Posted on 12/12/2004 6:20:24 AM PST by Liz
Can Joe (I'll-say-anything-to-win) LIEberman be trusted?
Silly question.
LIEberman won his Senate seat by outright lying about his abortion position.
Getting elected on the backs of the innocent unborn is not something that would inspire confidence in a position requiring utmost integrity.
If Joey would go to the lengths he did to get the pro-life vote - lying smackdab in the face of pro-lifers, telling them what he knew they wanted to hear - he is surely capable of promising just about anything he thinks people want to hear.
Abortion separates the men from the boys. As a radical pro-abortion advocate who voted six times for partial birth abortions, Joey proved himself to be a pimple-faced adolescent who fools the folks into thinking he's at the library when he's out smoking weed with the rest of the nerds.
Appoint him to HomeLand Secretary?
I wouldn't trust him to walk my dog.
In Sept 2000, The Washington Times reported how Lieberman, a staunch pro-abortion candidate made a pro-life pledge to religious leaders.
EXCERPT: Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman is a staunch supporter of abortion rights now, and even voted (six times) against a ban on partial-birth abortion, but Catholic leaders in Connecticut remember another Joe Lieberman.
He called on the state's archbishop with a pro-life pledge 12 years ago, when he was first a candidate for the U.S. Senate.......(and) met with Archbishop John F. Whealon of Hartford to seek Catholic votes in the final stretch of his 1988 Democratic bid to oust 18-year Sen. Lowell P. Weicker Jr., a Republican who supported abortion rights.....
"Joe was very liberal, like Weicker, but we had a poll on abortion that showed which way the wind was blowing," says Daniel Cosgrove, then the Democratic town chairman in Branford, Mr. Lieberman's hometown.
The poll showed anti-abortion sentiment outweighed pro-choice views in urban areas throughout Connecticut. "In the Waterbury area, it was more than any, 12,000 [more] against," Mr. Cosgrove says.
"He expressed himself against abortion, all suicide, and euthanasia. His position on that definitely was well received by the archbishop and priests" religious leaders said.
In fact, Mr. Lieberman's pro-life assurances were so convincing that Archbishop Whealon arranged for the Democratic candidate to meet with Catholic priests throughout the state shortly before the November 1988 balloting. Mr. Lieberman's expressed pro-life views in those meetings, Father Berry said. "That probably was not insignificant" in the November 1988 election outcome, he said.
Nothing, but abortion is a legitimate issue, although I am with Rush Limbaugh who often says one-issue voting is boneheaded and self-defeating for Conservatives.
I personally think Kerik was stiffed. He came up the hard way in life, so his record is not the lilly-white record of some, but he's tough, and just the right person for Homelamd Security. I wish Bush had stuck by him.
Wouldn't that just frost the jihaidis, a Jewish Homeland Security czar? The ant-semites would be rather ticked off too. :))
I guess you missed the threads where democrats are going into therapy because Bush won :-)
Totally mindbending, hahaha! Not so funny is the observation that liberals don't hate specific religious customs, as much as they hate God. It is not the Nativity displays or the hymns so much as what they represent. Someone other than me came up with that the other day. It makes sense.
Joe Lieberman? I'm sorry, but we don't need a wish-washy Security Chief. Kerik, no matter what was dug up, would make me feel much safer. How about someone like Gordon Liddy. We need someone along that line. We need someone who is a little bit on the edge, as the chief. You don't put a poodle on the lawn to guard your life and home.
In our dreams. Or Ollie North. The kind of hard-core type that we need at HS would never make it through the hearings. That's the problem.
BTW, while he's been strong on the war on terror, Lieberman is a radical on immigration matters, which is far more relevant to his suitability for DHS than abortion.
ROFLMAO! Good one.
Tom Ridge is pro-choice, and a highly decorated Vietnam vet. You gonna call him a wimp too?
Snowball's chance in hell. If Bush wasn't willing to go to bat to defend Kerik for hiring an illegal, what makes you think he would defend the guy behind Watergate?
Bush is simply not going to choose someone anywhere close to controversial.
Rudy is the obvious choice, but I think he's saving himself to run against Hillary, and/or for Prez. Liz wouldn't approve though, he's also pro-choice. ;)
Not only is Ridge pro-choice, but he changes his tune on abortion depending on the crowd he's speaking to, the same thing Liz is accusing Lieberman of. He is against partial-birth abortion though.
LOL. That would really get the Jews-run-the-world conspiracy types spinning...
Oliver North, exactly! I called the Whitehouse duringthe hearings. I loved Reagan, but I left a message: Please don't leave this guy hung out to dry. I think Oliver North could make it with Dems, given a little or big shove from the WH.
Let them dig up what they want on him, but he was the first one to utter the name Abuni Dahl . He was way ahead of his time then, he knew that fighting certain groups meant fighting them off traditional ground. He has been all over the Mideast...arrrr. Yes, Oliver North would be perfect.
But abortion's not relevant to DHS, or to who might be a good singer, or centerfielder, for that matter.
HHS would be another story entirely. That's a Department where a pro-abortion Secretary could do real harm.
It would....still NOT a good idea, however. Please NO rat party creep. ;o)
People were actually suggesting Netanyahu on another thread.
Why don't you go run over and play on DU where you'll be more comfortable.
This site is for Conservatives, in case you haven't figured it out yet.
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.