Comments on: Joe Lieberman; Words versus actions

By: Mr Pink Eyes

Mr Pink Eyes — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 10:45:22 +0000

He already did, both Independents in the senate voted in favor of cloture.

By: Mr Pink Eyes

Mr Pink Eyes — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 10:44:35 +0000

I hope that you are right, but I just don’t think so.

By: Mr Pink Eyes

Mr Pink Eyes — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 10:44:00 +0000

Good point Terrant. I still have a problem with him coming out not only opposed to the public option but extremely opposed to it only to change his mind. He must have known what his constituents wanted when he came out opposed to the public option, this makes me feel like he was bargaining for something all along.

By: Ron Russell

Ron Russell — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 00:01:21 +0000

There is too much dealing in those back rooms for the common man to have any idea about whats going on. They are afraid to bring their sh#t out into the open for fear of a revolution if the American people saw their corruption. Joe Liebermann in the end will roll over if he hasn’t already done so as you claim.

By: Reaganite Republican

Reaganite Republican — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 16:19:06 +0000

Yeah, I expected a little more fight out of him… and am dissappointed.

But according to Politico, the deals made with him and others dealt a death blow to the public option… I hope they’re right, Mr P/E:

http://reaganiterepublicanresistance.blogspot.com/2009/11/divided-dems-move-obamacare-along-but.html

By: Terrant

Terrant — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 15:44:53 +0000

It depends on how you define principals. If the polls are accurate, his constituents want the public option. As their representative, shouldn’t he be representing them? In an ideal world, that is what should be happening with elected officials.

Now that said, this probably the result of some back room deal. I expect that his nest was feathered in some way. My prediction is that he will be running an underfunded democratic candidate.

By: Terrant

Terrant — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 15:27:43 +0000

Now that said, this probably the result of some back room deal.

By: Tom

Tom — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 14:34:34 +0000

But isn’t the post about the principles of the man? Obviously, something happened that caused him to reverse his position – perhaps something similar to “the Louisiana Purchase”?

But regardless, refusing a debate on a bill can and should be stopped by many or one if that bill is un-Constitutional, not in the best interests of the country or its citizens, or just frivolous.

And the bill they just voted to have debate on meets at least two of the three criteria I just listed above.

By: psychonauticalmindbloom

psychonauticalmindbloom — Sun, 22 Nov 2009 12:30:48 +0000

I think its a good vote. Yes I am in favor of the current legislation, but even if I opposed it I would think it would be wrong for one man to deny the country a debate..