Should Joe Lieberman Be Allowed To Caucus With The Democrats?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

Poll question: Should Joe Lieberman Be Allowed To Caucus With The Democrats?

The reason Harry Reid is the Democratic Majority leader is because Joe Lieberman chooses to caucus with the Democrats...If Joe Lieberman chose to caucus with the Rethuglicans Trent Lott would be the Majority Leader and the Rethuglicans would be the committee leaders...

That being said I share the late Arthur Schlesinger Jr.'s assessment that Joe Lieberman is a "sanctimonious prick."

Should Joe Lieberman be allowed to caucus with the Democrats?

[mmonk]

1. I sent contributions to Lamont.

I don't think Lieberman needs to even be in the Senate.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. That's A Different Question

DSB

[mmonk]

15. No it doesn't but I don't want him to feel he has some sort

of balance of power. Anyone who backs bush/Cheney I consider a political opponent anyway and don't look for help from him.

[Warren Stupidity]

3. Too late for this term. Done deal.

If the senate has 51 Democratic votes in 09 without the sanctimonious prick then they should politely invite him to go sit with his friends.

[rinsd]

7. Yup

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. Maybe This Will Give You A Chuckle

Arthur Schlesinger was at an event with Hillary Clinton during "L'affaire Lewinsky" after Lieberman ripped Bill Clinton a new one on the Senate floor for his affair..Joe's name came up and Schlesinger said "he's certainly a sanctimonious prick" and Hillary answered "he's certainly sanctimonious."

[Warren Stupidity]

14. lol nt.

[SteppingRazor]

4. Of course he should.

That said, after 2008 -- and the several Senate seats we'll invariably pick up -- he won't be nearly as relevant.

[hobbit709]

5. You don't have a HELL NO option

[CTyankee]

25. How about VOMIT at the Question option?

I don't know if I'm madder at him or at my fellow CT citizens who voted that bastard back in office.

But don't get me started. I had such high hopes for Ned and I still get his email updates. It makes me happy but also sad to hear from him, becaue we were right and yet got defeated...

[Richardo]

6. For the reasons you state, I think he should be *encouraged* to caucus with the Dems

What's the point of not letting him? Ideologic purity? Hell, I think Trent Fucking Lott himself should be encouraged to caucus with the Dems. The numbers mean everything.

[FredScuttle]

8. Are you sure?

I remember reading after the 2006 elections that even if Holy Joe abandoned the Dem caucus, the chairs of each of the Senate committees would stay in Democratic hands and Reid would still remain Majority Leader due to Senate rules.

I'll look the reference...but for now, my feeling is you don't let traitors in on your strategy meetings. And Holy Joe, in every action he's exhibited since his 2006 victory, is a traitor.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

12. There Are Fifty Rethugs...Forty Nine Dems

Lieberman the Indy and Bernard Sanders the Independent Socialist caucus with the Dems...

Without Joe the split is 50-50 and the VP casts the tie breaking vote which would be used to order the Senate...

[onehandle]

9. We must control the Senate. nt

[Stinky The Clown]

11. I'm pragmatic .....

..... so yeah ...... until we win control with a greater number of seats ...... then I want his ass keel hauled and then thrown overboard.

[brazos121200]

13. Since Joe Lieberman was Al Gore's running mate

back in 2000 and would now be the legitimate Vice President if the election hadn't been stolen that year by Bush (and if they had been re-elected in '04), I think he should be allowed to caucus with the Democrats. I know he has gone over to the dark side but he had been a loyal Democrat for many years before the iraq war muddled his thinking.

[IndianaGreen]

27. Who told Gore to put Lieberman on the ticket?

The only silver lining about SCOTUS appointing Bush is that Holy Joe is not today the Democratic frontrunner. I would never support that warmongering POS.

[LoZoccolo]

16. Why would we not want him to?

This is another example of DU emotion over logic. Giving up the majority to teach someone a dubious personal lesson? If you think he's such a prick, why would anyone think he'd learn the lesson anyways?

[hobbit709]

18. When someone jacks me around more than once

I won't have anything to do with them after that. I'm not a glutton for punishment. As far as I'm concerned Liarman consistently votes the administration's way, therefore he's not anyone I want to have dealings with.

[LoZoccolo]

20. "When someone jacks me around more than once I won't have anything to do with them after that."

Why?

[hobbit709]

21. Do you really need to ask?

[LoZoccolo]

28. What does that do for you? n/t

[LoZoccolo]

17. I also think it's interesting that the "no's" are in the majority, but...

...none of them have really given us a reason why.

[The Magistrate]

23. Sometimes, Sir, Examples Must Be Made

On the condition that we do have a sufficient number of seats for a majority absent the reptile, this would make a good occassion for one. Party discipline needs stiffenning on both wings....

[cali]

19. 70% of the respondents to this poll are willing to hand

the Senate back to repukes. What a crying shame. Yes, the dems have been weak in many ways, but I don't want to see Barbara Boxer handing back the gavel to Inhofe, or Pat Leahy handing his back to Specter.

[The Magistrate]

22. Once We Have Over Fifty Without Him, Sir

He should certainly be barred from the room, and from any committee assignments in the gift of the Party....

[ginchinchili]

24. Unfortunately, yes. That's how our system works.

And as you point out, this time it's to our benefit. But I, too, sent contributions to Lamont in hopes that he'd unseat the sanctimonious prick. Choosing Lieberman as a running mate was Gore's biggest mistake, but he's more than made up for that.

[IndianaGreen]

26. Electing a Democratic Congress has made no difference!

Democrats voted for Kyl-Lieberman (the bomb Iran when you are ready resolution), put impeachment off the table, supported warrantless searches, failed to defund the war, and now we got them embracing torture thanks to those neocon darlings DiFi and Schumer.

What this country needs is an American version of the UK's Liberal-Democrat Party (that's their actual name if some web nanny question my use of "Democrat").