I think it was the rumour that Joe would replace Rumsfeld as Sec. Defense which did it for most of us.

Matt

I don't think the Republican party would want him either, if the reverse were true.

Don't be hypocritical.

"... now the Democrats want to throw Lieberman out in the garbage because he doesn't always follow the liberal line." - Margolis

One has to wonder if Matt actually read the article: "A Quinnipiac University poll, taken in March when Lamont announced his candidacy, showed Lieberman with support from 68 percent of registered Democrats to Lamont's 13 percent."

You see, most of us aren't throwing him in the "garbage" - what this is called - and which is very, very difficult for you Sheep to understand - is *disagreement*

I know you are accustomed to blindly following the talking points of King George ("Intelligent Design" being far and away my favorite), so this is a new idea to you. Most Dems (and most people in the world, I'm sure) oppose the Iraq debacle/invasion/occupation, regardless of what one of our leaders says.

If King George woke up from his nap later this afternoon and announced that we were pulling out of Iraq tomorrow, I guarantee you 98% of the Sheep would take out the pom-poms and cheerlead along right with him.

Joe Lieberman should wake up and defect from the failed Demublican party. He should run as an Independent. Although a career politician, he has some redeeming qualities, such as being able to look at al-Qaeda and realize that they - not George W. Bush - are the enemy. That's something that an increasing number of people in his party don't seem to be able to do. That's why they are going to come up even bigger losers this fall than they are already...

Speaking of throwing people into the garbage ...

"President Bush's approval ratings have sunk to a personal low, with only a third of Americans saying they approve of the way he is handling his job, a national poll released Monday said."

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/04/24/bush.poll/index.html

Ahh, the ship is sinking - who will be the last rat left on board? Dbog? Queefer? Bearman?

Nah. My money is on Noonan.

Anyone to the right of Chairman Mao would be considered too much of a Republican to this group of democrats.

Lieberman is a Democrat?

"President Bush's approval ratings have sunk to a personal low, with only a third of Americans saying they approve of the way he is handling his job, a national poll released Monday said."

Didnt CBS have him at 31 %

These NEW LOW headlines are getting old

The Democratic Party has every right to define itself. As they refuse to do it directly, this is a valuable insight.

As a conservative who votes Republican and supports Republicans I find myself rejecting certain quasi-Republicans as not being conservative enough to really qualify. I think the Dems are not only entitled to do the same thing, I think they owe it to the party to clarify what they stand for and to limit their support to those who agree.

And you can tell as much about a party by what they are against as by what they are for, when you encounter one that won't actually officially come out in favor OF anything.

Canadian,

How do? We've got all sorts of GOPers who played up to the Clinton Administration when that Administration did things those particular GOPers liked...these GOPers still annoy us, but for the most part we don't try to boot them out of the GOP.

At bottom, however, is this fact: Lieberman is as liberal as the day is long, but he simply WILL NOT subscribe to the absurd and treasonous slanders launched against President Bush vis a vis the War on Terrorism...because he will not bow down before this leftwing idol, the left is determined to destoy him. For the American left, it is hate Bush or get out...

maf,

Well, it is a poll of 1,021 adults taken over the weekend - a timeframe where the GOP always does more weakly in polling - and the number of Democrats in the sample far exceeded the number of GOPers...

I hope that you keep believing these bogus MSM polls...it'll make November that much sweeter for me...of course, I fully expect that you'll blame Diebold for your loss, just as you did in 2002 and 2004.

I'm with Almiranta on this one. If the Dems want to kick him that's their right. If they don't they can do that as well. I find it interesting that those who are against him think they've got enough support to run against him in the primary, but other than that it's just a nice side note to me.

This is about Zionism, and Lieberman's neo-con warmonger tendencies. Peace

Liberals are so full of themselves if they think Lieberman is going to lose. What is KKKOS record now? 0 for eternity that’s what. In other words all bark, bark,bark,bark,bark and no bite.

Yet more proof that the far left base runs the DNC. Godforbid that a moderate speaks his/her mind in the democratic party.

Steve perfectly illustrates the disgusting anti-Semitism that runs rampent in democrat circles.

Maf

31% in the polls??? BFD!!

News flash...President Bush isn't running for office. He's there for the next three years.

DEAL WITH IT!!!

Also previously posted a message which is apparently off womewhere in the ether:

The Dump Lieberman Campaign is being run by those centrist Deaniacs and its being led by none other than Dean's brother.

Can we all say AAAEEEEIIIIIIII!!!!!!!

"Steve perfectly illustrates the disgusting anti-Semitism that runs rampent in democrat circles."

You're right CJ! You know, there was a time when I thought supposed anti-semitism in liberal circles was more myth then reality. in the last few years, ive seen example after example of how the far left seems to hate israel, and the Jewish people in general.

"now the Democrats want to throw Lieberman out in the garbage because he doesn't always follow the liberal line." thats right. and he can take Zell with him.

anyone remember the republican response to Jim Jeffords (sp?) when he defected from the party a a few years ago? No? I didn't think so.

dav, aka the Big Weenie---get out your dictionary. That's right, the one with the pictures.

Now look up "defected". (It is probably on the same page as "defecated", which is a description of what Jeffords did to the party that got him elected.)

OK? Now do you grasp that Jim Jeffords got himself elected as a Republican and then LEFT the party, all by his ownself?

Did we kick him out? No

Did we think he was sneaky, for using the party as a stalking horse, knowing that was the only way he could have gotten elected, and then showing his true colors? Yes

Did we think he should not have taken Republican money and resources for his campaign, and led Republican voters to think they were voting for a Republican senator when he knew it was all a lie? Yes.

Did we respond appropriately to a very underhanded and deceptive person? Yes

But the Dems are drawing a line in the sand and saying that a principled liberal who is honest enough to acknowledge the truth even when it does not promote his personal agenda is not the kind of liberal they want. And I say fine, make your position as clear as possible. I've had it figured out for a while, but please, go ahead and make it unmistakable for the moderates in the party.

Delay is a Zionist and he's a Christian so stop Jew-baiting by calling anyone who dislikes Israeli policies an anti-semite. OK, CJ and conservative democrat? Either that or learn who the Ashkenazi are and that Arabs are semites. Peace

dav,

Jeffords wasn't just switching parties, he was thwarting the will of the people - the people, via their votes, had given a majority in the Senate to the GOP...Jeffords, because he wanted to be in the newspapers and be lauded as a hero, decided to change this result...to, as it were, deny what his own voters had determined...he was voted into office in 2000 as a Republican, with no Republican voter thinking that he'd stop being a Republican...Lieberman hasn't stopped being a Democrat...he's just not freako-left enough for some Democrats.