Tuesday, November 14, 2006

Dems Give Lieberman A Standing Ovation


There is one major drawback, that I can think of, to the Democrats holding a 51-49 majority in the Senate. Joe Lieberman has way too much power.

The reality of the numbers is that the GOP and Dems have a 49-49 split, with the 2 Independent Senators (Bernie Sanders being the other) agreeing to caucus with the Democrats. If Lieberman goes GOP, on a party line vote, that brings us back to 50-50, with Dick Cheney breaking ties. It obviously would affect control of the individual committees as well.

Still, I found the following piece from CNN disturbing, to say the least:

Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman, who bolted the Democratic party after losing a primary election this year to run as an independent, won a standing ovation at a closed meeting of all Senate Democrats Tuesday.

Lieberman was introduced by Democratic Leader Harry Reid who, according to Lieberman, told his colleagues that, "families go through crisis but we survived and I just want to welcome back Joe Lieberman."

"It's been a helluva year," Lieberman told the group before imploring them to heed the lessons of the midterm election and "be willing to compromise" with Republicans.

Lieberman, who now calls himself an "Independent Democrat," was asked if the warm reception helped remove lingering bitterness from the campaign when many of his closest Democratic allies supported his opponent Ned Lamont.

"You have experiences that naturally affect you. This year in many ways did change me," he said. "But you know, we're all adults and I'll work with everyone in my caucus and the Republican caucus as well.
I guess it will be easier for Sen. Lieberman, now that he has been given chairmanship of the Homeland and Governmental Affairs Committee.

However, Lieberman's comments on Meet The Press should be an affront to every Democrat.

Among his choicer comments from that show:

I want to continue to work to bring the party back to its historic traditions of, of strength on national security, foreign policy and innovation, and progress in domestic policy—the, the Harry Truman/John F. Kennedy Democrat that, that I was raised to be.
In other words, Lieberman feels that the Democrats have it wrong on Iraq and terrorism. Joe will lead us back on the path to military righteousness.

I’ll work with anybody I agree on. I’m not going to—agree with on a matter. I’m not going to look at party labels, I’m going to look at, at what can we get done for our country and my state.
Joe will side with Dems, as long as the party takes the Lieberman position. How good of him.

I’m going to be an optimist, and take some encouragement from the fact that this was an election in which, in the House and Senate, Democrats came to the majority of both chambers by electing moderates mostly. This was an election that might be called the return of the center of American politics. And I think that my colleagues and leaders in the Democratic caucus get that. The fact is that this was not a major realignment election in my opinion.

I'm sure Ohio's Sherrod Brown loved this quote. This was a typically incorrect spin that has been echoed in the media, completely disregarding the many progressives who got elected, as well as the growing voter rejection of socially conservative positions.

I’m not going to start by threatening. I’m going to start by making clear what my priorities are, and I’m going to seek the support of, of my leadership and of members of both political parties.
I guess the threatening comes later.

The voters spoke on Tuesday that they’re unhappy with the status quo. I don’t believe that they, they want us to pick up and leave Iraq, because they know that that would have disastrous consequences on Iraq, the Middle East, and on our security against terrorism.
What exactly about America's eagerness to bring the troops home can Mr. Lieberman not fathom? And how dare he play the GOP game of tying Iraq to the war on terrorism?

And, for this, he gets a standing ovation.

Welcome to the madhouse.

8 comments:

Naomi said...

What a vile little toad is Ho Lieberman!

He knows he can walk all over the Dems and will enjoy it. He can't punish the citizens of Connecticut but he sure can extract his pound of flesh out of the Dems. They are, after all, close and semi-vulnerable. And he'll enjoy every minute of it.

I like the idea of luring Collins and Snowe to cross the aisle. Permanently! Anything that will be a stick in Toadie-Joe's spokes...

And do we only have his word for it that there was a standing ovation? Could he be inflating "polite clapping" with "rock-star cheering"? Or maybe Harry Reid cued everybody to do it...

(Ouch! My tinfoil hat is pinching me)

Naomi

scootmandubious said...

This man has me frustrated Naomi. How on earth did he keep his hide intact?

I guess I am amazed that he thinks it is still possible to equate withdrawing our troops from Iraq with being less secure against terrorists.

How does he get a pass on this garbage?

newpantaloons said...

I agree, Joe Lieberman is a "vile little toad", but if you look at his votes and his campaign contributors, it is obvious that he likes the war in Iraq because it is a barrier between the Middle East and Israel. Or so he thinks. If you look at all the NeoCons in the White House and the Pentagon, you will see policy that favors the protection of Israel and Joe Lieberman knows which side of his bread is buttered and by whom.

SensibleDem said...

Here's the thing. This vote was a vote against Bush and corruption. The only reason the so-called "progressives" that you speak of like Sherrod Brown got elected is because they provided an alternative choice. Voters felt that voting Republican was tantamount to condoning corruption and an ill-conceived war.

On a side note, these hacks are not "progressives". They are protectionists, plain and simple, who have no understanding of the values of free trade for the US economy. Like Lou Dobbs and his "look who's sending jobs overseas" bits on moneyline, its mere populist rhetoric that has no basis in economics whatsoever. If you actually look at the social records of those democrats who recently got elected (which is the true mark of a progressive), there are more anti-abortion, anti-gay marriage, pro-gun democrats in power than ever.

Also, I'm not really sure what all of you are thinking when you advocate immediate withdrawals of US troops. If we leave nothing behind in Iraq, it will descend in to a far more horrific civil war than we have seen so far, pulling in Syria, Iran, and Turkey and completely destabilizing the region.

A withdrawal timetable over the next 2 years makes much more sense as it will force Iraq's government to start working together in earnest, but it is not so short a time period that terrorists will think they only need to up their efforts to push us out and take over.

And finally, newpantaloons, while I have a great distaste and distrust of Lieberman, I would avoid anti-Semitic conspiracy theories if I were you.

Anonymous said...

Just how much weight Joe Lieberman will carry is yet to be seen. Lets not forget that there were a couple of Republicans that have been anti-war almost from the beginning. Lieberman's vote to favor staying the course could very well get lost in the shuffle. Conversely, there are Democrats that could vote to continue the strategy in Iraq. The point is, nobody can predict the future and in no way can predict what will happen tomorrow, let alone months or years from now.

The election proved one thing. The American people want a Congress that will address their needs through compromise on issues and not polarization.

newpantaloons said...

Sensibledem: What I posted was NOT "anti-Semitic conspiracy theories"! It is a well known THEORY, if not a fact, that the war in Iraq was a neoconservative fairy tale of a democratic Iraq that could be viewed as a buffer for Israel in the Middle East and could house US troops for any contingency that might arise. But, perhaps you still believe it was all about weapons of mass destruction!?

Please keep your self-serving comments to yourself and quit trying to label others.

Naomi said...

Ah, newpantaloons, just because it says "sensibledem" doesn't mean he's a Democrat. You know how the right-wing trolls are...

And accusing you of being anti-semitic nails him to the troll wall. Only the right can talk about Israel--but then they never can admit that Israel isn't perfect. They won't allow investigations in the use of weapons we've developed and sold them, such as D.I.M.E. And the European investigation into bomb craters in Lebanon that register the presence of radioactivity. And the use of white phosphorus on Lebanese civilians...

I used to think Israel was a good country. But it has turned into a mean-spirited country and claims that the ME made them that way. My take is that their humanity has gone downhill since January 20, 2001. You can sort out what I mean...

(And tell me, what happened to your old pantaloons? And was there an interim moment when you were sans pantaloons?)

Naomi

Naomi said...

Oops! My French is rusty, as is my French history--

--so pantaloons and culottes and a tired brain now sounds like a come-on...

The French Revolution had a group of "patriots", depending on whose side you were, called "sans culottes"...

Close but no cookie--and an apology for my faux pas.

Naomi