Lieberman, Lamont, Iraq, Israel
Jason Horowitz has a piece on the Joe Lieberman race in which the senator yells at staffers over an event gone awry, supporters see anti-Semitic strains in the anti-war opposition, Ned Lamont eats potato skins and Anthony Weiner assesses a disconnect between internet liberals and Israel:
"We do have a problem with progressives and those in the blogosphere, because the Palestinian position seems to be perfect for the Internet world of pithy back-and-forth and 30-second You Tube tapes, where the Zionist position is more at home in a seven-page New York Review of Books article."
Read the whole thing here.
Listening to Anthony Weiner opine is like watching a gorilla play with its poop
( I'M still disgusted over the last post--but let's push on!!) There has always been a strong and valid thesis that "the Iraq war is good for Israel." The Bush Administration has been consistantly downplayed this so as not to antagonize the Arab nations of the region. As American liberal-progressives push back against the war, and as the National Democratic party coalesses its oppostion to the war---will supporters Of Israel now openly and publiclly state their support of the war because of the enhanced security it brings to the embattled State of Israel?
if you think an elected offical yelling at staff is news, you have no clue what it is really like to work for these people. Ada Smith, Liz Holtzman and Carol Bellamy stories are only the tip of the iceberg.
How did Jason Horowitz get and accept the idea that
Senator Lieberman is a civil libertarian? My understanding is that Senator Lieberman has been an enthusiastic supporter of Bush's limits on civil liberties. He voted to support the "USA Patriot Act," and to deny of habeas corpus relief to "enemy combattants."
I have not heard Mr. Lieberman opposing the warrentless searches, telephone taps and phone record retrivals that Bush-world has brought us.
To be fair, Lieberman opposed the "flag-burning" amendment to our Constitution.
However, in an era when Bush has shredded our liberties, Lieberman has, for the most part, cheered him on.
As long as focusing on Weiner, to write that he "opposes the war in Iraq" ignores history. He voted for the war in Iraq.
... as a public service, it might be a good idea to print the roll call vote of our local Senators and Members of Congress on the main legislation that authorized the War in Iraq. I know most of the local supporters have now claimed " they were duped,"and are NOW AGAINST the war, but their actual vote would be illuminating.
Lieberman, with his attempts at weakening the line between church and state, is dangerous to religious freedom for Jews and non-Jews. I oppose him for many reasons. The peace movement may or may not have anti-semitic tendencies, but the pro-war movement is worse. Did anyone see the article in the NY Times that showed that our army has been infiltrated by neo-Nazis?
Blogs have major element of anti semitism; anti Israel bias. Left wingers are just as bad as far right lunatics. Joe Lieberman is public enemy number one for both fringes. Lamont and Dean's brother are far left and wouldnt surprise me if they encourage a little "kike-bashing" to get out to the vote.
being against the war has nothing to do with anti-semitism. conflating the two will boomerang. Congressman Weiner would do well to tone down his rhetoric if he intends to run for a higher/wider office.
hey bloomers, wiener's doesnt call anyone antisemetic here. he is right. zionists like him have been losing the fight on the blogs.
I am a Peter Beinart Democrat who thinks Lieberman's defeat would be bad for the party because of the larger (and, I think, mostly false) conclusions it would lead people to draw about our party. However, Lieberman has, in large part, brought this upon himself; principled disagreement is one thing, but sometimes Lieberman seems to have gone far beyond principles to give aid and comfort to W. In addition, by this point, it's hard to countenance his pro-war position; most Dems who did not oppose the war at the begining have since re-stated their postion to account for new information, but Joe is still looking for the WMD we couldn't find during Sadaam's cavity search. It's one thing to say that bad idea or not, one can't just cut and run now; it's another thing to still believe in the glorious adventure for its own sake.
Nonetheless, the article had one big shocker. Was the Lamont volunteer named Maura Keaney the same one who works for Chris Quinn? Chris would never let this happen if Lieberman represented Brooklyn instead of Connecticut. But even more shocking, if it is the same Maura, is the conversation where Maura berates Lieberman for threatening to cut and run on the Democrats. Well, good for Maura! Except, for one thing; wasn't that Bloomberg's campaign checks you were cashing last year, girl?
Must apologize to miss Keaney; skimmed the damned article too quickly. This was obviously a different person (or, though i doubt it, it was her using her real name but a false occupation). Too bad; it would have been a great story.