If the "Obama lead" Democratic congress cannot/will not even crack the whip with Liarman...

[MNDemNY]

I think it is now safe to predict that NOTHING of any real substance will get done in the next four years. Fuck.

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

1. Agreed. I am very upset over this issue. Keep LIEberman in the caucus, but at the very least...

strip him of that Government Oversight and Reform chairmanship. LIEberman neglected his duty to investigate the Bush administration for all their wrongdoing. If he is allowed to retain his leadership position, who's to say that he won't try to investigate Obama for any and everything that he does.

I'm asking the Democrats to grow a fucking spine. That's all I want!

[Ichingcarpenter]

2. Thanks Nostradamus..... now did you call Schumer and Hillary yet?

Reid and Durban?

[MNDemNY]

10. Yes, yes, yes, and not yet.

[Ichingcarpenter]

12. I think Hillary and Schumer might be a No

What is your read on them?

[MNDemNY]

14. Schumer has said as much, Hillary has been silent, to my knowledge.

[GarbagemanLB]

3. Oh christ. Yeah, it couldn't be a strategic decision on the Democratic leadership's part...

:eyes:

[MNDemNY]

5. I'll believe that when I see some action.

Fuck "bi-partisanship" elections should have consequences, this one, in particular should have HUGE consequences. The right is just wrong, it does not make sense to use ideas that are wrong for the sake of being nice.

[democrattotheend]

4. Or, perhaps they are saving their political capital for stuff they consider more important

Like actual legislation. Of all the things I want Obama and Congress to accomplish, getting revenge at Lieberman is pretty low on the list, since it has so little impact on ordinary people's lives.

[phleshdef]

6. Exactly. The last thing Obama needs is a whole new slew of media attention focusing on negative shit

And thats exactly what a Lieberman demoting along with the impending party switching would lead to.

I'm just as sick of Joe as anyone else, but I also realize the importance of keeping the drama meter in check.

[MNDemNY]

8. So, we should just give-in to people and ideas that are just plain wrong, so we don't look negative

That is bullshit that will get us less than nowhere.

[phleshdef]

18. No. But sometimes the situation is too fragile to screw with making examples of people...

...and I think right now is one of those times. Had Obama cruised in with a stable economy and a peaceful world, then you and I would probably agree on how it should go with Joe Lieberman.

Besides, Joe will have to defend his Senate seat again. I have a feeling the next time around, CN won't be so good to him.

[MNDemNY]

26. Yes, we would not want to make waves, and all.

[phleshdef]

30. We DO need to make steady waves... just not a huge tidal wave.

[MNDemNY]

37. I disagree, a tidal wave is in order.

[knixphan]

55. Yep -

Next time around, I'll surely be donating to his opponent.

[against all enemies]

31. Actions have consequences, let people know upfront or for the next

4 years it will be a free for all. Lieberman must answer for his actions.

[MNDemNY]

38. Yes.

[librechik]

53. nah, If he's in "our crowd" he can shit in our cornflakes

and we'll say thank you.

WHERE IS CHANGE????!!!

[MNDemNY]

7. Political capital?

This is an internal Democratic Party issue, what "political capital" would possibly be spent?

[gravity]

9. We have real issues to worry about

What happens to Lieberman really doesn't really matter compared to the challenges this administration will tackle during the next 8 years.

[MNDemNY]

11. You can not "tackle" any of them with out a spine.

[gravity]

16. What are you expecting to accomplish?

How will punishing Lieberman help Obama push his agenda through Congress?

[MNDemNY]

17. If this is an indication of how he intends to "Push" we will only slide further down the hill.

[gravity]

21. Obama wasn't pushing for anything

[MNDemNY]

23. Sure, Reid changed his mind all by himself.

[Radical Activist]

13. I like your positive attitude. Keep hope alive!

[MNDemNY]

15. Election is over, time to advocate.

But thank you for your concern.

[Radical Activist]

27. You're not advocating anything.

No. Spreading negativity, mind reading and encouraging cynicism doesn't bring change.

[MNDemNY]

39. Letting congressional Democrats know that they must grow a pair, is advocating.

[Radical Activist]

57. Then try doing that. Chicken Little was not an effective advocate.

"I think it is now safe to predict that NOTHING of any real substance will get done in the next four years."

That's not sending a message to Congressional Democrats or advocating anything. That's spreading mindless negativity.
"The sky is falling! Noting will get done for four years!" Give me a break.

[gcomeau]

19. Considering...

...the primary reason to let him keep the chairmanship would be as a step towards blocking Republican filibusters to make sure ANYTHING they want to get done will get through, your statement is ridiculous. There is exactly ONE reason to let Lieberman keep that position. To keep him in the Caucus and keep him voting with the Democrats on their domestic agenda. If they're letting him keep the chairmanship they're obviously confident it will result in votes their way. So your complaint reads like this:

"They're willing to do something I don't like to get things done! This is a sign nothing will get done! ARRGGHHHHHH!"

Take a step back, a few deep breaths, and get the difference between personal vendettas and concrete policy goals into your head. Ousting Lieberman is the former, passing it over to secure the latter is the right trade to make. Obama and Reid show they're willing to do what it takes to make sure the Republicans can't block his legislative agenda even if he has to take a pass on getting in what I'm sure would be a very personally satisfying smackdown on Lieberman to do it... and you're bitching about it being a sign they're not going to push to get things done? You might be pissing and moaning about this now, but if a year or two from now Universal Healthcare came down to one damn vote and kicking Lieberman out of his chairmanship cost it how much would you be savoring getting a shot in on him then?

Priorities.

[MNDemNY]

22. Why do you assume that the Liarman will vote with us?

Is it not just as likely that he will follow the lead of his choice for POTUS?

[Jersey Devil]

29. Exactly! And if he joins Repubs in filibusters Dems can do nothing about it

Once he gets the Chairmanship under Senate Rules he can only be removed by Resolution of the Senate, which can, and would be filibustered by Republicans.

He can just thumb his nose at Dems and do whatever the f**k he wants.

[MNDemNY]

40. Bull shit.

Remember the "nuclear option"? They threatened it, we should use it, for the sake of our nation.

[gcomeau]

52. The fact that they are rather painfully obviously....

...letting him keep the chairmanship position to GET the damn votes. If he turns on them afterwards he can be buried then when he definitely will be serving no purpose in the caucus. As long as he is a vote in our favor however we keep our eye on the ball.

[MNDemNY]

58. The fact is it is much harder to remove him at a later date.

[gcomeau]

60. Which changes nothing.

The equation is still the same. Spike him now, lose the vote. Lose the vote, maybe lose Universal Health Coverage.

If he turns on us later we deal with it when it happens.

[4themind]

20. Obama isn't a senator

he doesn't tell the caucus decide how to allocate its membership, his role is to present bills and consider bills brought up from the legislative branch. If he were intimately involved in the composition of senate committee's themselves THAT would give me extreme pause. Not only that, but he was the subject of Lieberman's bashing. if he didn't recuse himself I'd criticize it in the same way as if a Supreme Court justice (I"m looking at you scalia) refused to recuse himself from a case.

Obama does not have the constitutional/legal power to get rid of lieberman, perhaps you should realistically expect him (and criticize him if he doesn't) to do his job based upon THOSE responsibilities that he does have. Harry Reid is the leader of the senate, obama is in a separate branch of government regardless of what he USED to be. He can try to influence the senators but he can't legally MAKE them do what he wants (from all accounts of constitutional law that I've read), no president can. How do you know btw that he DOESN't want the whip cracked on lieberman ,if by cracking the whip you mean removing his chair. I have seen no official statements from Obama or his team on what they want done regarding the chair at least. Also, Obama's wishes may or may not be followed by the caucus , they are their own people. Maybe you can suggest a way to GUARANTEE that they will "crack the whip on lieberman" (and show that they are not already doing it, as they haven't voted yet and we don't know yet know the results), otherwise this post just seems like relatively unconstructive carping.
All that being said I personally want his homeland security chair to be revoked. What I don't like is that since this is a secret ballot, we won't know how our senators voted.

[MNDemNY]

24. And his recent statements carried no weight?

[4themind]

25. What were his recent statements?-nt

[MNDemNY]

28. He made it very clear that Liarman should be kept in the D caucus...

And Liarman made it clear that he would leave if he was stripped of his chairmanship, thus , this is the outcome.

[4themind]

33. Still not seeing a sourced link from Obama directly

or an official statement from his team. But if for the sake of argument we consider what you said, I'd use the following hypothetical: I want 1 million dollars in one week's time (for myself and my wife), My wife's boss tells her that she'll have to work 140 hrs this week to get it. I still want 1 million dollars, but I don't want her to work to work 1000 hrs a week to get it. What Obama wants to exchange for what he desires isn't intimated from what you wrote. Also the outcome of the vote will be determined after it takes place tomorrow (depending upon what you meant by "this). Again, I will be very dissapointed if lieberman gets that chair, but I will be dissapointed in the people who voted for it directly. I guess that would also give me some concerns for their strength on getting other legislation through, but I'm not going to give up hope on that from know before they are even sworn in, I need to see the actually results (or lack therof) before election time.

[Name removed]

41. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[4themind]

45. Ahh name calling

the last subterfuge of the ill-equipped for debate? You made a claim and when asked to produce evidence of said claim you did not. As I don't have all day to spend "debating/discussing" I'll have to take that as the extent of our argument. :hi:

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[4themind]

51. However you define it

as I've seen it also used like a noun (hence my intention with the question mark at the end of the sentence) I guess we'll see if a moderator views it this way:
"A personal attack against another member of our website, or otherwise uncivil. "
I also don't see it as a logical rebuttal to an argument from my understanding of rhetoric at least.
Anyway you still failed to defend your claim with actual statements from obama.(and yes I extended my time with you, can't make any future promises though)

[Jennicut]

32. Oh please. Ger over you apocalyptic ass and wake up. Bush will be gone.

GONE. No more Shrub and co equals a huge change already. I hate "the world sucks and I can never change it" people. Obama already changed the world by winning. Now get over it already.

[MNDemNY]

46. OK, the job is done. Let's go shopping.

[Jennicut]

54. I have no money for shopping but no time to complain about my new president elect 24/7 either

He needs support right now, you know the Rethugs and the media will give him all kinds of crap. Loserman is my Senator and I dislike him immensely. But kicking him off the committee is small potatoes compared to the problems this country faces and complaining about one little thing equals that its already over for Obama is ridiculous. He has not taken office yet, I believe. As for Loserman, well he really needs to be kicked out of congress. I hope we in CT put up a good candidate against him. His #'s here are not good.

[Doctor_J]

34. This does not bode well for change

Maybe he's going to count this as a Repuke in the Cabinet. Fer chrissakes, Liebermann campaigned for every Repuke that called him, and no Dems.

[BeyondGeography]

35. Another faux pro-Obama voice returns from the wilderness

:eyes:

[MNDemNY]

42. I am Pro-progressive, the election is over, get over your damn self.

[BeyondGeography]

44. Missed you all these months

Was election night tough for you?

[MNDemNY]

47. Not at all, but feet must be held to the fire.

If this IS a sign of things to come, we will fall short of any real change.

[BeyondGeography]

49. You've come back just to give Obama shit

which is what you've always done. Couldn't even wait until Jan. 21. :thumbsup:

[MNDemNY]

50. I never left.

I did as I always said I would, I supported the Democratic nominee with my time, my vote, and a lot of my money. So do not lecture me because I do not follow blindly.

[HeraldSquare212]

36. There's a lot to do. I see a big agenda coming. We need everyone.

[MNDemNY]

43. "WE" do not have him.

And if we move a little further to the right we can get some more!!! Yippeee!!!

[w4rma]

56. You may be right. LIEberman is the worst Senator for that seat. He'll use that position to blackmail

Democrats for the next 2 years. And, worse, I'll have to put up with LIEberman drama for the next two years. He's nothing but a worthless distraction.

[PVnRT]

59. Truly a pathetic attempt to bash Obama

since he has nothing to do with party structure in the Senate.