smurphy said:
his politics are supposed to be in line with russ feingold's. now depends on what you think about russ feingold's politics..to me he is too liberal. to stevied he may be considered a conservative. depends on point of view.
Lieberman
- Thread starter DOGS THAT BARK
- Start date
his politics are supposed to be in line with russ feingold's. now depends on what you think about russ feingold's politics..to me he is too liberal. to stevied he may be considered a conservative. depends on point of view.
All I know is that Sean Hannity was practically crying all night as Lieberman was trailing. I didn't know he cared so much for the Democrats.
That lying nut Santorium will also meet the same fate as Lieberman as the people speak.
That lying nut Santorium will also meet the same fate as Lieberman as the people speak.
guys...c`mon...it`s connecticut....moonbat central.....it`s expected....
who cares....
cynthia mckinney got zapped...now that`s fun....something we can all enjoy in a spirit of comraderie.....satisfying...
kinda like seeing your ex get fat.....
who cares....
cynthia mckinney got zapped...now that`s fun....something we can all enjoy in a spirit of comraderie.....satisfying...
kinda like seeing your ex get fat.....
Believe Al and Jessie spent to much time in Conn and let their intellectual candidate fend for herself in Georgia--she still got 40% of vote--does that tell you anything
since we been discussing Reuters bias on war in other thread--does their headline this morning surprise anyone---
" Lieberman loses battle over war "
since we been discussing Reuters bias on war in other thread--does their headline this morning surprise anyone---
" Lieberman loses battle over war "
Last edited:
Don't guess I'm going to get my wish for a conservative/moderate Democratic presidential candidate for the 2008 election. Guess I'll have to vote once again for whoever is running on the Republican ticket/lesser of 2 evils (as will the majority of America I'll bet). Sad shape both parties are in now.
lieberman should continually run ads showing pictures of lamont's victory speech showing jackson, sharpton, & maxine walters on the platform.
with all democrats jumping on the lamont bandwagon, watch in 08 the republican presidential candidate keep harping on the fact that the democratic candidate endorsed lamont.
the best line i heard was from pat cadell(sp?),( was campaign manager for carter's presidency), who said that...
"now the democrats are eating their own"...that cracked me up.
with all democrats jumping on the lamont bandwagon, watch in 08 the republican presidential candidate keep harping on the fact that the democratic candidate endorsed lamont.
the best line i heard was from pat cadell(sp?),( was campaign manager for carter's presidency), who said that...
"now the democrats are eating their own"...that cracked me up.
Wouldn't call it necessarily inaccurate Matt---
However will let you know my thoughts more when I see demogaphics of voters and where the below came from--if you get my drift.
"In the run-up to the primary, 14,000 new Connecticut voters registered as Democrats, while another 14,000 state voters switched their registration from unaffiliated to Democrat to vote in the primary.
--but if you assume that headline is accurate I would assume you would think headlines-- GW wins 2nd term on stance on war-- would be equally accurate????
---I did change my mind on prior stance however in that Lamont will finish 3rd in 08. Believe in retrospect the moderates and independents will be split between gop and Lieberman while Lamont will have automatic 90% + vote of liberals-blacks and "those of alternate lifestyles"
However will let you know my thoughts more when I see demogaphics of voters and where the below came from--if you get my drift.
"In the run-up to the primary, 14,000 new Connecticut voters registered as Democrats, while another 14,000 state voters switched their registration from unaffiliated to Democrat to vote in the primary.
--but if you assume that headline is accurate I would assume you would think headlines-- GW wins 2nd term on stance on war-- would be equally accurate????
---I did change my mind on prior stance however in that Lamont will finish 3rd in 08. Believe in retrospect the moderates and independents will be split between gop and Lieberman while Lamont will have automatic 90% + vote of liberals-blacks and "those of alternate lifestyles"
Why so much concern? Not one of you is from Connecticut. Let Connecticut vote for who they want to. DTB - why does it bug you so much that black democrats got into this? Please elaborate on these "demographics" that bother so much.
As for moderate presidential candidates, we all know Lieberman would never have had a chance. The guy is unbearable to watch or listen to. He couldn't even help Gore in 2000.
Again, if he's so great - then he'll do fine as an independent. In fact, this election was a good sign for an independent movement - something everyone around here has been chirping for. Don't understand the complaining.
As for Lamont, do we even know enough about him to start pigeonholing the kind of liberal he is? As far as my concerned, is a new face in congress and that's good. Let's get a few hundred new faces in there asap.
And DTB - You are really reaching if you think there's something slanted in that Reuters heading. Sounds like they summed it up pretty well.
As for moderate presidential candidates, we all know Lieberman would never have had a chance. The guy is unbearable to watch or listen to. He couldn't even help Gore in 2000.
Again, if he's so great - then he'll do fine as an independent. In fact, this election was a good sign for an independent movement - something everyone around here has been chirping for. Don't understand the complaining.
As for Lamont, do we even know enough about him to start pigeonholing the kind of liberal he is? As far as my concerned, is a new face in congress and that's good. Let's get a few hundred new faces in there asap.
And DTB - You are really reaching if you think there's something slanted in that Reuters heading. Sounds like they summed it up pretty well.
Last edited:
StevieD said:
you got to be kidding !
the image of the democratic party took a direct hit on their image as weak on national defense.
if anybody doesn't see this...they are then politically blind.
it may not hurt the dems this year, but,imo it will definitely hurt them in 08.
Smurph I have no prob with black politicians as with all some are competent some are are not. My prob lies in the fact that any entity of people vote 90% one way regardless of who is running'whether it be black/white-rich/poor.
I would equate it on similiar scale if I voted strictly GOP.You get people clueless to anything blindly following individuals (like Jackson) or orgs (ncapp) without any knowledge of who/what they are voting for. How on earth can someone vote a dimwit like McKinney in office and then after national headlines of f-ups and failure to even show up for debates and still garner 40& of the votes?
With almost 40% of population paying no taxes are you not concerned that the social deadbeats (all races) combined with the liberals will inevitably be the ruling class at some point in time.
Depending which element one belongs to they should be cheering or be concerned.
Saw many remarks about how this has been worse admin ever--amazing --In past 6 years we have experienced lowest interest rates--most affordable housing--low inflation--much better than ave employment figures--good market ect. I am not naive to think any party was responsible solely for these #'s but I can say without hesitation they are highly unlikely to continue regardless which party is in power--ruling party after 08 whoever it is will have tough road to come near these #'s in fact it decline before GW leaves office--which should open door for Dems--I'm just hoping there will be a few moderate Dems left.
I would equate it on similiar scale if I voted strictly GOP.You get people clueless to anything blindly following individuals (like Jackson) or orgs (ncapp) without any knowledge of who/what they are voting for. How on earth can someone vote a dimwit like McKinney in office and then after national headlines of f-ups and failure to even show up for debates and still garner 40& of the votes?
With almost 40% of population paying no taxes are you not concerned that the social deadbeats (all races) combined with the liberals will inevitably be the ruling class at some point in time.
Depending which element one belongs to they should be cheering or be concerned.
Saw many remarks about how this has been worse admin ever--amazing --In past 6 years we have experienced lowest interest rates--most affordable housing--low inflation--much better than ave employment figures--good market ect. I am not naive to think any party was responsible solely for these #'s but I can say without hesitation they are highly unlikely to continue regardless which party is in power--ruling party after 08 whoever it is will have tough road to come near these #'s in fact it decline before GW leaves office--which should open door for Dems--I'm just hoping there will be a few moderate Dems left.
Bush/Cheney caused the divide. They killed the moderates. So now we have what we have. I'll take anything different than status quo. Our leaders are already deadbeats, so I don't really care if they are replaced by deadbeats of a different class.
Al, this "weak on national defense" thing doesn't fly with me. The reason is that I feel Bush has hurt our national security more than anyone could have. Throwing troops into ill-fated wars is not a sign of strong defense. It's an indication of wrecklessness which only puts us in deeper danger.
Al, this "weak on national defense" thing doesn't fly with me. The reason is that I feel Bush has hurt our national security more than anyone could have. Throwing troops into ill-fated wars is not a sign of strong defense. It's an indication of wrecklessness which only puts us in deeper danger.
""Al, this "weak on national defense" thing doesn't fly with me. The reason is that I feel Bush has hurt our national security more than anyone could have.""
sorry bud...can`t let that slip by....
the n.y.t`s explains that the 1st amendment bestows on itself the right to betray national security secrets to jihadists who are even now killing our soldiers in iraq....and nobody seems to notice that this is treason in any sane society?.....
democrats fighting the patriot act and nsa programs tooth and nail......even though they are clearly violating no one`s rights...and are helping us thwart our enemies....
c`mon...
and this clown richard cohen, whose name at least appears to be jewish, begins a recent washington post column with the proclamation that “israel is a mistake”—- right in the middle of a hezbollah blitz when 3,000 missiles are exploding over the heads of israeli civilians huddling in bomb shelters—- nobody seems to notice anything odd?...... a democracy that shares our values.....vs a terrorist organization that has already killed hundreds of americans?
with the extreme left,it ain`t just "being soft"....the habit of betrayal has now become so ingrained that loyalty to friends and country, commitments to wives and children, even the ability to speak and act freely in the universities(the rotc issue) , all those fundamental civilized values have simply been ridiculed and trashed......
by the extreme left...
forget iraq...we`d still have to be in afghanistan...and it`d still be hard...and they`d still be trying to kill us....
you can use bush as your straw man....but,you know that when he goes,the problem remains....it was here before he got a whiff of the presidency....
9/11 still happened....it happened in spain...britain...denmark...india...the sudan...egypt....attempted in canada...france.....not all involved in iraq....many outwardly blocked us on iraq....
it`s happening to muslims,christians,jews,hindu`s,you name it.....all over the world....
bush ain`t the problem.....and it ain`t going away come 2008....
get real...
sorry bud...can`t let that slip by....
the n.y.t`s explains that the 1st amendment bestows on itself the right to betray national security secrets to jihadists who are even now killing our soldiers in iraq....and nobody seems to notice that this is treason in any sane society?.....
democrats fighting the patriot act and nsa programs tooth and nail......even though they are clearly violating no one`s rights...and are helping us thwart our enemies....
c`mon...
and this clown richard cohen, whose name at least appears to be jewish, begins a recent washington post column with the proclamation that “israel is a mistake”—- right in the middle of a hezbollah blitz when 3,000 missiles are exploding over the heads of israeli civilians huddling in bomb shelters—- nobody seems to notice anything odd?...... a democracy that shares our values.....vs a terrorist organization that has already killed hundreds of americans?
with the extreme left,it ain`t just "being soft"....the habit of betrayal has now become so ingrained that loyalty to friends and country, commitments to wives and children, even the ability to speak and act freely in the universities(the rotc issue) , all those fundamental civilized values have simply been ridiculed and trashed......
by the extreme left...
forget iraq...we`d still have to be in afghanistan...and it`d still be hard...and they`d still be trying to kill us....
you can use bush as your straw man....but,you know that when he goes,the problem remains....it was here before he got a whiff of the presidency....
9/11 still happened....it happened in spain...britain...denmark...india...the sudan...egypt....attempted in canada...france.....not all involved in iraq....many outwardly blocked us on iraq....
it`s happening to muslims,christians,jews,hindu`s,you name it.....all over the world....
bush ain`t the problem.....and it ain`t going away come 2008....
get real...
smurphy said:
i know you don't, & i'm not surprised by your answer. i'm not going to reply about iraq anymore. ...my feelings on this war is all over this forum.....but just one thing...there are no democrats that i have seen so far, other than lieberman, that i would trust run this country.....& come nov. 08..i most likely would put my money where my mouth is...
Last edited:
smurphy said:
In weasels world, everything funnels back to the 'MSM' in general, and the NYT in particular.
Kinda like Wayne and Clinton.
It's a condition.
One tort reforming, Bush backing, war mongering, incumbent minion down, 99 to go. Although I have a feeling this new, beholden slob ain't gonna be any better until we get meaningful campaign finance reform passed. Who is the American Nazi party running against Lamont?
Eddie
Eddie
