Tuesday, January 31, 2006

Windsor to Follow Manchester's Lead?

Apparently, Windsor Democrats have also had enough of Joe Lieberman. They will be voting on two proposed resolutions censuring Senator Lieberman at their next meeting on February 2nd. The resolutions were sent to me by a WDTC member (See comment section for the full text of the proposed resolutions).

The person I talked to said he'd be surprised if at least one of the resolutions didn't pass.

They aren't as concise or focused as the Manchester resolution, but they do capture the same sense of frustration that a certain segment of Democrats feel about their junior senator. For the record, it is very, very rare for DTCs to do anything like this.

Just how indicative this is of hostility towards Lieberman in DTCs statewide is impossible to say. We'll have to wait and see.


Genghis Conn said...

The text of the proposed resolutions:
First Motion

Resolved: That the Windsor, Connecticut Democratic Town Committee reprimand
Senator Joseph Lieberman for embracing President George Bush' position on
the Iraq War, including denying that we wrongfully entered the war, and
denying that the war is not accomplishing the objectives set out by
President Bush and the absence of any reasonably detailed standards for
withdrawal of American troops from Iraq.

Second Motion

Resolved: That the Windsor, Connecticut Democratic Town Committee reprimand
Senator Joseph Lieberman for his positions on issues that are contrary to
traditional and current Democratic Party positions on important issues, as

(1)He was one of the few Democratic Senators that supported the
Appointment of Alberto Gonzalez as Attorney General, author of the infamous
comment that the General Convention on Torture was "quaint." Senator
Lieberman was ambiguous in his opposition to those remarks and still
apparently believes that torture is justified certain circumstances.

(2)During the Kerry Presidential Campaign in Florida, Senator Lieberman
praised George Bush.

(3)Senator Lieberman has, in the past, opposed affirmative action;
during his campaign for Vice President, he apparently somewhat modified his
position, but it is not clear where he stands on this issue today.

(4)Senator Lieberman initially opposed civil unions, but it is not
clear where he stands on this issue today.

(5)Senator Lieberman opposed the Federal Accounting Standards Board
Rule requiring expensing executive stock options, which indicates more
concern in helping greedy executives than helping the "Little Guy."

(6)Senator Lieberman does not have the proper respect for the
Constitutional separation of Church and State. He has, in the past,
advocated for direct federal aid to church schools. He was also quoted as
saying that "Life is a faith-based experience."

Proud Moderate Dem said...

As a Democratic Town Cmte member i sincerely hope these resolutions are changed. we should be saving this venom for Republicans. and i know the boilerplate response is that Lieberman is a Republican, but his voting record indicates otherwise. the Democrats should have other priorites this year.

Anonymous said...

Hello Alito, Goodbye Abortion! God is looking down on this nation after all. Happy Days are indeed here again. Looking forword to OUR President's speech tonight!!!

Anonymous said...

Anonymous 2:38:

Senator Lieberman? Is that you?

ctkeith said...


This is about Much Much more than just Iraq.

First Manchester and now Windsor.These aren't exactly Liberal towns.

There's nothing moderate about Wars of Choice,Attorney Generals promoting torture or Joe Lieberman.

These and many more reasons will do in Joe.

Anonymous said...

I'm as annoyed as anyone about Joe's votes, but have you seen this guy Lemont speak? He's not at all appealing.

Proud Moderate Dem said...

ctkeith, yes i understand that is your new slogan about this being about much more than Iraq and i understand some of your positions. but with what is at stake in terms of trying to get dem control of the house and senate, this is the wrong primary at the wrong time in the wrong place. Democractic energy and resources should be going other places.

DeanFan84 said...


The Gonzales vote, CAFTA, the Bankruptcy bill, the Alito nomination, Joe's WSJ piece on why "Our Troops Must Stay", etc. -- Don't these things suggest that basic party discipline should be one of our biggest priorities in 2006?

The fact is that an incumbent like Lieberman feels so safe that he worries more about his popularity amongst Republicans than his duty to Dems.

As long as we have a two-party system, and as long as the GOP plays hardball, I'm going to continue to argue for the importance of Dems uniting. You have the caucus, and then you get behind the group's decision. Unity equals strength.

And then there is message discipline, that which the GOP uses to consistently kick our derrieres. What was the message on Alito? Every last Dem felt the need to craft their own, while the R's kept it simple with the ABA rating, (the gold standard), his overwhelming qualifications, and an "up or down" vote.

For a glimpse of how effective a primary can be, take a look at Arlen Spector's recent behavior. How do you square his utter toadiness with his prior promises not to back overtly pro-life appointees? The primaries got Arlen in line, and that is what we need to do with Lieberman. (Or get rid of him!) fwiw.

Proud Moderate Dem said...

Deanfan, by that same line of thinking, in the spirit of party disipline, if state and national dem party leaders(as they have) were to ask lamont not to primary, should he follow their orders?

DeanFan84 said...

This is about more than Iraq? Is that your new slogan? And all along I thought you were a pacifist...

Where should MoveOn focus as we watch Iraq devolve into yet another Vietnam? Really, all three million of us who are pissed about elective war, and the use of fear and faux patriotism to manipulate the American populace?

The focus is going to be on Neocon Joe, as well it should be. And don't kid yourself, these are small donor dollars that wouldn't be going anywhere else. I mean who doesn't have the extra $50 or $100 to give against a "Democrat" who is an honorary chairman of a group like THIS.

Anonymous said...

Yes..this is about much more then the war....

Lieberman's ex chief of staff was a major Rowland fundraiser....Lieberman's present staff director's husband has been helped by Lieberman to obtain millions of federal dollars for his organization but if religious folks want to see him about the war he ducks them....

In addition Lieberman's wife is a " consultant" in DC bringing down the BIG BUCKS...thats how these Senators now get paid off...

DINO JOE is or was against affirmative action,universal healthcare,civil unions...he was or is for privitizing social security,healthcare and many governmental services....

Furthermore...he likes to hobnob with the elite and proudly touts his friendships with Sean Hannity,Bill Bennett,Newt Gingrich and Bob Novak...

He has abandoned his party here...he only campained a few days and raised a paltry 35k for curry when he ran for Governor in 2002 and did the same for Barbara in 1998 and curry again in 1994..

As you read this..he is cultivating a relationship with Governor REll. and Congresspeople Shays,Simmons and Johnson.

In 2004 he was the only Democrat to be booed at the National AFL-CIO Convention.


Proud Moderate Dem said...

DeanFan, as i said yesterday, i hope you accept my offer to agree to disagree. I think we should focus energy and resources on CT's 3 targeted Congressional races so we can take back the House and budget bills such as the one that will be voted on tomorow will be a thing of the past. there is also a gov race here in CT which is very important so we can clean up the corruption in hartford among other things. further, the dems have a chance to take back the Senate and a primary here in CT does open up the opportunity of CT sending an R to the Senate who will be voting for trent lott as leader, not harry reid. and it is the senate races where dems can beat actual R's that national resources should be given to.

Aldon Hynes said...

One anonymous poster (3:23) here doesn't find Lamont's speaking appealing. Eighty people I met face to face in New Haven found Lamont's speaking quite appealing. I think I'll go with the eighty people I met face to face.

PMD, I have to respect your concern about what will best help Courtney, Farrell and Murphy, as well as the Governor's race and other Senate races around the country.

If I believed that politics was a zero-sum game, I would agree with you. However, from what I've seen, people interested in Ned Lamont's campaign are getting more motivated and more excited and hence are more likely to contribute and help with other campaigns.

DeanFan84 said...

I heard Harry Reid is not made unhappy by the Lamont primary.

Reid: "I’ve spoken to Joe Lieberman and he knows he’s out there alone. I mean, literally alone. Joe is a fine man, he has strong feelings, but he’s just alone. Even Republicans don't agree with Joe."

But then again, Howard Dean really likes Lieberman. lmao.

And Nancy Pelosi, she really likes it when Joe goes on FoxNews to criticize the Party...

Finally, you miss something when you don't see that this is a bottom-up, and not a top-down effort.

Will you still support Joe if he ditches the Party to run as an Independent? I mean if he isn't committed to being a Democrat, why should any Democrat support him?

Proud Moderate Dem said...

Aldon, i undrestand your point, but manpower and money are limited resources and they must both be used and spent wisely. spending so much time, effort and money to try and get rid of Lieberman hurts our congresisonal candidates, candidates for gov, our coordinated campaign and National Senate races such as PA and TN. if the dems didnt have these kind of opportunities this year i could understand this effort to cause a primary but under these circumstances i truly think we are shooting ourselves in the foot.
DeanFan, asl lamont himself, he has said that party leaders from the state and otherwise have asked him not to run. him running flies right in the face of your party discipline motto. i will be supporting the dem candidate in the fall election, whether it is Lieberman or Lamont, but i really think that more thought needs to go into the possible consequences of the actions taken in the next few months.

Anonymous said...

So first Manchester wants to get rid of Uncle Joe, and now Windsor wants to give him the boot?

My only question: When will they kick John Kissel out of the Democratic Party?

Serious Democrat said...

I respect the folks who want to get rid of Joe because he demonstrates no party discipline, but that's not my reason.

I won't support Joe because he doesn't represent my views. After all, isn't that the meaning of "representative democracy?"

Joe may be "principled." We may "agree to disagree." But in the end, I'd prefer a U.S. Senator to value the same things I value. Joe Lieberman just doesn't fit the bill.

Nominating and electing a U.S. Senator who will stand up for mainstream Democratic values will help us win the 3 congressional seats. For example, Joe's stand on the war is the same as Simmon's stand on the war. It's awkward at best, downright fatal at worst, to Courtney's effort to defeat Simmons.

Voters should choose a Democrat who'll vote the way they'd vote. For me -- and many other -- that's not Joe Lieberman.

Anonymous said...

You can, if you wish, channel your disappointment and anger into an effort to purge Democratic senators in primaries, or you can realize our biggest problem is the limited quantity of Democratic senators, not their "purity" or willingness to make every fight in the Senate the fight of their lives. ---NewDonkey.com

Serious Democrat said...


I don't advocate a "purge." I've said that I'll vote for a Democrat that closely matches my values. How else would one make a decision?

Joe Lieberman's positions simply don't match mine -- and I suspect they don't match most Democrats. That's the truth - nothing more.

ctkeith said...

PMD and all Joe Supporters,

Please explain what the Dem unified message will be in 06 if Joe is the Dem Senate Nominee?

DeanFan84 said...

Hey, Mr. 5:32Anonymous/Lieberman staffer/DLC guy--

Welcome to CTLocal!

When were you planning to tell everyone that you are part of the DLC's blog zoo?

And this is a loyalty campaign, not a purge. Neocon Joe's problem isn't just his being a Neocon, it's also his willingness to be good buddies with FoxNews' Sean Hannity.

MikeCT said...

If you'd like to witness the spectacle of Democratic backbones in action, the Windsor Dems are reportedly meeting on Thursday at 7:30 pm at Town Hall, 275 Broad Street.

turfgrrl said...

Anything that opens the door for the GOP to increase it's number in the Senate is counter productive. This is not the year or the way to get Lieberman to focus on CT issues. It would be more effective if petitions and protests were targets against him in order to change his positions.

MikeCT said...

Why support a Dem who fights for Republican priorities, hurts the country, and overtly attacks the positions and values of the Democratic base? If being a Democrat has any meaning beyond a cynical form of corporate branding, Joe should not go unopposed. I would agree that the Congressional challengers should generally be prioritized, but I have no problem with folks who want to focus their attention on Lamont. That race will probably bring out folks who would not ordinarily work on any campaign. And if Dems are so weak that they can't stomach some internal debate, we need help with more than this election.

You can see for yourself (Quicktime movie) what Joe thinks of the opinions of his constituents. He reportedly could not contain his enthusiasm for Bush last night.

Proud Moderate Dem said...

the unified Dem message will be our country can do better. we need to return holding political office to its true roots of public service, not personal ambition by cleaning up the culture of corruption. we need to pass budget bills that protect and strengthen our middle class, our seniors, our students and those in need. we need to address global warming bc guess what, its happening and we need to stop raping the environment. we need to invest in our workforce. we need to stop our reliance on middle east oil and develop energy alternatives. we need to once again make the United States of America the land of opportunity. we need protect our homeland, be strong on security, and build coalitions, something that we did not do in iraq, but are doing now with iran. we need to reach back and accept people in our party that we may not agree with 100% but have a goal of consensus through debate. it should be ok in our party to have faith in god, in should be ok, not to. dems have senate races all over the country so it is hard to have one message for all as what will work in MN wont work in NJ and what works in NJ wont work in TN but as Dems our overall message needs to be to make harry reid MAJORITY leader and not create a situation where it is possible that a vote for Trent Lott is sent to DC from CT.

DeanFan84 said...

This idea of CT sending a Republican to the Senate in 2006 is a complete joke.

One, the only person who could possibly contest for the seat, Chris Shays, has already said he wouldn't want it, b/c he "didn't think he could hold it."

Otherwise, who else is there? An aging Nancy Johnson, or the angry and untelegenic Rob Simmons? Neither of these guys would bet the farm in our Blue state.

Further, the trends in 2006, particularly in New England, will be against the Bush Republicans. No way do we want to add to the corrupt current group's power.

P.S. PMD-- the Senate Majority Leader is Bill Frist, not Trent Lott.

P.S.S. Turfgirl-- Lobbying Joe on the issues is worthless. He doesn't care what any of us think.

Proud Moderate Dem said...

DeanFan, so CT selecting an R to the Senate is a complete joke and not possible? kind of like CT not having a dem gov over 15 years. it could happen, dont kid youself. and thanks for the civics update but FYI, bill frist is retiring and trent lott is his rumored successsor.

DeanFan84 said...

They're bringing back Trent Lott? Hadn't heard that.

And I'm not saying CT could never send an R senator to DC. Just that it ain't happening this year, unless the "man of integrity" goes Zell Miller and switches parties.

Anonymous said...

For what it's worth, the New Haven DTC seems highly unlikely to do anything but wholeheartedly support Lieberman. Two towns out of 169? Color me unimpressed.

turfgrrl said...

MikeCt and deanfan84,

The point is not that Lieberman shouldn't be challenged on his postions and view, but that the energy spent going after him are better spent going after republicans like Shays and Johnson because tipping the House bad to Dem control is more important and a greater priority than going after Lieberman. Lieberman for all his stupidity, does not vote with the GOP caucus. Shays and Johnson do vote with the GOP. If you want to see check and balances in DC then focus on getting Dems in control of committees which is only achieved with a plurality in the house. The senate is not in play for CT.