Democrats are losing their bowels for sure with this one.

Lieberman says leaving the Democratic Party is a "very remote possibility."

Don;t get your hopes up to high. This looks more like leverage than a bolt.

Lieberman has almost a full six year term to serve and despite local opinion the folks in CT can't do a thing about it.

However, his "power" is going to be short lived. Now he's the swing vote. So dems let him keep his seniority.

But Joe is no idiot. After 2008 Senate Dems will no longer need to cowtow to him as they'll surely increase their majority by at least 3 seats. And then he's totally at the will of the Dem leadership.

Perhaps he's sees greener pastures cutting a deal with the GOP for some seniority in the minority party.

He's got nothing to lose after all. There's no way he gets re-elected as an Independant, Dem or Republican given the extreme displeasure with him held by the people of CT.

Good for you, Joe. I hope to hell it doesn't come that, tho.

"He's got nothing to lose after all. There's no way he gets re-elected as an Independant, Dem or Republican given the extreme displeasure with him held by the people of CT."

Amazing they elected him this time around, isn't it? Davebo, it's time to pull your head out for some fresh air.

That would be sweet payback for what the nutroots tried to do to him.

I doubt that either Lieberman or Smith will be changing parties. Both have voting records largely in line with the majority positions of their respective parties. However, both are offering their own independent views on Iraq and other issues.

Smith is becoming a little bit like former Senator Mark Hatfield. Hatfield was a Republican moderate, and Smith is voting more similiar to Hatfield than few would have ever expected.

Smith ran for office on a hardline social conservative platform with many of his ads an attack on a single Gay owned adult video store in Portland. But has since seemed to vote far more moderate than any serious political observer in Oregon could have ever expected. He often works on bipartisan bills with Senator Ron Wyden, a champion for consumer rights and aging issues. Smith is also a champion of aging issues.

When Oregon was hard-hit with high unemployment after 9/11, Smith no doubt received many help letters from hurting Oregonians and moved to a more moderate stance in support of increasing the minimum wage and protecting the Food Stamp program and social programs from $40 billion in cuts to help finance $70 billion in more tax cuts mainly for the benefit of the higher income segment.

There should be enough room in the Senate for both more moderate Republicans and more conservative Democrats like there used to be at one time. At one time, the Democrats ran the range from former SDS radicals like Tom Hayden to Alabama Governor George Wallace on the right. The Republicans also had a wider range of represented views as well.

"After 2008 Senate Dems will no longer need to cowtow to him as they'll surely increase their majority by at least 3 seats."

If Iraq isn't noticably improved by 2008, congressional politics won't matter. I predict things will improve.

The war in Iraq will end the day before the 2008 Presidential election, so this will all be moot before long.

The war in Iraq will end the day before the 2008 Presidential election, so this will all be moot before long.

Hmmm. It isn't going to happen, but just for the helluva it, let's say that by some miracle it did. Would that be a good or bad thing, Lee?

Iraq...hmmm..we know other nations are bailing as we ramp up...check out http://www.icasualties.org/oif/
Just as we desire that Iraq can overcome serious (and in their case deadly) differences...we are no better...
...at some point in time.we will withdraw mostly..kindly..pretty much...

It appears, as our past presents, we only differ about the circumstances....Ya all..or the spectrum between...cry out for more...more..more..
I don't have to be a moonbat to SHOUT OUT ..ah less..less
yeah..a a disabled vet i will rant...Fook all people who pretend ..and i don't doubt..you are sincere...that..just as I don't know how I would live your life...I would hope you would not presume ...to ..pretend..unless you say.."I pretend"
Bring'em home..unless you or your children..replace them..

I've been somewhat preoccupied but...

...wasn't the "send more troops" a liberal demand not so very long ago?

I remember that, maybe not the Dem leadership and certainly not people like Code Pink and who-all, but certainly anti-Bush people here and elsewhere when they talked about what Bush did so very wrong it was "not enough troops."

It isn't going to happen?

It's November 4, 2008. I can see it now.

President Bush arm in arm with the Republican candidate for President - standing in front of a big banner that says "Mission Accomplished".

You don't think the Republicans will end the war once the polls show them losing the Presidential election if they don't? Hell, even if it isn't over they'll lie and say it is.

Man, you conservatives are a gullible bunch.

nogo, everyone going over there is a volunteer. You know that. All new recruits and all reenlistments. Maybe not me or my children (none of us would be accepted into the military at this point anyhow, so the point is moot) but by *definition* the people going to Iraq and Afghanistan and going into the military are people, like me, who support what our military is doing over there.

They *are* being replaced by people who support the mission. They are being replaced by people from the sub-set of the population that you are asking to replace them.

Why pretend they are not?

You mean Lieberman ISN'T a Republican now?!

Um, Lee, FYI, that (Republicans ending the war--which is laughable in itself) doesn't answer my question nor was it a part of your original "thought". Your initial thought suggested/implied that the war might be over by then (not by the hands of the Republicans mind you, just plain over). So--surprise, surprise--you still didn't answer the question.

Nevertheless, moving on...

Wasn't it rumored/widely believed/theorized that the Republicans would trot out OBL just in time for the 2002 elections. Or was it 2004? Both? If memory serves, both. What about Saddam; he was supposed to be caught just before 2004 elections, too. Turns out he was...a good 11 months before that happened and most people forgot about it by the elections. Finally, wasn't it rumored/widely believed/theorized that the Republicans would end the war before the 2006 elections. (I don't know about you, but I had more than a few friends (including co-workers) predict this to my face.) Oops. Didn't happen. Unfortunately.

With this in mind, I suggest taking up a new line of work and try prognosticating this year's World Series winner. $5 says you'd have better luck than past track record...

P.S. I'd take the Yankees over the Phils.

This bush league blackmailing crap by Lieberman has got to stop. What's to prevent every other Senator from threatening to switch parties when they don't get their way on an issue? Heck, they might as well play musical chairs every morning in the Senate chamber.

Reid should sit down with Lieberman and tell him to put up or shut up. You're either with the Democrats or you're with the Republicans. Be a man and pick your side Joe!

Man, you conservatives are a gullible bunch.
Posted by: Lee at February 22, 2007 06:49 PM

Well "we" would be if we had an ounce of belief in your ability to predict the 2008 elections.

But we don't. And even less in your ability to comment on the topic instead of making a lame attempt to drag the thread in another direction.

Ignore the troll

Larkin there are no "men" in the democrat party (well maybe one or two). That's the whole problem.

You've convinced me Peter -- I'm betting on the Yankees too!

Nice try Synova...
yep..everyone now in..went to a recruiting office..

a simple fact..I became aware of when our son-in-law..a medic from the Fairbanks "Stryker"..who left the Army because of a medical discharge..
Ya know..our govt did not pony up our share of govt matching college funds...because he did not fulfill his 4 year obligation?
Do ya think..any recruiter points out.."I want to make it clear..when you think you are signing up for 4 years, you can be extended"
I know you check the web out...you know..that the volunteers we are accepting..would not have even been considered 10 years ago...
Even during Viet Nam..NO ONE DID MORE THAN ONE COMBAT TOUR...unless they "volunteered"...
The reason our "volunteer Army" is reduced to felons and dropouts...is because few others are desperate enough...when you joined..I am assuming you are a fellow vet..What did your recruiter tell you?
I challenge you to find anyone who was told by their recruiter in the past five years..
1. You may have to serve in active duty more than these four years....

2. Understand..if you are discharged because of injuries sustained in training or in combat, the government will not fulfill it's share of the promised college fund, because you did not fullfil your part of the contract.

3. Understand, our President and The past Republican majority has asked, and gotten cuts in tax payer money to V.A. Hospitals...so we are behind..but we will really..really try to take care of you..

Larkin was it "bush league blackmailing crap" by Senator Jim Jeffords after a switch that placed the Senate in Democratic control?

Ah... I love the smell of sour grapes in the early evening.

And another thing Reid should tell Lieberman is that the Democrats are going to stop the war because that's what they ran on in the election, they won, and the people expect them to keep their promises.

Of course, I wouldn't expect someone who didn't have the courage to respect the vote of his own party which also gave him the chance to be Vice President to understand that. Lieberman is the most unprincipled crass opportunist in Washington DC right now and his trying to blackmail the Dems just proves that once again.

Do ya think..any recruiter points out.."I want to make it clear..when you think you are signing up for 4 years, you can be extended"

"Nice" variation on the troops are dumb lie. Do you think these aren't 10 year olds and as adults are able to read, understand and then sign what they are committing to.

Vet rant continued...seriously..ya don't have to be a vet to have an opinion on the failures/successes now taking place with our military presence in Iraq...
but..please...realize..how the greatest fear in your daily life compares to the fear of a troop going out on patrol as part of our President's surge to "secure Baghdad"...or anyone riding around in an unprotected humvee 4 years into this...

I give only one real challenge...attend the funeral of the next troop dying for this lie(Wmd's) from your town/city..

Do this..and try to remain unchanged..one way or the other...

Marc,

I don't recall Jeffords threatening to switch for months and trying to blackmail the Republicans because of a single issue. As I recall, he switched rather quickly and cleanly. He said the party had moved too far to the right and he couldn't identify with it anymore.

Lieberman should have the guts to do the same. If he chooses to go I say good riddance and don't let the door hit your ass on the way out. It actually puts the Dems in a better position for 2008 because then they won't be held responsible for Iraq and can run as the opposition party again.

As a high school diploma is no longer required (as it once was)to join the military...your assumption that those joining are all literate ..given the pathetic state of our public schools..is a stretch...
and unless..you have personally seen the currant contract that is being signed..ah..well..

Just to be more precise:

Those who join the military agree to this provision under paragraph 9c of the enlistment contract states:

In the event of war, my enlistment in the Armed Forces continues until six (6) months after the war ends, unless my enlistment is ended sooner by the President of the United States.

But current enlistees are too stupid to read that right nogo?

Political opponents (and if memory serves you are one who has used back-door-draft) of the President often refer to Stop Loss as a "back-door draft," and act as if President Bush invented the policy.

Congress first gave Stop Loss authority to the Department of Defense right after the draft ended.

nogo, did you whine and cry after Clinton imposed Stop Loss at the beginning of the Bosnia deployment, and during the Kosovo Air Campaign.

given the pathetic state of our public schools..is a stretch...

See I told ya... nogo thinks they are too stupid.

.you have personally seen the currant contract that is being signed..ah..well..
Posted by: nogo postal at February 22, 2007 07:44 PM

Seek and ye shall find nimrod.

And BTW

Even during Viet Nam..NO ONE DID MORE THAN ONE COMBAT TOUR...unless they "volunteered"...

Maybe, just maybe you could wrap your brain around the fact the U.S. Military was at minimum twice as large as it is now.

I have my doubts

The slow bleed plan could better be described as al qaeda's war plan. They wanted the US to "bleed" just as the Soviets had before them in Afghanistan. According to the book Taliban, the terrorist assumed the US probably would come into Afghanistan after them and had several days before 911, assassinated the Uniter Front commander, to cause chaos.

Lee,

Picking the Royals is more inline with your past predictions. LMAO.

Good-bye for a while, you crazy kids! MY butt is off to the Caribbean tomorrow morning for 9 sun-filled days. I'm sure America will still be here when I return...unless Lee, Barney, nogo, et al somehow overthrow it all before I get back.

Interesting to read the comments about Smith of Oregon. I thought - when saying anything about Mormon politicians (except Harry Reid, of course) - the only "acceptable" comment was to call into question whether or not they would destroy the country if allowed to express an opinion.

;-)

I wrote to my Senator Smith about his Vietnamization of the War in Iraq. He did respond in a form letter that basically stated his position that defending the current government was encouraging it to not solve its problems fast enough. So the only logical thing to do is pull out now. Sounds like he already joined the Democratic Party.

I've attended the local services of our dead, as well as services for 14 folks I've know personally who died in uniform, and the local rededication of Veteran's Memorial here in this blue state. Sad to see so few turned out for either local function. The grounds were overflowing for the ones on military bases. Its interesting to note that 90 years ago 5,000+ people (a sizable chunk of the county population) showed up for he town memorial's dedication. This summer less than fifty showed up for the rededication after an extensive restoration.

Something sure has changed.