Tuesday, December 12, 2006

Lieberman Switches Party Affiliation

So says Tony Snow in the White House Daily Press Briefing:

Q Okay. Republican Senator Gordon Smith, last week, said, "Our soldiers patrolling the same streets in the same way, being blown up by the same bombs day after day, it's absurd. It may even be criminal," and that he can no longer support this. What is your reaction to a Republican senator saying that what's going on right now in Iraq is criminal?

MR. SNOW: Well, we dispute the "criminal" part, obviously, and at the same time, understand the senator's concern. We share the concern about not doing well enough fast enough. But do not assume that people are simply being blown up. They are on missions. And as General Chiarelli said last week, "There's not an engagement our people have lost, but it is still important to continue the work of building greater capability and capacity on the part of the Iraqi government and helping them out."

People on both sides are going to have disagreements, much as Joe Lieberman, formerly a Democrat, apparently run out of his party for disagreeing with what was seen as orthodoxy at that time, but Gordon --
[emphasis mine]

Um, Tony? I think you were supposed to let him announce it before you allude to it in your briefings...

Also, I know we have done this a few times before, but Senator Lieberman wasn't "run out" of the party for "disagreeing" with "orthodoxy."

He made some "constituents" unhappy with his position on an issue important to them, an "opponent" ran against him in a "primary election" and won. Here in Connecticut, we call it "democracy." You can look it up.

Hat tip to BarbinMD.


Gabe said...

Presumably, his opponent "had the audacity to run against" him!
[Quote, as yet, unsourced]

Anonymous said...

Doesn't Lieberman plan to join CFL (CT for Lieberman party)and work with Professor Orman for the good of all?

BrassBoy said...

he made a small minority of his constituents unhappy. They proceeded to run him out of the party by defeating him in a primary.

Once the election was opened up to all of his constituents (i.e. the general election), he was re-elected.

Anonymous said...

I'm sure it was just him mispeaking and refering to him being tech an indi i doubt he meant he is going to be a republican now.

Anonymous said...

Holy Joe is going to save the world.

Peace on earth.

Gabe said...

BrassBoy, if it was just a small minority he would not have lost the primary. Especially since, even though the primary was in August, it was the highest primary turnout in Connecticut history.

And defeating someone in a primary election is not running them out of the party - if it is, there alot of unsuccessful primary candidates who have been run out of both parties.

TrueBlueCT said...

While we are snarking away, did anyone else here about the big transportation proposal that Lieberman and Dodd will be announcing in January? Finally Fairfield County will be getting its own "Big Dig"!

It's only fair, what after Fairfield-ites have sent so many tax dollars to both D.C. and Hartford, year after year.

Anyway, this was the price that Democrats paid to keep Joe in the Party. So hats off to both Lieberman, and Lamont for this playing out so well. Hundreds of thousands of Nutmeggers will be singing "Hallelujah" come January!

Sean said...

You are putting words in Snow's mouth. He didn't say Lieberman switched parties, as you did. He said Lieberman is no longer in the Democratic Party, which is technically true.

Anonymous said...

Hey, no one ran Lieberman out of the party. If I remember correctly, Henry Lowendorf went to Sharon Ferrucci, the New Haven Registrar of Voters, and did try to have Lieberman removed from the voter roles. Sharon said "no, Joe is still a Democrat", and 95% of the Lamont crowd had no problem with that decision.

Yes, we were disappointed that Joe put himself before the collective will of the Party. But the Party has never asked Lieberman to leave. (despite his threats to do so.)

Just setting the record straight.

Anonymous said...

"BrassBoy, if it was just a small minority he would not have lost the primary."

7.9% of the states registered voters.

Sounds pretty small to me.

Anonymous said...

lets be real- the progressive element of the D party in CT have no use for the moderate D team ... if you are not 100% you are not good enough .. there are thousands of disenfranchised D's that want to be "D's" but have no home -- that's why the Independents are the biggest growing party in CT..... Nancy D take note - you need to bring home the thousands of us - we want to be "Ds" but we are not accepted.... what's wrong with this picture?

If you ( the D state party) want to take back the 2nd floor (governor's ofice) find PLACE FOR US MODERATES...... It's good for CT its good for the D's.

TrueBlueCT said...


You are so not right. Campaign Finance Reform and Civil Unions are so not scary that even Rell embraced them.

Decry CT "liberals" all you want. But you can't site any specifics. Sure we are against stupid, elective, potentially unwinnable wars, (As in the Iraq Debacle!), plus we don't like it when average Americans are sold out to corporatec quick-profits agendas...

You have no argument against Democrats. Did you fail to notice that our message won veto proof majorities in both the Senate, and the Statehouse?

But that's right. The overwhelming number of CT Democrats who voted for a Democratic legislature are actually left-wing fringe-nuts.