Comments on: Lieberman risks payback from senate Dems

By: kris

kris — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 22:07:17 +0000

Since Lieberman has left the democratic party, I think he is useless. McCain is a hothead that gets pumped from Lieberman, and the retarded republican party. Obviously if you support McCain, then you don’t support your rights in America. Giving into to this is sickening, but I’m seeing it happen every day. I am a person just like everyone else, and I deserve the rights that everyone gets except GLBT. Why would we consider ourselves as second class citizens because we are gay.lesbian,bi-sexual, & transgendered. We all put our pants on the same way, so why am I not able to marry, like you do, share a loving relatioship like you do, and still keep on smiling.

By: docpatmac

docpatmac — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 17:24:11 +0000

Sen Harry Reid has every right to censure Leiberman. I’ve lived in his district for two decades, and seen him vote against whats right and decent again and again and again. He Should lose whatever power he holds in the Senate until his term expires, because he surely will not regain his seat.

By: Roger Ramjet

Roger Ramjet — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 17:17:03 +0000

Liebermann is a loser. He’s a traitor and he is the direct reason why conservatives in this country think that Congress after the 2006 elections is ‘do-nothing.’ His stonewalling and anti-democratic votes have ground the progressive movement in the US to a halt.

Can we kick him out of the party? If not, why not?

Liebermann wants a legacy. He wants to be the new Kissenger AND he wants a Noble Peace prize.

Good luck with that: Kissenger will go down in history as a Genocidal Criminal and the Nobel Peace Prize is reserved for people who actually HAVE original thoughts.

Imagine what life would have been like if the fabled Jesus and his friends told Judas to take a hike!

By: DRUNKEN REPUBLICAN

DRUNKEN REPUBLICAN — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 05:14:02 +0000

does anyone remember “the countdown with keith o.” segment “worst persons in the world” awhile ago that had con.(no extra n because that’s what he is)senator backstabber’s” campaign withholding info from the public until after the election about ned lamont’s supposed wrongdoing in a political matter? this intentional action cast a shadow of doubt over an innocent man & his campaign.the investigation cleared lamont BEFORE the election took place but sen.backstabber & his bush allies delayed the results until he had won “fair & square”.i don’t think i ever heard con. backstabber ever apologize for this slimeball tactic. i thought when this was found out a recall may have gotten this jerk rightfully thrown out of office. oh well if no recall power exists in that state,i guess the rest of us honest folk can dream can’t we? LIEberman=disgrace.

By: Trace

Trace — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 02:01:54 +0000

So John, tell me why the all mighty and powerful Democrats allow him to caucus with them to this very day?

I would think that the all mighty and powerful Democrats should have backed Mr. Lieberman during the primary. But then, it seems that the all mighty Democrats are not showing the best judgment in who they support these days.

And by the way, Lieberman was re-elected. The Democratic backed candidate did not.

By: Carlos

Carlos — Sun, 07 Sep 2008 01:48:11 +0000

Come on people lets remember he is a friend and supports civil unions, yes he made me mad too when he attacked Barack but he is still a positive influence in favor of gays in the senate

By: John

John — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 22:46:14 +0000

“Loyal” members to the party don’t run against the party’s nominee after they’ve lost a primary. “Loyal” members don’t constantly vote in defiance of the party’s electoral manifesto. “Loyal” members don’t throw fundraisers for opposition candidates. And “loyal” members certainly don’t become headliners at the opposition party’s convention.

If Laura Bush had delivered the keynote address at the DNC, the Republicans would have her crucified.

By: Trace

Trace — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 11:13:53 +0000

How hypocritical.

“We’ll re-evaluate after the election.”

Translation = we want to keep him now so that we don’t lose control. But if more are elected, we’ll turn our back on someone that has been (by and far) a very loyal member to the party.

By: Christer

Christer — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 10:49:54 +0000

I was waitng for it, let him pay back.

By: John

John — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 23:06:53 +0000

Everyone’s in a “wait and see” mode right now, including Lieberman himself.

He would probably change from Dem to GOP right now, if he thought it would make any difference. But since the Democrats have a 236-199 majority in the House, it doesn’t really matter what he does. Any proposal by a Republican led Senate in the remaining five months of this Congress would get vetoed by the House.