Lieberman to keep Committe Chair

[tricky]

Complete and utter bullshit. Put this useless hack out to pasture. He campaigned against our candidate and our ideals, and will now retain chair of a key committee? bunch of pansy ass democrats

WASHINGTON — Sen. Joe Lieberman will keep his chairmanship of the Senate Homeland Security Committee despite hard feelings over his support for GOP nominee John McCain during the presidential campaign.
The Connecticut independent will lose a minor panel post as punishment for criticizing Obama this fall.
Lieberman's colleagues in the Democratic caucus voted 42-13 Tuesday on a resolution condemning statements made by Lieberman during the campaign but allowing him to keep the Homeland Security Committee gavel. He loses an Environment and Public Works panel subcommittee chairmanship, however.
Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said he was very angry by Lieberman's actions but that "we're looking forward, we're not looking back."
Added Reid: "Is this a time when we walk out of here and say, 'Boy, did we get even?'" said Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev.
Lieberman's grasp on his chairmanship has gotten stronger since President-elect Barack Obama signaled to Democratic leaders that he's not interested in punishing Lieberman for boosting McCain and criticizing Obama during the long campaign.
"This is the beginning of a new chapter, and I know that my colleagues in the Senate Democratic Caucus were moved not only by the kind words that Senator Reid said about my longtime record, but by the appeal from President-elect Obama himself that the nation now unite to confront our very serious problems," Lieberman said after the vote.
Anger toward Lieberman seems to have softened since Election Day, and Democrats didn't want to drive him from the Democratic caucus by taking away his chairmanship and send the wrong signals as Obama takes office on a pledge to unite the country. Lieberman had indicated it would be unacceptable for him to lose his chairmanship.
Lieberman, who was Democratic presidential nominee Al Gore's running mate in 2000, was re-elected in 2006 as an independent after losing his state's Democratic primary. He remains a registered Democrat and aligns with the party inside the Senate.
"It's time to unite our country," said Lieberman supporter Ken Salazar, D-Colo.
On the other side were senators who feel that one requirement to be installed in a leadership position is party loyalty.
"To reward Senator Lieberman with a major committee chairmanship would be a slap in the face of millions of Americans who worked tirelessly for Barack Obama and who want to see real change in our country," Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., said in a statement Friday. "Appointing someone to a major post who led the opposition to everything we are fighting for is not 'change we can believe in.'"

[PETA]

Perhaps the Democrats are trying to hew true to campaign claims that they wished to end partisanship and begin an era of cooperation? If so, let me be the first to say I'm interested to see more and that we must give the Dems and Obama a fair shot before simply condemning them.

[tricky]

There is a difference between cooperation and being a pushover. You can't run a campaign on the premise of "change," and then leave the same asshats in power positions (or nominate them to sec of state). Lieberman clearly stands opposite of where us progressives stand, and to leave him in charge is a stab in the back and a big "fuck you." The senate has no desire to move on after the voters clearly said they wanted change in 2006 and again in 2008.

[charlie brown]

I'm with xian - the democrats are just being dallas djs aka politicians and trying to make conservatives happy

[PETA]

Originally Posted by tricky

There is a difference between cooperation and being a pushover. You can't run a campaign on the premise of "change," and then leave the same asshats in power positions (or nominate them to sec of state). Lieberman clearly stands opposite of where us progressives stand, and to leave him in charge is a stab in the back and a big "fuck you." The senate has no desire to move on after the voters clearly said they wanted change in 2006 and again in 2008.

Ah, so diversity of opinion means "everyone who agrees with us" and therefore change, for Tricky, means everybody better agree with the far left of the party or be shunned for blashepmy. Noted.

FTR - Lieberman sides with the Democrats on all but a small handfull of issues the most notable departure is his hawkish foreign policy. Further, did you really expect him to be a company man after the party that ran him as VEEP turned its back on him in his bid for re-election? He relied on Republicans to retake his seat - not Democrats so a bit of turn about is fair play. It sounds like the party is trying to mend wounds, play nice and hopefully begin a new era in politics that will embody much more cooperation. I'm skeptical of course but so far Obama's done quite a few things that continue to assuage my concerns on a number of issues.... which must give you great pause because I know that's a horrible notion to you. Many of us, however, would like to see it - even those who didn't vote for Obama.

[Dionysos]

Originally Posted by St. Stalin the Apathetic

Perhaps the Democrats are trying to hew true to campaign claims that they wished to end partisanship and begin an era of cooperation?

More like they're waiting to see how the last 3 Senate races turn out and what their numbers look like. Right now things are technically tied with Obama resigning his spot. They can always strip him of his committee chair later.

[PETA]

Originally Posted by Dionysos

More like they're waiting to see how the last 3 Senate races turn out and what their numbers look like. Right now things are technically tied with Obama resigning his spot. They can always strip him of his committee chair later.

dude.... they're not even in office yet. Please let some of us hold out hope that they really meant they wanted to change the way DC does business.

[Dionysos]

Originally Posted by St. Stalin the Apathetic

dude.... they're not even in office yet. Please let some of us hold out hope that they really meant they wanted to change the way DC does business.

I'm sure some of the new ones do, but the ones in power know better.

[PETA]

Originally Posted by Dionysos

I'm sure some of the new ones do, but the ones in power know better.

Listen Mr Cynical.... I mean it. I really do. I'm quite prepared to bash away when I think his policy goes off the cliff but until I have cause I'm quite prepared to sit back and give him his shot so quit kicking dirt on my new shoes.

[Dionysos]

Originally Posted by St. Stalin the Apathetic

Listen Mr Cynical.... I mean it. I really do. I'm quite prepared to bash away when I think his policy goes off the cliff but until I have cause I'm quite prepared to sit back and give him his shot so quit kicking dirt on my new shoes.

In honor of the Socialist-Elect, I've spread your wealth of shoes to my closet. You are now down one right shoe.



i'll be back for the left shoe later

[PETA]

Originally Posted by Dionysos

In honor of the Socialist-Elect, I've spread your wealth of shoes to my closet. You are now down one right shoe.



i'll be back for the left shoe later

I still have them both.... when I lose one I'll be the first to bitch and if he tries to come around for the second I may beat that new puppy to death with it

[tricky]

Originally Posted by St. Stalin the Apathetic

Ah, so diversity of opinion means "everyone who agrees with us" and therefore change, for Tricky, means everybody better agree with the far left of the party or be shunned for blashepmy. Noted.

FTR - Lieberman sides with the Democrats on all but a small handfull of issues the most notable departure is his hawkish foreign policy. Further, did you really expect him to be a company man after the party that ran him as VEEP turned its back on him in his bid for re-election? He relied on Republicans to retake his seat - not Democrats so a bit of turn about is fair play. It sounds like the party is trying to mend wounds, play nice and hopefully begin a new era in politics that will embody much more cooperation. I'm skeptical of course but so far Obama's done quite a few things that continue to assuage my concerns on a number of issues.... which must give you great pause because I know that's a horrible notion to you. Many of us, however, would like to see it - even those who didn't vote for Obama.

Diversity of opinion means "do you see ANYONE being appointed that shares my ultra liberal viewpoint that got obama elected." no one represents the progressive cause. we're getting pushed aside for these clinton has-beens.

Lieberman's hawkish foreign policy? What exactly do you think I like in that......? nothing! He lost his primary and ran as an Independent. He no longer represents the policies of our party, so why should we have supported him? I'm glad you're happy, but that really is the least of my concern. You represent the ideology of yesterday and I really wish he was making decisions that would have you running scared. So when would would be a good time to get that other shoe?

[PETA]

Originally Posted by tricky

Diversity of opinion means "do you see ANYONE being appointed that shares my ultra liberal viewpoint that got obama elected." no one represents the progressive cause. we're getting pushed aside for these clinton has-beens.

Such a pity

Originally Posted by tricky

Lieberman's hawkish foreign policy? What exactly do you think I like in that......? nothing!

Yes, he's a hawk. And yes, I think you like nothing about that.

Originally Posted by tricky

He lost his primary and ran as an Independent. He no longer represents the policies of our party, so why should we have supported him?

Because he does support the majority of your party's principles. As I said the notable departure was foreign policy. For some that issue alone was enough to swing their choice for President. That election is now over. Tossing him over the side would be foolish for the Dems in my opinion. With Congress this close they need his vote and alienating him is no way to get it.

Originally Posted by tricky

I'm glad you're happy, but that really is the least of my concern. You represent the ideology of yesterday and I really wish he was making decisions that would have you running scared. So when would would be a good time to get that other shoe?

I never said I was happy about this. I said Obama has done several things that make me less concerned than I was before.

[zymote]

Personally, I'm really glad that Lieberman didn't lose his committee chairmanship. It was both a magnanimous move on Obama's part, and a very shrewd one. First, it shows directly Obama's commitment to bipartisanship and diversity of opinion. Second, Lieberman is nothing if not loyal - look at how far he went for his good friend John McCain. Now that he owes Obama his political life, he'll spend the next 8 years being quiet and voting with the Dems.

I'm no big Lieberman fan by any means, but it's better to have the votes you need to accomplish your goals, rather than cutting off your nose to spite your face. Obama's just taken another chance to show that he's results oriented, and still the bigger man.

[tricky]

Originally Posted by zymote

Personally, I'm really glad that Lieberman didn't lose his committee chairmanship. It was both a magnanimous move on Obama's part, and a very shrewd one. First, it shows directly Obama's commitment to bipartisanship and diversity of opinion. Second, Lieberman is nothing if not loyal - look at how far he went for his good friend John McCain. Now that he owes Obama his political life, he'll spend the next 8 years being quiet and voting with the Dems.

I'm no big Lieberman fan by any means, but it's better to have the votes you need to accomplish your goals, rather than cutting off your nose to spite your face. Obama's just taken another chance to show that he's results oriented, and still the bigger man.

You may be right in the long run, but it still pisses the hell out of me right now.