Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lieberman: Call Me a Democrat (Barf Alert)
Newsmax ^ | 11-11-06 | Newsmax Staff

Posted on 11/10/2006 10:41:25 AM PST by truthandlife

Sen. Joe Lieberman, who won re-election as an independent, has a message for his Senate colleagues in the next Congress: Call me a Democrat.

The three-term Connecticut lawmaker defied party leaders when he launched his independent bid after losing to Democrat Ned Lamont in the August primary. During the campaign, he vowed to be an "independent-minded Democrat" if he were re-elected. In Tuesday's election, Lieberman won strong GOP support and given the closely divided Senate, Republicans are expected to court him.

So will he count as a Democrat or an independent who caucuses with the majority Democrats? In an e-mail message late Thursday, Lieberman spokesman Dan Gerstein said the senator will begin his new term as a Democrat.

With the Democratic takeover of the Senate, Lieberman is in line to become chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

In a post-election news conference, Lieberman said he was reassured by Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid that he would retain his seniority when the new Senate convenes.


TOPICS: Front Page News
KEYWORDS: cant; captainobvious; democrats; duh; heisarat; lieberman; notsurprised; trust; whatdidyouexpect
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-86 next last
Just shows, you can't trust a Democrat. If the President thinks he can get along with the Dems in D.C. he does not understand how the Dems operate. I hope after 6 years he finally understands that Reagan was the only Republican who defeated these guys in a big way and never did it by trying to get along with them.
1 posted on 11/10/2006 10:41:27 AM PST by truthandlife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Joe said all along that he would caucus with the Democrats. That's probably a reason he won. If he did anything else, he would be untrustworthy.


2 posted on 11/10/2006 10:42:46 AM PST by HitmanLV ("If at first you don't succeed, keep on sucking until you do succeed." - Jerry 'Curly' Howard)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
Why is anyone surprised?

I never understood all the enthusiasm for Lieberman by conservatives/Republicans in this Senate race anyway.

3 posted on 11/10/2006 10:44:20 AM PST by Zionist Conspirator (Vayo'mer HaShem, za`aqat Sedom va`Amorah ki rabbah; vechatta'tam, ki khavedah me'od.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator
I never understood all the enthusiasm for Lieberman by conservatives/Republicans in this Senate race anyway.

I didn't either. People were acting as if he were another Zell Miller.

4 posted on 11/10/2006 10:47:14 AM PST by TUAN_JIM (Sic Semper Tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
Republican sages, in the not-too-distant past, strongly urged, even demanded, that the Neanderthal conservatives 'wise up and support Joe!'
5 posted on 11/10/2006 10:49:06 AM PST by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

As if we would have confused him with a Republican.


6 posted on 11/10/2006 10:49:37 AM PST by theDentist (Qwerty ergo typo : I type, therefore I misspelll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

No real surprise there.


7 posted on 11/10/2006 10:49:40 AM PST by cripplecreek (If stupidity got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
Just shows, you can't trust a Democrat.

How does it show that?

8 posted on 11/10/2006 10:50:09 AM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
Just shows, you can't trust a Democrat.

I may not agree with Sen. Lieberman but you cannot say he is untrustworthy. He has always said if he was elected as an independent he would caucus with the Democratic party. He has never said he would not do this.

In a sense, Lieberman is now the most powerful Senator. He owes absolutely nothing to the Democratic Party now. He can demand any chairmanship with either party if he wanted to. Without his caucus vote, the Democrats would not have a majority and would be forced to share power with Republicans.

9 posted on 11/10/2006 10:50:20 AM PST by pnh102
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator

he is a strong supporter of the war on terrorism. we should be fortunate we can get even that out of connecticut.


10 posted on 11/10/2006 10:50:51 AM PST by philsfan24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Good point!

Lieberman will never learn. I felt badly how he was treated; now I don't.


11 posted on 11/10/2006 10:51:49 AM PST by cvq3842
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: philsfan24
he is a strong supporter of the war on terrorism. we should be fortunate we can get even that out of connecticut.

We'll see.

I don't trust any liberal or any Democrat.

12 posted on 11/10/2006 10:52:50 AM PST by Zionist Conspirator (Vayo'mer HaShem, za`aqat Sedom va`Amorah ki rabbah; vechatta'tam, ki khavedah me'od.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator
I never understood all the enthusiasm for Lieberman by conservatives/Republicans in this Senate race anyway.

Why?! What's so hard to understand that Lieberman is 5X better than his opponent, Demented?

13 posted on 11/10/2006 10:53:55 AM PST by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

The wife in denial who stays with the abusive husband no matter what.


14 posted on 11/10/2006 10:54:09 AM PST by Argus (Silver Lining in the Democrat Takeover Top Ten List #6: The gay weddings will be fabulous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Just shows, you can't trust a Democrat. - not true; campaigns are one thing, working with the other side is quite another; politics is NOT nice business, the President knows this.


15 posted on 11/10/2006 10:55:50 AM PST by SF Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jla; #1CTYankee
Republican sages, in the not-too-distant past, strongly urged, even demanded, that the Neanderthal conservatives 'wise up and support Joe!'

If we didn't, the Senate would have included George Soros' / moveon.org's pet anti-war, anti-Bush moonbat Ned Lamont, who roared into Connecticut like a hurricane. Lieberman was clearly the lesser of the two evils. He's a liberal for sure, but definitely "gets it" regarding the WOT. The Connecticut GOP candidate was not even remotely viable. Our choice was between Lieberman and Lamont.

I never thought for one day Joe would become a Republican after he won the election, btw. I knew he would remain a democRAT.

16 posted on 11/10/2006 10:56:04 AM PST by nutmeg (In 2008 we will crush the Democrats like the cockroaches they are! -- Mark Levin 11-8-06)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
An idea of how sick this debacle makes me.

Regards, Ivan

17 posted on 11/10/2006 10:56:57 AM PST by MadIvan (I aim to misbehave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator; All
In early January, when this hoopla about Lamont will have died down and party activists are thinking about other things, Joe Lieberman will contribute a very large sum of money to a Democratic campaign organization to make amends for his failure to help Democrat House candidates.

Say a little bird told me.

After that, as far as anything official goes, Lieberman will be a full member of the Democrat establishment. Joe Lieberman is as much a Democrat as Pat Leahy. What's unbelievably ironic about all this is that the money that Lieberman turns over is almost exclusively from the $6-$8 million in GOP contributors that Rove steered towards him. So you'll effectively have Bush Pioneer types funding the Democrat party. BRILLIANT STRATEGY GUYS -- so glad that money went to a stalwart conservative like Loserman rather than to, I DON'T KNOW ---- George Allen.

18 posted on 11/10/2006 10:56:58 AM PST by Alter Kaker ("Whatever tears one sheds, in the end one always blows one's nose." - Heine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Anybody who expeced Joe to be a republican was just fooling themselves.

Joe has sense and can be trusted more than any other dem on the WoT, but other issues he has always promised to be the liberal that he is.


19 posted on 11/10/2006 10:57:13 AM PST by FreedomNeocon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AmericaUnited
What's so hard to understand that Lieberman is 5X better than his opponent, Demented?

Thank you... you are correct. Joe is probably at least 10X better than Red Ned Lamont, who was supported by George Soros, Moveon.org, Code Pink, Daily Kos, DU, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Cindy Sheehan...

20 posted on 11/10/2006 10:59:39 AM PST by nutmeg (In 2008 we will crush the Democrats like the cockroaches they are! -- Mark Levin 11-8-06)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: RaceBannon; scoopscandal; 2Trievers; LoneGOPinCT; Rodney King; sorrisi; MrSparkys; monafelice; ...

Connecticut ping!

Please Freepmail me if you want on or off my infrequent Connecticut ping list.

21 posted on 11/10/2006 11:00:12 AM PST by nutmeg (In 2008 we will crush the Democrats like the cockroaches they are! -- Mark Levin 11-8-06)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker
In early January, when this hoopla about Lamont will have died down and party activists are thinking about other things, Joe Lieberman will contribute a very large sum of money to a Democratic campaign organization to make amends for his failure to help Democrat House candidates.

Say a little bird told me.

After that, as far as anything official goes, Lieberman will be a full member of the Democrat establishment. Joe Lieberman is as much a Democrat as Pat Leahy. What's unbelievably ironic about all this is that the money that Lieberman turns over is almost exclusively from the $6-$8 million in GOP contributors that Rove steered towards him. So you'll effectively have Bush Pioneer types funding the Democrat party. BRILLIANT STRATEGY GUYS -- so glad that money went to a stalwart conservative like Loserman rather than to, I DON'T KNOW ---- George Allen.

I just thought this post of yours deserved to be read again!

22 posted on 11/10/2006 11:01:37 AM PST by Zionist Conspirator (Vayo'mer HaShem, za`aqat Sedom va`Amorah ki rabbah; vechatta'tam, ki khavedah me'od.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Heck, Joe's just being what he always has been. He didn't pretend to be otherwise, and he's sure better than Lamont.


23 posted on 11/10/2006 11:01:42 AM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

It probably would have better if Lamont would have won, it would have put MORE pressure on the dems to pull out NOW.(Whats the difference anyhow)


24 posted on 11/10/2006 11:01:54 AM PST by Echo Talon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nutmeg

What's your thought on Republican contributions (steered to Lieberman by Rove) being passed on to Democrat Party organizations? See my post above. Thanks to you guys and Rove, GOP donors have supported not just Joe Lieberman, but the entire Democrat Party from Dean to Pelosi. We're talking $6-$8 million or more, not exactly chump change.


25 posted on 11/10/2006 11:03:12 AM PST by Alter Kaker ("Whatever tears one sheds, in the end one always blows one's nose." - Heine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Supporting Lieberman helped keep Lamont out of office. But Joe was never one of us.

In hindsight, we may have been better off with Lamont.


26 posted on 11/10/2006 11:03:19 AM PST by Corin Stormhands (Attention 2008 Candidates: This tagline for rent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

Did you people seriously think he was going to switch parties and become a conservative? The only benefit we got from Lieberman's election was watching ned lament spend a pile of his own dough.


27 posted on 11/10/2006 11:04:36 AM PST by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nutmeg
f we didn't, the Senate would have included George Soros' / moveon.org's pet anti-war, anti-Bush moonbat Ned Lamont, who roared into Connecticut like a hurricane. Lieberman was clearly the lesser of the two evils.

~extending my hand~

Take it, Nutmeg, or else you risk falling off that precipice.

28 posted on 11/10/2006 11:04:41 AM PST by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: jla

I see you live in VA. How would you have voted in this CT race?


29 posted on 11/10/2006 11:06:19 AM PST by nutmeg (In 2008 we will crush the Democrats like the cockroaches they are! -- Mark Levin 11-8-06)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator

The race was interesting because it was direct evidence that Iraq was _not_ the deciding factor in 2006. Votes in Conn had a clear choice between a pro-War and an anti-War candidate that was untouched by the Congressional Republican scandals, spending, earmarks and just plain bad bills.

And they went for the pro-War candidate.


30 posted on 11/10/2006 11:07:20 AM PST by tdewey10 (Can we please take out iran's nuclear capability before they start using it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
With the Democratic takeover of the Senate, Lieberman is in line to become chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

Actually that is good news for the company I work for. About time you brought home some bacon Joe!

31 posted on 11/10/2006 11:07:21 AM PST by McGruff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nutmeg

I vote only for conservatives, no exceptions.


32 posted on 11/10/2006 11:07:32 AM PST by jla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
I'm beginning to wonder about Glenn Beck as far as that goes. He was the one out there telling everyone to vote for the person and go for those supposed "blue dog" demonrats. I think he has set a place for himself at the golden trough of the pigs who feed from the scraps of the world elite. I hope all of those who stayed home or voted in the demons choke on the dust of our ruin!
33 posted on 11/10/2006 11:08:28 AM PST by Camel Joe (liberal=socialist=royalist/imperialist pawn=enemy of Freedom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife
I hope after 6 years he finally understands that Reagan was the only Republican who defeated these guys in a big way

What a crock .. Reagan never defeated Democrats in any way. He got Democrats to support the economic and foreign policies of John Fitzgerald Kennedy. He had Tip O'Neil, the Democrat speaker of the house, over the white house many times. Reagan never invited Conservative Barry Goldwater anywhere.

Reagan governed using the Democratic economic policy of cut taxes and deficit spending. The deficit doubled under Reagan as did federal spending. The number of civilian government workers under Reagan grew by over 200,000 people. He only managed to close just one tiny government agency. The Reagan foreign policy was the Kennedy policy of defend any friend and oppose any foe of liberty. .. Right out of the JFK inaugural address.

Reagan got along very well with Democrats. Why should they dislike him he governed as liberal as JFK.

34 posted on 11/10/2006 11:09:34 AM PST by Common Tator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker

I blame Sean Hannity.


35 posted on 11/10/2006 11:09:41 AM PST by sabe@q.com (Yes, I'm a SW freak!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: nutmeg
Thank you... you are correct. Joe is probably at least 10X better than Red Ned Lamont, who was supported by George Soros, Moveon.org, Code Pink, Daily Kos, DU, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Cindy Sheehan...

If Lieberman had won the primary, who would those folks have supported? The GOP candidate?

Those people supported Jim Webb too.

36 posted on 11/10/2006 11:09:48 AM PST by Corin Stormhands (Attention 2008 Candidates: This tagline for rent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Zionist Conspirator

Agreed. Some on this board were more excited with Lieberman than with true conservative candidates. It made me nauseous.


37 posted on 11/10/2006 11:09:48 AM PST by MBB1984
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Echo Talon

That is what I am thinking now.

We actually needed to win three of the elections, not two.

Chafe would have switched if the senate was a 50/50. He waiting for his moment as a hero to the MSM. SO we should
have just elected Lamont.

I think I got played by thinking that the Senate was close.


38 posted on 11/10/2006 11:11:03 AM PST by mtairycitizen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: McGruff
'tator take on the real significance of the 2006 election.
39 posted on 11/10/2006 11:11:31 AM PST by Common Tator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Alter Kaker
What's your thought on Republican contributions (steered to Lieberman by Rove) being passed on to Democrat Party organizations? See my post above. Thanks to you guys and Rove, GOP donors have supported not just Joe Lieberman, but the entire Democrat Party from Dean to Pelosi. We're talking $6-$8 million or more, not exactly chump change.

I totally disagree with Rove and the GOP giving $$ to any Democrat Party organizations. I don't think Joe needed help from them or anyone else to win this election. I was pretty confident he would win all along, with moderate Democrat, Republican and swing voters.

Thanks to you guys and Rove, GOP donors have supported not just Joe Lieberman, but the entire Democrat Party from Dean to Pelosi.

Don't give me the snarky "thanks to you guys..." I didn't give a dime to Joe's campaign, nor to the RNC. I supported some individual GOP candidates in other - redder - states whom I really thought had a fighting chance to win their races.

How would you be feeling today if enough of us voted for Alan Schlesinger, split the Lieberman vote, and we would now be welcoming "Senator Ned Lamont"?

40 posted on 11/10/2006 11:13:25 AM PST by nutmeg (In 2008 we will crush the Democrats like the cockroaches they are! -- Mark Levin 11-8-06)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Corin Stormhands
If it was simply a choice between Lieberman and Alan Schlesinger - the GOP candidate - I would have most certainly supported Schlesinger.

I gave NO money to Lieberman, btw...

41 posted on 11/10/2006 11:15:09 AM PST by nutmeg (In 2008 we will crush the Democrats like the cockroaches they are! -- Mark Levin 11-8-06)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

Comment #42 Removed by Moderator

To: mtairycitizen
Bull Crap. Lieberman is not stupid. The democrats are in control and he will caucus with the Democrats.

But don't think he is not ticked off at the lack of Democrat support for his reelection campaign.

He will do what others have done in the past. He will vote with the Democrats in every case where they do not need his vote to prevail. He will mostly vote against them when they do need his vote.

He will have a high liberal rating from ACLU but he will not be their for the Democrats when they really need him.

Right now he wants the chairmanship of a senate committee. He is very pro Democrat. Once the session starts his voting record will show how he is teaching the Democrats a lesson for not supporting him when he needed their support.

43 posted on 11/10/2006 11:16:44 AM PST by Common Tator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: nutmeg

Actually I would have felt better.


44 posted on 11/10/2006 11:17:42 AM PST by mtairycitizen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: nutmeg

Karl Rove had a number of prominent Bush fundraisers, like Tony Kuhn, raise insane amounts of money on behalf of Lieberman. Take a minute and imagine what could have happened if they had been raising money for Talent, Allen or Burns --- or even Lincoln Chafee.


45 posted on 11/10/2006 11:18:45 AM PST by Alter Kaker ("Whatever tears one sheds, in the end one always blows one's nose." - Heine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Common Tator

Let me clarify.

I was thinking that supporting Lieberman might not
have helped at all.


46 posted on 11/10/2006 11:20:17 AM PST by mtairycitizen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Common Tator

Lieberman isn't ticked off at anyone, except maybe at Democrat idiot primary voters. The Democrat Party supported Lamont because it is virtually impossible NOT to support the guy who wins your primary and still have a political career. But there was no there there. The Democrat leaders -- with the exception of Hojo Dean -- were all rooting for Lieberman, and none lifted a finger to help Lamont.


47 posted on 11/10/2006 11:21:00 AM PST by Alter Kaker ("Whatever tears one sheds, in the end one always blows one's nose." - Heine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: jla
I vote only for conservatives, no exceptions.

Whatever. In a perfect world, that would work out very nicely. I vote GOP 99% of the time. This was one of those very rare exceptions. We couldn't take the chance of splitting the vote in a risky three-way race, and ending up with Lamont.

Other than Lieberman in this election, I voted straight Republican.

Empowering the likes of Red Ned Lamont would do far more damage to this country - especially in a time of war - than a Senator Lieberman would, IMHO.

48 posted on 11/10/2006 11:22:01 AM PST by nutmeg (In 2008 we will crush the Democrats like the cockroaches they are! -- Mark Levin 11-8-06)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: nutmeg

As MadIvan has pointed out... Leiberman may be a liberal but he is not a traitor.


49 posted on 11/10/2006 11:23:09 AM PST by AmericaUnited
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: truthandlife

rather have hawkish dems like Lieberman, than rino's like Chaffee.....

wouldn't you?


50 posted on 11/10/2006 11:23:25 AM PST by fhlh (Since 11/7/06, The MSM has failed to inform me about any of our soldiers dying in Iraq)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-86 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson