I think Roger Moore was right when he described Lieberman as “a moderate Republican” in the Democratic party.
Democrats don’t particularly like moderate Republicans, and today’s Republicans can’t stand them.
I really don’t care that he’s Jewish. I DO care that he’s deeply religious, and wants to involve religion in everyone’s life.
Being charismatic and confident is NOT good enough for me. I want to vote for a candidate who I feel will represent me. As an atheist and a liberal, I don’t think that JL would represent me well.
When did James Bond become so involved in American politics?
Lynn articulates my feelings well. I don’t want to elect any overtly religious candidate who loudly discusses his morals. I don’t care if that religion is Christianity, Judaism, Islam, or Rastafarianism. Besides which, Lieberman comes off as a Republican, not a Democrat.
He’s probably a fine man personally, but I don’t want him as president.
Why is he even a member of the Democratic party, then?
Free Nachos at the Friday night get-togethers?
(No, I wouldn’t vote for Lieberman either. He’s George W. Bush with a different paint job. 
)
Let me be perfectly clear about this. There is nothing inherently wrong with a Jewish president. OTOH, to elect a Jewish president right now would create a shitstorm of immense proportions in the ME. It would inflame the Europeans to critical mass, while proving the neo-Nazi “Christians” and Islamists (strange bedfellows) to be “right” – in their own minds.
Sadly, that’s the way I think most people think about it subconsciously. More sadly, they are right.
On the rare occasions I’ve heard people mention Lieberman they tend to think he’s a reasonable guy that can’t win in the Democratic party, one, or the general election, two. Getting them to explain why is a bit more tricky. Somehow, with qualifications, his Jewishness always comes up.
He probably should switch parties. The Republicans are doing a much better job of grabbing the center. Religion, despite the lack of grotesque 10 Commandment “Golden Calves” in front of every courthouse, is booming in the US right now. I’m not particularly happy about religion in politics, but there you have it. Similarly, in France for example, the Muslims have been doing a good job of pushing for laws to tangentally uphold sharia. It’s not just here.
Me: throw all the prosthelytizing busybodys back in church, synogogue, temple, or mosques where they belong.
The Democrats keep litmus testing moderates out of the party better than the Republicans – who are doing a pretty good job of it themselves.
How about two more parties? One Democratic Party without all the revolutionary Communist hate-America claptrap. They can all go Green, let’s say. Then, we need a Republican Party without the big dose of fundmentalist Christianity.
Cause hes a republican who supports censorship, government sponsored religion and the war? :rolleyes:
We don’t fo that, Dude. 
But Lieberman does. In fact, a number of Jewish Democrats I know find his very public religiosity off-putting because like the plant-dude says, it’s not really in keeping Judaism.
Regarding the Middle East, I would say Lieberman is actually to the RIGHT of Bush on the relevant issues. Bush has at least paid lip service to the two-state solution, said Sharon should give up the settlements, and opposed the wall-building (I think). I’m not aware of Lieberman doing any of that stuff.
If you take the war-mongering, wildlife sanctuary-drilling, deficit-spending, big-corporation-loving Republicans with you, I’ll gladly keep the fundamentalist Christian Republicans with me. Can we work something out?
You’re right, of course. I obviously meant that other Moore. The guy who wrote Roger And Me about the CEO of General Motors. It was Roger wasn’t it? Or am I just stuck on that name for some mysterious reason.
A Rasta president would certainly change the marijuana laws!
War “mongering” – I’m not really sure what that means. We did overthrow the Taliban and capture Saddam. I’m one of those people that does not consider a brutal regime that kills hundreds of thousands of its own citizens while starting multiple wars “peace”. Especially when the first war was never finished and the peace terms were not complied with.
During the Versailles Treaty the French disassembled a factory in the Ruhr Valley of Germany and sent it to France. That was “peace” – that directly led to war. Similarly, not finishing off Saddam when we had the chance directly and inevitably led to this war.
The UN sanctions regime, and the oil-money-for-French-banks program, along with Saddam’s use of food as a weapon (the biggest factor) were killing more people than the freaking war did by a factor of 100.
War isn’t the worst thing that can happen in our world. It should be, but it’s not.
“wildlife sancutary drilling” I can’t comment on that. Well, I can say one thing. The native people that live up there would really like to drill a few wells in a very small area so they can get rich. What, you don’t want dark-skinned people to get rich? Just kidding.
“Deficit-spending” You got that right. Bush is big-spending liberal.
How the Democrats plan on building the welfare state without even more spending is a mystery to logical people everywhere. The Ds mostly cut defense spending. That’s a big chunk of the budget, granted. OTOH, entitlements are bigger and grow automatically. The Democrats have never met a large bureaucracy that didn’t need more money, except the Pentagon.
“Big-corporation-loving” The world would be better off without big corporations? Anyone know a horse I can buy cheap? Wood stove?
A “corporation” is just a business form with limited liability to the shareholders and officers. A “partnership” is also a business form. I always wonder why corporations get the grief. The private ownership of public corporations (stocks) is probably one of the greatest advances in wealth distribution ever invented. Thanks to corporations what Marx said about ownership turns out to be total crap. If you worked for Enron, sorry.
As for fundamentalist Christianity. I’m against turning our courthouses into cathedrals, forcing kids to pray in schools, totally banning abortion, or not allowing gays to get a piece of paper that functions as some kind of “marriage”.
Back to Lieberman,
Bottom Line: He sounds too much like Porky Pig. “Be vewy, vewy quiet.”
Just because big corporations play a useful role in the modern world doesn’t mean they are flawless. And the big corporations of the world certainly don’t need government welfare to help them out. They’re big enough and rich enough to stand on their own feet.
Lieberman hates violent video games. How can I trust him to command the U.S. armed forces when he doesn’t even have the moxie for Grand Theft Auto?
I couldn’t bring myself to vote for such a man.
Wow, looks like Beagle is trying out for the Jay Leno show!
What world do you live in Beagle? In my world, there is one center party that has everyone from the small left wing through the center right and another party that has the center right through the far right (with the far right dominating). What you seem to be proposing in your over-the-top rhetoric is that we need to move the centrist party to the center right.
Just out of curiosity, have you travelled much outside the U.S?
Everything in moderation, my friend. What we are complaining about is not the existence of corporations but the stranglehold they have over our political system at the moment.
BTW, you might want to check on some actual statistics of how wealth distribution has evolved in the U.S. over the past 25 years or so.
I think he looks more like Yoda