Author: has written 1136 posts for this blog.

Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

18 Responses

  1. J.H. Bowden
    J.H. Bowden July 12, 2006 at 11:06 pm |

    Lieberman is being targeted for one reason, and that is for his support for the war against militant Islam. Senator Reid openly wants restrictions on abortion rights, but Democrats have yet to mount a jihad to oust him. Much of the nitpicking of Lieberman is a rationalization not to vote for him rather than a substantive reason.

    Nevertheless, as an independent or as a Democrat, I project Lieberman to retain his Senate seat.

  2. Puzzled?
    Puzzled? July 13, 2006 at 1:26 am |

    The topic of Rape seems to appear quite frequently here and in other posts. I am puzzled that you all seem to be in the dark on the rape of an 11 year old Fresno runaway. She claims that 10 Freson City College football players gang raped her. They have 2 black football players in custody as of yesterday.

  3. Jill
    Jill July 13, 2006 at 1:45 am | *

    Lieberman is being targeted for one reason, and that is for his support for the war against militant Islam. Senator Reid openly wants restrictions on abortion rights, but Democrats have yet to mount a jihad to oust him. Much of the nitpicking of Lieberman is a rationalization not to vote for him rather than a substantive reason.

    Is Harry Reid up for re-election against a more progressive Democratic candidate right now?

    Maybe, just maybe, that’s why we’re focusing on Lieberman.

  4. Jill
    Jill July 13, 2006 at 1:46 am | *

    Puzzled-

    Can’t speak for Piny and Zuzu, but I’m aware of it. Just waiting for a little more information before I write something.

  5. Jill
    Jill July 13, 2006 at 1:47 am | *

    Lieberman is being targeted for one reason, and that is for his support for the war against militant Islam.

    And it’s a war against militant Islam now? Someone needs to keep track of what exactly we’re waging war on this week, because I keep falling behind.

  6. Kathy McCarty
    Kathy McCarty July 13, 2006 at 2:11 am |

    Jeebus H Christ, isn’t Ann Richard’s DAUGHTER the current president of Planned Parenthood? She’s no idiot. Let’s get on the phone and bring her up to speed!

  7. KnifeGhost
    KnifeGhost July 13, 2006 at 2:32 am |

    Senator Reid openly wants restrictions on abortion rights, but Democrats have yet to mount a jihad to oust him.

    Awwww, that’s cute.

  8. Dianne
    Dianne July 13, 2006 at 6:33 am |

    Someone needs to keep track of what exactly we’re waging war on this week, because I keep falling behind.

    Eurasia. Or maybe Eastasia. It doesn’t matter. Whoever it is, we’ve always been at war with them.

  9. Christopher
    Christopher July 13, 2006 at 9:21 am |

    I think that that Lieberman quote demonstrates that if you have no goddamned clue about a subject, ESPECIALLY one as important and emotional as rape, you should keep your fool trap shut until you can do some research.

    Eh, Congress. They pull that kind of crud all the time.

  10. libdevil
    libdevil July 13, 2006 at 11:02 am |

    Lieberman is being challenged in the primary for many reasons, none of which have to do with any supposed war on militant Islam. He’s being challenged because he’s in bed with the President on the illegal and morally bankrupt occupation of Iraq. Because he tried to destroy Social Security (switching sides only when it became apparent that his buddy Bush was going to lose that particular fight). Because he screwed over the country to support the bankruptcy bill. Because he’s awful on womens’ issues. Because he’s miserable on free speech. But most of all, because he’s more interested in maintaining power for Joe Lieberman than in remaining loyal to either his constituents or his party. That, in the end, is what drives all these other considerations. It’s why he aligns himself with Republicans when he thinks it’s to his advantage. It’s why he spends so much time on Fox News slamming other Dems. It’s why he won’t abide by the results of the primary. He’s all about himself.

  11. Beet
    Beet July 13, 2006 at 12:43 pm |

    I know very little about hospitals, but it seems that by starting up a hospital in a particular location, Catholic groups use up demand for hospital services in that area, thus depriving other potential hospital entrepreneurs of customers and employees. That would be fine, except that they are now no longer providing services on the basis of religious beliefs, services marginal enough that the demand created by such services wouldn’t support another hospital in the same community. Thus aren’t they in a way depriving the community of certain services? Again, I know very little about Connecticut hospitals, but theoretically that reasoning holds.

  12. Azelie
    Azelie July 13, 2006 at 1:04 pm |

    Re: lack of uproar about Reid

    I can never keep it straight – is it supposed to be a good thing that we don’t get upset about some senators having positions outside of the party mainstream or is it a bad thing? We get accused of being purists who won’t accept anyone who deviates one iota from lefty ideology, then we get accused of being inconsistant and having base motives for accepting some people who deviate from mainstream Democratic views.

    For elected representatives, there has to be some combination of exercising your own judgment and representing your constituents. Where Reid is concerned, we know that he’s ultimately going to work toward advancing the Democratic agenda. There are some senators and congresspeople that we know have to take centrist and even some conservative positions to retain their offices, otherwise the seat will go to a Republican. The problem with Lieberman is that Democrats can’t trust that he’s going to work for our party, and it’s not just a matter of taking a few positions, either prinicipled or strategic, that don’t fit into a progressive agenda (see libdevil’s comment above).

  13. NBarnes
    NBarnes July 13, 2006 at 2:10 pm |

    Senator Reid voted against cloture on Alito. Liebermann voted in favor. No, I don’t have a problem with Reid. He keeps his pro-life views in his goddamn pants.

  14. NBarnes
    NBarnes July 13, 2006 at 2:11 pm |

    Also, libdevil in 10. is 100% correct.

  15. Erika
    Erika July 13, 2006 at 3:11 pm |

    Poor women will face the unenviable choice of carrying…a child conceived of incest (imagine the hell of being impregnated by your own father for a moment)

    I believe that’s also known as rape. That father would be a r-a-p-i-s-t. Sorry, I know it’s nit-picky, but it annoys me when people differentiate between rape and non-consensual incest.

  16. Kristen from MA
    Kristen from MA July 13, 2006 at 3:46 pm |

    The problem with Lieberman is that he is a conservative republican who calls himself a democrat.

    Recently he stood up on the floor of the senate and argued the GOP’s position on a particular issue – I think it may have been Kerry’s proposed timetable for withdrawing from Iraq. He argued on behalf of the republicans. That’s why liberals/progressives/democrats are so upset.

  17. Shinobi
    Shinobi July 13, 2006 at 4:02 pm |

    I can’t even believe there is a debate about this. How could a religious group be so full of their own morality and so empty of empathy that they would want this.

  18. Beet
    Beet July 16, 2006 at 6:04 am |

    How could a religious group be so full of their own morality and so empty of empathy that they would want this.

    That’s rather the point. Religion places the locus of morality at an entirely different place than human instinct left to its own devices. The mechanism is the same, but the ends are by no means the same. At the extreme, terrorism is either a profoundly moral or immoral act based on the acceptance and interpretation of religious teaching. At a lesser extreme, you have situations like this. Somewhere in the middle are the parents who do not allow their children to receive medical attention.

    As I mentioned above, this creates a market inefficiency whereby the behavior of some supplier behaves in a way that is not “pareto optimal” if you measure utility from the perspective of “secular morality” or objectives, because rather than attempting to maximize their performance w.r.t. aforementioned objectives, they are actually attempting to maximize similiar, but different objectives. A society where religious belief and disbelief, or varying different religious beliefs are observed, is objectively worse off, because market actors cannot simultaneously optimize their behavior with a set of different value sets; the more different value sets exist the worse off society is, and religion artifically inflates these differences in a way that human instict by itself would not.

Comments are closed.

The commenting period has expired for this post. If you wish to re-open the discussion, please do so in the latest Open Thread.