Whither Joe?
| Wed Nov. 5, 2008 10:20 AM PST
WHITHER JOE?....So what happens to Joe Lieberman now? If Dems had gotten to 59 or 60 seats in the Senate, it would be really tough to kick him out of the caucus. But at 56 or 57, Lieberman is a lot less important. Sure, every vote counts, but needing four or five GOP votes to break a filibuster instead of three or four — well, that's just not such a big deal.
On the other hand, politics makes for strange bedfellows, and political leaders swallow hard and make compromises for the greater good all the time.
On the third hand, dumping Lieberman, especially if Obama were behind it, would be a very dramatic way of encouraging party loyalty from the rest of the Democratic caucus in the future, wouldn't it?
So....I dunno. What do you all think happens to Holy Joe? Stay in the caucus on condition of good behavior? Stay in the caucus but lose his committee chair. Get kicked out completely? Something else?
Advertisement
Advertisement
Comments
I'm all for kicking him out but only after he begs to stay. Given the anti-McCain mood the Republicans are likely to be in (hey, it's not like McCain is suddenly going to be a leader in the Republican caucus --- never was before and sure ain't gonna be now), I don't see much happiness for him in that caucus.
As his cringing statement of 'support' he put out today for Obama shows, he already knows he's well and truly f***ked. He should thought of that two years ago! I'm not the kind of person who takes pleasure in the distress of any living creature ---- but here I'm gonna make an exception This will be fun to watch.
Something has to happen, but I suspect it will be a demotion from committee chair to chair of some minor subcommittee, with him staying in the caucus if he chooses (and on the understanding, explicit or implicit, that he be on good behavior). A chastened Lieberman -- if that's possible, which I don't know that it is -- could actually be useful.
Out. Out. Out.
It is one thing to endorse the other party's candidate. It is another to stand behind him (literally) at almost every campaign event.
He also blatantly lied in his Connecticut re-election bid about, well, everything.
If Lieberman had merely voted for McCain or endorsed McCain due to his stance on foreign policy issues, I would say no recrimations. However, Lieberman campaigned for McCain and frequently spouted Republican b.s. talking points in an attempt to discredit Obama. In essence, Lieberman functioned as a Republican operative during the Presidential campaign. For functioning as a Republican operative, he should be stripped of any leadership positions or other perks not available to members of the opposition party.
The only reason to suck up to Lieberman would be if there is a chance Democrats will need him to retain a majority in 2010. Otherwise, Holy Joe can continue to vote his conscience as an independent with no links to Democrats.
Am I the only one that thinks that it would be a brilliant strategem for the Democrats to engineer a highly publicized "we're going to kick him out" hoo haw, then have President Obama come out in support of him (saying something along the lines of "now is the time to unite, both my supporters and my opponents blah blah blah")?
Submitted by neill (not verified) on Wed Nov. 5, 2008 10:24 AM PST.
the term "shit stain" come to mind when holy joe is discussed. it isn't just the loyalty of the caucus -- it is the goddam trustworthiness of the english language...
throw his ass out...
Payback for Joe's apostosy might feel good... but would be counter to the Democratic overall theme that it is Republicans who are the Party of anger and vengence.
He's not part of the Democratic Party anymore... so he shouldn't hold any seats normally held by the majority.
But I think a little forgiveness could go a long way in building our image of the "leadership" Party.
I think he should be kicked out as a matter of simple party discipline... he opposed the party candidate for President.
However, Kevin, I think your take that keeping him on board would have been more important if we had been closer to the 60 threshhold is wrong. The important votes in the senate are rarely party-line votes. I don't think much of Lieberman, but the idea he would filibuster something like health care reform, which he has supported all his life, solely on the basis of a political grudge is way off base. Even if he was so petty, which I don't think he is, he still wouldn't risk looking that petty. Let's not forget that other than foreign policy, this guy is fairly liberal.
I have mellowed a bit from my demands of last night that he should just be pants and kicked down the Capitol Steps.
Now I think that if he donates a kidney, a liver, a cornea, and one or two heart valves, that he should be forgiven and allowed to keep his committees.
Joe walked away from the party. I think the issue is not what the party does, but what Joe does.
The party needs to get a dem elected in Joe's seat. He has a long way to go to get into the good gracies inorder to be that candidate.
In the mean time, Joe needs to earn our trust again and work his way back. Or not, it is really his choice - I suspect he will not.
I'd like to see some of the following:
- removal from all chairmanship positions (Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Subcommittee on Private Sector and Consumer Solutions to Global Warming and Wildlife Protection, and the Subcommittee on Airland)
- votes on cloture as directed by leadership
- apologies to President-Elect Barack Obama and the Democratic Senators, and/or
- fire Marshall Wittmann.
Can Harry Reid pull some concession before folding this time?
Hey, if I'm at the blackjack tables and decide to take a really, really stupid double down with two queens or something and then bust, do I get taksies-backsies? No.
Joe doubled down with McCain. Joe busted. Joe has no more chips. Joe is escorted away from the table. There are no taksies-backsies.
Bye, Joe.
Make an ostentatious display of unity along with a 'regretful' need to strip his committee memberships. In practice he should be kept in the dark as much as possible. In reality his liberal constituency is his only minder anyway. Let him take his chances as a Republican if he cares to.
Submitted by Tom Hilton (not verified) on Wed Nov. 5, 2008 10:41 AM PST.
The important thing is not just to kick him out but to make it clear to Republicans that they'll face retaliation if they give Lieberman any position on any committee. And they need to move him to a tiny office in the basement.
You don't have to make a big show of it. It's not like he can claim he has any claim to any committees or chairmanships. Just freeze him out of everything. Put him on boring committees and don't give him any chairmanships.
Then offer him an ambassadorship. Like to Israel. Although I'd prefer to send him to Krgzystan (is that spelling even close?).
Lieberman has shown no loyalty to the Democratic Party, and he worked actively to defeat it in yesterday's election. Did he use his access to Republican deliberations to reveal their strengths and weaknesses to his Democratic brothers and sisters? Has he used his access to Democratic deliberations to reveal their strengths and weaknesses to his Republican buddies?
It won't cost the Democrats the senatorial majority to exclude Lieberman from his caucus, and if keeping him doesn't raise the Democratic total to 60, why should they have to endure another minute of his duplicity?
Let Lieberman be Lieberman, clinging to the shriveling bosom of the Greedy Old Party.
Submitted by skippy (not verified) on Wed Nov. 5, 2008 10:46 AM PST.
i think a more important question to be expecting obama to answer is, what about all the voting shenanigans that happened the last decade? what's going to happen to all the people who caged voters, purged voting rolls, helped jam voter hotline phone lines, and spread pamphlets w/outright lies about voting procedure?
these people should all be investigated, indicted, tried, convicted and sentenced to hard time by the obama justice department.
also obama ought to have a little talk w/the colorado attorney general who dismissed felony charges against the skin heads who wanted to kill obama.
screw lieberman, he's an old man anyway. let's make sure none of this election rigging ever happens again.
Submitted by Itinerant Pedant (not verified) on Wed Nov. 5, 2008 10:47 AM PST.
I thought about this a LOT early last month when I looked possible that Joe might become 60, or even 59.
I think the answer is simple, yet devious and evil.
Strip Joe of his current committee assignments. Let him retain ALL his seniority. Only allow him to serve/chair domestic committees, preferably ones that would let him be of great benefit to Connecticut.
Here's the evil part. Make sure the committees he has in NO WAY benefit Israel whatsoever. If he leaves, it will be painfully obvious that he's leaving not for being dissed, not for being punished, not for being kept from "voting his conscience", but because Israel is 100 times more important to him than his nominal constituency and that even though he could do something valuable for Connecticut, he's leaving because he's helpless to advocate for Israel.
That's my recommendation.
For me, the solution is simple. Strip Joe of his chairmanship and his seniority. Treat him like he is a newly elected freshman senator. If he wants to work his way up the ladder in the Democratic Party, fine. Let him do that. If he chooses to work his way up through the Republican Party, fine. But let's give him a blank slate to start with, and let him do what he wants.
While I understand, and share, the desire for revenge and the sentiment to punish him, it's important to remember that the question is not what Lieberman deserves. He deserves as ignominious an exile as possible. The question though, is what best serves the Dems' purposes? And while the case can be persuasively made that the Dems are best served by a show of discipline, I honestly don't know that's the case. It all depends on Lieberman. If he's willing to STFU and do as he's told -- and, again, that's a HUGE if with Holy Joe -- then he could be a useful vote.
If Lieberman is present in sensitive caucus strategy meetings, one has to assume that the content of the meetings will be immediately related to the Republicans.
Lieberman cannot be trusted. For that reason, he should be excluded from the caucus.
Submitted by Will Divide (not verified) on Wed Nov. 5, 2008 10:51 AM PST.
As Dan Savage would put it:
DTMFA
I think that the Dems should go easy on Joe.
Point 1) Joe must not run as anything but a Democrat in 2012 and if he loses the primary that he pledges to support the Democrat in the general election.
Point 2) Joe doesn't publicly support any other Republicans
If the tables were turned, what would the GOP do to one of theirs who stood right behind Obama on the dias in every video posted on the internet?
He would not be allowed in the caucus, not seated in ANY GOP chairs on ANY comittees, and get an office in the trunk of his car. He would be dumped in the hallway, totally abandoned, and it would have happened a couple of months ago.
I'm fairly sure soft-hearted, gutless Harry will give Joe whatever he wants just for old times' sake.
Lieberman has shown terrible judgment in matters of foreign policy and national security and so should be removed from committee positions in homeland security and armed services. With respect to other committee assignments, he should be judged based on the merits.
We should all try to turn the page on revenge, division, and hate, on the whole notion of party over country. This is the time for healing and coming together in the best interest of the country.
There is no need to punish Lieberman. The shame at associating himself with such a cheap, sordid and demeaning campaign is punishment enough.
Submitted by sdh (not verified) on Wed Nov. 5, 2008 11:29 AM PST.
Loss of his chairmanship and seniority should be enough. Since he claims to be 'independent' then I would have no problem with him caucusing with the Democrats--after all he does tend to vote Democratic on most issues.
The point should be--those who openly support non-party candidates should not expect to keep their positions of power.
A note to Joe Liebermann...
Joe,
The common working people of your state elected you and you sold them out. I hope you never get another Union person to vote for you for the rest of your political life. Why don't you move onto a nice red state and become the "real Republican" that you are.
Regards....
"encouraging party loyalty"
What a revolting way of putting it. You mean "punishing independence", you totalitarian little shit. -- jonas
As far as domestic policy goes he's still voting with Democrats. On foreign policy he's not trustworthy.
Further, he broke with the Democratic party by not abiding by party rules in Connecticut when he lost the primary race to Lamont and simply re-registered as an Independent...NOT A DEMOCRAT. What use does the party have for him in terms of chairmanships? What use does the party make of Bernie Sanders?
No chairmanships for Joe.
Loss of all chairmanships, loss of seniority and an office in the basement next to the furnace room (maybe IN the furnace room.)
Let him caucus with himself since he is sooo all about himself.
"...Let's go with wit. Wit wins over rage." - theora jones
Before the election, there were only 49 Democratic senators, thus the Democrats needed both independents (Lieberman and Sanders) to join their caucus to reach a majority of 51 so that Democrats could control Senate committees, set the agenda, etc. Of course, Lieberman was not a reliable vote, especially when it came to matters of national security like the Iraq occupation. Joe voted with Bush and the Republicans.
Democrats now have a majority without Lieberman and they do not need him to control committees or anything else. I say throw him out. What's he good for? Absolutely nothing, just like the war he loves so much.
Nononotagain has it exactly right.
Nothing is worth keeping him-it would send the worst kind of message, especially to the blue dogs.
If you're a Democrat, be a Democrat. If you like the GOP view of things, go on over to the other side of the aisle.
Post new comment
MoJo Comments: Send Us Your Feedback
We changed our spam software to better filter comments. Should you encounter any issues, please let us know.
