by J.B. Williams
Tuesday, august 8, 2006
Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman is the last standing moderate Democrat in congress and he is taking heavy fire from his own party which is working to replace him with liberal Democrat challenger Ned Lamont.
Polls have the two running neck-n-neck 24 hours before the polls open and Lieberman's long distinguished political career may be drawing to a close. Six years ago, he was his party's choice for Vice President as al Gore's White House running mate. a short six years later, he is being run out of town by that party. What are the unforgivable sins that threaten to bring his career to a close?
Like his party, Lieberman has a long history of supporting liberal positions on nearly every issue.
• He has voted for abortion rights
• He has voted against a balanced budget amendment
• He has voted against protecting the flag
• He voted against banning same-sex marriage
• He voted to protect homosexuals against "hate-crime"
• He has voted for affirmative action
• He has voted for increased education spending
• He has voted to protect the environment
• He has voted against protecting traditional family values
• He has voted against free enterprise and capitalism
• He supports both the UN and NaTO
• He voted to protect lobbyists' gifts to congress
• He supports Social Security benefits for illegal aliens & guest workers
• He also supports growing social welfare, even for illegal aliens
I can keep going, but you get the picture. So far, he sounds like the perfect liberal Democrat, right? Wrong… He has also voted the opposite way on most if not all of these issues at one time or another. In other words, he has not blindly toed the party line, but rather voted his personal conscience on the basis of the merits of each individual bill. He is somewhat measured and deliberate, he is a moderate. That's his first sin… The party has no love for anyone unwilling to blindly toe the socialist liberal line today and Joe is on the outs…
But his biggest sin, the one that might cost him his seat in the Senate, is his pro-american stance on national security and the war against international terrorism. Like the Bush administration, he sees protecting innocent american lives by hunting down international terrorist's intent upon killing innocent americans, as a high priority. Unlike most of his fellow Democrats, he sees american soldiers as real heroes and real terrorists as the real evil that threatens peace and freedom everywhere.
as a result, he is the last standing national security "hawk" in the DNC and so, the far left element currently in control of the DNC has written him off on this basis alone.
His challenger, Ned Lamont has mounted a campaign to unseat Lieberman on the basis of this single issue. Lamont is on-board with the party rhetoric. He has no real experience and no real official position on anything, but he is willing and able to toe the party line and that's apparently enough. If you don't hate Bush and every Bush policy, you are not welcome in the Democratic Party today. Just ask Joe…
Most americans realize that both political parties are interested only in candidates they can control. The inside-the-beltway power structure within the two parties is not designed to support much less encourage independent thinking. This is the primary reason for the general anti-incumbent sentiment present in almost every american voter today. In each case, the party has become more important than the country itself, or the people they are supposed to represent.
I personally lost respect for Lieberman when he sold out his life long beliefs to join forces with al Gore in 2000, who he often opposed throughout his Senate career. Liberals loved him for selling out then, but have since lost respect for him as he returned after the 2000 defeat, to his old more moderate positions.
This is the problem with selling out one's own belief systems. In the end, neither side can respect someone willing to sell out so easily.
On the other hand, Ned Lamont is simply squawking the party rhetoric in an effort to gain enough votes from the far left (currently unhappy with Lieberman) to win his seat. We will soon see if Connecticut voters want a man willing to make independent decisions even when they are unpopular, or if they prefer a man simply willing to squawk the line.
Either way, the Democratic Party has once again proven just how far left they are interested in going and just how disloyal they are to those unwilling to squawk the line. Once again, the so-called party of the people is more interested in the party than the people.
The quality (or lack thereof) of today's Democratic Party is certain and glaringly obvious. The Lieberman race will only tell us about the quality of Connecticut voters. Hopefully, Connecticut voters are wiser than their neighbors in Massachusetts, who keep re-electing the nation's two most embarrassing members of congress, as if they are the only men on earth qualified to represent New England liberals.
I'd love to see a real conservative elected in a New England state just once in my lifetime. But until then, I'll settle for a true independent moderate Democrat over any anti-america DNC parrot. Hopefully, Connecticut voters will too!
Pursuant to Title 17 U.S.C. 107, other copyrighted work is provided for educational purposes, research, critical comment, or debate without profit or payment. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for your own purposes beyond the 'fair use' exception, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Views are those of authors and not necessarily those of Canada Free Press. Content is Copyright 1997-2024 the individual authors. Site Copyright 1997-2024 Canada Free Press.Com Privacy Statement