McCain / Lieberman?

Reading this item at TPM via Roll Call, Senator Lieberman looks to be doing two things: He is burning his bridges with the Democrat Party; and he is already acting like a VP candidate - playing the attack dog.

Yesterday, the news was McCain wants to go after former Hillary supporters. Can you think of a better way to do that, while also completely stealing Obama's change / healing / uniter thunderstorm than by selecting a recent but now former Democrat to accomplish all that?

They don't call him a maverick for nothing, after all. And while it wouldn't help him with conservatives, if he is intent on winning from the center, it's hard to conceive of a better choice. Well, I suppose he could pick Hillary, but I suspect she has plans for 2012, if not before.

Furthermore, during a Senate vote Wednesday, Obama dragged Lieberman by the hand to a far corner of the Senate chamber and engaged in what appeared to reporters in the gallery as an intense, three-minute conversation.
While it was unclear what the two were discussing, the body language suggested that Obama was trying to convince Lieberman of something and his stance appeared slightly intimidating.

Using forceful, but not angry, hand gestures, Obama literally backed up Lieberman against the wall, leaned in very close at times, and appeared to be trying to dominate the conversation, as the two talked over each other in a few instances.

Still, Obama and Lieberman seemed to be trying to keep the back-and-forth congenial as they both patted each other on the back during and after the exchange.

Afterwards, Obama smiled and pointed up at reporters peering over the edge of the press gallery for a better glimpse of their interaction.

Obama loyalists were quick to express their frustration with Lieberman's decision and warned that if he continues to take a lead role in attacking Obama it could complicate his professional relationship with the Caucus.

Comments

[IslamoLlama]

"-- By the way, Iraq has been going quite well for quite a while. Your whole "child with finger paints" metaphor doesn't really hold up, never did, but now it is becoming obvious to most. The punch bowl is empty on that one. Even Kevin Rudd, the new PM of Australia, who once called the war a complete disaster has changed his tune. France has changed their tune. Even FAZ, the large German newspaper wrote a long peice on how the Germans are going to have to accept that the Iraq war has been a success. --"

k.

I suppose that means you won't object to Obama withdrawing troops once his term begins. You'll also be able to point to all the WMDs we found and disarmed.

Don't get me wrong. The Iraq War has been an amazing success. Why, our President visits the capital to the applause of roaring crowds.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23429996/

"-- Iraqi officials laid out red carpets and military bands played for the hardline president — the first Iranian leader to visit Iraq. In front of live TV crews, Ahmadinejad held hands and exchanged kisses on the cheek with Iraqi President Jalal Talabani, who fondly told him to call him "Uncle Jalal." --"

Wait, no. Wrong President. I always get those two confused.

[Tood]

Rock solid proof that Republicans are smarter and more productive than Democrats.

http://www.singularity2050.com/2006/06/a_take_on_the_l.html

Look at the difference in the physical appearance of right-wing and left-wing people.

http://www.singularity2050.com/2006/12/a-picture-is-wo.html

[Tood]

Rock solid proof that Republicans are smarter and more productive than Democrats.

http://www.singularity2050.com/2006/06/a_take_on_the_l.html

Look at the difference in the physical appearance of right-wing and left-wing people.

http://www.singularity2050.com/2006/12/a-picture-is-wo.html

[Tom]

jharp still does not realize that his IQ is below average, and hence he is a Dumbocrat/Homocrat.

The Dow was down 407 points today. It was up 250 yesterday. If Bush is to blame for the 407-point fall, does he not get credit for the 250-point rise?

*(crickets chirping in the ashamed silence of jharp upon his being stumped by simple, non-homocrat logic)

Unemployment rate over Bush's 7 years : 5.0%
Unemployment rate over Clinton's 8 years : 5.2%.

From www.bls.gov.

Facts are a bitch, eh? And don't get too excited upon hearing the word bitch, you girlie-man**

**Girlie-man is a term used by Gov. Schwarzenegger of CA to describe leftists. Since it can accurately be used to describe both male ('girlie' being the insult) AND female ('man' being the insult) Democrats, it is hence a superb term with great philosophical depth.

[bobInStamford]

It would appear that you patriots are babbling. Time to go to bed, heroes! Be sure to say your prayers to your God and your leader. And tomorrow, go fill up your tanks. Consider it your duty.

Thank you for your service. 94 more years to go in the 100 year war, patriots!!

[jharp]

Tom,

If you are trying to be provocative I guess it worked.

jharp still does not realize that his IQ is below average, and hence he is a Dumbocrat/Homocrat.

Good one. A real zinger.

"The Dow was down 407 points today. It was up 250 yesterday. If Bush is to blame for the 407-point fall, does he not get credit for the 250-point rise?"

His policies are responsible for the instability. Throw a minus 400 here, plus 250 there, and that somehow doesn't mean anything to you.

And $136 for barrel of oil. Nothing to look at here. Just move along.

[Thomas Jackson]

McCain should remain true to himself and choose Ted Kennedy as his VP. He's lost the conservative vote, he might as well go after his supporters.

[Worst President Ever]

Facts are a bitch.

Clinton's average is higher because Daddy Bush left behind a 7%+ unemployment rate. In fact, unemployment went down every year under Clinton. Then started back up under Bush the Shrub.

http://www.miseryindex.us/URbyyear.asp

Wanna do average deficit? Or average surplus?

Homocrat? Not a trifle homophobic are you?

[seekeronos]

Speaking of IQs, here is something that may help put the Bush = IQ of a turnip rumours:

http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/hoaxes/presiq.asp

http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview?id=292960

(this is probably well known, but certain pinheads here like to beat us over the head with how stooopid they believe the POTUS to be).

[bour3]

This is the best description of that exchange I've read yet. Thank you for that.

As to the comments that followed; could they be more wearisome? I realize you'll never recover from your BDS, and you'll persist in endlessly recycling the same decayed offal, but I have recovered from any need of reading them. I get a minute fraction of the way through them, see them for what they are, and skip right through. You go unread. No apology here. You're officially too stupid to read. Have yourself a perfectly lousy evening, you do deserve it.

[jharp]

"The fundamentals of our economy are very strong, very strong."
--John McCain, June 5, 2008

From this morning's New York Times:

The unemployment rate surged to 5.5 percent in May from 5 percent — the sharpest monthly spike in 22 years — as the economy lost 49,000 jobs, registering a fifth consecutive month of decline, the Labor Department reported Friday.

The weak jobs report, coupled with a staggering rise in the price of oil — up a record $10.75 a barrel to more than $138 — unleashed a feverish sell-off on Wall Street, sending the Dow Jones industrial average down nearly 400 points. The dollar plunged against several major currencies.

[jrharp]

On the 2nd of July in 1964 the President Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act into law. The fight wasn't over; he knew it. The President told me, "I think we've just handed the South to the Republican Party for the rest of my life - and yours."

[Fred Beloit]

Here is a good idea discussed by Shannon Love at Chicagoboyz:

"Having a plebiscite [Iraqis vote on whether they want the U.S, forces to stay] before the U.S. election would serve to protect the people of Iraq from the dreaded Cambodia scenario regardless of the outcome of the U.S. election. A positive vote might prevent Obama from winning in the first place, and even if it did not, it would make it difficult for him to throw the Iraqis to the wolves when he assumed office."

http://chicagoboyz.net/archives/5844.htm

[Fred Beloit]

"The unemployment rate surged to 5.5 percent in May from 5 percent — the sharpest monthly spike in 22 years — as the economy lost 49,000 jobs, registering a fifth consecutive month of decline, the Labor Department reported Friday." By Harpo

We are just beginning to see the bad effects of the Dem majority in Congress. No wonder Americans hold the Congress in the lowest regard of the three branches of government.

[Fred Beloit]

Here Harpo notes the damage the Dems in Congress and their supporters have done by their refusal to permit further drilling in the northern Alaska wilds.

"

[Fred Beloit]

Oops Here is Harpo:
Throw a minus 400 here, plus 250 there, and that somehow doesn't mean anything to you.
And $136 for barrel of oil. Nothing to look at here. Just move along."

[seekeronos]

As Fred B. might say... WPE is quite the sly funster.

On http://www.miseryindex.us/indexbypresident.asp we see that none other than WPE himself at the top of the list, the questionably honourable Jimmah Cartuh!

[Fred Beloit]

Here's that pesky question again. Seems there may be no answers:

"On what occasions did Bush meet with Gore, Kerry, Hillary, and Rockefeller and lie to them about WMD? And was Bush still governor of Texas when he somehow lied to Bill Clinton while Clinton was president in 1998? That was truly a remarkable feat."

[jharp]

"We are just beginning to see the bad effects of the Dem majority in Congress."

Yeah, Fred, that 49-49-2 Senate majority is really putting through some serious legislation.

Be patient. A real democratic majority is only months away. I, along with 75% of Americans, can hardly wait.

[jharp]

"On what occasions did Bush meet with Gore, Kerry, Hillary, and Rockefeller and lie to them about WMD?"

He didn't meet with them. He lied in plain sight of all of us.

Writes Feingold: "Even the deeply flawed October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) did not support the claims made by the President and the Vice President regarding an Iraqi nuclear program. That NIE assessed that Iraq did not have a nuclear weapon or sufficient material to make one, and that without sufficient fissile material acquired from abroad, Iraq probably would not be able to make a weapon until 2007 or 2009. Yet the President made the following statements: '[Saddam] possesses the world's most dangerous weapons' ( March 22, 2002); '[w]e don't know whether or not [Saddam] has a nuclear weapon' ( December 31, 2002); and, of course, '[f]acing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof - the smoking gun - that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud' ( October 7, 2002). Meanwhile, Vice President Cheney insisted that assessments related to Iraq's nuclear program that were disputed within the Intelligence Community were known 'with absolute certainty' ( September 8, 2002) and through 'irrefutable evidence' (September 20, 2002). And, on the eve of war, after the IAEA had reported that its inspectors had found 'no evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a nuclear weapons program in Iraq,' the Vice President asserted, '[w]e believe [Saddam] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons' ( March 16, 2003).

"Administration officials' claims of a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda were even more outlandish. Before the war, the Central Intelligence Agency assessed that 'Saddam has viewed Islamic extremists operating inside Iraq as a threat,' that 'Saddam Hussein and Usama bin Laden are far from being natural partners,' and that assessments about Iraqi links to al Qaeda rested on 'a body of fragmented, conflicting reporting from sources of varying reliability.' Moreover, the Intelligence Community consistently assessed that Saddam's use of weapons of mass destruction against the United States rested on his being 'sufficiently desperate' in the face of a U. S. attack and his possible desire for a 'last chance at vengeance.' Yet the President not only repeatedly suggested an operational relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda, but asserted that Saddam would provide weapons of mass destruction to al Qaeda for an unprovoked attack against the United States: 'you can't distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror' ( September 25, 2002); '[e]ach passing day could be the one on which the Iraqi regime gives anthrax or VX - nerve gas - or some day a nuclear weapon to a terrorist ally' ( September 26, 2002); '[Saddam] is a man who, in my judgment, would like to use al Qaeda as a forward army' ( October 14, 2002); '[Saddam] is a threat because he is dealing with al Qaeda. . . . [A] true threat facing our country is that an al Qaeda-type network trained and armed by Saddam could attack America and not leave one fingerprint' ( November 7, 2002); and '[t]he danger is clear: using chemical, biological or, one day, nuclear weapons obtained with the help of Iraq, the terrorists could fulfill their stated ambitions and kill thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent people in our country or any other' ( March 17, 2003)."

[Worst President Ever]

In an informal survey of 109 professional historians conducted over a three-week period through the History News Network, 98.2 percent assessed the presidency of Mr. Bush to be a failure while 1.8 percent classified it as a success.

Asked to rank the presidency of George W. Bush in comparison to those of the other 41 American presidents, more than 61 percent of the historians concluded that the current presidency is the worst in the nation’s history. Another 35 percent of the historians surveyed rated the Bush presidency in the 31st to 41st category, while only four of the 109 respondents ranked the current presidency as even among the top two-thirds of American administrations.

http://hnn.us/articles/48916.html

[seekeronos]

Oh, Fred:

Let us not forget how our democraticic congress forbids our oil companies from tapping the abundant fields in the Gulf of Mexico (accessible from off our Southern coasts) while Castro cut a swift deal with the Red Chinese to slant-drill in under into our oil from Cuba.

Or not rattling the Canucks for selling their oil from their Atlantic Maritime region via pipeline thru Canuckistan to those same Red Chinese.

Of course, the Democraticics feel that glow-bull wormening, which will take $45T to cure, is a much higher concern.

I guess we will all have to HOPE that the Obamassiah will use his magick to CHANGE our reality which is now inextricably bound to petroleum so we learn to happily mass migrate to high density Ecolopolises and bike everywhere.

[seekeronos]

"...an unscientific survey..."

What are the chances that the vast majority of those historians are part of the ultra-left wing academic establishment?

Any guesses?

[Fred Beloit]

The USSR used to have people who rewrote history. Now we do too.

NOW
"Before taking the country to war, this administration owed it to the American people to give them a 100 percent accurate picture of the threat we faced," said committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va. "Sadly, the Bush administration led the nation into war under false pretenses."

THEN
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.”
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

The USSR used to have people who rewrote history. Now we do too.

[Fred Beloit]

Yes, seek, our history rewriters probably consider themselves "historians".

[Fred Beloit]

This is really funny, seek. Harpo quotes Bush saying: "...'[w]e don't know whether or not [Saddam] has a nuclear weapon' ( December 31, 2002);..."

But Sen Offhisrocker was positive a few months previously that Saddam was working on them. "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.”
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

Harpo say: "He[Bush] lied in plain sight of all of us." I guess he means like Hillary did about dodging snipers or Obama saying he wasn't present for Wrights anti-America rants. But Bush did not lie.

If Rocker watched Bush on the tele to get his intelligence information (clearly a Harpo fabrication), why didn't rocker say "We don't know...etc."? Just when and how did Bush convince all these Democraticics, including Clinton on 1998? He didn't. They had the same intelligence Bush had and so they came to the same conclusions. This issue is just another ho hummer.

[Fred Beloit]

How would you girls and boys like some good news for a change? Here is some from Little Green Footballs:

"WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court on Friday upheld the conviction of an American citizen for plotting to assassinate President George W. Bush and conspiring with al Qaeda, rejecting his claims that he had been tortured into confessing by the Saudi police.

As part of its ruling, the appeals court based in Richmond, Virginia, overturned Ahmed Abu Ali’s 30-year prison sentence on the grounds it was unreasonably lenient and sent the case back for resentencing.

“In this case, we are satisfied that Abu Ali received a fair trial, though not a perfect one, and that the criminal justice system performed those functions which the Constitution envisioned for it,” the three-judge panel concluded."

[Worst President Ever]

Since the the over-whelming majority of Americans also thinks Bush sucks at his job, are they Marxist, Ultra-liberals, BDS victims too?

http://www.pollingreport.com/BushJob.htm

[Fred Beloit]

Thanks to pfcmac, a commenter at Winds of Change, you can read a declassified document sent to The House Intelligence Committee:

http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/Iraq_WMD_Declassified.pdf

This is the kind of information informing our government officials, including Bush. No wonder they formed the opinions most of them had at the time.

[Fred Beloit]

Ever say: "Since the the over-whelming majority of Americans also thinks Bush sucks at his job..."

They feel even more so about Congress (where the Dems are in the majority and have failed to deliver on the pre-election promises of Pelosi and Reid).

[Fred Beloit]

The USSR used to have people who rewrote history. Now we do too.

[Fred Beloit]

Meanwhile, Harpo continues to pound the Dem-led Congress.

"Oil Gushes Higher by More Than $11 to Record $139.12- AP

Oil prices have shot up more than $11 to a new record above $139 a barrel after a Morgan Stanley analyst predicted prices could hit $150 by the Fourth of July. Traders were also rattled by rising tensions in the Middle East.

* Jobs Data, Oil Crush Stocks, Dow Plunges 370 Pts- AP
* Unemployment Rate: Biggest Monthly Rise in 22 Years"

[jharp]

Another Bush lie. Though not quite as damaging to human lives it was very damaging to our Constitution and civil rights.

Bush, April 2004:

Transcript:

Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires — a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we’re talking about chasing down terrorists, we’re talking about getting a court order before we do so. It’s important for our fellow citizens to understand, when you think Patriot Act, constitutional guarantees are in place when it comes to doing what is necessary to protect our homeland, because we value the Constitution.

[Fred Beloit]

Well, Ever is to be congratulated. He has finally proved something to us with a link to the source. What has he proved, you ask? Why that poll results are widely divergent.

[jharp]

"Meanwhile, Harpo continues to pound the Dem-led Congress."

Fred, I know you are a nitwit but I also know you are not as dumb as your post implies.

You are being dishonest.

You know how Congress works. And the dems have had a 49-49-2 majority for 18 months. Not enough to get anything done.

And the dems are going to kick your ass in November. Then we'll see what the get done.

Remember the last three special elections the the GOP considered safe and in heavily republican districts.

The democrats won all three and it wasn't even close.

Bwahahahahahahahahah

[Fred Beloit]

Forgive my ignorance, Harpo, but what part of the statement is a "lie", with a source, if you would be so kind?

[jharp]

"Forgive my ignorance, Harpo, but what part of the statement is a "lie", with a source, if you would be so kind?"

This part. Liar. And stupid fuck.

"Meanwhile, Harpo continues to pound the Dem-led Congress."

[Fred Beloit]

Harpo "You know how Congress works. And the dems have had a 49-49-2 majority for 18 months. Not enough to get anything done."

But Harpo, we were led to believe by folks like you and by the MSM that the Dems won a great victory and swept the last election. Not only that but there are Rinos who regularly vote with the Dems.

Were we lied to by you folks and the MSM?

[Fred Beloit]

Temper, temper, Harpo. I don't want you to ruin the image you have tried to build up here that you are a reasonable and sane person. I was referring to the Bush statement you quoted below.

[Worst President Ever]

Bush's approval in May ranges from 25% to 33% with disapproval ranging from 63% to 68%. Anyway you cut it, that's an overwhelmingly unpopular president.

But Fred the Tool thinks the numbers are "widely divergent".

[jharp]

I was referring to the Bush statement you quoted below.

Oh, sorry Fred.

Bush, April 2004:

Transcript:

"Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires — a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we’re talking about chasing down terrorists, we’re talking about getting a court order before we do so."

Right there is the lie. They were doing so without court orders and continued to.

Certainly even intellectually challenged ones such as you can see and comprehend this. Fool.

[Worst President Ever]

Fred teh Tool, I know your mind can't really wrap itself around the fact that Bush has almost destroyed the Republican Party. But let me quote from Tom Davis, Republican from Virginia:

"Members instinctively understand that the Republican brand is in the trash can. I've often observed that if we were a dog food, they would take us off the shelf."

1. Polling

The most recent CBS/New York Times poll (April 25-29) laid it out. The Democratic Party has a 52% Favorable, 41% unfavorable rating. The Republican Party has a 33% Favorable and 58% unfavorable rating. Translating the data into Congressional elections, voters were asked which party they intend to vote for in November’s House elections. The results:

Now% October 06%

Democratic 50 52
Republican 32 34

Moreover, among Independents, the GOP favorable is 25% and unfavorable is 60%. Indies rate the Democratic Party at 45% favorable and 43% unfavorable.

http://virginiavirtucon.wordpress.com/2008/05/17/tom-davis-memo-on-house-gop-revealed/

[jharp]

I was referring to the Bush statement you quoted below.

Oh, sorry Fred.

Bush, April 2004:

Transcript:

"Secondly, there are such things as roving wiretaps. Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires — a wiretap requires a court order. Nothing has changed, by the way. When we’re talking about chasing down terrorists, we’re talking about getting a court order before we do so."

Right there is the lie. They were doing so without court orders and continued to.

Certainly even intellectually challenged ones such as you can see and comprehend this. Fool.

Sorry forgot to cite my source. www.whitehouse.gov

[Fred Beloit]

Well, Herpes, here is what the WH.gov says:

"The Patriot Act Gave Law Enforcement Agents The Ability To Use Tools Against Terrorists That Are Already Available Against Other Criminals.

* The Patriot Act Corrected Pointless Double Standards. Before the Patriot Act, it was easier to use a wiretap against a person committing mail fraud, or track the phone contacts of a drug dealer, or get the credit card receipts of a tax cheat, than to use these respective tools against a foreign terrorist.
* Roving Wiretaps Are Essential In Investigating International Terrorists. The Patriot Act extended the use of roving wiretaps, which were already permitted against drug kingpins and mob bosses, to international terrorism investigations. They must be approved by a judge. Without roving wiretaps, terrorists could elude law enforcement by simply purchasing a new cell phone.

Sounds OK to me. Congress thought it was OK too because they passes it.

[jharp]

Fred,

You truly are a moron.

"They must be approved by a judge."

This is the entire fucking problem, bozo.

They aren't being approved by a judge as required by law.

[Fred Beloit]

Now, Worst, hope you don't mind if I call your by your first name, polls are polls, but you folks have a teeny weenie problem too. You have a rookie senator of zero accomplishments, who has "100% certified choice liberal" stamped on him, has a shady Chicago political background complete with a convicted criminal(Rezko) and two religious racists who hate whitey and America acting as albatri around his neck, and a bomber who supports him. And this is the one person your party has pointed to and said: Hey, this is the man we want to be the president of the United States of America.

Congratulations and mission accomplished. You dorks may increase your representation in Congress, but your fellow Americans ain't going to vote your man into that WH.

[Fred Beloit]

Now, Herpes, please tell me who was illegally wiretapped or who was wiretapped illegally. It seems you keep repeating this point but you offer no evidence of illegal wiretaps. Oh, they weren't illegal? Well then what the hell are you whining about?

[jharp]

"Now, Herpes, please tell me who was illegally wiretapped or who was wiretapped illegally. It seems you keep repeating this point but you offer no evidence of illegal wiretaps. Oh, they weren't illegal? Well then what the hell are you whining about?"

It's top secret, dumbass.

What do you suppose the big fight over telecom immunity is all about?

You think the telecoms need immunity because they were following the law.

You are a stupid, stupid, man.

[IslamoLlama]

Well, looks like the wingnuts were right on this one. John Cole has the tape you've all been waiting for.

http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=10570

[IslamoLlama]

"-- Now, Herpes, please tell me who was illegally wiretapped or who was wiretapped illegally. It seems you keep repeating this point but you offer no evidence of illegal wiretaps. --"

By that logic, you could make the claim that no one is on the no-fly terrorist watch list. Since no one is allowed access to the watch list to see who is on it, we can safely assume that no one is on it and no one's rights are being infringed without cause.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,134223-page,1/article.html

Lawsuits against the government and the telecomm companies were dismissed, repeatedly, because the Administration claimed they didn't have to turn over the lists of who had been wiretapped. Evidence collected by the NSA was classified. And you can't sue for privacy infringement if you can't prove your privacy has been infringed upon. So it's a beautiful little Catch-22. We won't show you the documents, which prevents you from proving we've committed a crime. And you can't have the documents until you prove we've committed a crime.

If you were so unfortunate enough to have been dragged off to prison for alleged wrong doing, you would end up like Jose Padilla - thrown in jail without charges and held on evidence you weren't allowed to see or contest.

But yes, what warantless wiretaps?
*earmuffs on*
*thumb up butt*