Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Ned Lamont Warned You

Looks like Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) was against a Republican president before he was for it.

During a 2006 debate against Democratic primary challenger Ned Lamont, Lieberman pledged -- and that's very much past tense -- that he wanted a Democrat to be elected president in 2008. (Check out the video below.)

Today, of course, Lieberman wants a Republican to be elected president, as he prepares to endorse GOP presidential candidate Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz).

By washingtonpost.com Editors  |  December 17, 2007; 10:57 AM ET
 
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Sen. Graham Goes to Aid of Fellow Impeachment Manager
Next: Condi Rice Shops 'Til She... Jets Off

Comments

Can the people of Connecticut have a recall....PLEASE!!??

Posted by: DC John | December 17, 2007 11:51 AM | Report abuse

"uncle joe" has & will continue to represent an alien constituency, he is the Independent senator representing Israel.

Posted by: tom tyskiewicz | December 17, 2007 12:01 PM | Report abuse

Let us all hope and pray that we pick up enough Democratic seats in the Senate in the 2008 election so that Democrats no longer need this backstabbing slime and can kick him out of the Democratic Caucus and strip him of his chairmanship of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

Posted by: Veteran1 | December 17, 2007 1:46 PM | Report abuse

I know its hard for the Democrat supporters to handle, but they should welcome a variety of views, especially Lieberman's support of the Iraq War. This is what sets the Dems apart from the narrow and extremist Republican Party.

Posted by: Nathan | December 17, 2007 11:52 PM | Report abuse

One wonders how Lieberman tricked the Conn. voters to vote for him. They certainly thought they were getting something different .

Posted by: cjjoy | December 18, 2007 3:02 AM | Report abuse

another "journalist" needs lessons in logic

Posted by: Anonymous | December 18, 2007 9:04 AM | Report abuse

Most folks do not pay much attention to what goes on in the Senate. Looking back to 2000, Joe Lieberman was the harshest critic of Bubba, then Al Gore, who turned his back on Bubba, added the additional slap in the face by choosing Joe as his VP, and many of us old timers accurately predicted the loss of the election mainly based on these two things.

Posted by: lylepink | December 18, 2007 10:07 AM | Report abuse

"I know its hard for the Democrat supporters to handle, but they should welcome a variety of views . . ."

I hardly think the view that someone of the other party should be elected President qualifies as a view any party should "welcome" among its members, particularly those who pledge the opposite in their own elections.

Posted by: Stonecreek | December 18, 2007 10:17 AM | Report abuse

Lieberman is an idiot.

Posted by: Glenn | December 18, 2007 10:28 AM | Report abuse

Give this to Lieberman. He has the fortitude to stand up for what he feels is right. If only we had more politicians that were as forthright. Like him or not at least you know where he stands. Watching Hillary and Mitt (and practically all the others) flip flop their way throught the political process is revolting.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 18, 2007 12:48 PM | Report abuse

Lieberman is NOT an idiot ! He is a shameless fool, and a fixer of the first order...With a guy like this, it kind of makes you sad they don't allow caning in the Senate Chamber anymore ! Supporting the GOP in the next election during this national emergency is ,I hope , the message the voters of CT need to see that sometimes, going to the center, is dead wrong...He needs to change parties...not be cast as a kingmaker in the Democratic caucus...

Posted by: Daniel Wargo | December 18, 2007 12:50 PM | Report abuse

Joe Lieberman should be kicked out of the Democratic Party. He endorses a Republican for President, before the Primaries and caucuses. He looses his renomination bid, and rather than obey the party rules and tradition and pull together to back the Democratic Party Nominee for Senate, Ned Lamont, he changes parties and runs as an Independent. He votes more often with the Republicans than the Democrats, hugs President George W. Bush, and supports vocally the Administration's Polices on Iraq, Iran, the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act and the Protect America Act. He might as well change his voter registration card to Republican, sit and caucus with the Republicans. He better not try to come to the Democratic National Convention. He should be barred from attending that. He is a DINO, a Democrat In Name Only. We don't need any more DINO's in the Democratic Party. Good Riddance!

Posted by: Paul Roden | December 18, 2007 4:05 PM | Report abuse

One can only wonder what position McCain promised his old buddy, JoeMentum.... the CT Zell Miller, to obtain his endorsement. Probably V.P.

Posted by: jiminycricket | December 18, 2007 4:18 PM | Report abuse

"Give this to Lieberman. He has the fortitude to stand up for what he feels is right. If only we had more politicians that were as forthright. Like him or not at least you know where he stands. Watching Hillary and Mitt (and practically all the others) flip flop their way throught the political process is revolting."

The above comment is emblematic of the critical thinking employed by the GOP commentators. I would hope any future Salon posters would have the discipline to at least read the 75 words that accompany the video of a verifiable flip flop by a true traitor to the party. He screwed us in 2000, 2004 and now 2008. Look where it landed us. Say it ain't so, uncle joe.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 18, 2007 4:42 PM | Report abuse

Lieberman has more testicular fortitude than the Democratic Party leaders who promised to change directions after the last election but fear the consequences of implementing the irrational policies on which they campaigned. Throw him out of the Democratic Party? You already did. What a sorry bunch of whiners and losers you are.

Posted by: Coloxlator | December 18, 2007 4:43 PM | Report abuse

Lieberman will support any pres who is prepared to send Americans to defend Israel.

Posted by: Jack Pollack | December 18, 2007 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Your best column, dealing with what a majority of Connecticut's voters now regard as their worst mistake. Dead in his home state, holding dual citizenship here and in Israel (only member of the Congress to do so) Lieberman is a hopelessly compromised politican seeking an alliance that will somehow keep him in viable view until people forget his history.

Posted by: sisyphusinsoho | December 18, 2007 7:49 PM | Report abuse

It's pretty humorous that the "small tent" party expects allegiance from Lieberman after they chose and supported some nobody, (lamont), for his seat, based only on his rigid adherence to the controlling lefty agenda. lieberman is an Independent folks....just like me and lots of other Americans. Apparently, he's also an independent who thinks the democrats are not fit to control the corner office. Good for him.

Posted by: ronzo bogini | December 18, 2007 9:01 PM | Report abuse

Lieberman, like Bush, is willing to sacrifice anything and everything just to save face. Just look at the Iraq War fiasco, which is now transferring into an Afghanistan debacle. He's such a fraud and sellout.

Posted by: Frank F. Kling | December 19, 2007 2:50 AM | Report abuse

Mr. Lieberman is a FRAUD!!!!! I am of the jewish faith and I detest what he stands for BOTH in the Senate and in his so called centrist stance. I firmly believe he should be kicked off his Senate chairmanship. The other FRAUD is McCain--that man has no core--after what he went through in Viet Nam he--more than anyone should want this war to end I hope both McCain and Lieberman go to bed at night and think of the almost 4,000 young men and womenwho have died in this stupid war. I am a WW2 vet. and I almost threw up watching the press conference in of ALL Places an American Legion hall--which in my opinion is just an arm of the Republican Party. While Mr. Lieberman is a strong supporter--as am I--of Israel I don

Posted by: vergen2 | December 19, 2007 3:23 AM | Report abuse

Compare and contrast.

2004
John Kerry: John McCain, you and I are great friends with great mutual respect. The GOP faithful despise you. Come join my team, be my vice president, and together we can change America.

John McCain: John, as much as I respect you, I cannot betray and dishonor my chosen party. I respectfully decline.

2008

John McCain: Joe, you and I-

Lieberman: Democrats suck!

Posted by: howlless | December 19, 2007 9:44 AM | Report abuse

Joe Lieberman needs his head examined. He should change parties, or get kick out of the democratic caucas.

Posted by: James Pender, Wilmington,NC | December 19, 2007 11:24 AM | Report abuse

I have written to all the "real" Democrats on the Homeland Security Committee, urging them to work to replace Joe Lie-berman as chairman. He has clearly left the party -- it's time the party left him. He doesn't warrant the perks that chairmanship gives him.

And, to the Deputy Whip, Sen. Pryor of Arkansas, who is also a member of the committee, I asked that he also work to oust Joe from the Democratic Conference. It is not wise to have a turncoat in the caucus, privy to the strategy sessions, etc. that are for the party faithful only.

I see no reason to wait for the next election to take this action. Kos has said that "it is unclear" what the ramifications would be if Joe left the fold. I believe the republicans plugged that loophole last time. If the dems have a majority at the beginning of the session, they keep that status until the next congress is inaugurated. That's 2009. Nothing else would change in the senate if they did the moral and courageous thing and took away Joe's toy.

Let's face it, he has a lifetime rating of only 75% for his voting pattern. And, Harry Reid, the Majority Leader has decided that it is the super-majority that counts ... 60 votes, and not 51. So what difference does Joe make anyway? Let him climb into bed with his repubuddies. He is after all a majority of one.

Bah, humbug.
Happy Holiday of Your Choice

Posted by: wide-eyed1 | December 19, 2007 12:36 PM | Report abuse

Joe Lieberman is the man. He is one of the most respectable men in the Senate--actually willing to stand up for what he believes in, regardless of political consequences.

Posted by: Josh | December 19, 2007 1:17 PM | Report abuse

I get a kick out of all the whiners complaining that Uncle Joe supports the Republican defense of Israel. No matter who is elected president, the US support of Israel will remain unchanged.

Posted by: jbruceb | December 19, 2007 1:36 PM | Report abuse

2008 Presidential Election Weekly Poll

http://www.votenic.com

New YouTube Video!
The Only Poll That Matters.
Results Posted Tuesday Evening At Midnight.

Posted by: votenic | December 19, 2007 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Ed Lamont could have beat Lieberman if he had kept campaigning after he won the primary. But no, he had to vacation in Hawaii, leaving Mr. Lieberman to "strut his stuff" back home.

I am so furious that this has happened, If Joe cared one/half as much about the American people as he does the land of his ancestors, maybe we just might get some serious problems solved in this country.

Posted by: Sissy | December 19, 2007 3:36 PM | Report abuse

It looks as if republicans aren't the only ones who vote against their best interests.
As long as people continue to worry about whom is sleeping with whom down the street instead of worrying about whom is killing whom thousands of miles away, we don't deserve the Constitution we are frittering away.
The writing has been on the wall for several years now, but it seems no one can read. This guy would have been a vice president as hawkish as our present one.
Perhaps it really didn't matter who won in 2000. Our fate as a great nation is sealed.

Posted by: tobpirat | December 19, 2007 6:01 PM | Report abuse

jews

Posted by: Anonymous | December 19, 2007 9:30 PM | Report abuse

tyskiewicz has a problem with jews

apparently all the nazis weren't german

Posted by: Anonymous | December 19, 2007 9:31 PM | Report abuse

That the Democrats lack the balls to expel Lieberman well illustrates why they may yet snatch defeat from the jaws of victory next year.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 20, 2007 3:21 PM | Report abuse

I watch president bush gloating about how he has prevented the Dem's from changing his policies on the war. He knows it takes 60 votes to over-ride his veto, and as long as he got those Chicken-Hawk Republican and one Joe Lieberman on his side he will prevail.

Posted by: James Pender, MGysgt. USMC (Ret) | December 20, 2007 8:38 PM | Report abuse

Thankfully, this will be Joe's last term, too bad it's 4 more years. Do they have recall ability in CT? He wants to drag us into WWIII.

Posted by: Anonymous | December 21, 2007 12:23 PM | Report abuse

"Give this to Lieberman. He has the fortitude to stand up for what he feels is right."

I wonder how many other atrocious political movements and leaders throughout history could be described in the same fashion.

Standing up for the wrong thing is not admirable. Doing so consistently is even worse.

Posted by: Phil | December 21, 2007 10:20 PM | Report abuse

nazis nazis everywhere

Posted by: Anonymous | January 4, 2008 6:42 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company