Reid Claims To Have Talked To Lieberman About Attacking Obama
Inquiring minds want to know if there is anything at all that Joe Lieberman could say about the Democratic presidential nominee that would get Harry Reid to tap the Connecticut Senator on the shoulder and say, "Psst -- hey bud, you enjoy your senior committee slots at my pleasure, so watch it."
It's a question that many Democrats are asking right now, in the wake of Lieberman's aggressive foreign policy attacks on Barack Obama yesterday. Even Obama himself took Lieberman aside and privately rebuked him yesterday.
Now Reid himself has been asked about this, and he told reporters that, yes, he has given Lieberman a talking-to of sorts...
"I've had conversations with Lieberman at some length. I'm not going to discuss the conversations here. But I think the discussions he had with Obama yesterday and the discussions he had with me yesterday were fruitful. We'll let the future decide what it's going to be, but I'm not about to threaten anybody."
"Fruitful," huh? Anyone who thinks Reid will put any kind of pressure on Lieberman behind the scenes is just kidding himself. It isn't going to happen, and Lieberman will continue to attack Obama -- and soon enough will start portraying him as too weak to defend the country -- secure in the knowledge that the only thing that will happen to him is that he'll get more press attention for it.
Now, I think this is a first. I agree 1000 percent with your post gregg. Traitor joe is going to be a scum until november.
June 5, 2008 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
ME TOO!
McMentum 2008!
Be sure to vote in the MSNBC Veepstakes!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24672458/
June 5, 2008 3:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wish it were otherwise, but Reid can't pull the plug on Lieberman because Lieberman can pull the plug on him. By switching caucuses from D to R, old Joe could switch Harry from majority to minority leader.
It's a classic standoff akin to Mutually Assured Destruction. Slim Pickens would know all about that :-)
June 5, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not so fast. All we really need is a replacement for Lieberman from the Republican ranks. Hagel, perhaps, in the short term? Or, in light of the thumping the Republicans will surely take in November, one of our Republican incumbents might be interested.
June 5, 2008 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. I'd trade Hagel straight up for Lieberman any day.
June 5, 2008 4:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Red Rover Red Rover, let Joe come over!
June 5, 2008 7:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Dream on. Hagel is as Republican as they get. He's been one of Bush's biggest supporters, on everything but the war. Why do people keep thinking he's some liberal Democrat-wannabe? I respect the man for standing up on the Iraq war issue. He's sacrificed his political career to tell the truth. But I disagree with him on EVERYTHING else. Trust me, he's been a loyal Bushie in every other way (though that hasn't kept him from being crucified by the Nebraska GOP).
June 6, 2008 8:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Actually, as I understand it, the Senate can't flip to Republican control during this Congress, even if the Dems lose their majority. That's the regular rule. The flip when Jeffords went I was under an exceptional rule situation.
June 5, 2008 8:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Even if Lieberman goes repub the Dems will still be in charge according to the agreement that organized this session. The danger would be if the Dems lost another. Then it would switch. That's my understanding.
June 6, 2008 9:13 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'd like to toss Lie-berman's ass out in the street.
June 5, 2008 2:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I certainly hope Joe is enjoying his time in the Senate as an Independent, it's gonna be his last.
June 5, 2008 2:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Do I love this man, or do I LOVE this man! =) It's about time someone put that slimy little Iago in his place!
June 5, 2008 3:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I can't wait til after the election when we can dispose of that little maggot.
June 5, 2008 2:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
And I bet you anything Lieberman will switch over to the Republicans after that, to serve out his last couple years in the Senate servicing them, and I do mean in a sexual way.
June 5, 2008 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
please, I don't like what Lieberman's doing either - I hate it, in fact.
But calling him a maggot?! Not that you're being anti-semitic (I know you're not, really). But calling any member of a minority group a maggot, or subhuman, or parasite, or whatever, is dehumanizing them, which is always a step in the direction of discrimination and ultimately alienation from society and then possibly even worse.
Let's think of other more appropriate and less inciteful names for Lieberman. Make it like a party game! Think of a name and then everybody take a shot. Such as these I just came up with, though a lot of them are kinda weak (sorry).
Joe LeaveObamaAloneMan
Benedict Joe Arnold
Joe LieberQuisling
Jerk Lieberman
Joe the Jerk
Joe Shmoe
Joe BlowMeMan
Joe LastTermAsSenatorMan
Joe Loserman
Joe LiarMan
Joe Dickhead
Joe Fartwad
Joe Turncoat
Imperial Joe
Joe Schmuck
Joe Putz
Nebbish Joe
Tojo from Connecticut
Smarmy Joe
please no dehumanizing attacks. There are plenty of good old-fashioned political slurs that can be used. What are yours?
June 5, 2008 10:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I"m left handed, so you better not call me names either.
June 6, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
The thing is, the asshole Lieberman ( I guess I did not have to say Lieberman, asshole would have been enough for you to know to whom I was referring)votes Democratic on most things. It would be great to see him caucus with the Republicans so he could be a scumbag to both parties.
June 6, 2008 9:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
One way or another this will be Joe's last term as a Senator.
Obama treated Joe very well the last time Joe ran for office. Next time Obama will be campaigning against him. He is toast.
June 5, 2008 2:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Plus, CT is solid Obama country. CT hates Lieberman now.
June 5, 2008 2:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Aye, the days of accomodating this sort of political wandering are over. Joe has zero to gain here. I am glad Boss Obama went down to the Floor to let him know how it is. LBJ-ish, I would say.
June 5, 2008 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Greg - now that's an analysis we can believe in.
June 5, 2008 2:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Was this 'analysis' or just opinion? I didn't like it much, myself. If Greg is going to say something like this, he should at least tell us why. And give us some useful information, like the truth about the Democratic control of the Senate this year. What happens if Lieberman officially switches to the GOP? Do they take over immediately, or not? After all, that's the critical issue here, right?
Is there any reason the Democrats shouldn't come down hard on Lieberman? Or should we be agitating for some appropriate action towards him?
At TPM, I want information more than opinions. I've got plenty of opinions of my own. :)
June 6, 2008 9:00 AM | Reply | Permalink
When Joey sees how the race will be going against his candidate in a few weeks, trust me, he will change his tone because at that point he will be thinking about his own political future knowing that it could all come to an end very, very quickly.
June 5, 2008 2:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yup, never let it be said that a common rat could desert a sinking ship faster than Traitor Joe.
June 5, 2008 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agree. I will be very disappointed if he doesn't get the boot from his chair in January. I am going to enjoy that, and let him go over to the Republicans. He already is one. Frankly, he should move to Israel. He actually would be more useful there I think.
June 5, 2008 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Move to Israel? Don't you think our stock in the middle east has gone down far enough without inflicting Lieberman on them?
June 5, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't want him on that holy dirt. Dubai is a better choice for Lieberman.
June 5, 2008 7:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
SmackDown Obama!...Since Harry has been completely ineffective in addressing Joe...We now know that Barack can and will address it and to all those who wander away from the New Age; tread lightly! Joe is such a pussy and twit it'll interesting to monitor he behavior throughout the campaign!
June 5, 2008 2:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hell yeah, give him The Treatment.
http://www.afterimagegallery.com/nytjohnson.htm
June 5, 2008 2:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, notice "the forceful but not angry gestures."
I thought about this very series of pictures when I read about the Obama-Lieberman contretemps.
June 5, 2008 4:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I love the idea that Joe Lieberman thinks he can mock anyone else as weak. He's the most cowardly man in the entire senate.
June 5, 2008 2:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
He actually gives me the creeps. I could not stand listening to him when he was running with Gore.
June 5, 2008 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lieberman's the reason we lost in 2000. Let's hope his magic touch works just as well in 2008 with McCain.
June 5, 2008 2:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, indeed.
By the way, did you all see the video of Obama taking ol' Joe by the hand?! Priceless.
June 5, 2008 3:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, that whiny, sanctimonious little voice is like fingernails on a blackboard.
June 5, 2008 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's sort of got a Wormtongue vibe to him... lurking at McCain's side, whispering things into this ear...
June 5, 2008 2:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hmmm.
Lieberman in one ear and ex-Senator Phil Gramm in the other - shouldn't McCain have one angel and one devil instead of two devils afflicting his conscience?
June 5, 2008 4:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I guess I'm going to be Devil's advocate. I'm not convinced that Joe Liberman is going to cost Obama any votes.
In fact, you could argue that Joe will cost McCain conservative votes!
IMO, Joe is poison, and him actively campaigning AGAINST Obama and FOR McCain is actually good news for Obama.
Now, I'm not suggesting that Reid reward Joe, but I don't think this hands-off approach is the worst idea.
June 5, 2008 2:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. And the two of them together, yuk......
June 5, 2008 2:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I dislike Reid so intensely. It's like he rose to the top by being the most spineless person in the room.
June 5, 2008 2:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
Reid has the worst job in Washington, and though he could do better, he has almost no real authority to herd the cats he is "leader" for -- so cut him some slack.... He could be FRIST, after all....
June 5, 2008 2:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed. He actually is doing a good job with what he has to work with. 1 moderate republican, olympia snow, and traitor joe. Talk about being is an sh*tty position.
June 5, 2008 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
On top of everything Reid is working with an obstructionist minority leader who has an iron grip on 48 Republicans and Joe. Reid has a tough job.
June 5, 2008 3:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
He has a tough job. No disagreement from me on this. Still, I do not recall Reid ever performing a single act of political bravery. I hope this is not the case in reality, but nothing comes to mind.
June 5, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Harry's problem is that he doesn't seem to understand that the Republicans have decided to obstruct everything. They are using the 60 vote cloture rule at a record pace. He should force the Republicans to engage in real filibusters all the time. That would demonstrate who is being obstructionist. It would help Democrats in the fall. On the other hand forcing all nighters every week might kill some of the older senators.
June 5, 2008 3:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
How soon you people forget the dark days of 2004. Our fortunes were at a nadir. We were down to, I think, 41, 42 in the Senate. We had lost Edwards' seat and a bunch of others, lost the presidency and even our frakkin majority leader had lost his reelection race. There was a lot of talk that we'd been reduced to poltical irrelevancy. It was Harry who recognized we had nothing left to lose, rallied the remnant, dug a last ditch and got a lot of crazy stuff stopped.
Just sayin'
June 5, 2008 4:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Indeed he did. And thanks for reminding people, to a certain extent myself included. Reid was definitely a worthy tactician then. I wonder, though, if now isn't the time to begin thinking about a real strategist in that position.
As the times change, a different set of leadership skills may be called for.
June 5, 2008 7:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that the Senate has two levels of battle going on, with the Republicans operating in public and the Democrats operating outside public view.
I suspect that Reid is fully cognizant of the Republican intentions and tactics, but that he sees his job as dealing with those problems behind the scenes rather than in public. Here's why.
It's Reid's responsibility to get stuff done in the Senate. No other Senator accepts comparable responsibility, while McConnell and the Republicans actively and publicly want Reid, the Democrats and the Senate to fail in public eyes. For Reid to go public with his work against the Republicans would simply make their efforts more effective. The public sees that kind of conflict in public as failure.
If, as I suspect, that's the calculus of the situation Harry is in, then it is no surprise that we have not publicly seen him doing anything. We would only see his actions when they failed and he could be blamed for them in public.
Harry Reid's history of taking on the mob in Nevada suggests strongly that he is far from spineless.
June 5, 2008 4:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Specter's pretty moderate too.
June 6, 2008 11:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
I wonder if Jozell Millieberman will have a speaking part at the Repug convention?
June 5, 2008 2:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Does anyone remember why Gore picked Lierberman as his VP? I don't remember and, in hindsight, wonder what he was thinking -- although Joe didn't really turn until afterwards?
June 5, 2008 2:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Some inside deal with Gore going waaaay back from what I've heard.
June 5, 2008 2:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gore picked Lieberman because Lieberman was a vocal critic of Bill Clinton during the impeachment. Gore wanted to distance himself from the Clenis, so he picked the loudest anti Clinton Democrat he could find.
June 5, 2008 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
It was also thought that Lieberman could swing the Jewish vote Florida.
June 5, 2008 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
In fairness to Senator Schmendrake, he actually did, except for that large "Jews for Buchanan" contingent in Palm Beach County.
June 5, 2008 3:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
he wanted to win the jewish vote in florida. worked out well, no?
June 5, 2008 8:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Joe Lieberman is the new Zell Miller. Notice how that loon has faded from the scene. The same will happen to Traitor Joe.
Notice how silent Al.Gore still is. Do not forget that it was Al that elevated Joe onto the national stage. Wouldn't a real party Leader speak out and denounce what the man he picked for VP is saying about the party nominee. Mr. Gore is proving to be just another Profile In Jello.
June 5, 2008 2:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where is Al Gore, anyway? You'd think he'd have made some sort of public appearance in support of Obama by now...
June 5, 2008 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
The untold story about Al.Gore is that he has become very very wealthy, just as much as the Clintons, by leveraging his fame. He has gotten a lot of publicity and awards, but he has not gotten any major global warming pacts or laws enacted. He is not going to step out and take sides, because that might reduce his power access. He is one of the most overrated Democrats in the past fifty years. In 2000, he made a Moron, that he should have wiped the floor with, look like a very acceptable alternative.
June 5, 2008 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Liam, you always have really good insights. I appreciate what you bring to the board.
June 5, 2008 6:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Though you must remember that Zell was retiring/retired when he made his trip to the zoo.
June 5, 2008 3:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
You give Lieberman too much credit.
The right hates Lieberman just as much as the Left does.
The fact this liberal Jew is stuck with McCain galls them.
There will be no "Give em Hell, Joe!" at the Repub Convention.
June 5, 2008 3:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
*just to clarify, "Liberal Jew" is what the right calls Joe, not myself!
And no disrespect to the Jewish people either.
June 5, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
...oh so that's how y'all make your racial slurs...use the term and say "that's what the mean Republicans would call him"...not that there's anything wrong with that.
June 5, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wasn't aware that "Jew" was a slur....when he is, after all, a Jew.
I would simply say Lieberman is an asshole. Hows that for a slur?
June 5, 2008 4:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
...and Obama's black, but if I make any referance to that the walls start shaking in here...just pointing out your hypocrisy.
June 5, 2008 4:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
So true.....
http://www.motherjones.com/mojoblog/palpatine_lieberman.jpg
June 5, 2008 2:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
haha... I was just thinking that myself! I didn't realize someone had already made the comparison so visually explicit. ;-)
June 5, 2008 4:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Any one knows if Lieberman can be recalled or impeached from treason?
June 5, 2008 2:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
There is no constitutional provision for recalling a Senator, though the Senate can eject and/or refuse membership of one. Not sure what states, if any, have in their own laws as a method of recalling a United States Senator, but I don't recall ever reading of any such example of it occurring or reading of such a set of laws, etc.
June 5, 2008 3:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
It would be up to each state. It states where recall is permitted by law, organizers meet a signature requirement to get the measure on a ballot. Majority vote carries the recall, empowering the governor to seat a replacement through each state's replacement procedure.
This applies to AK, AZ, CA, CO, GA, ID, KS, LA, MI, MN, MT, NV, NJ, ND, OR, RI, WA, and WI. Joe's state has no legal route to recall.
It is EXCEEDINGLY rare, and has never disloged a sitting Senator.
June 5, 2008 3:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not so sure that Reid and other Dem leadership won't put "behind the scenes" pressure on Lieberman.
After all, we've seen the Dems do a few things recently that we'd all but given up on. They might have found that they really like showing a little backbone.
June 5, 2008 2:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Another talking too. That'll do it, Harry.
June 5, 2008 2:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
Crazy Uncle Joe. And spineless Harry Reid.
More and better Democrats, please.
And TPM? Your comment system sucks.
June 5, 2008 2:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wasn't real hot about reid, but this piece explains the position that he is in.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/05/30/reid-superdelegates-know_n_104324.html
I think that we should give him some slack. He's doint the best that he can with what he has to work with.
June 5, 2008 3:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
From that piece:
Right. You know why? Because there aren't any consequences for bucking the party. That's why Joe Lieberman behaves the way he does. There's no cost for him in behaving that way.
Harry Reid might have a tough job, but I tend to think his leadership style has made it tougher.
June 5, 2008 3:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree with you to a certain extent, the issue is control of the senate. Reid really only controls the senate by 1/2 a vote in reality, traitor joe. I guess the strategy from the beginning was to maintain control no matter what. In that environment, you really don't have any leverage.
Now, if after the 06 election they basically said screw it on control, which some advocated, then the leverage situation would have been different.
I am annoyed and frustrated by the lack of action as you are. Unfortunately, the fact that they only control by 1/2 a vote really puts reid in a bind.
June 5, 2008 3:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh, and the answer to this:
The answer is "No".
Another edition of simple answers and all....
June 5, 2008 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
One thing I think people are overlooking. The resolutions on Senate organization is where Joe got his hair from, and we don't want to open that can of worms with Holy Joe being the swing vote while the remainder of the 110th is in session.
Joe will be shown the curb in Jan. have no fear.
June 5, 2008 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know what? Fuck that approach, and excuse my language. Let Holy Joe be the swing vote that tips something in the Republican direction. Then, the Democrats can go all over the airwaves pointing out that Joe basically is a Republican.
That way, Joe's seeming "bipartisan" support for McCain will be illuminated as the fraud that it is.
Stop giving him so much damn power.
June 5, 2008 3:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
Joe doesn't really have any power, and while I can see on some levels the optics of it might have a nice blowback on the GOP to some level, it is actually a rather foolish move.
June 5, 2008 3:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
Joe keeps getting media attention for being a "Democrat" for McCain. That's power.
Take away his Homeland Security committee chairmanship and give it to someone who'll do more with it than pester YouTube to remove videos that he doesn't like.
Yes, I know it will leave the Democrats without the majority, but they don't really have a majority now. They're not going to lose committee chairmanships, or the ability to set the agenda of those committees, either.
Joe will be unmasked as what he is, and the damage isn't going to be all that bad.
June 5, 2008 3:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
CT Voter:
Saying Lieberman is a Republican is like saying Hagel is a Democrat.
They are just at opposite ends of the war (and, by extension, Presidential power) from their party.
All that matters is the MAJORITY of Americans are against the war, and by extension, are against Joe Lieberman, George Bush, and John McCain.
June 5, 2008 3:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't think I understand the point that you are making.
I want Joe drummed out of the Democratic Party, NOW. When he took to the floor of the Senate to lecture Bill Clinton on morality, it gave real support to the Republicans in the public relations battle, because they could say, and did, "even members of Clinton's own party think that he's wrong".
Same here. Even Democrats are supporting McCain. He needs to be drummed out now.
And this is also the problem with Clinton's stupid CIC comment. Even Democrats think John McCain more qualified.
June 5, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Really? There are people out there who still care what Joe Lieberman says or does?
Any "Democrat" who would vote for McCain is not a true Democrat. (which you're right, totally negates what I said earlier).
I guess instead of making silly comparisons, I should stick with making opinions:
The days of Lieberman influencing anything are over. Either voters are for the war, or against it.
Nobody's going to change their minds on that now.
Which is why I don't buy for a minute all this talk that true Hillary supporters will vote McCain. That's just not going to happen.
June 5, 2008 3:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sure there are people out here who care what Joe thinks. I don't happen to know anyone like that, however.
My point has to do with the political narrative that can develop over time. McCain can claim he has "bipartisan" support, that even Democrats support him. It's not Joe Lieberman, the individual, that's important, it's Joe Lieberman the Democrat.
And yes, everyone, I know he's an Independent. I live in CT. I also know that he is still referred to as a "Democrat", even here in CT.
That's my concern. That it will be used by McCain in a public relations effort.
June 5, 2008 3:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
If it was anybody else, I'd be worried.
But I honestly don't think many "Independents" look to Joe Lieberman for guidance.
Hell, Jesse Ventura is probably more popular.
June 5, 2008 4:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
The funny thing about Joe being a "Democrat" for McCain, the other day on CSPAN, they showed a press conference with Senators Boxer, Lieberman, and John Warner advocating a global warming bill. Boxer spoke first, and in her comments she refereed to the bill as "Tri-lateral". Both Lieberman and Warner looked at her with real surprise when she said that. She went on to say that the bill has Democratic, Republican, and Independent support before leaving the stage to allow Joementum™ and Senator Warner to stand side by side and explain why they supported the bill.
It's pretty clear that the Democrats have begun the process of culling themselves of The Rot named Joe.
June 5, 2008 4:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
Joe does enjoy his unique power on a very thin thread, and he is a sniveling little rat enough to find Reid intimidating. He should not be a chairman of anything, and should have gone back to freshman status, IMO.
My guess is that Ried is more tough in private than in public, and has put a significant amount of pressure on LIEberman (but certainly not enough to actually take away chairmanships)
...and Reid's style of politics don't carry water in this environment. He has to get replaced.
June 5, 2008 3:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
We don't need Reid to keep Joe in line. There's a new Dem boss in town and I think Joe will end up very sorry for crossing him.
June 5, 2008 3:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's a schlemiel with a tiny little schmekel who in six months time will be nothing more than a gornisht.
June 5, 2008 3:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Isn't old Joe from Connecticut... I think his constituents need to have some conversations with that boy... he seems to be angling for McCain's VP or major cabinet slot... We need a bigger majority in the senate next year so that Joe can make himiself an official republican and get it over with.
June 5, 2008 3:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
oh man, PLEASE let McCain pick ol' Joe as his VP!
That way, there's no way he would win!
Joe is election poison. He can't even carry Florida....
June 5, 2008 3:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Joe or Mitt. Those would be my recommendations, were McCain to ask me.
June 5, 2008 3:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or Alan Keyes.
That would be Funny.
June 5, 2008 3:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Joe was reelected in 2006 as an Independent Democrat. He lost the primary the Republicans threw their candidate under the bus to support him against Ned Lamont in the general. At the time lots and lots of DLC types were blaming the netroots, especially Kos, for promoting Lamont against Joe. It turns out the netroots were right. Old Joe is poison.
June 5, 2008 3:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
He was elected on the backs of Republicans and Dem/Ind voters familiar with him after so many years....I think his days are numbered in this State, however, particularly when the CT TV stations run this story on the local news tonight. He has really done nothing for us since he was reelected 2 years ago, and now is actively running against our choice in the Dem Primary.
Obama is quickly taking over the role of leader of the Democratic Party, and IMO, will be far more effective than Pelosi or Reid have been in keeping the Dem Caucus in line.
This is great stuff, and bodes so well for the future of this Party.
June 5, 2008 4:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
I've just got to stand to all the Reid bashers for a second(Greg). He was my Senator in Nevada for a decade, and has always done a great job.
Just because you want someone to take a bat and smash Lieberman over the head with it (lord knows I do) doesn't mean that this is necessarily the best way to achieve the desired outcome. Reid's forte was never in-your-face conflict, it was results (although nobody has 100% success).
For instance: despite every other progressive in the country abandoning the cause, the nuclear waste dump at Yucca mountain has had to fight for everything from research funding to water. They STILL don't actually have all their permitting. This has been accomplished without screaming, yelling, or public tantrums. The last time opposing the nuke dump was trendy was what ... like 1997? Well, Reid is still plugging away.
Considering the current makeup of the Senate, I'd rather see Lieberman drawn back into the dem fold than forced out into the GOP. Reid has quite a bit of long term leverage - the Dems are going to solidify their majority this election leaving Lieberman scant few weeks remaining where his decision matters. Caucusing with the majority and maintaining committee assignments is a pretty big carrot/stick combo ... if the discussions can take place without one party being embarrassed.
Ultimately it will be Lieberman's choice - Reid only has the power to make the wrong choice cost him. I think he pointed that out in his usual understated fashion. Let's let Reid do what he does: get results without yelling or humiliation.
BTW: He promised they would end the nomination fight by the end of June and it's .... oh ... JUNE 5.
June 5, 2008 3:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lieberman risked his Senate seat to support Bush's position in Iraq. He is not going to change positions in any significant way merely to keep a Chair. In my opinionReid should cut him loose -now-. You have to consider that with his sympathetic stance, he may actually be functioning as something of a spy for the Republicans to the extent that he's privy to Democratic strategy in the Senate. Hopefully he's not.
June 5, 2008 4:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
You realize that if you drum him out NOW that the GOP would have the majority. I *think* that means that Boehner would become the Senate Majority Leader and some other GOP fucktard would become Speaker of the House.
Great thinking.
June 5, 2008 4:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Drumming him out has nothing to do with the house. It might have an impact on Reid's position in the Senate, but I think that since they would remain 50/50 he would remain Majority Leader. Of course, Majority Leader/Minority Leader is meaningless when the Minority stops everything from happening all the time.
June 5, 2008 4:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
D-oh...of course it doesn't I'm a retard.
June 5, 2008 5:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
No. For one thing, what happens in the Senate would have no effect on the House; it's entirely possible to have the Senate under Republican leadership and the House under the Democrats. So even if the leadership in the Senate changed hands, Nancy Pelosi would remain as the Majority Leader in the House, where the Democrats would still be the majority party.
But unless I am mistaken, the rules under which the Senate was organized in this Congress said that even if party switches changed the makeup of the majority party mid-session (as happened in 2001), there would be no re-organization of the body until the next Congress in 2008. Certainly the committees would not be reorganized, and I think that also means Harry Reid would still be in charge of setting the Senate's agenda.
June 5, 2008 5:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well shit then ... kick the little fucker out :-).
(Seriously though, there might be better strategy "keeping him" ... I'll leave it to the leadership)
June 5, 2008 5:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think you miss-spelled "McConnell", right?
Maybe I'm worrying about it unnecessarily, but I'm just suspicicious that "Old Joe" could be providing a conduit of strategic information.
June 6, 2008 2:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Lieberman back in the fold? He's become a raving lunatic. The Republicans aren't going to want to have anything to do with him either. He's only good for scaring children.
June 5, 2008 6:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think the Dems need to talk to Stormin' Joe about not letting the door hit in on the ass on his way out.
Honestly, you do have to wonder why Lieberman doesn't have slightly better gauge of which way the winds are blowing right now. He should watch McCain's speech from the other night and really ask himself who's going to win this thing.
June 5, 2008 3:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
His blind support of the Iraq War has taken its toll.
He can no longer see anything but the false vision of an America controlled Middle-east.
I don't know, maybe the Dems SHOULD kick him out. He's become a very bitter man.
June 5, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
In fairness Joe thinks he is helping his friends in Israel. Of course, he isn't, but a lot of Jews mistakenly believe that any effort to bring peace to the Middle East is bad for Israel. Peace is certainly bad for the Likud party, but Israel and Likud are not the same thing. People like Joe sometimes forget.
June 5, 2008 3:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know it's not PC to say aloud, but sometimes people like Joe need to remember that their primary interests are Connecticut and the United States of America, and not some country on the other side of the world.
June 5, 2008 3:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not, but you're right. I've said so myself.
I find it very very ugly. He's not elected by any other goddamn country but this one - to serve his constituents here.
Not anywhere else and just like you I think he cares more about places that are not in the United States or any of its territories.
June 5, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
The RBC did not steal any delegates from Hillary, because, before the Committee acted, she didn't have any delegates. The DNC had stripped Michigan of all of its delegates, because of the rule-violating primary, so she had exactly zero delegates before last Saturday's meeting. After declaring that the primary wouldn't count for anything, and signing a pledge to "not participate" in it, she violated that pledge choosing to keep her name on the ballot. Then, she decided that she was entitled to exactly the number of delegates that the "wouldn't count" primary would have produced. Because she didn't get exactly the formula she wanted, people like Harold Ickes and "blank" charge that something was stolen from her. In fact, she was given 69 delegates she had no right to. Granted, the delegate formula was a bit arbitrary - trying to balance a lot of interests - but it gave her almost all that she wanted and far more than she was entitled to.
It amazes me that supporters of Hillary threaten to vote for McCain. Hillary is going to support Obama, why can't you? Do you really think that you honor ardently pro-choice, pro-universal health care Hillary by backing a man who would appoint Supreme Court justices who would overturn Roe v. Wade and who opposes any significant change in health care?
June 5, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
His blind support of the Iraq War has taken its toll.
He can no longer see anything but the false vision of an America controlled Middle-east.
I don't know, maybe the Dems SHOULD kick him out. He's become a very bitter man.
June 5, 2008 3:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wish they could kick him out. It would swing control of the senate, and we'd have GOP committees and so on and so forth. Maybe it wouldn't be so bad to put them back in control for the rest of the year. Remind everyone that they still don't know what they're doing.
Anyway, the first item of business after the election should be holding Joe's smug face down into his poop and telling him it's bad to shit where you eat. Then wack him with a rolled newspaper.
June 5, 2008 3:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think he just went around the bend after 9/11. He seems to believe Americans have to commit to permanent war and unlimited and never ending deployments of the National Guard in order to defend Israel. He doesn't give a damn what it does to the National Guard. You never get a sense from the creep that he cares about the American dead or wounded. That's why Chuck Hagel despises him. Hagel's no leftie, he's just a Vietnam vet who can't stand to see American troops used as cannon fodder by a bunch zealous lunatics.
June 5, 2008 6:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
It would have been hard for Joe to have heard McFuckup's speech Tuesday night when Joe is so far up McFuckup's ass.
June 5, 2008 3:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
If THAT was Joe's vantage point, the sound was probably pretty muffled.
Anyway, it seems consistent with my belief that Joe has become Smithers to McCain's Monty Burns.
June 5, 2008 4:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
One Republican defection is all we need to part ways with Old Joe. Wanna bet Obama mentioned that yesterday?
June 5, 2008 4:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
The rumor is that Obama spoke with Lieberman directly . . . Reid still thinks that Lieberman is a Democrat.
June 5, 2008 4:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Harry Reid needs Lieberpuke to maintain his position as majority leader..plain and simple...at least for the next few months.
June 5, 2008 5:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
The Dems have to force Lieberman into the arms of McCain. Kick him out and McCain will feel he needs revenge on the Dems for the treatment of his little buddy and will choose him as his VP...
June 5, 2008 6:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Via CNN:
I can't wait to kick this guy to the curb come November.
June 5, 2008 6:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
Nope. They have an organizing resolution in force that says who gets what committees and stuff ... and if Lieberman bolts, it still is in force: Harry is still majority leader.
However, after New Year's, we shouldn't have this problem any more.
June 5, 2008 6:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Myrtle the Turtle baby! JoeMentum. Go Joe. Doesn't the AIPAC have a lobbying job lined up for you?
CurbRider
June 5, 2008 8:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Joe is in a precarious spot now. After the 2008 elections, he will not have nearly as much leverage as he does now. The Democrats won't need his vote to break the tie anymore.
Joe is living in the Israeli world. In that world, Iran certainly is at war with Israel, they certainly are developing nuclear weapons, the American NIE was wrong, and immediate action is needed. The neocon/Israeli cabal has controlled his fundamental principles, so that even if he does vote as a Democratic Liberal on many things, he will side with McCain over the Democrat. The Republican party has been partly co-opted by the neo-con/Israeli cabal, and Joe is now one of them.
Once Obama becomes president, and the Senate gains a few more Democratic seats, Joe will begin to fade.
BP
June 5, 2008 10:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now is the time to start the process to put Hillary in the position of Harry Reid. With Obama in the White House, Pelosi incharge of Congress it would only serve the Democrats better to have Hillary Clinton incharge of the Senate.
June 6, 2008 1:23 AM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry, but I'm not sure it even serves the Democrats to have her in the party! After years of supporting her, I finally realized she's a Republican at heart. She clearly cares ONLY for her own political interests. We need to have someone much better than that in charge of the Senate!
June 6, 2008 9:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Joe Schmuck is my vote.
June 6, 2008 11:46 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not sure this post is quite accurate.
Dems do have some leverage, because after January with the indications looking strong that they will not just retain hold of the senate but pick up seats regardless of who wins the presidency.
At that point, should Joe continue his bullshit, he can be relegated to a backbencher, stripped of all committee assignments.
He clearly realises he's facing little to no prospect of re-election in '10 and his only hope is a McCain cabinet spot. But his survival instincts as a politician will tell him it's more prudent to play both sides of the fence and hedge his bets, since if Obama does become president he can be relegated to irrelevancy for the remainder of his term.
June 6, 2008 1:17 PM | Reply | Permalink