Why Joe Lieberman should bugger off

We should certainly tell Lieberman to quit the race–but not because his
presence on the ticket will deliver the election to the Busheviks. Formerly
his ticket-splitting antics could, of course, have just that mischievous effect.
Today, however, that is not the major danger posed by such independent or
third-party operations.
The Busheviks today routinely steal elections when and where they want to
and can pull it off, whether their opponents are, or are not, stuck in three-way
races. A three-way race is better for them, not because that makes it likelier
for them to win the necessary votes: because the Busheviks don’t operate
by winning votes. They’d rather have a three-way race because that sort of
contest makes it easier for them to represent their “victory” as legimitate.
In other words, it gives them excellent cover for their anti-democratic
operations, which the Establishment (the press, the national Democrats)
would rather not perceive, preferring, lazily, to interpret the official
outcome, however dubious, as a simple consequence of what “the spoiler” did.
Take Ralph Nader’s infamous participation in the Florida race six years ago–
an act of interference noted in the following petition. It’s probably the case that
Nader took some votes away from Gore; and it is also true that Nader’s votes,
if all of them had gone to Gore, would have offset Bush/Cheney’s winning
But it is not true that Bush/Cheney surely would have been defeated if the
controversial Nader hadn’t run. If you’ll recall, the Bush machine kept coming
up with ever more Bush/Cheney votes throughout the stand-off in 2000, and
also kept on mounting challenges to ever more pro-Democratic ballots. If
you think that the Bush machine did not intend to “win” in Florida under
any circumstances, you weren’t paying very close attention. And if you
find yourself, in retrospect, detesting Nader more than you distrust the
Bush machine, you should look deep within, and ask yourself if you believe
more fiercely in the Democratic Party than in US democracy itself.
In any case, “Sore Loserman” should quit the race ASAP, so that the
Bush machine will have that much more difficult a time concocting a
“defeat” for Ned Lamont. And if the senator stays in, it will amount to
one more big wet kiss on Bush’s cheek.
Dear Friend,

On Tuesday, the message sent by Connecticut voters was loud and
clear. They want change, and they want Ned Lamont to represent
them in the U.S. Senate, voting for Ned by a 52%-48% margin over
Senator Joe Lieberman in the Democratic primary.

Unfortunately, Joe Lieberman began collecting petition
signatures to run as an Independent several weeks ago while
concurrently running in the Democratic primary. In short, he
wanted to have his cake and eat it too.

In 2000, the presence of a third party candidate, Ralph Nader,
no doubt played a role in the defeat of Vice President Gore and
Joe Lieberman. Now Joe Lieberman is risking our party’s claim on
his Senate seat by running as a third party candidate himself.
Recent news reports detail the GOP’s interest in supporting just
such an effort. It’s time to draw a line.

As Democrats, Wes Clark and I have committed ourselves to
supporting the Democratic nominee for the US Senate in
Connecticut and I ask you to do likewise. Because too much is at
stake with our troubles abroad and at home, we cannot play games
this Election Day.

Please join Wes Clark and me in urging Senator Lieberman to drop
his bid for the Senate as an Independent and endorse the duly
nominated Democrat.

Forward Joe Lieberman an email here:

0 thoughts on “Why Joe Lieberman should bugger off”

  1. So true, he has done enough damage. He knows the party played by the rules, stood by the incumbent through the primary race. Now he should respect the protocol and step aside. There seems no honor or quality in statesmanship these days, it is surly a loss for the nation on the whole. His constituency has spoken, his political career has ended, please step down with a bit of dignity.

  2. I don’t think it’s your job to tell Joe to quit or call him names. The voters themselves will tell Joe everything he needs to know. It’s the voters right to choose from as wide a variety of choices as possible. He’s been a senator for a long time and many people might like to keep him on the job. It’s what they want, not what you want, that counts

  3. The voters have spoken, and it appears they are reminding Mr. Liebermann who he works for first and foremost. The elites on both sides of the aisle should take note. Mr. Lieberman is in the realm of public forum and capacity that goes well beyond the state of Connecticut. Certainly he represents that constituency on a primary basis, but he also represents Democrats all across the nation. You are correct it is not my job as participant of representative democracy, but my duty to speak out on this issue. I have been a life long registered voting Democrat, an issue orientated volunteer and a financial donator to the party locally and nationally. So as far as I am concerned next to my duty it is my right to tell Mr. Lieberman to do the right thing and step aside.

    Mr. Lieberman played on a board where the engagement concerning rules, commitment and party protocol are to be considered. Mr. Lieberman went into this primary with full support of most top ranking Democratic leadership, even Bill Clinton who Mr. Lieberman turned on in 1998. He has had financial support from this party in his past general election bids and typically enjoyed full party support up to now. The leadership have expressed their wishes now that he has lost the primary, they expect him to step down. Instead, Joe has slapped them in the face and has shown contempt rather then appreciation for their loyal attempt to preserve his seat. If you are blind or indifferent to these facts or condition, all I can say is you need to take it to the Republican party, as that is where this kind of behavior and contempt reside.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *