Joe Lieberman’s Dark Side
Joseph asker
Everyone thinks Joe Lieberman's Mister Morality. Checked his record
lately?
Aug. 11 — It's always dangerous when politicians claim to be doing
God's will. So as the novelty fades from Al Gore’s selection of Joseph
Lieberman, journalists should ask some probing questions about the
ticket's conspicuous piety.
OVER THE YEARS, Republican policymakers have been fond of saying that
they rely on divine guidance. Cementing his alliance with
fundamentalist Christian groups, President Reagan loved to perform at
high-profile prayer breakfasts and other rituals of the religious
right. All too often, political leaders — especially conservative ones
— have tried to blur the separation between church and state.
FLAUNTING THE FAITH
With Al Gore’s choice of Joe Lieberman, the Old Testament has become
grist for the centrist mill. New Democrats are morphing into New
Theocrats.
At Tuesday's formal announcement of his selection for the V.P. slot,
Lieberman declared that Gore "has never, never wavered in his
responsibilities as a father, as a husband and, yes, as a servant of
God Almighty." The vice president stood a few feet away, beaming.
Evidently, in the current political milieu, private beliefs and
personal prayer aren't sufficient. To really do the trick, faith must
be flaunted. What good is religiosity if you don't wear it on your
sleeve and get a lot of good press?
Colleagues laud Lieberman as someone of impeccable personal morality,
a judgment echoed by countless reporters and pundits. Yet a strong
argument could be made that he promotes extremely immoral policies —
if we look beyond such matters as sexual behavior and public
profanity.
POLITICAL CRUELTY
‘Lieberman may be a committed Orthodox Jew in his personal practice,
but in his role as a public spokesperson he has gone far away from the
best aspects of the Jewish tradition.’
— RABBI MICHAEL LERNER
By all accounts, Lieberman is personally nice. But he is politically
cruel.
For instance, his scrupulous morals do not extend to Iraq, where
several hundred thousand children have died in recent years due to the
U.S.-led sanctions that he enthusiastically supports.
Connecticut's junior senator urges quick deployment of the perilous
"missile defense" boondoggle. And this Bible-quoting moralist has
continued to push a wide range of new multibillion-dollar weapons
systems, which just happen to mean huge revenues for the arms
manufacturers that have fattened his campaign coffers. For military
contractors, Lieberman is a visionary prophet for profits.
Whether Al Gore is truly "a servant of God Almighty" can only be a
subjective matter. But the guy he chose for his running mate is
certainly a devoted servant of DOLLAR ALMIGHTY.
Few Democratic members of Congress are more eager to undermine the
public sector. Lieberman wants taxpayers to subsidize vouchers for
private schools. He has been outspoken in support of partially
privatizing Social Security.
In contrast to his media reputation as a consumer advocate, Lieberman
joined with only three other Senate Democrats in 1995 to put a cap on
punitive damage awards in product liability cases.
He's on record in favor of slashing capital gains taxes.
Like Gore, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, he is a fervent backer of
NAFTA, the World Trade Organization and other devices for
globalization on corporate terms.
The world's poor people rank quite low in Joe Lieberman's universe of
values.
As for Palestinians, his brow does not even furrow for them. A
down-the-line supporter of Israel, he has proven to be comfortable
with the systematic violations of human rights in occupied
territories, underwritten by billions of dollars from the U.S.
government.
INTERESTS OF THE RICH
Lieberman may be a committed Orthodox Jew in his personal practice,
but in his role as a public spokesperson he has gone far away from the
best aspects of the Jewish tradition," Rabbi Michael Lerner points
out.
"He has none of that prophetic voice that leads Jews to criticize our
own Jewish community and Israel in the name of Torah values.
He has none of that Jewish sensitivity to the oppressed that would
place their needs above the needs of the wealthy."
Like most other senators, Lieberman has built his career by serving
the interests of the rich.
Now that he looms very large on the national political stage,
Lieberman is well-positioned to further corporatize the Democratic
Party. Lerner is on target when he comments: "Lieberman is likely to
accelerate the process in which the two major parties seem to be
merging into one pro-business, pro-wealthy, elitist and morally
tone-deaf governing force."
The men on the 2000 Democratic ticket represent a new theocratic
style. Eager to evoke Judeo-Christian unity, they make a show of
rejoicing in shared monotheism. But judging from policy priorities,
the one god that they most revere is MONEY.
Corporate media outlets keep praising Joe Lieberman as a paragon of
moral virtue. But actions speak much louder than pious words.
He is a disaster.
Ruff-Cut
avoid being labeled an anti-semite by the media if they don't like
Lieberman?
Ruff-Cut
Joseph asker <joe...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:39947B82...@nospam.com...
>
> Everyone thinks Joe Lieberman's Mister Morality. Checked his record
> lately?
>
> Aug. 11 - It's always dangerous when politicians claim to be doing
> God's will. So as the novelty fades from Al Gore's selection of Joseph
> Lieberman, journalists should ask some probing questions about the
> ticket's conspicuous piety.
>
>
> OVER THE YEARS, Republican policymakers have been fond of saying that
> they rely on divine guidance. Cementing his alliance with
> fundamentalist Christian groups, President Reagan loved to perform at
> high-profile prayer breakfasts and other rituals of the religious
> right. All too often, political leaders - especially conservative ones
> - have tried to blur the separation between church and state.
>
>
> FLAUNTING THE FAITH
> With Al Gore's choice of Joe Lieberman, the Old Testament has become
> grist for the centrist mill. New Democrats are morphing into New
> Theocrats.
>
> At Tuesday's formal announcement of his selection for the V.P. slot,
> Lieberman declared that Gore "has never, never wavered in his
> responsibilities as a father, as a husband and, yes, as a servant of
> God Almighty." The vice president stood a few feet away, beaming.
>
> Evidently, in the current political milieu, private beliefs and
> personal prayer aren't sufficient. To really do the trick, faith must
> be flaunted. What good is religiosity if you don't wear it on your
> sleeve and get a lot of good press?
>
> Colleagues laud Lieberman as someone of impeccable personal morality,
> a judgment echoed by countless reporters and pundits. Yet a strong
> argument could be made that he promotes extremely immoral policies -
> if we look beyond such matters as sexual behavior and public
> profanity.
>
> POLITICAL CRUELTY
> 'Lieberman may be a committed Orthodox Jew in his personal practice,
> but in his role as a public spokesperson he has gone far away from the
> best aspects of the Jewish tradition.'
> - RABBI MICHAEL LERNER
Albert Reingewirtz
In article <sp9baf...@corp.supernews.com>, Ruff-Cut
<shar...@asapnet.net> wrote:
> Thanks for the info. I wonder how much explaining one will have to do to
> avoid being labeled an anti-semite by the media if they don't like
> Lieberman?
>
> Ruff-Cut
That is an easy one! I do not like Lieberman and I am not an antisemite
because I am an atheist Jew. When a non-Jew doesn' like Lieberman yet
he is a Democrat, and usually votes for democrats and then will not
vote for Gore because of Lieberman? That's an easy one! The chance of
him not voting for Gore not because of antisemitism is close to nil.
Joseph asker
Jose M. Alicea
Joseph asker wrote:
> Run that by again.
It's the argument put forth by Cal Thomas. It goes like this:
Joe Lieberman is an Orthodox Jew: the most "religious" of Jews.
Joe is a US Senator.
Joe's Senate record doesn't indicate that Joe is an Orthodox Jew.
Conservative Conclusion: Joe is not really religious.
Basicly, if a religious person is not shoving their religious views
down the country's throat, then they're not religious. That's
conservative wisdom fer ya.
Here's hoping that Joe demands the all the Torah's commandments
are posted in our nations highschools. Then we'll see just how religious,
and tolerant that republican party really is.
Jose Alicea
Ruff-Cut
about a candidates religion. There is absolutely no reason why it should be
an issue. It's painfully obvious that the Gore campaign needs yet another
superficial attempt to gain a portion of the voting public,as well as an
ankle-grabbing pose for the Jewish friendly media.
If Joe had any balls he would denounce the focus on his faith and stop
the Gore people from exploiting it for their own gain. His failure to do so
only sparks concern from the mainstream public who is now growing more
suspicious of his motives. If your so concerned about the relationship
between church and state then you should be worried also. I hope it blows up
in their face,and no,I wouldn't call most people
anti-semetic if they did not vote for him based on his Jewish background.
Not when it's used as a playing card for the election.
Ruff-Cut
Jose M. Alicea <jma...@earthNOSPAMlink.com> wrote in message
news:3994E564...@earthNOSPAMlink.com...
Wayne Johnson
wrote:
> The biggest problem with Lieberman is that most Americans do not care
>about a candidates religion.
Name one Moslem member of Congress.
Name one atheist member of Congress.
Name one Buddhist member of Congress.
Wayne "There's no rush" Johnson
cia...@hotmail.com
======================================
Wayne's SCAA Sideline Recommendations:
Any Post Originating From Supernews or Remarq
Any Post Originating From Cotse.com
Anonymous (Note: All users named Anonymous are sidelined)
B9 Predator (Uses various phony provider names)
Big Don
Gary Glaenzer
sheets3inthwind
Spectre
Ruff-Cut
Wayne Johnson <cia...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:399551f2...@nntp.we.mediaone.net...
> >about a candidates religion.
>
>
> Name one atheist member of Congress.
>
> Name one Buddhist member of Congress.
>
> Wayne "There's no rush" Johnson
How many Moslems,Atheists,and Buddhists seek office? If they did,how do
you know that they lost the election do to their religion or lack of?
How many times does a Protestant,Baptist,or Catholic allow such attention
to be focused on their religion? When does the media carry the topic to such
an extent?
There's no place for this kind of concern in an election. Just because it
happened with Kennedy doesn't mean that it has to happen now. If the Gore
campaign is trying to use Lieberman's faith as a tool to gain votes or media
support,then they deserve whatever
lack of trust they get from the public.
Ruff-Cut
Ruff-Cut
> On Sat, 12 Aug 2000 09:48:51 -0500, "Ruff-Cut" <shar...@asapnet.net>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Wayne Johnson <cia...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >news:399551f2...@nntp.we.mediaone.net...
> >> On Sat, 12 Aug 2000 08:10:00 -0500, "Ruff-Cut" <shar...@asapnet.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
care
> >> >about a candidates religion.
> >>
> >>
> >> Name one atheist member of Congress.
> >>
> >> Name one Buddhist member of Congress.
> >>
> >> Wayne "There's no rush" Johnson
> >
> > How many Moslems,Atheists,and Buddhists seek office?
>
> lately?
>
> Hell, which ones have you EVER seen run?
*** The lack of a potential candidate proves nothing. Also,what would you
expect to be the number of qualified candidates who follow those
religions?
>
> >If they did,how do
> >you know that they lost the election do to their religion or lack of?
>
> Wait a minute. I looked at the line I quote above, and you say that
> people don't care about the candidate's religion. Since this is a
> claim that needs some kind of substantiation, would you care to back
> up your claim with some examples that show this is true?
*** Ok. How about Kennedy then? His Catholic faith was said to be a
burden,yet he won. How many times have you heard of a specific religion to
be of any concern? The public often puts morals both religious or not as a
priority,but I seldom hear of a particular religion to be of any importance.
Maybe Snake Handling.
>
> >How many times does a Protestant,Baptist,or Catholic allow such attention
> >to be focused on their religion?
>
> Every time they show up at a prayer breakfast. Every time they are
> interviewed by a religious periodical. Every time they publish
> campaign literature talking about how they value membership in their
> church/synagogue/stake/whatever.
*** How often is their religion spot-lighted by the press so much? Pandering
to ones religious peers is one thing,but having it become a
campaign issue for all is too much.
>
> Don't you ever read the crap they mail to your home?
*** It lines my bird cage.
>
> >When does the media carry the topic to such an extent?
>
> Have you already forgotten the cacaphony when Clinton went to a prayer
> breakfast, right after the Blue Dress story broke, and begged
> forgiveness...and got it? "HYPOCRITE!" people shouted, and so on,
> because his devoutness (or whatever you call it) was being questioned.
*** I was talking about using religion as a merit to win an election. Once a
person is president they can draw all kinds of attention whether it involves
religion or not. Also,he may have got some forgivness from his own,but not
from all.
>
> To put it mildly.
>
> > There's no place for this kind of concern in an election.
>
> I didn't say there was a place for it; I'm only questioning your claim
> that it is a non-issue. I've never seen it be a non-issue when it was
> raised, and if you would like to point out some counter-examples,
> please do so.
*** The fact that it was raised as a groundbreaking accomplishment to
nominate a Jew is my point. If once nominated he got caught stealing from
the collection plate,then I could understand the attention. All the guy did
was get nominated,and his religion is all we hear about.
>
> >Just because it
> >happened with Kennedy doesn't mean that it has to happen now.
>
> It's already happening. And as has been pointed out, in 1960 the
> issue was keeping religion out of politics; this is forty years later,
> and Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, George Bush, and Al Gore all want to
> bring religion and "religious values" into politics, for the perceived
> voter advantage.
*** They aren't bringing any attention of a specific religion,just religious
values.
>
> You mean you hadn't noticed this trend?
>
> >If the Gore
> >campaign is trying to use Lieberman's faith as a tool to gain votes or
media
> >support,then they deserve whatever lack of trust they get from the
public.
>
> Would you say the same thing about George Bush and his pronouncements
> that religion plays a huge part in his life, affects his values, and
> will definitely affect his decisions as President?
>
> Wayne "At least make an attempt to be consistent" Johnson
*** If he was banking on his own religion or if it was all we knew of
him,then yes.
Ruff-Cut
Wayne Johnson
wrote:
>
>Wayne Johnson <cia...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:399551f2...@nntp.we.mediaone.net...
>> On Sat, 12 Aug 2000 08:10:00 -0500, "Ruff-Cut" <shar...@asapnet.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > The biggest problem with Lieberman is that most Americans do not care
>> >about a candidates religion.
>>
>> Name one Moslem member of Congress.
>>
>> Name one atheist member of Congress.
>>
>> Name one Buddhist member of Congress.
>>
>> Wayne "There's no rush" Johnson
>
> How many Moslems,Atheists,and Buddhists seek office?
Only the ones who expect to win. Which ones have you seen running
lately?
Hell, which ones have you EVER seen run?
>If they did,how do
>you know that they lost the election do to their religion or lack of?
Wait a minute. I looked at the line I quote above, and you say that
people don't care about the candidate's religion. Since this is a
claim that needs some kind of substantiation, would you care to back
up your claim with some examples that show this is true?
>How many times does a Protestant,Baptist,or Catholic allow such attention
>to be focused on their religion?
Every time they show up at a prayer breakfast. Every time they are
interviewed by a religious periodical. Every time they publish
campaign literature talking about how they value membership in their
church/synagogue/stake/whatever.
Don't you ever read the crap they mail to your home?
>When does the media carry the topic to such an extent?
Have you already forgotten the cacaphony when Clinton went to a prayer
breakfast, right after the Blue Dress story broke, and begged
forgiveness...and got it? "HYPOCRITE!" people shouted, and so on,
because his devoutness (or whatever you call it) was being questioned.
To put it mildly.
> There's no place for this kind of concern in an election.
I didn't say there was a place for it; I'm only questioning your claim
that it is a non-issue. I've never seen it be a non-issue when it was
raised, and if you would like to point out some counter-examples,
please do so.
>Just because it
>happened with Kennedy doesn't mean that it has to happen now.
It's already happening. And as has been pointed out, in 1960 the
issue was keeping religion out of politics; this is forty years later,
and Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, George Bush, and Al Gore all want to
bring religion and "religious values" into politics, for the perceived
voter advantage.
You mean you hadn't noticed this trend?
>If the Gore
>campaign is trying to use Lieberman's faith as a tool to gain votes or media
>support,then they deserve whatever lack of trust they get from the public.
Would you say the same thing about George Bush and his pronouncements
that religion plays a huge part in his life, affects his values, and
will definitely affect his decisions as President?
Wayne "At least make an attempt to be consistent" Johnson
Billy Whistler
wrote:
>On Sat, 12 Aug 2000 08:10:00 -0500, "Ruff-Cut" <shar...@asapnet.net>
>wrote:
>
>> The biggest problem with Lieberman is that most Americans do not care
>>about a candidates religion.
>
>Name one Moslem member of Congress.
>
>Name one atheist member of Congress.
>
>Name one Buddhist member of Congress.
>
It's likely there are a few atheist out of 550 members. They just
don't put it on campaign pins.
Susan Cohen
Joseph asker wrote:
Who is entitled to his opinion.
> By all accounts, Lieberman is personally nice. But he is politically
> cruel. For instance, his scrupulous morals do not extend to Iraq, where
> several hundred thousand children have died in recent years due to the
> U.S.-led sanctions that he enthusiastically supports.
Total bull, of course, because Iraq had to be stopped, and
it was the bleeding hearts calling for sanctions.
If he had called for bombings instead, someone else
would be on his case.
> Connecticut's junior senator urges quick deployment of the perilous
> "missile defense" boondoggle. And this Bible-quoting moralist has
> continued to push a wide range of new multibillion-dollar weapons
> systems, which just happen to mean huge revenues for the arms
> manufacturers that have fattened his campaign coffers. For military
> contractors, Lieberman is a visionary prophet for profits.
Gee, sounds almost Repoublican!
Must be why Bush is saying he's very close to their side.
> Whether Al Gore is truly "a servant of God Almighty" can only be a
> subjective matter. But the guy he chose for his running mate is
> certainly a devoted servant of DOLLAR ALMIGHTY.
> Few Democratic members of Congress are more eager to undermine the
> public sector. Lieberman wants taxpayers to subsidize vouchers for
> private schools.
Gee, also sounds Republican!
(But how does this undermine the public sector?)
(How does this make him a servant of the DFOLLAR?)
> He has been outspoken in support of partially privatizing Social
> Security.
How does this undermine the public sector?
How does this make him a servant of the DOLLAR?
> In contrast to his media reputation as a consumer advocate, Lieberman
> joined with only three other Senate Democrats in 1995 to put a cap on
> punitive damage awards in product liability cases.
> He's on record in favor of slashing capital gains taxes.
> Like Gore, George W. Bush and Dick Cheney, he is a fervent backer of
> NAFTA, the World Trade Organization and other devices for
> globalization on corporate terms.
Hmmm, Clinton & Gore were for that, too.
> The world's poor people rank quite low in Joe Lieberman's universe of
> values.
> As for Palestinians, his brow does not even furrow for them. A
> down-the-line supporter of Israel, he has proven to be comfortable
> with the systematic violations of human rights in occupied
> territories, underwritten by billions of dollars from the U.S.
> government.
The usual anti-Jewish/-Israeli canard, totally ignoring the fact that
the Palestinians brought their trouble on themselves, and have been
worsening it themselves with *their* systematic violations of
human rights wherever they go.
> INTERESTS OF THE RICH
> Lieberman may be a committed Orthodox Jew in his personal practice,
> but in his role as a public spokesperson he has gone far away from the
> best aspects of the Jewish tradition," Rabbi Michael Lerner points
> out. "He has none of that prophetic voice that leads Jews to criticize
> our
> own Jewish community and Israel in the name of Torah values.
Because to do so would be against the First Amendment.
> He has none of that Jewish sensitivity to the oppressed that would
> place their needs above the needs of the wealthy."
The people in Connecticut sure like him.
No poor people in Connecticut?
> Like most other senators, Lieberman has built his career by serving
> the interests of the rich.
> Now that he looms very large on the national political stage,
> Lieberman is well-positioned to further corporatize the Democratic
> Party. Lerner is on target when he comments: "Lieberman is likely to
> accelerate the process in which the two major parties seem to be
> merging into one pro-business, pro-wealthy, elitist and morally
> tone-deaf governing force."
>
> The men on the 2000 Democratic ticket represent a new theocratic
> style. Eager to evoke Judeo-Christian unity, they make a show of
> rejoicing in shared monotheism. But judging from policy priorities,
> the one god that they most revere is MONEY.
>
> Corporate media outlets keep praising Joe Lieberman as a paragon of
> moral virtue. But actions speak much louder than pious words.
>
> He is a disaster.
The last three to five paragraphs are all rehashes of each
other, and all without a shred of actual proof.
the only "poor people" he's supposed to have abandoned
are terrorists! Fabulous!!!
Susan
Wayne Johnson
Black race down.
Kiss My BLACK AZZ
Wayne "You need help" Johnson
cia...@hotmail.com
======================================
Wayne's SCAA Sideline Recommendations:
Any Post Originating From Supernews or Remarq
Any Post Originating From Cotse.com
Anonymous (Note: All users named Anonymous are sidelined)
B9 Predator (Uses various phony provider names)
Big Don
Gary Glaenzer
sheets3inthwind
Spectre
On Sun, 13 Aug 2000 23:43:55 -0400, Susan Cohen <fla...@hers.com>
wrote:
al...@rev.net
>Whether Al Gore is truly "a servant of God Almighty" can only be a
>subjective matter.
The grifter's supposed to be working for us. He should give back his
salary.
-- The Green Troll <http://www.rev.net/people/aloe/ajivika>
