the issue was never complicated. it's something even joe the plumber and the sara'cuda can understand. as leahy put it:

I would feel that had I done something similar, that I would not be chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee in the next Congress

this is only complicated to the village elders who follow the byzantine rules versailles uses to reassign the dance cards at the ball.

"I believe Senator Lieberman has revealed beliefs and values that are inconsistent with the Democratic party and the President-elect's mandate from the people."

and instead embraced beliefs and values consistent with the politics of division as practiced by Atwater & Rove.

Thank you Greg for re-posting this-- I actively follow Bob Geiger's column as I find his thought process to one that benefits all Democrats. I can only hope that all the Democratic Senator's listen and follow this recommendation for the good of the party and the American people they represent.

"And given his performance as Homeland Security chair, they think stripping Lieberman of his post is, you know, better for the country. Some seem incapable of imagining that the push to oust Lieberman could be about anything other than revenge or that anyone could possibly oppose Lieberman simply because of his ideas, values, and governmental failures."

Aren't committee chairmanships assigned almost exclusively based on seniority, rather than merit or past performance? If not, is there any precedent for someone to lose their chair for ineffective performance?

This isn't a rhetorical question. I simply don't follow Congress close enough to know the answer and would gladly defer to Josh or someone else who might think of an example where it has happened.

If there is no such precedent, however, then it's not so unreasonable to assume that the motivation is revenge.

I've yet to read anyone point out that Lieberman is where he is because he ran against the Democratic party candidate, Ned Lamont, in 2006, and thus denied Democrats the seat.

Add that to the manifest of the Offenses of Joseph Lieberman, please.

This really isn't that complicated. He's a back-stabbing ass who did absolutely no good whatsoever as chair of his committee and votes against the caucus on what most Democrats consider "critical issues". Toss him. Toss him hard enough that he bounces twice. You don't need a double-dealing snake like this in the caucus.

He becomes a Republican? He quits the Senate? Good riddance. Get the extra votes from Olympia Snow or Susan Collins. Hell, neither of them is a stupe; offer one of them a cabinet post, and get the other one to switch parties. In this environment, does anyone think that a Republican Senator from New England has a lengthy shelf-life?

How many times do the Democrats need to have the sand kicked in their collective faces before they show some stinkin' backbone? Yeesh.

I wrote all the senators on the senate democratic steering and outreach committee and asked them to give holy joe the ol' heave ho. Love that two members have come out against him publicly now. We voted for a new direction. This one's important already. Joe blows. http://democrats.senate.gov/steering/index.cfm?pg=6

There is nothing to fucking apologize for in punishing the smirking swine! Geiger's piece is fine as far as it goes, but mine would not faile to add, "And of course, His statements putting the next President's patriotism in doubt were incomprehensible and disgraceful."

I sent my Senators in California - Feinstein and Boxer - the following cribbed from the faux press release:

I have increasing grown wary of Senator Lieberman's positions in recent years however motivated they may be by what he views as his conscience.

I am aware that having a 60 person majority in the Senate is highly desirable. However such a supra majority is not worth the sacrifice of core party values. Moreover if the vote you are counting on is Liberman's vote it is by definition uncertain, and so really of little consideration.

If legislation is proposed in the Senate that cannot gain the support of even a handful of Republicans to override a filibuster perhaps such legislation is too partisan and should be reconsidered.

In any event, Senator Lieberman's support of the Republican nominee in the 2008 presidential campaign and his persistent and active participation in events and forums that smeared and discredited President-elect Barack Obama in intentionally misleading and despicable ways, make Senator Lieberman's beliefs and values no longer consistent with the Democratic party and the President-elect's mandate from the people.

Therefore, I ask you to vote in the Senate Democratic Conference meeting next week to strip Senator Lieberman of his Chairmanship of the Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs Committee.