Log in to become a member of Missing Link's Fan Club!
Joe Lieberman, well, what can you say. He's the toast of the Republican party for becoming the goat of the Democratic party and all for a speech about bipartisan unity that slid like water off an elephants back. What a schmoe.
The incredible thing is that he stood there alone waving the white Fruit of the Loom flag as a one-man Democratic surrender. I am amazed at Joe's lack of understanding of warfare, the guy who surrenders does not get to call the shots Joe. The guy who surrenders loses his leverage Joe. Politics is about pushing the ideas and philosophy that matter to you and the side that surrenders gets diddly-squat Joe! Joe Lieberman can't even bring his own party to the table after tonight and I doubt any Republican will return his calls in 48 hours.
It was amusing to see the confused looks on the young Republicans who appeared dazed, confused and slightly panic-stricken by Joe's assertion that it isn't as important to be a party member as it is to be an American. The startled looks in the crowd were hysterical as young Republicans who came to feed on Democratic flesh were told by a Democratic keynote speaker that their banners didn't matter. There were also telling shots of the chortling older Republicans as Joe Lieberman performed an act of political self-mutilation on stage.
I am sure that there were teams of Republican veterans on hand as crisis intervention specialists to handle the momentary crises. I'm sure that they rushed in to triage whenever some rabid Republican got a good whiff of bipartisan smoke and mirrors. I'm sure they were trained to reassure the youngsters that it doesn't matter what the old Democrat had to say, it only matters that it's embarrassing to the other side that he's here. I'll bet that Ronald Reagan smelling salts were administered and Cheney ice compresses to foreheads, a few Jelly Belly's to raise the blood glucose up again.
I don't know if it was on purpose but there seemed to be an awful lot of fat jowly young white guys in the pictures of the convention tonight. It sort of reminded me of the son of the Southern political candidate in "Oh Brother, Where Art Thou". Now I know it isn't PC to point that out but perhaps it is the liberal media's goal to make Republicans look ungainly. If that is the case, they succeeded tonight. They looked porky.
We have a new Republican term, the "ANGRY LEFT" that was liberally used tonight. What after all does the left have to be angry about; well, maybe record foreclosures, record deficits, lied to the UN and the American public to go into the Iraq war, use of 911 to limit freedom, record unemployment, record oil profits, bank failures, and the list goes on and on. I guess it's true that the Left is Angry but what mystifies me is why the Right isn't.
George W. has been in hiding for a year now and it seems that Laura has to go out and do all of the tough speeches. Laura made it to the convention, why not George? Was he about to heft a chainsaw in Louisiana and cut up some fallen limbs? Does he run FEMA? Is his cell phone out of order? Is Air Force 1 in the shop? Can't Cheney oversee the "disaster" for one evening? I don't get the video thing but there it was; it came off weak and wimpy.
And where were all the Republicans? Why all the empty seats? Can't they even fill the convention hall? I have to say that it doesn't look like there is much enthusiasm on the Republican side. The President doesn't show up, the hall isn't even full, and a Democrat is needed to pump up the base.
I doubt that Joe Lieberman really thinks his speech could convince the Republicans to extend a hand of bipartisanship to the Democrats. I doubt that Joe Lieberman really thinks that John McCain would turn his back on his funders if he got into the White House.
It must be that Lieberman is simply messianic because he isn't politically naive.
Missing - regarding your comments about the "angry left", you all might be less angry if you were more accurate. You speak of "lied to the UN and the American public to go into the Iraq war, use of 911 to limit freedom, and record unemployment." First of all, give us a freakin break on the "Bush lied" thing. That he acted on inaccurate intelligence data we can agree on. The accuasation of lying is a disgraceful charge against an honorable man. The same thing goes for the "limiting your freedoms"; start looking at it as "trying to save my ass" and maybe you will be less angry, dude. And finally, if you think we have "record unemployment" you must be very young and/or very uninformed. At least get your facts right. How is that for a little anger from the "right"?
If those were not lies delivered to the UN, then where is Colin Powell in the VP debate? if he delivered the "truth" to the UN where is he? Why isn't he stumping for the Republicans? If you are kidding yourself that the Bush admin didn't know darn well what the Iraqi's had then you are young or naive. Isn't the President responsible for making sure the "intelligence" is accurate before going to war and killing hundreds of thousands of people? They knew what they were doing and it was about the oil, get right Mr. Right.
What about Bush's firing of US Attorneys based on their poltical party? Is that what you consider honorable? Is that what you on the right consider justice? It sounds like the act of a dictator to me. Remember Alberto Gonzales Mr. Anonymous?
As far as "trying to save my ass", you have to be freakin' kidding me. You are willing to have your rights limited and your freedom curbed under the guise of protecting you? I quote one of the founding fathers you right wing knucklehead, from his speech in 1775 "Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death." Patrick Henry said this, "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God!"
Why the anger? Why the remorse? Why the "whys"? This is all old hat. Nothing new here. Politics in the modern world. Been going on for decades. Why the surprise? Why the blue treatment to the picture? Why no name? What are we all hiding from? Ohhhhhh, the truth. Nothing new there, either. Peace out.
Ummm, did Mr. Smith have something to say? Sorry but I couldn't tell. Every time I write something controversial about the "right" they attack my blue picture, maybe it would be more acceptable to the conservatives in red?
» left by Butch Trucks (89 days 5 hours ago.)
I find that the majority of talkers are rarely doers. If people got out and did more, meaning got up some courage to get off their couch to see how perfect they can be in the public eye, then I think we'd see less commentary from the weak and hiding. I believe only those whov'e been in the public eye to at least a minor degree should throw stones. Because it takes courage to get up there and participate whether your liberal or conservative. And keep in mind that all those negatives aimed at the non-water walkers are sent by the same. How easy is it to fling from behind a computer or anonymity of any sort. Too easy. Even though I don't care for him, I admire Bush for getting up and doing. Few do. You? Respond to this comment
Oh Butch get a clue, you're living in a Democracy. We all get to throw stones. If people want to pretend they're perfect by stepping out into the public eye, then they better expect some scrutiny. Besides Butch , I "do" every day, I work and I pay all the taxes to fund my government and I call it how I see it. I get to because I am a free man living in a participatory Democracy. Don't like my persepctive? Then let's debate, but don't tell me to be quiet simply because I choose not to get into political life. We've got enough people suckling at the public trough and few enough of us private business owners paying the freight. We workers are the ones who are "doing", don't confuse us workers with the politicians who can't seem to get anything done except talk.
Missing link, I like your take on this whole thing. I often wonder if Lieberman would win his re-election. Everyone is keeping an eye of him. The fact that he betrayed his party will come up in his re-election. Consequently, he will lose Democratic votes. And Republicans will be busy prioritizing one of their own. Independents are usually not enough to vote anyone in office. McCain can not bail him out then either. By the way, I join your fan club.
Disclaimer: All information on this site is provided for informational purposes only! By no means is any
information presented herein intended to substitute for the advice provided to you by any health care or other professional
or organization.
