Maddow: Obama Counsels Dems To Let Lieberman Be -- UPDATED
By Nicole Belle Tuesday Nov 11, 2008 12:00pmI know that we're supposed to be healing and reaching across the aisle and being all post-partisan with our upcoming Obama presidency, but I, like Rachel Maddow, need to be seriously talked down with the news that President-Elect Obama has counseled Harry Reid and the Democratic Party to not kick turncoat Joe Lieberman out of the caucus in the next congress.
Steve Clemons from The Washington Note tries to explain how there are ways to at least send a message to Holy Joe by removing his chairmanships to critical committees.
UPDATE: Think Progress has a new report out today showing how Holy Joe, who once proclaimed that he was "a Democrat with a 35-year record of fighting for progressive causes" has lost his way. And BraveNewFilms has a new site and video called "Joe Lieberman Must GO"
Login or Register to post comments.
Be what?
to walk away from the Democratic Caucus on his own after he is removed as a Committee Chair. Obama is saying don't kick him out.
He is not saying do what it takes to keep him in of his own accord.
Let the sanctimonious ego maniac walk away whining with no Obama fingerprints on the knife he sticks in his own political career.
He should ask Sen. Lieberman to go to Georgia to campaign for the Democrat Jim Martin who is facing the run-off election Dec. 2nd against Republican Sen. Saxby Chambliss!
John McCain (Lieberman's lover) will be in Georgia campaigning for Chambliss. President-elect Obama, Sen. Harry Reid and Rep. ("The Snake") Pelosi should ask Sen. Lieberman to show his allegiance to the Democratic Party and go to Georgia to campaign as hard as he freakin' can for Jim Martin!
On second thought....I guess Jim Martin would say, "Thanks Joe...but, no thanks."
Obama was right about a mixed man becoming president, I think this is his message of saying he's not out to destroy careers, that's the voter's job. He made that clear everytime the audience booed via a reference to Mccain, he simply quelled them to vote their anger out.
Obviously, no need to panic, but I hope he's going to end up being the progressive we all were expecting.
I guess in the end Lieberman will be hard-pressed to unilaterally ruin things for us in the Senate, but it is a bit disheartening that Obama's seemingly coddling folks like Lieberman (and Emmanuel, for that matter.) Let's hope he gets back on track with the whole change thing. I think his stated intention to reverse most of Bush's executive decisions will certainly be a step in the right direction.
Obama doesn't *need* to be all that "progressive". The center of the country wants some simple things that most of us want: *health care reform*, *education reform*, *an end to the war in Iraq*. Further, I think the center of the nation and plenty of people further to the right are behind the idea of an opportunity for public service from our citizens--in schools, in parks, in a whole slew of places where educated, smart, dedicated people who might get tuition in exchange but not a huge wage can do wonders for our people and our infrastructure.
We get those things, and I'm willing to let a few of my more left positions wane for a while longer, because those things will be monumental for this country. And those are *centrist* things. So I'm in no way ready to start slamming Obama, especially before he even takes office, for being the centrist he will very likely be.
Me, too, provided the "manhattan project" for alternative energy is on that list.
Thank you!
I liked the guy they had on that said, take away his homeland security chairmanship and give him charimanship of another committee. The guy belongs in the democratic caucus but he does need to be moved from something like homeland security and into something less damaging to dems. I don't know enough about the committees to be able to speak to which one would be a good fit, but regardless of his idiocy in his campaigning for McCain and all the lame things he said while on the trail, if you remove the Iraq war from his voting record, he is a total progressive.
McCain out "mavricked" himself when he picked Palin instead of Joe the senator for Israel. That was the reason he jumped on the McCain bus, he wanted to be McCain's VP. Then when he wasn't picked, he had already made his bed, so he decided to sleep in it.
The "can't we all get along" stuff is going to get old awfully fast.
Obama needs to knock it off.
The republicons give us the middle finger for 8 years, and I'm in no mood to be nice and forgiving to them.
Lieberman is a stinking skunk, a mealy-mouthed, two-faced, back-stabbing SOB. He needs to go.
Exactly, instead of working on getting things done, we should work on getting as much revenge as possible.
Your irony is much-appreciated, Mr. Anon. Because yeah, we need to be working on getting things done, and no matter how "betrayed" people feel by Joe Lieberman, he really can help to get a lot of things--things very, very important to liberals and to democrats--done.
Smart people do not leave untrustworthy people in positions of authority and importance. Especially when there are others who are so much more worthy of the position.
Lieberman is a cancer in our government, and that cancer needs to be removed for the government to work as it was intended.
Too bad that you don't get it.
also applies to the notion that Obama's supposed signal to not kick him out of the Caucus really means leave him alone and his positions intact. I doubt very seriously that is what Obama really wants to see happens. He just does not want the blood on his hands.
Tell Lieberman to caucus with the Repugs and strip him of his Homeland Security Chairmanship.
I say let him have the Chairmanship on the Senate Committee for Libraries!!!
And move his freakin' office into the basement next to the Janitors Room where he can enjoy the smell of PineSol all day.
"The republicons give us the middle finger for 8 years, and I'm in no mood to be nice and forgiving to them."
F' Yeah! My thoughts exactly. Stalker Joe must have some serious dirt on somebody...
I'm really conflicted regarding letting Lieberman stay with the Dems considering the stunt he just pulled....
The only thing that would make sense is that this strategy has included a good dose of the "keeping your friends close but your enemies closer" included in this decision....
EXACTLY !!
We shouldn't be surprised. It's consistent with his appointment of the aggressive arch-Zionist Rahm Emmanuel and his AIPAC groveling. He's going to maintain the US's extreme Israel-centeredness, apparently.
Get a new song. I've heard this one to death already.
You've heard it so much because it's true. Just because you're bored with hearing it doesn't mean it isn't a valid observation. And interesting that you bring up death, since deaths will continue to be high in the Middle East as long as the US maintains such extreme positions in the region.
Yeah, that Israel has the right to exist is so extreme.
The idea that Israel will forever exist at the expense of the Palestinians is extreme. Any country that would support an apartheid country like Israel deserves all the misfortune that God can heap upon it.
Of course, the Palestinians are the only ones suffering over there and they've done nothing to perpetuate it.
As far as I know, the Palestinians had nothing to do with the Holocaust.
That doesn't mean they haven't done anything to perpetuate the misery of the region.
but because YOU say they have doesn't make it so, Einstein.
If you can say that that Palestinians haven't done anything to perpetuate the misery of the region, you need to get in touch with reality. You need to buy a clue.
The rapist has no right to criticize the means that the rape victim uses to stop the rape, and similarly, the occupier has no right to judge the ways in the occupied tries to resist the occupation.
UN Resolution 2649 affirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples under colonial and alien domination recognized as being entitled to the right of self-determination to restore to themselves that right by any means at their disposal.
Ah. I wasn't aware that the Holocaust was the Alpha and Omega of suffering. Good to know.
Surely you knew this?
They just want the land they were robbed of by the UN and the new state of Israel back.
Rocks (Palestinian hoi polloi) are equal to manfactured military gear (IDF) isn't it?
Fair fight. You get the rocks I get the fucking missiles.
How do you have something robbed from you that you had never really owned? Do you know the history of the region? Before the UN partitioned the region, it was part of the Ottoman Empire, then the British took control, then the League of Nations gave it to Great Britain, then finally after WWII, the UN partitioned the area in 1947. Before that time, the Palestinians had never had political control of any area. So again, I ask, how do you have something robbed from you that you never really owned?
Semitic Gentiles had lived between the Jordan River and the sea for centuries. The fact that they never had a centralized government with all the bells and whistles that we associate with a nation-state is irrelevant. They didn't need paper documents issued by some government agency showing ownership of land they had farmed for eons. That's the same White supremacist logic that's used to justify what was done to the American Red Indians, and it's just as immoral and criminal.
Wow. Did you really just refer to the Native Americans as "red indians"? Seriously?
How else would you distinguish them from the brown Indians of India? I guess I could have said "feather Indian" as opposed to "dot Indian".
....as "Red Indians". I don't think harm is meant by that phrase.
The current "State of Israel" is referred to on this map as "Palestine In the New Testament Times". I see on this map the areas of Idumaea, Judaea, Amaria, Galilee, Decapolis and Syro-Phoenicia. Not word one about "Israel". Israel was a "deal". Go to The Washington Report On Middle East Affairs and read all about the "history" of how Israel evolved.
Israel is the 51st state of the United States of America. Get used to it.
And for some strange reason, Israel has a major political grip on W.D.C. (Oil-grabbing real estate?)
Why do you think the first major meeting Sarah Barracuda had was with John McCain, Joe Lieberman and the AIPAC heirarchy?!
Sarah had to get Israel's blessing, or no cigar.
We're talking an attitude which strives for Israel for Jews only over Israel for All (which would include the people who were inconveniently located there in 1948). And Rahm and Joe are the kind of true Anti-Semites, guys against people of Middle Eastern extraction, specifically Palestinians.
And to see that Israel's 'Right' to exist overrode the Palestinians right to stay on land and in homes that was theirs in the first place, does make it an extreme idea.
Zionists always bring the thought of equal rights for Palestinians, people from who they TOOK Trans Jordan, back to "You hate Jews." And nothing could be further from the truth.
Joe and Rahm need to be marginalised and their racism needs to go no further than their own heads.
I couldn't have said it better nyself, miss kitty. And ironically, the outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert seems to agree with us.
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1036034.html
once they left office.
It seems the politicians can be less zionist, and more amenable to Palistinian rights, but the voting public in Israel will not permit officials in power to display that opinion.
once they left office.
I just read Haaretz yesterday and there are many Israelis able to openly write about their country in ways that are not possible in this AIPAC-US corporate media. Two examples, one that criticized Israelis for thinking Obama was "not good for Israel" because he wouldn't be an unquestioning "yes man" - saying it hadn't been good for Israeli society at all, look at the results. And the other saying there was a long way for Israel to go before they could imagine having their minorities imagine heading government, let alone that NO one mentioned in a democracy it could even be ARAB ISRAELIS.
Such statements never occur in discussions in the U.S. without being shot down and just like in this comments section, chided as lumping in everything bad as being anti-Israeli, or anti-semitic enforcer script.
Sorry, but even the Daily Show hit the point clearly when all the candidates genuflected at the AIPAC meeting - why is it only IN Israel people can speak against what's going on there. Why is it treated like the VATICAN, not like the 51st state!
Why couldn't the Palestinians live alongside the Jewish settlers right after the influx of refugees after WWII? Other people did it, including many Christians living in the area. They're fully-fledged Israeli citizens and they do not feel that they are being 'occupied', nor do they feel that they are being treated as second-class citizens.
And how did we turn an American political thread into an argument about Israel and the Palestinians??? LOL!
Obama's making some odd choices New
Tue, 11/11/2008 - 12:09 — marbotty
Obviously, no need to panic...p>
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_88KB7CbwPw
I'm not exactly Lieberman's biggest fan, but starting off a Congress that the Republicans are going to be doing their level best to obstruct by tossing out a member of your own caucus may not be the most prudent of courses. Giving the Republicans Lieberman gives them a figure to rally around and a message of "we're the true bi-partisans" to use against Obama.
I'd rather kick him to the curb too, but let's let this play out before we start dubbing the Obama Presidency a failure, okay?
I really don't think this action represents Obama's lying down for Lieberman -- if anything, I think it's a power play. Obama went to the mat for Lieberman and Lieberman back-stabbed him. By protecting him so publicly now, Obama's sending the message that Joe OWES HIM, and that any further disloyalty will cost him dearly.
Obama's canny and careful that way in his relationships with people.
Of course their co-workers for the same gov. CEO,citizens,eyes open
I hate this whore...but we need him.
We do not.
Mmm...donuts...(drool)...
Obstruction is all they have left. Stop Obama from succeeding for 2012. Don't be cavalier, we'll need all the support we can muster.
Weneeed him - or what?
He just might be useful some day.
I'd rather not wait for Joe's final betrayal on some metaphorical Mount Doom.
President Elect Obama is giving Reid an Opportunity To Lead.
As Democrats, we've watched as time and time again, Reid and Pelosi fail to show leadership in enforcing subpoena's and impeachment proceedings against this nightmare of a Presidency that is thankfully, almost over.
Sometimes, a good leader has to give the people who are supposed to do the work of protecting and defending the Constitution the chance to actually do so and failing that, have their peers show them the door.
Should Senator Reid fail again to show leadership and instead demonstrate irrational and un-called for capitulation, then WE need to stop focusing on Lieberman for a moment, and concentrate our energies instead on replacing Senator Reid with a Senator that will lead.
....need to vote him out rather than the President commenting on it. Additionally, with weak-kneed "leaders" like Harry Reid, Joe is hardly sweating it. I say just leave him be too - let him die on the vine.
The Republicans have always made fun of Democrats because we don't go for the jugular. We are suppose to be better than that. They have always used that trait against us. Maybe Obama wants to play nice and hope it will pay off in the end. I'm afraid it will turn around and bite him on the ass. Like always. But, Obama didn't get where he is by making stupid decisions. Lieberman deserves some kind of punishment. He's already told Reid he won't step down from his Chairmanship of Homeland Security. Under no circumstances should he be able to dictate his terms to stay with the Democratic Caucus.
The president-elect innaguration is not even here yet, already he is beginning to turn on the people that put him where he is today.
This is another PELOSI "off-the-table" momment.
Now OBAMA will be remembered as the "Let-it-BE" kind of President. Working accross the aisle does not mean, working with traitors and leveraging politics.
HOW DO WE EXPECT TO CLEAN UP WHITE HOUSE and House of Congress, when our effort to clean it up ARE being sobotage before WE allow the installation of a NEW administration?
AMERICA must not STAND for it. WE WANT A CLEAN GOVERNMENT and WE ARE THE CHANGE that is NEEDED to PUSH our government to the RIGHT DIRECTION.
WE CAN NO LONGER STAND AT THE BACKDROP and let the STATUS QUO POLITICS continue to go ON.
WE THE PEOPLE must make a STATEMENT early in the GAME before WE are SO FAR IN that WE WILL MAKE THE SAME MISTAKES as we have done with the PELOSI/REID off-the-table politics.
"Working accross the aisle does not mean, working with traitors and leveraging politics."
Barney Frank said something truly profound, and blindingly obvious, on NPR last week. He said, "If you're a congressman and you can't sit down and work with people you absolutely detest in order to get things done that need to be done, then you're in the wrong line of work."
I detest Lieberman, but that's an emotional, "he was *mean* to me and mine" reaction, not a reasoned and intelligent one. What we really voted for--what this nation *really* voted for--was an articulate, intelligent, competent man who understands the egos of power and knows how to utilize them, and work with them, to get things done.
If that means Lieberman stays in the democratic caucus--which I think he needs to do, for the benefit of democrats and for the benefit of the nation--then so be it. I can dislike him, have all my petty emotions, and still understand that getting things done is far, far more important than my petty feelings.
Tue, 11/11/2008 - 14:42 — Proud American
You certainly are entitled to differ. But perhaps you failed to see the wisdom. This is precisely the attitude of a co-dependent to an alcoholic.
You can't get rid of a problem by defending the one that causes it. Otherwise we will be faced with the same problem and ALWAY going to work on SOLUTION and reformulating solutions to an OLD tired problem.
It takes alot of dicipline to be able to resist the temptations that professional con-artist can have on the vulnerable. It is this viscious cycle and revolving door of ineffective problem solving that is a never-ending tactics that is characteristic in the U.S. Politics.
It is reflective in our policies; in our schools; in how we handle our home economics as well as our national economics. It is this tard cultures that is woven into fabric of AMERICAN mentallity that is distructive. It is the toleration for MISCONDUCTS and LAWBREAKERS that will ultimately destroy the PRINCIPLES we aspire to practice.
It takes dicipline...........it is tough love ! but a necessary ONE, if we are to learn anything other than free ourselves with solving OLD problems and making the same mistakes; again and again.
There must be consequences for our actions or lack there of OR as history has shown; HISTORY will be repeated AGAIN and AGAIN.
I have to ask what purpose would be served by kicking him out of the caucus? This is a democracy, and, while I didn't agree with his support of McCain and the things that he said during the course of the campaign, he had every right to support his candidate of choice. Just as Colin Powell, Christopher Buckley and countless other Republicans had every right to support Obama without being concerned that they would be criticized or, as in the case of Mr. Buckley, "banished" from their jobs or their party.
As for Rahm Emanuel, to think that any one individual would have that much influence in shaping President Obama's positions flys in the face of all of the evidence that we've seen in terms of his decision making process, as does harboring any expectation that he is going to be playing tit-for-tat politics.
Oddly, I have to ask what purpose is served by keeping him IN the caucus? We have seen time and time again that Holy Joe will be voting how Holy Joe wants to vote, party affiliation, caucus or will of the voters back home be danged. He's not even a DINO, he's an IINO for heaven's sake.
Can't say I'm surprised. Interested in seeing how this plays out.
Oddly enough Lieberman is a Democratic analogy to John McCain, they've both proven to be useful idiots. Lieberman may be Benedict Arnold, but we know he is and will continue to be a traitor. He's the devil we know, not the prodigal son. A fall guy will always be useful.
"keep your friends close, but your enemies closer."
"never tell anybody outside the family what you are thinking again"
the dems have bigger fish to fry. Lieberman was spouting bi partisan ship and his proof was in supporting mccain. obama and dems were also spouting bi partisan ship, and it would be difficult for them to prove that by ousting a member for being bi partisan. this is politics for you. dems are better off being nice with lieberman, there is no need to start infighting so early. the voters will have their say in 2 years right? just wait it out.
i suggest the blogosphere just drop it. i suspect Lieberman to keep a low profile anyway.
He was a traitor. He wouldn't work with his OWN party.
BiPartisan my arse.
indeed but, in this case, its all about image, right?
obama is trying to keep his support high, not ousting lieberman will upset no one but the left who just got their guy in the white house. they wont be turning their back on obama anytime soon. obama has possibly more politically to lose is what im saying, from ousting Lieberman.
punishing lieberman might be the just thing to do. but he is no longer a threat and just letting him linger is the safer thing to do.
at the bottom of the pile, with absolutely no seniority, and none until he's reelected on a Democratic ticket.
No rewards for bad behaviour. Giving Golem Joe a pass on his shit sends a message to other would be traitors, like "Hey, I can say what I want, without regard to how it affects what the party, I HAVE, MYSELF, CHOSEN, and when the a holes I hang with are chucked out, I can have my old shit back, WITH IMPUNITY.
It also diminishes the actions of the congressional members who stuck with the party and the candidate through thick and thin.
No Walk for Traitor Joe. Sure let him back in, but as a backbencher who has to sit in the nosebleed section.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdj8iRSh9wI
Love you Miss Kitty, but politics is dirty and unfortunately, we need this nasty little man.
I don't trust republicans to be "loyal opposition" in a true spirit of bipartisan cooperation. Remember the trojan horse? Let them into your confidence, and they will work you from the inside out. Hopefully, Rahm will be the real pitbull to sniff out repub partisan thugs.
Don't worry about Joe, in DC, it shouldn’t take more than a short ride to get to another
hospitalcaucus.I trust Obama. I mean I think Lieberman should be booted from the caucus. But Obama has proven himself time and again in this campaign. Their judgment has been outstanding.
Could they be wrong on this one? Sure. Do I disagree? Like you wouldn't believe. But, like I said, Obama has earned a very real trust, at least with me, so I will trust his judgment.
rahm emanuel...let the two jews duke it out
you see, rahm is also an observant jew, who's synagogue also supports the state of israel...but rahm didnt sell out his candidate, his party or his country, supporting a war criminal based on one issue
rahm didnt cover for the war criminal's crimes...nor did he take trips to iraq and lie about the state of affairs there to the nation
let rahm grab holy joe by his bris and twist it until he says uncle
btw, obama didnt say that joe shouldnt lose his chairmanship...did he?
Exactly Uncle Joe. Joe? Not relation to Lieberman are you? Heh heh
As progressive as you might like them to be, Obama and Reid are first and foremost politicians and pragmatists.
Before discarding Liebermann they need to know what the Senate will look like: there are three undecided races out there, and numerous election challenges and recounts. It would be imprudent to turn on The Connecticut Quisling at this point in time.
Nicole, thank you for posting this. I'm not sure that the Dems need to kick him out of the caucus but wait...
They HAVE to get him out of his Chairmanship if the Homeland Security Committee!! That is the deal!! Let him be on (and I only mean only ON) the committee that studies the mating habits of rats or something. Lieberman told Reid that it would be unacceptable for him to be kicked off the Homeland Security Committee so maybe the decision for Lieberman to just leave the Democrats alone will be made by booting his ass off the committee. Yoiu have to email or call your Senator to let them know your feelings...... NOW!!!!!!! Phone numbers coming.....
Yeah, some of us have John McCain as our Senator, so I've always laughed at this call your Senator thing. It must work GREAT for other people. ^_^
Call other Senators.
I agree that Lieberman hurt our feelings. I don't *care* that he did, but I agree that he did.
I care about giving President-elect Obama every tool he can possibly use to perform on the promises he made during his campaign. I don't care if he's "progressive" enough; I don't care if he's "liberal" enough. *I* care that Obama is brilliant, articulate, has *already* recaptured much of the world's good will toward our country, and that he has a few important things to do.
Here's how Lieberman will help the democratic caucus, President-elect Obama, and every single person who posts to this site: *health care reform* (he's for it); *education reform* (he's for it); a new kind of civilian public service, where citizens can donate 1 or 2 years of their time to education and infrastructure rebuilding (he's for it); and growing a green economy (he's really for it).
Here's how Lieberman will hurt the democratic caucus *regardless of whether he remains in it or not*: the war in Iraq. He won't want to draw down and he won't want to get out. His loyalties to Isreal are too deep and too personal, and I think he sees Iraq as another stronghold against danger to Isreal.
If he leaves the democratic caucus, he might be less helpful on those very, very important issues I listed above. And we--the American people--need his votes. We might hate him, we might want to punish him, but if we get his help on those big-ticket issues above, then hating him really becomes trivial and personal, not profound and global, as the issues we need to tackle in the coming years truly are.
But here's why I really, really don't care that he hurt my feelings: WE WON. That should really matter to people more than it seems like it does. That should be the most important thing. Who cares about Joe? We *WON*!
Christine
Excellent points. But if Joe really supports reform of health care, education, infrastructure and the environment then why was he such a strong advocate for McCain? ...even going farther than McCain himself with his criticisms of Obama?
Because Joe wants to take out Iran. He knows that Obama will talk our way out. McCain would have went in with guns a-blazen.
Thanks, I guess the concept of "Bomb'n Johnny's" foreign policy trumping all domestic issues seems so... foreign, that the thought just didn't occur to me.
Here is the web page with all the senator's phone numbers.
Start dialing NOW!! It is cheap a cheap phone call. Be nice but make your feelings known!!
I'm an idealist. I have never been too impressed with Obama, and I hate Lieberman, but this is a really difficult choice.
If you strip Holy Joe of his chairmanship, you dont get his cooperation and him remaining in the caucus is useless. It may also send a bad message that Obama is out for revenge for the Dems as soon he takes the presidency. Same goes for kicking him out of the caucus completely.
On the other hand, if you let him be for a while, 6 months or a year, you see how helpful he really is in the Senate and decide on that.
If he helps, great, you wait for the voters to decide on him. If he doesn't, you kick him out on his ass and you lose nothing.
Obama did his part. He made it public what he said. That is all he needs to do. The Senators can do what they want. Lieberman NEEDS to be punished!!
Go look at the video of Lieberman at the Republican Convention. Then tell me he should be forgiven. He did all he could to defeat President Obama!! Do you think for a minute that the Republicans would let him slide if it was turned around?
You have no need to try and convince me. I would kick Lieberman out on his ass. I would have done it long ago.
But, I don't have a country to unite and a shitload of problems to fix. The fate of the world may depend on it.
I know Nikola. I saw that video last night. Lieberman is lower than a snake's ass. he can stay in the caucus but punish him. NOBODY would expect anything else. Like somebody else said, let Rohm have a few words with him. Se if he comes out of that meeting with that shit eating grin on his face.
- You want a New Green Energy Economy,
- You want Education Reform
- You want the War to End
- You want a proper Response to the Government Economy
Screw what the other guys think! They've been wrong for a long time and they lost! Do you really want to adopt the strategy and way of thinking of the side that lost?
"Keep your friends close, but keep your enemies closer". - Michael Corleone
They don't need Lieberman, but they'll keep him just in case they need him. There's plenty of time to eject him from the party. The Dems don't trust or need him and he knows that. That's why he's rattled about almost losing his Chairmanship. He's become irrelevant overnight.
Oh, and yes, he's a douche.
First of all, I agree with this. Keep Lieberman in; don't let him go rogue.
Second of all, and more importantly: Reid should say this to Lieberman: "You can still caucus with us. We won't kick you out. We won't mock you, or anything negative like that. But now...I own you, bitch. You vote what I tell you, when I tell you. You're ass is mine now."
But, you know, more politely. :)
NOT more politely. Lieberman tried to defeat Obama with everything he had!!
This is exactly this sort of case. Obama and his boys have read Machiavelli (this is a good thing), Sun Tzu and all the great strategists. Their entire campaign was evidence of this.
Obama knows what he is doing, and I'll spell it out for all of you who need to be talked down. If the Democrats throw Joe out, Joe will be angry and vindictive. He may very well vote against them on several bills just to spite them, despite what his better judgment tells him. Remember on Domestic Issues Joe votes with the Democrats 90%+ of the time.
If Obama and the Democrats keep Joe with them, remove him from his foreign committee positions and gives him a pet committee that he has some direct interest in (Education, etc.), this will keep him relatively happy and he will not be looking for revenge. The Dems can easily run someone against him the next time he's up for re-election (if Joe is still not playing ball).
Good ole' Nico Mach said that you either destroy a man utterly or you treat him with kindness, for a wounded man will always seek vengeance. Kicking Joe out of the Dems will cause him to do exactly that. The 60 vote majority is more important than any of our petty desires for vengeance any day. We need that number to get all of these Big Idea plans Obama has for the country passed.*
* - For the advanced followers of this I wouldn't put it past O and the Gang in having cooked this whole thing up. It gets Joe quakin' in his boots and lets Obama can sweep in and look like the good guy to Joe and keep him in the fold. That way when the time comes O can lean on Joe and remind him that Joes's still in a caucus because of O.
Like I said he can stay in the caucus (if he wants to) but take away the Chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee. That is his punishment.
I completely agree, except the if he wants to, they need to try and keep him, but not make it look like they need him.
I don't think they do need him. they needed him when they only had 49 Senators. Not they have 57 or something. He makes no real difference.
I would expect nothing less of Obama. He has demonstrated repeatedly that he agrees with the Spirit of the teachings of his Lord and Savior.
Hey, I may be an atheist, but I can appreciate the teachings and agree with most of them.
Peace begets peace. War begets war.
Actions speak louder than words.
"Vengeance is mine," sayeth the Voters.
You forget, or maybe don't know about Obama's other great Spiritual Passion - Poker. Obama's no dumb bunny - he knows where he needs to play his chips, and he knows that Joe has the short stack.
Obama needs to deal with other more pressing threats, he can take Joe out of the game anytime he wants.
Maybe Obama's hand is just saying what he said and behind the scenes saying cut him loose.
So he would be wise to not fuck Obama around again ... Obama only has two cheeks and the bible says nothing about including the buns.
any other Senator of either party. Democrats only needed him in the caucus to get to 51. Any number above that and he is simply one vote to be rounded up on each vote the Senate takes. Cloture takes a 3/5 vote each time. Lieberman being a member of the Democratic Caucus
does not mean he will vote with the Obama tax program or foreign policy. He campaigned against them. The question then becomes what do you get with him as a Committee Chair. In my opinion you get a totally untrustworthy person with a traitorous history. He can do harm.
I do not believe Obama is saying anything other than, Joe is a Senator and the knife needs to be wielded by Senators, not me. And I applaud him for that.
He can be 60 if things go well for Alaska and Stewart Smalley.
My understanding is that Obama told Reid that he wants Joe to stay right where he is with zero retribution. As an elected PCO in my home state I can tell you if I was caught campaigning for a Republican, I would be shunned in my Legislative District organization and certainly would not be elected to any position on its Executive Board.
What LIEberman did in this election cycle was a betrayal to the party AND to the country by being a part of a campaign of smear and distortion. He helped to spread the seeds of mis-trust around this country's next president and, in so doing, has already helped to undermind the efforts of the new administration. If he wants to campaign like a Republican, he should become a Republican and the Democrats should make a full out effort to elect Ned Lamont in 2012.
Peace,
Chad (The Left) Shue
I've gone back and forth and back and forth all over again on this. My knee-jerk response is to disagree with this play. It smacks of weakness.
But perhaps we're much closer to getting those 59 Senate seats than we thought. It's tough to get a read when the "conventional wisdom" seems to change every day twice a day. Like the Dodgers did with Manny Ramirez, the Dems may be renting Lieberman's 60th filibuster-proof vote for Obama's first term. Because barring some sorta spectacular "come to Jesus moment", Lieberman will not be re-elected in four years.
Forgiveness puts Joe on the shortest possible leash too. He'll have to toe the line or start packing. Switching parties is not a realistic option. If his ego would let him (and it won't), it would be tantamount to political suicide (see re-election). McConnell doesn't even have a ranking position to offer Lieberman let alone a chairmanship. God knows Holy Joe's done a piss poor job as Homeland Security Chair.
Reid can give Joe Veterans Affairs and tell him to shut the f--- up.
-AF
Andrew Sullivan Is A Fraud
... "Kicking Joe out of the Caucus" has never been under serious consideration. Removing him from his chairmanship is what is in question. And that is appropriate. They should do that. If they can retain him in the caucus with a token chair of some minor committee, then that's what they should do. (And if Joe has an ounce of common sense, he should take that if offered.)
Who knows what lies down the road? His presence in the caucus could be the difference between a Democratic majority of 59 and one of 60 at some point. What practical purpose would deliberately kicking him out serve? Retribution is not a practical purpose. I can think of no other purpose that would not be equally or better achieved through stripping him of his powerful chair.
Get on the phone NOW and call as many Senators as you can. Keep him in the caucus if he wants but take away his Chair.
I appears that Senate offices are closed today and the voice mail boxes I called are full. Wait until tomorrow.
Everyone including the press corps seems to think there is magic in 60 Dems. There is a potential filibibuster breaking cloture of 3/5 which is 60 when there are 100 Senators present and voting. It does not matter how many Democrats or Republicans there are, only how many will vote for a cloture motion to end debate. Lieberman is useless before 50 and after 51 except as an individual vote regardless of which side's jersey he suits up in.
it's interesting how impotent the senate was in the last two years in absence of the the 60 votes, but still with a simple majority over the republicans.
i think this was more an abdication of responsibility, or pure political cowardice, than anything else, though.
Obama is not even president yet. I don't want to second guess him. While he was told to attack, fight back, etc., he never did. He kept the highr road and won.
Perhaps he wants to keep Lieberamn closer (keep enemies closer) and exercise some authority over him. I think Lieberman could use a "demotion", but I'll trust Obama for now. Lieberman is an opportunist, and Obama knows it (we all do). Perhaps Obama will play on that.
Nicole said:I know that we're supposed to be healing and reaching across the aisle and being all post-partisan with our upcoming Obama presidency
We are? Says who? I agree with David Kurtz @ TPM: "...it seems as if the Democrats are expected to play nice. There is a decidedly unequal expectation that, after they decried the ravenous partisanship of the Bush era, the Democrats must not engage in any partisanship, which is a silly and even dangerous false equivalency."
Yes, dangerous.
*sigh**
This is a Nancy Pelosi mindest of not sinking to the level of the Republicans- BUT time and time again, when the Democrats don't hit back, that gives the Republicans the edge to smash us....
Lieberman stabbed Democrats in the back by supporting the Rethuglicans- but when his ship sank, he slithered back and thought he'd be accepted with open arms by the people he screwed over....
And I hate to say it, he may be right....
Lieberman should be shunned, not embraced by the Democrats
The headline is deceptive. Rachel does not report that she has heard Obama saying "let Lieberman be." She says the Huffington Post says their sources say Obama is telling Reid not to kick him out of the Caucus. They also reported Clinton making calls for Lieberman which Clinton has denied. There is a big difference between not kicking him out of the Caucus and "leaving him be." You can strip him of anything important and let him walk away on his own accord. That is probably what Obama is signalling because it is the best way to handle the rat. Let his starve in the wilderness or eat whatever cheese Dems give him if he stays on the ship that is still afloat.
bingo! people are knee jerking like crazy.
...not at all--get used to them, and get over it--that , and more, is what's coming...btw, mark it down: 4/20/09--still in Iraq with no draw down...more repugs in O's Cabinet than in any previous Democratic Administration.
I'll say it again. I smell blackmail.
Joe should have got the boot, figuratively and literally.
I smell it too....so,ok joe,you can stay but the toilet #44 is plugged,would you mine fixing it?
So make him Joe the Plumber, not Joe the Chairman. Then he walks away on his own.
Stop all the bashing and finger-pointing. Let him find his own way. Once he studies the movement for change he will finally understand what it's all about. Old habits die hard, and it is going to take a while for everyone (including many Democrats) to realize that the old party power politics and hard-core political ideologies are a waste of time. They have never worked, really, and it's time to start thinking a new way. It we can just think about the problems we are facing in this country, try to analyze them and look for plausible solutions, then we might just come up with some workable solutions. This extremism is the reason why our country is in such a mess, and we are all guilty. Let's stop talking about who caused the problems and start thinking about ways to fix them. Once Senator Lieberman gets into this mindset he will probably embrace the movement for change. And it wouldn't surprise me one bit if John McCain got with the program, too! Both of these guys have been trying to find their place in the country's political system, and now they just might have a chance.
QUOTE Let's stop talking about who caused the problems and start thinking about ways to fix them."
Are you serious???? How are we to fix the problems in this country without addressing why they happened, and who was the cause??
It's a waste of time to talk about 'who' caused the problems. That's just name-calling. We need to study WHAT caused the problems, not WHO caused them. When we get into the blame game we stop thinking about the problem itself.
Somebody earlier said they hope Obama turns out to be a progressive he is supposed to be or something like that.
Obama is a moderate. People need to get ready for that fact. I knew that when I voted for him. He needs Lieberman's vote and I don't really think he cares all that much about what was said during the campaign. The Senate Dems can be outraged all they want but they still need his vote.
My bigger concern is that he is doing a lousy job at Homeland Security not that he trashed Obama during the campaign. I don't know what the fix is for that because Joe doesn't want to give us that cushy job.
no one said anything of the sort so calm down with your strawmen. both sides have suffered horrible casualties. and both sides are not pure as snow when it comes to committing atrocities.
supposed to be in reply to SFnomad, way up whining about Israel.
I hate to tell you this, but Obama is going to be as disappointing to us as Bush was to CONs. Obama will work more to win CONs over than he will to please us idiots that vote for him, watch and see.
Oh, I dont't think so. Believe me, I would have loved to have seen an ultra-liberal progressive elected as President so I know I'm gonna be dissapointed but you cannot compare Obama to Bush in any way. Obama has a brain and intends on using it.
From: 36th U.S. President: Lyndon B. Johnson
You certainly are entitled to differ. But perhaps you failed to see the wisdom. This is precisely the attitude of a co-dependent to an alcoholic.
You can't get rid of a problem by defending the one that causes it. Otherwise we will be faced with the same problem and ALWAY going to work on SOLUTION and reformulating solutions to an OLD tired problem.
It takes alot of dicipline to be able to resist the temptations that professional con-artist can have on the vulnerable. It is this viscious cycle and revolving door of ineffective problem solving that is a never-ending tactics that is characteristic in the U.S. Politics.
It is reflective in our policies; in our schools; in how we handle our home economics as well as our national economics. It is this tard cultures that is woven into fabric of AMERICAN mentallity that is distructive. It is the toleration for MISCONDUCTS and LAWBREAKERS that will ultimately destroy the PRINCIPLES we aspire to practice.
It takes dicipline...........it is tough love ! but a necessary ONE, if we are to learn anything other than free ourselves with solving OLD problems and making the same mistakes; again and again.
There must be consequences for our actions or lack there of OR as history has shown; HISTORY will be repeated AGAIN and AGAIN.
I miss Zell Miller... reminded me of Foghorn Leghorn on downers.
If LIEberman gets to stay, he'd better PUBLICLY kiss Obama's ASS for all the things he said and insinuated!
joe should EVEN be around the US government anymore. there are PLENTY of bad reasons. i'm so sick of this "keep your enemy close" wimp rationales.
talk about the dumbing down of the herd!
thank you, sir...may i have another!
the time for drawing a line in the sand is here. WHY is he so irreplaceable, and there's NOBODY better qualified than him? what does he know?
DEMS ARE PUSSIES!
I do remember his ripping Joe a new one on the Senate floor. So, he's certainly no fool. I would imagine he'd keep him on a tight leash and not reward such two faced treachery. He knows what Lieberman is and I'm guessing there's already plans to take his seat in the 2010 election.
Since senators terms are for six years, and putz was re-elected in 2006, we have him for four more years.
by getting rid of this A-hole! I guarantee the majority of you posters would be bursting w/ pride at that. If not, please see my preious post on why we need a 3rd party.
Sorry, I'm not ready to make nice with Lieberman either. It's not about "revenge" (well, maybe a little). Lieberman has been proving for years that he is willing to use his position as a high-profile Dem to be the Right's go-to-guy when they need someone to trash the Democratic Party. This isn't just a politician forgetting to keep all the promises he made while on the campaign trail (adult voters expect some of this from our politicians unfortunately), nor were his associations with Republicans of the healthy reaching across the aisle variety. His behavior in this election was not an aberration for him; it was business as usual. Lieberman is a is a serial liar and character assassin. The Democrats would be fools to trust him ever again.
Obama could care less about being nice to Lieberman. He wants his vote in the Senate.
Lieberman is a reprehensible turncoat. But, he still votes with the Dems on most issues.
If you think slapping Lieberman for ideological transgression is more important than winning votes in the Senate, well then, you're thinking like a Republican.
If you want someone who thinks ideology trumps reality, don't look to Obama.
Democrats are just as corrupt and oppositional as Republicans. They just make up for it by pretending to look at the other side.
Hooray for Lieberman, Hagel, and anyone else who walks away from the expectations of the two party system -- it's a JOKE and it's a bigger obstacle to a healthy political system than any individual issue.
Obama's biggest saving grace is that he seems to be standing up to the entrenched rhetoric that thinks anything will change as long as the country is divided. It's not about getting control, winning, or being right. It's about rising above the personal opinion of a Joe Lieberman and moving forward with EVERYONE on board!
I admit I am a bit unsure about how this should be carried out. Maybe if Obama actively removes Lieberman, the latter will be used as a good warning to future Democrats against being a turncoat/bushdog.
On the other hand it could become a dangerous precedent where party loyalty is above everything else, i.e. if you want to stay with the party, you have to toe the party line. That is very republican in nature and stalinist.
There's no easy way about making these sort of decisions, and I respect Obama's choice of not being too hardline at this early stage. But I do expect him to have a '3 strikes and you are out' policy to remind HolyshitJoe he's been watched very closely.
The problem is that Joe has had far more than three strikes. He's been a de facto GOP mole for years; his behavior during this election was just more of the same from him. I mean really, were any of us shocked when we heard him trashing Obama at the Republican Convention? If you were, you haven't been paying any attention to him all these years. Hell, during the Clinton years he was very eager to run to the likes of Sean Hannity and talk about how immoral our last Democratic president was for having a consensual affair with an intern, but he has no problems rubbing shoulders with a war criminal and torturer like Bush?
Lieberman received loyalty from the GOP in return when they pulled the rug out from under their own candidate to prop up their favorite Dem when he ran as an "Independent" in 2006. Why would they do that? Simple, because they viewed him a reliable ally to the Bush Administration on the Iraq War (among other things). The fact that the likes of Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck endorsed him should send up a monster size flair to any progressive, but some here (not necessarily you, KX) seem to be tripping over themselves to forget his past.
I understand and appreciate pragmatism, but Lieberman is not even remotely trustworthy and not worth the thousandth chance Obama appears to be giving him here. If Reid and the rest convince him to stay, guaranteed we'll be having more outraged conversations on this site in the future about Lieberman's latest betrayal. The party line before the last election was that we needed him because we had a razor thin majority, but that he'd get booted if we could increase that majority. We have, handily. 2012 is too long to wait to get this lying fox out of the henhouse.
I must also respectfully contest the word "Stalinist" to describe a political party expecting an iota of basic loyalty from its highest elected officials. Many of us just want Lieberman stripped of the high party position which he has inarguably and repeatedly abused (if that makes him bolt, so be it). If Stalin was in charge, he'd be shot.
Let him lose in 2012. We still need the jerk for the Senate "majority" until then.
All this fucker wants is power and influence, in his evil mind he says "fuck loyalty". Dems don't really need his vote anymore. It is time to strip this traitor of all his power in the next session. Balls, Dems need balls. Stop being the "mommy party", Obama won!
Joe Lieberman aided & abetted war criminals. Remember the war? It's Veterans' Day,... kids dying, coming home with no arms, legs, faces?
I couldn't give a fuck about what Droopy Dog said during the election,... but what he's been doing has been lying about an illegal war while Bin Laden runs free, & the blood of 9/11 victims rots in NYC sidewalks unavenged.
Indite Bushco, & let's see some of these convicts get some jail time.
of retirement age? Why do these people not want to spend their golden years traveling, fishing and sleeping in a hammock all afternoon? Freaks! Their egos need to have their AA batteries ripped out.
All the cynics just said "Start the tab for Obama" . . .
1) The Patriot Act.
2) Warrantless Wiretapping
3) Joe Lieberamn
Am I missing any?
_
4) Funding the continued illegal occupation of a country that never attacked America.
.
Rachel Maddow asks:
Easy, you grow a spine and stand up for principles. Because we all know, the Democrats are best at caving, capitulating, compromising...
Thanks Connecticut...
Now, PLEASE ELECT LAMONT!!!
Ned, please use Joe's promise to campaign FOR Democrats and flip/flopping to punt against Democrats... Can Joe be trusted to campaign for the citizens of Connecticut , or will he turn against them?
Connecticut, YOU DECIDE!!!
.
I like to view Obama as Tom Regan in Miller's Crossing...he seems to quietly have all the angles figured out ahead of time. Liebeman is like Bernie Bernbaum trying to find the alliance that is the most beneficial and we now how that turned out. I am willing to give Obama the benefit on this one...he makes smart plays. I doubt that J.L. will be reelected in CT. I would have liked to kick him out originally, but what does that really do in order to heal wounds and move forward. Based on the real world issues, the Lieberman problem is so fricking small...why labor over this...to marginalize him is probably best. We are giving him more press than he deserves. Let him quietly fade away. I also think that Obama is trying to reset the balance of the three branches of government (post Bush). Let the legislative branch deal with him, and aside from an opinion, keep the elected Executive out of the equation...I just hope Obama does not chase the "Lucky Hat"
I love that I am not the only on who calls J.L. Droopy Dog (I should not feel so special). EVERY time I see Lieberman on TV I say to my wife "Hello Folks" in my best Droopy Dog impression...and she laughs (of course). Oh the youth (27 + under) would never understand.....
Login or Register to post comments.