Me...Praising a democrat...Oh...It's Joe again!
Okay, you wanna know whats going on in Iraq, take it from one of the only representatives to GO to Iraq. Since apperently what the troops on the ground think doesn't matter to someone because they don't see the big picture, here is a rep that sees the big picture and will actually get off his fat drunk ass to see what is really going on instead of just mindlessly droning on that the War is failed (cough...Ted Kennedy...cough...Barbara Boxer...cough...Joe Biden...cough...). Everyone enjoy one of the only democrats that i can stand to hear speak. Joe Lieberman reminds me of an old style democrat. What we are looking at here is a democrat from the same mold as a Skip Jackson from the pre-Vietnam era. You know before the democratic party became so concerned with special interests such as tree hugging, abortion, welfare, homosexuality, and other specialized projects and was actually focused on issues that matter to the whole country and would be of national importance. I don't agree with Joe on alot of stuff, he is still a liberal after all and I, obviously, am not. But Joe actually has some credibility because he offers solutions to problems and is in touch with national security being more important than petty politics or making being in power the most important thing. He "gets it." Oh yeah, love the money quote up top.
Joe Lieberman Speaks
Joe Lieberman Speaks
posted by Maddawg at 11/29/2005 11:54:00 AM
2 Comments:
Yeah, because little things like privacy and equal rights are ONLY beneficial to the people that fight for them, and NOT the whole country.
But somehow, just because Joe Lieberman actually agrees with you on one issue, he gains "credibility," while the rest of the Democrats remain un-credible. And WE'RE the ones that are being partisan. Whatever.
That said, there aren't many of us progressives who think there should be a stone-cold withdrawl (that "coward" John Murtha excluded - and that's another thing. How come when a Democrat questions a soldier or vet - NOT EVEN SO MUCH AS CALLING THEM A NAME such as coward - he's disrespecting the uniform and all soldiers and this and that bullshit, but when some stupid freshman cunt Congressman calls an UNQUESTIONED, pro-military, HIGHLY-HONORED former Marine - y'know, the REAL men, Jim - it's all fine and dandy? Partisan-much?). And it's incredibly ignorant to insist that that's our position. It's almost as retarded as the conservative argument of "You're either for the war or your against the troops." Why don't you stop writing about what the extreme flank of our party is saying and start writing about the MAJORITY of our party's views. It'd be like if I said all conservatives want to kill or enslave everybody that's not white and rich and Christian because that's what their extreme wants to do. Oh wait, that IS the Republican model. Nevermind.
I don't think i ever said that privacy was only important to those that fought for it. Same for equal rights.
And yes Joe has credibility. Joe doesn't change his position on the war 2 years later by claiming that he has bad intelligence compard to the rest of the world (see my earlier post on how almost none of the Senators that have been bitching about getting less intelligence than the president actually READ the NIE that was specifically asked for). Joe has been on the ground in Iraq and talked to the top brass, field commanders, and the actual soldiers. He will give credit where its due and criticism when its due. He also seems to have a clue as to how important what is going on is to our national security. Even if you don't agree we should be there in the first place, or that Iraq will become more democratic, its still very important in the stratigic if not tactical sense. So yeah, Joe has some credibility because he is not playing politics with our national security.
The whole point you were trying to make about a total immediate withdraw is silly because I never mention it. Nope didn't say it once. Not even accusing the democrats of saying it either.
Now about John Murtha, I never have said a single bad word about John Murtha. I tend to think that he is an American hero for his war service. I know about the comments made by the Republican you mention but I have never endorsed them, i think they are retarded when he made them and still do. I am not happy with how the media has characterized his words because he has been saying for the past 2 years that he favors a very quick withdraw if the number of troops cannot be close to tripled. Well everyone knows that is not a practical reality so he essentially has been saying the same thing for 2 years. Don't agree with him but at least he is consistant. So i don't the "y'know, the REAL men, Jim - it's all fine and dandy?" comment. Who are you contrasting him with? Is it me, Joe Lieberman, the president? You don't make that clear at all because i have never even thought to say that John Murtha isn't a REAL man.
On writing about the flank, here is the problem. The people in the democratic party that get the most face time seems to be the flank. Joe Biden is a leading contender for the democratic nomine for president. Ted Kennedy makes many of the speechs that are intended to be the democratic partie's rebuttal to speechs from the president. I would write about a democrat who is more moderate but they don't seem to be saying anything most of the time. I simply write about the people that right now are the face of the party. Oh yeah, and i am writing about Joe Lieberman, who is not really on the flank of the party. And i just mentioned John Murtha, also not on the flank.
The problem is that many of the people that are right wing extremists are not elected officals. While many of the left wing are. The two people most often on the right making asses of themselves are Rush and Pat Robertson. Neither holds and office, or i think ever really has. Pat Robertson tried to run for President and didn't get close to getting as many votes as Nader. Now if these people were elected and supported by the RNC, that would be something.
Like what MAJORITY party view should i write about? Am i missing one besides BUSH LIED? Or perhaps i should write another article on Mary Mapes's crap about Bush cheating to get into the ANG, the story that according to many democrats when it came out said was very troubling and needed to be highly looked into.
Post a Comment
<< Home