Is Joe looking to leap to GOP?
Here's the unsurprise of the week. Co-dependent Joe Lieberman told Fox News today he's considering voting Republican in 08. My bet is he would jump parties altogether if they offered him a good slot. In any event he owes the GOP big time for getting him elected. Meanwhile, clueless Joe blames his sudden disaffection with his old party on the single issue of Iraq. He's got both feet firmly planted on the Bush bandwagon and he just can't believe the Democratic Party isn't going to just let the White House have everything it wants. All in the spirit of bi-partisanship of course. Maybe he hasn't noticed the GOPers are jumping ship too.
He probably should have held on to that party he created to run against LaMont. At the rate things are going, he's may find neither party is going to want to claim him.
posted by Libby Spencer at 6:23 PM
3 Comments:
Libby, I think if you'd look at it rationally, you'd empathize a lot more with Joe. How would you feel about Chuck Hagel or Ron Paul (both of whom I know you've recently written nice things about) being all but hounded from the GOP for their anti-Iraq war views? Litmus tests on any issue, IMHO, are unamerican, and the same goes for conservatives like Hugh Hewitt who are working hard to have honorable people like Hagel and Paul ostracized from their party.
Quite possibly all the definitions are in flux. Christians aren't christian, conservatives are anything but, dem and rep literally don't mean the same anymore. I think the differences will boil down to this - defenders of what used to be the idea of America: freedom and constitution vs the fascist usurpers and their hordes of brain dead faux xtian death cultists.
It doesn't matter what whiny Joe calls himself, He's already made his choice.
Steve - It's not Joe's position on the war that I have a problem with. I disagree with it of course but support his right to hold it. It's the hypocrisy and the deceit I have a problem with. He lied during the campaign, implying he was in support of ending the occupation and furthermore he smeared LaMont as a one-issue candidate and now turns around and bascially says he's not going to support the party that gave him his current power at caucus, based on that same one issue. And by the way, Paul has also been barely tolerated right along and Hagel hasn't exactly been the darling of the pary as it stands now.
Nolo - well said. I have nothing to add to that.
Post a Comment
<< Home