WilliamPitt

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Fri Nov-09-07 02:46 PM
Original message

I know the word "Douchebag" isn't considered appropriate by some here, but...

...when the bag fits:

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/11/09/lieberman-calls-liberal-democratic-base-paranoid/index.html?hp

Lieberman Calls Liberal Democratic Base �Paranoid�
By Kate Phillips

In remarks yesterday, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman criticized the Democratic presidential candidates for their adherence to the views of the �politically paranoid, hyper-partisan� liberal base of the Democratic party, saying that allegiance could harm the eventual nominee�s chances of gaining entry to the White House.

The Financial Times termed the speech, given at a Center for Politics and Foreign Relations/Financial Times breakfast at The Johns Hopkins University Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, the most critical he�s given in the year since he lost the Democratic primary in Connecticut and then successfully won re-election as an independent.

In the speech, Senator Lieberman referred to his primary loss, and denounced the anti-war base of the Democratic party that worked hard to defeat him last year. Despite the fact that he overcame that opposition and won re-election, leading Democrats and many of the presidential candidates, consider the 2006 election results � which gave Democrats majorities in the House and Senate � a mandate against the Iraq war.

(snip)

The senator, who has been a stalwart supporter of President Bush�s troop buildup in Iraq and who has voted with Republicans on several measures pertaining to that policy, then offered up his view of what�s happening on the campaign trail in relation to his sponsorship of the Kyl-Lieberman amendment on Iran. Approved in a vote of 76-22, the amendment, which Democratic front-runner Senator Hillary Clinton has been criticized for supporting, called for the Bush administration to designate Iran�s Revolutionary Guard as a terrorist organization and to impose economic sanctions on it.

Mr. Lieberman called opposition to the amendment, �a case study in the distrust and partisan polarization that now poisons our body politic on even the most sensitive issues of national security.� He then assessed how Democratic officials have been swayed by anti-war forces within the party:

First, several left-wing blogs seized upon the Kyl-Lieberman amendment, offering wild conspiracy theories about how it could be used to authorize the use of military force against Iran. These were absurd arguments. The text of our amendment contained nothing�nothing�that could be construed as a green light for an attack on Iran. To claim that it did was an act of delusion or deception.

On the contrary, by calling for tougher sanctions on Iran, the intention of our amendment was to offer an alternative to war. Nonetheless, the conspiracy theories started to spread. Although the Senate passed our amendment, 76-22, several Democrats, including some of the Democratic presidential candidates, soon began attacking it � and Senator Clinton, who voted for the amendment. In fact, some of the very same Democrats who had cosponsored the legislation in the spring, urging the designation of the IRGC, began denouncing our amendment for doing the exact same thing.

And just one further passage, before Senator Lieberman concluded that people should consider themselves �independent Democrats or independent Republicans:�

I understand that President Bush is a divisive figure. I recognize the distrust that many Americans feel toward his administration. I recognize the anger and outrage that exists out there about the war in Iraq. But there is something profoundly wrong�something that should trouble all of us�when we have elected Democratic officials who seem more worried about how the Bush administration might respond to Iran�s murder of our troops, than about the fact that Iran is murdering our troops.

There is likewise something profoundly wrong when we see candidates who are willing to pander to this politically paranoid, hyper-partisan sentiment in the Democratic base�even if it sends a message of weakness and division to the Iranian regime.

...more...

Doooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooosh.

(sorry)

I know the word "Douchebag" isn't considered appropriate by some here, but...

DOUCHEBAG