Cannibalism in CT?
 

I sincerely hope Joe Lieberman is successful today.

It's amazing and sad that some are willing to sacrifice a honorable, decent
and honest man, simply to make a political statement.

Eisboch

Cannibalism in CT?
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
I sincerely hope Joe Lieberman is successful today.

It's amazing and sad that some are willing to sacrifice a honorable,
decent and honest man, simply to make a political statement.

Eisboch

Lieberman might have avoided the primary today had he merely been
"hawkish" on the war and otherwise been non-supportive of Bush and Bush's
conduct of same.

I am watching MSNBC as I type and listened to an interview with somebody ...
didn't catch who .... who pointed out that Joe Lieberman is really the last
of the old school, Kennedy-type Democrats. His vision is greater than that
of simply the interests of his own party and is willing to work to influence
without slamming doors shut. We need more of people like him in politics.

Eisboch

Cannibalism in CT?
 

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 11:32:19 -0400, Harry Krause wrote:


Lieberman might have avoided the primary today had he merely been
"hawkish" on the war and otherwise been non-supportive of Bush and
Bush's conduct of same.

Suggesting he might run as an independent, if he looses, has also cost
him. It's telling the primary voters that their votes don't count, and
that he somehow deserves to be their Senator. If he is going to run as an
independent, he should have at least kept his mouth shut until after the
primary.

Cannibalism in CT?
 

Eisboch wrote:

I am watching MSNBC as I type and listened to an interview with somebody ...
didn't catch who .... who pointed out that Joe Lieberman is really the last
of the old school, Kennedy-type Democrats. His vision is greater than that
of simply the interests of his own party and is willing to work to influence
without slamming doors shut. We need more of people like him in politics.

Eisboch

I agree.

Cannibalism in CT?
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 11:39:58 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
m...
Eisboch wrote:
I sincerely hope Joe Lieberman is successful today.

It's amazing and sad that some are willing to sacrifice a honorable,
decent and honest man, simply to make a political statement.

Eisboch

Lieberman might have avoided the primary today had he merely been
"hawkish" on the war and otherwise been non-supportive of Bush and
Bush's
conduct of same.

I am watching MSNBC as I type and listened to an interview with somebody
...
didn't catch who .... who pointed out that Joe Lieberman is really the
last
of the old school, Kennedy-type Democrats. His vision is greater than
that
of simply the interests of his own party and is willing to work to
influence
without slamming doors shut. We need more of people like him in politics.

Damn straight...

Been listening to Zell maybe.

Cannibalism in CT?
 

"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 13:07:29 -0400, Harry Krause
wrote:

Charlie Morgan wrote:
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 11:56:10 -0400, thunder
wrote:

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 11:32:19 -0400, Harry Krause wrote:


Lieberman might have avoided the primary today had he merely been
"hawkish" on the war and otherwise been non-supportive of Bush and
Bush's conduct of same.
Suggesting he might run as an independent, if he looses, has also cost
him. It's telling the primary voters that their votes don't count,
and
that he somehow deserves to be their Senator. If he is going to run as
an
independent, he should have at least kept his mouth shut until after
the
primary.

It's amazing that Lieberman would EVER consider running as an
independant/spoiler if the Dems make it clear they don't want him.
Someone should remind him of how a similar decision by Ralph Nader
kept Lieberman himself out of the White House.

I wouldn't count Joe out of the Dem primary just yet.

If I were still a Connecticut resident, I'd have a hard time voting
against Joe in a Democratic primary. He's been a solid Democrat and he's
entitled to hold positions that don't adhere to the party line at any
given moment. That doesn't bother me nearly as much as his announced
plan to run as an Indy if he loses the primary. *That* would cause me to
vote for his opponent in the primary if I found his opponent acceptable.

That's the key right there.

Lamont isn't acceptable - in particular to me. He might be acceptable
to those gold coast leftie ton-of-money liberal moonbats, but he's not
anywhere near what I would consider acceptable.

According to my sources, Lamont was talked into this bid by Markos
Moulitsas Zuniga of the Daily Kos and some from MoveOn.org based
solely on Lieberman's support for the Iraq war - that's it - period.

Here's some commentary from those supporting Lamont - all direct
quotes.

"Ned Lamont and his supporters need to [g]et real busy. Ned needs to
beat Lieberman to a pulp in the debate and define what it means to be
an AMerican who is NOT beholden to the Israeli Lobby" (by "rim,"
posted on Huffington Post, July 6, 2006).

"Joe's on the Senate floor now and he's growing a beard. He has about
a weeks growth on his face. . . . I hope he dyes his beard Blood red.
It would be so appropriate" (by "ctkeith," posted on Daily Kos, July
11 and 12, 2005).

On "Lieberman vs. Murtha": "as everybody knows, jews ONLY care about
the welfare of other jews; thanks ever so much for reminding everyone
of this most salient fact, so that we might better ignore all that
jewish propaganda [by Lieberman] about participating in the civil
rights movement of the 60s and so on" (by "tomjones," posted on Daily
Kos, Dec. 7, 2005).

"Good men, Daniel Webster and Faust would attest, sell their souls to
the Devil. Is selling your soul to a god any worse? Leiberman cannot
escape the religious bond he represents. Hell, his wife's name is
Haggadah or Muffeletta or Diaspora or something you eat at Passover"
(by "gerrylong," posted on the Huffington Post, July 8, 2006).

And then there was the Jane Hamisher incident in which she posted a
picture of Joe in black face. Lamont claimed he didn't know Hamisher
at first and when some bloggers posted pictures of him taking to
Hamisher and hugging her at a commercial shoot Hamisher was making for
him, he said she wasn't part of his "staff".

No thanks Mr. Lamont - I'll take a pass on you. If your primary
backers are these kind of folk, forget it.

If Joe does lose, I'll support his Independant Bid in the same fashion
as I've supported him through 30 years of politics.

He's the only Democrat I've ever sent money to and the only one who
I've consistently supported by my direct vote.

GO JOE!!


I had a strong feeling that there was more to this behind the scenes than
what appears in the "normal" news media. Lieberman has too much class to
even respond to such dirty politics and his statement to run as an
independent if he loses is as far as he would go.

It's not often I feel so positive about a Democrat, particularly from
another state, but I think he is one of the few honest people in federal
government and we need to keep him, Democrat, Republican or Independent.

Eisboch

Cannibalism in CT?
 

Calif Bill wrote:
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 11:39:58 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
m...
Eisboch wrote:
I sincerely hope Joe Lieberman is successful today.

It's amazing and sad that some are willing to sacrifice a honorable,
decent and honest man, simply to make a political statement.

Eisboch

Lieberman might have avoided the primary today had he merely been
"hawkish" on the war and otherwise been non-supportive of Bush and
Bush's
conduct of same.

I am watching MSNBC as I type and listened to an interview with somebody
...
didn't catch who .... who pointed out that Joe Lieberman is really the
last
of the old school, Kennedy-type Democrats. His vision is greater than
that
of simply the interests of his own party and is willing to work to
influence
without slamming doors shut. We need more of people like him in politics.

Damn straight...

Been listening to Zell maybe.
Zell's losing his mind, he goes off on rants so easily these days, I'd
take anything he said with a grain of salt.

Cannibalism in CT?
 

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
Lamont isn't acceptable - in particular to me.

As a rightie and a Bush-Cheney supporter, why do you think
your comments on Democrats have any relevance, other than to
let Democrats know when they are gaining ground?

DSK

Cannibalism in CT?
 

Eisboch wrote:
It's not often I feel so positive about a Democrat, particularly from
another state, but I think he is one of the few honest people in federal
government and we need to keep him, Democrat, Republican or Independent.


Then why didn't you vote for him for Vice President?

I think it's kind of funny that the Rove-bots are shrieking
about keeping Joe Lieberman in place, and even claiming that
a primary challenge to him is proof the Democratic Party is
anti-Semitic. Now they rightwingnuts have got some of you
folks who ought to have better sense chiming in.

Personally, I'd prefer to see Lieberman stay... but then I
am actually a registered Democrat even if it's not my state.

Regards
Doug King

Cannibalism in CT?
 

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
I much prefer to call myself a moderate rather than a "rightie".


The problem with that claim is that the position you espouse
on many of the 'Big Issues' are pretty far right. AFAIK you
have relatively few moderate or centrist views, and if you
have ever once taken a liberal stand, I didn't notice it.





Because I prefer courteous and vigorous debate than mindless robotism
currently in vogue in the left wing of the Democrat Party.


BZZZT giveaway- the term is 'Democratic Party.' Only the
Repugnicrat borgs and Rove-bots use the term 'Democrat
Party.' This is what is called a 'tell' in poker, kind of
like the way you revealed your position when trying to claim
the high ground in the evolution debate.

It's not curteous to enter a debate under false pretenses.
Vigorous, maybe, but you can't expect anybody but fools to
stand up & salute when you enter flying false colors.

DSK

Cannibalism in CT?
 

"DSK" wrote in message
...

Now they (the) rightwingnuts have got some of you folks who ought to have
better sense chiming in.

Regards
Doug King


Rightwingnuts have absolutely no influence on my high regard for Joe
Lieberman. And his support of the war and/or perceived support of Bush have
absolutely no influence either. I just think he's an honest man with strong
convections.

Eisboch

Cannibalism in CT?
 

"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

Calif Bill wrote:
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 11:39:58 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
m...
Eisboch wrote:
I sincerely hope Joe Lieberman is successful today.

It's amazing and sad that some are willing to sacrifice a honorable,
decent and honest man, simply to make a political statement.

Eisboch

Lieberman might have avoided the primary today had he merely been
"hawkish" on the war and otherwise been non-supportive of Bush and
Bush's
conduct of same.

I am watching MSNBC as I type and listened to an interview with
somebody
...
didn't catch who .... who pointed out that Joe Lieberman is really the
last
of the old school, Kennedy-type Democrats. His vision is greater than
that
of simply the interests of his own party and is willing to work to
influence
without slamming doors shut. We need more of people like him in
politics.

Damn straight...

Been listening to Zell maybe.
Zell's losing his mind, he goes off on rants so easily these days, I'd
take anything he said with a grain of salt.


We need more who will speak their mind, not the party line!

Cannibalism in CT?
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
Calif Bill wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

Zell's losing his mind, he goes off on rants so easily these days, I'd
take anything he said with a grain of salt.


We need more who will speak their mind, not the party line!





In the case of your hero Zell, however, what's left of his mind is
certifiable.
He's loony tunes.


Many here think otherwise Harry. From what I have read from and heard
about the man he seems to be a man of integrity. ;-)

Cannibalism in CT?
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"DSK" wrote in message
...

Now they (the) rightwingnuts have got some of you folks who ought to have
better sense chiming in.

Regards
Doug King


Rightwingnuts have absolutely no influence on my high regard for Joe
Lieberman. And his support of the war and/or perceived support of Bush
have absolutely no influence either. I just think he's an honest man with
strong convections.

Eisboch



I know it was an innocent typo........but I would invite anyone with strong
heat 'convections' to stay at my house all winter long free of charge. ;-)

Cannibalism in CT?
 

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"DSK" wrote in message
...

Now they (the) rightwingnuts have got some of you folks who ought to have
better sense chiming in.

Regards
Doug King


Rightwingnuts have absolutely no influence on my high regard for Joe
Lieberman. And his support of the war and/or perceived support of Bush
have absolutely no influence either. I just think he's an honest man with
strong convections.

Eisboch



heh ... make that "convictions"

Eisboch

Cannibalism in CT?
 

" JimH" not telling you @ pffftt.com wrote in message
. ..

"Eisboch" wrote in message
...

"DSK" wrote in message
...

Now they (the) rightwingnuts have got some of you folks who ought to
have better sense chiming in.

Regards
Doug King


Rightwingnuts have absolutely no influence on my high regard for Joe
Lieberman. And his support of the war and/or perceived support of Bush
have absolutely no influence either. I just think he's an honest man
with strong convections.

Eisboch



I know it was an innocent typo........but I would invite anyone with
strong heat 'convections' to stay at my house all winter long free of
charge. ;-)


did too much technical writing in my life.

Eisboch

Cannibalism in CT?
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
Calif Bill wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...
Zell's losing his mind, he goes off on rants so easily these days, I'd
take anything he said with a grain of salt.

We need more who will speak their mind, not the party line!




In the case of your hero Zell, however, what's left of his mind is
certifiable.
He's loony tunes.


Many here think otherwise Harry. From what I have read from and heard
about the man he seems to be a man of integrity. ;-)


I don't know enough about him to comment on his integrity. What I know
about him comes from his public appearances and writings. He's loony
tunes.


Could you offer some examples of his writings that would classify him as
crazy?

Cannibalism in CT?
 

"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
JimH wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
Calif Bill wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...
Zell's losing his mind, he goes off on rants so easily these days,
I'd
take anything he said with a grain of salt.

We need more who will speak their mind, not the party line!



In the case of your hero Zell, however, what's left of his mind is
certifiable.
He's loony tunes.

Many here think otherwise Harry. From what I have read from and
heard about the man he seems to be a man of integrity. ;-)

I don't know enough about him to comment on his integrity. What I know
about him comes from his public appearances and writings. He's loony
tunes.


Could you offer some examples of his writings that would classify him as
crazy?

Sorry; haven't read anything of his for several years. The ones I remember
were in outer space, as were his "appearances" at public forums that were
televised. Really, to me he came across as a rabid dog.


I could easily say the same about the DNC Chairman Howard Dean and support
it with facts. ;-)

Could you actually be thinking that because, and only because, Zell has
stepped over party lines several times, most importantly during the
Republican Presidential convention of 2004 and with his support of the Iraq
war? I think so. ;-)

Does a Democrat always have to believe in the party line? Conversely, does
a Republican always have to believe in his/her party line?

These folks were elected to represent *us*............a mix of liberals,
moderates and conservatives. There is nothing wrong with standing up for
the *right* thing though, despite political labels (as Bill said earlier).
;-)

Cannibalism in CT?
 

Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:

Because I prefer courteous and vigorous debate than mindless robotism
currently in vogue in the left wing of the Democrat Party.

That's a heck of a statement, given that the right wingers would
blindly follow BushCo off of a cliff like lemmings!

Cannibalism in CT?
 

Eisboch wrote:
"Harry Krause" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
I sincerely hope Joe Lieberman is successful today.

It's amazing and sad that some are willing to sacrifice a honorable,
decent and honest man, simply to make a political statement.

Eisboch

Lieberman might have avoided the primary today had he merely been
"hawkish" on the war and otherwise been non-supportive of Bush and Bush's
conduct of same.

I am watching MSNBC as I type and listened to an interview with somebody ...
didn't catch who .... who pointed out that Joe Lieberman is really the last
of the old school, Kennedy-type Democrats. His vision is greater than that
of simply the interests of his own party and is willing to work to influence
without slamming doors shut. We need more of people like him in politics.

Eisboch

Agreed! I like him. I'd vote for him.

Cannibalism in CT?
 

Id rather have him as a president over Bush or Kerry.

I'd rather have him for my congressman than, Durbin, or Obama


thunder wrote:
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 11:32:19 -0400, Harry Krause wrote:


Lieberman might have avoided the primary today had he merely been
"hawkish" on the war and otherwise been non-supportive of Bush and
Bush's conduct of same.

Suggesting he might run as an independent, if he looses, has also cost
him. It's telling the primary voters that their votes don't count, and
that he somehow deserves to be their Senator. If he is going to run as an
independent, he should have at least kept his mouth shut until after the
primary.

Cannibalism in CT?
 

Eisboch wrote:
Rightwingnuts have absolutely no influence on my high regard for Joe
Lieberman.

Mine neither.

... And his support of the war and/or perceived support of Bush have
absolutely no influence either.

OK, if you say so.

... I just think he's an honest man with strong
convections.


IMHO he is as honest & conscientious a Senator as is likely
to be found on either side.

*But* let me ask a few leading questions... why does the
Republican publicity machine suddenly want to dabble in a
Democrat election?

I can think of several reasons- by having a lot of blatant
Bush-Cheney Cheerleaders supporting Lieberman, he is more
likely to lose, thereby removing a senior Democratic Senator
with a lot of influence over where the money goes; also
putting in place a more vulnerable Democrat.

Did it not seem odd to anybody else that the rightwingnuts
are suddenly so hot about Lieberman, when just a few short
years ago they were screaming about what a
commie-liberal-fag-traitor he was (almost as bad as
shudder Al Gore).

DSK

Cannibalism in CT?
 

On 8 Aug 2006 15:02:25 -0700, "basskisser" wrote:


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:

Because I prefer courteous and vigorous debate than mindless robotism
currently in vogue in the left wing of the Democrat Party.

That's a heck of a statement, given that the right wingers would
blindly follow BushCo off of a cliff like lemmings!

Proof? You are awful quick to condemn all.
--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

Cannibalism in CT?
 

Oh please - I made a freakin' typo.


Funny kind of typo, you made it two or three times in a row.
Another funny coincidence is that a lot of the rightwingnuts
are making exactly the same typo as a sort of highbrow
insult to the Democrats. George Will explained it a few
months ago.

And I do have the moral high ground. That's because I'm a moral kind
of guy.


Then why are you meddling in a primary election that is not
in your state and not in your party? Because the Rove-bots
and rightwingnuts are suddenly paying it a lot of attention?


It's not curteous to enter a debate under false pretenses.
Vigorous, maybe, but you can't expect anybody but fools to
stand up & salute when you enter flying false colors.


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:
I'll pretend to understand that.

Ok, no, I won't.

It's simple. You claim to be a moderate... let's see some
moderate opinons from you. You claim to support Lieberman,
yet in the one instance in your life when you could have
voted for him because, as you say, you "really could support
a moderate Democrat" you did not vote for him because his
running mate was also a moderate Democrat.

In other words, you're not really a moderate. You know that,
I know that, so quit pretending. You're not fooling anybody.

DSK

Cannibalism in CT?
 

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On 8 Aug 2006 15:02:25 -0700, "basskisser" wrote:


Shortwave Sportfishing wrote:

Because I prefer courteous and vigorous debate than mindless robotism
currently in vogue in the left wing of the Democrat Party.

That's a heck of a statement, given that the right wingers would
blindly follow BushCo off of a cliff like lemmings!

Proof? You are awful quick to condemn all.

Kevin is projecting again

--
******************************************
***** Have a Spectacular Day! *****
******************************************

John

Cannibalism in CT?
 

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 20:38:52 -0400, DSK wrote:

Then why are you meddling in a primary election that is not
in your state

Last time I looked Shortwave Tom was very much in Connecticut.

Cannibalism in CT?
 

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 20:03:09 -0400, DSK wrote:


IMHO he is as honest & conscientious a Senator as is likely to be found on
either side.

*But* let me ask a few leading questions... why does the Republican
publicity machine suddenly want to dabble in a Democrat election?

I can think of several reasons- by having a lot of blatant Bush-Cheney
Cheerleaders supporting Lieberman, he is more likely to lose, thereby
removing a senior Democratic Senator with a lot of influence over where
the money goes; also putting in place a more vulnerable Democrat.

Did it not seem odd to anybody else that the rightwingnuts are suddenly so
hot about Lieberman, when just a few short years ago they were screaming
about what a commie-liberal-fag-traitor he was (almost as bad as shudder
Al Gore).

I can think of another very good reason Republicans are interested, fear.
The main issue that brought Lieberman's defeat, was his support for the
war in Iraq. That makes a lot of Republicans, and Democrats, worried.
It's too early to say, how a Democrats defeat, in a relatively liberal
state, will translate to a national election in November, but I would say,
many do have reason to worry.

Cannibalism in CT?
 

"thunder" wrote in message
...


I can think of another very good reason Republicans are interested, fear.
The main issue that brought Lieberman's defeat, was his support for the
war in Iraq. That makes a lot of Republicans, and Democrats, worried.
It's too early to say, how a Democrats defeat, in a relatively liberal
state, will translate to a national election in November, but I would say,
many do have reason to worry.


There may be an unexpected backlash in the national elections that does not
favor Democratic candidates.
Democrats everywhere will be taking notice of what happened to Joe Lieberman
and collectively will be moving their respective positions more to the
left, further narrowing voter options. Republican candidates will then have
room to move more to a center "moderate" position and may end up having more
appeal nationwide.

Betcha Hillary starts moving left soon. This is going to be interesting.

Eisboch

Cannibalism in CT?
 

On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 06:41:50 -0400, Eisboch wrote:


"thunder" wrote in message
...


I can think of another very good reason Republicans are interested,
fear. The main issue that brought Lieberman's defeat, was his support
for the war in Iraq. That makes a lot of Republicans, and Democrats,
worried. It's too early to say, how a Democrats defeat, in a relatively
liberal state, will translate to a national election in November, but I
would say, many do have reason to worry.


There may be an unexpected backlash in the national elections that does
not favor Democratic candidates.
Democrats everywhere will be taking notice of what happened to Joe
Lieberman and collectively will be moving their respective positions
more to the left, further narrowing voter options. Republican
candidates will then have room to move more to a center "moderate"
position and may end up having more appeal nationwide.

Betcha Hillary starts moving left soon. This is going to be
interesting.

While my politics differed with Lieberman, he did have my respect. You
knew where he stood. He was unlike the gutless wonders you describe
above. Those willing to take any side of any issue to get elected, then
sliding back once they are entrenched. It will be interesting, but I
don't think much will change, regardless of which party wins.
Unfortunately, to me, both parties are much the same. With 300 million
people, I keep thinking we should be able to find better leadership.

Cannibalism in CT?
 

Harry Krause wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"thunder" wrote in message
...

I can think of another very good reason Republicans are interested,
fear.
The main issue that brought Lieberman's defeat, was his support for the
war in Iraq. That makes a lot of Republicans, and Democrats, worried.
It's too early to say, how a Democrats defeat, in a relatively liberal
state, will translate to a national election in November, but I would
say,
many do have reason to worry.


There may be an unexpected backlash in the national elections that
does not favor Democratic candidates.
Democrats everywhere will be taking notice of what happened to Joe
Lieberman and collectively will be moving their respective positions
more to the left, further narrowing voter options. Republican
candidates will then have room to move more to a center "moderate"
position and may end up having more appeal nationwide.

Betcha Hillary starts moving left soon. This is going to be interesting.

Eisboch





I dunno. What is it now - 65%-70% of Americans are none too pleased with
the Bush Administration's conduct of its war against Iraq? While the
Repubs will try to paint Lamont and other Dems who oppose their war as
"weak on defense," I don't believe that dog is going to hunt. You'd
think by now that most voters would be able to differentiate between a
failed foreign policy that has drained our national security and a
reasoned approach to getting out of Iraq that recognizes that country is
heading down the toilet.

The Democrats are weak on defense.

The Bush-Republican-Neocon fiasco has done us serious and long-lasting
damage around the world. We have "lost face" everywhere. Central and
South America are turning left. Iran is thumbing its nose at us every
way it can, and because we're bogged down in Iraq, it was able to get
its Hezbollah client to start up serious trouble with Israel.

We are in the initial stages of WWIII. You can choose to bury your head
in the sand if you want but, this war hasn't even gotten started.

The Bush Republicans have failed miserably. It's time to put some
backbone in Congress and make sure our handicapped POTUS doesn't make
any more really serious foreign policy mistakes for the remainder of his
term.

Backone yes, but it is the Democrats that need to stand up and do what
is best for the country not just to regain political power. The biggest
problem with the democrats is that they are power hungry and only power
hungry.

Cannibalism in CT?
 

Calif Bill wrote:
"basskisser" wrote in message
ups.com...

Calif Bill wrote:
"Shortwave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 8 Aug 2006 11:39:58 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
m...
Eisboch wrote:
I sincerely hope Joe Lieberman is successful today.

It's amazing and sad that some are willing to sacrifice a honorable,
decent and honest man, simply to make a political statement.

Eisboch

Lieberman might have avoided the primary today had he merely been
"hawkish" on the war and otherwise been non-supportive of Bush and
Bush's
conduct of same.

I am watching MSNBC as I type and listened to an interview with
somebody
...
didn't catch who .... who pointed out that Joe Lieberman is really the
last
of the old school, Kennedy-type Democrats. His vision is greater than
that
of simply the interests of his own party and is willing to work to
influence
without slamming doors shut. We need more of people like him in
politics.

Damn straight...

Been listening to Zell maybe.
Zell's losing his mind, he goes off on rants so easily these days, I'd
take anything he said with a grain of salt.


We need more who will speak their mind, not the party line!

But he's gone way too far, he's lost it. You should hear him lately.
Being a local, I've heard many, many things he's said that was so far
off base, it's laughable. I liked the cut of his jib until he went off
the deep end. I wouldn't trust him to be a school custodian.

Cannibalism in CT?
 

Harry Krause wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:





I dunno. What is it now - 65%-70% of Americans are none too pleased
with the Bush Administration's conduct of its war against Iraq? While
the Repubs will try to paint Lamont and other Dems who oppose their
war as "weak on defense," I don't believe that dog is going to hunt.
You'd think by now that most voters would be able to differentiate
between a failed foreign policy that has drained our national
security and a reasoned approach to getting out of Iraq that
recognizes that country is heading down the toilet.

The Democrats are weak on defense.


Report back here when you've finished high school, Bertbrain.

I did near 30 years ago.

Do you disagree that the Democrats are weak on defense? The say the have
a better plan, they say the will fight smarter but, they can't put their
better plan into words and the can't describe how to fight smarter. The
reason is that they have no better plan and they don't know tot fight
let alone fight smarter.


The Bush-Republican-Neocon fiasco has done us serious and
long-lasting damage around the world. We have "lost face" everywhere.
Central and South America are turning left. Iran is thumbing its nose
at us every way it can, and because we're bogged down in Iraq, it was
able to get its Hezbollah client to start up serious trouble with
Israel.

We are in the initial stages of WWIII. You can choose to bury your
head in the sand if you want but, this war hasn't even gotten started.


Well, then, son, you ought to re-up. I'm sure the marines could use you
to stop a bullet or an IED.

When are you going to serve your country?

Cannibalism in CT?
 

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 20:38:52 -0400, DSK wrote:


Then why are you meddling in a primary election that is not
in your state


Wayne.B wrote:
Last time I looked Shortwave Tom was very much in Connecticut.


My mistake, I thought he was in Massachusetts

DSK

Cannibalism in CT?
 

"DSK" wrote in message
...


On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 20:38:52 -0400, DSK wrote:


Then why are you meddling in a primary election that is not in your state


Wayne.B wrote:
Last time I looked Shortwave Tom was very much in Connecticut.


My mistake, I thought he was in Massachusetts

DSK


Yeah. That was *me* meddling in a primary election that was not in my
state. But, MA and CT are connected at the hip, so to speak, geographically
and politically.

Eisboch

Cannibalism in CT?
 

JimH wrote:

Could you offer some examples of his writings that would classify him as
crazy?

Jim, if you heard his speech rants locally, you'd realize the man is
losing it. As for some quotes:

"I'm just an old man looking after cemeteries,"

"[We have] a prolonged and seemingly unending period of a lack of
decency. A fish doesn't know it's wet. We're numb and we can't even
feel it."

Then take a look at this:
http://tinyurl.com/6oema

Eric Zorn has transcripts of Miller's just-short-of-clinically-insane
interviews on MSNBC and CNN right after his speech.


William Saletan goes nuclear: this is no longer just an ordinary
election, he says, it's "becoming a referendum on democracy."


NewDonkey: "Not since Pat Buchanan's famous 'culture war' speech in
1992 has a major speaker at a national political convention spoken so
hatefully, at such length, about the opposition. At the dark heart of
the speech was the same old tired litany of lies and
mischaracterizations about Kerry's Senate votes on military spending
and weapons systems that BC04 has been retailing for many months."


From a time machine, Zell Miller himself criticizes his speech. Here's
what he had to say in 2001: "John Kerry has fought against government
waste and worked hard to bring some accountability to
Washington....John has worked to strengthen our military."


Andrew Sullivan: "[Miller's] speech tonight was in this vein, a classic
Dixiecrat speech, jammed with bald lies, straw men, and hateful
rhetoric....The man's speech was not merely crude; it added whole
universes to the word crude."


Jonathan Cohn in the New Republic: "It was one of the most vile
political speeches in recent American history, every bit as offensive
as Pat Buchanan's infamous call in 1992 for "religious war" and,
perhaps, a little more disturbing. Buchanan's speech, after all, was an
assault on decency. Last night Miller declared war on democracy."


Matt Yglesias, who was in the hall when Miller spoke: "I don't believe
I've ever heard a more disgusting speech delivered in the English
language. The fact that I couldn't see a single person on the floor who
seemed to feel anything less than the utmost enthusiasm for that lunacy
was, well, a bit disturbing."


Commenter Thumb, reacting to my pithy comment last night: "Zell's
speech reads better in the original German."

Cannibalism in CT?
 

Bert Robbins wrote:

When are you going to serve your country?

When Hannity and Limbaugh does.

Cannibalism in CT?
 

Harry Krause wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:
Harry Krause wrote:


I dunno. What is it now - 65%-70% of Americans are none too pleased
with the Bush Administration's conduct of its war against Iraq?
While the Repubs will try to paint Lamont and other Dems who oppose
their war as "weak on defense," I don't believe that dog is going
to hunt. You'd think by now that most voters would be able to
differentiate between a failed foreign policy that has drained our
national security and a reasoned approach to getting out of Iraq
that recognizes that country is heading down the toilet.
The Democrats are weak on defense.

Report back here when you've finished high school, Bertbrain.

I did near 30 years ago.

Ahh. I should have said, "graduated."

I did that when I walked across the stage with my other 600 classmates.


Do you disagree that the Democrats are weak on defense?

Yeah, I disagree. The Republican plan is to do the same stupid things
over and over and over, and hope for a better outcome. We see the
results of that in Iraq and on the Israel-Lebanon border, and in Iran
and North Korea shaking in their boots. The Republicans are weak on
defense, because they haven't a clue as to what works.

Complaints and more complaints. What would the Democrats do if they had
the power to do so?

You have no plan, you have no idea how to fight a war.



We are in the initial stages of WWIII. You can choose to bury your
head in the sand if you want but, this war hasn't even gotten started.

Well, then, son, you ought to re-up. I'm sure the marines could use
you to stop a bullet or an IED.

When are you going to serve your country?


I have.

As a generals civilian dog-robber?

Cannibalism in CT?
 

basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:

When are you going to serve your country?

When Hannity and Limbaugh does.


There you go again Kevin. Putting dependencies on everything.

Why don't you just do it.

Cannibalism in CT?
 

Harry Krause wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:

When are you going to serve your country?

When Hannity and Limbaugh does.



I took no pleasure in Lieberman's defeat last night, but I did see some
clips of Hannity getting close to a stroke, and that was fun. What an
ass he is.

Hannity is a self serving ass!

Cannibalism in CT?
 

Bert Robbins wrote:
basskisser wrote:
Bert Robbins wrote:

When are you going to serve your country?

When Hannity and Limbaugh does.


There you go again Kevin. Putting dependencies on everything.

I see that you are still posting in ignorance. Care to take the $5000
challenge? Put up, shut up, or admit your afraid.