Keep Lieberman in the Democratic caucus

[Onlooker]

Look, Lieberman is not the most conservative Democrat, Ben Nelson is:

http://www.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/sen/lib_cons.htm?o1=lib_composite&o2=desc

On many issues, Lieberman is indeed in the liberal wing of the Democratic Party:

http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Senate/senator_ratings-2005.html

He's an asshole for backing McCain and a nut when it comes to Iraq, but other than that he is quite tolerable.

We need him because the best tool the Republicans have to block Obama's plans is the filibuster. Not only can Lieberman be a reliable vote on issues such as health care, taxes, and appointments, he is also an important conduit to the Republicans. He has influence with them that no other Democrat has.

I don't like Lieberman at all, but I think the place to punish him is at the voting booth, not in the Senate. We need his vote and support, and Reid can always take away his leadership role at a later time should he fail to cooperate on key issues.

[Doityourself]

1. He fucking questioned Obama's patriotism! Fuck him!

[HereSince1628]

2. How many times did Nelson speak against Obama at McCain rallies?

I really didn't notice any, but I could have missed his committed support to the election of McCain-Palin.

[marylanddem]

3. "asshole for backing McCain & a nut when it comes to Iraq"

Enough said. He needs to fucking go.

[vanbean]

4. As a member of the Democratic caucus does he have to vote with them?

[stray cat]

5. He votes with dems most of the time - I don't like it but we should keep him

why give the repubs another member who is more often with us than against us. Lets not start the administration by kicking people out - look at Lincolns example of keeping his enemies close.

However, I hope his state votes him out of office but thats up to his constituents

[democracy1st]

6. Lieberman is a con that has spit in your face

[Danger Mouse]

7. We don't need him. We won't have enough to block a fillibuster, with or without him.

So screw him.

[No Elephants]

10. Correct. Even if we had 62, we would not have enough. No one can control Dems.

[grantcart]

8. He did not 'back' McCain he was his most visable surrogate.

If he had made a 'Powell' type of endorsement on principle that would be one thing.


He stood behind McCain and smiled and clapped at the rallies where McCain was speaking, not on Iraq, but slamming every Democratic principle and labelling Democrats as Socialists.

He should be kicked out of the caucuse and we can negotiate with him and the other Republican Senators at that time - if it is necessary.

[abburdlen]

9. Joe has little leverage.

If Lieberman’s vote made the difference in a filibuster then maybe give him a chairmanship but it seems even with Joe the Dems will be short of the 60 needed (plus does anyone really think Lieberman wouldn't break ranks?)
So take away Lieberman's position on Homeland security where he's done nothing anyway and Obama can let Joe know if he behaves himself for a couple of years (If Gov. Rell loses in 2010) he might get himself an ambassadorship to Israel. Problem solved

[QueenOfCalifornia]

11. Hell no

he is a traitor

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7825263

[GodlessBiker]

12. Let him stay in the caucus, but strip him of his committee chair.

[Fluffdaddy]

14. Agree

[crossroads]

16. YES!

[Ichingcarpenter]

17. Totally agree.....

If he won't take that as well deserved punishment
then cut him loose

[GodlessBiker]

19. Agreed. He can't pretend nothing has changed.

[Marsala]

23. Yes. Of course, Lieberman is threatening to leave if Reid does this...

...in which case, good riddance.

[GodlessBiker]

26. Yep. His choice.

[AlinPA]

31. Please see my post below, re: his actions during campaign.

[Recursion]

13. Better in the tent pissing out

than outside the tent pissing in.

If he'll stay without his chairmanships, I say keep him. For that matter, if he wants to vote with us for forming the leadership and rules I don't think we can stop him.

[MadBadger]

15. He wont vote against us on an issue he agrees with us on

So whats the point if hes in our caucus or not?

[liberalpragmatist]

18. Reid's deal was generous

He gets to remain in the caucus, he keeps his seniority, and he gets his choice of chairing another subcommittee. Frankly, it's not a bad deal, and if Lieberman took it, my attitude would be the same as yours: better to inside the tent pissing out and all.

But he's acting like a total douche -- he claims this would be unacceptable. Seriously? He showed serious disloyalty and attacked the party's presidential nominee. Now he expects to chair the committee in charge of investigations against a Democratic president?

Lieberman is free to support whoever he likes for president. But being in the Democratic Caucus is a team effort. He can do what he wants, but that doesn't mean the other members of the caucus have to oblige him.

[RepublicanElephant]

20. lie-berman lied about being a "democrat" for mccain before millions on primetime tv.

how can you trust a guy who betrays the party to win his senate seat, then lies about still being a dem to help put sarah palin in the white house?

strip lieberman and let him earn his way back up the chairmanship ladder.

[WeDidIt]

21. Under NO CIRCMUSTANCES Can He Cahiar ANY Committee

Sorry, Lieberman cannot be trusted to not use a chairman's gavel to attack Barrack.

If that means he leaves the caucus, so be it.

[walldude]

22. You want to show him your back while he's still pulling the knife

out of Obama's? Good luck with that.

[garybeck]

24. He should be voting his conscience, regardless of what caucus he's in!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

so it should have no effect on his vote.

If he is going to all of the sudden start voting with the repugs more, just because he's angry about a political game that he started, then screw him, it only shows what an asshole he is and how he deserves to lose his job completely.

Stripping his chairmanship, or not letting him caucus with the Dems, or both, should have absolutely no affect on how he votes, with fillibusters, or otherwise.

[AndyTiedye]

39. LIEberman Voting His Conscience? What Conscience?

He says he's pro-choice, and people still claime he is a "liberal", yet he voted for cloture every time Bush** had a wingnut judge he wanted confirmed.
He just finished doing everything he could to get McAnus elected, even though McAnus was committed to continuing all of Bush**'s foreign and domestic policies.

[Warren Stupidity]

25. Fine. Nobody is kicking him out of the caucus except Joe himself.

What he is being kicked out of is his chair position. That position should go to the next LOYAL Democratic Senator in line. Joe can choose to caucus with the Democratic Party or not, that is up to him.

[AlCzervik]

27. ******Please see this thread on why Lieberman cannot be allowed to keep his Chairmanship******

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x7822989

Do you want him funneling information to his buddies at Faux because that's what he'll do with that info.

[IndianaGreen]

28. Only as a cadaver!

Holy Joe should be purged!

[AlinPA]

29. Sorry, he stood with Palin and McCain while people screamed "kill him", and while

Palin & crowd called Obama a terrorist, a socialist, communist and supporter of terrorists. His vote is valuable, yes, but on principle I can't accept Lieberman as part of the Democartic caucus.
Who can trust him?

[truthisfreedom]

30. This sums it up.

[frazzled]

32. Only after removing all his fingernails

and making him write on a blackboard 5000 times "I will not disrespect Democrats."

I don't care what the hell happens to him anymore. There was a time I thought people should try harder to bring him back into the fold, but that time has passed. He should not be chairing a committee. Let it be on his head what to do after that. He was a schmuck, let him figure it out.

[americanstranger]

33. Things are going to be different with this administration.

Obama will, IMO, appoint a good number of Republicans to cabinet posts in his administration. This will help accomplish that which Bush talked a lot about but never really intended to do - 'change the tone in Washington.'

With an agenda that is advanced by a cabinet made up of Democrats and Republicans, I believe that such an agenda will stand a much better chance of being embraced by Democrats and some more moderate Republicans in both houses of Congress.

Sure, there will be a number of knuckle-draggers that will try to obstruct President Obama's agenda - there always will be, but they will look more and more like sour-grapes losers working against the best interests of the country. And the fact that Republicans will be helping Obama push the agenda will give cover for the few sane Republicans left to get on board with a lot of policy proposals.

We may not need 60 Dems. We may have enough thinking people to beat back a filibuster with the majority we have and a handful of Republicans.

This might be wishful thinking on my part. But I think that Congress, by and large, will want to be seen as actually solving the country's problems more than scoring cheap political points. And Lieberman will either want to be a part of that or risk losing his seat when he comes up for re-election.

I say take away his chairmanship and let him do what he wants. A pissy Lieberman with no juice in Congress will be a lot easier to manage than a Lieberman with a chairmanship and a grudge.

- D

[Warren Stupidity]

38. My good number is zero.

[onenote]

34. an even better reason to keep in the caucuse: more Democrats on committees

The allocation of seats on Senate committees is a reflection of the proportion of seats held by the caucus. The larger the caucus, the more seats on committees held by Democrats. Some of our newly elected Democrats may be able to get assigned to better committees if we have one more seat on some of those committees, which could be the case if Lieberman caucuses with the Democrats.

He doesn't deserve a significant committee assignment, but Reid should offer Lieberman something as a fig leaf. Its not as if the repubs can offer him anything. Call his bluff.

[Warren Stupidity]

37. Reid offered the fig leaf and Joe the Putz said 'no'.

Putz was offered subcommittee chair positions and refused. He is the one determined to take this to a vote.

[jonnyblitz]

35. there is more to a politician than just how they vote on the issues.

this is not rocket science.

[SOS]

36. Lieberman should join the Republican Party

He campaigned for them and questioned Obama's patriotism.
The end.
In 2012 he will have to run as a Republican and Lamont will kick his ass out for good.

[Howler]

40. No way1!!!

Get rid of the rat!!!He has got to go!
If you want to keep him have him stuffed and mounted.