On Why The Senate Must Either Fix or Ditch Lieberman-Warner
Barbara Boxer has been a real leader on Global Warming issues in the US Senate. A leader who suffered for far too long under the ‘tutelage’ of Senator James Inhofe (R-Exxon). Sadly, for whichever set of reasons, Senator Boxer has being working hard to corral votes in support of the fatally flawed Lieberman-Warner Coal Subsidy Act and reacting strongly against those who have the audacity to question the bill and her approach to it. The bill, however, is getting growing notice and the questioning of Senator Boxer’s approach to it is spreading.
Amid this spread, Matt Stoller at Open Left strongly makes a good point about why Lieberman-Warner, as it now stands, is worth standing against: voters don’t support the fossil fuel industry and standing up to fossil fuel polluters makes good politics. [..]
And, for those of you who are Barbara Boxer constituents, perhaps you might want to pass the following message to her from D-Day, me, and you:
A “deal” on a bad cap and trade bill … would lock in a giveaway to polluters on the order of trillions, and make it very difficult for the next President to do anything about it. If you care about the environment, I think you need to let Sen. Boxer know that only a real climate change bill that hits the necessary targets is sufficient. Otherwise, she has to walk away from this.
Senator Boxer, let us remind you that elections have consequences. Let’s work hard, together, to ensure that the November elections have positive implications for the planet and let the Global Warming legislation flow from that.
http://democracyforamerica.com/candidates
My politics has become very simple of late: If Joe Lieberman is for it, I am against it.
Lieberman and Warner are to the Democratic Party what Military Music is to Music.
My, my... betrayed again by the 'liberal' dems. Who'ed a thought? Another lieber-clone raises her head. Remember who campaigned for leiberliar? If you want things to change, you must work to kick out all the dem leadership and most of the dem followership, too. They have all made themselves rich, important and beholden by selling out to the corporatocracy. Do not make hero's of any of these people. They gained their postions at the expense of those they were supposed to represent. Boxer is no exception.
"It's the Corporations, stupid" ;)
Lieberman has more sense that 80% of all democrats.
RHM (www.thecandidacy.com)
6 RHM Says:
"Lieberman has more sense that 80% of all democrats."
That is a very easy thing for a Republican to say, but i prefer the opinions of people who think.
Boxer is fighting for California. I think Bob Shrum said that
I haven't a clue as to the respective merits of this arguement. That can and will change
I do know that any bill with Lieberman's name attached to it is immediately suspect in my mind.
I remember, too, that Boxer campaigned for JoJo during his primary fight, and then took a hike on LaMont after he won the party's nomination. I still feel the fury rise when I consider her support to re-elect a man whose pro-war vote would literally cancel out her own in any future Iraq war showdowns on the senate floor.
[Deleted. Off topic-Sitemonitor]
I've never had a great amount of trust for the NRDC. They have too many ties to industries that would benefit from a 'softer' focus on things like global warming...
I've taken some heat for that opinion, even locally but I still don't and can't trust them. Now I'm somewhat vindicated...
xoites defends Constitution @ 3 said:
Lieberman and Warner are to the Democratic Party what Military Music is to Music.
Unfortunately we need Military Music:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uU8gBpRONHU&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3G1FvlPakkU
But we would need them if 100 years of war McCain is elected. We have lots of military music to inspire the troops to use:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkajXeVLpk4&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tnyLaYPfjHE
boxer is proof that the corporate masters are still in charge.
My, my… betrayed again by the ‘liberal’ dems. Who’ed a thought? Another lieber-clone raises her head. Remember who campaigned for leiberliar? If you want things to change, you must work to kick out all the dem leadership and most of the dem followership, too. They have all made themselves rich, important and beholden by selling out to the corporatocracy. Do not make hero’s of any of these people. They gained their postions at the expense of those they were supposed to represent. Boxer is no exception.
You did mean republicans didn't you. Last I heard Warner is a republican and Lieberman wears depends.
Boxer jes luvs her some old, stringy, skanky Joey the Liarman. Girl jes cannot....
Help herself.
10 Did Meth Give You Dentures?
Gee, that may be wee bit OT.
the fact that any dem is supporting anything with holy joes name on it disgusts me
kick him and any of his legislation to the curb
RHM @ 6:
I'm curious, Mr. Miller -- genuinely curious, not being snarky -- as to how a Democrat-turned Republican-turned Libertarian-turned independent who compares McCain's "Bomb Bomb Iran" ditty to the "Death to America" chants of people in the Middle East, and who supports the eventual and principled legalization of drugs came to the conclusion that Lieberman has more sense than 80% of Democrats.
I ask this as a very libertarian-influenced progressive myself. Lieberman strikes me as a hawkish authoritarian-progressive. What makes you prefer him to more libertarian-progressives?
12 Saint Augustine
Sobering.
18 Karen
You really think Lieberman and "progressive' belong in the hemisphere?
same^
Ron, the post refers B. Boxer, my 'liberal' dem senator (as, haha, opposed to my conservative dem senator, difi).
xoites defends Constitution @ 20:
On the basis of his entire record, yes, I stand by my characterization: Hawkish Authoritarian-Progressive.
Lieberman supports traditionally progressive issues such as pro-environment legislation, stem cell research, gun control, Social Security, affirmative action, civil rights and equality for racial minorities, women and the LGBT community.
He is also on-board with neo-con imperialism/wars, iffy on abortion and contraceptive rights, and has little problem blending church and state.
In short, he believes that government can be a force for good in bringing about equality as well as for enforcing his brand of morality on people. He's also a war hawk.
Hawkish Authoritarian-Progressive.
lol Xoites, nice quote from Groucho Marx their ;)
23 Karen
Then he is schitzophrenic and needs medical care.
xoites defends Constitution @ 25:
Well, I won't argue with ya there. :)
Fix or ditch?
Ditch.
25 xoites defends Constitution Says:
Then he is schitzophrenic and needs medical care.
LMAO!
No mention in this coverage of WHAT IS POSSIBLE in THIS Congress. You're talking about the same Senate as we all saw two weeks ago is a laydown for Bushco. Do you REALLY think that Republicans and DINOs will vote for a bill that isn't larded up like this one is? You're dreaming.
Chairman Boxer deserves more than just FOE agitation that ignores politics -- the only way bills ever get passed.
And, one technical point -- research money for sequestration is VERY GOOD EXPENDITURE if it develops the tech to do it. Removing carbon from the air in some energy-efficient way would be a major development, and science expenditures to do such a thing will necessarily involve basic atmospheric research that will aid the entire effort, even it proves impractical.
FOE dismisses it outright. Why is that?
The ONLY bills that will pass this year will come through this committee, and THESE votes. You have to have a majority of these 19 Senators to get ANY bill passed by this committee:
Barbara Boxer, Chairman
Max Baucus
Thomas R. Carper
Hillary Clinton
Frank Lautenberg
Ben Cardin
Bernie Sanders
Amy Klobuchar
Sheldon Whitehouse
Joe Lieberman
James M. Inhofe
John Warner
Kit Bond
George Voinovich
Johnny Isakson
David Vitter
Larry Craig
Lamar Alexander
John Barrasso
You will notice that Lieberman is the swing vote. Otherwise, it is 9 to 9. Try getting a majority to pass an FOE-happy bill out of committee with Kit Bond or Inhofe. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN.
It must be lovely living where no politics need ever darken your door. We don't live there, and there is no such thing in the U.S. Senate either.
D-day: "A “deal” on a bad cap and trade bill … would lock in a giveaway to polluters on the order of trillions, and make it very difficult for the next President to do anything about it."
Any bill can be revised under better circumstances. Laws are fungible, and next year we will have a much better set-up. There are three approaches available. Block any bill, or pass a 'bad' bill and come back next year with a better hand and revise it. The third option is to let the bill leave committee, and amend it on the floor (which would have little chance of passage given this Senate).
Chairwoman Boxer is a proven Progressive, and I think she deserves some trust given her record. This bill itself has, so far as I can tell, NOT been put on the calendar yet (why it has no bill number, presumably)-- who has the text? FOE? Or is this currently based on scuttlebutt?
Everyone arguing "carbon tax" vs. "cap and trade" is missing the fundamental point that there is no incentive to change when a monopolistic entity, such as an electric utility, can just pass the costs right on to the consumer. When a solution to a problem can't be driven from the bottom up by consumers, that's when the government needs to step in and mandate they change. Both parties are doing a nice dance around the CO2 issue because by and large they're beholden to energy interests, which by the way encompasses more than just oil companies. ;) On a similar note, another monopolistic entity, the public education system, isn't going to progress until the grip of teachers unions on our local/county/state/federal government bureaucracies can be lessened.
Karen @ 23:
Not only is Lieberman is a progressive, but also one who can list actual accomplishment on their resume. Of course then again he has learned when/how to compromise.
Does anyone doubt the underlying cause of Boxer's promotion of Lieberman? Is it not the same instinct which inspired Michael Blumberg to dispatch a cadre of political operatives and a small treasure to insure Lieberman's success in his last election fight. It is Zionism first, humanity last.
It's long past time that Boxer lost her seat.
Frank @ 34:
Barbara Boxer is NOT a Zionist. The obvious reason for her support of his candidacy is that she promised to support him as a fellow Senator who served on the same committees she did. That kind of political backscratching is so commonplace only the greatly delusional could take it as some sort of 'pro-Jewish racism' action.
Paul @ 35:
Great argument. I will ponder your cogent points for days.
peaceful easy feeling @ 33:
He prostitutes himself for Bushco, and that ain't compromise -- that's treason.
carbon credits are bad!!!
bad
bad
bad
think it through!!!
Comments are closed on this entry