In Private Meeting, Reid Tells Lieberman That It's Unlikely He'll Keep Committee Slot
In the private meeting today between Harry Reid and Joe Lieberman, Reid bluntly informed Lieberman that Dem sentiment against him had risen to the point where it would be tough for him to keep his plum Homeland Security Committee chairmanship -- but Lieberman pushed back and said he thought he should be allowed to keep it, a source familiar with the meeting tells us.
But Reid stopped short of saying outright that Lieberman would be stripped of the slot if he didn't voluntarily relinquish it, the source says.
"Reid did not say that he was going to strip it," the source says. "There was a discussion, however, about how many in the [Dem] caucus are upset and don't want him to continue on the committee."
Reid confronted Lieberman with some of the comments he'd made about Obama during the presidential election. "Senator Lieberman defended his comments and said he thought that he should be able to continue as chairman," the source says.
No agreement was reached in the meeting, the source says, but Reid apparently is looking at a coming caucus vote as a mechanism to resolve the standoff.
"If they aren't able to work something out satisfactorily, there will be a vote in the caucus," the source said.
It doesn't appear that whatever agreement is reached will be linked to the question of whether Lieberman is allowed to remain in the Dem caucus in a general sense. "That's Lieberman's decision," the source said of the question of whether Lieberman would continue caucusing with Dems.
Earlier today, Nico Pitney of The Huffington Post reported that Reid had offered Lieberman a deal by which he'd relinquish his plum committee slot in exchange for a lesser role on another sub-committee. HuffPo added that Lieberman hadn't accepted the deal. The source we spoke with couldn't confirm the deal offer.
In his public comments on the meeting, Lieberman refused to disclose what had happened, saying only that he was mulling his options going forward.
If he had simply said I support my good friend John McCain for the following positive reasons and left it at that I might be a little sympathetic, but the SOB went further and bad mouthed Obama at every turn. Traitor Joe must go.
November 6, 2008 6:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Y'all are forgetting something.
The problem is that if the Senate Dem count gets to 59, then Lieberman being the 60th gets leverage again. (It almost makes you wish they *don't* reach 60 so they can kick the sumbich out to the back-benches where he belongs.)
But if Chambliss loses the runoff, Franken wins the recount, and Stevens either loses or gets replaced by a Dem in a special election, then Joe's back in the cat-bird seat.
Reid's no dummy either. He doesn't want to antagonize Lieberman so much that he permanently loses a chance at getting to the 60, in case it's that close. This thing isn't going to go away until the other races are settled.
November 6, 2008 9:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Agreed that they'll hold off on booting him until the unlikely case that all three mentioned races go the Dems way is eliminated (or completed, one hopes) but can he even be trusted to vote with the Democratic caucus on the big issues? What are they going to do, threaten to remove his chair if he doesn't? Then they're down to 59 anyway. If he actually plays along, maybe he could make up for some of the crap he pulled, and I guess it's worth it to keep him around for the chance of 60 and that alone, but I can't wait until he goes up for reelection. Those should be some pretty fun campaign ads...
November 7, 2008 12:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm in agreement with y'alls reasoning. They don't want a potential enemy defecting to the Republicans and agitating.
I think if Reid is very smart he'll threaten Lieberman's position and then bring out some some rewards contingent on his playing along with the dems. Carrot and stick.
November 7, 2008 2:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama doesn't need Lieberman to get what he wants. Not all republicans are far right extreamists and there will always be a few moderate republicans who will vote with Obama. For instance there was a new moderate republican from Illinois elected to the Senate who knows and likes Obama personally.
The word of the day is "Bipartisanship" and I don't think any republican wants to be labled an obstructionist. Besides, Lieberman votes with the democrats on 90% of the issues and I really can't see than changing that much.
November 7, 2008 7:37 AM | Reply | Permalink
I live in Illinois, have all my life. Please enlighten me when did Illinois get three senators? Until Obama's place in the senate is filled, the 2 senators representing Illinois are Barack Obama and Dick Durbin, both Democrats.
November 7, 2008 8:12 AM | Reply | Permalink
Who are these moderate Republicans who will just 'go along' with Obama because he asks them nicely? What kind of watering down will each and every piece of legislation have to go through, just to satisfy these moderate Republicans?
Joe Lieberman is that moderate Republican, and his vote's much easier to get than just about anyone else I can name. Withdrawal from Iraq's a given, and speeches to the contrary, no one in the Senate's going to risk his or her good name on one more soldier being killed than necessary. But what about environmental legislation? Do we really think that Pat Inhofe will be so impressed by the shift in power that he'll vote for a carbon tax/tariff scheme? Do we really think that any Republican is going to vote to change capital-gains or estate taxes to offset a lowering of taxes on income from wages, i.e., money that comes from working? Come on. These guys will close ranks, they will shut out any but the most necessary legislation, and they will make us look foolish.
We need Obama to lock in his best guesses for dealing with national problems early, to demonstrate competence. We won't be given any credit for a recalcitrant Senate rump that blocks all of our necessary legislation. We need successes to build our credibility with a public that doesn't think highly of government.
There are too many pressing needs to bother with petty revenge.
November 7, 2008 8:24 AM | Reply | Permalink
fubar,
this goes to the idea that Obama "has" to reach across the aisle and "work in a bipartisan way".
If Lieberman is the deciding cloture vote then there is no "reaching across the aisle" being done by Republicans.
I'd like to know which Republican Senators may help Obama cut off a filibuster.
Of course its the Republicans and the MSM, people like David Broder, who are babbling about working across the aisle, the same people that professed that George Bush and the Republicans had a mandate to run the government according to the Republican ideology in 2001. What was the count on that vote again?
November 7, 2008 8:28 AM | Reply | Permalink
Except that he isn't, because Bernie Sanders caucuses with the Democrats. Franken win, losses of Stevens and Chambliss, buh-bye Lieberman.
November 7, 2008 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's mulling it over by going right to the GOP and getting a counter offer.
I hate weasels like this - playing both sides against the middle, they think, so clever.
I wrote to Reid. I will keep writing.
November 6, 2008 6:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wrote to him too and my senator, Salazar. If he is smart he will step down and take the lesser position or he'll likely end up with none if it goes to a vote. He is remarkably ignorant!
November 6, 2008 6:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wormtongue.
November 6, 2008 6:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
You guys just made me realize that come Janurary, I will finally have a senator to write to again about stuff like this.
November 6, 2008 7:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I am looking forward to being able to now write to my Sr. Senator and not having him be unable to effectively do anything since my Jr. Senator would simply cancel out his votes and actions by siding with BushCo.
Now I have the luxury of not only having my voice in D.C. heard, but having the amplifying effect of having twice the voices now in the Senate chamber.
November 6, 2008 8:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I e-mailed Reid as well, Tena. There can be no backing down on this - Lieberman has to lose his chairmanship.
November 6, 2008 7:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's too much of a narcissistic fool to just take the cover Reid provided and keep it moving. I'm sure Reid knows this. So let him join the rethug conference--I'm sure they could use the company.
November 6, 2008 6:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wish he would - that's the whole idea. Just get him the fuck out of our party caucus.
November 6, 2008 6:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
The only thing Traitor Joe is mulling is whether or not he wants to retire in four years by choice or by force.
If he goes GOP, he's toast. If he tries to mend fences and stay Dem, he's still toast but he can still try to run again.
Either way, Lieberman is irrelevant, which actually makes him perfect for the senate GOP.
PEACE
November 6, 2008 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
One possibility (though I'm giving Reid some credit he has not earned) is that they want to watch Lieberman wriggle a little before stripping him in a week or so. That way he will compromise himself even more (like he did today) by flipping back to pretending to be a democrat.
That way no-one will want him, if anyone still does.
November 6, 2008 8:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
He either begs to stay "with preconditions" or ends his political career in the next two years.
Isn't it that simple?
November 6, 2008 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
What is it with Reid that he can't take action, like, EVER? This is the most cut-and-dried case of Party treachery that you could provide. Why is he simply unable to just say, "Thanks, you're out." Simplest damn thing in the world.
November 6, 2008 6:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly. Thank you. Reid and Pelosi need to stop posturing for Fox News.
November 6, 2008 6:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yep, me too. Nice working with you, Joe. Good luck w/your new colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
November 6, 2008 7:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
How is Joe the Traitor supposed to keep our homeland secure if he really believes our new president is a terrorist?
If he switches to the GOP caucus, would he remain on the committee as a minority member?
November 6, 2008 6:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Joe was never a very good Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee to begin with. Absolutely useless when you get down to it. That alone ought to be enough of a reason to ask him to step down even without all his other traitorous actions.
November 6, 2008 11:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can we presume that Reid consulted with Obama before his discussion with Traitor Joe? If so, what do you think President(E) Obama may have said?
November 6, 2008 6:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
I may be that you are right about what is happening behind the scenes, but I doubt that even so.
The reason I doubt that is that Obama is now the head of the Executive. He really is not supposed to really get involved with what is going on the Hill. My gut tells me that Reid didn't have to talk to him and also that Obama will not get involved, because he shouldn't.
November 6, 2008 6:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
It may be - and forgive the generally run and clunky and incompleteness of those so-called sentences.
:)
November 6, 2008 6:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
What about Steering Committee member Biden?
(O.T. thanks for the link earlier--emailed Bingaman, also on the steering committee, about our pal Lieberman)
November 6, 2008 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's on the committee and I guess he's on the committee until he resigns.
He's fair game - but he's not supposed to have any function or authority in Congress once he's VP, of course, except to break ties.
November 6, 2008 7:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't worry about style and grammar -- I'm no better. I'm thinking that Obama has some role as head of the party. Plus, I would think that he wants a message sent down to the ranks that dissent is okay, but back-stabbing is punishable by shunning.
November 6, 2008 7:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that was understood.
;)
November 6, 2008 7:40 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well actually, Obama is still a senator until January 20th and technically part of the Democratic caucus.
November 6, 2008 8:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually January 3rd, 2009.
The 111th Congress convenes for the first time on the 3rd, and new members are sworn in then. So technically, for 17 days both Obama and Biden will be unemployed.
;-)
November 6, 2008 8:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
How exactly is Lieberman in the driver's seat here? For God's sake, just strip him of his chairmanship. Harry Reid needs to grow a pair.
November 6, 2008 6:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
http://democrats.senate.gov/steering/index.cfm?pg=6
You can, if you so choose, write to any or all of these members of the Democratic Steering and Outreach Committee. Notice that Biden is a member.
November 6, 2008 6:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yup, I noticed.
Here's where the gray area comes in. What Senate duties do Obama and Biden have until January? Would Biden act against Lieberman or be predisposed not to get involved? When are the replacements brought in? And, curiously, do we have ideas who these people will be?
November 6, 2008 7:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
It is a good question, but Biden could pass along our mail and e-mail to Reid and others. Although, I cannot imagine Joe Biden keeping his opinion to himself for the next 75 days.
November 6, 2008 7:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
They are still part of the lame duck congress until the new congress convenes in January, so they still have a say in the caucus.
November 6, 2008 8:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
hillary's on that committee, as well. don't know if that's a good thing, but i'm her constituent, so at least i can bother her.
November 6, 2008 7:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Blast from the past about our good friend traitor joe and Obama dealing with him:
http://commentsfromleftfield.com/2008/06/obama-tells-lieberman-quit-campaigning-against-democrats
November 6, 2008 6:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why would anyone want to have Lieb continue in this position. I seem to recall that while Waxie was working his ass off with his Committee trying to oversight the Bush Administration, Lying Lieb spent the past two years with his thumb up his ass when it came to running any oversight investigations. Does anyone have their finger on the pulse of any significant oversight that Lieb's committee did in the past two years?
This is an important Committee. It really needs to be in the hands of someone who will work it.
John
November 6, 2008 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
LIEberman must go.
I was at a speech here in So Florida, at a Jewish Community Center that LIEberman gave after a rally with McSame in Miami.
The asshat spent 45 minutes talking about Obamas associations with Rashid Khalidi, Ayers etc, lying his butt of.....it was disgusting. Luckily we had Wasserman Schultz and wexler to set them straight.
He is on a scorched earth mission against Obama and the dems....he must go
November 6, 2008 6:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
Not only will we force him to step down, we will make him disappear from political scene. Rest assured.
November 6, 2008 7:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
With Rahm being the Cheif of Staff I'm sure Joe the traitor's days are numbered.
I can see Emanuel give Ried an earful. Men with balls are finally taking charge.
November 6, 2008 7:00 PM | Reply | Permalink
I"m loving me some Rahm. I am loving me some Chicago style government - this shit roxx!
November 6, 2008 7:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
REAL men, not snakes. How refreshing.
November 6, 2008 7:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Did you see the picture of Rahm and his children over on HuffPo? those are gorgeous children.
November 6, 2008 7:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Is that a great picture or what? Loved it :)
November 6, 2008 8:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
ladies.....please.
November 6, 2008 8:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yo?
November 6, 2008 9:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
Benedict Leiberman take away his chairmanship, and let him caucus with the gop...
Added note
REPO MAN II
starring Sarah the material career girl who had a love for clothes that lead her to go Imelda Marcos with campaign funds
and the lawyer who is dispatched to Alaska to hunt down the rogue pitbull vp, and retrieve the clothes to avoid further embarrassment.
November 6, 2008 7:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lieberman is like the fox in the hen house. The fox must go. I don't trust him at all. And neither should the party. He should be excised, like a cancer.
November 6, 2008 7:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think that was correct until Tuesday night. Since then he's been more of a cockroach in a henhouse, and boy is he getting pecked. :)
November 6, 2008 7:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
I like your characterization better than mine.
I also see Lieberman as extremely passive aggressive. One sign of that is how s l o w l y he talked, as if he was going to force people to listen to him.. by speaking a slow and as syrupy as molasses. Ugh!
November 6, 2008 7:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's shown that he cannot be trusted and shouldn't be trusted.
He asks the charismatic junior senator from Illinois to campaign for him and help him save his senate seat from Lamont and then turns right around and stabs Obama in the back. And, he didn't blink.
November 6, 2008 7:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's right. He didn't just ask. They begged Obama to campaign on his behalf. And he figuratively stabs in the back. There have to be consequences.
November 6, 2008 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Regardless of the outcome of all this, I welcome today's and any future humilliating, pathetic, undignified public squirming. :)
November 6, 2008 7:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's like watching Boston Legal, we're now at the plea bargaining stage.
November 6, 2008 7:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!
Indeed.
November 6, 2008 7:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
My question is WHY? Is there some reason Harry Reid cannot simply say "We're done with you, go away."
November 6, 2008 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
My guess? Reid wants Lieberman to go away voluntarily. That way, Joe can't blabber to Fox about how the Democratic Party has left him. Reid's probably applying pressure, and hoping Joe buckles.
November 6, 2008 7:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Take away enough toys and he'll go off and pout. So Reid hopes.
November 6, 2008 7:32 PM | Reply | Permalink
Perhaps Ried is waiting for direction from President Elect Obama?!?
I would be greatly interested in hearing Obama's opinion on this issue.
I would throw Joe the turncoat out, but Obama is a much more gracious and generous human being than most of us. Also, dare I say, smarter and more pragmatic.
(Also, like to hear Biden's leanings on this matter too.)
November 6, 2008 7:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
*sigh*
Ok, do I have to conduct a course on the constitution here? I mean no offense, but everyone is all over what President Obama is going to do. I know y'all are smart and I know y'all know that the Executive doesn't have any business getting involved with procedural shit like this on the Hill.
November 6, 2008 7:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tina, perhaps I worded it poorly. I would be interested in the 'thoughts' of Obama and Biden on this issue. I understand that's probably never going to happen and yes, I understand the constitution.
My other point being that Obama continues to amaze me with his ability to look at the 'big picture' and not get mired in the quick of shifting sands.
November 6, 2008 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tena, you should send a memo to pretty much all of our former presidents because they routinely got involved with stuff like this.
I'm not sure why you are saying it's against the Constitution, though there is of course an understanding of a separation of powers. But there's nothing that I see in the Constitution that precludes the president from talking to leaders in the Senate and trying to influence their decisions. Think about the crap Johnson alone pulled!
That said, I agree that it wouldn't be kosher for the president-elect to get so involved with such procedural issues, especially in a public way, and it definitely seems like Obama does not want to get his hands dirty with stuff like this, which seems like precisely the reason he's hiring someone like Emmanuel.
November 6, 2008 8:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
I see a problem when one party takes over both branches and then starts dealing between those branches. Like we just saw? For 8 years. Scared me to death -
I know they have opinions and I think Reid knows those opinions.
I think Reid told Lieberman he's over, basically. Just like the post says.
November 6, 2008 8:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
Barack has enough snarly mess to deal with at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue. Let the Senate Democrats kill their own snakes.
November 7, 2008 8:32 AM | Reply | Permalink
Legally, Obama and Biden are still members of the Senate until they resign. That doesn't have to be until Jan. 20.
The new Congress convenes on Jan. 3. Each party will hold its caucus before then, and it'll include incoming (not-yet) Senators but not outgoing (exterminated) ones. BigO and Joe are entitled to participate in the Dem caucus and even vote for the Organizing Resolutions that are passed during the first week. If they want.
Ethically, the people of Illinois and Delaware are entitled to have their interests represented in the Senate by both their Senators.
Practically, this is Democratic party politics, and one's influence is whatever it is. How either of them choose to wield such influence will have consequences. I'm sure they both know that and will act accordingly.
November 6, 2008 8:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
The fact that Lieberman thinks he should be allowed to continue on as chairman reveals how delusional he is about the impact of his comments.
Words have consequences, Joe. You repeatedly maligned the Democratic nominee in the worst way. This is not the same as respectfully disagreeing with your party and backing the opposing party's nominee. You were the equivalent of an attack dog for John McCain.
And you had to have known what a joke Palin was, how erratic McCain was, and how they, as a team, were a disaster waiting to occur. And yet you still went out and attacked Obama.
There have to be consequences for this behavior.
November 6, 2008 7:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I suspect that there are friendships here that have been severely strained and although Lieberman doesn't give a flying f**k, my take is that Reid is trying to do this without embarrassing JL any more than he has already made an ass of himself. Due to JL's arrogance, that time has passed. I suspect now he will be maligned big time. Personally, WTF was Gore thinking?! This guy is a cockroach.
November 6, 2008 7:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's delicate - the man represents the people who elected him - it's not just "you're fired."
God.
It's also procedural - there are rules.
November 6, 2008 7:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tena: Your comment made me smile: "there are rules", as, after the last 10 years (yes, the last two with Clinton) I had forgotten that essential point. Maybe once again there will be.
November 6, 2008 7:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
How would Tom DeLay handle this?
I'm not saying that we stoop so low, but there would be NO MERCY for a Repubican who acted this way under DeLay or even Gingrich.
November 6, 2008 7:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tom Delay did not give one shit about the rules. Reid is an expert on procedure.
More boring, less bold, but correct.
November 6, 2008 7:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
I just think DeLay would have hung a Republican traitor out to dry, probably by his nuts.
November 6, 2008 7:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
Probably so and when push came to shove - they bit him back. You cannot keep loyalty through fear.
Get over the stinking Repugs, please. I don't want anything to do with those LOSERS.
November 6, 2008 7:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
I keep forgetting, it is a brand new day in America. Thanks for reminding me Tena.
November 6, 2008 7:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes. I'm not sure Democrats should emulate Tom DeLay, but it would be refreshing if they didn't seem so meek and mild. I understand Reid has done a reasonable job in a good situation, and I hope he's waiting for Joe to make the move. But if Joe doesn't make that move, then maybe Harry Reid out to channel some Tom DeLay and make sure that the Caucus votes against Joe.
November 6, 2008 7:34 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree. We should never stoop so low, but follow Obama's example of dignity and civil discourse.
There does need to be loyalty and reliability. Lieberman's behavior was and is a disgrace to the Party, to his state and to himself. He shouldn't be a Chairman of anything. He lacks the judgment, ethics and morals to lead, even to lead a committee.
November 6, 2008 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's not even the effectiveness factor - because rule by fear is not effective in the long run.
You have to be smart. Smart.
Reid is very smart. I'm loving these smart people - Rahm, the transition economic team - smart damn people, not cronies.
November 6, 2008 7:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
President Elect Obama has more important things to worry about than what is appropriate for Holy Joe's fate . Just not a productive use of very valuable time. Joe Biden, on the other hand, while I'm sure he's got lots on his plate, is really still just a senator, with no fixed portfolio of responsibilities to come up to speed on.
November 6, 2008 7:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
And it is unconstitutional.
November 6, 2008 7:26 PM | Reply | Permalink
I want to hear Lieberman's defenses to some of the ridiculousness he was spewing. "I got caught up in the moment, fighting for my friend" is about all he could say. Like I mentioned in an earlier thread about Lieberman - How can he expect to keep his Homeland Security Chairmanship after taking part in the Palin charade, trying to fool America into thinking she was ready from Day One to be President?
How can folks take him seriously in that Chairmanship role when he was willing to risk President Palin if it meant his buddy would get elected President and he could get the Secretary of State cabinet post he always wanted?
November 6, 2008 7:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Bottom line, as always, once words spew forth, they cannot be taken back. Also, Lieberman knew he was toast: he gambled and lost. Oh well, shit happens.
November 6, 2008 7:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
You know, you can chalk up his McCain support to him being bipartisan and going with the candidate that he really wanted to win. The election's over. We won, his guy lost.
The thing that really gets me and I don't see it discussed in any of these stories - is that he also stumped for several Republican Senators in senate races (Coleman and Collins I remember off the top of my head). Effectively working against the Democrats goal of increasing their majority.
If he wasn't on board with the Senate Democrats in the senate campaigns, he has no business taking up Democratic slots in any committee (let alone chairmanships).
November 6, 2008 7:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lieberman knows "bi-partisan" is the word of the day and he's going to run with that to try and save his skin.
If Lieberman wants to be forced out via vote, so bit it. He doesn't have any support from the Democratic Senators he caucuses with. He's proven he can't be trusted - how can you caucus with somebody that you cannot trust and is out for themselves?
November 6, 2008 7:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama should appoint him ambassador to Nauru.
November 6, 2008 7:29 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!
Place sounds incredibly depressing, frankly.
November 6, 2008 7:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'd make him to be a head of something near the
"caves" where Bin Laden lives.
November 6, 2008 7:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
Exactly. I think Reid has said in so many words that the caucus isn't going to work with him - they don't want to.
November 6, 2008 7:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
Just sent a letter to Senator Reid. Joe Must Go! I pasted it in here and then realized it's 360 words long. So I'll put it on my TPM blog if I can ever figure out how to get the god damn thing working.
Of course, it would have been much shorter to say, "Get that motherfucker out of here!" but I'm actually hoping this letter gets read to Reid.
Buh-bye Joe! Hang around any longer and you're gonna need an operation to remove my foot from your ass! Fucker.
November 6, 2008 7:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
I wrote him early today and said rather rudely that I was one of the people who just helped finance these campaigns and I wanted Lieberman out of our caucus.
November 6, 2008 7:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Along the lines of something more organized Jane Hamsher of FireDogLake has an online petition here for the "Senate Democratic Steering and Outreach Committee".
It might be another way to make the point.
November 6, 2008 9:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
Am I the only one who loved watching 90 sec press conference of the MoFo? I mean the one on the frontpage.
My Unwarrented Advice:
Don't fret, just enjoy the old fucker frizzle bit by bit, like a corpse in the middle of a desert.
November 6, 2008 7:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I have to admit that I did not enjoy that 90 seconds. It was painful to watch. I truly believe Lieberman thinks he can BS his way back into the good graces of Democrats by invoking Obama's words. It is about as low as one can go.
Reid needs to rid us all of this scourge. THAT is what is best for the country and for national security. Lieberman never should have been re-elected. He cannot be gone soon enough.
November 6, 2008 7:45 PM | Reply | Permalink
Reid is such a wuss. If this was the house, even Nancy would have kicked his ass to the curb, like she did Jane Harman!
November 6, 2008 7:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
You can't let Lieberman play the martyr.
It's pretty bad that his only hope at getting re-elected in four years time is hoping Barack Obama is a bad President and then he can campaign on "I-told-you-so". For that reason alone you need to marginalize him as much as possible. That may sound ridiculous, but so was stumping that Sarah Palin was ready to be President. He put his own interest above that of the country there, whose to say he won't do it again?
November 6, 2008 7:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah - did you bring Nevada in for Obama?
Reid did. Look at that map.
November 6, 2008 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah, the Obama campaign and the thousands of volunteers from California probably had nothing to do with Nevada going blue.
Neither did the fact that the Obama campaign was there for 11 months before the election.
November 6, 2008 7:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry. I retract the comment.
November 6, 2008 8:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
Alaska election was stolen: A plausible story. At least 15% votes disappeared.
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/kpete/8022
November 6, 2008 7:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
yes, Reid should tell Senator Lieberman to take his joementum somewhere else!
November 6, 2008 7:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
this is tricky. i should say at the outset that i can't stand lieberman.
HOWEVER, think about the vindictive government we've had for the last 8 years. you talk against the boss, and you pay a severe price. you walk against the boss, you pay a severe price. silence all critics. you're with us or against us. much of the reason that i cannot stand the current administration.
stripping joe outright of his position solely because of the things he said, no matter how offensive, smacks of the current administration's hyper-retributive playbook.
while i cannot fucking STAND lieberman, something about stripping him of a leadership position solely because he exercised his freedom of speech ... well ... it kind of creeps me out. just as much as the things he said creeped me out.
i know this post may draw a lot of fire, but i can't help how uneasy this makes me feel.
November 6, 2008 7:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
Chuck Hagel supported Obama in a dignified way and did not betray his party.
Lieberman went above and beyond his freedom of speech. He coached Palin for the debate and talked absolute shit about Obama for months.
November 6, 2008 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
the only thing i recall hagel doing is going to the middle east with him. he didn't endorse obama. he didn't appear on the stump.
secondly, your concept of the first amendment frightens me.
November 6, 2008 7:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Actually Hagel did more than that. Despite being a republican, he sacrificed his standing with his party not endorsing McCain despite not officially endorsing anyone and is considered a scourge and turncoat on par with the vitriol directed here against Joe Lie.
He also had massive scorn heaped upon him with wingnuts calling him a treasonous turncoat when he went public about his very unflattering statements of Palin, including when asked about her foreign policy cred that she offered up about being able to see Russia from her house as being an insult to the intelligence of all Americans and an embarrassment to the world.
Plus, despite not endorsing anyone, his WIFE did make a very public endorsement of Obama. You think that would have happened without his implicit approval? It's easy to see that his wife acted as a surrogate speaking for him on his behalf even if she was a big Obama supporter in her own right. She wouldn't have went public with her endorsement otherwise.
November 7, 2008 2:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
and do you approve of how the "wingers" are treating hagel? or do you find it vindictive, nasty, self-centered, juvenile, and overly partisan?
November 7, 2008 7:55 AM | Reply | Permalink
Reid needs to go Corleone on Lieberman's ass.
November 6, 2008 10:31 PM | Reply | Permalink
You put Committee Chairpeople in place to influence the production of legislation. Lieberman's actions put him at odds not only with party leaders, but also with the very ideals of the Democratic Party.
This isn't about being vindictive. Lieberman deserves to lose his chairperson role because he can't do the job required of him. He has absolutely no influence left. If the caucus doesn't remove him, it will send a signal that party leadership still has not sprouted balls in spite of the testosterone shot coming out of the 2008 election. The fact that we despise the motherfucker is not relevant. He's gotta go because he can't do the job.
November 6, 2008 7:48 PM | Reply | Permalink
How about stripping him of his leadership position for the following reasons: Lieberman had to have had some sense of how unprepared Palin actually was, and also had to have some understanding about the dysfunctional relationship between McCain and Palin.
Yet he went out and publicly maligned Obama, repeatedly.
It's not vindictive behavior to ask someone who clearly has serious flaws in judgment to hand over the chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee.
And if that's not enough, how about making him move along because frankly, he did a shitty shitty job as committee chair? How many hearings did that committee hold over Katrina?
November 6, 2008 7:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
fair enough. if there is a merit-based reason (the last would be the best, i.e., the quality of the work he did or didn't do), i'm fine with that.
but then any other ineffective chair better be removed, as well.
the bottom line is that this is going to come across as vindictive partisan behavior. someone has to be the "bigger man." someone has to take the first step.
i'm grossed out that i'm suggesting no retaliation for the "betrayal," but it is what it is. that's why i prefer reid's offer -- step down, joe, and take an (R) behind your name.
November 6, 2008 7:57 PM | Reply | Permalink
Best option, as far as I'm concerned.
As for the part about being the "better man". I understand that. However, I also think that the Democrats have behaved far to complicitly over the last 8 years than was good for the country, and all the complicity was bathed in the glow of seeking "compromise" and being "bipartisan". And the reality was that the Republicans and Bush ran roughshod over us.
I don't think Democrats should steamroll Republicans. In the long run, we'll all pay for it. But Joe Lieberman has figuratively stabbed the Democratic nominee for President in the back, repeatedly, lacked the judgment to recognize just how awful McCain's judgment was, and did a piss poor job as chairman of what should have been, if you believed Republicans and Joe's drivel about national security, one of the most important committees in the Senate.
This screams for some sort of negative consequence for Joe. Something a bit more substantial than being disinvited from the weekly lunches.
November 6, 2008 8:04 PM | Reply | Permalink
I completely agree that he should be branded with the dreaded "R"!
http://www.televisiontunes.com/Branded.html
November 6, 2008 8:22 PM | Reply | Permalink
Or just strip him for the very simple reason that he's not a Dem, but a CFL. There are other LOYAL Democrats who've earned that committee chair.
If he has a problem with that, he can go align himself with the opposition party and see what they'll give him.
November 6, 2008 8:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Compact flourescent light?
November 6, 2008 9:42 PM | Reply | Permalink
he's not a Dem, but a CFL.
Canadian Football League?
November 7, 2008 2:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
The problem with Lieberman is not only what he's done in the past, it's that you can't trust him in the present or future. How can you have someone chairing a major committee when the congressional leadership and the White House can't trust him?
November 6, 2008 8:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
I think Reid should use the plum position to blackmail Joe into voting with the caucus every time. First time he votes with the Repugs, bye bye chairmanship.
November 6, 2008 7:44 PM | Reply | Permalink
Disagree strongly. We don't have to pussyfoot around like that any more. Lieberman is no longer capable of effectively filling a chairperson position. He has no cred with party leadership and simply cannot be trusted. Joe has been all about Joe for too long. He's trying to weasel his way back into the main stream because the bet he made went very badly.
We do not need to fret about this guy. Move him out of the way. Put people in the roles who can do the fucking job. We need a leader who can lead, not a weasel who needs a caretaker.
November 6, 2008 7:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
I know it sounds oxymoronic given Lieberman's droopy disposition, but is there any bigger drama queen than him? To Lieberman, it is all about Lieberman all the time.
I hope the Dems do strip him of his chairmanship, and he can go do what he wants after that. I'm sure he intends to make them beg and plead for his vote on a lot of issues. They shouldn't. They should stop playing his game and make him their vote of last resort in situations...go to him after they've tried to get Collins, Snowe, Specter, et al.
By letting him get away w/ his BS, they just empower him.
November 6, 2008 7:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm not a big fan of Reid. But why is everyone pouncing on Reid. It seems clear Reid doesn't want the rotten Onion in the caucus and he's just being polite in his statement.
Wait until GOP spits on lil' joey. He's going down.
November 6, 2008 7:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Probably the best strategy is to strip him of all privilages and force him to switch parties himself, rather than completely banish him. Then he will have to face his own constituents who elected him as an independent-democrat. I would think if Connecticut really wanted a Republican to represent them, they would elect one.
November 7, 2008 10:34 AM | Reply | Permalink
I cannot say often enough how awed I am by the Obamas' relationship. The way she looks at him is the way a best friend looks at a best friend. She doesn't openly adore him with a simpering look on her face, ala Nancy Reagan, Laura Bush, et al. She is totally his equal and you can tell he would never have it any other way. God that's a great relationship and god she's an asset.
She's as smart or smarter than he is - and hasn't the ambition Hillary had.
I love this.
November 6, 2008 7:47 PM | Reply | Permalink
I really admire Michelle. She is a strong, self-confident woman who is comfortable in her own skin and she's obviously done a great job with those kids. Both of them have.
I saw them walk on stage on election night and I was excited and thrilled that they would be our next first family.
Good-bye Dry Drunk George, Stepford Laura and the Party Girl Twins. Dignity vs. Disgrace.
I also heard that publishers are turning down Bush's memoirs. Not kidding.
November 6, 2008 7:51 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's all too much!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
LOL!
November 6, 2008 7:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I loved Obama's - "The love of my life" on Tuesday night.
November 6, 2008 8:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
And you know it's true - it's not just bullshit.
God I love these people.
November 6, 2008 8:25 PM | Reply | Permalink
Jeeebus Peeps - Reid brought in Nevada.
Think about it - look at that blue map.
November 6, 2008 7:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama brought in Nevada, Tena. Not Reid.
November 6, 2008 7:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I got it up thread, retracted the first one. Retract this one. I'm sorry.
November 6, 2008 8:03 PM | Reply | Permalink
Oh geez, don't be sorry. I think it's obvious I detest Lieberman, and therefore, am probably a little harsh on Harry Reid, so it's good to be reminded that he's not the spineless jellyfish I sometimes perceive him to be.
November 6, 2008 8:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's probably one of those people who is so into the rules that that is his total game. The Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals in Dallas when I worked there was like that. He even looked like Reid.
There were 13 judges, counting him, so he didn't sit. There were 4 panels of 3 judges that rotated every quarter - his idea. Thing was, if he decided to get mad - and did get mad once in awhile, it was everybody duck! Because he was so fucking smart that he would just cut whomever he was mad at to pieces.
I try to cut Reid some slack because he's had a hard job running a Senate almost evenly divided.
I think he fired Lieberman, basically. So I think it's premature to think he's ball-less. I guess.
November 6, 2008 8:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
Well, I felt bad about discarding all those volunteers like that.
November 6, 2008 8:17 PM | Reply | Permalink
That's why I said I was sorry.
November 6, 2008 8:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Without Reid, there still would have been no Nevada blue. He represents Nevada Democrats. Shelley Berkley only gets reelected because she represents the center of Clark County, which is strongly Democratic. She has not shown herself to be a friend of liberty, nor has she opposed the War in Iraq.
This is not to detract from the Obama campaign. Both times the campaign's door to door workers came to my house they were polite, and after the first recorded my responses that I was voting for Obama, but there was no way in hell I'd vote for Berkley, the second one inquired if I needed a lift to early voting without asking my preferences. There was not a third knock, and I assume that was because I early voted the day after the 2nd representative knocked on my door (in Nevada, all major indoor malls had early voting for 2 weeks, and I tied my voting with a desired trip to a couple of electronics stores). All in all, a very professionally run team, who showed courtesy to a barbarian such as me, who is registered as a member of the LP.
It was a cooperative effort, and Reid deserves his due for Nevada too.
November 6, 2008 8:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hope sometime before the next midterm there is a change of leadership in the senate.
I hope that the next majority leader of the senate is Hillary Clinton.
Make that change before Reid fumbles a major bill.
November 6, 2008 7:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton is on the Steering and Outreach Committee. Write to her to get Lieberman removed from his chairmanships.
November 6, 2008 7:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
LOL!
And so the entire round robin argument begins again.
November 6, 2008 7:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
Gadzooks People! We're arguing about the best way to run the country because we can actually do it now!
How fucking great is that!?! We're debating courses of action that are focused on improving our nation. We're no longer talking about how badly fucked we are!
This is fucking great!
Shit. I just came all over myself. Gotta go change my underwear...
November 6, 2008 7:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Durbin.
November 6, 2008 7:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
Clinton wouldn't want it. It's only glamorous in title.
November 6, 2008 7:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
I agree - it's kind of a thankless job, or so it appears. Though they are much more polite in the Senate with each other.
November 6, 2008 8:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Which is exactly why Reid is a good choice for the job. He works quietly behind the scenes, is willing to forgo vacation time if the circumstances warrant it, and is a man who keeps his word. With Reid, a handshake is as good as a written contract, and that is one of his finer personality traits.
I suspect most of these persons you've been having a dialog with on this thread, who do not like Reid, will not admit their true reasons, and that is because he is not "progressive" enough for their tastes. Well "progressive" is a term liberals, who are ashamed to admit it, self-identify with.
November 6, 2008 8:58 PM | Reply | Permalink
My choice would be Clinton. I feel that Reids days are numbered as there will be wholesale "change" at all levels of leadership. Obama has only so much time before the republicans regroup and oppose everything.
Remember not one republican voted for Clintons 1993 budget the one that paved the way for a balanced budget.That's probably how it will play out again, I hope not, but we'll see.
They need to slam a child health care bill through fast and get some republicans to vote on it.
November 6, 2008 8:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ok, Nancy Pelosi's feelings about Reid might matter here - she has to work with the majority leader.
Maybe they make a good partnership - I don't know -
November 6, 2008 8:15 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's what I want to know: when are chills going to quit running up my spine every time I see the new First Family?
November 6, 2008 8:20 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tena: Check out this headline! LOL
http://www.236.com/news/2008/11/06/inappropriate_hottie_rundown_t_4_10113.php
November 6, 2008 8:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
I love it.
I just heard that thousands of babies born in Kenya in the last couple of days have been named Barack.
I was saying on a lower thread that I expect tens of thousands of little girls named Melia and Sasha to start showing up here.
November 6, 2008 8:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Good point - Chuck Grassley is now from a blue state which means he is more likely to vote with us!
November 6, 2008 8:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Could it be that Reid is waiting for the results of the still undecided races and run offs?
November 6, 2008 8:27 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excuse me? Is this something they need to *agree* about? Who fucking cares if Liebersuck agrees or not. Why oh why doesn't Reid have the ball to take action. I just don't understand...
November 6, 2008 8:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
Can Lieberman be recalled, or is that just something strange that only happens in California?
What's going to happen with the expulsion of Stevens? Did he win - What's going on with that race? CNN has him ahead in the latest results. Does Palin appoint a replacement or is there a special election? Would Palin appoint herself? OMG! I thought we were going to get rid of her, but maybe not.
November 6, 2008 8:38 PM | Reply | Permalink
Begich is not conceding. There's a serious question about possible missing ballots. Seems that Alaska had an 11% decrease in voters this time as compared to 2004. Doesn't make any logical sense given the earlier polls taken.
Palin would have to call for a special election (she can't appoint herself) which would then be held 60 to 90 days after the announcement.
November 6, 2008 8:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thank you for explaining the system in Alaska. What a relief.
Reid could wait to get the expulsion of Stevens in the new Senate - Then the special election would take place with an Obama-appointed DOJ to monitor voter irregularities.
I wonder if a few of the attorneys Obama had in the battleground states could take a swing through Alaska to help Begich.
November 6, 2008 9:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Mmmm....yes, I like this scenario.
November 6, 2008 10:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
CT voter has said more than once that Connecticut doesn't have recall provisions. They can't do anything.
November 6, 2008 8:50 PM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks. Wishful thinking I guess. Whatever Dem runs against him in 2012 will get some money from me.
November 6, 2008 9:12 PM | Reply | Permalink
Amazing! After watching the campaign for two years, and watching Clinton and the entire Republican party self-destruct due to infighting and taking their eyes off the prize, I would hope that a few more of you would learn from Obama's example.
This is national politics, not schoolyard grudges.
Remember how silly the Republicans looked when they said they didn't vote for the $700B bailout . . . because Pelosi hurt their feelings in a speech?
Lieberman, properly, was given a chance to save face and some political power. If he is too narcissistic or foolish to compromise, then his committee will be given to someone else, but their is no benefit gained from flogging him further or ostracizing him. He knew his actions might make him less significant, and they will. That is enough. He has given many years of support to liberal causes, and he continued to support the Dems through this past cycle on most issues. Who knows what vote on S-CHIP, or universal health care, or an economic stimulus plan will need his help for cloture or to pass?
If you are more interested in petty vendettas, I suggest the remaining Tom DeLay Republicans have a party where you will feel right at home. If you are interested in seeing Obama lead this country down a better, safer and more productive path, may I suggest you suck it up and get over it? Please.
November 6, 2008 8:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm with you - don't be looking at me, somebody else's shit hanging.
;)
November 6, 2008 8:52 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't disagree with you for the most part. Though Lieberman is dead-man walking. But I agree that the calls for public scourging is politically dumb.
November 6, 2008 8:59 PM | Reply | Permalink
And if he is, so be it. At best he becomes less significant. Most likely he becomes rather irrelevant. I really doubt he'll join the Rs. If he was going to do that, he would have already done it. He gains nothing from joining the minority party. I can't recall anyone, ever, doing that.
If we get out of Iraq cleanly and quickly, it wouldn't surprise me if Joe pinned the D back on his lapel, apologized publicly, but not really, making some sort of mush-mouthed defense about loyalty to individuals and beliefs being more important than lock-step politics. But judging from the comments above, he re-election chances as a D,R or I are diminished. More interesting of a question is whether he or McCain will even run again.
November 6, 2008 9:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah...as much as I detest Lieberman, I guess we should take take a cue from Obama's pragmatism. I guess he'll get his ultimate punishment in a few years when he's finally voted out of office, right?
November 6, 2008 9:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Reid is doing what he needs to do within the appropriate parameters of Senate procedures. Here's insight about the Lieberman situation from Josh Orton who used to work with Reid:
http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/11/6/152735/419
November 6, 2008 9:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
A thousand blessings shower upon thee for that.
:)
November 6, 2008 9:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lieberman is toast. Reid is attempting to let him save some face by relinquishing the chair voluntarily. It's being diplomatic, and I can guarantee you that Lieberman is conferencing with The Senate GOP to see if they are willing to toss him any bones. I doubt that they have much to offer him, because many of the initiatives they supported, which he helped, had to do with a unitary executive, something the GOP will be pushing hard against now that a Democrat sits in the White House. What can he offer them?
November 6, 2008 9:08 PM | Reply | Permalink
They need to strip him of his chairmanship so he Lieberman doesn't have the ability to gin up bogus homeland security dept. investigations against the Obama administration. Leaving Lieberman in charge of that committee would be an invitation to endless mischief by that creep. It would be more phony scandal, ala the Clinton years. No thanks.
November 6, 2008 9:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yes, yes, yes, the man deserves no bones, no scraps. He deserves castration for his open betrayal.
November 6, 2008 10:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Rachel Maddow just said that 9 out of 10 ballot initiatives to either make marijuana legal or more available medically or whatever -
PASSED!
We're getting closer than I thought to legalizing. I didn't think I'd live to see it but now I think I sure will.
Hot damn!
November 6, 2008 9:18 PM | Reply | Permalink
Wow this means there will come a day when I do not have to worry about my girlfriend getting busted for giving joints to her elderly neighbor to relieve her arthritus pain. Better days are on the way soon.
November 6, 2008 9:39 PM | Reply | Permalink
Someone asked about the "Barney Bites Reporter" story. Here's the link.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/06/white-house-dog-barney-bi_n_141868.html
November 6, 2008 9:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Harry, the wimp, kicking out Joe, the pimp ? It ain't happening. Dems need to elect a new senate leader with some balls.
November 6, 2008 9:30 PM | Reply | Permalink
Here's one for Traitor Joe and the Bush: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Pq8PwHFhy8
November 6, 2008 9:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Hate to go all ROGUE and MAVERICKY and stuff, but Since Joe Biden will be in charge of the US Senate as Vice President, he can unilaterally remove Lieberman, censure him, kick him out of his Homeland committee chair, and appoint him chairman of the NAFTA subcomittee on Nieman Marcus Clothing Manufacture in British Guyana, Belize, and Ukraine.
God this is fun! I already miss Sarah. I wonder how many Southern Baptist gentlemen will have bootleg copies of "Nailin Palin" in their DVD players....
Palin/Complete GOP oblivion 2012
November 6, 2008 9:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Where did you get that notion about Biden's authority in Congress?
No he can't. He can only break ties.
Goddamn it - the Executive has no authority over the Legislative.
November 6, 2008 9:53 PM | Reply | Permalink
Tina - honored to have you cuss me out as I am a fan of yours, but relax.
I know that the pleanry power of the executive means nothing in the congress, especially in the Senate, as LBJ had to find out the hard way from Mike Mansfield in 1961.
It is a backwards (appropriately) reference to Her Esteemed Highness/Hillbilly Sarah Palin's response as to the role of the Vice President in one of her 3 news interviews*** during the campaign.
***denotes NOT FOX.
November 6, 2008 10:01 PM | Reply | Permalink
Sorry - it went over my head. Obviously.
November 6, 2008 10:11 PM | Reply | Permalink
Holy sh*t, I almost forgot Lieeeeeeeeeeberman was a chief for the biggest Fed PORK project of this admin (then again, we're talking about Lieberman).
Boot the f*cker out, might as well dissolve the HS sham(e) in the process; it could be a gentler way to boot his ass,the process of dismantling Homeland "Security."
November 6, 2008 9:43 PM | Reply | Permalink
Don't y'all remember how Sarah Palin was mocked for saying that the Vice President runs the Senate?
No the Vice President does not. The Senate Majority Leader runs the United States Senate.
lord love it -
November 6, 2008 9:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
I do (and goddammit, such stupidity I will never forget...). She said that FOUR times.
November 6, 2008 10:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
and my bad. I forgot to include the country of Africa in NAFTA. That's what one of the "A"s stand for, right?
You betcha.
November 6, 2008 10:05 PM | Reply | Permalink
Totally OT: I think I see Modo more often writing trash than decent pieces, but her column today made me shed tears.
November 6, 2008 10:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
Surely, Pious Joe needn't be reminded that "actions have consequences". As a result, Reid would be exposing him to a "moral hazard" by NOT booting him out of those plum committee posts.
November 6, 2008 10:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Lieberman's next opponent, whatever party he or she may represent, will have my generous financial support. So Reid and the caucus need to decide whether they want Democrats supporting a Democrat, or Democrats supporting a Republican. It really is that simple.
November 6, 2008 10:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'll go out on a limb, because well, because I like doing that, and more importantly I see a real opportunity for President-Elect Obama to demonstrate that he is, indeed, prepared to reach across and unify disparate factions. I think he should back up Senator Lieberman, and not because Lieberman is saying all of a sudden, and disingeuously most likely, that he respects Obama. As far as I know, and I don't have any data as I write this, Lieberman has continued to vote with the Democrats on domestic issues. Presumably, for example, he's going to vote with the Democrats on taxes, on labor issues, on healthcare, and on judicial appointments. It's easy to toss Lieberman aside, and lots of folks would be happy to see that and for good reason, but candidly this liberal Democrat doesn't think it would be smart to do that for political and for more lofty reasons.
November 6, 2008 10:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
I couldn't agree more. Joe, as much as we hate the turncoat that he is, is still liberal on EVERYTHING besides anything that doesn't involve Israel.
That said. Fuck. Joe. Lieberman.
It's one thing to be on the wrong side of history. It's another to be the exemplifcation of being on the wrong side of history.
November 6, 2008 11:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I hear you Gooner. I can't disagree with you.
November 6, 2008 11:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
Ugh. Come on, can't we pleeeease? I hate him so. ;)
(Really I agree with you. Really I also really hate him.)
November 6, 2008 11:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't believe you are capable of hating anyone Hilary, but I can understand that you, as a Connecticut liberal, have reason to really, really, really dislike him. :)
I'm glad you understand what I'm saying though. I'm not fully comfortable with my position, but it is something I've been thinking about for awhile. Ciao,
Bruce
November 6, 2008 11:21 PM | Reply | Permalink
At the same time, Lieberman represents a very hard line view of foreign policy in total lock-step with Bush. Lieberman is one of few people likely fully informed regarding domestic wiretaps, etc. and I haven't seen any daylight between him and Bush on these issues either. The DHS touches on so many interrelated issues - and those are the areas where Lieberman tends to part with the democrats and support neoconservatives.
If this was purely retaliation, you would probably be right. But Lieberman would cause more damage by advancing a neoconservative agenda directly than he ever could by joining the republican caucus in the minority. I don't think congress shouldn't be viewed as Lincoln's cabinet. Don't put folks who have said they won't advance the agenda in charge of advancing the agenda. We've already got Pelosi trying to backpeddle on health care - do we really need to deal with Lieberman also?
I say call his bluff. The dems aren't getting 60 anyhow. Besides, there are more important things than a supermajority. If democrats do their job well, they should have some republican support. The offer Reid has on the table seems quite fair.
November 7, 2008 4:31 AM | Reply | Permalink
Pious Joe Lieberman is a spineless collaborator. He should be marched down the Champs Elysee shirtless and barefoot. He'll probably enjoy it, since he is a quavering, asskissing masochist. The shaved head is optional.
November 6, 2008 11:06 PM | Reply | Permalink
Yea, but how do you really feel? :)
November 6, 2008 11:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
He's spine. Just wait. He's giving Joe a slow death. Hot from the wire: An aide to Reid discloses to AP that "Reid was leaning toward removing Lieberman."
November 6, 2008 11:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Obama waxed poetic about a "Team of Rivals" style cabinet. In all likelihood Lieberman would have been Secretary of State under McCain. Now I'm not saying that you put him in Obama's Cabinet, but at the same time I think he is more useful to the country than nothing more than a Senate pariah.
It's too bad Conn. has a Republican Governor, because otherwise Obama could have offered Lieberman an Ambassador gig, getting him out of the Senate and replaced by Lamont.
November 6, 2008 11:24 PM | Reply | Permalink
Relinquish his chairmanship?
After what he's done, and how he's behaved, tell him he's out. No discussion, no pushing back, don't let the door hit you on the way out.
November 6, 2008 11:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
I'm sorry - all this love on Joe is making me ill.
Elections have consequences.
November 6, 2008 11:49 PM | Reply | Permalink
Realistically, my guess is that since Obama reached out to John McCain after the election, his first request was most likely:
"Use what influence you have to keep Joe from walking the plank. He supported me not from hating you, but out of his affection for me".
Problem is the down-ticket stuff he did during the cycle as well as the over-the-top rhetoric. He cant walk that shit back for free. I do however see a way out. It involves a short leash, public piety, absolute adherence to Obama and Reid's agenda, and bieng the referred to in the Senate Chamber as Barack's Bitch.
Call if Post-Partisan Bondage. And still expect a well funded opponent in 2 years.
November 6, 2008 11:54 PM | Reply | Permalink
All Joe did was reach across the aisle and work with Republicans. Cable news keeps telling me that's what the people have voted for Obama to do - so doesn't it send the wrong message to punish Joe for it?
November 6, 2008 11:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
If that were all he did, he could be forgiven. It's the lies he told about Obama that've cook his goose.
That and his work for down-ticket GOP candidates. His Dem colleagues don't cotton much to that shit.
November 7, 2008 12:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Does anyone know the technical description of "causcusing with". Does this give Joe access to information which Repubs would ordinarily be privy to?
November 6, 2008 11:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
You got it right: If he is allowed to caucus with Democratic Party, he will have access to "a closed-door strategy or decision-making meeting."
November 7, 2008 12:08 AM | Reply | Permalink
Hooray! Yippee!!!
My Obama-Biden car magnet came in the mail today! Now I'm ready for this election. Bring it on!
November 6, 2008 11:56 PM | Reply | Permalink
Now you're ready for 2012. That must be long campaign, if you begin today.
November 7, 2008 12:11 AM | Reply | Permalink
Oy. This whole thing is upsetting Hadasssah.
November 7, 2008 12:04 AM | Reply | Permalink
Says Jim H...
Ugh. Coleman? Feh!
OK, now I'm inclined to agree with Tena. That makes him more of a putz than a schmuck.
November 7, 2008 12:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Since Reid took this action today, I believe that either directly or indirectly the president-elect has agreed that Lieberman should not chair an important committee. The Democrats can't start out their mandate from the country by bowing to a turncoat who was publicly warned by Obama, and then he arrogantly ignored the warning...which in effect was shooting the finger at Obama. If you let Lieberman get away with it, then who will disrespect Obama next? Not the way to start.
November 7, 2008 1:20 AM | Reply | Permalink
"Lieberman refused to disclose what had happened, saying only that he was mulling his options going forward."
That's a threat that he might join the Republicans if his chairmanship is stripped. Should the Democrats bow to the turncoat's threat?
I don't think so. They have no choice but to stand up to him or they will look weak.
November 7, 2008 1:35 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama should appoint Joe to some position where he can do no harm, maybe ambassador to Fiji or something like that. Then, they can have a special election in CN and Lamont can take his rightful place.
November 7, 2008 7:14 AM | Reply | Permalink
I hope the SOB gets stripped of his chairmanship and does turn into a Republican. He'll be voted out in 4 years anyway. I'm surprised Reid was able to meet with the guy. His stink must have been unbelievable after being up McCain's ass for so long.
November 7, 2008 8:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Do you hear that sound? Its Sen Reid squeezing Lieberman's balls.
November 7, 2008 9:05 AM | Reply | Permalink
Take it to the Dem Caucus to decide.
Works for me.
November 7, 2008 9:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
Fear that Lieberman will join the Republican caucus seems to ignore the fact that he has nothing to offer them....
and they, being out of power, have nothing to offer him...
maybe Reid will throw him a face-saving bone, but to those of you who said all he did was reach across the aisle...
let me suggest that when one reaches across the aisle to knife one's own people in the back, in some kind of perverse payback for losing the Democratic nomination for Senator...
this shows the degree of trust which should be given this man, especially when the people he lied to and betrayed were is constituents in Connecticut.
He is not a man any Democrat can trust to do the right thing.
November 7, 2008 10:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
What is the up side to keeping Joe? It's not like you can count on his vote. I'd not only strip him of committees, I plain old tell him he's not welcome. He has become an erratic old man, which explains his attraction to McCadaver.
By Joe, don't the the door hit you in the ass.
November 7, 2008 10:42 AM | Reply | Permalink
While I appreciate the strategy-oriented comments, e.g., don't alienate Lieberman, Dems may need him to get to the 60-vote majority, I must ask...
yet again...
What's with the fear of filibuster? I maintain that Democrats could simply call the bluff. Let them filibuster and show their true nature.
In short, what the Hell is up with the strategizing and calculating and lack of action????? This is exactly how Bush--I mean, Cheney got his way.
Threats and intimidation do not deter those who are truly committed. These tactics are only effective against cowards.
November 7, 2008 11:57 AM | Reply | Permalink
>Let them filibuster and show their true nature.
Exactly, why not show these bottom feeders for the obstructionists they are, for trying thwart popular programs and defeat the will of the people.
On something like a need public works program this would be worth the risk.
November 7, 2008 12:33 PM | Reply | Permalink
Let him stay. Each time he walks in the caucus room he will have to face those he betrayed and was to coward to completely abandon. The humiliation will fit the crime.
November 7, 2008 1:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
When Joe "the turn coat" needed help in his election, Obama went to Connecticut and campaigned for him. When Obama needed him, Turn-Coat supported the other side.
You reap what you sow.
November 8, 2008 12:48 PM | Reply | Permalink