Obama would endorse Clinton or Edwards

Keep it going, Mr. McCormick. You haven't yet made your Obama quota for the day!

Actually, a Democrat did say something significant today. Not Obama, of course. Instead, it was Senator Joe Lieberman, Al Gore's running mate in 2000. And Lieberman had something of note to say about his party's base:

"Mr. Lieberman was particularly critical of his 22 Democratic colleagues in the Senate who voted against the senator’s resolution to label Iran’s revolutionary guard corps and elite Quds Force a foreign terrorist entity. He accused liberal Web logs of peddling a “conspiracy theory,” namely that the legislation was a back door authorization for war. Also, without naming names, he said some of his colleagues who had voted against it said they agreed with its substance, but told the senator, “We don’t trust Bush. He’ll use this resolution as an excuse for war against Iran.”

Mr. Lieberman concluded, “There is something profoundly wrong-something that should trouble all of us — when we have elected Democratic officials who seem more worried about how the Bush administration might respond to Iran’s murder of our troops, than about the fact that Iran is murdering our troops.” He added, “There is likewise something profoundly wrong when we see candidates who are willing to pander to this politically paranoid, hyper-partisan sentiment in the Democratic base — even if it sends a message of weakness and division to the Iranian regime.”

from the New York Sun.

Liberman is not a Democrat.

He belongs to a party called "Wingnuts for Lieberman" of which he is the only member.

Actually, a Democrat did say something significant today. Not Obama, of course. Instead, it was Senator Joe Lieberman, Al Gore's running mate in 2000. And Lieberman had something of note to say about his party's base:

Posted by: bruce | November 9, 2007 2:52 PM

Robo Bruce,
That's because LIEberman isn't a Democrat anymore, we kicked him out of the party...

I like you better when you call yourself "K W Smith", Brucie.

Bruce-

Joe Leiberman is not a Democrat. He is a member of the "Connecticut for Leiberman" party.

But thank you for letting us know that the CfL party is all for a war against Iran without congressional authorization.

Bruce --
This may totally bum you out, but the fact that Lieberman does not agree with the Democratic base does not really qualify as significant. Liberman, as we all know, lost the Democratic primary and the won the general election as an "Conneticut Independent". So we can assume he gained a lot of votes in the general election from conservatives who typically would vote w/the GOP, which is the side of the table his war views consistently fall on. He's well known as a Bush ally in that regard. He's currently listed in the Senate records as an "Indpendent Democrat", which I think is code for "I don't have the guts to just switch parties altogether, like I want to".

So not sure that Lieberman saying he disagrees with Dems is really "significant". The words he spoke carry no more impact than if they were uttered by Dana Perino.

But keep at it, determined friend. If you break some more "significant" news, like Barry Bonds being suspected of using steriods or that a lot of people are defaulting on their subprime mortgages, just let us know.

Did I miss something here? Obama said he would support the Democrat nominee; I did not see the quote that he would support Clinton or Edwards. There are five other candidates, are there not? Certainly he did not preclude the others by saying he would only support Hillary or Ed. Or did he? What if Kucinich wins? Would Bama support him? Now, THAT is a question worth an answer.

He answered the question Garfield (cunningly might I add). He will support a Democrat (Hillary & all) because the alternative would be a guaranteed four more years of Bush (Rudy)-- stellar appointments, stellar military, stellar Patriot Acts and wire taps, stellar wars with Syria and Iran, stellar natural disaster recovery, stellar speeches, stellar vetos and over rides, stellar do nothings in Congress, stellar partial pardons, stellar approval ratings, stellar reputation abroad...the possibilities are endless.

Is this another one of those hyped headlines that do not track with the quotes in the story? Come on Swamp, do your job and stop making news.

Fact-challenged (and insanely boring) Troll Bruce: Joe Lieberman is not a "Democrat." He is an independent.

For such a voracious fact-checker as yourself, I'm very disappointed in you. Of course, mistaking the party affiliation of one of the 100 US Senators (to make a partisan argument, of course) is really not noteworthy, but man, if someone messes up a homophone they really should be banished from offering their opinion on anything.

When you can go figure out the party affiliations of the politicians you quote, you will be able to rejoin the discussion with the adults. Until then, you are clearly unfit to offer any opinion.