AMERICAblog: Why is Harry Reid praising Joe Lieberman
paulbe
· 1 year ago
Maybe Harry's received his new orders from Likud.
Older_Wiser
· 1 year ago
Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi have never had spines, nor have a large number of Dems. You can say that they were outnumbered as far as impeachment is concerned, but many of us saw them as going along to get along with their Rethug colleagues. When Nancy Pelosi announced that impeachment was not "on the table" I knew there would be no fight whatsoever. They kept allowing Bush to make an abomination of the people's government.
This is the major reason I became an Unaffiliated voter on July 5, 2007.
scottinsf
· 1 year ago
Yeah, I dropped my Democratic Party affiliation around then too and for the same reasons.
Unfortunately, in order for my votes in the primaries to make any difference here in CA --we basically had two here this cycle-- I again made my party affiliation with the Democratic Party. I have not dropped that affiliation since the primaries even though you are free to vote for anyone in the general (it's a little footwork, but not a big hassle).
Although I gladly contributed to and voted for a slew of great Democratic candidates this year, I think now that the general election is over I'm dropping my Democratic Party affiliation again. As a party they just don't work for me.
Apphouse50
· 1 year ago
The real question here is why would anyone find this surprising?
Reid is dedicated to the proposition that one needn't be effectual to be Senate Majority Leader. He's a weakling, and I don't care what he says in his autobiography. Get him out.
okojo
· 1 year ago
Senate Majority Leaders are true powers when the White House is controlled by the opposing party. Much like LBJ was in the 1950s. Senate Majority Leader become glamorized water carriers when both parties control the Senate and the White House. One Reason the Bush White House loved Bill Frist..
Reid needs to be nice to about 4-5 Republicans, including McCain, Collins, Snow, Murkowski, (personally I would try to flip, she is probably not the biggest Palin supporter or that enamored with Palin trying to get Stevens' senate seat) Spector, etc to get certain things past.
Certain legislation will peel off some Dems, so he needs to play nice.
On Lieberman, there should be no negotiations, offer him the sub committee job or tell him to head to the Republican Cloakroom.
hawkseye
· 1 year ago
I agree with most of what you say. Reid's position may depend in part on how close they come to Fillibuster proof. He might be looking for a way to allow Lieberman to stay in the post in exchange for an agreement to vote with the Caucus on all crucial matters. Being able to trust him is another matter.
Apphouse50
· 1 year ago
If that's Reid's dilemma, I would ask, "Why would anyone accept on faith Lieberman's word that he will stick by the family given his recent behavior, which was nothing short of reprehensible."
Who the hell was Joe to cast aspersions on ANYone's loyalty?
Get him out.
hawkseye
· 1 year ago
There may be an "or else" to go with the agreement.
Apphouse50
· 1 year ago
Now.
Before he does anymore damage.
Harry Reid doesn't have what it takes to deliver an ultimatum and be taken seriously. The fact that we're having this conversation at all shows how little regard Lieberdolt has for him.
Now. Now I say! (Complete with pitchfork and torch.)
hawkseye
· 1 year ago
As I said below to Apphouse50, there may be an "or else" attached to any agreement. Personally, I think Lieberman is an ass, a sick narcissist with whom negotiations may be pointless. Obviously, others have different ideas. I think people who are guided by pragmatic politics do not pass judgement on those they have to work with.
hawkseye
· 1 year ago
I am a progressive and would be most happy living under a democratic socialist administration. However, I am a pragmatist and understand that my goals will probably not be reached in my lifetime. Just my opinion: Harry Reid is a pragmatist with three or four constituencies to please and lead. Pragmatism is not a sign of a weak spine. It may be a sign of guts. Purist progressives are going to be very unhappy with the new administration until they learn to deal with the art of politics: getting things done requires pragmatism and all Dem Party leaders are pragmatists. During FDR's first term, some progressives came to him with a great idea. FDR told them he liked their idea very much. "Now, force me to do it." If we want Barack Obama, Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi to behave in certain ways, we have to force them to do what we want---which may take moving many national constituencies, senators and representatives to our position.
An_American_Karol
· 1 year ago
I'm all for kissing and making up, but what message would Reid be sending to his fellow Democrats by allowing Lieberman to maintain his current position? Loyalists are in line for these chairmanship positions.
hawkseye
· 1 year ago
I don't believe Reid says anything on a subject like this without the agreement of all or a broad part of the Dem Caucus.
Older_Wiser
· 1 year ago
You mean this "pragmatism" (otherwise known as "scratch my back and I'll scratch yours"):
Reid: "So he [Lieberman] is a senior member – person around here. And I want to remind all of the people that are watching this newscast or however this program is going to air that I would not be majority leader but for his vote."
Haven't we had enough of this kind of tit for tat? Where's the integrity?
hawkseye
· 1 year ago
I think pragmatism has a much broader definition.
dula
· 1 year ago
Huh? On the one hand you are saying we need to "force" the Obama Admin. to get rid of Lieberman but on the other hand you say we should be pragmatic.
hawkseye
· 1 year ago
No, I said that people would be unhappy until they accept the pragmatism of all the leaders of the Dem party. What you choose to be is up to you. But I didn't say it well.
bill__free
· 1 year ago
OFF TOPIC: Why not order your FREE copy of the Book of Mormons of LDS. It can be used in many ways. Put it near your fireplace for those extra cold nights (just toss it in the fireplace for that extra heat), or in the bathroom in case you run out of TP and must make do.
You sound just like one of those mouth-breathers at little green footballs.
We don't need to stoop to their brand of bullshit.
bill__free
· 1 year ago
I have heard all kinds of ideas here. Protest them, boycott the state of Utah (punishing not only the Mormons, but other citizens as well). All I was saying was hit them in their pocket. A direct hit to their pocketbook. You would target a complete state for a boycott just to get back at them rather than find a better way to target just them?
From what I have seen posted here, and without dissent, were ways to get back at them for butting into other people's lives.
They offer their book for free. It cost them money. They take a financial hit. Why not stoop to their level, or better yet, wait till next time when there is a ballot issue affecting you, and watch them screw you again. I think their religion is vile and nothing would be better that a huge book burning of their free book. A large peaceful bonfire with a lot of NEWS coverage. And the LDS can watch all that money they spent on those books go up in smoke, as well as people being able to tell reporters what the LDS religion is and what they believe in. The Joseph Smith story and the golden tablets that only he had seen. Or the massacre that the Mormons planned in the 1800's. (I hope I got all my history right.)
bill__free
· 1 year ago
Also, I don't know what a "mouth-breather" is and I don't think I have ever been to "little green footballs".
I just found a link and posted it, why not just say "thanks, but I think it's a bad idea". Maybe this one was bad, but it certainly didn't deserve any reply like you posted. Maybe you read it wrong, or maybe I don't see what is wrong with what I posted.
I occasionally post ideas here and every once in a while it seems I have a decent idea.
Verchiel
· 1 year ago
Advocating burning or using any faith's book as toilet paper is pretty classless, even in jest. It's the same sort of thing the right wing nutjobs have talked about doing with the Quran since 2001.
bill__free
· 1 year ago
Point taken. I failed to view it in a religious light. I was wondering why you responded like you did, now I understand where you were coming from.
High Crimes & Misdemeanors
· 1 year ago
Bill-free, i wouldn't worry about the likes of verchiel, to much of a soft skin doesnt get you far on this blog. Apparently being classless trumps being kicked and beaten by haters... Your post was excellent and no need to apologize to the likes of verchiel. I understood your subtlety of the book burning!!!! Its a great idea and hits them where it counts in two ways, financially and metaphorically.
bill__free
· 1 year ago
Thanks for your reply. I thought his reply seemed over the top. I was going to suggest that people order the book and just put it away.
FunMe
· 1 year ago
I voted for CHANGE ... sounds like we need to CHANGE the head of the Senate since they are "more of the same".
What elese can we do to stop this? Seriously, if they let LIEberman stay all the goodwill they had with Obama's victory will go down the drain even before January 20.
Out with Reid!
Out with LIEberman!
whomod
· 1 year ago
It's always been my belief that we need new leadership in the Democratic Party. Obama isn't enough. For too long we've had to endure weak spined Democrats in the form of Harry Reid, Tom Daschle, etc. etc.
I think the current leadershp still suffers from Stockholm Syndrome. If tey don't snap out of it soon, well, then they to can be replaced.
Bush_Bites
· 1 year ago
Harry really has to go.
He's been a wuss ever since he became majority leader.
Everybody gives Pelosi shit, but the House has passed some good legislation since 2006,.
It all gets killed when it reaches the Senate.
skwcw2001
· 1 year ago
lie- berman will always betray he is a true cowardly politicain he seeks only power and to be notice and has his worth as a man tired up in the power and perks
qualitycontrol
· 1 year ago
Hmm. I hear you guys about the desire for retribution, but there may be something interesting going on here. What if Reid is cutting a deal? Lieberman can keep his Homeland Security Chairmanship, but has to RE-JOIN the Democratic Party. Make him give a "I've been lost but now I'm home" kind of prodigal son speech. In this speech he has to publicly state that he will NEVER again run as anything other than a Democrat.
What we get: Another Dem seat in the Senate and an opening for Ned Lamont or another true Dem to challenge Lieberman in 4 years. This would be pragmatism, but shrewd as well.
Just my thought.
martha
· 1 year ago
Oh please. I would never trust Joe LIEberman, and Reid shouldn't either. He should be banished and admonished.
hawkseye
· 1 year ago
You could definitely be right.
okojo
· 1 year ago
Technically Lieberman has never left the Democratic Party. He is still a registered Democratic Party Member.. The Connecticut Democratic Party wants to expel him for being such a putz...
I think it is way past being conciliatory toward Lieberman, tell him the political reality, take the sub committee chair or go Mitch McConnell office and have him stroke your ego...
I just find it ironic that Lieberman is whinging about this, given he was probably angling for a top cabinet positions in the hypothetical McCain Cabinet....
I understand what Reid is doing, but to call Lieberman progressive, when he is more than willing to support a conservative Republican as President, and is willing to waste much of US riches on a idiotic crusade in Iraq, is kind of not progressive... Yeah, Lieberman is progressive, He is very progressive in inanity.
dula
· 1 year ago
I agree! Make him grovel publicly for the Chair. He must denounce all the negatives he has said about the Dem Party and admit he was disrespectful to us throughout this campaign cycle. Joe must eat crow!
KarenMrsLloydRichards
· 1 year ago
In the Senate personal friendships-working relationships trump EVERYTHING ELSE. Think of a gentlemen's club that never actually expels its members, just sends subtle signals that one's presence is less than welcome. He can then move to a corner of the Library, and bury himself under the newspaper. He will still be served his brandy and soda by the staff.
CarrieCann
· 1 year ago
I already sent my email to Senator Reid to do the right thing and strip Lieberman of his chairmanship. As Janet would say, "what have you done for me ... lately?"
houstonray
· 1 year ago
It's time for Harry Reid to go. I don't mean go as in leave the Democratic Caucus, I just mean time for a new Senate Majority Leader. I hope that happens...
Lieberman is a disgrace to the Democratic Party. It's time for him to go join the Republican's and move on...
hallam
· 1 year ago
Looks to me like Reid is bending over backwards to prevent Lieberman being able to blub to the media about how he is being treated badly.
Indigo
· 1 year ago
"Progressive"? What an odd way to spell "Jewish."
dad
· 1 year ago
don't make me lowercase your name Harry.
Change.
High Crimes & Misdemeanors
· 1 year ago
i beat you to it dad, ive been doing it for some time.... the dem punk has got to go
davidkc
· 1 year ago
I said it before and I'll say it again, wimp Reid will not do anything to Lieberman. How many times does Reid have to pull the football away from you folks before you get it?
dad
· 1 year ago
Joe Lieberman is one of the most progressive people ever to come from the state of Connecticut.
Connecticut Democrats didn't think so Harry.
HarpoSnarx
· 1 year ago
Apparently Dems aren't contacting their senators about Holy Joe.
Harry pisses on the base again.
coolcatdaddy
· 1 year ago
I'm beginning to wonder if Lieberman's got some kind of dirt on some Dems and he's blackmailing the leadership. Reid can't be dumb enough to keep playing this little game.
Either way, both Joe and Harry need to go.
Savage8862
· 1 year ago
Reid is too weak to punish Lieberman.
burro
· 1 year ago
I don't like Harry Reid. He's mealy mouthed as hell. And HoJo is always going to be tainted with his traitorous past. He'd say anything. He can't be trusted. You can tell that Reid is perfectly happy to let bygones be bygones. That alone says loads about Reid's conviction to bring about change. There isn't any.
I once thought Reid's style was to speak softly and carry a big stick. I now know that he speaks softly and carries very little of anything. Is Reid known for his clout? Is he known for creative use of Senate rules? Maybe a couple of times but nothing that amounted to anything and never any follow through.
He's an OK guy. He has an interesting life story. But he hasn't been and won't be a memorable Senate Majority Leader and we really need one. And we don't need HoJo at all.
If HoJo is so progressive, then how would he be able to compromise his progressive principles by going over to the dark side? Does he stand for progressive principles or not. Doesn't sound like it. McBush certainly wasn't the progressive candidate. And the Repukes can't be wanting him thinking that he's going to be voting for progressive principles. They know he'll vote with them. So HoJo doesn't have any f'ing principles at all.
HoJo is a weasel and Reid finds that acceptable. That sucks.
burro
· 1 year ago
And the thing to keep in mind is that Reid is defending a joker who has been obstructionist and unrelenting in his desire to have the Homeland Security Committee do absolutely nothing. HoJo has been completely ineffective at everything except constraining any sort of examination of what the hell has been going on with Homeland Security. And Reid thinks that's OK.
The Senate Majority Leader at a time of great concern, (so they say, what's our alert level today?), about national security doesn't much care that the Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairman has been running around the country campaigning for the RepubCo candidate for president while the Senate Committee the Chairman chairs basically lies fallow. Very conveniently fallow from ShrubCo's standpoint. Nice work HoJo.
That's showing 'em Harry.
High Crimes & Misdemeanors
· 1 year ago
PROPOSITION 2008 - NO TO HARRY REID!!!
We seriously need to start a campaign to get rid of this ass clown!!!!
naschkatzehussein
· 1 year ago
Just before the election Lieberman said that if the Democrats won a 60 seat filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, it would mean the end of the country. I wrote Christopher Dodd that any Democratic senators who support Lieberman after saying this just make me puke.
RevDrBillyBob
· 1 year ago
Why should this surprise anyone ? ???? Reid = Lieberman = Pelosi = Bush.
Happy_Housewife
· 1 year ago
How is the Senate Majority Leader selected? Will he have to be reappointed in the new Senate? Who's next in line if he were to be ousted? Is there a hierarchy?
hawkseye
· 1 year ago
By vote of members of the caucus.
TTC
· 1 year ago
actually the dems would look weak if the kicked out leiberman now. what a way to show how big they are than to say see? there is room for bi partisanship and moderates ...
hawkseye
· 1 year ago
You are entirely correct.
High Crimes & Misdemeanors
· 1 year ago
ahhhhh sorry, i disagree with both TTC and hawkseye. i hardly think they would look weak at kicking out a traitorous punk like lieberman. the man stood at the repuke convention and called for the american people to vote for mccain. the republican convention. This one move would say to the dems, we wont tolerate traitorous acts by our own members.
PROPOSITION 2008 - NO TO HARRY RIED!!!!!
mdavis000
· 1 year ago
I totally disagree John.
We have this one historic moment with a nice majority in the Senate. Why shouldn't we do everything we can to get each and every vote we can? THere are bound to be some very close votes on coloture on any number of hugely important issues. I for one value the passage of that legislation much more than getting back at Lieberman. MUCH MORE. He may be a traitor to the party, but if its what it takes to get better healthcare, better tax policy, and better energy solutions...then I would be the first to kiss his feet and have him stay in the caucus. He is one more vote. We can't deny the supreme importance of one more vote.
Once we are done using him, and we gain 60 in 2010, then we can dump him. But not now. Not when so much is at stake. Not when I need better healthcare for my family.
dula
· 1 year ago
Joe has said it would be a bad thing if Dems controlled White House and Congress. What makes you think he's gonna vote with us if we kiss his ass? Call his bluff! Let him get pissed off and start voting against his constituents in Conn...then they can recall the pig.
hawkseye
· 1 year ago
Thanks for saying that, and saying it so well. I agree with you 100%
Maybe we would have made it to the MAGIC sixty if Joe Lieberman hadn't been such a traitor and given Democrats cover to vote for Republican Senators? That should be enough right there to can his sorry A$$. I KNOW he cost us votes in conservative Oklahoma. As Democratic Vice Chair of my county, I heard it from elderly Democrats talking about how much they "admired Joe Lieberman, etc." when coming up with excuses NOT to vote Democratic. Joe should GO! Otherwise, what good is having a Democratic Party? If Harry Reid can't enforce good discipline within the caucus then we need a new majority leader. Discipline is KEY and when you are part of a caucus you don't campaign for the other side.
I am not deluded that anyone will read my message, but once they get the gist, they can add it to the tally. What I said is this:
It wd be sickening if Holy Joe gets to keep his committee assignment. Too bad if he votes with you-- he just devoted his whole life, for months, to smearing Obama and backing Insane McCain and his scheming bimbo.
Besides, 1. He's incompetent at handling Homeland Security and has done nothing to deserve continuing even if he were not a traitor. 2. He did nothing to investigate the most evil, stupid, incompetent law-breaking unimpeached president in history. 3. Before the election started he was already the most hated man on Capitol Hill.
You have spent years now letting Bush/Cheney get away with atrocities, including actual war crimes. Now you're gonna let Lie-berman get away with his crimes?
At some point, don't you have to do something just because it is Right? Or are you really gonna let this turncoat spend his time investigating the Obama administration in ways we haven't seen since the last Dumocrat was president?
Stop pussyfooting around and looking like a wimp and DO THE RIGHT THING. If he wants to be forever known as the man who left his party after campaigning against the first African-American president because he would rather join the minority than work with the new administration, let him let History have its judgment.
This tergiversation, this vascillating, is pathetic. Dump the bastard. It's not only the right thing to do, it will be wildly popular. And, as lagniappe, as a bonus, it will make the heathen rage.
High Crimes & Misdemeanors
· 1 year ago
wow - two nice words there ThommThomm: lagniappe and tergiversation
smallhandff
· 1 year ago
Reading Sen. Reid's comments, you feel he's seriously beholden to Sen Lieberman. Perhaps, Sen Reid is planning the ultimate honor to Sen Lieberman by getting Lieberman baptised as a Mormon. Presuming Lieberman predeceases Reid. It is, afterall, the Mormon thing to do.
Meantime, no one cares to ask Al Gore his feeling about this issue?
Tatarize
· 1 year ago
Lieberman can't be put out to pasture while 60 is still in reach and Reid and others know it. We couldn't give up the senate majority last time and we can't give up our chance at a super majority this time.
If Franken wins the recount, those ton of votes leaning against Stevens gets counted, and Martin wins the run off that's 60. That means, quite frankly, Lieberman gets to keep his chair so long as he never votes for cloture. If Franken loses of Chambliss wins his runoff then boot Lieberman as fast as possible but while the hope is alive the slime survives.
All Comments
This is the major reason I became an Unaffiliated voter on July 5, 2007.
Unfortunately, in order for my votes in the primaries to make any difference here in CA --we basically had two here this cycle-- I again made my party affiliation with the Democratic Party. I have not dropped that affiliation since the primaries even though you are free to vote for anyone in the general (it's a little footwork, but not a big hassle).
Although I gladly contributed to and voted for a slew of great Democratic candidates this year, I think now that the general election is over I'm dropping my Democratic Party affiliation again. As a party they just don't work for me.
Reid is dedicated to the proposition that one needn't be effectual to be Senate Majority Leader. He's a weakling, and I don't care what he says in his autobiography. Get him out.
Reid needs to be nice to about 4-5 Republicans, including McCain, Collins, Snow, Murkowski, (personally I would try to flip, she is probably not the biggest Palin supporter or that enamored with Palin trying to get Stevens' senate seat) Spector, etc to get certain things past.
Certain legislation will peel off some Dems, so he needs to play nice.
On Lieberman, there should be no negotiations, offer him the sub committee job or tell him to head to the Republican Cloakroom.
Who the hell was Joe to cast aspersions on ANYone's loyalty?
Get him out.
Before he does anymore damage.
Harry Reid doesn't have what it takes to deliver an ultimatum and be taken seriously. The fact that we're having this conversation at all shows how little regard Lieberdolt has for him.
Now. Now I say! (Complete with pitchfork and torch.)
Personally, I think Lieberman is an ass, a sick narcissist with whom negotiations may be pointless. Obviously, others have different ideas.
I think people who are guided by pragmatic politics do not pass judgement on those they have to work with.
Just my opinion:
Harry Reid is a pragmatist with three or four constituencies to please and lead. Pragmatism is not a sign of a weak spine. It may be a sign of guts.
Purist progressives are going to be very unhappy with the new administration until they learn to deal with the art of politics: getting things done requires pragmatism and all Dem Party leaders are pragmatists.
During FDR's first term, some progressives came to him with a great idea. FDR told them he liked their idea very much. "Now, force me to do it."
If we want Barack Obama, Harry Reid or Nancy Pelosi to behave in certain ways, we have to force them to do what we want---which may take moving many national constituencies, senators and representatives to our position.
Reid: "So he [Lieberman] is a senior member – person around here. And I want to remind all of the people that are watching this newscast or however this program is going to air that I would not be majority leader but for his vote."
Haven't we had enough of this kind of tit for tat? Where's the integrity?
Why not order your FREE copy of the Book of Mormons of LDS. It can be used in many ways. Put it near your fireplace for those extra cold nights (just toss it in the fireplace for that extra heat), or in the bathroom in case you run out of TP and must make do.
http://mormon.org/mormonorg/eng/basic-beliefs/b...
We don't need to stoop to their brand of bullshit.
From what I have seen posted here, and without dissent, were ways to get back at them for butting into other people's lives.
They offer their book for free. It cost them money. They take a financial hit. Why not stoop to their level, or better yet, wait till next time when there is a ballot issue affecting you, and watch them screw you again.
I think their religion is vile and nothing would be better that a huge book burning of their free book. A large peaceful bonfire with a lot of NEWS coverage. And the LDS can watch all that money they spent on those books go up in smoke, as well as people being able to tell reporters what the LDS religion is and what they believe in. The Joseph Smith story and the golden tablets that only he had seen. Or the massacre that the Mormons planned in the 1800's. (I hope I got all my history right.)
I just found a link and posted it, why not just say "thanks, but I think it's a bad idea". Maybe this one was bad, but it certainly didn't deserve any reply like you posted. Maybe you read it wrong, or maybe I don't see what is wrong with what I posted.
I occasionally post ideas here and every once in a while it seems I have a decent idea.
What elese can we do to stop this? Seriously, if they let LIEberman stay all the goodwill they had with Obama's victory will go down the drain even before January 20.
Out with Reid!
Out with LIEberman!
I think the current leadershp still suffers from Stockholm Syndrome. If tey don't snap out of it soon, well, then they to can be replaced.
He's been a wuss ever since he became majority leader.
Everybody gives Pelosi shit, but the House has passed some good legislation since 2006,.
It all gets killed when it reaches the Senate.
What we get: Another Dem seat in the Senate and an opening for Ned Lamont or another true Dem to challenge Lieberman in 4 years. This would be pragmatism, but shrewd as well.
Just my thought.
I think it is way past being conciliatory toward Lieberman, tell him the political reality, take the sub committee chair or go Mitch McConnell office and have him stroke your ego...
I just find it ironic that Lieberman is whinging about this, given he was probably angling for a top cabinet positions in the hypothetical McCain Cabinet....
I understand what Reid is doing, but to call Lieberman progressive, when he is more than willing to support a conservative Republican as President, and is willing to waste much of US riches on a idiotic crusade in Iraq, is kind of not progressive... Yeah, Lieberman is progressive, He is very progressive in inanity.
Lieberman is a disgrace to the Democratic Party. It's time for him to go join the Republican's and move on...
Change.
Connecticut Democrats didn't think so Harry.
Harry pisses on the base again.
Either way, both Joe and Harry need to go.
I once thought Reid's style was to speak softly and carry a big stick. I now know that he speaks softly and carries very little of anything. Is Reid known for his clout? Is he known for creative use of Senate rules? Maybe a couple of times but nothing that amounted to anything and never any follow through.
He's an OK guy. He has an interesting life story. But he hasn't been and won't be a memorable Senate Majority Leader and we really need one. And we don't need HoJo at all.
If HoJo is so progressive, then how would he be able to compromise his progressive principles by going over to the dark side? Does he stand for progressive principles or not. Doesn't sound like it. McBush certainly wasn't the progressive candidate. And the Repukes can't be wanting him thinking that he's going to be voting for progressive principles. They know he'll vote with them. So HoJo doesn't have any f'ing principles at all.
HoJo is a weasel and Reid finds that acceptable. That sucks.
The Senate Majority Leader at a time of great concern, (so they say, what's our alert level today?), about national security doesn't much care that the Senate Homeland Security Committee Chairman has been running around the country campaigning for the RepubCo candidate for president while the Senate Committee the Chairman chairs basically lies fallow. Very conveniently fallow from ShrubCo's standpoint. Nice work HoJo.
That's showing 'em Harry.
We seriously need to start a campaign to get rid of this ass clown!!!!
This one move would say to the dems, we wont tolerate traitorous acts by our own members.
PROPOSITION 2008 - NO TO HARRY RIED!!!!!
We have this one historic moment with a nice majority in the Senate. Why shouldn't we do everything we can to get each and every vote we can? THere are bound to be some very close votes on coloture on any number of hugely important issues. I for one value the passage of that legislation much more than getting back at Lieberman. MUCH MORE. He may be a traitor to the party, but if its what it takes to get better healthcare, better tax policy, and better energy solutions...then I would be the first to kiss his feet and have him stay in the caucus. He is one more vote. We can't deny the supreme importance of one more vote.
Once we are done using him, and we gain 60 in 2010, then we can dump him. But not now. Not when so much is at stake. Not when I need better healthcare for my family.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-clemons/rem...
He's correct.
You can go there, too, I betcha *wink*
I am not deluded that anyone will read my message, but once they get the gist, they can add it to the tally. What I said is this:
It wd be sickening if Holy Joe gets to keep his committee assignment. Too bad if he votes with you-- he just devoted his whole life, for months, to smearing Obama and backing Insane McCain and his scheming bimbo.
Besides, 1. He's incompetent at handling Homeland Security and has
done nothing to deserve continuing even if he were not a traitor. 2. He did nothing to investigate the most evil, stupid, incompetent law-breaking unimpeached president in history. 3. Before the election started he was already the most hated man on Capitol Hill.
You have spent years now letting Bush/Cheney get away with atrocities, including actual war crimes. Now you're gonna let Lie-berman get away with his crimes?
At some point, don't you have to do something just because it is Right?
Or are you really gonna let this turncoat spend his time investigating the Obama administration in ways we haven't seen since the last Dumocrat was president?
Stop pussyfooting around and looking like a wimp and DO THE RIGHT THING. If he wants to be forever known as the man who left his party after campaigning against the first African-American president because he would rather join the minority than work with the new administration, let him let History have its judgment.
This tergiversation, this vascillating, is pathetic. Dump the bastard. It's not only the right thing to do, it will be wildly popular. And, as lagniappe, as a bonus, it will make the heathen rage.
Meantime, no one cares to ask Al Gore his feeling about this issue?
If Franken wins the recount, those ton of votes leaning against Stevens gets counted, and Martin wins the run off that's 60. That means, quite frankly, Lieberman gets to keep his chair so long as he never votes for cloture. If Franken loses of Chambliss wins his runoff then boot Lieberman as fast as possible but while the hope is alive the slime survives.