Lieberman, Seniority Sure, Has No Plans to Join G.O.P.

The New York Times ^ | November 9, 2006 | JENNIFER MEDINA

[Toby06]

But that weekend in Mystic sure was fun, eh? :)

[nopardons]

I've been to Mystic ONCE, it was with my husband, and on a weekday. :-)

And before you ask, yes, I had a slice of Mystic pizza. Guess what kind it was. LOL

[PzLdr]

Why would Lieberman go Republican if the Dems take the Senate, which I believe I read on another thread they had. It would leave him in the minority, with no shot at a committee chairmanship.

[Azzurri]

Why would Lieberman go Republican if the Dems take the Senate, which I believe I read on another thread they had. It would leave him in the minority, with no shot at a committee chairmanship.

If he switched parties or, better yet, caucused with the Republicans, then they would be in the majority. He'd be in the majority either way.

[4rcane]

bolted the party? thats not the right word. More like kicked out of the party

[4rcane]

NYT is blaming Lieberman for leaving Democrats, instead of of the other way around where the Democrats kicked him out

[NYRepublican72]

The Slimes would rather have the "people's candidate" Ned "the Red" Lamont in the Senate than Lieberman.

As much as I do not agree with Loserman and some of his views on liberal social policies, the guy will stand up for what's right in the WOT and will be a crucial vote when it comes to replacing Rummy and other issues dealing with our national security.

Barring a RINO switch, he is the vote that will swing the Senate on anything related to National Security issues. The Rats have 49, the pubbies 49. That useless commie Sanders gives the Rats 50. But with Loserman on our side on Iraq, it's 50-50 and Cheney breaks the tie.

[nutmeg]

Connecticut ping!

Please Freepmail me if you want on or off my infrequent Connecticut ping list.

[#1CTYankee]

"It's not that we loved Lieberman, we loathed Lamont."

Yup.

[Non-Sequitur]

He's said all along he'd caucus with the Democrats. And I've said all along that the whole 'independent' routine wouldn't last six months before he was back in the Democrat fold, less if the Dems took power. Lieberman will be the next head of the Armed Services Committee, mark my word.

[Non-Sequitur]

If he switched parties or, better yet, caucused with the Republicans, then they would be in the majority. He'd be in the majority either way.

As a junior member. By going back to the Dems he'll be a committee chairman.

[Man50D]

Didn't his party leave him?

No. That is the illusion they and LIEberman used to fool the RINOs in Connecticut. He is still a registered Democrat.

[Man50D]

Nobody expected Lieberman to switch. There was no way a Republican was getting elected in that race and Joe is literally the lesser of evils.

That is exactly the attitude LIEberman was hoping RINOs would fall for with his illusion. His minority stance on the war in Iraq will be negated by the majority Socialist Democrats. His socialist views on all other issues will only help the RATS. RINOs think they have won the battle with his election but they have lost the war, figuratively and literally.

[Alissa]

REMEMBER THIS IS THE NEW YORK TIMES!!!. Lieberman was on Sean Hannity's radio show yesterday and said he wasn't going to forget the people who helped him and what the Dims did to him hurt very much. He would remember, but he solidly supports Iraq and he still a liberal, but it sure sounded to me that he would NOT be in lock-step with the Dims!

[Man50D]

As Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee and a crucial vote and potential coalition-builder, Lieberman may be able to play a positive role in the next two years. Not saying I like it, just that he is in a crucial position at the balance of power between the two parties.

Who are you trying to kid? LIEberman's minority position concerning the war in Iraq will be negated by the majority Socialist Democrats.

Don't anyone jump down my throat, please, I'm not saying I like anything about the situation, except that I'd still rather have Lieberman chair the Homeland Security Committee in the Senate than any of the uber-leftists who might have been in line....

Now why would you think anybody would jump down your throat? Is it because you and RINOs know voting for a Socialist like Lieberman instead of your own party candidate are trying to convince yourselves you did the right thing when you now realize you helped the Socialist take control of Congress? Congratulations on a job well done.

Also, while I have no use for the "Gang of 14" (now "Gang of 12"), the FACT is that some such coalition is now going to play an even more crucial role in the Senate, for the next 2 years at least

Coalition? Do you mean that bipartisan crud? Bipartisan means sacrificing your principles by agreeing with the Socialists in order to avoid any criticism.

and Lieberman is going to be in the driver's seat a lot of the time..... so we'd better pay attention to what he's doing because both parties are going to depend upon his support and coalition-building for just about anything they want done in the Senate.

He will be in the drivers seat for passing all the socialist issues he agrees with the RATS other than the war in Iraq and that position he will be in the minority.

[Man50D]

Even though 75% of the folks that voted for Lieberman were not Democrats he will caucus with the RATs anyway. What a whore.

Exactly. The weak kneed RINOs fell for his garbage hook, line and sinker. They now will try to convince themselves there are some "conservative/moderate RATS" they can work with across the aisle. It's amazing the RINOs preferred to vote for a socialist like LIEberman instead of their own party candidate who has a stronger position national security position. It's time for a new party!

[mewzilla]

He sure duped all the connecticut republians who voted for him.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

[Man50D]

I must be a stubborn SOB because there is NO WAY IN HELL I'd caucus with a party who trashed me and left me beside the road, and then came crawling back pretending none of it happened.

LIEberman will do anything to maintain power. He had a strong stance for parental control on what was viewed on TV but quickly waffled on that position when he became Gore's running mate.

I was hoping Lieberman would stiff the Democrat leadership after the election but, alas, he's soft as we've known all along.

If you knew all along he was soft then why did you hope he would stiff the RATS? It defies logic He's been one for more than thirty years but you think he will change his spots just before the election.

At least we can count on him on WOT votes.

You're kidding yourself. Many people are under the impression the war on terror is only in Iraq even though terrorism has many fronts globally. One of those fronts is the porous Mexican border where terrorists, posing as illegal aliens, can enter the U.S. to destroy us. Building a fence will make it more difficult for them to enter the country yet LIEberman voted against the Secure Fence Act because he wanted to attach an amendment that would have allowed illegal aliens/terrorists amnesty through the "Guest Worker" program.

LIEberman's inconsistent stance against terrorism endangers our country. Any RINOs who voted for him have done likewise.

[Puppage]

He sure duped all the connecticut republians who voted for him

Not this CT Rep.

[Man50D]

I would expect Lieberman to at least stay consistent with his pro-military stance. So having military issues be 50-50+1 instead of 49-51 is a plus, and the vote on those issues is the most we could have hoped for from Connecticut.

You shouldn't count on anything with him given he's buckled in the past on issues. RINOs in Connecticut could have hoped for much more had they selected months ago a candidate they could unite behind. Instead they did nothing and voted for a Socialist Democrat. They are now trying to convince themselves they did the right thing. That's pathetic.