Posted on 11/10/2006 1:29:10 AM PST by xtinct
Newly re-elected Sen. Joe Lieberman has been promised by Sen. Harry Reid – who is in line to become the next Senate Majority Leader – that he will support Lieberman’s efforts to become chairman of the powerful Homeland Security Committee.
In a private phone call on Wednesday, Nevada’s Reid told Lieberman that he would recognize Lieberman as the senior Democrat on the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which would facilitate Lieberman’s move into the post.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
From the head instead of the heart great post.
Many freepers want 100% of their agenda and anything less means the person is a RINO.
As others have said they muddle conservative with Republican you can be 100% republican but your conservative ratings maybe very low on certain issues.
If you are non conservative on certain issues that does not make you a RINO.
Many people just want their candidate to win and do not see the broader picture.
In Britain my party leader is far more liberal than I care for but if he gets my party back in power I am 100% for him. You can do nothing out of power.
Each race is local the overall picture is what you have to look at you cannot put the same type of candidate up for each seat.
Forget that vote he will vote with the dems
LOL
If you ask me, although many here was PO'd that the Republicans weren't conservative enough, many, many people in this country thought they were too conservative. That may sound idiotic, but given how the media portrays Congressional Republicans and the President, I don't think I am far off.
When we have scandals such as Foley and Cunningham, a lot of voters think we are simply hypocrites who say "do as I say, not as I do." On top of that, the media has made Iraq seem like a debacle, and a lot of people think that Bush is simply stubborn or stupid.
It breaks my heart to see a guy who has done so much discounted as a weak, ineffectual person, when..without him, we would never have had the Republican majority of the last 4 years.
As far as McCain, he is far more conservative than Lieberman. My unease about his candidacy is because I don't think he is emotionally stable, and also because I firmly believe that the media wants him to be the nominee, so that they can drag out all of the dirt they have collected on him. They are simply too eager to praise him.
From looking at it from across the pond I think you have hit the nail on the head.
As I said in an earlier post I do not agree with my new leader on most points but if he gets my party back into power I am 100% behind him.
From what you have said before I also trust and agree with your comments on McCain.
Far preferable to Reed, Pelosi, Hitlery, Shumer, and the rest of the nightmarish Democrat freak show.
That's probably an improvement.
The Republicans should offer Liberman the Majority Leadership if he cacuses with the R's. We'd be better off with him as leader and R's as committee heads. He would be of more value to Connecticut as Leader than committee head.
Oh no........
The dreaded stomp!
This makes me feel a little better. Liberman has been consistent in his support for the WOT-even when his own party tried to throw him out. He's one of the few sane democrats.
John McCain has done more damage to the Republican party in the last six years than .. Biden, hillary, Slickster, Reid, and all the others combined!!
McCain has been backstabbing GWB at every turn, except Iraq, and even there occasionally.
He worked against mainstream conservative thinking on everything: Immigration, judicial appointments, taxes, oil/energy development, N.Korea, Cabinet appointments, and much much more.
In effect, McCain gave lisence to any and all lunatic critics, the Dems, and mainstream libs, the talking head cable-TV pundits, and other Republicans to viciously tee-off on the President with the excuse, "See, even the leaders of the GOP thinks Bush is doing a horrible job."
And notice McCain ALWAYS veered left... LEFT on immigration, oil, taxes, supreme court selections.. Oh, I already said that.
Your rant is big on emotion and small on logic.
Tell me HOW McCain has done damage in these areas. Because on most of these things, there is a case to be made both ways.
What difference does it make? Either way, he's in bed with Bay Buchannan.
Besides, if you have figured out a way to separate a politician from the causes he champions, you're the first. I'm sure he cares about the cause, but it's still self promotion. I'm not criticizing self promotion, but recognize it for what it is.
Here is the scope and purpose statement for the PAC: Illegal immigration is the most critical issue facing our nation today. The mission of Team America is to make this issue a significant part of the national political debate and to identify, recruit, and help elect to public office individuals who are committed to enforcing our laws and securing our borders.
Yah, like I said, he's a nut.
If he honestly believes this, he's either stupid or insane. Anybody that thinks Mexican fruit pickers are the biggest issue of our time isn't clear-headed, and anybody who thinks the most effective way of fighting terrorism is by closing off the Mexican border quite simply doesn't know what they are talking about.
And what's more, he's not really against illegal immigration, but against immigration period. He says he's only against illegal immigration, but the second you propose something to the effect of "You know, you are right, we do need to know who's coming accrost the boarder, and it should be orderly and lawful, we should make sure we don't have mexico ship us their crooks, etc. But we shouldn't stop people from coming to get jobs if there's a demand for them. Let's crack down on border security while allowing for more legal immigrants, which would make border security easier anyway," he hits the roof too. Calling it 'hidden amnesty' or something along those lines, like he did of Mike Pence's plan, which really should be unobjectionable if all he is against is illegal immigration.
Legal, illegal, whatever, he just doesn't seem to like immigrants much. And I find that repugnant and flat out wrong.
Like I said before, I'd vote for him to keep the majority, but for absolutely no other reason.
That was last night, watch out!!
Lieberman votes for conservative Judges. He supports (as far as I know) non-activist judges.
On all other issues, he ties Barbara Boxer in voting.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.