Posts
All Comments
Lieberman would end up being a headache on either side of the aisle - a mole on the Democratic side, a Judas on the increasingly extremist Republican side. What's more, Republicans don't have any committee chairmanships to hand out, either. And nobody's going to put their seniority aside for him.
Joe Lieberman is putting out word that if the Democrats don't allow him to keep his chairmanship, he'll take up Mitch McConnell's invitation to join the Republican caucus. I think the answer has to be, go for it.
Joe Lieberman is a sanctimonious egomaniac who has no sense of loyalty or gratitude and he will stab Obama in the back as often as possible.digby again ...
This whole discussion is ridiculous. Joe Lieberman was repudiated by Democrats in his state, he campaigned for the Republican candidate for president. In what sense is this guy a Democrat?
Of course, committee assignments generally go to those who helped the party gain its majorities. ... Why? Because to the victor go the spoils. It's called democracy, and the people have made their preferences felt at the ballot box. If they wanted the Lieberman version of DC, they would've voted for McCain.
Good governance is going to be about more than passing new legislation, it's going to be about cleaning up the mess that has been made over the past 8 years. It's going to be about weeding out the graft and greed and corruption that has caused American taxpayers to foot the bill for outrageous deficits.
...
Not only is Joe Lieberman not doing that job, as Chairman of the Department of Homeland Security Committee he's keeping anyone else from doing it.
Lieberman is the Fox News of the Senate. Enable him now, and it'll just bite you in the rear later. Obama might as well recognize Joe's bad faith early and save himself the headache.
Make no mistake: if Lieberman is allowed to retain his seniority and current committee chairmanship, Senate Democrats will be setting an entirely new and incredibly low standard for party loyalty. This would set a precedent that is offensive not only to "activists" or "the base," but to those with heterodox views who felt enough moral obligation to the Donkey Party to at least keep their mouths shut and stay away from Republican campaign rallies and the Republican convention. Lieberman made his own choices, and that's fine; it's a free country and all. But the idea that it's Democrats who are offending him by insisting that his choices have consequences, particularly when they are bending over backwards to keep him in the Caucus when they no longer need his vote to control the Senate, is simply bizarre.
