Joe will caucus with GOP if he feels uncomfortable with Democrats.

[madfloridian]

I think we should not pamper so much. Let's let him do what he needs to do. All the Dems would be holding their breath trying not to offend. That is an impossible situation. Just let him go and do his thing.

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2006/11/13/lieberman_wont_rule_out_gop_caucusing/

"WASHINGTON -- Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut said yesterday that he will caucus with Senate Democrats in the new Congress, but he would not rule out switching to the Republican caucus if he starts to feel uncomfortable among Democrats.

Lieberman, a Democrat who won reelection as an independent, also said he wants to be called an Independent Democrat.

With many Senate Democrats having campaigned or raised money for Lamont, as the party's nominee, Lieberman acknowledged that it might be "a little awkward" for him back in Washington.

"They played by the traditional partisan political playbook. And I can't say I enjoyed it, but we're all grown-ups, we've got a job to do, and I'm going to do my best to get that job done," Lieberman said."

He is bitter, and it could get very touchy indeed if all our Democrats are walking on pins and needles.

What Joe has done has changed my way of looking at things in the long run. I am a lifelong Democrat, but there will be plenty of them to vote for who did not cater to Joe. In 08 I will have no dearth of people to vote for.

It changed my view:
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/madfloridian/624

[Erika]

1. Let him get the hell out of the democratic party

He can bathe in a Zell Miller light for a while. Connecticut wants a Dem, not a GOP. He got 70% of the GOP vote, very little of the dem vote. Let him get the hell out of the party.

[aquart]

2. Well, who thought Lieberman would be that petty?

Is there anyone here NOT raising a hand?

He wants to be called an Independent Democrat instead of Bought-and-Paid-For-Republican-Stooge? Dear me, we must try to remember that.

[indepat]

20. My, my, has the complicit enabler got his feelings hurt? Joe needs a big red T painted

on his forehead. :crazy:

[lapfog_1]

3. What we really need is one more Dem seat in the senate.

Somehow... talk up the nomination of any Republican Senator to posts within the administration where said Republicans come from a state that has a Democratic governor.

Attempt to bribe some other moderate Republican with committee chairmanships or whatever to switch to Democratic or Independent.

Other ideas?

[hijinx87]

4. first off, I think this is a bluff

lieberman wouldn't be even slightly comfortable as a rethug; his
ADA liberal quotient is over 80, as I recall.

having said that, however, he's got us. we need him much more than
he needs us. if he flips, the senate flips back. we should find out
what he wants, hold our collective nose, and give it to him.

edited for spelling.

[Erika]

5. Both Collins and Snowe could come over to the Dems

The Hell with Joe.

[hijinx87]

7. interesting you should mention snowe and collins

I was just reading an article on the two of them.

http://www.timesrecord.com/website/main.nsf/news.nsf/0/7D6AB8091993BABB05257225006030B1?Opendocument

also interesting is that collins will have to give up the gavel of the
homeland defense committee to . . . . joe lieberman.

[nickinSTL]

35. heh...offer Snowe the opportunity to keep it...

if she switches.

Then, she keeps her chair, and we don't need Joe.

[hijinx87]

42. exactly.

that was my first thought as well. if it turns out that lieberman is
trying to "better deal" us, maybe we should be working in the background
to beat them to the punch.

or just give joe whatever he wants to remain a democrat. :mad:

[orleans]

25. and if collins & snowe don't come over to our side? and joe goes

R...then who controls the senate??

it's a fucked up situation, and as much as he pisses me off...i'm not ready to kiss the senate goodbye.

[Hardrada]

10. I agree. Talk to him. See what he wants.

just like we should do with Kim Jong-Il.

[FrenchieCat]

6. Isn't there a sick Senator on the GOP side from a state with a Dem Govenor?

Craig?

Statement from the Office of U.S. Senator Craig Thomas:

November 9th, 2006 - U.S. Senator Craig Thomas today announced that he has been diagnosed this week with a form of leukemia. Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) is a cancer of the blood and bone marrow. AML is the most common type of leukemia. More than 16,500 new cases occur in the United States each year.

Thomas had experienced energy losses over the last few weeks and was diagnosed with pneumonia Sunday. Further tests Sunday indicated low white cell levels, explaining the pneumonia but not the source of the blood cell anomaly. In preparation of Monday votes and party leadership elections on Nov. 15, Thomas flew to Washington DC to pursue further blood testing this week.
http://thomas.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=639&Type=Press%20Release
------------
David D. Freudenthal: Wyoming Governor, Democrat
http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m2519/is_4_24/ai_100543180

I'm just sayin'! :shrug:

[hijinx87]

8. okay, that's pretty morbid. n/t

[FrenchieCat]

9. Yes....but,

It is a fact, not a wish.

I'll pray for him, but God don't make mistakes.

[hijinx87]

12. I admit you piqued my curiosity

but it sounds fairly routine.

Thomas was diagnosed with acute myeloid
leukemia, the most common form of the disease.

Dr. Brian Monahan, director of hematology and medical oncology
at the National Naval Medical Center, said in the release that
the disease usually can be forced into remission in people in
Thomas' "great physical condition."

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2641763

[California Griz]

13. Give the guy a break already

He's just making the Democrats squirm a little. The party abandoned him I don't begrudge him a little payback. We need him on our side. It would be political suicide for him to switch parties and he knows it.

[FredScuttle]

30. The party abandoned HIM? Huh?

Remind me again...who was the DEMOCRATIC Senate candidate from Connecticut this year?

That asshole didn't get abandoned...he lost his party's primary. Fuck him and his self-serving bluff.

[snowbear]

11. I heard about that on the radio...

They said that even though he was just elected.. it was highly uncertain if he could fulfill his obligation to the senate.

Doesn't each state have different laws on how the U.S. Senate seats are filled?

For example... because the disgusting (out of a job next month) governor of Alaska appointed his daughter, we voted to make certain a governor here could no longer appoint that position and that it had to go to an emergency election.

I also read that in West Virginia.. if God forbid Senator Byrd cannot complete his 6 year term he was just elected to.. that the highly popular Democratic Governor, Joe Manchin (who wants the job) can appoint himself.. http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2006/01/05/05n_manchin_narrowweb__300x309,0.jpg

That wouldn't be a pick up.. but Manchin does get to make the selection if needed.. :shrug:

[FrenchieCat]

14. Now, you know I'm gonna "borrow" that praying avatar, larissa.....

don't you?

I am after all a true joe Biden to your Wes Clark! :)

[snowbear]

16. Of course you can borrow.. steal.. heist.. ANY of those smilies!

If you (or anyone else here didn't) I'd slap U silly!

~~~~

Oh.. p.s. On the test that someone else put on here today, I didn't copy & share my results like everyone else because.. =GULP= .. speaking of Biden, he came in as number 1 on my list.

How the hell did that happen !?!? BIDEN !?!?

[Behind the Aegis]

15. I am not too sure about this.

However, I have seen a few posts that indicate the law of Wyoming requires the governor to replace the Senator, should it come to that, with someone of the same party as the departing senator. I don't know that for "fact," but I have seen it many times here.

[hijinx87]

17. you're exactly right.

what an unusual law.

Utah and Wyoming require the governor
to select an interim senator from a list
of three candidates proposed by the state
central committee of the political party with
which theprevious incumbent was affiliated.

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:IOXoQBEGvYIJ:www.senate.gov/artandhistory/history/resources/pdf/Vacancies.pdf+in+the+event+of+the+death+of+a+senator+wyoming&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=21

so, FrenchieCat, he can die all he wants to, and
we still won't accomplish anything. :evilgrin:

[Behind the Aegis]

21. Thanks for the backup.

Now, if I see this again, I will know it is not just my imagination. :)

[snowbear]

22. What the phuck kind of law is that !?!?!?

Give ---- Me ---- A ---- Freakin' ---- Break!

That is seriously one bizarre law.

So here's what the Democrat who ran against the ill senator should do.

*** Immediately change registrations to r-THUG now.

*** Should the (morbid) but reality occur, the Democratic Governor can then appoint the Democrat--turned--Republican who lost the recent election.

*** After he's in, he switches back.

Problem solved...

[hijinx87]

23. no kidding

for all intents and purposes, the state political party
selects the senator. how undemocratic can you get?

[Shrek]

38. That won't work

The governor is allowed to select from a list of 3 candidates supplied by the state party appartus.

Wyoming statute.

It's doubtful the state party would nominate anyone who recently switched from (D) to (R).

[izzie]

18. He has let it go to his head and fast. I hate to tell Joe but

I am willing to bet blackmail will not work. He has already made his point and no Dem. or GOP is going to let this guy push them around even if he likes war. I will bet he will just be walked around by both sides and soon. Funny how these people become sort of no one.

[hijinx87]

19. if he is looking to cut a deal

then control of the senate hinges on which way he goes. and
you had better believe that if that is the case, blackmail will
work beautifully.

[izzie]

29. But he will have to play both sides in this.

He could sell out to the GOP but could he go off every thing he has once voted on to stay with them? I think not and that means he would have to play on both sides. I am betting he wants to stay in the Sen. and if he goes GOP will he be-able to run in 6 years. Course power is such a sexy thing one hates to say what people will do for it so you may be right about it all. He is not the first that will say they think this way or that way to get into office and change if you hand them a clapping hand or a dime.

[Larry Allen]

24. If he had made that statement one week earlier

Lamont would be senator elect. If he had said he couldn't rule out becoming a republican, democrats and independents would not have voted for him.

[cali]

26. Oh, hang it up, MF.

Can you do anything about it? No. Do you have any say whatsoever in Reid's strategy re Joe? No. This endless whining about Joe serves no purpose.

[madfloridian]

33. There we go...that word "whining". Joe is the whiner, not me.

I am tired of that word being used against those who really care about the party and its goals and meaning.

I am not the whiner, Joe is. You should be ashamed for calling me the whiner.

Joe whines like a little baby when he doesn't get his way.

When someone calls me a whiner when I care so much about my party, I get suspicious of their motives.

My motives are to stop our Democrats from rubber-stamping that right wing agenda that took us into an invasion that is devastating our resources.

What our your motives? Joe is the whiner, I am NOT a whiner. If you call me a whiner then I wonder.

[FredScuttle]

45. Amen MF

Dems should call this rat bastard on his bluff.

[madfloridian]

34. And no, I won't hang it up. Joe wants to continue the war.

He is whining because we as Democrats don't love our little president more...no, I will not hang it up.

[TomClash]

27. "They played by the traditional partisan political playbook."

Maybe that's because they're in a political party.

[LeftishBrit]

28. Though I'm far away, I'm prepared to bet money that he won't switch in the end

(1) He loses his bargaining power if he rules out the possibility of switching - just as the leader of a tiny party would in a coalition with larger parties in a Europaean parliament. So he keeps the option open. But that's not saying he seriously means to do so.

(2) If the Republicans really wanted him to switch, they'd have made him do so IMO when they abandoned their candidate for him.

(3) The Republican leaders can do more with him as their 'pet donkey' making them look bipartisan, than as a rebellious Republican. Their symbol may be an elephant, but their ideal party member seems to be a cloned sheep. I suspect that even now they are muttering that "the only good thing about this election is we won't have to deal with Chafee any more". They don't want another likely rebel.

(4) Yes, they might get control of the senate - but probably not for the full 2 years, as he'd be ready to switch again at any time.

(5) In the unlikely event that he does switch parties, he may well end up in the political history books with the dubious distinction of being the only incumbent senator to have been dumped in a primary election by BOTH parties.


I may be utterly wrong, but I'm prepared to bet on it, and I'll make an extra donation to DU if I am proved wrong.

[trogdor]

31. Let him go.

What good does it do kissing his ass? At what point does kissing his ass make us look bad? Most importantly, at what point does kissing his ass render our one-seat majority worthless? Joe should be welcome to caucus with the Democrats, BUT - he should not, under any circumstances, be allowed to hold the caucus hostage.

[MonkeyFunk]

32. No thanks....

I'd rather have a Democratic majority in the Senate than the satisfaction of showing Joe what's what.

[Deep13]

36. Okay, I've got an overstuffed recliner on order for him.

He out to be comfortable in that. A few committee chairmanships and the swallowing of ones pride is a small price for a Senate majority.

[cmkramer]

37. Slim and none

Those are the chances that Joe will actually end up with the Republicans. The only way I see it happening is if the extreme leftists take over the Democratic party and crazily enough, the Republicans start looking like moderates and sane people. And in that case, I think you'd see a few more defections.

[TSIAS]

51. Who in the Senate is an "extreme leftist"?

Maybe we need more Democratic "Centrists", in the mold of Strom Thurmond and Zell Miller.

[LeftishBrit]

52. Not trying to be snarky, but yes, who is 'extreme leftist'?

By my standards, even Bernie Sanders isn't; but for the sake of argument, I'll grant you him. Who else?

[cmkramer]

54. No

What I mean is that if the Dailykos and Firedoglake types and anyone else who whored for Ned Lamont becomes the dominant voice of the party to the point where moderates and even just plain sane liberals feel uncomfortable, then I can see Lieberman defecting. But that would also have to include the Republicans becoming a moderate party themselves.

[bigwillq]

39. It's all about his ego.

Pay no mind to him. The more we waste our time talking about him, the more time the media wastes talking about him, he'll feel he's so important and that his vote really can swing the Senate.

Maybe if we stop talking about him, he'll realize he's really insignificant on the broad scope of things and he'll chill out a bit.

[Little Star]

40. Bull Crap! Joe is not going to give up his seniority!

Turn Repug or even caucus with them, he then starts at the back of the the line again. He is much to arrogant to let that happen, mark my words.

[Cha]

47. lieman just wants the Dems to make it

Really Really COMFORTABLE for him.

[AussieDave]

41. In the end, I don't believe Holy Joe will go anywhere - it's all puffery

An interesting post from Josh Marshall's Talking Points Memo:

".....when I finally got a look at the next round of 2008 Senate seats. Barring an orgy of retirings to run for President, there is a real liklihood that the Dems could hold their numbers . . . and pick up a number of R seats as well . . .

I think Joe sees this and realizes sure, he could switch parties - but in two years, he'll be back in the minoity, and just like that - not only would he be completely irrelevant, but Meet the Press would stop calling."

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/011109.php

Lieberman hasn't gone to all this trouble just to leave the Senate in 6 years (which is exactly what would happen if he switched to the GOP - CT voters would kick his ass out in a heartbeat).

He'll huff and he'll puff - but he'll play the hand he's been dealt.

[grizmaster]

43. traitor joe, showing his colors again

[nadinbrzezinski]

44. He caucuis wiht the GOP he looses senirority

and in two years when more dems should come in, he's SOL

[Cha]

46. Is this what joe lieberman said on the campaign

trail?

"Senator Joseph I. Lieberman of Connecticut said yesterday that he will caucus with Senate Democrats in the new Congress, but he would not rule out switching to the Republican caucus if he starts to feel uncomfortable among Democrats."

Is that what he told the Dems in Connecticut who voted for him? Or is this just since he won and got back to D.C. by hook or by crook?

[rman]

48. What if dems are uncomfortable with Joe?

[Riddler]

49. He's just going to milk this for all it's worth.

He was nothing but a Republican in sheep's clothing pretending to be a Democrat to begin with, that's why we didn't trust or support him. Somebody should tell him that if he thinks he can extort or blackmail the entire Democratic Senate into succumbing to his whims then he needs to just go on and caucus with the repukes because we don't want or need self-serving pretend democrats.

[LeftishBrit]

50. Just noted that 2 out of 3 Connecticut Republicans lost their seats to Dems

and the third nearly did so.

I think that in itself will be quite a deterrent to his switching parties. He's a nasty hawk, but his main ambition in life seems to be to keep his seat, not to become a Republican. Looks like being a Republican wouldn't serve his main ambition!

[MasonJar]

53. Well, he won't have a chairmanship over there.

[CabalPowered]

55. After watching Star Wars episode 3 last night

I'm convinced Lieberman, in a future life, will be a Sith Lord. He looks like Senator Palpatine... err.. Lord Sidious.

[Silent3]

56. That's a ridiculously cavalier attitude.

"Just let him go and do his thing." Are you nuts?

That you don't like Lieberman, and apparently think he "might as well" be a Republican isn't that important. I'm not crazy about Lieberman either, but for some reason, I don't feel the need to express my distaste in a wildly self-defeating manner.

Are you prepared, just to satisfy your anger at Lieberman, GIVE UP CONTROL OF THE SENATE???

As long as Lieberman CAUCUSES with Democrats, even if the f*cker then goes on to vote with Republicans 99% of the time, DEMOCRATS STILL RETAIN CONTROL OF THE SENATE. Every SINGLE BILL needs to be approved by committees RUN BY DEMOCRATS before they even reach the Senate floor for Lieberman to have a chance to vote on the bills the way a Republican might.

Think confirmation hearings. Think Alito. Think Roberts. Think of how old the liberal Justice Paul Stevens is (86 years old). Think about who Bush would pick to replace him. Many important votes have been 4-5/5-4 these days.

Is your anger at Lieberman so great you'd give up control of the Senate to satisfy that anger? Are you so very annoyed about the idea of any Democrat even giving Lieberman the time of day that you'd rather sending him off packing to the Republicans than, oh, say prevent the takeover of the Supreme Court by the likes of Scalia for the next 20 years?

Please...

1) Learn how the Senate works.
2) Learn what CAUCUS means, and how it's often much, much more important that individual votes on individual issues.
3) Get some f*cking perspective.