Chafee Quietly Exits Party

[Socrtease]

I don't think Lieberman is a fair comparison. Because he is a radical on the defining issue of our time, and that is the Iraqi war, and preemptive war in general. Don't forget, he is now beating the war drums on Iran.

Is that a moderate? No.

Ok so you don't agree with him on the war. But lets see who the dems chased out of their party.

Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 77 percent in 2006

2005-2006 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the American Association of University Women 78 percent in 2005-2006

2005-2006 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the American Civil Liberties Union 75 percent in 2005-2006.

2006 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the American Conservative Union 17 percent in 2006.

2005-2006 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the American Family Association 0 percent in 2005-2006

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the American Humane Association 100 percent in 2004.

So absent the war the dems are getting rid of a guy that most would consider liberal. Not only that but With the exception of Ron Paul I can't name a single candidate Repub or dem that is going to pull us out of Iraq after they enter office. So because Lieberman is pragmatic rather than Ideological he is no longer welcome in the party.

 

[Cypress]

Ok so you don't agree with him on the war. But lets see who the dems chased out of their party.

Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 77 percent in 2006

2005-2006 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the American Association of University Women 78 percent in 2005-2006

2005-2006 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the American Civil Liberties Union 75 percent in 2005-2006.

2006 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the American Conservative Union 17 percent in 2006.

2005-2006 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the American Family Association 0 percent in 2005-2006

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the American Humane Association 100 percent in 2004.

So absent the war the dems are getting rid of a guy that most would consider liberal. Not only that but With the exception of Ron Paul I can't name a single candidate Repub or dem that is going to pull us out of Iraq after they enter office. So because Lieberman is pragmatic rather than Ideological he is no longer welcome in the party.

Lieberman wasn't representing the interests of his constituents. It had little to do with him being a moderate or conservative Dem. Connecticut was extremely anti-war.

If you don't think moderate and conservative Dems got elected last time around, I invite you to look at the websites for newly elected senators Jon Tester, Jim Webb, Claire MacKaskill, and Bob Casey.

 

[Cancel7]

Ok so you don't agree with him on the war. But lets see who the dems chased out of their party.

Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 77 percent in 2006

2005-2006 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the American Association of University Women 78 percent in 2005-2006

2005-2006 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the American Civil Liberties Union 75 percent in 2005-2006.

2006 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the American Conservative Union 17 percent in 2006.

2005-2006 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the American Family Association 0 percent in 2005-2006

2004 Senator Lieberman supported the interests of the American Humane Association 100 percent in 2004.

So absent the war the dems are getting rid of a guy that most would consider liberal. Not only that but With the exception of Ron Paul I can't name a single candidate Repub or dem that is going to pull us out of Iraq after they enter office. So because Lieberman is pragmatic rather than Ideological he is no longer welcome in the party.

Do you believe that someone who embraces the neocon worldview of preemptive war (a radical departure from traditional American foreign policy) is "pragmatic"?

Let's start right there. Are you saying that a neocon is a pragmatist?

 

[Damocles]

Lieberman wasn't representing the interests of his constituents. It had little to do with him being a moderate or conservative Dem. Connecticut was extremely anti-war.

If you don't think moderate and conservative Dems got elected last time around, I invite you to look at the websites for newly elected senators Jon Tester, Jim Webb, Claire MacKaskill, and Bob Casey.

He clearly was, he was re-elected, and not by too small a margin either.

 

[Cypress]

He clearly was, he was re-elected, and not by too small a margin either.

Okay, that was a poorly worded statement on my part. I meant, that he lost the Dem primary, because he wasn't representing the interests of his party in Connecticut.

 

[Socrtease]

and now compare Chafee to Lieberman

2005 Chafee supported the interests of the AFL-CIO 57 percent in 2005.

2005-2006 Chafee supported the interests of the American Association of University Women 80 percent in 2005-2006.

2001-2002 Chafee supported the interests of the American Bar Association 67 percent in 2001-2002

2005-2006 Chafee supported the interests of the American Civil Liberties Union 75 percent in 2005-2006.

2005 Chafee supported the interests of the American Conservative Union 12 percent in 2005.

Looks like dems and repubs don't like the same kind of politicians

 

[Socrtease]

Do you believe that someone who embraces the neocon worldview of preemptive war (a radical departure from traditional American foreign policy) is "pragmatic"?

Let's start right there. Are you saying that a neocon is a pragmatist?

No what I believe is that if you pull out of Iraq, right now, like all the liberals want, the people of Iraq get hurt again. The Kurds gets destroyed, the Sunni also. The Shi'a with their support from Iran take control of the country and it becomes an Islamic nightmare. It was a BAD idea to go to Iraq in the first place but it's like the sign says in the antique store, "You break it. You buy it."

 

[Cancel7]

No what I believe is that if you pull out of Iraq, right now, like all the liberals want, the people of Iraq get hurt again. The Kurds gets destroyed, the Sunni also. The Shi'a with their support from Iran take control of the country and it becomes an Islamic nightmare. It was a BAD idea to go to Iraq in the first place but it's like the sign says in the antique store, "You break it. You buy it."

Ok. But that is not what Lieberman believes.

Lierberman is a neocon, who advocated for the Iraqi invasion, and is now talking up a bombing of Iran. That is radical. That is not moderate.

He has no place in the Democratic party, and in fact, Paleoconservatives like Pat Buchanon would drum his ass out of the Republican party.

 

[uscitizen]

No what I believe is that if you pull out of Iraq, right now, like all the liberals want, the people of Iraq get hurt again. The Kurds gets destroyed, the Sunni also. The Shi'a with their support from Iran take control of the country and it becomes an Islamic nightmare. It was a BAD idea to go to Iraq in the first place but it's like the sign says in the antique store, "You break it. You buy it."

yeah that was the Bushco fallback plan all along.
Get control of Iraq one way or another.
Iraq might be broken but we have it's oil.
But at what price.....

 

[Socrtease]

All I know is that when Connecticut as a WHOLE voted they voted Lieberman back in and in a three way race I might add. So obviously he DOES carry water for the largest group of voters in Conn. He actually got 50% of the vote. So just like the Republican party, in the dem party, if you don't tow the line completely then they want you gone, at the cost of losing a seat for that party. I think the Dems are lucky that Lieberman decided to caucus with them after being treated like a pariah.

 

[Socrtease]

It is the problem with party politics in general. No party can see the bigger picture and try to run candidates that appeal to the general election voter. Instead with Repubs and Dems we get (warning a generalization will follow) gun grabbers on one side and queer haters on the other, and then the fringe on both sides vote in the primary and then the moderate independent gets to hold her nose and pull the lever for one of two people, neither of which really represents her.

 

[Cypress]

All I know is that when Connecticut as a WHOLE voted they voted Lieberman back in and in a three way race I might add. So obviously he DOES carry water for the largest group of voters in Conn. He actually got 50% of the vote. So just like the Republican party, in the dem party, if you don't tow the line completely then they want you gone, at the cost of losing a seat for that party. I think the Dems are lucky that Lieberman decided to caucus with them after being treated like a pariah.

Oh, God. The old Lieberman got his feeling hurt argument

You might not remember, but the overwhelming majority of national democratic leaders came to connecticut in the primary to for Joe and against Lamont.

If Joe is going to cry and can't handle the fact that the party he belongs to almost universally opposes Bush's war, then he can leave as far as I'm concered. That's the sign of a petty and weak man, to cry about that.

 

[Damocles]

Oh, God. The old Lieberman got his feeling hurt argument

You might not remember, but the overwhelming majority of national democratic leaders came to connecticut in the primary to for Joe and against Lamont.

If Joe is going to cry and can't handle the fact that the party he belongs to almost universally opposes Bush's war, then he can leave as far as I'm concered. That's the sign of a petty and weak man, to cry about that.

He didn't, that was the point. He chose to caucus with them, thus ensuring their control of the Senate.

 

[Cancel7]

All I know is that when Connecticut as a WHOLE voted they voted Lieberman back in and in a three way race I might add. So obviously he DOES carry water for the largest group of voters in Conn. He actually got 50% of the vote. So just like the Republican party, in the dem party, if you don't tow the line completely then they want you gone, at the cost of losing a seat for that party. I think the Dems are lucky that Lieberman decided to caucus with them after being treated like a pariah.

Well you are entitled to your opinion. But preemptive war is not a little issue. If we attack Iran as the radical neocon Lieberman wants us to, many thousands will die painfully. Many will be children. It is my opinion that Lieberman is lucky someone doesn't put a hit on him, never mind who he caucuses with. So, we differ.

 

[Damocles]

Well you are entitled to your opinion. But preemptive war is not a little issue. If we attack Iran as the radical neocon Lieberman wants us to, many thousands will die painfully. Many will be children. It is my opinion that Lieberman is lucky someone doesn't put a hit on him, never mind who he caucuses with. So, we differ.

Don't vote for him for President then.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Moderates continue to be drummed out of the Republican party. It's "not their party anymore". It is now the party of radicals, stereotypical rednecks, religious fanatics, and war mongers.

Out of step with America, and with Americans.


PROVIDENCE — Lincoln D. Chafee, who lost his Senate seat in the wave of anti-Republican sentiment in last November’s election, said yesterday that he has left the party.

Chafee said he disaffiliated with the party he had helped lead, and his father had led before him, because the national Republican Party has gone too far away from his stance on too many critical issues, from war to economics to the environment.

“It’s not my party any more,” he said.

Chafee’s departure is another step in the waning of the strain of moderate Republicanism that was once a winning political philosophy from Rhode Island and Connecticut to the Canadian border. For the first time since the Civil War, the six New England states combined now have only one Republican U.S. House member, Connecticut’s Christopher Shays.

Chafee said he disaffiliated from the party “in June or July,” making him an unaffiliated voter. He did so quietly, and until yesterday, he said, “No one’s asked me about it.” He said he made the move because “I want my affiliation to accurately reflect my status.”

“There’s been a gradual depravation of … the issues the party should be strong on,” and the direction of the national party, he said.

That’s no secret. In a Journal Op-Ed piece published on the Thursday before the election, Chafee himself laid out some of the ways he disagreed with his party, notably as one of only 23 senators and the only Republican to oppose the resolution supporting the invasion of Iraq. He went on to criticize the “permanent deficits” caused by Republican tax cuts.

http://www.projo.com/news/content/CHAFEE_GOP_09-16-07_DP751KF.31dd3fe.html

Chaffee was the loneliest politician in the world.

He's even admitted that it was better off for the nation that he lost that senate seat in 2006. He'd still be in the senate if he had switched to Democrat to run, or at least to an independent caucusing with the Democrats.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Ok. But that is not what Lieberman believes.

Lierberman is a neocon, who advocated for the Iraqi invasion, and is now talking up a bombing of Iran. That is radical. That is not moderate.

He has no place in the Democratic party, and in fact, Paleoconservatives like Pat Buchanon would drum his ass out of the Republican party.

Luckily, he's a radical warmonger that's caucusing with the peace party. And as an individual senator, he at least can't do a whole lot of harm.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Chaffee might run for governer as a Democrat or independent. But I can't see him regaining his senate seat against an incumbent.

 

[Cancel7]

Chaffee was the loneliest politician in the world.

He's even admitted that it was better off for the nation that he lost that senate seat in 2006. He'd still be in the senate if he had switched to Democrat to run, or at least to an independent caucusing with the Democrats.

Yeah I know, I don't know why he didn't do that.