Which Best Describes Your Attitude Toward Obama's Support of Lieberman?

[Truth Teller]

[babylonsister]

1. What support would that be? He didn't want Lieberman kicked out of

the caucus. Did he not want him stripped of chairmanships, or is that assumed?

And ya know what? No one's talking about Clinton! :hide:

[Truth Teller]

7. Heh

But at least she didn't support McCan't.

[babylonsister]

9. Seems PE Obama got over it. Maybe we need to learn by example. nt

[Truth Teller]

10. He sure doesn't hold a grudge

And is pragmatic as hell. The guy fascinates me.

[Demit]

13. I wish that had been an option in the poll. I would have voted for it.

There's also the fascinating possibility that he's biding his time, understanding that revenge is a dish best served cold. I trust how he sees things way before others do. This may be an example.

[MNDemNY]

11. Yes, we must now follow with out question. It is the American way.

[babylonsister]

12. Bite me. I never said that. Don't put words in my mouth. nt

[MNDemNY]

16. You know full well that if the Liarman was stripped of that chairmanship, he would have left ..

the caucus. Obama knew that as well, conclusions can be drawn, with no stretch. C'mon, you are smarter than that. With out Obama's insistence on retaining in the caucus of the Liarman, he would have been stripped of that committee. You are splitting hairs that are not even there.

[babylonsister]

18. I know no such thing, and neither do you. You are guessing, and

you 'might' be smarter than that.

[MNDemNY]

23. Right, you only "know" what you are told to "know"

:eyes: :crazy:

[babylonsister]

26. No, but I'm not a mind-reader as apparently you are.

:eyes:

[MNDemNY]

35. You are one of about 3 people in the country who do not see the connection.

[Better Believe It]

20. So What? Do You Really Want Him Reporting To Repugs On What Happens In The Caucus?

I don't want him heading up so-called "Homeland Security" unless you have no concern for your civil liberties and democratic freedoms.

If he leaves the Democratic caucus do you really think he'll vote against Democratic proposals 100% of the time?

[MNDemNY]

22. I think you misdirected your post.

Or misread mine. I want him GONE, as well.

[DireStrike]

2. Stupid, unless he has some real dirt on Lieberman.

Lieberman has no honor. He will follow no deals, and Obama has no control over him at this point. Unless there's something behind the scenes.

I can see why Obama would want to do this. But I think it's more trouble than it's worth.

[MNDemNY]

17. And what message does this send in regard to party discipline?

[Bicoastal]

3. I don't know about everyone else, but I like Obama a lot more than I hate Lieberman.

Anyone who says otherwise may have some...issues.

[babylonsister]

6. ...

:thumbsup: Me, too.

[Truth Teller]

8. Me too n/t

[peace13]

4. As long as Obama does away with Homeland Security

I don't mind if Lieberman heads up the committee. You go Joe.

[kiranon]

24. Good idea. n/t

[marylanddem]

5. Obama DID NOT SAY he wanted Lieberman to retain his

chairmanship. Please stop spreading this misinformation.

[clear eye]

19. He said he wanted Lieberman to remain in the Democratic caucus

which gave Lieberman the leverage to demand keeping the chair of HSGA. 1+1=?

[ThePowerofWill]

14. I can almost agree...almost.

I can almost see it from a "keep your friends close, but your enemies closer" angle, but holy Joe is just to dangerous. Reminds me of the old story of the old lady and the snake.

An old lady found a snake exposed and near dead in the winter. She took it in can cared for it, brought it back to health. At the emergence of spring she picked it up to set the snake outside. As she was setting the snake on the ground it turned and bit her on the hand. She wondered aloud why would the snake bite her after she had taken such good care of it. The snake turned and un apologetically told her "hey lady you knew i was a snake when you picked me up".\


Holy Joe is for sure a snake.

[Bryan]

15. I understand where he's coming from

While effective enforcement of boundaries is an important part of any managerial situation, I can't really say that working overtime to get all the Senate Dems on board with reprimanding Lieberman is the best use of Obama's time.

[Better Believe It]

21. So do I. I think the proper word is weak. The opposite of FDR

[LynneSin]

31. As oppose to breaking a campaign promise of ending partisan politcs which would then make Obama...

weak.

Perhaps, if anything Obama has shown his strength and the only ones who are weak to allow petty partisanship to control us. Obama is bringing a whole new world to DC and this is us DUers already running around like a chicken with our heads cut off.

[Better Believe It]

32. So You Think We Should All Link Arms With Right-wingnuts?

[clear eye]

25. He didn't have to say Dems should keep Lieberman in the caucus

When asked, he could have said the decision was up to the Senators, and that he, Obama, would prefer Lieberman remain in the caucus, but that the final decision would remain theirs. The Democratic Senators on their own could have driven a much harder bargain (loss of his main committee chair, retention of the subcommittee chairs), without appearing harsh. If Lieberman didn't know the other side's bottom line--that he had to be given whatever bribe he demanded to stay on board, no matter how inappropriate--he would have been grateful to take the subcommittee chairs and be allowed back into the caucus. Obama removed all the Dems leverage and gave it to Lieberman. That is an attack against loyal Democratic Senators as well as politically inept, unless the point was to show Obama's power over mainstream Democratic Senators, and nevermind the consequences to the work of that important committee. I find it an ominous portent.

[Bryan]

27. No, he didn't have to, so why did he?

I may well be incorrect, but considering the spread, I'm operating from the assumption that the votes to oust Lieberman from the committee weren't there to begin with, and that Obama knew this and preferred to strike a conciliatory tone.

[clear eye]

28. The spread could just have easily resulted from

Obama's having left the Senators no options other than give Lieberman whatever he demanded to stay on board, or be disloyal to the PE right at the start of his stewardship of the party. Obama's statement encouraged Lieberman's intransigence, so the Senators were left with all or nothing.

This smells of Emmanuel's tactics--show your own people right away who's boss.

[Truth Teller]

34. Interesting point

It was by quite a margin.

[LynneSin]

29. Wow - 55 people who would rather Obama break campaign promises

and allow this piece of shit dirtbag try to ruffle Obama's feathers.

Sad but I guess expected.

[Better Believe It]

33. What Promises Did Obama Make To McCain's Main Backer Leiberman?

[fla nocount]

37. Stop asking blue dogs wonder why questions,

You're being cruel.. "Bark! Bark! When's master bringing food? Bark! Bark!"

[Lilith Velkor]

30. Surprising results

I guess all the Koolaid drinkers are over in GD:P rending their freshly soiled garments.

[slackmaster]

36. Other

I haven't been paying attention to the news and really don't know what this topic is about.

[depakid]

38. Naivety

Firtunately, with people like Obama, that's cured easily enough by the school of hard knocks.

Unfortunately, the same can't be said of weakness (which as Cenk points out, Harry Reid just exudes) or cowardice, complicty- and lack of political fortitude, which infects all too many other Democratic senators.