Login Here 
Uber-prig Joe Lieberman took so much pride in standing on the floor of the Senate and scolding Bill Clinton over a blow job that you just knew he'd come out swinging over Dennis Hastert's part in the coverup of sexually predatory behavior towards minors, didn't you?
No we don't live in that world, we live in friggin' bizzaroworld. When asked whether Hastert should step down today, Joe scolded Democrats for attempting to make it a partisan issue. Of course he has no interest in holding Hastert or any other Republican to account.
Joe Lieberman just can't bring himself to hold anyone in Washington accountable, even when the safety of our children is at stake. If Dennis Hastert knew that Mark Foley was harassing minors and didn't do anything about it, he should resign immediately. Anyone who disagrees is morally tone deaf. The fact that Joe Lieberman says calling for Hastert's resignation is too "partisan" demonstrates that he's been in Washington so long that he can't recognize the difference between what's right and what's partisan. We expect Senator Lieberman to stand by President Bush on the war and other failed policies, but until now we didn't expect him to protect a public leader who put the safety of our children at risk. Connecticut deserves better than someone who puts a twisted definition of "bipartisanship" ahead of what's right for this country. It's time for a change.
Joe Lieberman does not want to take responsibility for his mismanagement of the disastrous war in Iraq, nor does he want to hold Dennis Hastert responsible for his role in this sordid affair. This may be Tortureman's definition of what it means to be "bipartisan," but it is not mine.
Moderator adds: Lieberman transcript from Imus show here.
Share This 
Spotlight
Jane!
Holy Joe gotta go.
So what’s the next crazy gooper scandal gonna be? Sheesh, we’ve gone beyond surreal to, well, whatever that condition is called, that exists beyond surreal hehe.
I’m voting for the next scandal involving ritual human sacrifice and cannibalism!
Wow, did Joe really say that calling for Hastert’s resignation is “partisan”? Then why is Human Events going to do just that? And the Washington Times - what about them?
The fact that Lieberman is on the wrong side of even this issue will be the last straw for many people.
I’m shocked!! (NOT)
Joe won’t say anything bad about Repugs but he sure doesn’t mind mouthin’ off about Dems.
I’m surprised he hasn’t blamed this on Ned.
Oh goody.
Joe, you get Denny’s back.
Denny, you hang in there buddy. We need you to stay tough. Throw everybody else over to save yourself. Keep up the denial.
Fox, Drudge, Dobson, Rush you guys keep backing Denny too. It makes you seem so in touch with the American people.
I have a feeling that Lieberman’s money masters haven’t informed him as to what position he should take on this Hastert matter, so he fell back on the tried and true “too-Partisan” excuse, which he has rendered utterly meaningless.
It seems like curtains for ole Joe.
Let’s see–his buddy Foley hiding out in a mistreatment center with his liver hanging out of his pant leg, Hastert’s term as Cover Boy for Foley…how does it feel to be a Republican Joe?
The GOP sewer of DC is the result of years of “Democratic” Liebermanism.
I wonder if anyone can help define what “Liebermanism” is. Let’s coin the term.
Jane, I wonder if we should have a definitions contest?
Fordham says he repeatedly told Hastert’s then-Chief of Staff Scott Palmer as far back as 2003 that there was a problem with Foley and the pages. And nothing was ever done.
http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/
Face it, Joe is one strange fellow who is now in bed financially and politically with the Semblers (child torturers) of the world. He has passed into the dark side and is beyond contempt.
Go Ned Go CT Dems!
no time to check for double-postings, but this seems important:
Resignation Statement by Kirk Fordham (who said he could last until Friday?) on AmericaBlog:
Liebermanism is like Fox calling Foley a (D)
Isn’t it obvious at this point that Holy Joe has long been a Republican mole? That everything out of his mouth confirms that he is, at best, a concern troll?
Prof: This part by Fordham is going to make them drop….
I will fully disclose to the FBI and the House Ethics Committee any and all meetings and phone calls I had with senior staffers in the House Leadership about any of Foley’s inappropriate activities.
ccmask @ 14
I like Liebermanism. Maybe we should shorten it: Lieberism.
But at this point, this is what’s making my head explode: who, aside from Repubs, are seriously going to vote for him? What Dem in their right mind would vote for this Republican Lemming? Cause as we know, he will lead them right over the cliff.
Don’t you wanna go knocking door to door in Ct. and just ask, “Why?”
That statement by Ned is as solid as it gets.
If a Democrat calls for Foley-enabling/covering-up Speaker Dennis Hastert to resign, Joe Lieberman says it’s “partisan.” And, as a member of the Party of One, partisanship is anathema to him.
But what does he call it when a veteran leader of the conservative movement like Richard Vigurie, or other conservatives, call for Hastert’s resignation? Are Republicans allowed to do it, but Democrats aren’t? Or is everyone just supposed to STFU while this collossal failure of moral leadership by House Republicans continues to endanger underage Congressional pages?
What would Joe do?
And it only took Fordham a week to figure out that telling the truth was the right thing to do.
Jeesh.
Yes! MORE AGGRESSSION PLEASE! This is good stuff. Ned needs to continue to point out where he is plainspoken and right on basic common sense issues.
To defend Hastert on this is lunacy on Joe’s part.
afterthought @ 6
Don’t forget Preznit Bush. He was still staying the course the last I heard. No cut and runner, he.
OT (not really considering RGJ) but wow– just saw Eleanor Smiel on Tucker who spoke out for a woman’s right to choose and she was one of the best I have seen.
smart, empathic, factual, calm and fair.
http://www.local10.com/health/10001245/detail.html
I’ll bet Fordham has some good stories.
Definitions in Liebermanism:
1) partisanship is attacking Republicans
2) bipartisanship is helping Republicans attack Democrats
3) ?
Pachacutec @ 9
A disdainful contempt for the political party to whom one claims to belong?
Muzzy @ 18
afterthought @ 25
3) Change the rules in the middle of the game if you don’t think you’re winning.
3) is when a kiss float follows you at every campaign stop.
Liebernamism:
Talking out both sides of your mouth AND your a** at the same time,and Lying while you do it.
Joe’s just trying to buy a little more insurance. You know, like when he decided he’d run anyway, after he lost the primary. Yup, Joe’s said it was about insurance, and if all it takes is demonstrating his complete lack of ethics, why, it seems to be something he’s OK with. What a crumb.
THE KISS FLOAT! I miss that. Is it still around? I don’t see it anymore.
I really think Lieberman’s unwillingness to take a stand against those who conspire to protect pederasts will be the last straw for all who saw him as a man of morals.
Which is exactly why Lamont needs to absolutely pound on this issue.
It is a wake up call for those who do not yet realize that Lieberman is a man of no integrity.
Lieberman lined up on the wrong side of Predatorgate. An incomprehensible act of political suicide - particularly for someone who claims not to be a Republican.
Let’s make sure the voters of Connecticut know about this.
Based on past statements, LIEberman will likely “refrain from criticizing the leadership” on such sensitive national sexcurity issues!
Now back to reality . . .
If the election were held today, Ned would lose.
IMO, his handlers need to break away from the soft sell, anti-Iraq, antiJoe approach.
He already has those votes. WE know what he stands for, but THEY don’t.
If Foley can come out of the closet and admit he’s gay then I think it’s time for Lieberman to come out of the closet and admit he’s a Republican.
Lamont’s statement is perfect for the situation. Ned is really getting his voice and getting the momentum at the perfect time. Lieberman is toast.
Great statement by Lamont. Keep it up. Go Ned!
Lessee, it’s partisan if Democrats criticize Hastert, even if they’re right. And it’s not partisan if Republicans criticize Clinton, even if they’re wrong.
Slash-and-burn partisanship is Grover Norquist’s “bipartisanship is another name for date rape.”
Liebermanism is chiming in with “she was asking for it.”
Speaking out against President Clinton on the floor of the Senate because of a overly friendly consensual sex is statemanship.
Speaking out against harassment of 16 year old pages is evil partisanship.
O-kay.
Pachacutec @ 10
I was just thinking of that. TRex has some Ray Charles CDs to give away.
Slothrop @ 37
You got it.
Redshift @
36
Yes, that really does capture Joe’s persona. That, and she can take a “short ride”.
OT Your daily gas and oil prices
Average price for regular gasoline 10/04/06 in 50 states and DC
$3.00 plus 1 state
$2.90 plus 0 states
$2.80 plus 1 state
$2.70 plus 0 states
$2.60 plus 6 states
$2.50 plus 4 states
$2.40 plus 4 states
$2.30 plus 7 states
$2.20 plus 10 states
$2.10 plus 17 states
$2.00 plus 1 state
Average national price: $2.295, down $.010 from yesterday
Down 64.6 cents from same time last year.
Highest recorded national average price: $3.057 9/5/2005
Highest average price: Hawaii $3.074
Lowest average price: Missouri $2.036
http://www.fuelgaugereport.com/sbsavg.asp
Nymex Crude Future $59.41, up $.73
Dated Brent Spot $58.34, up $.63
WTI Cushing Spot $59.41, up $.73
Gas prices continue to decline but at a slower rate. There may even be some localized increases. Oil prices hang out at the lower end of their price range.
with losermon this chummy with repukelicans, it would seem ludicrous for democrats to even think about having him in their caucus (does the phrase “spy in your midst” strike a chord?). democrats should force him to declare himself the republican candidate now, kick him out NOW so he stops screwing up the election - its the only honnest thing to do. there is no way it would be wise to have him in the dem caucus if he wins.
.
Ray Charles Cd’s? Do they include “Hit the Road Jack”?
Slothrop @ 43
I think they do.
Joe: “Ned has run a relentlessly negative campaign and done a lot of finger-pointing,” Lieberman said. “He is inexperienced and would just add to the partisanship and polarization in Washington that’s blocking progress on national challenges like home ownership and health care costs.”
http://www.boston.com/news/loc.....or_lamont/
snip
Joe’s been talking about health care for 18 bloody years! Let me wring out my hanky…I just found out that without Joe and his party of freakin one health care will not exist!! So what Joe is saying is that the reason Connecticut’s box of band aids is empty is because of Ned? His idea of health care is having Americans snort packs of Dr. Feelgood’s Boogie Woogie HMO Powders! Time to come home from the fair Joe.
What more evidence is required to realize that Joe Lieberman is a stain on statesmanship. This individual is grossly irresponsible. He protects the Bush administration. Turns his back on his party. And now fails to condemn Hastert for turning a deaf ear toward information presented to the Speaker three years ago surrounding the pervert-pedo Republican Congressional Representative, Mark Foley.
*xyz @
31
Incredibly, incredibly stupid decision by Lieberman. This was an absolute no-brainer, a freebie, and Mr. Morality lined up, not just with the Republicans, but with the pro-pedophile Republicans. Good on Ned for calling him on it.
If one couldn’t see how neatly Lieberman’s “moral” positions consistently line up with a Republican agenda, you would have to guess that Lieberman practices “Magic 8-Ball” morality - choosing whether to freak out about any given issue based on sheer chance.
Thus, Clinton warrants a full-scale dressing down on the floor of the Senate, while anyone who criticizes Hastert regarding Foley is “partisan”.
In the battle of Lamont vs. LiarMan, this is a HUGE opening in the LiarMan lines. Mr. Lamont needs to drive a freight truck thru this. No more kum-ba-ya moments, please Mr. Lamont. Stand up like a man, and take a swing.
I urge Mr. Lamont to get this latest message out to those groups who voted for LiarMan in the primary. Chip away at LiarMan’s democratic base. Well crafted messages such as the one cited by Ms. Hamsher will do the trick. It’s very very hard to convince even LiarMan’s diehards to stick with a man who excuses child molestation. LiarMan is at best, an enabler of rape of our children.
I urge Mr. Lamont to swing hard on this. Such opportunities do not come around often. Hit LiarMan, and hit him hard with this message. Start knocking down LiarMan’s base from the primary. It can be done….but you gotta be willing to fight. Now’s the time. God speed Mr. Lamont.
Ghostman
I really like “uber-prig”!
Joe is okay with endless, pointless war, Joe is okay with child molesters in the government. What *else* is Joe okay with?
Eli @ 47
Not if your main audience is diehard Repugs in CT!
You see there is principle and then there is reality. Joe will do nothing and say nothing against Republicans because they have him by the short hairs. He’s as much at their mercy as oh say, a 16 year old page.
Ghostman - Agree 100%.
Lieberman’s moral image is about to take a massive and well-deserved hit.
But I really want to hear the full quote by Lieberman saying that criticisms of Hastert and Republican leadership in the wake of Predatorgate are “partisan”. Anyone have a link?
It seems almost too good to be true that Lieberman would cause himself such an avoidable self-inflicted wound. But it would be consistent with his past behavior…
Question: Is Joe still strong among the black voters? I had heard/read that is his base and combined with republicans those are his voters.
True? Why for goodness sakes?
Bipartisan = when both Bay Buchanan and James Carville (on CNN) declare that Hastert will/should resign by this weekend, and Cafferty says “you can now describe the Speaker as ‘toast’” — is that “bipartisan” enough for Joe?
I don’t think that word means what [he] thinks it means. — Y. Montoya
tfitznc @ 52
So die-hard that they’re okay with covering up for Foley? I don’t think it would really cost him much with Republican voters to say that what Foley and the Republican leadership did was very, very wrong.
When you look up saboteur in the dictionary, you will find Lieberliar.
Throw him out.
GrandmaJ @ 55
He was a big civil rights guy 800 years ago.
dipper @ 50
Yes, the uber-pig is Hastert.
Eli at 57 - Exactly. Lieberman could have come down on the right side of predatorgate without really alienating Republicans, many of whom are outraged themselves. But he didn’t. What a fool. I can’t wait to get out to CT and start volunteering.
I think there can be multiple definitions, and I like the submissions so far. I hope people offer others. Here’s what I just worked up:
Liebermanism (n): the cultivation of political, institutional or governmental corruption, indecency or vice, abetted by superficial displays of public morality and inauthentic protestations of outrage over pious irrelevancies.
Thanks Eli for the answer. But with the torture bill passing with nary a word from Joe about ‘civil rights’ why is that not being pushed against joe?
Nevermind. There are no answers sometimes - just my brain spinning with confusion.
Oh, Joe. Didn’t you learn anything from Yom Kippur? Are you going to spend another year inscribed in the Book of Assholes?
Pachacutec @ 62
Add a little something about malignant narcissism and I think you’ve got it!
Pachacutec @ 62
Annoying whining should be in there somewhere.
Wolf’s CNN Situation Room has been nothing but “the sky is falling” —
In Iraq: Car bombings, bullet riddled bodies, more US soldiers dead, death squads infiltrating security forces — and that’s the lead in to Mike Ware, who is even more alarmist.
The reporting on Foley is — the Republican sky is falling.
Get the children indoors.
Pachacutec @ 62
I think it’s more about betrayal and collaboration for some sort of amorphous advantage (really, what exactly does Lieberman get out of it?) than it is about corruption, though.
Can anyone here imagine, in the real world, if you got caught “trolling” for page boys, the cops don’t come knocking to pick you up for questioning? Especially with a Family Morals party in power! Why, what a great arrest it would have been right before the election! If Foley wasn’t such a chickenhawk, he could have outed himself. Now, that’s courage.
If only Libby had outed Foley instead of a Plame, a mother of twins
Pachacutec @
63
I like. This part:
“displays of public morality and inauthentic protestations of outrage over pious irrelevancies”
in particular.
1,293 DAYZ AND THE KILLIN’ GOEZ ON AND ON AND…
Citizen Hamsher:
First, can you please tell me the name of the vocal artist who sings the lead in “Have You Had Enough” ?
Now then, what do your insider contacts say about the dance of the elephants that’s goin’ on inside the elected leadership, both house and senate, with regard to positioning (especially in the senate) for leadership changes for the new congress. How does the Clinton family’s reluctance to get out front for Ned effect Mrs. Clinton’s chances to supplant Harry Reid and elevate Chuck the Bookkeeper over Durbin? Is there a “progressive” effort that has it’s eggs in Ned’s basket to “contain” Mrs. Clinton and create space for Al Gore in ‘08?
KEEP THE FAITH AND YOUR EYES OPEN, THE FASCISTS ARE LOOKIN’ FOR SOME SKIRTS TA HIDE UNDER!!!
GrandmaJ @ 63
Just note that I’m not sure Joe really *is* that popular with the black community. But if he is, that ancient history is probably the reason.
Atonement?
Thou must have the wrong man, JupiterPluvius!
Joe’s only concern is for Joe and family; there is NONE for his deliberate warmongering and mistakes.
*xyz @ 61
Is Lieberman against ANYTHING except Dems?
Watching Woodward on Hardball. Bob and Chris have just propounded that “countries don’t like to be occupied”. Astounding. I had no idea.
Pachacutec @ 62
2. The elevation of narcissism to the point where myopia displaces common sense in the political process leading to the selling out of any principles one might have once had.
First, can you please tell me the name of the vocal artist who sings the lead in “Have You Had Enough” ?
Rickie Lee Jones.
Norske, it is Rickie Lee Jones.
angie @
59
actually that’s unfair to the saboteurs of the French Resistance, who metaphorically threw clogs (sabots) into the machinery to gum up the Nazi / Vichy (?) war industry. (the sabot mention is from earlier in the Industrial Revolution).
But, yes, by all means throw Joe out.
*xyz @ 54
Help me out with this one too. I got all excited but I want to see the quote. Is this all based on Imus? There I think you can read where Joe thought it was bad that Shimkus did not inform the Democratic members of the committee, and THAT act was partisan.
I’d love to think that Joe said something wrong, but we are dealing with the issue of kids, so lets not put words into his mouth that aren’t there.
Now, the lead from Joe should be… Hastert has to go because he allowed Foley to remain in his committees…. apparently he did not do that and that is a serious lapse of judgement. BUT there’s a lot of venom and no quotes yet. Help us out with some…
CNN: “Staying the course is not good enough, because staying the course has to have an end.” — Colin Powell
Ware follows with “. . . something radical has to be done; staying the course will only strengthen America’s enemies.”
Next up: we’ll ask Woodward: “Did the Saudis intentionally lower oil prices in 2004 to help Bush win the election?”
I hope Rove watches television — this is a feeding frenzy, sharks everywhere, and blood in the water.
Eli @ 68
Shouldn’t there be something about eagerness to betray one’s own party?
DhR32: do i make you a little subjugated
waqiraqi: a little
DhR32: tell me when you’re civil war reaches rock
Jane Hamsher @ 39
With apologies to the sight-impaired, I remember standing on a runway with newly-painted centerline stripes that “even Ray Charles could see” (according to the painter) … this is behavior that is so outrageous, so egregious, so utterly wrong that, yes, even the proverbial “blind man” can see it for what it is. I’d ask what it is these people are thinking, but it’s abundantly clear that thinking is an activity wholly foreign to them. And I’ll save my definition(s) for the contest.
Howie sent me a copy of the ROFLMAO. I always blast it when I do my banking at the drive thru. The girls love it.
I have a cheaper dictionary.
Liebermanism (n): Backstabbing political opportunism wrapped in tedious moralizing and delivered with a whine.
punaise @ 79
gentle punaise, I meant no harm to those brave souls of the French Resistance. It was rather a reference to a dirty scoundrel and pretender to the Dem/Progressive cause!
I will NOT buy Bob Woodward’s newest book.
What a godsend, for Joe to be so deaf. Ned has to get this into a TV ad soonest, get it on the radio into heavy rotation. Strike while the foot is still in the mouth!
Oh!!!! I am so glad that Lieberman said that out loud. It is straight from the BushCo. playbook, where every bit of criticism/ fair questioning/ etc. is labeled as *Partisan*. EVERYTHING. *Partisan* is BushCo’s favorite attack word. Global warming, Schiavo stuff, criticism from Union of Concerned Scientists (just to cite some things that have dropped under the radar).
Geez, I wish I could remember that phrase from some internet gamer thing that I knew nil about until TRex had it as an alternative FDL title.
Kinda like “all our partisan are belong to Bushco?”
Oklahoma kiddo @ 88
Don’t need to. By the time he finishes the talk shows, he’ll have told us everything interesting. The value was having him on so many times, as a “credible” reporter, confirming what we already knew.
So how do we Spotlight this to Harry Reid?
The battle to defeat Lieberman is the central battle of this election cycle. The Democrats cannot be a party, let alone an opposition party with Lieberman in it. If he wins, I hope he bolts. Sometimes less is more. This is such a case
angie @ 88
I know. I was just trumpeting the little bit of history I sort of know. :~)
jeffreyw @ 89
Who could have ever predicted that?
Cozumel @
11
Thanks Coz.
This is shifting from Foleygate to Hastertgate.
As Christy asked this morning, where is the documentation?
Leibermanism, n, politics science/psychology, a mental condition/syndrome combining delusions of grandeur, persistent confusion of status as politician with that of a statesman, a deranged ‘bipartisanship’ that consists of continual betrayal of the subject’s own party, and a Stockholm Syndrome like identification with the opposing political party.
Eli @ 51
Joe is OK with slamming a hospital emergency room door in the face of a rape victim.
Valley Girl @ 90
All your base are belong to Bush?
xyz:But I really want to hear the full quote by Lieberman saying that criticisms of Hastert and Republican leadership in the wake of Predatorgate are “partisan”.
snip
Must be nice to be partisan-free Joe.
Oklahoma kiddo @
76
Ask any older European who was alive during WWII.
We a have huge pretend progressive in the Democratic party. This individual supports keeping our troops in harms way in the midst of the Iraq civil war. And supported the Lebanon invasion. Who might this ‘individual’ be?
Didn’t Bob Woodward just publish a book about Joe “Gotta Go”?
You know, something called “State of Denial”?
Oh…wait a minute, that book is about Junya.
If Woody changed the name of the main character to Joe, who could tell the difference?
I wonder if the next thing we hear from Gerstein is some reference to Lamont’s private e-mail to Lieberman re Clinton.
punaise #79,
Yes, the French threw clogs in the cogs. The things you learn in the bogs of the blogs.
Hugh @ 105
ROTFLMAO– so clever here at the lake!
John Casper @ 96
Good. Foleygate buys us little - either party can have a few “bad apples”. But when the party establishment and leadership covers up for them, it takes on a much, much larger significance.
This is basically everything that’s happened over the last five years, replayed in a Jerry Springer format.
Actually, I picture Joe as Bette Davis in “Whatever happened to Baby Joe”
Re: Foleygate to Hastertgate:
If CREW’s allegations that the FBI sat on this story because of political interferance, this may well become Gonzalesgate…
Hugh @ 106
oh, for peat’s sake….
Mr. Bill @ 109
that is what I am hoping for…
Eli @ 107
You’d think by now they would have learned that it’s not the crime, it’s the COVER-UP that gets you. sheesh!
Good for us that they are just that thick. Hubris indeed.
Jane Hamsher @ 38
I think a contest to predict when Hastert will finally resign would be more fun.
My prediction is this Friday after the news cycle.
I hope I’m wrong - the longer he stays in office the longer the story stays on the air and the better for all the Dems.
Go Denny, go! Hang in there!
WOODWARD: OK. But I had that in the book two years ago, “Plan of Attack.” And there was lot