Lieberman on Meet the Press

Lieberman on Meet the Press (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

slvemike4u -> Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/23/2008 7:49:04 AM)
Sen Lieberman(I-Conn) in a self servingstatement on meet the press ,when asked about his RNC attack of PE Obama says the election is over and "we can't afford the luxury of spending time going bact to the campaign"...self serving indeed!

SilverMark -> RE: Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/23/2008 7:57:06 AM)
I think he was somewhat gracious in his" I have regrets about some of what I said" although you could sense a certain amount of embarassment when they showed him speaking of Palin. Brokaw tried hard not let him off the hook....

slvemike4u -> RE: Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/23/2008 7:59:53 AM)
I agree,Brokaw held his feet to the fire a bit....as well he should have.

Evility -> RE: Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/23/2008 8:53:05 AM)
I'm not a Leiberman fan but Obama is reportedly the one who gave this guy clemency. Case closed, in my opinion.

celticlord2112 -> RE: Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/23/2008 10:57:07 AM)
I realize thoughtcrimes are unforgivable heresy in the New Democratic (dis)Order, but if your annointed Messiah of Mendacity declines to pillory a man of principle, shouldn't you, in slavish devotion, do likewise?

slvemike4u -> RE: Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/23/2008 3:15:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 I realize thoughtcrimes are unforgivable heresy in the New Democratic (dis)Order, but if your annointed Messiah of Mendacity declines to pillory a man of principle, shouldn't you, in slavish devotion, do likewise? Nope!!!!

rulemylife -> RE: Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/23/2008 4:26:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: celticlord2112 I realize thoughtcrimes are unforgivable heresy in the New Democratic (dis)Order, but if your annointed Messiah of Mendacity declines to pillory a man of principle, shouldn't you, in slavish devotion, do likewise? We've had this discussion before and you've never answered. How is it you can view someone who turns his back on people who have supported him and repeatedly breaks his word as a man of principle?

Owner59 -> RE: Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/23/2008 4:37:00 PM)
When did lying,breaking your promises and then whining like a cry-baby become principled? At least after January,backwards days and Orwellian thought processes won`t get the presidential seal of approval.

GoddessDustyGold -> RE: Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/23/2008 6:13:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Sen Lieberman(I-Conn) in a self servingstatement on meet the press ,when asked about his RNC attack of PE Obama says the election is over and "we can't afford the luxury of spending time going bact to the campaign"...self serving indeed! Just wondering if you would use the same expression, i.e., self-serving, if Hillary's and her campaign's comments were revisited on, let's say, 60 Minutes.

slvemike4u -> RE: Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/23/2008 6:32:35 PM)
Hillery campaigned for McCain ?

GoddessDustyGold -> RE: Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/23/2008 6:38:59 PM)
Cute! If you seriously cannot figure out what I mean, then I really can't help you. Otherwise, like I said... Cute!

slvemike4u -> RE: Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/23/2008 6:44:50 PM)
Oh I could figure it out.But here's my problem,Hillery campaigned for Obama during the actual/general election.What you were obviously referring to was the primary campaign in which she was running as a candidate.....patenly apples and oranges.But thanks for the concern and the attempt to help me.

GoddessDustyGold -> RE: Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/23/2008 7:01:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: slvemike4u Oh I could figure it out.But here's my problem,Hillery campaigned for Obama during the actual/general election.What you were obviously referring to was the primary campaign in which she was running as a candidate.....patenly apples and oranges.But thanks for the concern and the attempt to help me. Yes, I was referring to that. Rather than say "campaigning for McCain" , perhaps we should say "campaigning against Obama"? Primaries or general, they were still campaigns. They both moved on and I would call Hillary more self-serving that Lieberman. Not that I have anything against self-serving, mind you. But don't put blinders on to it when it is convenient.. Hillary was a good girl and toed the party line and did her public campaigning for him when she had to. After the fact. And no one really knows who she pulled the lever for when she visited the polls on Nov 4th, do they? She is a vindictive Bitch. (Hurray for vindictive bitches!) Give Me a person who is straight and up front about it, rather than one who plans her own agenda and gets hers back after it is all over but the shouting. Yes, I just finished reading the Hard Ball thread. Not that I expected anything different from her.

slvemike4u -> RE: Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/23/2008 7:11:12 PM)
Again Goddess Dusty, Hillary was running herself against Obama....If you can's see the difference between that and Lieberman going on the campaign trail for McCain....and against Obama (who had made appearences for Leiberman in the past,when Joe needed help to retain his seat) than it is I who can't help you...sorry .

GoddessDustyGold -> RE: Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/23/2008 7:19:19 PM)
Sigh Ya know, Mike, I didn't vote for either of them. But you're right. I do not see the difference. What I do see if someone saying that Lieberman owed and he didn't pay up when the time was right. I don't live by that rule. And I think it is high time that Washington, D.C. stopped living by that rule. If someone helps Me for whatever reason, that doesn't automatically oblige Me to stand by them at their command at a later date, especially if I have extreme differences of opinion and the stand is an important one. Who knows what changed, or didn't change? There is entirely too much back scratching going on, and I, for one, am sick and tired of the whole game. You feel that Joe should have stood by Barry, regardless of his personal convictions. He owed him. That's okay for you to feel like that. It's all about the party. I don't agree with you. 'nuf said.

slvemike4u -> RE: Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/23/2008 7:33:07 PM)
No goddess I never questioned him for backing his choice McCain for President.Where I (and the leadership of the Democratic Party) feel he went off the reservation was in attacking Obama while doing so.There is a clear difference in supporting one and claiming the other is unqualified and there was a choice that could have been made to support the one while not attacking the other.Lieberman decided his advocacy of McCain included aking shots at Obama....that was uncalled for.

GoddessDustyGold -> RE: Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/23/2008 9:11:27 PM)
But Hillary could take shots? Is that because she was in the same party and all's fair in love and campaigning when it comes to primaries, but not generals? Who made up those cock-a-mamie rules? I have yet to see a campaign where shots weren't taken, and if he felt he wanted and needed to publicly support McCain, then maybe some shots came with that territory. His decision, but I do agree that it is time to move on and he answered correctly in wishing to let it go. He is taking enough of his ownshots now from lots of people, including news anchors who want to pin him down and embarrass him. I guess My point here is...and I promise I do have a point...that Hillary was less than polite during the primaries. She put on a gracious face when when it came time to march with the rest of the party, but she is playing dirty again right now with her demands and deals. She is not moving on, and she is still going to get hers. I honestly would have had more respect for PE Obama if he had told her to go suck an egg...that if she wanted the job, she would take it on his terms. He won and he is the one supposed to be calling the shots. Is she the only possibility for the PE? Where does this power come from? I have too many freaking questions. Always a big problem with Me! Smile At least Lieberman is trying to keep it simple with an honest assessment of no luxury of time to go back and revisit the campaign. It's over and done. Why is no one asking Hillary to go back and revisit the campaign? Why is no one asking Hillary why she is throwing her weight around regarding this pending Secy of State position? She is not revisiting the campaign. But she is continuing it, in My opinion. Just in a more diabolical way. The whole attitude truly puzzles Me.

DomKen -> RE: Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/23/2008 9:28:08 PM)
Obama and HRC were opposing candidates during the primary but once the primaries were over, which are intended to involve members of the same party competing against each other (shocking to the GOP which prefers coronations but that's the way it is), HRC campaigned for the winning candidate and not for his opponent. Lieberman wants the perks of being in the majority party but campaigned against that party's leadership. He definitely should expect and fully deserves some hard questions on the matter. Claiming not to understand that pretty clear difference strikes me as passive aggressive behavior and not a legitimate misunderstanding.

GoddessDustyGold -> RE: Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/23/2008 10:02:12 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Obama and HRC were opposing candidates during the primary but once the primaries were over, which are intended to involve members of the same party competing against each other (shocking to the GOP which prefers coronations but that's the way it is), HRC campaigned for the winning candidate and not for his opponent. Lieberman wants the perks of being in the majority party but campaigned against that party's leadership. He definitely should expect and fully deserves some hard questions on the matter. Claiming not to understand that pretty clear difference strikes me as passive aggressive behavior and not a legitimate misunderstanding. Again text is lacking. Do not misunderstand where I am coming from, DomKen, and assume that I must be acting in a passive-aggressive manner, or that I am claiming not to understand. I understand just fine. I understand that the American people, as a whole, seem to be just fine with a two party system that has long outlived its usefulness and shows no measurable difference in what happens when business as usual resumes in Washington, D.C. administration after administration. I understand that in spite of all the sweet talk about not voting with the party or along party lines, that is really the way it is. I understand that if someone is not liked for the stand he took, it is never let go. We must always find a new way to dig and ridicule and call that person self-serving. I also understand that when the same thing is happening within the party (not the primaries, but right now) that those on that side refuse to see it or make excuses for it or won't even address it. Lieberman had a right to take his stand and say what he needed to say. People had a right to listen or discard it. Hell, the party has a right to blackball him. But that is not happening. And that is making a lot of people mad. But nobody is concerned that another party member is making power deals behind closed doors in conjunction with the offer of a very important cabinet position. What puzzles Me is the lack of concern on the part of the American people, regardless of party. Hillary is not making nicey-nice. She is demanding the power to which she obviously feels entitled. All is not honkey donkey in the Democratic Party. Everybody just wants to pretend it is. Because she publicly campagned for him, once she lost her bid for the nomination, everything is alright now and the nasty shots during the primaries are over and done and everybody is backslapping happy. Hmph! Obviously it isn't. I understand the people just want to ignore that. That does not wash for Me. Edit: quote: Lieberman wants the perks of being in the majority party but campaigned against that party's leadership. He definitely should expect and fully deserves some hard questions on the matter. I have no problem with hard questions. I do have a problem with the hard questions being posed by Tom Brokaw and him trying not to let Lieberman "off the hook" as another poster stated. Let the party take care of it. It does not need to be tried in the press. All that does is feed the idea that no one has the right to take a different stand. If they are with a party, then, by god, they are with that party all the way or they are a traitor!

DomKen -> RE: Lieberman on Meet the Press (11/24/2008 7:51:10 AM)
You really need to study some history. HRC trying to force her way into a position in the Obama cabinet is small potatoes. How did Hoover remain director of the FBI through all those different Presidents? Through actual blackmail and actual physical threats. Many other examples are out there if you care to look.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

3.100586E-02