Lieberman Controversy Attends Labor Day Parade Preparations

Newton Bee (CT) ^ | Aug 24, 2006 | John Voket

[summer]

US Senator Joseph Lieberman, pictured here at a recent Newtown appearance, has had an invitation to march in the town's Labor Day Parade retracted by members of the local Democratic Town Committee and First Selectman Herb Rosenthal.

If US Senator Joseph Lieberman chooses to march in this year's Newtown Labor Day parade, he will likely do so as a true independent. Local members of the Democratic Town Committee, including First Selectman Herb Rosenthal and former staunch Lieberman supporter Jim Juliano, agree that the Senator has no reason to believe he is welcome to march beside other endorsed party candidates...

...Mr Gerstein said he spoke with the Senator's scheduling aide Thursday morning, and confirmed that Mr Rosenthal had called personally to say Mr Lieberman was not welcome to march with the DTC, and that the first selectman would not march beside the Senator.

"This infers that Senator Lieberman is not welcome at the parade," Mr Gerstein said. "But the Senator believes there is too much at stake to walk away [following the primary], and he wants to give all Connecticut voters a real choice in November."

Mr Juliano said that as the local DTC vice chair, he agrees that the Senator should march in a separate unit, if he opts to join the parade September 4, adding that he supported Mr Lieberman up to the primary but remains undecided about his endorsement going forward. As a former officer for the statewide Plumbers and Fitters Local 777, Mr Juliano admitted that the Senator may have single-handedly headed off a small scale depression in Connecticut and Rhode Island when he crossed party lines to oppose the closing of the Groton submarine base earlier this year.

"Mr Lieberman was able to save 600 ship-fitter's jobs at Electric Boat, and 3,200 other jobs at that facility. I understand that a lot of people are sore about [his support of] the war, but closing that sub base would have triggered an economic depression that would have affected all of Connecticut and Rhode Island," Mr Juliano said. "I don't support the war...never did, but as a member of the executive board of the state Building Trades Association, I can't ignore the fact that he saved a lot of jobs."

Mr Juliano said he is supporting the DTC in refusing to march beside the Senator.

"He's not the Democratic candidate, he didn't carry Newtown in the primary, and he didn't receive Newtown's endorsement in the state convention. He's an independent and he should march as an independent," Mr Juliano said.

[summer]

Whew! This Lieberman situation is really impacting everything in CT! Even a Labor Day Parade!

[summer]

FYI.

[sgtbono2002]

Its pretty funny. No: He is not their candidate, but he is their Senator. What have you done for me today? That is the question Democrats cry. The past is forgotten, past good deeds done by Lieberman dont count for squat. Thats the way it is with New England Democrats. All Loyalty forgotten.

The term Yellow Dog Democrat means more in this election than before. With their stance on the war New England Democrats prove they really are yellow dogs.

[sandbar]

IMO, he should walk seperate. Completely alone with a sign that says "Lieberman for Senate"

That image of him walking by himself will impact far better than marching with the mean spirited Democrats and make them look like the dumb snotty clique we all knew in school.

[Vicomte13]

The Lieberman situation is a classic test of loyalty, ideology and power.

All of the pieces are on the board for great political drama.

The Democrats name a guy who is a pure anti-war ideologue, and a thin majority of voting Democrats choose him, on that one single issue, over a proven liberal Democrat.

The Republicans, knowing they could never beat Lieberman, let an ethically-challenged compulsive gambler have the slot. Now the race is wide open, but the ethically-challenged gambler is stubbornly holding onto the spot on the ticket, refusing to relinquish it.

Independents outnumber everybody, but in the normal two-party lock-up, they have to choose one party's candidate over the other.

And then you have Lieberman himself, a Liberal hawk, in the FDR mode. Were he not an Orthodox Jew, he might not be such a hawk, and he almost certainly would not have been the Vice-Presidential nominee. But he is, and he was, and the drama of a narrow wedge of bitter-enders on the war tossing the Democrat Vice-Presidential candidate out of the party is national news.

So, Republicans (like me) are going to skip party loyalty to vote for the closest thing to an FDR Democrat (hey, FDR WAS right on World War II, and along with Lincoln is one of the top two wartime Presidents in our history).

Partisan Democrats have a mini-civil war: is the Democratic Party really just an anti-war party? Will the pro-war Democrats and the Dems who like and respect Lieberman really throw him under the bus because the party says so?
How about the Jewish Democrats? The whole Jewish community was intensely proud of Joe Lieberman, with reason. Plenty of Jewish Democrats get the Iraq/Israel link and see what Joe Lieberman sees. Are THEY going to vote against Israel in order to remain loyal Democrats this election?

And Independents are going to come stomping out of the woodwork and DECISIVELY win this election for Lieberman, demonstrating to anybody who cares to look that Independents are actually the political plurality in the country, and the majority-makers, and that if someone runs appealing directly to them (and to hell with Republican OR Democratic partisans) he wins.

Big time drama in little Connecticut.

Lieberman will be the winner, decisively, and the lessons taught by this will reverberate in a whole lot of interesting ways all across the country for fellows like Bloomberg.

[Vicomte13]

The Lieberman situation is a classic test of loyalty, ideology and power.

All of the pieces are on the board for great political drama.

The Democrats name a guy who is a pure anti-war ideologue, and a thin majority of voting Democrats choose him, on that one single issue, over a proven liberal Democrat.

The Republicans, knowing they could never beat Lieberman, let an ethically-challenged compulsive gambler have the slot. Now the race is wide open, but the ethically-challenged gambler is stubbornly holding onto the spot on the ticket, refusing to relinquish it.

Independents outnumber everybody, but in the normal two-party lock-up, they have to choose one party's candidate over the other.

And then you have Lieberman himself, a Liberal hawk, in the FDR mode. Were he not an Orthodox Jew, he might not be such a hawk, and he almost certainly would not have been the Vice-Presidential nominee. But he is, and he was, and the drama of a narrow wedge of bitter-enders on the war tossing the Democrat Vice-Presidential candidate out of the party is national news.

So, Republicans (like me) are going to skip party loyalty to vote for the closest thing to an FDR Democrat (hey, FDR WAS right on World War II, and along with Lincoln is one of the top two wartime Presidents in our history).

Partisan Democrats have a mini-civil war: is the Democratic Party really just an anti-war party? Will the pro-war Democrats and the Dems who like and respect Lieberman really throw him under the bus because the party says so?
How about the Jewish Democrats? The whole Jewish community was intensely proud of Joe Lieberman, with reason. Plenty of Jewish Democrats get the Iraq/Israel link and see what Joe Lieberman sees. Are THEY going to vote against Israel in order to remain loyal Democrats this election?

And Independents are going to come stomping out of the woodwork and DECISIVELY win this election for Lieberman, demonstrating to anybody who cares to look that Independents are actually the political plurality in the country, and the majority-makers, and that if someone runs appealing directly to them (and to hell with Republican OR Democratic partisans) he wins.

Big time drama in little Connecticut.

Lieberman will be the winner, decisively, and the lessons taught by this will reverberate in a whole lot of interesting ways all across the country for fellows like Bloomberg.

[Vicomte13]

Well, it was good.
But not good enough to read twice.
Sorry.

[VeniVidiVici]

"I don't support the war...never did, but as a member of the executive board of the state Building Trades Association, I can't ignore the fact that he saved a lot of jobs."

Another Democrat for "Show Me the Money"!

When are the party minions going to realize their "leaders" are out for themselves?

[betsyross1776]

I thought this party was the party of inclusion. The blacks and other minorites better wise up. If this does not prove the Jewish vote you are really not wanted here any more I don't know what will!

[camas]

question, is it blue dog or yellow dog??? or what is a blue dog RAT?

[Vicomte13]

"The blacks and other minorites better wise up. If this does not prove the Jewish vote you are really not wanted here any more I don't know what will!"

I'm watching the Jewish vote closely this election.
We just had the Democrats, including Mrs. Clinton, out there gushing their support for Israel in the recent war, but opposing our own AMERICAN war effort against the same Islamist terrorists right nearby in Iraq.

That dog don't hunt.
The Jewish Lobby is pro-Israel, and that's fine. I've always supported Israel. But if the Jewish Lobby takes the pro-Israel/anti-American stance that the Democrats are offering, it will be time to reassess the single-minded American devotion to Israel. After all, Israel is NOT any longer the only democracy in the Middle East. Iraq and Afghanistan are democracies now too, and it is just as important to the United States that those two countries survive as democracies as it is that Israel does.

The Jewish vote historically goes about 75% Democrat. If that happens this election, we have to reassess.
The ouster of Lieberman shows that the anti-war Democrats care more about getting America out of Iraq than anything else. For AMERICA, a loss in Iraq is worse, even, than the loss of Israel. After all, Iraq is OUR baby, made with OUR blood and treasure. If the Jewish Lobby supports Democrats lock stock and barrel, it will be a pro-Israel, ANTI-AMERICAN vote.

Hopefully, the Jewish voters will get this. Americans overall are simply NOT going to be more loyal to Israel than to America herself. And that's what a Jewish Lobby vote for the Democrats this year will be: AMERICA loses in the Middle East, but ISRAEL gets full support.
Not tolerable.

I hope the Jewish Lobby backs Lieberman and the voting patterns show this.
If they don't, we all have to reasses support for Israel and take a hard look at the primary loyalty of the Israel Lobby.

[betsyross1776]

If the American Jewish lobby believes the democrats that an Iranian supported state in the same area is good for Israel then they need their heads worked on with electric shock. If they did not learn from what they found with the tunnels in the last war with Leb, then they are asking for the destruction of Israel again. If this happens it will be a shame on American Jews.

[Tzimisce]

We need the lesser evil - Lieberman needs to win.

If he doesn't, the moon bat bloggers will NEVER shut up....

[ottersnot]

This will be so great when Lieberman wins and refuses to caucus with these commies.

This is going to blow up in their faces.
Unless they can destroy him, but they would
never try that.....

[nutmeg]

Connecticut ping!

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

[summer]

I think he's going to win, too.

[summer]

I meant to tell you, I thought that was a good summary of what is happening here. But I also think Lieberman just wants to keep his job. He's not ready to retire. Or be fired.