posted
Looks like, at least up there, from what I could gather through the day, his constituents have decided that after being the VP candidate, he took to ignoring what they wanted and they were P-O-ed.
Yes, I heard a lot of them express disgust for his support of Bush and Iraq, but I heard a lot more just P-O-ed about him now being a Washington Senator rather than a Connecticut Senator.
So, I'm not thinking this offers quite so much insight into the national attitude on Bush or Iraq as the pundits want it to offer.
IP: Logged |
We need not just the "official" decent but some actual desire to uphold the Constitution that is backed by the power of the Constitution.
I thought after that farce of an impeachment the republicans pulled to destroy Clinton, I would never believe in another, but this guy has been so willing to violate the Constitution (and various oter kinds of actual laws.....I haven't yet found anywhere in the constitution that it awards criminal status to hanky-panky with a chick in private), I'd accept one just to remind future presidents what should happen when they forget what they are there to do.
I'm not ready to put both houses and the pesidency in a single party's hands, but anything would be better than this.
This guy is even more dishonest than Nixon. Back then, the republicans in Congress got fed up with him.....these guys still act like we are dumb enough to believe they aren't voting for the Party rather than the Country.
IP: Logged |
posted
My only point is anyone should be willing to stand up for what he believes, even when it it not a popular stand for his party. I will always have respect for anyone who does not cave in just because he is going to get critized for it. That shows character, something many in politics sadly lack.
IP: Logged |
posted
Who is the repub running in the election? This move seems that it is going to split the democratic vote here and open the door for repub to take the seat, but I know that is a part of the country that is pretty solidly democrat.
posted
He wasn't elected to stand for what "he believes in". He was elected to represent the will of the people in his district. Obviously the people disagree with his beliefs. It's about time this happened more often too. Glad to see Cynthia McKinney go as well. I hope it continues along both party lines.
IP: Logged |
posted
I'm not sure I agree with that ClayN. I believe our leaders are elected to govern the way they see best, than face the wrath, or support, of the voters in the next election. In cases like Lieberman, it works out right. If you want to take an unpopular path, than you face being voted out or bumped out in the primaries.
posted
I really don't understand what a lot of people are upset about what happened in Connecticut. Given a choice the dems voted him and his platform out. In effect Lieberman did not listen to the people who voted him in went his own way you may call this couarge but it was not representation and he is out maybe he should be an independent or switch parties. Who cares about a political opinion wether he is right or wrong this is about as American as it gets. Its a good thing
IP: Logged |
posted
Not to offend any body but if your representation just went to Washington and did what he wanted and voted the way he wanted and the way he or she felt was best for his people back home even if they did not like it. Why even have an election just let all of our representation be appointed
IP: Logged |
posted
Because that is what keeps their feet to the fire, an election. I guess it is up to the voters as to what they value, someone who is going to vote with them on the majority of issues, or someone who votes what they think is best, than explains their position and makes an effort to convince the voters that he is right. If the voters disagree and it's a major issue to them, then they vote against the rep. No right or wrong answer, just individual preference IMO.
posted
Agreed, but lame duck status, well that does not come along very often. Let's hope that Presidents in this situation place value in their place in history.
I mean, what would you have a rep do Glass? It is an interesting question. are reps in Washington, or anywhere, to strictly follow the will of the voters? Or are they elected to do what they think best, or a mix of both?
posted
You guys are getting the cart before the horse on Lieberman.
He ain't lost yet, just doesn't get the democrat's official support.
Therer are about as many "registered" independents as democrats there.
Best wait and see how things unfold. Contrary to what is coming out of the republican machine and being sent out for anti-democratic hate talk, that guy Lamont looks to be a substantial politician and will have adequate funds. But Lieberman has old old ties plus the help of the republican talk radio and propaganda organizations.
I don't really think this has any strong link to national politics, because it was more about the people of the state feeling betrayed.
IP: Logged |
posted
I was suprised it was that close and I do think he stands a strong chance in November. But the winds of change are a whistling in DC nowadays, so who knows.
posted
With him still issueing "signing statements".
hahaha how about just talking?
this is an official white house press release: For Immediate Release Office of the Press Secretary July 8, 2003
Remarks by the President to Embassy Personnel Leopold Sedar Senghor International Airport Dakar, Senegal
THE PRESIDENT: I thank you all very much for coming out to say hello. Laura and I are honored to be here with you all. I'm also, as you could see, traveling with quite distinguished company -- our great Secretary of State Colin Powell is with us, as well. (Applause.) I want to thank Ambassador Roth and his wife, Carol, for their service to our country.
I'm here to thank our fellow citizens who are serving a great land. Thank you for your dedication and your love of country. I want to thank the foreign nationals who are helping our fellow citizens make sure the embassy runs so well. (Applause.)
This is an historic trip -- oh, there's the Ambassador. (Applause.) But we are so honored to start our trip to this continent here in Senegal. I had the opportunity to go out to Goree Island and talk about what slavery meant to America. It's very interesting when you think about it, the slaves who left here to go to America, because of their steadfast and their religion and their belief in freedom, helped change America. America is what it is today because of what went on in the past. Yet when I looked out over the sea, it reminded me that we've always got to keep history in mind. And one of the things that we've always got to know about America is that we love freedom, that we love people to be free, that freedom is God's gift to each and every individual. That's what we believe in our country.
I'm here to spread that message of freedom and peace. Where we see suffering, America will act. Where we find the hungry, we will act. We're here not only on a mission of mercy, we're also here on a mission of alliance. And I want to thank you all for helping make that come true.
May God bless you all. And may God continue to bless Senegal and America. Thank you all very much. (Applause.)
END
it would be funny.... if we weren't looking at WW3
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
.....I thought after that farce of an impeachment the republicans pulled to destroy Clinton, I would never believe in another, but this guy has been so willing to violate the Constitution (and various other kinds of actual laws.....I haven't yet found anywhere in the constitution that it awards criminal status to hanky-panky with a chick in private), .....
Bdgee when you finish spouting party line, you might consider the following:
Bill Clinton wasn't being impeached for "hanky-panky", he was being impeached for perjury. If Bill Clinton would lie about something stupid like "hanky-panky", what else would he be willing to lie about?
IMO if he had come clean and appologized about it right in the begining, the movement to impeach him would be DOA.... But alas, honesty is too much to ask from a politician....
Regardless of why Clinton lied, or what he was lying about, shouldn't any president, or person for that matter be held accountable for lying under oath?
...I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time – never. These allegations are false. ...
-------------------- One is never completely useless. One can always serve as a bad example.
IP: Logged |
posted
Regardless of why Clinton lied, or what he was lying about, shouldn't any president, or person for that matter be held accountable for lying under oath?
what about NOT under oath NR?
or do you still believe that Bush and or Cheney has been completely honest with US?
-------------------- Don't envy the happiness of those who live in a fool's paradise.
IP: Logged |
posted
NR, you are an facist goose stepping idiot of the first class, without the sense or class God gave a carved hand puppet.
That so-caled "lie under oath" was a set-up trap paid for, arranged, and administered by the Republican party, and, except for that conspiracy, there would have been no "lie" (actually, it wasn't a lie, but the republicaan controlled court refused to listen to the truth).
Shouldn't any Federal Special Prosecuter be disbarred and put in prison for secretely and feloniously feeding secret grand jury testimony to a litigant in a civil suit?
And shouldn't each and every member of the republican party that "conspired" with him be in that prison with him?
Why do you claim it is acceptable to excuse republicans for violating laws?
NR, you certainly have claimed that both Bush and Chaney are honest, whether or not you remember it or not!
IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
JK
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
