November 11, 2008


It's odd that with the election over, and Lieberman's traitorous ways having had no tangible effect, that it somehow makes perfect sense to me that Reid and Obama are more concerned about how many noses than they can count in the next year than with whom was standing beside McCain on platforms this year.  Nobody has ticked me off more.  Lamont would have been a great Democratic senator, and, instead, we have, well, Lieberman.  As they say, more, better Democrats is what is needed,  and Lieberman is neither.

So I understand why people are angry about this.  But I ask those people to consider how they would react if Snowe or Collins (pro-choice, New Englanders who supported McCain but have the most liberal Republican voting records on the National Journal scorecard) switched parties.  Would they say no, we don't want your kind?


Paul Dirks said...

Would they say no, we don't want your kind?

I have to give a hearty "It depends"
pourmecoffee said this:
he is in the Top 25 most liberal for economic issues, which is Obama's top priority

The problem is that even though the economy might be Obama's top priority, its not mine. I'm MUCH more concerned about excess Militarism abroad, eroding Freedom at home and the predominance of Tribalism and Xenophobia in our thinking.

Joe Lieberman has NO standing whatsoever on any of the issues that matter to me.

Jay Ackroyd (@jayackroyd) said...

No, he's your implacable opponent on those issues. They happen to be my most important issues as well--but I believe the others that I care about are entwined with those.

Are you saying you would like to see the Democratic Party demostrate its commitment to those principles by tossing Lieberman from the caucus entirely?

Snowe is not as bad on these issues as Collins is, though their voting record on the NJ scorecard is about the same. Would you accept Collins, but not Snowe?

Paul Dirks said...

Would you accept Collins, but not Snowe?

I'm afraid I have to plead ignorance....

As far as Lieberman, I think the question of his Comittee chairs should be a question of his effectivness in those postions. People I trust (TPM) inform me that he's NOT been effective. Who he caucuses with should be his choice, Which comittee's he chairs shouldn't even be up for discussion.

I see from the news this morning that Obama is utterly failing to take my sage advice!

Vigilante said...

Barack Obama supported Lieberman for his re-election. Joe Benedict Lieberman was kissing McCain's ass in his unsuccessful attempt to get on the GOP ticket. What don't you get Ackroyd?????

Lieberman is a grade A-1 Quisling.

Ol' Joe needs some ol' school schoolin'.

Deny Lieberman seniority on committees of his preference. If he bolts the Democratic Party and becomes a Republican, his political career is over. The GOP candidate in Conneticut will crush him in his next primary. I say call his ff-ing bluff.

Todd and in Charge said...

There are different degrees of "we don't want your kind." And I would argue Lieberman's special BFF status with McCain puts him in a different place than, say, Snowe.

So while I wouldn't necessarily eject him from the caucus, he certainly has no business chairing such an important committee.

Heck, I would even strip him of his chairmanship on the basis of his non-performance in that position alone, even without the McCain lovefest he put on for all of us, especially down here in South Florida, where you couldn't go to a Conservative temple without hearing him scare us about Obama.