The Verdict Is In: Joe Must Go

On June 25, Brave New Films launched Lieberman Must Go, their petition drive urging the Senate Democratic Steering Committee to boot Joe Lieberman from the Democratic caucus. The petition reads:

We CANNOT tolerate a leader of the Senate Democratic Caucus who supports George Bush and McCain's War in Iraq. We CANNOT tolerate a Democratic chairman of the Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee who endorses and stumps for McCain. We call on the Senate Democratic Steering Committee to strip Joe Lieberman of his chairmanship and his leadership role.

2 weeks later, 43,460 and counting have signed and tomorrow Brave New Films will deliver the petitions to the steering committee.

The Hill has it:

Liberal activists say they will deliver a 43,000-signature online petition to Democrats on Wednesday seeking to strip Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) of his rank and Homeland Security Committee chairmanship in the next Congress.

More From The NY Times Caucus blog:

The group's goal is not to have Mr. Lieberman kicked out now - the Democrats need his vote to keep their slim majority - but in 2009, presuming the party picks up more seats in November.

The leadership isn't likely to embrace the idea - at least not right now. Democrats generally respected Mr. Lieberman's support for the war and Mr. McCain as principled stands. But they have become increasingly irritated with him, particularly after he went on a conference call sponsored by the McCain campaign last month characterizing the presumed Democratic nominee, Senator Barack Obama, as weak on Israel.

Harry Reid, the leader of the Democratic majority who is close with Mr. Lieberman, typically replies to questions about Mr. Lieberman's membership by saying that Democrats need his 51st vote. That leaves unsaid what might happen if they have more than 51 votes come next year.

What happens is that Joe Lieberman becomes essentially irrelevant, except to the extent that he holds a committee chairmanship, which really is the goal here -- to put it in the hands of a real Democrat. Seriously, Lieberman's embrace of McCain and his apparent plans to speak at the Republican convention in September really should disqualify him from being considered a true member of our caucus. You served a purpose, Joe, but now you must go.

And hey, how better to ensure that Lieberman's vote is irrelevant than to help us get to 60 senators not counting Lieberman. That means 10 new Democratic senators in 08. I think it's doable, especially if we support our Road To 60 Senate candidates.



Display:


He doesn't care of course! (2.00 / 1)

He's banking his future on being part of a McCain cabinet. If McCain loses, he'll just have to take his lumps and caucus with the Republicans. . . .

unless the inevitable happens, and the Democratic leadership all agree to let bygones be bygones and forgive Joe and forget everything he's done.

Then it will all happen again starting next January, when Holy Joe will be back on all the news channels attacking President Obama's Iraqi withdrawal plans, and calling him weak on terrorism.

I'm betting on a huge cave-in and they all agree to kiss Joe's feet once again while he laughs at them and calls them names.

That's our sell-out Democrats for you. They never learn.


by Cugel on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 01:31:15 AM EST

Re: The Verdict Is In: Joe Must Go (none / 0)

Great! Joe must Go A.S.A.P.


by Politicalslave on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 01:49:30 AM EST

Re: The Verdict Is In: Joe Must Go (2.00 / 1)

Joe has done many wrongs

1) He has clung to the defense that his stand on Iraq should not be the reason for being attacked because it is only one issue. But at the same time, he has had no qualms demonizing people who have differed with him on this one issue alone.

  1. He said he would support a Democcratic nominee for President. He lied. Since he claimed that one issue wasnt good enough to abandon him, why is he abandoning Obama for McCain even after Obama supported him in the primary?
  2. Lieberman has been derelict in his responsibilities as Chairman of the Homeland Security committee by being soft on all the wrong doers because he does not want to alientate the Bushies on Iraq.
  3. Lieberman is just an asshole


by Pravin on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 02:07:24 AM EST

Re: The Verdict Is In: Joe Must Go (none / 0)

Why not add his "Hillary for McCain spiel to the list of reasons to detest the man.

From the pool report of a (Bryn Mawr) PA McCain fundraiser 6/30/08:

Lieberman gave an enthusiastic plug for his friend, quipping that since Hillary Morgan was co-hosting the event, he could use this as a talking point when people mused on whether allies of Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.) would back a Republican presidential candidate this fall.

"People ask me whether there are friends of Hillary supporting McCain. From now on, I can tell them, `I was at a tent full of friends of Hillary supporting McCain,'" he said, adding that the fact that the campaign had raked in $1.5 million demonstrated his bid was gathering support. "That's a kind of market statement for a free market guy, that people believe in him."

Emphasis mine.


A drink whenever Palin makes a well-argued, semantically intact, logical and lucid argument -- or WASILLA for short.
by January 20 on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 04:41:05 AM EST

The Democratic Party insiders like Lieberman (none / 0)

I hate to have to be the one to point this out, but the insiders who control the Democratic Party - the ones who greased telecom immunity through over the last 2 weeks - LIKE Joe Lieberman.  They think his views on many issues, including Iraq, are correct and don't back him publicly only due to fear of their "lefty" constituents.  They aren't going to punish him in any way shape or form no matter what the outcome of the 2008 election is; quite the opposite in fact.

sPh


by sphealey on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 07:15:27 AM EST

With this capitulating Senate? (none / 0)

I fully expect the same Senators that are selling out our constitution and shielding a law breaking president will find some way to elect Lieberman Senate leader.  


by temptxan on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 09:36:54 AM EST

Re: The Verdict Is In: Joe Must Go (none / 0)

With Kay Hagen down 14 points?

Well I suppose. Doable, but not easy.


by MNPundit on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 10:37:06 AM EST

Re: The Verdict Is In: Joe Must Go (none / 0)

I have to believe Lieberman holds a deep and abiding grudge and even hatred towards the Democratic Party for leaving him "stranded" and backing Ned Lamont, even though Lamont beat him nine ways to Sunday in the Dem Primary in CT.

Lieberman owes his cushy seat in the Senate to Karl Rove, who noticed Holy Joe getting his teeth kicked in and saw an opportunity to secure some votes and a chance to foster weakness, instability, and chaos in the Democratic Party's power structures.

Lieberman holds hostage that Committee Chairmanship in Homeland Security.  During and since Katrina, and after the egregious screw-ups by Republicans in organizing, leading, and managing that Department, it remains visibly symbolic of the wildly inept and criminally negligent style of the GOP in handling anything of substance.

Rove knows it's a black eye, and an extreme liability to the GOP at all levels; local, state, and national, and he knew he needed a loyal henchman in there to seal that breach.

Enter Lieberman.  

The GOP spent BIG bucks and political capital in CT securing for him his seat in the Senate, and Holy Joe has not and will not forget who expects payments due for his Senate Clubroom key and the full array of his Senator perks.

And he will not hesitate to plunge the knife into the Democratic Party deep and twist it at every opportunity, and enjoy it.


by dembluestates on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 10:40:53 AM EST

Joe must go (none / 0)

Because he is willing to sacrifice most of his positions and principles for the sake of what he believes (wrongly in my view) is best for Israel.   He is putting the needs of Israel over the needs of the US.


by activatedbybush on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 10:48:37 AM EST

Okay Reporters, for the Freakin' Thousandth Time (none / 0)


ARGH!

The Dems DO NOT NEED Joe's vote right now to maintain the majority!

The consent agreement voted on at the opening of the senate explicitly states that regardless of what happens within the two year period regarding caucusing, no re-alignment. In short, power cannot change.

The 2000/Jeffords changeover was unique in that the 2000 consent agreement had a special rule in it specifically stating that power would flip should the numbers change. I think it was essentially a sop after all the machinations in Florida, but I could be wrong.

Reporters: The Dems do not need Joe's vote right now to maintain the majority. Please write that sentence over and over until you get it.

Thanks.


by alteran on Wed Jul 09, 2008 at 12:55:23 PM EST


You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.