Replies

Compared to Lowell P. Weicker, Jr., Joe Lieberman, who votes as a pro-abort although he is a devout and verrry observant Orthodox Jew, looks like a pro-lifer. When Weicker was governor of Connecticut (1991-1995) he repeatedly threw fundraisers for Planned Barrenhood and the National Abortion Rights Action League at the Governor's Mansion. In 1988, most of the babykillers voted for Weicker and a remarkable number of pro-lifers voted Lieberman to get rid of Weicker. Both favored a state income tax on wages and salaries but the US Senate does not decide that issue for Connecticut. We forced the repeal of Lieberman's 1971 income tax law (Connecticut's very first tax on wages and salaries) before a nickel could be collected and Lieberman respectfully backed off for the rest of his state legislative career. Weicker (reportedly a former Bircher until about 1970) had gone over to the anti-American side, was enraged by Reagan attacking Qaddaffi and actually went scuba diving with Fidel Castro and had the news footage on Connecticut news channels. Lieberman turned that footage into a commercial, had his in-laws show their tattoos as Auschwitz survivors and pledged never to support totalitarians abroad. He has kept his pledge. Weicker returned as an "independent" governor and punished the state by taxing wages and salaries. He does not spend time in Connecticut any more since 1995 and thereby keeps his skin and his scalp.

I cannot imagine Peoria or Pascagoula being governed by an evil and slimy SOB like Weicker but either community would gladly vote for Lieberman if they knew both of them.

There was a Buckley fundraiser for Lieberman in 1988 by a PAC called Buckleys for Lieberman. B-1 Bob Dornan was the main speaker. As you may recall, he was certainly a strong pro-lifer and no liberal on anything else. Then State Senator Tom Scott of Milford hosted the fundraiser and he was the most solidly conservative state senator of the last 40 years in Connecticut.

I understand that conservative is a very uncertain term in most of New England. It's all relative, I suppose.

As I implied earlier, I was a devout NR subscriber and never missed a Buckley column for over 30 years. However, he was human after all. I recall the sympathetic coverage he provided in his column to a convict he had befriended. He was eventually paroled, then not long afterward committed another murder. Buckley was aghast.

Was WFB wrong to have written those columns? Of course not; he could not foresee what would happen.

Likewise, those who deride Ron Paul for his non-interventionism cannot in any rational way offer evidence that this country will be taken over by a lesser power 5000 miles away if we don't continue to follow a cold-war foreign policy of intervening militarily in other countries when it's in "our national interest."

On the other hand, when was the last time Switzerland was invaded? Roman times?