Guess Which One Was Defending Pelosi’s Trip?: Hint: It wasn’t Lieberman

[cal04]

If you picked w/o the help—Arlen Specter then you are correct. Specter was accurately defending Pelosi's trip to Syria as being her constitutional right and duty, while Joe Lieberman played his usual good role as the Bush mouthpiece condemning her.

video
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/04/08/guess-which-one-was-defending-pelosis-trip/

[ShortnFiery]

1. IF we had a true Fourth Estate (Free and Fair Press) Pelosi's trip would be an NON-issue. n/t

[Demeter]

2. And BushCo Would Never Have Taken Office, Either n/t

[Clark2008]

3. No - it would be an issue - it just wouldn't be played as being

"bad" for the country. It would just be reported straight with commentary reserved for the editorial pages.

[C_U_L8R]

4. OT: What was wiith Lieberman's makeup?

Seemed like there were three or four more extra layers of pancake.
Was he pink for Easter ??

[wtmusic]

5. Scary

Preparing his new Republican look.

[Truthiness Inspector]

6. Maybe he was dressed up as a Peep? n/t

[Cha]

7. See what the repuke voters

in Connecticut put in our Senate to speak bush. Is there ANYWAY to make that big sack of shit repsonsible for the bile that comes out of his suckhole?

[pinto]

8. Yeah, caught that exchange....odd to watch it play out.

Sheesh.

[Behind the Aegis]

9. I thought Specter did a terrific job.

Lieberman stumbled all over his words, barely made a point, and when he did, it wasn't an accurate one.

[cal04]

10. Specter Defends Pelosi, Lieberman Criticizes

ABC News' Lindsay Hamilton reports: Two U.S. senators went against their usual party lines today to defend and criticize Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, D-Cali., over her recent trip to Syria.

Speaking with CNN's Wolf Blitzer, Republican Sen. Arlen Specter, Penn., said the Democratic leader did the right thing by going to Syria and meeting with President Assad, a trip the White House denounced.

"She has a very prominent constitutional role in determining what's going to happen in the Iraq war," he said. "I don't think it is helpful for people in the administration to characterize her as being engaged in, quote 'bad behavior,' unquote."

But Sen. Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., felt very differently.

"I respectfully and strongly disagree with Arlen Specter and with Nancy Pelosi. I believe her visit to Syria was a mistake, that it was bad for the United States of America and good for the Syrians," he said.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2007/04/republican_defe.html

[MissWaverly]

11. I think she saved us from an Easter War

I think that Bush was determined to blow the 15 Brits being held into an excuse for
a war with Iran, Blair told him to butt out and Pelosi went to Syria. He had no
pulpit to launch a war from.

[LeftishBrit]

20. Yes, for once Tony did the right thing

And Pelosi sounds like a really good influence on American, and therefore world, politics. I am so glad that Bush finally got his Opposition in November. It's making a difference to the world, IMO!

[MissWaverly]

22. Yes, I am glad too

At any other time, a president like Bush would be the lamest of lame ducks but now anytime
the Dems try to do anything they are savaged by the press as "disloyal." Disloyal to
what, a president who lead us to war based on failed intelligence which may have been
cooked up by loyal 'Bushie' staffers.

Congrats, on Tony Blair for not letting him let Bush use your Brits as an excuse to
nuke Iran.

[Cameron27]

12. I could really like Spectre, but then again I can't.

His instincts seem to be right, but then he remembers he's a republican and he caves.

He did good this time though.

[mudesi]

13. Wow. He sounds like Tony Snow

For all intents and purposes, I think Lieberman is a Republican.

[Name removed]

15. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lyonn]

32. Agree....

[Cha]

48. lieman is much much further gone than

any republicon..he's a fascist neoCON, whoringwarmongering, bushite.

Sorry for being so redundant but the traitorous asshole boils me blood.

[Tatiana]

14. Specter really gives me whiplash. One day he's a Bush puppet, the next a voice of reason.

While it's good that he's being rational for the moment, I'm not holding my breath for him to join the reality-based community.

[The Count]

45. Specter is a Bush puppet, but not so far up his a* as Joementum

joementum can make everyone look rational by comparison.

[tinfoilinfor2005]

16. Lieberman is concerned about the future of his country.

Specter is concerned about the future of our country. Two different countries, two different concerns. Don't ask me why Lieberman continues to live in the USA. More money to be made here, I guess.

[LeftishBrit]

19. Errr, perhaps because he was born in America like his parents before him?

I don't like Lieberman either (if he was ten years younger, I would have sworn that he and Tony Blair were separated at birth). But even when someone is a nasty person, it doesn't justify being racist about them.

[karlrschneider]

23. His parents were not born in America...they immigrated from Poland.

...

[LeftishBrit]

31. On a quick check with Wikipedia...

'Lieberman was born in Stamford, Connecticut, to Henry Lieberman (April 3, 1915 — January 3, 1986), the son of Jewish immigrants from Poland, and Marcia Manger (November 1, 1914 — June 25, 2005), of Austrian Jewish background.'

So it looks as though his paternal GRANDPARENTS were Polish immigrants, but his father was born in America. Not clear whether his mother was born in America or Austria. Certainly, Lieberman himself was born in America, and has lived there all his life.

[Behind the Aegis]

37. More info for you (and others)

PARENTS
2 Henry Lieberman, b. New York, N. Y., 3 April 1915, d. Stamford, Conn., 3 Jan. 1986 , bur. in the Agudath-Sholom Cemetery in Stamford.
m. ...
3 Marcia Manger, b. ... , Conn., ... 1915

GRANDPARENTS
4 Jacob Lieberman, b. ... , Poland, ... , immigrated in 1904, living in New Haven, Conn., in 1930, grocery store owner
m.
5 Rebecca Segalovich, b. ... , Poland, ... , immigrated in 1906, living in New Haven, Conn., in 1930
6 Joseph Manger, b. Putilla, Bukovina, Austria (now Putyliv, Ivano-Frankivska, Ukraine), 8 April 1878, naturalized in the Superior Court, Bridgeport, Conn., by Naturalization Certificate 634184 issued 30 Sept. 1915, in 1920 he was an expressman for a trucking company, d. Stamford, Conn., 20 May 1923
m. ...
7 Maly "Minnie" Sandhaus, b. Stansvsty, Austria, 1 May 1880, emigrated 1912, d. St. Joseph's Hospital, Stamford, Conn., 3 March 1967

source

[karlrschneider]

39. Yep, my memory was faulty. Thought his father was from Poland.

thanks

[karlrschneider]

38. Okay, I should have double checked...missed a generation.

thanks.

[Behind the Aegis]

42. The "wiki" entry was poorly worded, IMO. n/t

[tinfoilinfor2005]

26. I think you misunderstood my comment, or perhaps I worded it wrong

if it sounded racist. Let me try again: I firmly believe that Joe Lieberman's priority is the country of Israel over the country of the United States of America. He may have been born here, but Israel is the country of his heritage, and apparently he has made a choice as to which country he chooses to defend. Our being in Iraq may be of benefit to Israel, but it is a devastating situation for America.

[Behind the Aegis]

27. Trust me when I say...

...your explanation, didn't help your case!

[tinfoilinfor2005]

30. I don't have a "case".

I'm not a U.S. senator whose decisions make a life and death difference to thousands of americans.

[Behind the Aegis]

34. No, you are just a DU'er...

...relying on age-old anti-Semitic rhetoric. It is one thing to criticize Lieberman for his ignorant stance on the Iraq War, it is quite another to suggest he is more loyal to Israel because he is a Jew! Do you honestly not see the problem with your posts?!

[karlrschneider]

47. That's a pretty weak argument. There are plenty of * Protestants whose actions

indicate more allegiance to Israel than to the USA.

* meaning American Protestants

And Lieberman isn't the only Democrat, either.

[Behind the Aegis]

53. Show them.

I know there are some who by their rhetoric would appear to be more loyal to Israel, but they are not loyal to Israel, they are more loyal to their "rapturous" beliefs, but you point to me where the same is true of Lieberman.

Are you also saying Lieberman isn't the only Democrat (which he is not) more loyal to Israel than the US?

[karlrschneider]

54. I think I will drop this discussion.

Good bye

[Behind the Aegis]

57. I am so disappointed by your posts!

[tinfoilinfor2005]

60. Dear Aegis:

My Latvian friends who are more loyal to Latvia than the country they live in are so because they are ignorant, but they are also Latvian. They wouldn't have a misplaced loyalty to Latvia if they were Chinese. I don't think I am insulting them by calling them Latvians. Why would I be insulting Lieberman by calling him a Jew? He is a Jew. And I think he has a misplaced loyalty to Israel, not because he is a Jew, but because he is an American also, and a public servant to the country that he represents.

I do understand your point, but I don't think you understand mine. I guess I just have to say that if I insulted you, that was not my intention.

[karlrschneider]

40. What 'case'? It's pretty clear where his loyalties lie.

...

[Behind the Aegis]

43. Are you talking about Lieberman?

[LeftishBrit]

44. Yes, To himself, and to the Republicans who helped to elect him.

[LeftishBrit]

35. That is actually even more racist than if you thought he was an immigrant..

as you are questioning his loyalty, and the suitability of his living in the country *of his birth*, on the basis of his heritage, i.e. ethnicity.

Your views remind me rather of those of Norman Tebbit, a retired British Tory politican, who inspires the same affection in British leftists, centrists, and even moderate Conservatives, that Jesse Helms and Rick Santorum inspire in American liberals:

'In 1990 he proposed the "Cricket test", also known as the "Tebbit Test", where he suggested that people from ethnic minorities in Britain should not be considered truly British until they supported the England cricket team, as opposed to the country of their or their ancestors' birth. In August 2005, after the 7 July 2005 London bombings, which were carried out by three young men of Pakistani descent and one of Jamaican descent, Tebbit claimed vindication for these views.'


By the way, I fully agree that the Iraq war is disastrous for America. I also think it's disastrous for Israel. And Britain. And the entire world - most of all, of course, for Iraq. And I cannot stand Lieberman as a person or a politician.

[Behind the Aegis]

24. What an odd thing for someone like you to say.

Considering you are Latvian, and even have a Latvian statement in your sig line (God Bless Latvia - The NATIONAL anthem of Latvia), where do you get off saying that Lieberman, who was born in this country, is concerned about the future of his country, implying Israel? Oh that's right, it's the old, "He's a Jew, he's more loyal to Israel" bullshit!

Lieberman was born in Stamford, Connecticut, to Henry Lieberman (April 3, 1915 — January 3, 1986), the son of Jewish immigrants from Poland, and Marcia Manger (November 1, 1914 — June 25, 2005), of Austrian Jewish background.

source

Connecticut is a state in the New England region of the United States, located in the northeastern part of the country. Southwestern Connecticut is part of the Tri-State Region or New York metropolitan area, which also includes northern New Jersey and southern New York.

source

[tinfoilinfor2005]

28. I know many Latvians who were born here who are more loyal to Latvia

than to, what they consider, their "adopted" country. I tell them that the wall is no longer standing and that they are free to return. I don't care where Lieberman was born, he needs to decide why he thinks it is a good idea for the United States to continue it's involvement in the middle east.

[Behind the Aegis]

29. If this is true...

"I don't care where Lieberman was born, he needs to decide why he thinks it is a good idea for the United States to continue it's involvement in the middle east."...then you need to say that, because all you did was employ an anti-Semitic tactic that "Jews are more loyal to Israel than (insert country)." It is very easy to be against Lieberman's stance on the Iraq War, without resorting to anti-Semitism! I am against his stance.

[KittyWampus]

36. WRONG! DU'ers make the point that LIEBERMAN seems more loyal to what he percieves as good for Israel

and allows such priorities to cloud his judgement.

Not Jews in general, Lieberman.

And there's jolly well a lot of hard evidence to support that.

Besides Lieberman's own words and deeds, there's the NeoCon position that runs in hand in hand with Likud hardline politics.

Interesting that you can't deal with a specific observation about one Senator and insist on pretending a general slur was made or even intended.

Of course we can move on to the topic of American Jews who unquestioningly support NeoCon and Likud policies. And to some extent there is no question that their support of both NeoCon and Likud policies is based on how the US behaves or doesn't behave towards Israel and every other country in the ME.

I am sure there are American Christians who also unquestionably support NeoCons and Likud based on their ME agenda.

jUst because Lieberman is Jewish doesn't mean one can't call him out on his approval of policies that endanger Americans and Middle East people but which benefit the NeoCons and Likud pols.

[Behind the Aegis]

41. BULLSHIT!

BACK IT UP!

"DU'ers make the point that LIEBERMAN seems more loyal to what he percieves as good for Israel and allows such priorities to cloud his judgement."

It is always he seems, not one fucking poster has ever, EVER substansiated that assertion!

So, bring on your "jolly" hard evidence!

[KittyWampus]

46. His insistent support of the NeoCon-Likud agenda is hard evidence. But go ahead and shriek

"anti-semite". Your attempt to shut down that discussion won't work with me.

Edit- the fucking TOPIC OF THIS THREAD proves my point.

Lieberman doesn't want Pelosi or anyone else to help garner a diplomatic solution with Syria or Iran.

Lieberman, and the rest of the NeoCons and Likud pols WANT war and have gone out of their way to make it happen.

And the extremists in Iran, Syria, Palestine, etc are no prizes either.

[Behind the Aegis]

49. That is isn't proof of jack-shit.

That's your argument?! That's WEAK! It isn't even a legitimate argument! What about the other's who support the same agenda? Are they also more loyal to Israel or is it just the Jewish senator? Ever thought that maybe, like all the other fucking war-hawks, his loyalty is to the US and gaining dominance in an area filled with oil and an area where we have very little pull?

[Name removed]

51. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Behind the Aegis]

56. This post and the one you edited don't prove he is more loyal to Israel!

It proves he is not interested in peace with those in the region, as are many of the war-hawks. Surprise, surprise, surprise, the war-hawks in Israel and in AIPAC have the same goals; destabilization of the region, overthrowing of radical regimes, and "spreading democracy." They also all have different reasons for those "goals," much like the UK, also an ally in the region and the US.

[KittyWampus]

59. Yes, every person has different reasons for supporting the war machine. And since Lieberman includes

in his support unquestioning support of Likud/Israeli policies as regards Israel's neighbors, it's fair to suggest a sense of loyalty to Israel is part of that reason.

He certainly doesn't have America's best interests at heart although he may THINK he does.

But my assesment of his motivations are based on what he actually says and does and the actual consequences of his conduct. And his being Jewish is ancillary to that.

Now as a thought problem, what about the Fundie Christians who unthinkingly support Israel's current hardline, Likud policies and the NeoCons?

Are they more loyal to Israel?

Well, their support has something to do with a 'religious' belief in Israel's supposed role in an impending End Time.

So in their case, I'd suggest their loyalties lie elsewheres, other than America. Although they might THINK they're supporting America.

[LeftishBrit]

52. The Neo-Cons are Americans. Not Israelis.

And many Israelis do not support the Likud.

No doubt there are some points of contact between the Neo-Cons and the Likud, because right-wingers tend to hang together. Just as Ronnie and Maggie did - does that mean that Ronnie's loyalty was to Britain rather than America? That doesn't mean that Neo-Con policy is directly controlled by the Likud. If it were, then how can one explain such original Neo-Cons as Henry Jackson and Jeane Kirkpatrick, who were not Jewish or linked to Israel in any way? And who pursued their policies at times when the Likud was not in power, or even part of a coalition in power, in Israel (there have been plenty of times when the Labour Party were in power in Israel)? Supporting the Israeli Right is not loyalty to Israel, any more than supporting Republicans is loyalty to America.

How, for that matter, do you explain the Neo-Cons in the highest positions of power at the moment: Bush, Cheney, Rice, Gonzalez, Gates, Rummy till recently, etc.? Are they all loyal to Israel? How do you explain the loyalty - until recently, unswerving loyalty - to Bush and the Neo-Con view, of Blair, John Reid, and many other supposedly 'Labour' politicians in Britain, almost none of whom have been linked to Israel in any way (or even Jewish!)

[KittyWampus]

55. No shit many Israelis don't support Likud. And to pretend that there are people whose

support of NeoCon policies has NOTHING to do with how that impacts Israel ls ludicrous.

And there is nothing anti-Semitic in pointing that out because I said PEOPLE not Jews.

There are some Fundies Christians who'd like to see Muslim countries wiped off the map and Israel the only one left standing.

[karlrschneider]

50. IBTL here...you are exactly right.

...

[HCE SuiGeneris]

17. I am still dumbstruck that CT elected this disgusting man. n/t

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[caligirl]

21. The moment the camera panned to Lieperman hubby left the room, afraid i was going to be yelling. n/t

[ComerPerro]

25. Well, he is the Lieberman of the GOP

[LynnTheDem]

33. Funny thing tho, how lieberman hasn't spoken out against the Republics

who went to Syria before & after Nancy, nor the 3 who are going this week.

Real funny, that...

[Jack Rabbit]

58. Thank you for posting

I was hoping to see that sometime today.

It continues to upset me no end that the former vice presidential candidate for the Democratic Party gives this den of liars, thieves and war criminals political cover with the fiction that, simply because he supports this failed war and the attendant failed policies, support for Bush is bipartisan.

It's some Republicans and Lieberman, who was rejected by Democratic voters in Connecticut precisely because of his support for that failed war and those failed policies.

If Senator Specter's remarks are any indication, along with Senator Hagel's, opposition to the Bush foreign policy is now bipartisan.