Video: Joe Lieberman, Republican?

posted at 11:36 am on December 17, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Do you think CNN’s Dana Bash expected a different answer when she asked Senator Joe Lieberman if he’d run as a Republican? Based on her reaction, I’d guess that she expected either a demurral (“I’m not thinking about my next election”) or a denial (“I’m happy to be an Independent/Democrat”). Instead, Lieberman told Bash that “all options are open,” which will only stoke calls from the Left to banish Lieberman from the Democratic caucus and strip his committee assignments:

Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman, a former Democrat who sits with Democratic caucus, said Tuesday that he would not rule out running for re-election in 2012 as a Republican.

Lieberman angered his colleagues in the Democratic caucus this week by threatening to torpedo health care legislation if it contains a government-run public health insurance or an expansion of Medicare.

Lieberman said he wasn’t sure which party, if any, he would represent in his next election.

“I like being an independent, so that’s definitely a possibility,” the Connecticut senator said. “But I’d say all options are open.”

He called running as a Republican “unlikely” but added that he wouldn’t “foreclose any possibility.”

That would be quite a political journey, almost Churchillesque, in a political system that punishes party-jumping. After all, it was just nine years ago that Lieberman represented the Democrats on a national ticket as Al Gore’s running mate. Just switching to an independent is significant, but flipping to the GOP would be almost unprecedented.

And it almost certainly won’t happen. As I explained to a dismayed family member last night after Lieberman indicated he would vote for the ObamaCare bill (without a public option or Medicare expansion), Lieberman is solidly liberal in his domestic politics, even if he’s a hawk on defense. If Lieberman feels uncomfortable with Democrats on their statist expansionism and retreatism on the war, he would feel equally uncomfortable with Republicans on a wider range of issues. The surprise isn’t that he will vote for Reid’s ObamaCare Rump, it’s that he held out against the public plans for this long.

If any Democrat in the Senate is looking to flip, I’d watch either Ben Nelson of Nebraska or even possibly Evan Bayh of Indiana, both of whom have been increasingly critical of their party and both of whom need to distance themselves from it in their upcoming re-election efforts (Nelson in 2012). Those are also long shots, but they’d be more comfortable with GOP policy than Lieberman.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Boy, that would be a shocker.

AnninCA on December 17, 2009 at 12:46 PM

What w/b a shocke is if the Repulicans/conservatives showed steely ones and leadership. They’re most all playing in the sand, hoping and wishing, while changing wet pants, often.

I’m sick of both parties too Ann, particularly the extreme left and the gonads-deprived right.

Schadenfreude on December 17, 2009 at 12:51 PM

It’s a long way from now til 2012 for Joe and for Nelson as well. The only way I could see Joe flipping is if the DNC kept going in the direction Obama is leading, marching us off the cliff fiscally etc. There’s time for things on the ground to change, and they likely will. Pushback is increasing, IMO.

I’ve been watching Obama. He doesn’t have real political savvy. Bill Clinton absolutely had it. I think Palin has it.

I don’t think Obama has it.

I know that sounds very odd, since he was such the winner. But I think, like Ferarro said, it was the year of the AA candidate. He was iconic in that respect.

And that’s all.

As a real leader?

He’s not relevant.

I think Palin has more instincts about real politics than Obama. I don’t agree with her on a host of issues, but I think she is a lot more politically savvy than he is.

Just my 2 cents.

AnninCA on December 17, 2009 at 12:53 PM

He may be reminding the Democrats what would happen if they pushed him too hard. If the Republicans take 10 seats in 2010, he could change parties and put the Republicans in control.

jeannie on December 17, 2009 at 12:54 PM

What w/b a shocke is if the Repulicans/conservatives showed steely ones and leadership. They’re most all playing in the sand, hoping and wishing, while changing wet pants, often.

I’m sick of both parties too Ann, particularly the extreme left and the gonads-deprived right.

Schadenfreude on December 17, 2009 at 12:51 PM

Well, I think that we’re just frustrated because the internet and national media is still controlling the real conversation.

But they are dying.

What will emerge is a much different paradigm. With a lot more respect, I think, for regional issues.

I think that’s the next evolution.

But, I admit, I’m an optimist.

AnninCA on December 17, 2009 at 12:55 PM

On a personal level, I have no problem with Lieberman, Nelson, or Bayh, but on a political level, I have to say…WHOA WHOA WHOA!!!

When you spend your political career as a democrat, but become incensed with your party, you don’t suddenly change your beliefs, mindset, or ideology. They are democrats, and switching, would make them rino’s at best. Something the party does NOT need.

capejasmine on December 17, 2009 at 12:59 PM

On a personal level, I have no problem with Lieberman, Nelson, or Bayh, but on a political level, I have to say…WHOA WHOA WHOA!!!

When you spend your political career as a democrat, but become incensed with your party, you don’t suddenly change your beliefs, mindset, or ideology. They are democrats, and switching, would make them rino’s at best. Something the party does NOT need.

capejasmine on December 17, 2009 at 12:59 PM

I disagree. That’s the role of senators.

AnninCA on December 17, 2009 at 1:00 PM

I think I’m sick of hearing what Ann thinks.

Just my 2 cents LOL*

DarkCurrent on December 17, 2009 at 1:00 PM

Now it looks good. LOL*
It didn’t look worth a flip, even when I voted for McCain. But I’d already decided against that issue as a key voting factor. I compromised a year before Dems did, obviously.
But, no, I haven’t seen a real concern from the far right about people on this issue.
They seem stuck in dialogue about how people aren’t “trying.”
Yes, people ARE trying, and they need some help.
Real help.
Dems have just failed them. Will the GOP step up and offer something that works?
Boy, that would be a shocker.
AnninCA on December 17, 2009 at 12:46 PM

Well the GOP alternatives are based on free-market principles – principles that actually work in the real world.
The far right is concerned about people – just take a look at who contributes to charities the most.
But we would rather fix the problems than come up with just another program that will saddle people with more dependency on government.

Chainsaw56 on December 17, 2009 at 1:03 PM

I don’t want that liberal motor finger anywhere near the GOP. At best, he’d be a RINO.

Virus-X on December 17, 2009 at 1:07 PM

But, no, I haven’t seen a real concern from the far right about people on this issue.

They seem stuck in dialogue about how people aren’t “trying.”

Yes, people ARE trying, and they need some help.

Real help.

Dems have just failed them. Will the GOP step up and offer something that works?

Boy, that would be a shocker.

AnninCA on December 17, 2009 at 12:46 PM

What the “far right” offers is not a government plan, but freedom – freedom from all the years of regulation that have led to where we are.

Tort reform is needed – but not more regulation; more responsibility: responsibility, for example, from those who file frivolous lawsuits (don’t punish those with good claims by limiting damages – make those with frivolous claims pay the piper)

Freedom from regulations that limit true competition in the insurance market. If there is a demand for a product, like portable insurance, companies will offer it – just get the government out of the way. Let the companies compete across state lines.

Freedom from a lot of licensing laws. Full MDs are not the only professionals in the medical field qualified to give primary-level care. There are EMTs, licensed nurses and other technicians that know how to treat simple problems – and to recognize when a full MD is required. Get the government out of the way, and let them ease the market pressures for care-givers.

What you need to do is come to the basic question: can you take care of yourself, or do you need government to take care of you?

Me: get the blood-suckers out of the way and leave me alone!

ManUFan on December 17, 2009 at 1:09 PM

Lieberman has not “jumped party” while serving. He was on the ballot as an Independent. I respect him for that.

He is a liberal and says so. I oppose and respect him for that.

He supports our troops and understands what lack of global power is. I support and respect him for that.

I even like the earmarks he has proposed.

barnone on December 17, 2009 at 1:10 PM

Maybe Webb would switch; I’m fast giving up on Warner.

Bob in VA on December 17, 2009 at 1:12 PM

I take your word. I’ve never paid a smidge of attention to the GOP for my entire adult life.

So I can’t speak to what’s going on there.

What I have learned since “exploring” is that it’s not a lot different than what I’ve seen in the Dem party.

It’s the same dynamic, in other words.

You need Independents, like I guess I am today, to win.

You’ll not please us, of course. You’ll make decisions for your base that are, frankly, offensive.

Then, the middle weakens.

That seems to be how it goes.

Give me a candidate that actually supports the middle?

I’d work myself into poverty.

I’m so sick of both sides, in short.AnninCA on December 17, 2009 at 12:35 PM

So am I, but I’m more sick of the left, definitely. They must be taken down a notch. It’s been 3 years and they’ve gotten too big for their britches!

NathanG on December 17, 2009 at 1:13 PM

I think I’m sick of hearing what Ann thinks.

Just my 2 cents LOL*

DarkCurrent on December 17, 2009 at 1:00 PM

I think …
I don’t think… I think …
Real people! I think …
I think …
Clinton is great!
I don’t think… I think …
I voted for McCain! I think …
I think …

SO tiresome

AsianGirlInTights on December 17, 2009 at 1:14 PM

I’ve been watching Obama. He doesn’t have real political savvy. Bill Clinton absolutely had it. I think Palin has it.

I don’t think Obama has it.

I know that sounds very odd, since he was such the winner. But I think, like Ferarro said, it was the year of the AA candidate. He was iconic in that respect.

And that’s all.

As a real leader?

He’s not relevant.

I think Palin has more instincts about real politics than Obama. I don’t agree with her on a host of issues, but I think she is a lot more politically savvy than he is.

Just my 2 cents.

AnninCA on December 17, 2009 at 12:53 PM

I agree, Ann. That being said, I think Obama will be reelected. There isn’t a strong enough Republican candidate out there. The way I see it right now, the election will result in him losing one or two states that he won in 2008 (very likely North Carolina and Indiana), but he will still get reelected somehow. Sarah Palin certainly has the charisma, but I just don’t see her being elected. I think if she gets the nomination, she’ll give him a good showing, but he’ll still win by 5 or 6 points by the popular vote with maybe a squeaker in the electoral vote.

NathanG on December 17, 2009 at 1:18 PM

I think I’m sick of hearing what Ann thinks.

Just my 2 cents LOL*

DarkCurrent on December 17, 2009 at 1:00 PM

SO tiresome

AsianGirlInTights on December 17, 2009 at 1:14 PM

Ann gives Obummer a run for his money on narcissism…

ladyingray on December 17, 2009 at 1:19 PM

NathanG on December 17, 2009 at 1:18 PM

Virginia has a good chance of going back to red. The area around DC may stick with Obama, but he’ll lose any support in the southern part of the state that may have tipped the ledger in his favor last year.

ladyingray on December 17, 2009 at 1:21 PM

Virginia has a good chance of going back to red. The area around DC may stick with Obama, but he’ll lose any support in the southern part of the state that may have tipped the ledger in his favor last year.

ladyingray on December 17, 2009 at 1:21 PM

Oh yeah. I forgot about Virginia. I think they’ll campaign hard in those three states, especially Virginia.

NathanG on December 17, 2009 at 1:23 PM

Oh yeah. I forgot about Virginia. I think they’ll campaign hard in those three states, especially Virginia.

NathanG on December 17, 2009 at 1:23 PM

Well, I haven’t bought into it entirely yet, but I can believe Uncle Barry could become less popular than Jimmy Carter. He’s on track, and doesn’t seem to care.

Know what happened to Carter? Ran into a former governor with good, sound conservative values – a charismatic character that people identified with.

Eh?

ManUFan on December 17, 2009 at 1:33 PM

Well, I haven’t bought into it entirely yet, but I can believe Uncle Barry could become less popular than Jimmy Carter. He’s on track, and doesn’t seem to care.

Know what happened to Carter? Ran into a former governor with good, sound conservative values – a charismatic character that people identified with.

Eh?

ManUFan on December 17, 2009 at 1:33 PM

Tis true, tis true. I’m not sure that Palin can win after the media assault on her. Maybe I’m just an extreme pessimist, but I just don’t see it. I don’t know that she’ll get the nomination to begin with. If she does, she needs to pick someone with years of experience. I keep suggesting Paul Ryan because of his youth, experience, and his experience on healthcare legislation.
You also have to look at the recent comparison to Reagan. Reagan’s approval was about the same during this time in his presidency and he went on to win every state except Minnesota in 1984. History doesn’t necessarily tell us much anyway. I believe America has changed quite a bit since then. Besides, Jimmy Carter didn’t have the black vote in a lock, along with a majority of Hispanics.

NathanG on December 17, 2009 at 1:38 PM

He could remain independent and caucus with the Republicans.

Kafir on December 17, 2009 at 1:47 PM

I’m not sure that Palin can win after the media assault on her.

* * *

You also have to look at the recent comparison to Reagan. Reagan’s approval was about the same during this time in his presidency and he went on to win every state except Minnesota in 1984. History doesn’t necessarily tell us much anyway. I believe America has changed quite a bit since then. Besides, Jimmy Carter didn’t have the black vote in a lock, along with a majority of Hispanics.

NathanG on December 17, 2009 at 1:38 PM

The media did the same thing to Reagan – in the end, the media overdid it (as they are doing with Palin) and helped him.

Reagan increased his popularity because he was fixing the problem – not adding to it. And people knew it, just as they see where Uncle Barry wants to go.

America has not changed that much since Carter’s time. And Carter certainly did have the minority vote – you think it went to the GOP? There were, and are, far too many irresponsible voters – just as there were then – all of whom want something for nothing (i.e., they want bigger government). Reagan won because those people started to see Carter wouldn’t/couldn’t deliver – and because the charismatic Reagan energized the people who believed he could fix Carter’s mess.

You may be right that things are not right for history to repeat itself. But I think it’s possible (if it’s not already too late to fix the mess; a distinct possibility).

ManUFan on December 17, 2009 at 1:51 PM

Ann gives Obummer a run for his money on narcissism…

ladyingray on December 17, 2009 at 1:19 PM

Nothing new here.

You’ve posted this opinion how many times now?

I’d say at least 20 posts.

We do get it. You don’t like my opinions.

Here’s my response.

I accept that.

I don’t care, either.

AnninCA on December 17, 2009 at 1:52 PM

If right-wingers think they’l win based on hatred alone?

You’re about as naive as Obamabots.

AnninCA on December 17, 2009 at 1:53 PM

Republican candidate out there. The way I see it right now, the election will result in him losing one or two states that he won in 2008 (very likely North Carolina and Indiana), but he will still get reelected somehow. Sarah Palin certainly has the charisma, but I just don’t see her being elected. I think if she gets the nomination, she’ll give him a good showing, but he’ll still win by 5 or 6 points by the popular vote with maybe a squeaker in the electoral vote

NathanG on December 17, 2009 at 1:18 PM

I agree, today.

But there are 3 years.

I can’t predict what the opposition will present to the public yet;

AnninCA on December 17, 2009 at 1:55 PM

The fact of the matter is… The Dems have gone beyond SNAFU mode, they have gone beyond TARFU (Things are Really *Fouled* Up), and have executed a perfect swan dive towards the rocky bottom of the FUBAR (*Fouled* Up Beyond All Repair). They’ve managed to annoy EVERYONE. The lunatics on the left are crying that this bill doesn’t go far enough, and the overall majority of the U.S. is looking at this bill and realizing “This bill does everything BUT fix health care”

Razgriez on December 17, 2009 at 11:46 AM

This is not just eloquent not to be repeated! Should be QOTD!

gary4205 on December 17, 2009 at 2:01 PM

Ahh, Lieberman, you flip flopping opportunistic dooshbag.

Nice to know you never change.

Dave Rywall on December 17, 2009 at 2:01 PM

Oy! Need coffee! The above should read TOO eloquent not to be repeated!

gary4205 on December 17, 2009 at 2:04 PM

If any Democrat in the Senate is looking to flip, I’d watch either Ben Nelson of Nebraska or even possibly Evan Bayh of Indiana

Nelson may not have a choice if he wants to keep his seat. If he kills this health care fiasco, I look for the Dems to mount a challenge from the left. Even Nebraska has a few far left loons hanging around their university.

CJ on December 17, 2009 at 2:11 PM

Ahh, Lieberman, you flip flopping opportunistic dooshbag.

Nice to know you never change.

Dave Rywall on December 17, 2009 at 2:01 PM

What the hell do you care? You live in Canada.

NathanG on December 17, 2009 at 2:22 PM

Oh and learn how to spell douche.

NathanG on December 17, 2009 at 2:23 PM

I agree, Ann. That being said, I think Obama will be reelected. There isn’t a strong enough Republican candidate out there. The way I see it right now, the election will result in him losing one or two states that he won in 2008 (very likely North Carolina and Indiana), but he will still get reelected somehow. Sarah Palin certainly has the charisma, but I just don’t see her being elected. I think if she gets the nomination, she’ll give him a good showing, but he’ll still win by 5 or 6 points by the popular vote with maybe a squeaker in the electoral vote.

NathanG on December 17, 2009 at 1:18 PM

?????

Obama may be lucky to escape impeachment and conviction at this point, especially if Conservatives take both Houses. Obama would have to work some serious miracles to get re-elected, that and put down Saul Alinsky’s play book and pick up Reagan’s, which ain’t gonna happen!

Tis true, tis true. I’m not sure that Palin can win after the media assault on her. Maybe I’m just an extreme pessimist, but I just don’t see it. I don’t know that she’ll get the nomination to begin with. If she does, she needs to pick someone with years of experience. I keep suggesting Paul Ryan because of his youth, experience, and his experience on healthcare legislation.
You also have to look at the recent comparison to Reagan. Reagan’s approval was about the same during this time in his presidency and he went on to win every state except Minnesota in 1984. History doesn’t necessarily tell us much anyway. I believe America has changed quite a bit since then. Besides, Jimmy Carter didn’t have the black vote in a lock, along with a majority of Hispanics.

NathanG on December 17, 2009 at 1:38 PM

Nathan, the media is going to assault ANYONE who ends up as the nominee.

This is one of Sarah’s HUGE pluses. Sarah has had absolutely everything there is to throw thrown at her. There is nothing left. They are down to fretting over her choice of hats and t-shirts, seriously!

Sarah is fully inoculated against whatever new thing they try.

But that’s not the REAL point. The real point is she’s still here. You name me one other figure who could have withstood all she has. She has not only taken everything they have, and withstood it, she’s thrived in it!

It’s like the harder you hit her, the better she likes it!

I have a theory that Sarah LOVES a good fight. What the left has done is give her an excuse to go looking for one. Like Obama who had his thugs screwing with her in Alaska, the media and the rest of the left are making a huge mistake to tangle with her. Again, this just plays into her strength.

I’m telling you, if Sarah runs, it will not be pretty for the left. Lots of blood on the floor, so to speak.

Sarah has a lot more appeal to various groups that many don’t realized. She does very well with blacks and Hispanics. She has their values: faith, strong family, etc. She also does surprisingly well among gays. I think that comes from the fact she vetoed a bill, based on the state constitution that would have denied rights to gays. But they like her.

I’m not thinking 1984 blowout, yet, but certainly 1980 landslide when she wins. Maybe somewhere in between. It will be a big, jaw dropping win.

I like Paul Ryan, but no Congresscritters. That would be a huge mistake. She really needs another Governor. I really think she’ll pick Rick Perry. Just a hunch I’ve had for a while.

Texas created more jobs in 2008 than all of the other 49 states combined. Our economy is effected, of course, but over all things are really good here.

You would have, based on Sarah’s record as Governor, arguably the two most successful Governors in the country. Two seriously proven leaders who get results.

If Sarah picked Perry, I think it would look a whole like 1984, and I think they drag a whole lot of Conservatives into Congress with them.

gary4205 on December 17, 2009 at 2:36 PM

President Obama must remember his own words from the campaign. His call of “Yes We Can” was not just to us, not just to the millions of people who voted for him, but to himself. We all stood shoulder to shoulder with the President during his hard fought campaign. And, we will continue to stand with him but he must fight for the reform we all know is possible.

Our challenge to you, to the President, to the Senate and to the House of Representatives is to fight. Now, more than ever, all of us must stand up, remember what health insurance reform is all about, and fight like hell to deliver real and meaningful reform to the American people.

–Andy Stern, president SEIU, and most frequent union thug visitor to the WH

Schadenfreude on December 17, 2009 at 2:42 PM

What the hell do you care? You live in Canada.

NathanG on December 17, 2009 at 2:22 PM
———
Learnin’ ain’t your fortay.

Dave Rywall on December 17, 2009 at 2:49 PM

The fact is that most Presidential elections are referendums on whoever is in power. The 2012 election will likely be no different.

It is true that Democrats successfully ran against Herbert Hoover for decades, but there is too much information available today to allow them to keep up the “we inherited this” mantra for very much longer — at least among anyone who is a real moderate. While WWII had a significant effect in persuading many people to “stay the course,” Obama will have no such patriotic appeal going in his favor.

The 2008 election ended up being a referendum on George Bush and the Congressional Republicans, even though Bush was not on the ballot. That was largely because of the economy tanking the way it did in the early fall.

Arguments were made by both sides about whose fault it was, but in the end the Democrats “won” that argument because it was not anticipated by the Republican Administration or, should I say, not publicly anticipated the way it should have been. The Administration was not vigorously pursuing the legislation to stabilize the credit markets by reducing the toxic assets, in other words. That would have at least given the Republicans more ammo to argue that Barney & company really laid the foundation that caused the debacle.

Obama came flying in on a vague and utterly false set of promises, and since then, the center has simply dropped out of his coalition. He’s not getting the center back — they’re in “fool me once, shame on you” mode. So in the 2012 election, it should be easy to make the election a referendum on him, and on the Congressional Democrats, and win. Only if he actually loses Congress in 2010, could he thereafter shift some of the blame to the Republicans. But that would be offset by the problems they would create fo him.

The man has simply squandered his presidency so far. And from what I can see, he has done so largely based on his personal ideology . . . that, and hiring a bunch of like-minded groupies to hang around him. What serious, sober person would EVER have Anita Dunn as his Communications Director?

He is a committed, far left true believer. More and more people realize that every day.

Trochilus on December 17, 2009 at 3:15 PM

Oh man, the Jew-haters in the Republican party are not gonna like that. Yeah, I’m talking to you: Ron Paul, Pat Buchanan, the anti-semite poster eh and his twin Spathi.

Andy in Agoura Hills on December 17, 2009 at 11:40 AM

just to be clear, Andy in Agoura Hills is an lgf troll.

different from the common troll, that. you see, he’s been with HA from the beginning, but has recently taken a turn towards charles-johnson psychosis. the symptoms of this are clear:

whereas andy was once a racist poster who would spout birther codewords, such as referring to president obama as “HUSSEIN” (link, link, link), issuing veiled death threats against the president (link, link) and deriding the first lady as an “affirmative action” case (link), he now has very, very sensitively attuned ear for “dogwhistle code”. when he believes he hears one of these dog whistles, he believes he is duty bound to “expose” the supposed whistler in the shrillest terms. he does this believing that no one is going to simply google his posting handle and discover that he in fact is an obnoxious racist (
link
).

like charles, he no doubt believes that he has stood still on a foundation of non-aligned vigilance against crankery from left and right, yet when he sets out to smear a conservative as an “antisemite” or a “racist”, he trusts and cites the extreme left. for instance, his reason for smearing me as an “anti-semite” is that i disputed his use of the self-avowed stalinist, chip berlet in a post last night (link).

he in fact arrived in that thread on cue from charles johnson at lgf (link), voicing an unfounded rage over the trivia that the john birch society has rented booth space at the upcoming cpac convention. andy in agora hills is convinced that the jbs is “racist” and “antisemitic” based on no evidence whatsoever.

actually, it’s worth examining his thought process on all of this.

1) at the base of this is not a proper “thought” but rather an a priori conviction that all “extremism” on the right necessarily denotes racism/antisemitism. in the case of the jbs, this is not so; the jbs is said to be “extreme” because they believe ridiculous things about global conspiracies and rfid tracking chips.

2) andy is obdurate in sustaining this prejudice, so he goes about finding “facts” to support his errant prejudice. in this he cites a stalinist author who bases his case on nebulous inference.

3) when this non-evidence is defeated, andy calls me an anti-semite. in other words, challenging his prejudice confirms his prejudice. no reason can penetrate this.

4) when challenged to present an actual body of evidence for his smear, he commits manifold errors of logical fallacy. he says that the jbs distributed the (insane, but neither racist nor antisemitic) book, none dare call it a conspiracy, claims (without evidence) that its author was a “white supremacist”, and notes the trivia that louis farrakahn has referenced it. his thought process is reverse: louis farrakahn is an antisemite. louis farrakahn has referenced none dare call it a conspiracy, therefor the book is antisemitic and its author is a white supremacist. this has as much logical content as asserting that bubblegum is racist and was invented by white supremacists because bull connor chewed bubblegum.

his posting behavior has always been deranged blather marked by readily accusing others of anti-semitism based on obtuse and tendentious criteria.

eh on December 17, 2009 at 3:45 PM

Anyone who can drive the Democrats up the wall the way Joe Lieberman can is A-OK in my book!

pilamaye on December 17, 2009 at 3:53 PM

Oh no Andy in Agoura Hills lis here to call everybody a jew hater.

Dave Rywall on December 17, 2009 at 3:56 PM

Oh no Andy in Agoura Hills lis here to call everybody a jew hater.

Dave Rywall on December 17, 2009 at 3:56 PM

Canuck Go Home!

Terrye on December 17, 2009 at 5:03 PM

Reagan was a Democrat who became a Republican, but he was a lot more conservative on a lot of issues than Lieberman. I think he is just messing with the left on this.

Terrye on December 17, 2009 at 5:04 PM

From Ed’s post;

Instead, Lieberman told Bash that “all options are open,” which will only stoke calls from the Left to banish Lieberman from the Democratic caucus and strip his committee assignments:

We can only hope they push him over to the Republican caucus.
1. Any vote against health care is a good vote.
2. He can’t be worse than some of the garden-variety RINOs.
3. At worst, it’ll be like having Specter back. At best, he’s a pro-defense, pro-Israel vote, when needed.

massrighty on December 17, 2009 at 10:00 PM

Will the GOP step up and offer something that works?

Boy, that would be a shocker.

AnninCA on December 17, 2009 at 12:46 PM

They have been, all along; once again, you’re just not paying attention.

Republican plans have included:
A. Competition across state lines
B. Tort Reform
C. Catastrophic-only coverage

The solutions are here; as I said, you’re just not paying attention.

massrighty on December 17, 2009 at 10:04 PM

Ahh, Lieberman, you flip flopping opportunistic dooshbag.

Nice to know you never change.

Dave Rywall on December 17, 2009 at 2:01 PM

There are 4 spelling and grammar errors.
Try harder.
Or, don’t bother – the results will be the same.

massrighty on December 17, 2009 at 10:08 PM

That would be quite a political journey, almost Churchillesque, in a political system that punishes party-jumping. After all, it was just nine years ago that Lieberman represented the Democrats on a national ticket as Al Gore’s running mate. Just switching to an independent is significant, but flipping to the GOP would be almost unprecedented.

The ONLY reason Lieberman is an independent now is because the nutroots fringe decided Lieberman was not nutrootsy enough for their tastes and tried to put The Freshmaker Lamont in there.

Now that Lieberman can get his revenge, I imagine he is enjoying every. single. sweet. moment. of. it.

BKennedy on December 18, 2009 at 12:33 AM

Comment pages: 1 2