home

Pining For A RINO?

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Other Politics
Posted on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 08:47:35 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

From the people who launched Operation Leper (which I think is not wrongheaded BTW), this is pretty funny:

Dear Senator [Lieberman]:

Switch parties. Or at least, be an unhyphenated Independent and caucus with the Senate Republicans. There is no reason to think that you will ever be treated with respect and dignity in the Democratic Caucus again. Even if you seek to make amends for what Senator Reid perceives to be your apostasy, you will always be viewed with suspicion and bitterness by members of the Democratic Caucus.

By contrast, Republicans will welcome you into the fold. . . .

(Emphasis supplied.) Perceived apostasy? Okaaay. Here's the thing, I think Lieberman is, in his heart, a Republican. I do not think he really believes in Democratic principles. I think he is a Democrat by accident of history and where he lived. I actually think he would easily conform himself to the extreme Republican views and will actually not be a RINO. But I always knew Lieberman to be an unprincipled piece of sh*t anyway. Still and all, I would cut a deal with him that he can retain his committee chairmanship as long as he agrees not to block Democratic legislation in any fashion.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

< Obama Wins North Carolina | Bipartisanship and the Well Functioning Democracy – Part One >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Pining For A RINO? | 34 comments (34 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    If I were Reid, I would say something like (5.00 / 0) (#1)
    by andgarden on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 09:05:01 AM EST
    "We've decided to recreate the "District of Columbia Committee", and you're the new chairman!"

    (In days of yore, the DC committee and the Post Office committee were appointments threatened to out of favor members).

    Good idea, but (none / 0) (#3)
    by scribe on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 09:08:44 AM EST
    he'd find a way to use that committee screw up everything in DC just out of spite.

    Like have the traffic lights desynchronized or something.

    Parent

    Cutting a deal with this piece of garbage (5.00 / 0) (#2)
    by scribe on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 09:06:57 AM EST
    isn't worth the breath, time or effort - he'll break it.

    Lie-berman obeys one rule, and one rule only:  what benefits me, I do.  F the rest of you.

    In that regard, he is a perfect Republican.

    Oh - and don't forget his speech at the Munich Conference in 2003, pre-invasion of Iraq but post Powell's speech to the UN, where he said that in going down the road to war with Iraq Bushie was carrying out the McCain-Lieberman policy.  And he took credit for building that policy - with McCain and their fellow-travellers - going back to the late 90s.

    No - Lieberman must be stripped of his gavel.  If he wants to continue to caucus with Dems, fine, but he gets the pimp-hand every time he steps out of line.  Pour encourager les autres.

    And if he goes with the Rethugs - fine, too.  Don't let the door hit you on the way out.  The Dems can pick up filibuster-breakers from among the ranks of Republicans up for re-election in 2010 and coming from purple-blue states.  There are more than a few of those.

    I'll tell you what he's thinking about now: (5.00 / 1) (#4)
    by andgarden on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 09:09:16 AM EST
    how he gets reelected in 2012. You think he can even attempt that as a Republican?

    Frankly, I think he can't do it at all. Not on Connecticut. Maybe he'll move to Florida and run against Bill Nelson (no, he wouldn't win the Republican primary).

    Parent

    He isn't too popular in CT (5.00 / 0) (#5)
    by scribe on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 09:12:03 AM EST
    right about now, and that looks pretty well fixed-in-stone.

    Can't hurt to deprive him of the bully pulpit a chairmanship gives, can it?

    Parent

    No (none / 0) (#6)
    by andgarden on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 09:14:20 AM EST
    but as BTD says, his additional cloture vote is worth more than any minor hassles he might create. That's why I suggest that we leave him his job title, but strip the responsibilities.

    Parent
    Correct (none / 0) (#12)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 09:35:05 AM EST
    If he is willing to agree to not vote for cloture then he can keep his chairmanship.  With a Democratic President that role has little influence.

    Parent
    And who failed to back (none / 0) (#9)
    by BackFromOhio on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 09:29:04 AM EST
    the DEM candidate for CT senate?

    Parent
    SOP (none / 0) (#11)
    by Fabian on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 09:34:24 AM EST
    Stand up for the incumbent or stick his neck out for someone who never did anything for him?

    Parent
    Another idea (5.00 / 0) (#8)
    by Exeter on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 09:23:55 AM EST
    Put Lieberman in charge of a committee where there is no glaring conflict with the new Democratic administration-- such as environment or natural resources. He definitely cannot stay put.

    How in the world (5.00 / 0) (#10)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 09:33:16 AM EST
    is Operation Leper NOT wrongheaded?

    They want to stifle an dissension regarding Sarah Palin?  It is a defense of a cult of personality.

    You spent months criticizing the Lefty blogosphere for their Obamamania.  And now you suggest that RedState is not wrongheaded for openly stating that they will do the exact same thing?

    Sorry for the OT post but I just find that really odd.

    If Lieberman shifts openly to the Republican Party it will be the end of his political career.  He will have 4 more years and then become irrelevant.  He will NEVER get re-elected in Connecticut as a Republican. So he has a choice.  Play ball with the guys in charge or begin his irrelevancy in January.

    He's old enough to retire. (none / 0) (#13)
    by Fabian on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 09:36:22 AM EST
    Of course, his ego will never agree to that.  Some pols hide keep their egos discretely concealed.  Lieberman isn't that modest.

    Parent
    I do not think it is wrong (none / 0) (#14)
    by Steve M on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 09:44:19 AM EST
    for members of the conservative base to resist an effort to make a scapegoat out of Sarah Palin, the icon of the conservative base.

    I can put myself in the shoes of those guys.  From their perspective, what's going on is not a reasoned discussion about the pluses and minuses of Sarah Palin as a candidate.  What's going on is a complete trashing, calling her a "cancer" on the party, and all that.  If I were a member of the Republican base, I'd be like "don't try to blame US for this, we're the best thing you have going."

    Parent

    I understand the reasoning (none / 0) (#19)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 10:39:43 AM EST
    But it seems more than a little ridiculous.

    Nicole Wallace should be a leper?  Wasn't it Sarah Palin's team that "leaked" that it was Nicole Wallace who bought all the clothes for her?

    RedState has had a zero tolerance policy on criticism of Sarah Palin for sometime.  This is just an extension of it.  

    Instead of trying to rebuild their party they want to go after anyone who doesn't find her particularly compelling.  

    There are always scapegoats after an election.  It's how politics works.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#21)
    by Steve M on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 10:50:59 AM EST
    I agree on Nicolle Wallace, she wasn't the one who fired the first shot.

    Parent
    And that's kinda my point (5.00 / 0) (#27)
    by flyerhawk on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 11:55:16 AM EST
    I don't really have a problem with a advocacy group calling out the apostates.  

    But it seems that they are allowing their fawning over Palin to blind them to reality a bit.  Rather than find any criticism of Palin they knee jerk against anyone who has been mean to her.  Not exactly the best way to get the party back together.

    Parent

    This is misguided (5.00 / 1) (#15)
    by BrianJ on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 09:47:18 AM EST
    I think Lieberman is, in his heart, a Republican. I do not think he really believes in Democratic principles. I think he is a Democrat by accident of history and where he lived. I actually think he would easily conform himself to the extreme Republican views and will actually not be a RINO.

    Lieberman's actual record disagrees.  In 2007, there were eighteen Democratic Senators with more conservative voting records, including stalwarts like Tom Carper and Barbara Mikulski.  He's tied with Carl Levin, who's nobody's idea of a conservative.

    http://voteview.com/sen110.htm

    Meh (5.00 / 1) (#16)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 09:56:36 AM EST
    Let me give you a prime example why "voting records" are terribkle guides for this type of thing.

    Lieberman votes for cloture on the bankruptcy bill and then votes against it.

    Reid vote against cloture and then votes for it.

    According to that  - Lieberman is the more liberal.

    I know better. Do you?

    Parent

    "As long as he agrees (5.00 / 2) (#17)
    by brodie on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 10:05:53 AM EST
    not to block Dem legislation"???  Yeah, right.

    This guy cannot be trusted, not after he shifted and slithered after losing to Lamont in the primary in order to maintain power, not after he promised not to speak out against Obama at the RNC.  If the Dems continue to show weakness as Joe kicks sand in our faces, he'll only cause more trouble for us as committee chair as he uses the post to cast doubt on Pres Obama's policies in that area, then as he uses his clout to go on the Sunday windbag shows to further diss the Dems as dangerously weak and inept, etc.

    Sorry, but Reid has to act decisively on this one.  Reid isn't operating here in a political vaccuum both as to the Dem rank and file who are not at all happy with Joe, and as to fellow senate Dems, also not happy, whose support he needs to continue as ML.  

    I expect him to act to strip Joe of his Homeland chair -- wimpy half-measures short of that will not do.  He can be allowed for the moment, upon good behavior, to caucus with Dems, perhaps even chair an obscure subcommittee on maritime matters.  

    Ideally I'd like to see the Dems convene and have a formal "stripping" ceremony, whereby Joe stands before the caucus and Reid sternly itemizes the instances of party treason and announces the decision, and then compels Joe to literally hand over his comm'ee gavel.  Reid would then produce an old boxing glove from his glory days and strike Joe sharply on each cheek, sorta like they do in the military demotion ceremonies I've seen in the old John Ford cavalry movies.  D. A. Pennebaker would be there to film the proceedings for his cinéma vérité documentary feature film on the Winners and Losers of Election 2008.  

    Chairs can't be stripped in mid session (none / 0) (#22)
    by digdugboy on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 10:54:37 AM EST
    under Senate rules. You're right. Lieberman cannot be trusted to keep his word. Take his chairmanship away and neuter him as much as possible. If he decides to caucus with the republicans then he seals his fate in Connecticut in 2012, on the extremely remote chance that it isn't sealed already.

    Parent
    I read somewhere this morning (none / 0) (#33)
    by oldpro on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 01:53:43 PM EST
    that Reid offered him a subcommittee chair and he rejected it.

    A negotiation or standoff.  Time will tell but apparently they're not going to let him continue as chair in any case.  Not after this campaign/election.

    Hard to say what the caucus is telling Reid at this point...maybe give it a little time to sink in with Lieberman until he can read the handwriting on the wall.

    My bet is that then he gets an ultimatum from Reid.  Fish or cut bait.

    Parent

    Listened to Lieberman on NPR (none / 0) (#7)
    by Fabian on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 09:19:41 AM EST
    this morning.  They tossed in his bit at the RNC.  He's a Republican in DINO's clothing.  I'd treat him like one.

    (a Democrat by accident of history and location could describe more than Joe)

    Wounded animals (none / 0) (#18)
    by KeysDan on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 10:38:27 AM EST
    have difficulty contributing to the pack, being self-absorbed with their injury.  Tough choice, but, to me,  the humane thing is to set the Independent Senator from Conn.  free to make his way anew in the Republican wilderness.

    Harry Reid should stop threatening (none / 0) (#20)
    by oculus on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 10:50:28 AM EST
    if he isn't going to do anything.  Sounds pathetic.

    Let Joe Stau (none / 0) (#23)
    by Let Joe Stay on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 11:16:08 AM EST
    Joseph Liberman has sided with the Democrats on almost all domestic issues.  He only disagees with them when it comes to foreign policy.  The news of yetserday's meeting between Senator Joseph Lieberman and Senator Harry Reid has gotten me worried, to say the least.  As a supporter of Senator Lieberman I am offended by the threats from Senator Harry Reid and many of his Democratic colleagues to strip Senator Lieberman of his Chairmanships simply because he chose his friendship with John McCain over party politics.  In repose to these threats, I have set up the a blog, Let Joe Stay (http://letjoestay.blogspot.com/) with the hope of mobilizing like minded people to contact their Senators as well as Senator Reid and inform them not to put their pettiness ahead of what's right.  Senator Lieberman is the best man for these Chairmanships and to remove him would be foolish.  I understand many of you are angry that he did not support our party's candidate, but Colin Powel did not support his party's candidiate either and is viewed as being above partisanship.  Although we may disagree with Sen. Lieberman's choice, I believe he should not be punished for doing what he believes is right.  No criticism of President-elect Obama which he offered was any worse or more biting that what Sen. Biden or Sen. Clinton said durring the primaries. If this is truly the time for hope and change, then Sen. Reid should forgive and forget and allow Joseph Lieberman to keep his Chairmanship.  I hope some of you see this my way.  Thank you.

    You signed up just to post... (none / 0) (#24)
    by MileHi Hawkeye on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 11:28:17 AM EST
    ...this drivel?  Spare us the concern trolling and keep it at your own "blog".

    Also, you might want to look into these things called "paragraphs".  They help if you want to be taken seriously.

    Parent

    Colin Powell is not an elected (none / 0) (#28)
    by Radiowalla on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 11:57:00 AM EST
    official so your comparison falls flat.  

    Democrats found Lieberman's support for McCain to be truly offensive and hurtful.  These are not wounds that can be so easily dismissed.  There was no reason whatsover for him to fall all over himself to glorify the opposition candidate.    If he feels so strongly about the Republicans, then he should become one.  That would show a lot more integrity in my view.  

    Parent

    Interesting (none / 0) (#30)
    by Steve M on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 12:04:12 PM EST
    GLENN BECK: Do you agree that with Senator Hatch -- I've only got a minute before a network break. I hope we can hold you here. But do you agree that Senator Hatch said to me that if we don't at least have the firewall of the filibuster in the Senate that in many ways America will not survive.

    SENATOR LIEBERMAN: Well, I hope it's not like that, but I fear. And I think for some of us there is a key. You know, it gets a bad name but it was really put there, a 60-vote requirement as somebody said to me when I first came to the Senate, stop the passions of a moment among the people of America from sweeping across the congress, the House, to the Senate and to a like minded President and having us do things that will change America for a long time. So the filibuster is one of the great protections we have.

    "America will not survive" if Republicans aren't able to filibuster?  That's the guy you're defending?

    Parent

    Actions have consequences (none / 0) (#25)
    by mmc9431 on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 11:38:26 AM EST
    The Democratic tent can't be that big. A Democratic senator that spends a year campaigning for a Republican admin shouldn't be allowed to continue in his role. He made his choice. Now he needs to live with the consequences.

    I really think he'd retire if he's dumped. He hasn't any support left in Conn. The Republican's already have purged most of their moderates from the party. They won't want him. He has nowhere to go. He's become a distraction and embaressment to the party. The sooner he's gone the better.

    Lieberman's energetic campaigning for the (none / 0) (#26)
    by Radiowalla on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 11:50:08 AM EST
    opposition candidate is truly disgraceful.  
    But what to do about it isn't so clear to me.

    Here is a quote from Politico:  
    "Lieberman argued "that he had been a loyal vote on everything except Iraq, gave them the majority [by caucusing with Democrats], had contributed generously to the Democratic senate campaign committee and voted with the Democrats in greater margin than several of his colleagues over the past two years."

    Strategically and pragmatically, I would tend to ignore Lieberman.  Just as I would have preferred to ignore him in '06 and concentrate on taking down Republicans.  Personally and emotionally, I would like to see him kicked out of the caucus and shunned.

    Re: "Pining for a RINO" (none / 0) (#29)
    by oculus on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 12:00:07 PM EST
    Noticeable trend towards pithy, amusing titles lately.  Keep up the good work.

    Fillibuster (none / 0) (#31)
    by Let Joe Stay on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 12:56:00 PM EST
    "'America will not survive' if Republicans aren't able to filibuster?  That's the guy you're defending?"

    The Senate would be in trouble is the minority party (whoever that may be) cannot exercise the filibuster option.  That was why Senator McCain joined the Gang of 14: to STOP the Republicans from using the "nuclear option" and ending the Democrats ability to use the filibuster.  

    Hello??? (none / 0) (#32)
    by Steve M on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 01:41:46 PM EST
    The question was not whether the Senate would be in trouble.  The question was whether AMERICA WOULD SURVIVE.  And the context was not whether the filibuster should exist in the abstract, but whether it would be dangerous to America if the Democrats got a filibuster-proof majority.

    The House has no filibuster at all and somehow America soldiers on.  What you're accomplishing here is showing us exactly what sort of person defends Joe Lieberman and his inexcusable remarks.

    Parent

    Well (none / 0) (#34)
    by DancingOpossum on Fri Nov 07, 2008 at 02:36:12 PM EST
    Technically he wasn't shilling for the opposition's candidate since he's not officially a Democrat anymore, right? (He's an "Independent Democrat," LOL.)

    So the comparison with Powell really is apt, as is the comparison with the other warmongering neocon Republicans (e.g. Ken "Cakewalk" Adelman) who backed Obama, and which was portrayed by some as proof of Obama's impressive ability to reach across the aisle.In that light, Lieberman was merely reaching a little further across the aisle. The "elected official" qualifier doesn't wash. If a bunch of highly-placed officials from a former Dem administration had backed McCain your outrage would be just as loud.  

    Pining For A RINO? | 34 comments (34 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment