Skip to main content
No. of Recommendations: 3
Let's look at where he stands with the Democrats:

Pro-choice, opposed Bush's tax plan, supporter of Affrimative Action, voted to have hate crimes laws cover sexual orientation, supports condom distribution in schools, opposes drilling in ANWR, supports raising mileage standards, voted no on confirming Gail Norton as Sec of Interior, voted no on placing restrictions on violent video games, does not believe in pre-emptive war policy, voted no on photo ID's for voters, voted yes on background checks at gun shows, wants government funded health coverage for all children, voted NO on Bush's medicare plan, voted to raise minimum wage, against privatizing Social Security, wants to raise taxes on the highest 2%, voted no on eliminating the estate tax

The guy sounds like a pretty good Democrat when you look at this so why are they trying to push him out?

Let's see:
Supports war in Iraq, supports a capitol gains tax cut, supports NAFTA, supports embargo against Cuba, works with Bill Bennett to denouce Hollywood, supports some limited form of school choice and vouchers, voted to limit death penalty appeals, voted to prohibit same sex marriage, voted to limit class-action lawsuits, voted to ban lawsuits against gun manufactuers.

Those things make sound like not such a good Democrat.

So I guess the Democrats need to decide what their priorities are before they start kicking people out. Are they willing to sacrifice a vote for Affirmative Action in favor of making sure that Hollywood doesn't get their feelings hurt?

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
So I guess the Democrats need to decide what their priorities are before they start kicking people out. Are they willing to sacrifice a vote for Affirmative Action in favor of making sure that Hollywood doesn't get their feelings hurt?


the ones CURRENTLY in charge of the DEM party have already labeled Lieberman as baggage. And some of the same ones have already fired shots across hillys' bow to warn her to 'get in line' or else...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
So I guess the Democrats need to decide what their priorities are before they start kicking people out. Are they willing to sacrifice a vote for Affirmative Action in favor of making sure that Hollywood doesn't get their feelings hurt?

I'm not sure where this comes from.

I suppose that this is an extension of the discussion that was initiated by the "Republicans for Lieberman" thread, but nowhere in that thread is there any suggestion that Democrats were looking to get Lieberman out of the party. Rather, that article discussed a hint that Republicans might support Lieberman against a Democratic primary challenger.

Albaby
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
The guy sounds like a pretty good Democrat when you look at this so why are they trying to push him out?

Because he writes op-eds criticizing Dems that appear on the WSJ editorial page.

Erik
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I suppose that this is an extension of the discussion that was initiated by the "Republicans for Lieberman" thread, but nowhere in that thread is there any suggestion that Democrats were looking to get Lieberman out of the party.

Does that mean sbw, ken and AngelMay aren't Democrats?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"Does that mean sbw, ken and AngelMay aren't Democrats?"

I won't speak for the others, but I don't get a vote on whether he gets to stay a senator or not.

Ken

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I suppose that this is an extension of the discussion that was initiated by the "Republicans for Lieberman" thread, but nowhere in that thread is there any suggestion that Democrats were looking to get Lieberman out of the party. Rather, that article discussed a hint that Republicans might support Lieberman against a Democratic primary challenger.
</>

You may want to reread the thread. And it isn't the only one on the subject. This has been going on for months. Many, many Democrats on this board don't like Lieberman and consider him to be closet Republican.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I suppose that this is an extension of the discussion that was initiated by the "Republicans for Lieberman" thread, but nowhere in that thread is there any suggestion that Democrats were looking to get Lieberman out of the party.

"Does that mean sbw, ken and AngelMay aren't Democrats?"


I won't speak for the others, but I don't get a vote on whether he gets to stay a senator or not.


Here's your chance... Are you a Democrat and do you think he should be out of the party?
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
<Because he writes op-eds criticizing Dems that appear on the WSJ editorial page. >

If public criticism of elected dems is grounds to get you kicked out of the dem party, then there would be very few dems left as I have seen dems criticize their own in nearly every state.

We have reps criticizing Bush and the the admin in print yet you folks applaud them? You certainly do not call for them to be kicked out of the rep party. In fact, you put promote them as good examples of the party. The same is not said when it happens on the other side.

Be honest, what this is really about is the fact that dems abhor his lack of group think. Mavericks are only permissible in the rep party where they have people like McCain, Arnold, Spector, etc.

Is the dem party so touchy that they can't handle someone that disagrees within their own elected officials?

Hawkwin
Getting rather bored with seeing dems eating their own. Someone please come and rescue this party from itself.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
"Here's your chance... Are you a Democrat and do you think he should be out of the party? "

If pressed, I would say yes to the former. As to the latter, it is up to him and his electorate. I would also say, IF he was running for senate in my state, always depending on who else was also running, I would probably not vote for him.

But let's say he was running against Santorum? Then, I would swallow my dissatisfaction with some positions he's taken and vote for him, or rather against Santorum.

Ken
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"If public criticism of elected dems is grounds to get you kicked out of the dem party, ...."

The false premise is that folk are talking about "kicking him out of the Democratic party." I don't think that's it. Some of us would not be concerned, might even say we expect, he might one day declare he's running as a Republican.

I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting cut off his buttons, rip up his "Hi, I'm a Democrat" card, break his sword, and send him off into the Republican desert.

Ken
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"Does that mean sbw, ken and AngelMay aren't Democrats?"
-----

I think your question shows that if you can't pigeonhole someone into one party or the other, your head will explode.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
<I don't think anyone is seriously suggesting cut off his buttons, rip up his "Hi, I'm a Democrat" card, break his sword, and send him off into the Republican desert.>

Then you have not been reading enough posts at this board or blogs on the subject. There are quite a few that want to kick him out of the party.

A quick search found the following:

IS IT TIME TO KICK LIEBERMAN OUT OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY?
http://downwithtyranny.blogspot.com/2005/12/is-it-time-to-kick-lieberman-out-of.html

...And if we have to kick Lieberman out of the party to set an example...
http://www.mydd.com/story/2006/1/31/105657/109

And of course, there are numerous posts here by people that want him removed (not voted out of office but removed from the party).
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Here, I found a recent post by someone wanting to "toss him out" of the party:

http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=23772894

<Can the Democrats toss him out of the party?>

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Here, I found a recent post by someone wanting to "toss him out" of the party:

http://boards.fool.com/Message.asp?mid=23772894

<Can the Democrats toss him out of the party?>





Hmmmmm....maybe you should go back and read the post yourself.
I asked if the Democrats COULD toss him out of the party.
Frankly, I'd be happy if he would simply own up to his right-wing leanings and just leave on his own. At least that would be an honest position.

AM
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
"Does that mean sbw, ken and AngelMay aren't Democrats?"

I think your question shows that if you can't pigeonhole someone into one party or the other, your head will explode.

What kind of an idiotic response was that? I was resplying to someone that said Democrats weren't looking to get Lieberman out of the party. On another thread, the three of them seemed to express the opinion that Lieberman should indeed get out of the party. If you think I've pigeonholed any of the three of them by calling them Democrats I'd suggest you put the bong away for a few hours and let that buzz you got going wear off a little or your friggin' head will explode.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
I was resplying to someone that said Democrats weren't looking to get Lieberman out of the party. On another thread, the three of them seemed to express the opinion that Lieberman should indeed get out of the party. If you think I've pigeonholed any of the three of them by calling them Democrats I'd suggest you put the bong away for a few hours and let that buzz you got going wear off a little or your friggin' head will explode.

I think that there's a slight semantic misunderstanding here, caused by the imprecise way we refer to political groups.

There are several different formulations that can be used to talk about Senator Lieberman. Let's take three:

1) There is at least one Democrat that wants to remove Lieberman from the party;
2) Some Democrats want to remove Lieberman from the party;
3) Democrats generally want to remove Lieberman from the party.

By convention, when we speak of "the Democrats" or "the Republicans" being in favor of against a policy position, we are referring to the position that predominates the political groups that are included in that. That phrase is generally not understood as encompassing formulation #1, or even formulation # 2. This is the case even though technically the phrase "the Democrats want to remove Lieberman from the party" could be assigned the meaning of any of the three above.

Thus, it is incorrect to say that Republicans are in favor of liberalizing access to abortion, even though you could certainly find a non-trivial number of Republicans who believe that. That's because the reference to "Republicans" in that context is understood (by convention) to be a reference to the broader party, not small numbers of individuals within the group.

The same holds true when speaking of Democrats and Lieberman. The statement, "Democrats want to remove Lieberman from the party," would be technically true so long as at least two single individuals that are Democrats believe it. However, that phrase would commonly be understood as a reference to the policy position held by Democrats in general, not a small group.

If you like, it's easy to create confusion by ignoring that convention. Once can make statements such as "Republicans favor gay marriage" or "Democrats support bans on stem cell research," and then insist that they are technically accurate because there are indeed some individuals who take those positions. But it doesn't aid discussion.

Albaby

Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
"And of course, there are numerous posts here by people that want him removed (not voted out of office but removed from the party)."

I'll chalk it up to frustrated rhetoric. If not, I'll note I disagree.

Ken
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Let's look at where he stands with the Democrats:
Pro-choice, opposed Bush's tax plan, supporter of Affrimative Action,


I think being against the tax plan makes him a conservative.

Conservatives believe in fiscal responsibility.

McCain was also against the tax plan because it was not conservative (until this week when he flip-flopped for political reasons to get ready for 2008).

(And I think Lieberman is an Independent)

--ET
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Lieberman does what he feels is right.

No he belongs to neither party and the country doesn't deserve him.

Jedi
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Lieberman was not against privatizing Social Security. Read his statements on this very carefully.

C3
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Lieberman was not against privatizing Social Security. Read his statements on this very carefully.

Maybe you should read a little more carefully... no one was proposing privatizing Social Security.
Print the post Back To Top