again, we think this is an important story

Obama obviously knew this is how his statement would be used, and isn't losing much sleep over it. He's well aware of the spineless nature of his Senate colleagues, and offered them a nice bit of cover.

Its hard to say if the Obama camp anticipated there would be this much support on the Democratic side in the Senate supporting Joe. But, they obviously don't want to burn bridges, especially as they set out on a new Administration with the mantra of changing the waty things are done in Washington. Many on the left will freak out (possibly justifiably so), but it seems Joe is likely to stay on as HS Cmte. Chairman.

My own opinion on this is, let him stay, the Caucus can remove him later on if he goes off the reservation. To remove him now hands he and the Republicans a victory in their battle to show Obama is just another DC politician, and his call to change Washington is all talk. This is a time when principle has to yield to pragmatism.

I strongly disagree that Obama has given anyone "cover" on this nonsense. He has emphatically kicked this Senate can back to where it belongs--the damned Senate.

This is exactly what these folks did with the Iraq War Resolution--"not my problem so let the prez deal with it". It was spineless then and it is spineless now, even though the two issues are extremely far apart in importance.

We railed about these spineless Dems when the war vote was being considered, watched as an extraordinarily high number of these Dem senators attempted to grab the nomination, and now we have this tempest in a teapot that they want to pull Obama into.

Do not fall for this crap. These are spineless Democrats and I'm quite frankly ready to kick a few of them to the curb for their cowardice.

Obama is not in the fray. Who in the hell trusts Joe to tell us that he is?

Telwitchit, as the bachelor Norweigan farmers observe so well,,,,,,,, let the voters of Conn. decide. A special referendum the week of Thanksgiving would do nicely.

Allowing Joe to stay in the caucus... conciliatory, wise, careful, magnanomous.

Allowing Joe to keep his chairmanship without a period of reconciliation, rebuilding trust, demonstration of better skills... battered wife syndrome... handing him a big stick to hit you with later.

Lyndon Johnson wouldn't wait around and put the decision on the caucus. The Senate majority leader can't manage the legislative process unless he/she is willing to discipline members for breaking ranks.

Something must be going on here that we're missing. If Reid is not willing to exercise power, then where does the power really lie? There are a lot of government contracts that are under the purview of that committee and Lieberman has hardly been Harry Truman in running that committee. The power lies out there where that money is going.

Just called my senators' offices in D.C.  Neither Boxer nor Feinstein have a public position on LieberSchmuck.  Their staffers were happy to record my opinion in opposition to his continued committee chairmanship.

But Obama's statement... could also give cover to Senators who want to do nothing to oust Lieberman.

They don't need no stinkin' cover.  It's gonna be a secret ballot.

This is indeed a major story, Greg. The Democratic Senate caucus is in great danger here of turning itself into a laughingstock, in the eyes of both its enemies and its own supporters. If these abused and delicate flowers can't muster the political will to enforce even elementary party discipline in the face of renegade behavior this extreme and this outrageous, then they are a lost cause, and Obama's agenda will likely be DOA.

Right now, a lot of Dem senators are looking like bruised and abused parents whose kid just jacked their credit cards, ran over an old lady with a stolen car and boiled the neighbor's cat in a pot, and who are weakly promising in return to "watch over him" better.

It really is to laugh. Why don't we just give Mitch McConnell the chair of the Judiciary Committee, or John McCain the chair of the Foreign Relations Committee?

Call Joe's bluff. Connecticut is a blue state. Yes, they have a Republican governor who will likely choose a Republican replacement for Lieberman if he resigns. But that Republican replacement will be very moderate, and is unlikely to be any worse problem for Democrats than Lieberman himself. Republicans elected Lieberman after all, crossing over in droves to vote for Lieberman in his independent bid, while most Democrats voted for Lamont.

It's time to end this charade and sad episode of the history of the Democratic Party.

Don't assume that public statements are all that's gone on here. These guys talk among themselves. It's the job of the Majority Leader to know where the votes are and I can't believe Reid doesn't have a pretty good idea of how the vote is going to turn out. If the caucus is on the warpath and is half as pissed off at Lieberman as they seem to be, heaven and earth can't save him.

I think Lieberman deserves to be punished, and I don't think the Democrats need him any more than they need any other non-Democrat in the Senate. But we have goals more important than revenge, and if Obama thinks settling scores with Lieberman will hinder accomplishing those goals, I'm willing to respect his judgement.

I sent an email to my Senator pointing out how hard I and millions of others worked to elect more and better Democrats this year. I contrasted that to Joe Lieberman not only working to defeat Democrats at every level but speaking out against a Democratic majority, advancing the notion that Obama might not be patriotic, and applauding when McCain's audience boo'ed our presidential candidate.

Perhaps some of us could have had an hour or two more sleep leading up to the election if we weren't also fighting against a traitorous member of our own party.

Whatever else Obama may not be, he IS a stunningly skillful politician. He's got a reason for this. I'll be damned if I can figure out what it is, though.