Lieberman: “I can forgive… but I probably won’t forget.”

September 28, 2006

In an exclusive video interview with Pajamas Media, Senator Joseph Lieberman – the former Democrat now running as an Independent to retain his Connecticut senate seat – was asked by PJM’s CEO Roger Simon if he could forgive once close friends Chris Dodd, Al Gore and Teddy Kennedy, for endorsing his opponent Ned Lamont, the former Democratic Party vice-presidential candidate responded: “I can forgive … but I probably won’t forget.”

Lieberman is leading Lamont in the latest polls by upwards of ten percent.

See the full video interview HERE ON PAJAMAS MEDIA.

Bookmark and Share
 Email Print Podcasts Digg PJM Home

Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:

1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.

2. Stay on topic.

3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.

4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.

5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.

The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.

These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.

40 Comments

1. Purple Avenger:

“I can forgive … but I probably won’t forget.”

Translation: payback will be a bitch ;->

Sep 28, 2006 - 11:24 am 2. Bill G:

As Joe Lieberman has learned first-hand the depth of loyalty from his “friends”, perhaps he might now consider joining the Republicans who already agree with him on his common sensical beliefs about the genuine threat from the Islamofascists. Welcome, Joe.

Sep 28, 2006 - 11:26 am 3. mad stine:

I hope Liberman does not forget or forgive. He is a solid American and these others are not. They need to do a term in the Army as foot soldiers and they may get the idea of what Liberman is all about.

Sep 29, 2006 - 1:16 am 4. brjason:

What a whiny little bitch! He’s the one who deserted his fellow Democrats, not the other way around…

Sep 29, 2006 - 2:22 am 5. Ed Sonner:

So if Al Gore beats out Hillary for the nomination and runs for President again; will Joe be in Al’s camp to get elected? Or will he tell Al to go to Lamont for HIS endorsement.

Sep 29, 2006 - 2:32 am 6. R.C.Bourgeois:

If Joe was smart, and I think he is, He will remain an Independent.
Joe knows that both parties are corrupt and Joe is not. He lost some respect running with Gore and spouting Al’s BS, but returned to normal after the loss. Lieberman has the potential to go all the way to the top and if he had been the presidential candidate instead of Gore, I would have voted for the dems. One thing Joe is , he is honest.Although I am a militant conservative, I would rather vote for an honest Democrat than a corrupt conservative politician who says what we want to hear and does the opposite..Are you listening G.W.?? (worse vote I ever made but had no choice)

Sep 29, 2006 - 2:55 am 7. Phil Durst:

Make no mistake – Lieberman is a liberal and outside of his position on defense, bears no resemblance to a concervative.

Sep 29, 2006 - 2:59 am 8. Red State Donkey:

It is one thing to endorse the winner in your party’s primary. It is entirely different to lend support to a movement whose purpose is to burn down your party and remake it into some sort of “progressive” utopia.

Should Lieberman win (and it appears he will), the victory will send the KOS/MoveOn wing of the Democratic party spiraling downward.

On a related note, should the Democrats win the House and the Senate, one of them, or come close to winning one or both of them, public servants like Lieberman (centrists) will be the power brokers.

How ironic.

Sep 29, 2006 - 3:12 am 9. IndyReader:

LIEberman still does not understand why he lost. LIEberman followed this administration as they clamped down on our rights by rigging elections, caging peaceful prtoestors, banning books like “America Decevied” from Amazon, conducting warrantless wire-taps and starting 2 illegal wars based on lies. LIEberman will lose again in November. Maybe he can join AIPAC and lobby for America to fight more wars for Israel.
Last link (before Google Books caves to pressure and drops the title):
http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/book_detail.asp?&isbn=0-595-38523-0

Sep 29, 2006 - 3:21 am 10. John M:

Hey IndyReader…

Exactly what SPECIFIC rights of yours have been “clamped down” on? Were YOU denied permission to vote? Were YOU caged? Did the SS break into YOUR house and forcibly remove books from YOUR library only to burn them? Has YOUR phone been tapped?

Give it up, dude.

Sep 29, 2006 - 3:51 am 11. Larry Walker:

All you have to do to judge the effects of liberals is to read their comments and count the mis-spelled words. Evidently the key to liberalism is not education nor spelling. And they talk about Bush.

Sep 29, 2006 - 3:53 am 12. afka_bob:

“LIEberman”? Oh, that’s very clever–it’s imagination like this that will lead America into the new century!

Hate wasn’t enough to win in 2004–do you think if you hate *enough* it will win now?

Get some *ideas* to go along with that clever “imagination” and you might actually go somewhere.

Sep 29, 2006 - 4:08 am 13. FishGuy:

These Liberals are kooks. They are at war with peolle in their own party. First Al Sharpton, Then that Georgia Guy who spoke at the Republican Primary, and now they are kicking out Lieberman, because he has a difference of opinion on 1 issue, that they all agreed upon at first!!!!

Sep 29, 2006 - 4:10 am 14. Fed up:

Hey, IndyReader, I think your tinfoil cap might be on a bit tight. And it looks like you might have spilled the KoolAid on your shirt.

Sep 29, 2006 - 4:10 am 15. Connecticut_Voter:

Lieberman has my vote and hey I’m a republican. At least he has a backbone and stands up for his beliefs.

Sep 29, 2006 - 4:20 am 16. Dave Erce:

Go Joe GO! I wish Joe would run for President, and perhaps join the Republican party. He would be a stellar moderate Repub.

Sep 29, 2006 - 4:22 am 17. John Doester:

What the democrats have done to Lieberman is unconscionable. Just because Joe Lieberman stood for what he believed was right, even if it displeased his party’s stance, they stabbed him in the back.

If I had to fight in a war, I would rather have 5000 terrorists in front of me than 200 democrats behind me.

It says it all when the likes of Ted “Chappaquiddick” Kennedy, Al “the inventor of the internet” Gore and Hillary “my husband did’nt do it” Clinton turn around and discard a man who has more than proven his value as a Senator.

Our two political parties are rotten to the core. What we need is stand alone men and women who will represent us… not their own interests.

Kudos for Joe Lieberman and Godspeed in winning your election. It will be a great day for democracy and integrity, a basic quality that is totally absent in those politicians mentioned.

Sep 29, 2006 - 4:27 am 18. Tom:

Joe will win and the left will not. This summer the Dems were literally picking their new offices…almost giddy about a “take over”. Well, it would appear that it will be a much close race than they expected and instead of being a 94 election it may very well be a 98 election where they get SURPRISED that they didn’t win.

The biggest problem the left has is their echo chamber…it is quite excellent.

Sep 29, 2006 - 4:32 am 19. Av8tor:

IndyReader,

Two illegal wars? Crawl back into your shell.

Sep 29, 2006 - 4:58 am 20. confused?:

Dear Conneticut_voter. Think back to 2000… I seem to remeber Lieberman throwing those “beliefs” under a bus in lieu of Al Gore and his cronies’ beliefs. The ONLY reaso I would vote for him is to keep Lamont out.

Sep 29, 2006 - 4:59 am 21. PatriotVA:

IndyReader, the “right-wing-conservative” senator, Diane Feinstein, asked the ACLU to provide evidence on government abuses of civil rights, specically the Patriot Act. Well, well, well…..the ACLU came up empty. I am sure the left must be so upset that the ACLU chose not fabricate one incident of abuse in its reply to the Senator’s request … so I challenge you to provide any proof of your claim. Otherwise, there’s an old saying “Put up or shut up”

Do not call Senetor Feinstein’s office to demand an explanation why she switches from a “know-all” liberal to a “cold-heart” conservative – as the libs prefer to call, “the right-wing-conservative” is my sarcastic remark…..well “know-all”, and “cold-heart” are also sarcastic, ’cause we all know libs are blind by their hatred towards President Bush, and coservatives will rescue our country at the end of the day….

alright, alright, you may be steamy hot right now asking for the source of my claim, right? http://feinstein.senate.gov/05releases/r-patriot0609.htm

Sep 29, 2006 - 5:02 am 22. TVio:

I am a Republican, generally a conservative, retired military (Viet Nam era, though not a Viet Nam vet.), and a Connecticut voter.
I agree with most of Lieberman’s positions, and I disagree with ALMOST all of Lamont’s.
I now have a child in the military, and I will be voting for Lamont.
Nothing else matters. The life of, and / or risk to my child IS (and always will be) more important than intervening in some others’ religious civil war.

Sep 29, 2006 - 5:07 am 23. Jalans:

Note to John M.

If we don’t protect the rights of everyone, we are all at risk.

I remember how I scoffed when conservatives were squealing about the Clinton police state tactics, (Ruby Ridge, Waco, etc) Would you be so sanguine if it these were democrat’s proposals? I think not.

Sep 29, 2006 - 5:08 am 24. Kyriakon:

It’s unfortunate that there is no strong Republican in the race; the choice is between pro-choice liberal soft on defense and pro-choice liberal strong of defense.

Sep 29, 2006 - 5:32 am 25. KPNunn:

Hey John M,
What did you expect from IndyReader and his (or her) conservative-hating army? Joe Lieberman WAS a democrat but he lost his way with that wonderful, inclusive party when he actually backed up his arguments and did not throw profanity-laden tantrums when confronted with truth, logic, fact or commom sense.

Sep 29, 2006 - 5:48 am 26. John Doester:

Note to TVio,

You have a child in the military and for this reason alone you’ll be voting for Lamont. As far as I am concerned, nobody put a gun to your child’s head to join. Furthermore, why did your child join the military? Was it to belong to a social club? Or was it because he or she believed in the military, knowing full well that in case of declared war, your child would be deployed. A third possibility is that your child could have thought that the odds of going to war were second to none compared to the benefits of free education. If that is the reason, you loose my sympathy. Too many of our youth have joined for the wrong reasons and then declared themselves conciencious objectors once they are called to serve.

When my three sons were teenagers, I clearly informed them on how to make choices based on responsibility and integrity. They did and I will be supporting them entirely in their life for it, even if it becomes uncomfortable for me.

Sep 29, 2006 - 6:02 am 27. DBrooks:

I am a conservative. While I disagree with some of his social stances, I certainly support and agree with Joe Lieberman’s views on the WOT. If anything, we need more sensible Democrats, not fewer. Joe is no Republican. I would hope that, if he wins, he will caucus with the Democrats, and continue to represent a moderate-to-liberal view in that community.

Sep 29, 2006 - 7:20 am 28. TheManTheMyth:

Roger–apropos of not much–I’ve been enjoying your blog for quite some time now and was amused to see the “CEO Roger Simon” phrase—I’ll bet you got a kick out of that! :-)

Sep 29, 2006 - 8:29 am 29. ErnieG:

“Forgive your enemies, but never forget their names.”

- John F. Kennedy

Sep 29, 2006 - 8:48 am 30. Attila Girl:

Ruby Ridge did not occur under the Clinton Administration: it was during George H.W. Bush’s time in the White House.

Sep 29, 2006 - 9:13 am 31. dougf:

LIEberman followed this administration as they clamped down on our rights by rigging elections, caging peaceful prtoestors, banning books like “America Decevied” from Amazon, conducting warrantless wire-taps and starting 2 illegal wars based on lies.–Indyreader

Umm,Indy, as a public service I think I should warn you that ANYONE logging into the IndyMedia Site is automatically tracked and immediately entered into the ’secret’ database of ’suspicious persons’. Well I guess it’s not a secret now, but I really felt you should know.

You didn’t think that the evil Bushitler would be content with just a few ” banned books “, and a handful of “caged protestors”, did you ?

Just FYI dude.

Sep 29, 2006 - 11:27 am 32. Lem:

If anything clarifies the divergent party control btwg republicans and democrats these days is by what they do with dissidents.

Take Lincoln Chafee. If anybody can be said to be a maverick is this guy. Chafee enjoys the full faith and credit of the GOP but hardly can be counted on when the chips are down with almost every issue crucial to the base.

While Liberman in other hand, gets out of step on one issue and is sayonara, we hardly knew ye. Unless done in by scandal or indictment, I can’t think of anyone getting thrown under the bus by one of the majors on account of a single issue like this.

If republican retain control (and Joe wins) we should lobby for a chairmanship for Joe.

Start your pencils :)

Sep 29, 2006 - 12:31 pm 33. Lem:

If anything clarifies the divergent party control btwg republicans and democrats these days is by what they do with dissidents.

Take Lincoln Chafee. If anybody can be said to be a maverick is this guy. Chafee enjoys the full faith and credit of the GOP but hardly can be counted on when the chips are down with almost every issue crucial to the base.

While Liberman in other hand, gets out of step on one issue and is sayonara, we hardly knew ye. Unless done in by scandal or indictment, I can’t think of anyone getting thrown under the bus by one of the majors on account of a single issue like this.

If republican retain control (and Joe wins) we should lobby for a chairmanship for Joe.

Start your pencils :)

Sep 29, 2006 - 12:35 pm 34. epaminondas:

Now wouldn’t it be some halal cold gefilte fish, the senate was 49 repub-50 dem and if Joe decided to caucus with the repubs, keeping the majority in the red.

Sep 29, 2006 - 12:56 pm 35. John M:

Jalans:

Exactly what “rights” do terrorists have?

Of course, Indy-boy offered no response, as his statements were nothing more than bs red-herrings, just like much of what the left-wing spews.

It’s a little old, isn’t it?

Sep 29, 2006 - 1:43 pm 36. Jeff in Michigan:

If more public leaders had Joe Lieberman’s courage to step away from the two major parties, the highly politicized party platforms and the parties’ group positions, talking points, and selfish agendae, this country would be much better off as the ‘right’ thing would occur more often than what is in the best interest of a political party.

Sep 29, 2006 - 2:12 pm 37. CT Dem:

Just as with Joe, I came from a poor, but hard working democratic household. I didn’t know that I was poor until I got to college and met the Lamont types where I saw through their insincerity. Joe is straightforward. I trust him to understand my concerns and those of my family. He will get my vote.

Sep 29, 2006 - 6:25 pm 38. gringo:

Hey, Al Gore did NOT endorse Ned Lamont. Gore stayed out from the Connecticut race. He has nothing to do with it.

Besides, Al does not own anything to Joe just like Joe does not own anything to Al. They were never really close friends, anyway.
Joe was picked in 2000 simply because there was no better candidate available. That doesn’t mean they were in love with each other.

Sep 29, 2006 - 9:44 pm 39. wallyboy:

Lieberman wants it all: the democratic vote, and the ability to ignore what they have already voted. Unfortunately, the republican party in New England is pathetic, and do not have a decent alternative. We will probably once again have to vote for the lesser of evils, and Joe will win.

In many ways we get what we deserve. We deserve the best, and are being led astray by a bunch of professional politicians and media who are making bad choice after bad choice for us.

We need to change OUR thinking first. Why do we let the press set the agenda for us? Why let these idiots in Congress sell us out. It takes Walmart to bring fairer drug prices to America? I want to scream.

My friends who are democrats and independents are not much different in thinking. We agree on most core issues, such as education and health care. We want intelligent people to try to come up with solutions. But that is not going to happen.

I personally would dump the republican party in a minute if we could come up with a third alternative that could address the real needs of this country.

We the people, need to wake up.

As far as the Iraq war, which had undermined Joe so badly, it was a bad idea based on a total misunderstanding of the people involved. We pull out or not, there will never be any Democracy. They are going to have to kill each other as they have for years, until one group finally gains an upper hand.

Maybe the important point is, how do we deal with the final victor?

Sep 30, 2006 - 5:47 am 40. jose4:

To whoever (Attica Girl, or something) said Ruby Ridge happened under George HW Bush, you’re wrong. It happened during August ‘92 under the command of the redoubtable Janet Reno, the Clinton administration having entered office in Feb 92 after winning the election in Nov 91.

Oct 1, 2006 - 3:55 pm

Write a Comment

Name: (required, displayed)
Email: (required, not publicized)
URL: (optional, displayed)
Comments: