SAY IT AIN'T SO! Boxer going to Ct to stump for Libermann??????

[debbierlus]

Barbara, what on earth are you doing????????????????????????

http://www.firedoglake.com/2006/07/05/heelllppp/

[LaurenG]

1. Does it ever seem like these people have a different agenda than we do?

Do they have some information that we don't have? Some of the decisions they make are OFF THE HOOK!

spelling

[debbierlus]

3. I have no idea why Boxer would do this....

Why would she risk her reputation to help HIM? Boxer has been a responsible Senator. Why would she try to help a DINO Bush azz licker stay in office?

Stay out of it, Barbara.

[no_hypocrisy]

10. It's a gratuitious gesture. Backing up a colleague for the

primary. This doesn't mean that she'll go with Joe if he goes "indy".

[leftchick]

2. that will unite the Democratic party!

NOT! :grr:

[Cassandra]

4. I have heard that that came out of Lieberman's office...

not Boxer's. Let's calm down and find out.

[skipos]

5. You should call her and tell her it bothers you

If she gets enough calls she might not do it. There are phone numbers in this thread...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1579849&mesg_id=1579849

[bdamomma]

6. start calling her office

202-224-3553

[Karenca]

7. CALL ... nt

[Warpy]

8. They are friends even though they don't share all political

views. I'd expect her to campaign for him. Plus, he's quite powerful, having been in the Senate long enough to rise in the hierarchy. That's the main reason the party wants to keep him there. Lamont will be starting at the bottom.

If she campaigns for him after he LOSES the primary, that's a whole different animal and I'll be bagging her with the rest of you.

[debbierlus]

11. It isn't okay.

Period.

[man4allcats]

17. Agreed.

There is far and away too much nonsense that goes on in Washington every single day. The fact that it does go on regularly doesn't make it acceptable. Gratuitous or not, it is wrong, and Senator Boxer, for whom I have the greatest respect, should not allow herself to be a party to any of it, especially not campaigning for Lieberman.

[WI_DEM]

9. It's true, but most of his senate collegues whether they are

progressives or moderates tend to support him. But the question is will they support him if he loses the primary? That is the real issue. So far, several have said "No" they will support the winner.

[terip64]

12. My mom told me that yesterday. She's in CT and involved in local politcs.

She wants Lieberman to win. She is 75 and listens to AAR so she knows the story. She prefers Big Ed which makes me sick, but she listens. Most people I know in CT don't have a clue as to what is going on politically. She keeps telling me that Lamont is rich and from Greenwich, which is a big deal to some people in CT. The Greenwich, Stamford, Fairfield County area is considered to be NY to many CT people.

I think some people in CT want Lieberman's place at the table. He does get things done for the them and CT's economy is dependent on the sub base and Sikorsky, and Lieberman has come through for them.

I try to explain to her why we are so upset with Lieberman and she understands, but she still is working for him.

She brought up to me yesterday that Boxer was coming to support him. I think everyone wants this dem seat to be a sure thing and if Joe wins the primary it is.

[danalytical]

13. Excuse me?

"Most people I know in CT don't have a clue as to what is going on politically".

Says who? You?

CT is rated top of the class in education, we are always in the top 5 ratings, even scoring first a few years back. People know politics and pay attention around here. But CT has an old guard of fiscal conservatives and puritanical holdovers, and yet we are still very liberal.

CT knows Joe is a DINO, but he does bring home the bacon, and that counts for something. He is a solid Democrat on most issues, it's his Bush ass kissing and Iraq war stand that really irks us.

"She keeps telling me that Lamont is rich and from Greenwich, which is a big deal to some people in CT. The Greenwich, Stamford, Fairfield County area is considered to be NY to many CT people."

Yes it does indeed bother many people. Greenwhich CT is one of the richest areas in the United States. It's like having someone from Santa Barbara representing people from San Jose or Sacramento. It isn't necessarily bad that Lamont is a wealthy man, but if you know the area you might be skeptical about a super rich Greenwhich man claiming to be a working mans hero. CT has an unbalanced population, we have Ned Lamont's and we have the rest of the state.

"I think some people in CT want Lieberman's place at the table. He does get things done for the them and CT's economy is dependent on the sub base and Sikorsky, and Lieberman has come through for them."

This is all too true. Holy Joe has always been a bread winner for the state. It's what he does best. His politics suck, and it drives people like me crazy. I WANT to like Joe, he does work very hard for CT, but I can't get over his Republican lite stand on core issues. It really pisses me off. I've written to him and called a few times with pretty much 0 feedback. Which tells me he isn't listening to CT voters.

All those things combined is why I'm supporting Lamont. But I am not happy about it. My choices are a DINO or a silver spoon Greenwhich millionair who knows nothing about real life in CT. The truth is Lieberman might actually be a better rep for the working man, even if I agree more with Ned's politics.

[terip64]

16. Excuse you. Do you know the people that I know in CT?

I happen to be from the New Haven area originally and almost all the people I know don't know anything about politics. I come from a big Italian family and they just plain don't pay attention. My mother didn't even know about the debate last night and she follows the news. She went to bingo at the IA and said she would watch the replay later on C-Span. Her seven sisters who were at bingo with her don't even know what C-Span is. They think that I am a freak because I follow the news. What can I tell you? That's the fact.

If I were still in CT I would be voting for Lamont.

I agree with everything you just said.

Everything.

Except maybe the education thing, I use to teach in CT and in that area things are not what they used to be, thank you George W Bush.

So simmer down, friend, we are on the same side.

[danalytical]

22. voter turnout in 2004

http://www.eagleton.rutgers.edu/News-Research/NewVoters/VotingBehavior.html

Check out the voter turnout table. 2nd table down the page. You will notice that CT comes in near the top in it's percentages. 75% of voting age population is registered, and 77.9% of them voted. That's 3rd in the nation.

It's true that's only 58.4% of elgible voters, but that number is still 11th out of all 50 states.

[terip64]

23. Yes, and my whole family will vote but that doesn't mean that they

know what they are voting for or even who at times. They think they know and who knows, maybe they know all they want to know. But they vote, all of them.

Believe me, I am in MI now and I miss CT politics. This state is pretty red once you get west of Ann Arbor, which is where I am.

Conservative or liberal in CT people pretty much mind their business and don't worry too much about what their neighbors are doing especially if they take care of their lawn, another Italian thing I think. Anyway, MI is different and I miss the general liberal feel of CT.

For example, during the 2004 election we had a billboard in MI that read

Bush Cheney
One nation under God.

That would never fly out east and it still enrages me when I think of it!

My point, if there is one, is that I appreciate that CT is well educated and participates in the voting process but that doesn't mean that everyone knows everything that is going on or that they want to.

[LynneSin]

20. What we (non-CT residents) want and what Connecticutians want

are two different things. We can't assume that every democratic voter in the world spends their time online reading the forums and being uptodate on all the issues. We also can't assume that everyone in Connecticut has the same concerns that we have.

[Mike Nelson]

14. Really DUMB move...

I'll accept it now, but is she supports him if/when he LOSES, she's really in trouble.

[LynneSin]

21. Dumb move? Oh please, get over it

I consider all the good work that Barbara Boxer has done for us including speaking up at the nomination process for Bush in 2004 so there could be a debate on the voting flaws (didn't get us anywhere but at least she was brave enough to do it) and THIS is how we treat her.

I find it disgusting that anyone would dare be insultive to one of the most progressive, liberal democrats who has been fighting hard to end this war but just happens to also want to stump for someone that she probably is friends with from working with him for 12 years.

I have no qualms with any democratic politician wanting to support Lieberman in the primaries because it is their right to do so. (I do have qualms after the primary is overwith and I would bitch about any democrat supporting someone outside of the party).

Here's a concept we haven't considered. Perhaps the reason that democratic senators are supporting Lieberman now in the primaries is because should Lieberman win the overall election whether as a democrat (or god forbid an independant), we still need Lieberman to side with us when it comes to the majority so we can get those committee seats.

I would love to see Lieberman replaced by Lamont but no matter WHO wins this election in Connecticut I want to see a democrat who will help us get the majority. And if it's Lieberman we need that vote because for us to get Senate Majority it'll be a slim slim margin. And personally, I think the democratic senators, including Boxer, are playing it smart because if we do regain the majority the do NOT want to lose it because Lieberman crossed over and sided with the Republicans. Because for everything that pisses us off about Lieberman we need him for that crucical balance. Because democratic majority means that people like Boxer, Kennedy, Kerry, LEahy, Feingold and other progressive democrats in Majority Chair seats

[seabeyond]

15. hse represents us well. she likes lieberman and supports him

her right to chose

[LynneSin]

18. And??

She's worked with him for the past 12+ years and probably considers him a friend.

As long as Babs supports the democratic nominee in the end, that's all that counts

[October]

19. Atrios got me to thinking...

This is from Atrios:
http://www.atrios.blogspot.com/

Bad Jews

Woah, this is pretty awful:
http://lamontblog.blogspot.com/2006/07/john-droney-scolds-jews-for-supporting.html

"I find the behavior of a large segment of the Jewish community to be reprehensible and outrageous," said John Droney, a former chairman of the state party who is advising Lieberman to run as an independent. "When he's in trouble like this, they all ought to rally to him. It's too bad that you have to listen to an Irish-American to realize that you've got to support your own home cooking."



I'm just wondering...is Boxer being pressured because she's Jewish? Is she Jewish?

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

24. Politics, and politicians, as usual.

The Sacred Seat at the trough is inviolable.

[BigBearJohn]

25. What the Hell Is Barbara Boxer Thinking?

From the run up to Shock and Awe to last month's flurry of thrust-and-parry resolutions on Iraq, the junior senator from California has been one of the most consistent and vocal critics of the war. She voted no on the war in 2002 and co-sponsored the latest Kerry bill calling for our troops to be withdrawn by July 2007.
And she was one of only six Democrats to stand against the ambush vote orchestrated by Mitch McConnell and Bill Frist.

So what is she doing heading up to Connecticut to stump for pro-war Joe Lieberman and against his anti-war challenger Ned Lamont?

After all, Tailgunner Joe isn't just one of the staunchest supporters of the war, he's repeatedly and steadfastly spoken out against those who oppose it.

"Retreat and defeat," he said in speaking against the Kerry and Levin withdrawal plans on the floor of the Senate, "would be terrible for the safety and security of the American people." Indeed he was one of only six Democrats to vote against the withdrawal-lite Levin amendment.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/what-the-hell-is-barbara-_b_24516.html