Why are dems giving Lieberman the silent treatment?? - Page 3 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #21 of 23 (permalink) Old 12-06-2005, 12:45 PM
BenzWorld Member
Date registered: Jan 2005
Posts: 350
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: Why are dems giving Lieberman the silent treatment??

Posted by MS Fowler: The republican party does have a wider diversity of opinion than does the democrat party who refuses to even allow pro-life speakers at its convention.


So what Democrat was prohibited from speaking at their convention because he was pro-life? And what is your source proving this?

Joe B.
Joe Bauers is offline  
Sponsored Links
post #22 of 23 (permalink) Old 12-06-2005, 01:56 PM
Lifetime Premium Member
Shane's Avatar
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: And what was left was what was guilt was what u gave to me
Location: A cavalcade of strangers came to tear ur world apart
Posts: 41,520
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Quoted: 1726 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
RE: Why are dems giving Lieberman the silent treatment??

MS Fowler - 12/6/2005 4:48 AM

old300D - 12/5/2005 8:39 PM

MS Fowler - 12/5/2005 3:24 PM

I will grant the premise that the current administration is not truly conservative. It has not been financillay conservative; it has not protected the country's borders as it should.
However, there is some stirring among republicans to return to its conservative roots.
The republican party does have a wider diversity of opinion than does the democrat party who refuses to even allow pro-life speakers at its convention.
Yes, the conservatives have abandoned their principles.

But you are wrong that the republicans have a wider diversity of opinion, at least it may be a matter of perspective. In fact, I view the democratic diversity right now as a weakness -- they cannot focus and present a unified front to oppose Bush's bankrupt policies.

Colorado has a governor's race coming up next year, and right now the democrats are lining up behind a Catholic, so-called "right to lifer". His views are similar to a recent democrat (can't remember, virginia, new jersey..?) who also was elected perhaps in spite of "pro-life" views.

Both of these people also support choice and honor existing law. They just don't consider abortion as a personal choice like many others, including me.
I agree that the dems have a problem--they STILL don't present a coherent philosophy. They do not have a unified theory of government. The republicans are known as the party of conservatives--whether in fact they are, or not is another point. But at least there is a general understanding that repubs support a more limited view of government--their problem is that now that they actually have the power of government, many have abandoned their principles and are behaving like big-government, big pork-spending democrats.
On the other hand, democrats do not even have a unified philosophy, other than bigger is better, as far a government is concerned. They have focused almost exclusively on being anti Bush. Its easy to agree that someone, any one person is wrong, and be critical. It is significantly more difficult to offer a positive agenda that shows what positive action one would take that is different from the targeted "evil" person. Thats the problem the dems are begining to understand. Hillary gets heckled by the move-on fringe when she doesn't present a plan for immediate pull out from Iraq.
You may remember, I posted a thread a few weeks ago, asking dems to post positive statements concerning what they would do --if they were returned to power. Very few dems--particularly those who post the most extreme anti-Bush spew, responded in any intelligent way. In fact, they still posted negative, anti-Bush jabs. It seems that this is an illustration of the problems with the dems. They are unified only in their hatred; not in any positive agenda.
Isn't the dem leadership trying to formulate such a positive strategy behind closed doors? I think they have met several times, but seem unable to articulate a positive plan. It must be frustrating for them.
I think you are right regarding the failure of the Democrats in not having produced an outlined plan for recovery from the W years. They will continue to suffer as long as they attack without a coehesive plan. I honestly do not know why they do not fight harder as there is so much ammunition against Bush Co. that it is ridiculous.
I think it is a simplification on your part to divide things so ardently between the dems and repubs. I myself used to be a Republican back during the Reagon and Bush Sr. era. But the republicans, even to your own admission, no longer represent those values now. I do dislike Bush and the repubs now. Between the trumped up war, the huge debt, and the lower standard of living now spreading why would anyone not directly benefiting still defend this executive branch's behavior?
I voted against him TWICE when running for gov. of Texas. To see him win the whitehouse twice is merely insult to injury. My dislike of him is not party based, but track record based. (I HAVE NEVER EVEN VISITED THE DNC SIGHT ONCE!) I do not even like the two party system for that matter.
If there is any vindication here it is how DEFENSIVE you behave when defending W. That speaks volumes alone. Maybe you should hear yourself?
Shane is offline  
post #23 of 23 (permalink) Old 12-06-2005, 04:55 PM
BenzWorld Elite
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2014 E250 Bluetec 4-Matic, 1983 240D 4-Speed
Location: USA
Posts: 9,256
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
RE: Why are dems giving Lieberman the silent treatment??

old300D - 12/6/2005 10:25 AM

No argument MS. I'm sure the democrats are frustrated, as I am with them. There seem to be a number of them who still feel the need to support the war, and can only find fault with Bush's execution. That's pretty weak, IMHO. It also dilutes any withdrawal initiative. Personally I think there is a marvelous opportunity to formulate an expeditious withdrawal and force Bush's hand, as it seems that the administration wants nothing more than to stay. And pulling out can be done smartly -- I was impressed with Murtha's ideas on the subject.

As far as Lieberman, he's more than just a hawkish "democrat", he's a DINO, a shill, he should just switch parties and get it over with.
Lieberman got too close to the seat of power, and then lost. The experience taught him, personally, that if you can't beat 'em, join 'em. And that is why he is popular with the Republicans. Jim
JimSmith is offline  
Sponsored Links

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:


  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode

    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On


    Title goes here

    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome