Petition To Remove Smug...I mean Senator... Lieberman As Chairman

  • metta

    Posts: 39090

    Dec 05, 2009 7:10 AM GMT

    http://act.credoaction.com/campaign/joe_lieberman_po/?rc=fb_share1

  • Dec 05, 2009 4:30 PM GMT
    Why should he be removed? The majority of the population of this country are against the government option. I am against the government option. Senator Lieberman is against government option.

    Are you only in favor of keeping Senators in position when they agree with your MINORITY opinion? So typical.

    I live in Texas and sent a contribution to Lieberman when he was running in the Democrat primary two and lost. I also sent a contribution when he was running an as Independent in the general election.

    Its funny how so many "free-thinkers" on here are only in favor of freedom of throught, expression only as long as it is in lock-step with their own thinking. They shout from the rooftops that freedom of thought, expression are vastly important and then as soon as someone questions anything in their beliefs that person "needs to be shut down". Of course, this is a generalization but it is no more a generalization than that employed by the foaming-at-the-mouth left wingnut hetrophobes when they basically state that anyone who happens to disagree with them one bit is a homophobe.

    As for smug senators-are you also in favor of removing the other vastly more smug senators from their positions? Senators Boxer and Schumer come to mind first. It would be impossible to be more smug than these two.

    Good chance Boxer will be gone in the coming GOP sweep (2010). Obama will be the next Carter for the GOP-the gift which just keeps giving.

    What is it about Democrats that they can't stand a member or former member of their own caucus who is in favor of national securite (Lieberman)?

    I am ready for the onslaught from the bot-like gay sheep who denounce anyone who can think for himself. Attack away!! Its expected since you are like wind-up dolls who attach anything or anyone who questions your beliefs.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2009 4:46 PM GMT
    To form Joe Lieberman in the womb, I used a mixture of vinegar, water, and bird turd. When Joe Lieberman dies and his body returns to it's original state, it will be bottled and used to douche the poison vaginas of Michelle Bachman and Maggie Gallagher. In it's recycled form, the mixture will be used to clean out Carrie Prejean, Sarah Palin and Barbara Bush.
  • calibro

    Posts: 8888

    Dec 05, 2009 4:55 PM GMT
    StandingOvation saidWhy should he be removed? The majority of the population of this country are against the government option. I am against the government option. Senator Lieberman is against government option.



    The majority of the population in this country has not read the health care bill, do not understand what is actually being proposed, and develop opinions based from people they see on tv or hear on the radio. Why don't we just determine our war policy in Iraq by asking kindergartners how they feel about fighting? And second, the constitution specifically outlines not following the majority. It's why we have the electoral college. Our founding fathers were afraid of an uneducated public leading for the passage or stopping of laws that would harm the country if respectively acted upon. It's akin to civil rights legislation when the majority of the country was against that too.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2009 5:03 PM GMT
    StandingOvation saidWhy should he be removed? The majority of the population of this country are against the government option. I am against the government option. Senator Lieberman is against government option.

    You are apparently also against the facts. Here are the results of a recent poll ("public option" is actually how it's titled in the OP's link about Lieberman's opposition; you got that wrong, too):

    Believe in public option: 59.9 percent yes, 40.1 percent no.

    Poll: Most in U.S. want public health option

  • Dec 05, 2009 5:08 PM GMT
    So you are stating that since the majority of the people in the US have not read this bill which contains a public option it should be shoved down our collective throats? Most who are supporting the public option have not read it either and that includes those in the Congress (both houses) who are voting on it. I understand the majority does not rule all the time but the simple fact that a majority does not support does not mean it is a good idea.
    Your logic on that point is really convoluted.

    I think it is funny that the very people who are now bringing up the electoral college (which I have seen on TV) were the very ones AGAINST using the electoral college results in the 2000 Presidental elections. There are methods in place to protect the minority so the view of the majority can't always be forced through but a minority should not be able to pass legislation for which the majority is then forced to pay.

    It was long ago said that the downfall of a system or nation is when the population discovers it can vote benefits for itself; that the have-nots can vote in politicans who are more interested in their political careers than the good of the country and therefore will vote to give anything the have-nots want to them simply because of their voting power. We have now reached that threshold and are probably screwed.

    This healthcare bill is a disaster. It should be voted down. Hopefully if it passes it will be repealed once the GOP regains the Congress which will happen in 2010 if things continue in their current direction. The GOP is very far from perfect but compared to the Democrat Party it is close.

    Has anyone checked out President Incompetent's approval numbers lately and the generic Rep/Dem poll numbers?

    Obama is lying (again) that we will have a choice. The rules of this health-care monstrosity will quickly put the health-care insurance companies out of business so the government will be the only option. I hope you enjoy long, long line for working people so we can have the same health-care as those who don't work and are not productive. They have time to stand in line for inferior healthcare; hardworking people do not.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2009 5:10 PM GMT
    Liberman needs to go. Why is it Medicare the government option for all Seniors ok, but anyone under 65 cannot have a government option? We should let the people choose if they want it, from what I read and option is a choice. Why can't people 0-64 have an option to be in Medicare?

    Also, Health Insurance is not Health care, it is someone who takes money and will sometimes pay the doctor bills. That is why single payer makes so much sense. Why give money to a company who's goal is to make a profit by either raising premiums or denying care.

    Enough of the stupid scare tactics and enough of Liberman doing the Insurance Lobby's work for them.

  • Dec 05, 2009 5:13 PM GMT
    MSNBC LOL. Not surprising.

    Here is a poll which backs me up. You find an outlier and post it. My poll is from Rasmussen which has been by-far the most accurate recently.

    http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/november_2009/42_want_federal_government_to_address_health_care_reform_23_prefer_leaving_it_to_states

    It does not want to post as a hyperlink but copy and paste if you are interested in results of a more accurate poll.

    MSNBC is more leftwing than even Fox is right-wing. Take anything and everything that comes from MSNBC with a ton of salt. Their viewship is about 10% of that of Fox News. MSNBC is almost a wing of the Democrat Party.

  • Dec 05, 2009 5:20 PM GMT
    The link does not post properly but it is Ramussen which has been by far the most accurate polling recently for both the 2004 and 2008 Presidental elections and also for the wonderful results in VA and NJ recently.

    People should have what they can afford and want to afford. We already give too much to unproductive individuals who will always be hanging around with their hand(s) out.

    This government option is just another give-away to those who feel they are too good to be productive. Medicare to the older is because health care has traditionally, at least for the last several decades, been tied to employment and most are retired by age 65-68 so they are no longer able to obtain healthcare through their employment.

    People who do not pay their own way through work or family money, whatever, are not entitled to the same things as though of us who do. I have no polling to back me up on this but would be willing to bet that the majority of the population would agree with this too.

    We will see in November 2010 when the positions will be clear.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2009 5:22 PM GMT
    StandingOvation saidMSNBC LOL. Not surprising.

    Even less surprising that you cannot read. The poll article I linked is from Reuters, a respected international news agency, not by MSNBC. The actual polling was done by the Thomson Reuters Corporation. MSNBC merely posted it to their web site. The citation:

    Reuters, updated 10:18 a.m. ET, Thurs., Dec. 3, 2009
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2009 5:24 PM GMT
    StandingOvation saidIts funny how so many "free-thinkers" on here are only in favor of freedom of throught, expression only as long as it is in lock-step with their own thinking.


    I love how you all sound the same icon_biggrin.gif

    BTW, Free thinking was about freedom from being dictated to by the church or conservative society.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2009 5:34 PM GMT
    Standing ovation...
    if you don't want to sign the petition or if you find it uninteresting, that's fine...
    but why do you have to start an argument with someone?

  • Dec 05, 2009 5:35 PM GMT
    Right. Funny that when some of the guys on here can't argue against and argument they will start attacking the grammer or the font in which it is posted or anything.

    Most of the foaming-at-the-mouth lefty gays whom I know will make a point to say that people should be free to have and state their opinions. They make a loud point of them. Then you should hear them as soon as someone does not agree with a particular point.

    Just because "The Advocate" or some local gay rag calls for something does not make it good. Its funny how stating that is considered homophobic by some on the far left fringe.

    Free thinking may have began as it related to the Church but it has been used in other fields in recent years but its nice to see you grasping at straws to attack fact.

    There is NOTHING as intolerant as a queen with her rainbow flag and certainty of her position.

  • Dec 05, 2009 5:38 PM GMT
    Start an argument? When people post all types of vile things on here about Senator Lieberman? Why do you not question when they state hateful things simply because he does not agree with their positions 100%. He was always considered a liberal democrat and still basically is on all issues except this health-care non-sense and national security but since he is not LOCK-STOP with the nut in the White House and the extreme left they find fault with him.

    I did not start a fight; I simply questioned the need for a petition and if it would be applied equally to all the smug members of the Democrat Party who happen to be in the US Senate.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2009 5:38 PM GMT
    StandingOvation saidRight. Funny that when some of the guys on here can't argue against and argument they will start attacking the grammer or the font in which it is posted or anything.


    The spelling looks to be the best option here.

  • Dec 05, 2009 5:45 PM GMT
    OK Reuters; their recent accuracy leaves much to be desired too. Just how far off were they in the recent NJ governor's race and the two most recent Presidential elections?

    Any poll which shows 60% approval for the public option was either taken on a college campus or in an ACORN office.

    I think I have stirred up enough this morning. THANK YOU TO THE SIX regulars on here who have emailed me supporting my position and against the President's attempts to ruin healthcare in this country.

    Its so funny on here are afraid to publically state their position if it is against the President or against the position of the left-wing nutjobs. Six replies from men who are against both Obama and his plan. Funny how we have allowed the aggressive LOONEY LEFT to muzzle the majority with their demand for total pc talk and thought.

    Thank you. Reply all you want but I have other things to do now that you know that a large minority at least (possibly a majority) in the gay community are not in favor of ruining healthcare in the US.

  • Dec 05, 2009 5:48 PM GMT
    Hey Miss Crabtree aka Tiger Tim. I am not an English professor and that word has always been a problem for me! The degrees I use are in a field in which money can be make; not liberal arts (English) although I hate to admit I did go back and earned a BA in history but only for fun since I enjoy history.

    Why am I still surprised when I see again that when the left can't attack an argument they attack the way in which it is presented. So typical.

  • D972

    Posts: 125

    Dec 05, 2009 5:48 PM GMT
    You know i was going to post a long post about this subject but I decided against it. At this point, the health insurance debate has been dissected to bits.

    So I will say this as i have read what you have written OP:

    There is no correlation between working hard and having health insurance.

    If you truly believe your health insurance company has your interest at heart I hope you are never denied health benefits from your comfy Health insurance provider and you have to pay out of pocket for care.


  • Dec 05, 2009 5:49 PM GMT
    Miss Crabtree, you missed another error in my spelling. I used AND instead of AN in another location. You better get your RED EYEBROW
    pencil out again.


  • Dec 05, 2009 5:57 PM GMT
    There most certainly is a correlation between working hard and having health coverage. Not all who are hard working have coverage but there is correlation.

    Most who do not have private coverage are either in low-paying entry level jobs and qualify for medicaid or are simply too lazy (and too good) to get out of bed and go to work and are still on medicaid.

    Am I the only one who is tired to dragging out of bed everyday to go to work to pay for those who feel they are too good to work?

    Again, I realize there are some who work and are not covered by insurance at their place of employment but this is the exception rather than the rule.

    Most who are not covered simply to not work or do not take out available coverage.

    Oh, and I have never been denied a claim. I don't think the health care industry has my best interest at heart. They are a for-profit industry. The best way to address this problem is tort reform and to simply realize that not everyone deserves the same level of healthcare. The lawyers add billions to the cost of healthcare by forcing doctors to practice defensive medicine.

    Those who do not even make an effort to provide for themselves and their family do not deserve the same care as those who do.

    As for who has my best interest at heart I would rather trust Aetna or Cigna than President Obama. The two companies may be slugs but he is a snake and not the one winding around the medical staff; he is a viper who will ruin healthcare in this country.

    LONG LIVE SENATOR LIEBERMAN!! Vice-President or even President 2012!!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2009 5:58 PM GMT
    Standing Ovation...

    I stand corrected. You aren't starting an argument.
    You're bloviating.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2009 6:04 PM GMT
    StandingOvationPeople who do not pay their own way through work or family money, whatever, are not entitled to the same things as though of us who do. I have no polling to back me up on this but would be willing to bet that the majority of the population would agree with this too.


    It always astonishes me to see people take this (plutocratic) position. You're saying that poor people and much of the middle class do not deserve the "same things" (by which you mean access to health care, apparently).

    I don't know how this would poll in the US, but it's certainly true the residents of every other democracy would disagree with you. In those countries, health care is a right, not a commodity. Even under the present proposals, we are still far from taking that position.

    Besides advocating plutocratic ideology, your rant doesn't account for the way lobbyists overwhelm our elected officials. By any logic and simple observation of the rest of the world's health care, a single-payer system is the only one that makes sense.

    But public opinion itself is warped by lying lobbyists and their puppets in Washington and the media to an almost comical degree -- like the Teabaggers railing against the public option as socialist while at the same time threatening to eviscerate anyone who "touched" their Medicare.

    We have become a society of sheep, basically the globe's largest third-world country, with a population that is so uneducated and fearstruck that we vote repeatedly against our own interests and ideals to preserve the power and wealth of the upper class.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2009 6:07 PM GMT
    A standing ovation without a leg to stand on? Did I create that? My bad.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2009 6:12 PM GMT
    What I find more interesting, ObsceneWish, is how StandingOvation mischaracterizes those who disagree with him in terms of gender:

    There is NOTHING as intolerant as a queen with her rainbow flag and certainty of her position.

    Hey Miss Crabtree aka Tiger Tim

    Isn't it depressing that these right-wing zombies stick to the same tired old formula?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Dec 05, 2009 6:19 PM GMT
    personal political beliefs about senator lieberman aside, this petition is meaningless. there is no mechanism in our government where based on a petition like this could or would lead to someone losing chairmanship of a committee. if you want to do something about joe lieberman, work to elect his opponent in 2012, when he's up for reelection - if you live in CT, vote for someone else. if you don't, consider contributing to his opponent's campaign. don't waste your time with a petition.