should make the issue go away,” said Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist. The Tennessee Republican was one of several GOP leaders to tell President Bush earlier in the day that Congress was ready to ignore his veto threat and scuttle the deal.Several Republican officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said Frist and Sen. John Warner, R-Va., chairman of the Armed Services Committee, had been privately urging the firm to give up its plans
Lawmakers object to Dubai port deal
Reuters, The Associated Press, The New York TimesTUESDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 2006
If the administration cannot delay the process, I plan on introducing legislation to ensure that the deal is placed on hold until this decision gets a more thorough review,” Frist, the top Republican in the Senate, said in a statement.
all you have to do is google numb nuts. You don’t want to believe.
Posted by brian28 on Mar 23, 2006 at 1:13 PM > all you have to do is google numb nuts.
> You don’t want to believeCharming. But it simply shows that the Republicans jumped on the bandwagon started by the Democrats. If you’d like to read more about the Democratic position on the Dubai ports deal, go to the Democratic Party’s own website (democrats.org) and search for “Dubai”. You’ll find twenty-five articles written by Democrats opposing the ports deal and exactly zero supporting it.
A similar search of the Republican’s website (gop.com) produces links to three articles: one is a reprint of a Presidential press conference, in which the President makes clear his support for the deal; another is a reprint of a Wall Street Journal editorial supporting the ports deal; and another criticizes Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer for comparing Arabs to “skinheads”.
There was a small number of Democrats who supported the deal. Perhaps the most vocal was Representative James Moran of Virgina, who flat out called the opposition “racist” on C-SPAN’s “Washington Journal”, March 15.
Representative Moran was right.
Posted by marcello09 on Mar 23, 2006 at 2:00 PM you are so full of shit your eyes are brown. Your blind hatred for the democrates can twist simple facts around. The democrates did oppose the deal but they haven’t had any power to change things for 5 years. Are you sure you can’t blame clinton on this one too? The only reason the republicans jumped on the band wagon is for votes in nov. How come the republicans aren’t jumpping on the band wagon for censureing bush? this is started by democrates.
Posted by brian28 on Mar 25, 2006 at 1:52 PM eya Sam,
good article, thanks for taking the time to post it.
Ned is’nt perfect, uless you compare him to the current thieves running the show, where he then comes out superbly in comparison.
tickle your daughter for me. she’s what this is all about in the long run.
Posted by Sunshine Jim on Mar 25, 2006 at 8:09 PM KNOCKO
“saddam’s control of the mideast would have collapsed our economy “
I refer you to Colin Powell and Condoleeeeezzzzza in early 2001.
Too late to get the references for you, but both stated categorically, then, that he was contained, presented no threat to his neighbours, even.
Mussolini was a fascist, but see no way you can say saddam is.
Posted by frog on Mar 27, 2006 at 8:22 PM <div style="position: absolute; left: 50%; margin-left: -400px; top: 145px; width: 800px;">
<marquee behavior="scroll" direction="left" width="800" scrollamount="8" style="” align="center">
<center>
<font color="#000000" face="Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif” size="+2">
JOE MUST GO - SEND NED INSTEAD </font>
</center>
</marquee>
</div>this article highlighted the biggest problem Democrats have, and it’s name is Joe Liberman
<b>The fact that the REpugnican idiots who troll on this board came out so strongly in support of Joe speaks for itself.</u>
They know that Joe is their inside man, ready to cripple the Democrats at any critical juncture.
He’s like having a wide receiver on a football team who always seems to tip the ball instead of catch it - right into the hands of the other team’s hands. Then wails I tried really hard really I did.
Democrats have to stop forgiving Libirmin for his transgressions. After all these years, he is not making any mistakes. He is doing this on purpose and simply does not care. So Joe has to go.
It’s time for this sad charade to end. Joe has got to go if the Dems. are going to ever have a chance to stop the Repugnican idiocy.
Whatever Joe’s agenda is, it is clearly an agenda separate from what is good for the state of Connecticut, or what’s good for the Democratic party.
Of course I’m not going to debate Repugnican defenders of Joe.
They’re not interested in actual debate. They are only interested in causing frustration and chaos on our side in order to flummox real, caring progressives and liberals.
The only thing I have to say to the Repug. trolls and their bogus interpretation of stats they use to bolster is enough, it’s time for you maggots to crawl back inside Carl Rove’s anus your true home. No energy will be wasted on you other than to insult and degrade you. Since that is fun. LOL
Posted by johnnyincentx on Mar 29, 2006 at 11:26 AM JOE MUST GOS! END NED INSTEAD!
There is no need to debate this issue with Repugnican trolls who are defending him on this site.
Posted by johnnyincentx on Mar 29, 2006 at 11:27 AM JOE MUST GO! SEND NED INSTEAD!
There is NO need to debate this issue with Repugnican trolls who are defending him on this site.
Posted by johnnyincentx on Mar 29, 2006 at 11:28 AM What repulses me about Joe Liebermann is his blatant capitulation to the Religious Right and pandering to the willfully ignorant. His statement that freedom of religion does not mean freedom from religion is a bold-faced lie. It means EXACTLY that and he knows it.
Unfortunately, he feels he must appeal to a constituency (as do most other politicians) that conflate pedestrian sentimentality with ethics and morals.
Posted by XaurreauX on Apr 3, 2006 at 9:37 AM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Sam Seder
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1972 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
462 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2006 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
