Anyway, the back-story seems kind of relevant right now.

Geez, ya think?

I knew that Obama came here and spoke on Lieberman's behalf, obviously, but I didn't know that they had begged him to do so.

Makes Lieberman look pretty petty and small right now.

And I guess Obama really knows what a deserter Lieberman actually is.

No good deed goes unpunished....

Even the wingnutz, like a broken watch, are correct 2 times a day....

LOSERMAN!

Uriah Heep. Reminds me of Uriah Heep. He's like someone out of Dickens. Unctuous & Untrustworthy.

Wanker.

You know this fact makes Loserman look terrible. That kind of ingratitude and betrayal really does wonders for a politicians image.

I guess Obama's judgement failed him on that decision.

Lieberman is always there when he needs you

Alright, this is off topic, but I haven't seen it brought up anywhere else, so here goes:

Was anyone else surprised by how quickly Obama, as opposed to his surrogates, responded to McCain's speech this morning?

I am out on the West Coast and caught McCain's speech as I was making breakfast. I got up to get some coffee and put the dishes away, and Obama was already on TV. The reporters didn't even have time to set up real cameras and they had to use a web camera for Obama's remarks.

Now it is normal to see surrogates get out there after a speech to respond, but it was striking to see Obama out there himself. Am I making too much out of this.

This could provide some great entertainment, as well as a lot of discomfort for Senator Bush McCain.

Ron Paul's own convention
Posted: Tuesday, June 10, 2008 3:06 PM by Domenico Montanaro
Filed Under: 2008, Paul

From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
That thorn in the Republican establishment side is back.

Ron Paul's campaign is planning an event at a "large venue" with a "sizable" crowd Sept. 2 -- the Tuesday of convention week -- in the St. Paul-Minneapolis area a couple of miles from the convention site.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/06/10/1129290.aspx

use link to read the full report.

I love this, from the update:

"Senator Lieberman asked Senator Obama to come to the Connecticut JJB dinner at the request of the Connecticut Democratic Party

Translation: we didn't beg, no, no, no!!!!!!!

Paging Al Gore, paging Al Gore...

Joe's done. He knows that. Even if Obama were to lose -- highly unlikely -- Joe is gone from his chairmanship. This is his last term as Senator.

I knew he'd turn out this way. All of Connecticut should be ashamed.

Meanwhile, an official from Lieberman's campaign emails this quasi-confirmation: "Senator Lieberman asked Senator Obama to come to the Connecticut JJB dinner at the request of the Connecticut Democratic Party. A campaign staffer may have asked for an endorsement, but Senator Lieberman did not."

OK, not that any of us had any doubt about this, but for such a little guy, what a huge schmuck.

Though I disagreed with Obama's decision at the time, allow me to say a few words in his defense, if for no other reason than to play a bit of devil's advocate.

A lot of factors probably went into his decision, most of them very practical in nature. For example, this incident occurred during Obama's first two years in the Senate. This made him particularly vulnerable to pressure from a long-time incumbent Senator who had a committee chairmanship. Also, Obama had presidential ambitions. Simply throwing Lieberman under a bus would probably not be seen well by his colleagues, and Obama wanted to build support. Finally, perhaps Obama saw a potential way to diffuse the Lieberman time bomb, for his future political career, while not doing too much damage to Lamont's chances.

The fact that the decision didn't work out doesn't take away from the problems of the time. And there would still be no guarantee that Lamont would have won. It's too bad, though. With Lamont, it would've been that much easier to get a Democratic supermajority in the Senate.

A Wingnut I know and don't much like refers, hilariously, to Joe Lieberman as the "Garden Gnome":

http://blog.ugo.com/images/uploads/gnome_wideblog.jpg

While I think this *is* pretty funny, coming, as it does, from a die-hard Wingnut, I personally think this bears a closer resemblance:

http://www.deadissue.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/gollemsized.jpg

As a CT Dem who worked hard for Ned Lamont, I have no sympathy for every “knife” Lieberman sticks into Obama’s back. I voted for Obama in CT’s Feb. 5, 2008 primary because I am basically an “Anybody but a Clinton/DLC and Republican” voter this election year.

Obama should have held the same position as Sen. Russ Feingold who stated on Meet the Press in 2006 that he’d support the winner of CT’s Dem primary. Granted Obama gave Lieberman a lukewarm endorsement at CT’s JJB dinner but Obama failed to come to CT to campaign with Lamont in the 2006 general election. Obama managed to go to Massachusetts for book signings and fundraisers but failed to stop by CT to help Ned Lamont. I noticed that in 2008, he managed to make it to CT to win our delegates for his Prez nomination. This is why I can’t get enthusiastic about Obama. However, I will enjoy watching the cat fight between Lieberman and Obama. It will be entertaining. Karma is a B*tch and not just for Hillary.

Hartford Courant columnist Colin McEnroe picks up on this story and offers a clear example of Lieberman’s half-hearted defense of Obama -- Broin' out with O and Joe.

There is only one thing that will make me forgive Obama for snubbing Lamont in 2006 – him getting the Senate Dems to strip Lieberman of his chairmanships in 2009.

Yeah, Obama did make a bad call on this one. But do did people I really like, like Barbar Boxer, who even supported him in the general. Yikes. At least Obama, and Hillary as well, to give her, her due, both supported Lamont in the general.

Most Democrats, besides like Kerry and Kennedy, were lukewarm with Lamont when it was clear that Lieberman was going to win.

Not Obama's best judgement, but lots of people still inexplicably trusted Joe in 2006. I mean this was the guy Al Gore picked to be VP as our Party once.

But while Obama might have been wrong on this one (he was) that doesn't hold a candle to LIEberman's utter douchebaggery. I need the Democrats to win in November for many big, important reasons. But a small petty one will be kicking this asshat out of the Democratic caucus and off chairing any committee. Wonder how much the Republicans will want to play with Joe-Joe then?

Obama should've punched him out on the Senate floor. Metaphorically. No. F that. Literally.

Gitta say this does not raise Obama in my estimation.

It does, however, confirm my opinion that to look to him for "change" of any significance is a fool's errand.

I would be completely surprised if Joe Lieberman does not harbor deep resentment that Obama is the Democratic candidate for president. Let us not forget that Joe had some pretty strong ambitions in this area, and did spectacularly poorly in his own dash to the Oval Office (remember Joementum?).

So here comes this young whippersnapper with only 4 years in the Senate, grabbing the biggest brass ring of all and...a schwarzer yet!

I think Joe is boiling over with resentment, and I think that partly, but not entirely, explains his behavior towards Obama. The other part is just rank arrogance and ambition, and a very myopic view of Israel's place in the Middle East.

So, basically, Joe Lieberman is a back-stabbing, traitorous scumbag, who will stick a shiv in his "friends" and go over to whatever enemy offers the strongest blind support to mindlessly militaristic Likudnik policies. Who would have guessed?

Gosh, with all the criticism of Greg that has been going on here, I've been hesitating to bring this up, but I guess I will. In the article at top of thread, Greg preens himself quite about about this personal scoop, using the first-person quite a lot. As I read it, I realized it was stuff about the "begging" that I've been reading for weeks. Not one piece of new information. I can't remember where I've been hearing this repeatedly, but just by Googling "lieberman begged obama," I get things like this from April 15:

Sullivan added another good point for reporters’ assignment desk: “Back in 2006, Joe Lieberman couldn’t get enough of Barack Obama, and Obama stoutly defended Lieberman from parts of the anti-war left. Lieberman begged Obama to come to Connecticut to speak on his behalf. It would be a good question for the press to ask Lieberman after his description of Obama as ‘far-left’ today. In what way is Obama ‘far left’ now in a way he wasn’t ‘far left’ then?”

And this from May 21:

Indeed, he’s repulsed by the foreign policy worldviews of Obama and the Clintons now, but it was Lieberman who begged them to campaign for him two years ago — when their worldviews were identical to what they are now.

I won't pursue this further, since my point that this is not original research on Greg's part is I think sufficiently made. It's not the crime of the century, and I know this is the Web where journalistic ethics are a little hazier perhaps, but I don't like being jerked around, being told I'm being granted his privileged access, only to read material (including exact expressions) that I've known for some time.

The point is certainly worth Greg's bringing up again, but it's not new, as he emphasizes.

Lieberman is a scumbag.

Jewish and Israeli interests are of far higher priority to him than Connecticut and American interests.

Would we tolerate someone from another Middle Eastern country supporting their own nation ahead of the one that they are supposed to be representing?

This backstabber needs to put in his place. Obama should have him booted off every significant position he enjoys in the Senate as a member of the majority.

In fact if possible, he should be impeached as a Senator, and the good people of Connecticut should initiate that.

WTF? He endorsed Lieberman????

Obama's an inside the beltway stooge.

God help us.

Lieberman has a function for McCain--that of a two-legged teleprompter--that pulls McNitwit back from the edge during one of those notorious lapses linguae (sp) moments which seem to be multiplying lately. Sunni? Shia? ah, well, what the hell. He (McCain) made another gaff just today--something about beer. of all things.

McCain is self-destructing as we speak. The pressure is just too much on his old brain and his nerves. Can't wait to see the debates. Hey, it happens to all of us sooner or later--senility. But we try to maintain our dignity--and stay out of the White House. Seriously, it's terrifying, the thought of the 3a.m. thing... nobody's home upstairs.

Lieberman is so wormlike that it's hard to see even Red State Republicans taking any delight in his endorsement of McCain. Of course, many of them hardly know him or don't know him at all. To them, he'll just be a Democrat for McCain. But if they look closely at the guy, I can't imagine them being that impressed.

The filmmaker who did this "webmercial" should do one about Lieberman.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kIXD6ADmP4

Obama was coming to Connecticut anyway. The question was whether or not he would say something nice about the incumbent, Joe Lieberman, when he spoke at JJB. He was asked repeatedly to do so and he did it. A courtesy to an incumbent and a colleague.
After the primary Obama endorsed Lamont.
So what if Hillary sent Lamont a check? BFD. Money was not Lamont's problem, ever.

Hillary's husband Bill was muddying the waters in favor of Lieberman so Hillary's check meant nothing at all. She did not speak out for Lamont.

Lieberman is still close to Hillary Clinton, and so are their staffs, big givers, and supporters. For Joe, the world is divided into those who were with Lieberman after the primary and those who were not.
This is a payback, and Obama does NOT deserve it. And Lieberman lied about supporting a Democrat for president. He has some nerve saying anyone is sleazy. And if his staff said that - there is no campaign now so it's a government employee, and the press should force them on the record or drop it.

I hope Obama is scheduling a second briss for the Liebersmeg.

Dear god but what a hypocritical little turd Joe truly is, though. Not that there's anything surprising or new in that.

I would suggest that we visit Joe LIEberman's Senate website an email our feelings to him right away. That ought to at least let him know that, while CT may have erroneously voted for him, the rest of the country sees him for the political jackal he is, and we see through his (to copy a term) "scumbaggery".

"I hope CT kicks that dude to teh curb, come next re-election."

Why wait? Don't they allow recall elections in Connecticut? I think it's time for CT voters to start a petition to recall Holy Joe.

Wow. This may be the first real questionable judgement I have read about regarding Obama.

So to sum it all up, I have come to the conclusion that Lieberman is a LOSER and a HYPOCRITICAL TRAITOR!