{"id":721,"date":"2005-03-15T11:01:32","date_gmt":"2005-03-15T18:01:32","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/?p=721"},"modified":"2005-03-15T11:01:32","modified_gmt":"2005-03-15T18:01:32","slug":"lieberman-versus-lowell-weicker","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/2005\/03\/15\/lieberman-versus-lowell-weicker\/","title":{"rendered":"Lieberman versus Lowell Weicker"},"content":{"rendered":"

<\/a>Looking around the Internet for old articles on the 1988 Senate race between Lowell Weiker and Joseph Lieberman<\/a>.<\/p>\n

A race between a liberal-oid Republican (hated by The National Review) and a conservat-oid Democrat (hated by The Nation).<\/p>\n

All I really found were a few National Review articles. The National Review evidentally included in it the “Weiker-Watch” — today, they’d go along with a “Specter-Watch” (Why not Chaffee? I don’t know.)<\/p>\n

Thus, Viva La Lieberman!<\/a><\/p>\n

He is a Democrat who: Applauded the use of military force in Grenada. Applauded the anti-terrorist strike in Libya. Applauded the deployment of naval forces to keep open the sea channel in the Persian Gulf All these positions, Republican Senator Weicker opposed.<\/p>\n

Lieberman favors a moment of silence in the public schools; and-as he put it, “in order”-he believes in God, in love of country, and in the work ethic. By contrast, Lowell Weicker prays every day only that there shall never be prayers said at school.<\/p>\n

Lieberman believes that Fidel Castro is one of the most finished totalitarians of the century: “He is more of a Marxist-Leninist than Gorbachev.” Weicker believes that Castro is “a man of enormous intellect and idealism.”<\/p>\n

Lieberman believes that one should first seek out a way of cutting expenses and only then go for extra taxes. He’d have voted, however inelegant he thought it as a piece of legislation, in favor of the Gramm-Rudman-Hollings bill, which Weicker opposed.<\/p>\n

On abortion (Lowell Weicker will be satisfied only when the Federal Government provides a bonus to any woman who aborts her child), Lieberman looks and sounds genuinely distressed by the subject. It is, he says, a profound moral question. He opposes abortion. But he would not outlaw it. And then he points out that Roe v. Wade, which turned the country’s laws around on the subject of abortion, recognized the right of the state at some point during pregnancy to extend protection to human life. He was saying, in effect, that although it developed under Roe v. Wade that anyone can get an abortion at any time, in fact, the Supreme Court only meant to license it for early in the pregnancy.<\/i><\/p>\n

And<\/a><\/p>\n

God… William Buckley’s “wit” is grating.<\/p>\n

Q. So that it is primarily the retirement of Weicker rather than the election of Lieberman that you wish? A. You can’t have the one without the other. As for Joe Lieberman, he is a moderate Democrat, and it is always possible that he will progress in the right direction. There is no such hope for Lowell Weicker. Q. Why do you call your organization Buckleys for Lieberman? A. Within my own family there are a good many Buckleys, grounded in Connecticut. An informal estimate suggests that there are in the neighborhood of 11,000 Buckleys in the state. Buckleys for Lieberman intends to devote its primary attention to mobilizing their support for the attorney general. Q. What do you purpose to do about Buckleys who advise you they are for Weicker, not for Lieberman? A. That matter will be referred to the Committee on Genealogy. It is entirely possible that there are in Connecticut, person who call themselves “Buckley” whose birth certificates would not bear out any such presumption. Q. You mean to say you would challenge the legitimacy of a Buckley who announced his intention of voting for Weicker? A. This is a very serious business. The future of self-government depends on retiring such as Weicker from the Senate. Correction, there is no such thing as “such as Weicker.” He is unique. Q. How do you propose to establish that? A. That is the responsibility of the Horse’s Ass Committee. Q. The what? A. The Horse’s Ass Committee. Q. What are its purposes? A. To document that Lowell Weicker is the Number One Horse’s Ass in the Senate. The committee, which is engaged in research, is absolutely confident that it will win any challenge, from anywhere, nominating any other member of Congress: Lowell Weicker will emerge as the winner.<\/i><\/p>\n

AND<\/a><\/p>\n

AND<\/a><\/p>\n

In a public debate with Democratic opponent Attorney General Joe Lieberman last week, Weicker attacked the Pledge of Allegiance. “Ronald Reagan tried to take us down a lot of wrong paths . . . and only one man stood up.” (He meant Lowell Weicker.) Asked about Buckpac (Buckleys for Lieberman), Lieberman said, “Buckley and tens of thousands of others can’t stand you for your political grandstanding.”<\/i><\/p>\n

Yes. Proudly wearing the endorsement of William Buckley, Jr. Which brings us to the “gloating” celebration, and what The National Review would most<\/i> like regarding the newly elected Lieberman.:<\/p>\n

And this is a bit ironic.<\/a><\/p>\n

Hmm. Suppose that, on swearing-in day in January at the Senate, Mr. Lieberman were to announce that, on mature reflection, he had decided to become a Republican?<\/i><\/p>\n

(Posted to an occasionally visited partisan site — the Bizarro Free Republic<\/a>… 41 posts in 2 1\/2 years!)<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Looking around the Internet for old articles on the 1988 Senate race between Lowell Weiker and Joseph Lieberman. A race between a liberal-oid Republican (hated by The National Review) and a conservat-oid Democrat (hated by The Nation). All I really found were a few National Review articles. The National Review evidentally included in it the […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-721","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-history-regurgitates-forward"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/721","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=721"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/721\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=721"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=721"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.struat.com\/election\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=721"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}