Dodd Says Obama Wouldn't Want Messy Fight Over Lieberman

[Pale Blue Dot]

Source: Hartford Courant

U.S. Sen. Christopher Dodd said Friday that President-elect Obama would not want one of his party's first major post-election issues to be a messy fight over Joseph Lieberman's status as a Democrat.

Lieberman's political future is uncertain because some Democrats want to punish him for supporting Republican John McCain in the race against Obama. But Lieberman and Obama have been Democratic colleagues in the U.S. Senate for four years, Dodd noted, and Obama generally resists confrontations if a compromise can be reached.

"What does Barack Obama want?" Dodd rhetorically asked reporters Friday in Hartford. "He's talked about reconciliation, healing, bringing people together. I don't think he'd necessarily want to spend the first month of this president-elect period, this transition period, talking about a Senate seat, particularly if someone is willing to come forward and is willing to be a member of your family in the caucus in that sense."

In another issue related to the new administration, Dodd said President Bush should nominate Obama's choice for the new treasury secretary now, before the president-elect takes office in January, to get a head start on resolving the nation's credit crisis and help ease the wild swings on Wall Street. Obama has not yet picked anyone for the position.

Dodd said he spoke to Lieberman several times Thursday, and that Lieberman told him he wants to remain in the Democratic caucus. Dodd was careful to say that he could not speak for Lieberman, but he pointed out that Lieberman votes with the Democrats 90 percent of the time.

Read more: http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc-lieberman1108.artnov08,0,1521405.story

---

In my opinion, Dodd has become a huge disappointment in the past couple of months.

[ingac70]

1. No need for messy...

just tell Joe to fuck off.

[HopeHoops]

20. That certainly doesn't sound messy - good suggestion!

[Cronus Protagonist]

31. I agree... how messy can it be dusting a cockroach off your table?

The man is not a friend of Democratics.

[TankLV]

51. Short and simple and to the point. Not messy at all...

Joe - YOU'RE FIRED.

end of discussion.

now get out - we have work to do...

[sabrina 1]

72. Lol!

That really cracked me up! :rofl:

[merwin]

94. I say let him caucus with us...

just take his committee leadership post away.

If he wants to leave, let him, but it helps our numbers in the senate for him to caucus with us. He can't do any damage when he's out of a leadership post.

[joeybee12]

2. Dodd needs Liar-berman's support when he's behind bars for

his VIP status with Countrywide...yeah, a real disappointment.

[fascisthunter]

3. Sorry Dodd.... time for acquiescence towards those who Harm Our Party to End

you are not helping us here.

[BlueCaliDem]

60. Dodd mischaracterizes P.E.Obama's mantra. It wasn't "bend over - again", it was CHANGE!

Some Democrats in Congress are now trying to tell us what Pres.-elect Obama's message is when it's clear it has always been "Change in how Washington does business".

How is Dodd's defense of a turn-coat "Independent-Democrat" after all he's said and done to a REAL Democrat like Pres.-elect Obama, signify "change"? How is "kid-gloving" LIEberman after he campaigned against our Democratic Pres. Candidate out of some warped sense of loyalty, "change"?? It sure still looks like "the ol' boys club" to me.

Dodd want's "business as usual" to continue. No wonder Obama didn't choose him for running mate!

Hopefully, the majority of Democratic Senators will oust that weasel from their caucus a.s.a.p.! With friends like Traitor-Joe, who needs Repubs?

[fascisthunter]

106. I Agree with you... I have Concerns with How These...

high-profile Democrats are going to try to steer Obama's administration AWAY from change. We as a populace must push back... forget about "pushing back"... WE MUST PUSH HIM away from their "center".

Centrist usually means, "I'm the balanced minded moderate that this country embraces, because I say so".

The points you make about how they handled the likes of Lieberman is right on. Forget about Lieberman, just look at how they went along with Bush. Great dog and pony shows where they appeared to be against his agenda, but in the end, Bush(Wall Street, corporate media, religious right wing churches, racists, homophobes, transnational corporations, wealthy class) got pretty much what the all wanted.

[BlueCaliDem]

110. The message Dodd is sending from the outset is: Play ball- or else. P.E. Obama must stand firm

... and not allow them to push him to their idea of "the center" (which is right of center).

P.E. Obama didn't win because he was repub-lite. He won because he was center-LEFT. This is hard on those high-profile Dems that have been trying so hard to push this country into a faux 2-party system while they ruled as a ONE-party system.

Words are cheap. Deeds matter, but I guess when you get those low-interest loans from a giant corporation like Countrywide, it tends to make one friendly to them.

I'm also worried about a seeming retribution against Howard Dean. With Rahm Emanuel as Chief of Staff and the shocking revelation (IF this is true) that the Obama group is re-centralizing the power of the DNC under Rahm's watch... I'm getting nervous. Chair Dean has fought hard to DE-centralize the power of the DNC to strengthen state and districts in his 50-state plan and it was that strategy that gave Pres.-Elect Obama this huge win in formerly 'red' states.

As reward, the DNC will lose Dean as chair (something that only happens when the Democrats lose elections ). It's no secret that Emanuel and Schumer have no love lost on Chairman Dean. Now, it seems, they're getting retribution, and that's not a good sign especially when considering that Sen. Obama had gone straight to Dean, rather than to Schumer or Emanuel when he was busy forming his plan for his campaign.

I just hope President Obama does not forget this.

[BunkerHill24]

4. Gee...have these politicians not understand that elections have consequences?

on edit: If Joe stays, you will go Harry

[babylonsister]

5. Dodd and Joe are obviously friends. I'm disappointed in that fact

that Dodd is using Obama as cover. I just bet the Dems could let Joe go to the dark side, and it'd be all about Joe, not the Dems. I wish they'd can his ass myself.

[sce56]

34. I agree with you babylonsister!

I can't help but think that if he was VP on 9-11 we could have been looking at the second election run for President Lieberman as they would have taken out President Gore that day also!

[bluestateguy]

6. I agree. No messy fight.

Let's just remove him, and that will be that. Nothing messy at all.

[lonestarnot]

16. Exactly.

[IsItJustMe]

Hop off the bus gus. I agree. bye-bye Joe. Two day news cycle, and it's over.

[LynnTheDem]

7. That's what Rhambo is for, Dodd.

It wouldn't be "messy" for Obama.

[glowing]

8. They're both from Conn.. perhaps he's trying to be nice.. and really,

Its really not Obama's job to handle the politics of the Senate.. I'm sure he has his opinions.. but right now, he's got a couple of other more demanding issues like the wars, economy, admin. to figure out right now.

[LiberalFighter]

9. Exactly!! Let the Senate handle it.

[kmac3]

21. Lieberman's Fate . . . .

"Its really not Obama's job to handle the politics of the Senate . . ."

Lieberman should be removed from his chairmanships of the Democratic party as a consequence for his behavior during the campaign but allowed to continue to caucas as an Independent. He should also be made aware that he no longer has the power or leverage he once thought he had . . . he's pretty well reduced himself down to a nothing that realistically nobody wants.

[chimpymustgo]

10. Use a scalpel. And cut that fucker off. No muss, no fuss.

[PassingFair]

112. Whatever it takes....

I suggest No. 1, the cauterizing iron.

[Metta]

11. Doesn't have to be messy. Just tell him he's gone and wish him well.

Everyone understands that he betrayed the party.

[MO_Dem]

12. Kinda sounds like

repigs maybe don't want sore-Loserman either!
U.S. Sen. Christopher Dodd said Friday that President-elect Obama would not want one of his party's first major post-election issues to be a messy fight over Joseph Lieberman's status as a Democrat.


:popcorn:

[Frances]

13. I don't think Obama looks good if there are no

consequences for Lieberman. That makes Obama look weak.

[bluedeminredstate]

14. I agree.

They don't have to publically flog Lieberman, but he needs to be held accountable for attacking Obama on the campaign trail. Loss of the chairmanship should do nicely as a knuckle-rapping.

[iamjoy]

40. The Reverse Is Also True

If Obama takes the lead in getting Lieberman removed from his leadership posts as a result of endorsing McCain, you know the RW will spin it as Obama being vindictive and punishing an opponent.

Maybe Obama can find a way to punish him in a way that doesn't look like a punishment, for example - ambassadorship to a country where no one wants to go.

Or, maybe the Senate Democratic Caucus should vote on the matter of whether Lieberman keeps his leadership/chairmanship. It's not an issue for President Obama

[TankLV]

54. I still say he should appoint him to some minor post.

Then, after a few months, quietly and "regretfully" "accept his resignation"...

We get a two-fer: LIEberman gone and a NEW DEMOCRATIC Senator to replace him!!!

[sabrina 1]

73. Excellent idea!

And that would be the end of 'Joe the Betrayer'! People on DU are very, very smart! :rofl:

[Nevernose]

85. "you know the right wing will spin it"

Truer words have never been spoken. It really doesn't matter WHAT Obama does or doesn't do. If Lieberman stays or goes, the RW will spin it. If Obama wipes his ass with his right hand, the RW will say he's disrespecting the people he's shaken hands with, and if he wipes with his left, they'll say it's because he's a secret Muslim.

The one thing we can't do -- and so far Obama's been pretty good about this -- is care very much what the right wing loonies will say, 'cause whatever they say will be bad.

[TankLV]

52. We have a WINNER!!!!

Exactly.

Obama needs to look and act STRONG.

He doesn't need to draw this out, or seek out all sorts of others.

Just THIS one time.

Just THIS TRAITOR...

[Duppers]

124. Strongly agree. nt

.

[MidwestTransplant]

15. Breakups needn't be messy. Just tell ol' Jomentum no chiarmanship.

[justaregularperson]

116. Exactly, he is an "independent". Why should he get to keep it anyway?

[volstork]

17. Who is Dodd to speak for Obama?

Let Obama speak for himself....

[Larkspur]

18. What about the other senators, Dodd?

The ones who worked hard for Obama and for increasing Dem numbers in the Senate. They should be rewarded at Lieberman's expense.

Lieberman is a traitor and traitors have no businees chair committees. Hillary has no chair. Give her one at Lieberman's expense.

[northernlights]

19. Interesting...

Dodd was "careful" to say he doesn't speak for Lieberman. But had no problem pretending to speak for President-elect Obama.

But he's right. There's no need for a protracted fight. Just a clean break. No chairmanship. Shut up and go to the end of the line. Or get out altogether. Your choice, traitor to the U.S.

I've been increasingly disappointed in Dodd over the past year. And there had been a time when he'd been a top pick for me...

[pipi_k]

22. As Paul Simon said....

You just slip out the back, Jack
Make a new plan, Stan
You don't need to be coy, Roy
Just get yourself free
Hop on the bus, Gus
You don't need to discuss much
Just drop off the key, Lee
And get yourself free


buh-bye, Joe!!!!!

:hi:

[Warren Stupidity]

23. Which Senator, Mr. Dodd, which LOYAL Democratic Senator

will not be getting a committee chair because the despised asshole putz Lieberman, who has actively and openly sided against our party's interests for at least the last four years, will be allowed to continue to hold his chair despite his DISLOYALTY?

Lieberman can work with us, should he desire to do so, from across the aisle, which is where he has put himself by his own behavior. Reid offered the putz a way out of the upcoming unpleasantness, the putz publicly and brazenly said 'no'. The putz has no intention of changing his ways. The putz will continue to work against our interests. The putz needs to be put down.

[TankLV]

55. good point. Plus the LOYAL Dems who would LOVE a "nice office" in the Capitol...

It's not "fair" to THEM!!!

[nyc 4 Biden]

24. Obama's key word during the election was "CHANGE", now...

that he has been elected the key word is "ACCOUNTABILITY." That means sorting out LIEberman, Bushco, and everyone else. Obama has said the buck stops with him, so he is also willing to accept responsibility for his own actions.

Edit for clarity.

[shadowknows69]

25. He's already not a Democrat!!!!

Kick him to the fucking curb, bi-partisan forgiveness should only go so freaking far. This guy has proven to be a first class weasel.

[AndyTiedye]

26. Let LIEberman Stay on as Chairman of the "Homeland Security" Committee…

…and abolish the committee. Make a new committee that doesn't have a name that came from Nazi Germany!

[rateyes]

27. If you cut the dog's tail off an inch at a time it will keep him mad for years.

One clean cut. Tell Joe to stuff it---there's nothing messy about it. As easy as getting shit out of a goose.

[Lena inRI]

28. Liar-man made the ultimatum, not Obama

Liar-man is the mess-maker = no chairmanship, threatens to leave Dems for Repukes.

All Dems do is take away Liar-man's chair and he'll take care of the rest by default.

Then the Dems can move forward without having to look over their shoulder to see when Liar-man will stab them in the back again.

There are several Republican senators who will vote with Obama to cancel Liar-man's defection.

ATTENTION all Democratic Senators:

VOTE NO CHAIR FOR LIEBERMAN

STRIKE THE IRON WHILE IT'S HOT

:kick: :kick: :kick: :kick: :kick:

[ExPatLeftist]

29. Since when is it up to Obama to control the Senate?

And why is Dodd putting words in Obama's mouth?

This is an obfuscation for the weak Democratic leadership of the Senate, who should take care of that slimeball, has nothing to do with Obama. But Reid and co are too wimpy to do a damn thing, so it seems that now they are trying to make it look like it is up to Obama...

[kiranon]

30. No mess at all. He just accepts change to a sub committee chairmanship instead.

[droidamus2]

32. First...

First Joe Lieberman declared himself as an independent he only caucus's (sp?) with the Democrats so he is not currently a Democrat. If he wishes to rejoin the party after what he has done I think he should pay some penance as in starting over. Joe if you look to the back of the chamber that's called the 'back bench' that is where you will be sitting from now on and if you are a good little Democrat and watch what you say in a couple of years you might even earn your 'own desk'.

[bagrman]

33. NO fuss, big boot.

[thesquanderer]

35. In Defense of Dodd

Let's not forget the strong stand he took against immunity for phone companies who participated in wiretapping and such... he was bolder there than any other senator, including Obama.

[Changenow]

69. It was doomed from the start

Dodd was just pumping the base for some primary love and cash.

[RCinBrooklyn]

36. Lieberman MUST go. Cut him off so he can be truly independent.

[IndianaGreen]

37. Lieberman should be appointed ambassador to Iran

and flown to Tehran immediately.

[robbibaba]

38. Here's an action you can take to help Joe lose his gavel!

Reid will likely put Lieberman's chairmanships up for a vote with the Democratic Steering and Outreach Committee. If you have a senator on the committee this would be a very good time to call or fax them and ask them to strip Lieberman of any and all leadership positions. Remove the gavel from his cold dead-like fingers!
Here's the committee:
Your Steering and Outreach Committee members:

Debbie Stabenow, Michigan - Chairwoman [phone]
Harry Reid, Nevada [phone]
John Kerry, Massachusetts [phone]
Daniel Inouye, Hawaii [phone]
Robert Byrd, West Virginia [phone]
Edward Kennedy, Massachusetts [phone]
Joe Biden, Delaware [phone]
Patrick Leahy, Vermont [phone]
Chris Dodd, Connecticut [phone]
Tom Harkin, Iowa [phone]
Max Baucus, Montana [phone]
Richard Durbin, Illinois [phone]
Kent Conrad, North Dakota [phone]
Carl Levin, Michigan [phone]
Herbert Kohl, Wisconsin [phone]
Barbara Boxer, California [phone]
Hillary Clinton, New York [phone]
Jeff Bingaman, New Mexico [phone]
Mark Pryor, Arkansas [phone]

[Duppers]

125. Let's get more attention. >>> PHONE NUMBERS HERE

My email from Robert Greenwald, et.al.:

Dear Duppers,

1. Watch the video
2. Make a Call
3. Send the video to your friends

Joe Lieberman has launched consistent, deeply partisan attacks on President-elect Barack Obama, questioning his patriotism and fitness to lead. While Lieberman campaigned for John McCain and spoke on his behalf at the Republican National Convention, he spread some of the GOP's nastiest smears. Think Progress has provided thorough evidence of Lieberman's partisan politics. Lieberman should not be allowed to have subpoena power to investigate the Obama administration as chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee. In fact, he should not be allowed to remain chairman of this or any other committee.

Watch the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AfJunZu22VU

Lieberman has proven he cannot be trusted to hold a high rank within the Democratic caucus. That is why we launched Lieberman Must Go last summer, a campaign that caught Congress' attention when we delivered a petition with over 43,000 signatures. Now, we ask you to help us escalate the pressure by contacting members of the Senate Democratic Steering Committee. Tell them to strip Lieberman of his chairmanship in the Democratic caucus.

We have included a sample script and phone numbers below for you to use, and we ask that you be polite when you explain why Lieberman Must Go.


Senator _________, my name is _________. I'm a registered Democrat and a resident. I urge you to vote to strip Joe Lieberman of his committee chairmanship when the Democratic Steering and Outreach Committee meets to discuss his future. A man who spent the entire election season demeaning Senator Obama's patriotism and his qualifications for office cannot be trusted with oversight authority over the Obama administration. Joe Lieberman is not a Democrat, and he should not enjoy the privileges of being a member of the majority party. Will you vote to strip Lieberman of his committee chairmanship?
Senator Debbie Stabenow, Michigan, Chair
[phone]
Senator Harry Reid, Nevada
[phone]

Senator John Kerry, Massachusetts
[phone]

Senator Daniel Inouye, West Virginia
[phone]

Senator Robert Byrd
[phone]

Senator Edward Kennedy, Massachusetts
[phone]

Senator Joseph Biden, Delaware
[phone]

Senator Patrick Leahy, Vermont
[phone]

Senator Christopher Dodd, Connecticut
[phone]

Senator Tom Harkin, Iowa
[phone]

Senator Max Baucus, Montana
[phone]

Senator Richard Durbin, Illinois
[phone]

Senator Kent Conrad, North Dakota
[phone]

Senator Carl Levin, Michigan
[phone]

Senator Herbert Kohl, Wisconsin
[phone]

Senator Barbara Boxer, California
[phone]

Senator Hillary Clinton, New York
[phone]

Senator Jeff Bingaman, New Mexico
[phone]

Senator Mark Pryor, Arkansas
[phone]


Make the call today, then let us know you did and send this e-mail to your friends and colleagues (and don't forget to Digg it!). Let Democratic leaders know Lieberman represents an impediment to real change in Washington, and that is why Lieberman Must Go!

Yours
Robert Greenwald, Leighton Woodhouse, ZP Heller
and the Brave New Films team

------
Brave New Films is supported by members like you, please consider making a donation. You can get all our latest videos via email, RSS, iTunes or YouTube here. To stop receiving updates from us, click here. We are located at 10510 Culver Blvd., Culver City, CA 90232 and [e-mail] .

[Libertyfirst]

39. Let Dodd know we don't like him attempting to involve Obama,

Dodd is serving his own selfish interests in trying to make it look like Obama should be concerned. Let the Democrat caucus do its job and kick the asshole out. Reid was entirely too accommodating as it was and Lieberman turned him down.

Let's let Dodd know we don't like his attempt to involve Obama, tell him to develop some backbone and do what has to be dome.

[skepticscott]

41. Lieberman probably knows he's burned all of his bridges

After all, he campaigned for McCain and then ran back to the Democratic caucus. The Republicans know as well as we do that he's a turncoat by nature who would stab them in the back as easily as he did us. They have no reason to welcome him with open arms either.

[Buns_of_Fire]

46. Hence, the "messy fight"...

Democrats: "WE don't want him, YOU take him."

rebubbalickins: "Are you crazy? WE don't want him, YOU take him!"

'Round and around and around and around and around...

[skepticscott]

62. Nobody HAS to take him...

Both parties just tell him nicely that they don't want him in their caucus, and he stays as an Independent and votes how he wants. He's chosen to reject any semblance of loyalty, so he can live with the consequences.

[Buns_of_Fire]

99. The easiest solution of all. Simple and elegant.

And probably the first thing the two caucuses could agree on in the last fifteen years.

[Cronopio]

42. Now I'm convinced that Lieberman was set up as a test of Obama's resolve -

- in the same way that the "gays in the military" issue was a test of Clinton. It always happens early on in the administration and it always ends up being a bargain between one group of supporters and another. Clinton failed the test and paid for it in 1994. It looks like Obama will pass it. Joe *must* make up his mind which side of the fence he's going to play on, or he needs to be forced to play on the other side. Given Joe's track record, it's safer for Obama to just not plan on Lieberman's support.

I also don't believe this is a result of Reid's cojones, it's Rahm's and Obama's - behind the scenes. The advantage of Rahm is that Lieberman can't hold the AIPAC lobby over them as a pressure point.

Finally, even though Lieberman votes with the Dems 90% of the time, the 10% happens when it counts. He knows this and is very artful about choosing his defections. If the Obama administration plans to be taken seriously, they need to make sure that they make an example of Lieberman rather than Lieberman making an example of them.

[TankLV]

56. Plus - part of that 10 percent is his OPPOSITION TO OBAMA'S PLAN TO LEAVE IRAQ!!!

That's simply NOT acceptable...

[truthisfreedom]

43. Whatever.

[mrJJ]

44. Lieberman's chairmanship should be revoked

Lieberman's chairmanship should be removed. If Lieberman decides to stay with the Gop & caucus with them...thats up to him.

The inflamatory remarks that Lieberman made against Sen Obama; while campaigning for the GOP nominee, was totally uncalled for.

[geomon666]

45. There is no issue. There is no debate here.

Lieberman is NOT a Democrat. He is an Independent. He doesn't belong caucusing with Democrats, especially when you look at his positions on political issues.

[paulk]

75. what are his "positions"?

He votes with the Democrats 90% of the time.

Progressive Punch ranks 6 Democrats in the current Senate as more conservative.

Should those 6 caucus with the Republicans?

One of them is Barrack Obama, btw...

http://www.progressivepunch.org/members.jsp?chamber=Senate

Also btw, Lieberman may have run as an Independent, but is still registered as a member of the Democratic Party.

[geomon666]

80. He voted for McCain for President. Enough said. n/t

[paulk]

88. not really "enough said"

Obama is going to need every vote he can get - and I don't see what is to be gained from kicking a guy who votes with your party 90% of the time out of the caucus.

Take away his homeland security chair and leave it at that.

[geomon666]

91. Well if he's really a liberal as you seem to think he is.

The President will get his vote either way. So I say, kick his ass out and send a message.

[paulk]

95. I never said he was liberal

so your point isn't valid.

He's a centrist - part of the group, both Dem and Rep, that will have the deciding votes on Obama's policies these next few years. I can't think of any good reason to push him into voting against the Democrats out of spite.

[geomon666]

97. You just got through saying he votes with Dems 90% of the time.

How is that centrist? And your assumption that his vote will be the deciding vote on any legislation is just that, an assumption. One which apparently the Democratic leaders don't subscribe to.

[Zhade]

82. He supported mccain. FUCK HIM, and fuck your excuses.

Always standing up for the conservative - why are you even a Democrat?

[paulk]

87. oh, poor widdle zhade

did I hurt your feelings?

:cry:

[Freddie Stubbs]

123. The problem is that Senate Democrats will need his vote to break GOP filibusters

Even if there are 60 Democratic Senators, there will be bills which not every Democrat will support. Without his vote it will be more difficult to pass those bills.

[Dover]

47. Then Lieberman should help Obama AVOID A MESS by walking away...

But the truth is...and I think it will eventually dawn on those from both political parties...
that we are heading for a one party system. If the Dem Congress's performance of the last
several years isn't evidence enough, the Lieberman issue (which should be cut and dried)
might supply the light of truth.

[Dr Fate]

48. Joe L's constituents will expect him to continue voting 90% DEM- so why does this matter?

It's not like Lieberman can go all Drama Queen Republican and start going negative and obstructing President Obama- his constituents would vote him out.

On the other hand- I'll go with whatever President Obama thinks will work best for him...

[ixion]

49. neocons like LIEberman belong in the Hague

'nuff said.

[Hawkowl]

50. No committee membership period!

Not only should he lose his chairmanship, he should be forced off every committee he is on. He'd be forced to go hat in hand to the rethuglicans. He would be forced to run for re-election as a republican. No candidate would seek the nomination in the republican primary because then upon winning the primary would be immediately be thrust into a three way race splitting republican votes between themselves and traitor Lieberman. The dem nominee would have an excellent chance of winning.

The dems need to think strategically of capturing Lieberman's seat. Deny him his camoflage and force the cockroach into the light of day. If he is forced to caucus with the rethuglicans he WILL BE A REPUBLICAN to his constituency. He already votes and acts like one. Only now there will be no more hiding behind disingenuous labels of "independent" democrat to fool the low info voters. This is the last thing Lieberman wants, seeing as republicans are an endangered species in New England. Reminds of cartoons of deer walking around with signs saying "I am not a deer" during hunting season.

Also, as others have pointed out, which loyal dem is going to get the shaft so Lieberman can have his committee assignments?

[StreetKnowledge]

53. Dodd's trying to play nicely here

And should be commended for it. He's probably right about Obama, too - but Lieberman is a backstabber, and he should get removed form any Dem committee posts. He doesn't belong there, end of story.

[RBInMaine]

57. I know Lieberman has folks here off bigtime, and me too, BUT he does vote with Dems on most issues,

so the best thing to do, I think, in the spirit of the goodwill and healing that Obama wants for the country, is to have Lieberman remain in the Dem caucus and remain chair of his committee. Look, we want to fight for our principles in the next congressional session, but at the same time we also want and MUST unite the country and be willing to work with R's and guys like Lieberman where possible. --- BUT, if they are going to roadblock and totally refuse to work with our MAJORITY, then they are in for a fight. And just let them go back to their districts and explain why they voted against middle class tax cuts, and against more regulation for corporations, and against expanding access to healthcare, and against better student loan programs for college kids, and against bringing Iraq to a responsible conclusion, and against extending unemployment benefits, and against investments in the new green economy, and against a new economic stimulus bill targeted to the middle class, ... just let them. Then they'll lose even MORE seats next time. So, let's work with them where possible, and let's also INSIST that they respect the election results and work with our majority.

[Dr Fate]

59. And his constituents expect him to continue doing that. Why is this part of the equation?

Joe's constituents do not expect him to be an Anti-Obama obstructionist no matter what his standing...

It is not in Joe's interest to change his reputation in New England as someone who "gets things done" and who "votes with DEMS 90% of the time."

I dont see how "I'll start voting with Republicans even more" is a bargaining chip for him to hold over our heads.

But as I said, I'm cool with whatever President Obama thinks will help him the most...

[pipi_k]

61. Except for the war in Iraq

Which was why he lost the CT Democratic primary to Ned Lamont.

Then he turns around and becomes an "Independent" who wins in CT when a majority of Republicans vote for him because they knew their own candidate wasn't going to win anyway.

He made a promise and then broke it.


For me, that negates everything. Even if he voted with Dems 100%

[Changenow]

70. He will remain with the Democrats

because neither stand for anything.

Lieberman does not help the Democrats when they need him on key issues. He will continue to side with the Republicans on important matters whether he the Democrats keep him or not.

[RBInMaine]

83. He DOES vote with Dems on 90% of issues. His McCain pick and the war issue sucks with him, but on

MOST issues he's a Democrat. This is life in politics folks. It's gotta be a big tent. Not every Dem can be a "lefty." There MUST, in a NATIONAL party, be room for some moderates and differences of opinion (just as we see on this board ALL THE TIME). -- The idea, in the end though, is to find common ground and focus on the many areas of agreement. Remember, politics is the art of compromise. With that, NOTHING gets done. Indeed, we wouldn't have been founded as a nation but for compromise.

[geomon666]

92. Wait a minute. Let me get this straight.

So he's supposedly a Democrat on 90% of the issues except for the President and the war. Right? Now follow me here, if McCain had won the election wouldn't that nullify his stance on the 90% of the issues he's supposedly since we know for a fact that McCain was against the Democratic position on all of those issues?

Come on now. There's a big difference between having a big tent and giving people who would stab you in the back in an instant a say in your party. He tried to undermine the party. There's no doubt about this.

[Ken Burch]

114. You can't really say we should let him get away with dissing our nominee, can you?

If Joe faces no punishment, he'll be even more arrogant. Why should we validate the way he's treated us?

We don't need Joe anymore.

[Pale Blue Dot]

71. If he is a man of principle, he will vote his conscience no matter what happens

If he is not, then he will be petty and vindictive no matter what.

If Dodd thought that Lieberman was a man of principle, he would not be concerned about this.

[David Zephyr]

58. No way. Period. Obama and the Democrats will regret they didn't purge this mole.

Yank his chairmanships.

[ananda]

63. Dodd is wrong.

Lieberman needs to go.

[zelta gaisma]

64. it's not up to Dodd to speak for Obama

[crickets]

65. So shut up and stop adding to the mess, Mr. Dodd.

After the man has left the party, played coy or hard to get on key votes, campaigned for the opposing presidential candidate and gone so far as to speak at the Republican National Convention, one wonders just how far Joe has to go before the Washington crowd will admit that he hopscotched over the line of acceptable behavior eons ago. It's time to make a clean break. Lop off 'Dead Branch Lieberman' quickly, surgically and with finality. No muss, no fuss required.

Obama isn't the one making the mess, Mr. Dodd. That would be you. You and your fellow Senators--who drag your feet and publicly air the issue over and over, then pluck Obama's name out of the clear blue sky to inject it into the conversation--it's you who are making a mess. There's no need for all of this public faffing around. Stop it. Deal with Joe and move on to more important issues. If you need ideas as to what those are, we the citizens have a nice long list for you.

[Eurobabe]

66. Yeah he votes 90% with Dems, but PROMOTES CONS 100% of the time

Fuck that, and fuck LIEberman. :nuke:

[martymar64]

67. Lieberman has to answer for Santino

Time to go, Joe.

Rocco, take him to the airport.

[crossroads]

68. How dare he speak for Obama?

[still_one]

76. That is the first thing I caught. Who in the hell is dodd to speak for Obama. What a persumputious

jerk

[still_one]

74. Sounds like dodd is already trying to cover for lieberman, and who is he to speak for Obama?

I would like to remind senator dodd that liberman IS NOT A Democrat, by his own choosing

liberman felt justified to go along with the R/W talking points referring to "terrorists" associations with Obama

Tell you what dodd, if you feel that strongly about defending liberman, why don't you change your party affiliation also

nobody forced lieberman to speak at the repuke convention

All I can say dodd, is I am sure glad you weren't our nominee

[Miss Chybil]

77. Lieberman is a Democrat? I thought he was an Independent. He left the club when he lost

the Democratic primary. I really don't get his tenacity in trying to hold this post. Would he have kept it, if McCain had won? What's he got up his sleeve?

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

78. The concerns that The Silly Little Man...

Will use his chairmanship of the oversight committee to institute endless investigations of Obama and whomever else he might want to investigate, in a punitive and self-serving fashion, are real and palpable. One thing we know as certain: The Silly Little Man serves a constituency of one. Himself. Everything else is lagniappe.

He has spent the last 4 years of chairmanship conspicuously NOT investigating the manifold offenses of the maladministration. He feels as if he has been slighted. The horse he bet on lost. He holds no loyalties, save to himself and perhaps AIPAC. He wants to keep the chairmanship to provide cover and insulation for himself, not to mention position in the floating world of The Beltway.

But he no longer can be trusted to do the right or honorable thing. It is not a stretch to see him start investigations of someone like Rahm Emanuel or the DNC or Democratic Party grassroots fundraising, for just three off the top of my head. Why? Just for more personal insulation.

So split the baby. "Sure, Joe. You can stay in the caucus if you want, but you will no longer have that chairmanship. We are giving it, and it's implied rewards, to someone who has earned the privilage and nurtured it, within the bounderies of the Democratic Party. Now, you can go caucus with the repukes, who are in the minority and likely to wander in the wilderness for a generation or two, as is your right, but know this: next time you are up for election, we are coming at you with guns blazing if you do. The chocks will be out and we will spare no effort or expense. As if what you have done was not sufficient reason, for you to attempt to arrogantly blackmail the party and caucus...well, that takes us to the borders of our goodwill. There's your choices. Consider them wisely."

Such a message should be delivered by a fellow person of Jewish provenance, a good, observant and honorable one who is known as a real mensch. Just to defuse that possible line of Joewish tomfoolery. Because you know he has the potential to go THERE.

The only other possible solution is to offer him an ambassadorship, to perhaps The Court of St. James. NOT Israel. He would immediately go rogue, just out of innate smugness.

[dweller]

118. i say just go ahead and nut him, and toss him back in the pen

Obama doesn't have to watch. And it will be a lesson to all others in the future.

dp

[yellowcanine]

79. What happens if Lieberman is no longer a Senator - say if he were ambassador to Israel?

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

81. He would go rogue in Israel.

He would quickly start working off of his own agenda sheet. His actions and initiatives would soon be at odds with that of the Obama administration, especially if Israel were to do something so unwise that we could not backstop them. He could not be trusted to deliver the official positions of the US without meddling in the process, off the script and off the reservation.

Remember also: The Silly Little Man holds dual US-Israeli citizenship, as does his wife. That is not an optimal turn of affairs. Indeed.

[yellowcanine]

86. If he "goes rogue" he gets recalled. At least he is no longer Senator.

[ksimons]

84. Lieberman

Lieberman is pallin' around with Republicans - guilty as charged

[BearSquirrel2]

89. He wants to retain his committee chairmanship ...

Lieberman wants to retain his control of a committee.

Here is the problem. If the reward for threatening to bolt the party is a committee chairmanship, everyone would do it.

Sorry, but Lieberman has tried to undermine the parties chances of undoing the damage Bush has done to this country. He loses his chairmanship.

Democrats should NOT expel Lieberman. Rather they should just let his leave in a huff if he wants.

[AKing]

90. I say put him on probation. Make him tow the line and support our agenda....

Any waffling and then he's out

[lovuian]

93. At every turn Obama disappoints

America will be watching and get angrier and angrier

[Richardo]

103. HAHAHAHAHAHA! You mean *a few at DU* will get angrier and angrier

America, not so much.

Disappoints at every turn :rofl:. In five days!! :rofl:

[lovuian]

109. Congress will make the decision lets see what the Dems say

but Lieberman is a TRAITOR to the DEMOCRATIC PARTY this is an OUTRAGE

[SlowDownFast]

115. That's absurd.

It hasn't even been a week yet.

Get hold of yourself.

[Vidar]

96. Last I knew, Obama was pretty good at speaking f himself; Dodd not so much.

[MNReformer]

98. Why don't they ask us?

The DNC could do a survey.

[Buns_of_Fire]

100. Because if they asked us, drawing and quartering would probably win.

Not that I'm against drawing and quartering, you understand, but stripping him of his committee chairmanship would probably suffice. This time.

[yellowwood]

101. Who is Dodd to Speak for Obama?

I've always heard that Lieberman is a friend of Dodd's. Lieberman has done immense damage to the party. His reputation as a warmonger, alone, should be enough to want him out. Dodd's support of Lieberman only makes me less respectful of Dodd.
Why was he speaking to Lieberman "several times" on Thursday? Hasn't he got more important things to do?
Lieberman's gecko smirk appearing over McCain's shoulder for the last few months has been disgusting. No more.

[Doctor_J]

102. Not messy, just quick and final

"Joe, you're not one of us any more. Best of luck"

[ElsewheresDaughter]

104. he can NOT be trusted to caucus with us.he has proven that

[ibegurpard]

105. I think Obama should make a POINT to stay out of it.

And Lieberman needs to go. I'm sorry but you don't campaign for the opponent and expect to caucus with us and retain a chairmanship when we have increased our majority.

[jody]

107. Move Lieberman to last place on the Dem caucus pecking order. That's none of Obama's business. n/t

[goforit]

108. Its not Obama's decision...It's CONGRESS's!!! Once again the Dems will be WEAK!

[mdmc]

111. Joementum wants to stay with us

let him and let him hold Obama accountable. Yes we can!

[young_at_heart]

113. It's very simple----Lieberman was/is a traitor

He should not be associated with the Democratic party any longer.....period!!

[Myrina]

117. Ok then, Dems ... kick him out NOW before Prez O has to get involved.

Easy enough, no? :shrug:

[La Lioness Priyanka]

119. i really wonder sometime if anyone who supported obama ever actually heard him

i can COMPLETELY see him saying he doesnt want this controversy. he promised less politics more action. i dont understand why so many here are so confused by him. i also dont understand why people think dodd would lie about this

[No Elephants]

120. If Dodd can't speak for LIEberman, why is he pretending to speak for Obama? And why is he stirring

pots? Yet another legacy thrown under the Straight Talk Express--McCain's, LIEberman's and now Dodd's. Anyone else on the line to tarnish their legacy?

[Algorem]

121. it's all just rhetoric anyway

just one big party

[Alter Ego]

122. I can understand Dodd protecting a colleague from the same state, but Chris,

say it ain't so! You disappoint our alma mater! (Dodd and I are both PC grads).