You also need to know that I [Joe Lieberman] have never suggested that the President or anyone else – including me – should be immune from criticism. The best proof of that is I myself have challenged the President’s policies on many occasions.The first sentence is a downright lie ("It’s time for Democrats who distrust President Bush to acknowledge that he will be the commander in chief for three more critical years and that in matters of war we undermine presidential credibility at our nation’s peril."). But, since he apparently challenges the President's policies, you'd think he would be the first in line to bring some oversight. So, Lieberman, in an effort to make sure everybody knew what a huge critic he's been, decided to miss key votes, saying they were "typical party-line procedural votes". So what were these "procedural" votes on?
The votes on Democratic amendments had to do with artificially influencing the Iraqi news media, and requiring the Bush administration to report on the possibility of a civil war in Iraq. [Courant]If Lieberman really wanted to send a message the president that he was for oversight, he'd have made sure he was there, supporting his "fellow Democrats".
-------
Iraq. Joe2006.com. 9/11/06.
-
Jon Kantrowitz. Lieberman Says His Skipped Iraq Votes Just “Procedural” and Do Not Matter. My Left Nutmeg. 9/11/06
-
Associated Press. Candidates spar over Senate votes. Hartford Courant. 9/11/06.
14 comments:
Hey turfgrrl,
So much for the sleeping bear.
Yes, for many people, standing on your principals and showing leadership is just show.
Then, there are real leaders.
But if Lieberman actually wanted to be a big critic of the administration, wouldn't he have used these votes to send a message?
He shouldn't miss votes like this just because there is a campaign going on. He can't just disappear from the Senate. It's almost as if Joe were some kind of large, hibernating mammal...maybe one that Stephen Colbert would be afraid of.
truthteller06 said..."Senator Lieberman has said that he would have supported the two amendments, and that’s what is important. He has been a frequent critic of President Bush’s handling of the war..."
My point was, that if Lieberman supported these amendments, and is in fact the critic of the war he says he is, why did he brush off this vote that would have been an easy way to send a message to the Administration and voters that he's for more oversight?
Goldwater & Humprey used to skip votes every so often if the other one wasn't there for some reason.
(They tended to cancle each other.)
No one ever accused either of not being Conservative or Liberal enough.
There's plenty of non-issue votes and missing those is a non-event.
Truthteller06 said...
I really think that this is a new low for you,
Not bad for Bobby M - a new low on his third post.
turfgrrl - what a surprise... if Lieberman ate a kitten on national tv, the next day you would have three posts about how heroic he was in battling a tiger.
BTW - if you are making one of the talking points of your campaign how you hold hte president accountable, its a bad idea to miss votes that are trying to hold him accountable - regardless of whether you know they are doomed to failure or not. Especially when you were elected 18 years ago running campaign ads about how your opponent missed votes.
And the message he could have sent would have been to the voters.
You would agree if you didn't have so much invested in not agreeing. Or so much invested in you.
ACR -
Who was Lieberman cancelling out by not voting?
Sound familiar?
Before answering the question, Burns attacked Tester's answers and said, “Mr. Tester has taken four different stands on Iraq.”
Seems like someone got the Rove/Lieberman playbook!
The wink normally means someone is kidding. (sigh) Would that it were...
One day, please, address a substantive point.
BUT I'd say its it fair to critisize Joe for missing votes since that was one of the main themes in his campaign against Weicker?
Turfgrrl - this is the part that I hoped you would address:
BTW - if you are making one of the talking points of your campaign how you hold hte president accountable, its a bad idea to miss votes that are trying to hold him accountable - regardless of whether you know they are doomed to failure or not. Especially when you were elected 18 years ago running campaign ads about how your opponent missed votes.
And the message he could have sent would have been to the voters.
You would agree if you didn't have so much invested in not agreeing. Or so much invested in you.
D_R - the second part of that statement seems to be saying that any criticism of the president is a betrayal of the united states. We are at war with Eurasia, we have always been at war with Eurasia.
What scares me about your side is that you seem like you would be comfortable ending partisanship by eliminating one party...
Where was the pearl clutching about partisan bs when a president was impeached for getting a hummer?
You Conservatives and Lieberman Supporters should go to dogfood-for-america blog and read about the instagators that got us to this place and time and how we need to stand up and take a stand against the NedManiacs,Lamontsters and Lamontistas Also No-to-Ned has some good reading as well.
It is nice to have a different Viewpoint(Non-Liberal and Uncensored)to read for a change
Lamont is Left.....Way too Left thats why he is going to lose the election and then we say goodbye to dumpjoe.com and Dogfood for America and all these liberal Icon and Moron sites.
I bet all you Lamontistas will be kissing up to Joe once he wins re-election in November.
I look forward to seeing Keith and Petey kiss up to Lieberman after all the trash they have talked over the last year or so.
Uncle Ned Lamont has "jumped the shark" his campaign is toast.
He hasnt been to Litchfield County in awhile I guess he has tapped the rich people and Liberal Wackos dry for money and support.
Bye bye to Ned, DFA, dumpjoe.com , my left nutmeg and all things bad and Liberal Oriented.
You Liberals are all worthless and weak Now drop and give me 20.
Post a Comment