Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Are heads over here exploding yet?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Bread and Circus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:21 PM
Original message
Are heads over here exploding yet?
=================================================================================================

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/10/obama-wants-lieberman-to_n_142731.html

Obama Wants Lieberman To Remain In Democratic Caucus

President-elect Barack Obama has informed party officials that he wants Joe Lieberman to continue caucusing with the Democrats in the 111th Congress, Senate aides tell the Huffington Post.

Obama's decision could tie the hands of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who has been negotiating to remove Lieberman as chair of the Homeland Security and Government Reform committee while keeping him within the caucus. Lieberman has insisted that he will split from the Democrats if his homeland security position is stripped.

=================================================================================================

Frankly, I think it's probably wise of Obama. Keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
THUNDER HANDS Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:22 PM
Response to Original message
1. practically speaking, there's no advantage to kicking him out
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cronus Protagonist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. I haven't heard anyone in the DNC calling for L to be kicked out of his caucus
Just his chairmanship, which is entirely appropriate since he may be caucusing with us, but he's not in our side.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
John Q. Citizen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:25 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Take his chairmanship and leave him in the caucus. Give him some subcommittee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moodforaday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:28 PM
Response to Reply #1
7. You could just as well say
You could just as well say there's no advantage in putting a thief behind bars, since he's already stolen the stuff, sold it and spent the money.

Do you really want Lieberman to keep sticking knives in the party's back?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alter Ego Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:43 PM
Response to Reply #7
14. He supported the losing candidate and is now in a VERY hostile Senate
where most Republicans don't like him and a lot of Democrats are pissed too.

And he's probably not going to be reelected either because CT hates him now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #1
17. What about giving his chairs to a younger, more deserving dem?
Sounds practical to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:47 PM
Response to Reply #1
18. The issue is who will win the CT Senate race in 2012.
If we drive Lieberman to the Republicans now, then we can get a good Democrat from CT to work for the people for decades starting after the 2012 election.

If not, then Lieberman may still be in the Senate decades from now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sharp_stick Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:50 PM
Response to Reply #18
20. I really don't think Lieberpuke
will ever run in CT again. The Democrats in the State hate his guts and the pukes won't nominate him here because of his history. At the end of his term he's history IMO
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Doityourself Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:23 PM
Response to Original message
2. I will go with what Obama wants..but I won't cry if LIEberman chokes on a pretzel! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Freddie Stubbs Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 08:40 AM
Response to Reply #2
38. I'm more inclined to go with what SENATE DEMOCRATS want
Since it is their caucus, and they will have to work with Lieberman every day.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:24 PM
Response to Original message
3. I don't like it, but I think it's a moot point anyway.
He'll be out on his ass in another 18 months, when he gets killed in the next primary. He will NEVER succeed in another half-assed 'independent democrat' run again.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #3
16. Lieberman's next election is 2012. NT
NT
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RaleighNCDUer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Nov-12-08 10:11 AM
Response to Reply #16
44. My mistake - I thought he ran last in '04.
I guess the last two years just FELT like 4 years.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lerkfish Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:25 PM
Response to Original message
5. there's a difference between stripping of chairmanship and staying in the caucus.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
acmavm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:31 PM
Response to Original message
8. I have been saying to wait until OBAMA actually does something
before jumping in his shit. Well as far as I'm concerned, this qualifies. And I'm jumping.

The guy needs to go. He should have been gone long ago.

Why are traitors so unjustly rewarded in America these days?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
marlakay Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:34 PM
Response to Original message
9. Dodd said the same thing so he was trying to explain
I don't like Lieberman either but we have to realize Obama said he is going to reach out to both sides and if Joe promises to vote with Obama on most issues i can see that...but about him being head of committees what is obama going to do about that??

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Barack_America Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:37 PM
Response to Original message
10. Obama "would like it", "wants it" or "demands it"?
This snippet does little to clarify whether Obama truly wants Lieberman to stay, even if it means letting him keep his chairmanship -OR- whether Obama is just trying to appear magnanimous, but is really just giving Lieberman extra rope with which to hang himself if he bolts.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sniffa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:40 PM
Response to Original message
11. Does he think Chambliss, Coleman and Stevens are going down?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Alter Ego Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:41 PM
Response to Original message
12. Well, I don't like it, but frankly, Lieberman's fucked anyway.
He revealed his true colors, and CT will boot his ass out when he goes up for reelection.

With the Democrats having as large a Senate majority as they have, he doesn't have NEARLY as much power as he did before.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
soleft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:43 PM
Response to Original message
13. Again, intellect vs. emotions
I'm not sure we've seen much of this in our leaders. it's down right Ghandiesque.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Strelnikov_ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 04:19 PM
Response to Reply #13
27. Yep n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:43 PM
Response to Original message
15. If we drive Lieberman to the Republican caucus now, then we can get rid of him in 4 years.
If not, then Lieberman may still be in the Senate 25 years from now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Essene Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
19. Get over it...
Taking his power is sufficient.

Obama needs a lot of bi-partisan moderates. Lieberman's integrity may be a legitimate issue but let's get over that crap.

The fact that he got up there with Mccain/Palin during the hate fest is as despicable as it can get, but I'll wait to see how he acts in the senate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:53 PM
Response to Reply #19
23. We know how LIEberman acts in the Senate. He didn't to anything with his committee that was supposed
to oversee the executive branch. But, he supported that executive (Bush). He didn't support the new executive (Obama).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cessna Invesco Palin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
21. Meh. The Jihad against Lieberman was never hugely popular to begin with...
...outside of the netroots. I personally feel that the fucker should lose his committee assignments, but it's not the end of the world.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #21
24. On the contrary, LIEberman very nearly lost his Senate seat two years ago and lost his primary. (nt)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cessna Invesco Palin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:59 PM
Response to Reply #24
25. Nearly lost? By ten percentage points?
Anyway, what does any of that have to do with this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 04:37 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. Yes, if the Republicans had run an actual candidate instead of throwing their support to LIEberman,
LIEberman would have lost that Senate seat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cessna Invesco Palin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 05:57 AM
Response to Reply #28
32. If this, that, or the other thing... not relevant.
What happened was predictable and predicted. It's not my fault that certain people can't deal with reality. I doubt he'd win today, but he won, decisively when he ran.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 11:14 AM
Response to Reply #32
40. It wasn't predicted that he would run as an independent at the time and join with the Repugs. (nt)
Edited on Tue Nov-11-08 11:14 AM by w4rma
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cessna Invesco Palin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #40
41. You couldn't predict he'd run as an independent?
That's funny, Lieberman was able to predict it:

http://edition.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/07/03/lieberman/index.html

And it had been predicted by others well before that. I still don't see how the outcome of the 2006 election is relevant to whether or not he keeps his committee assignments. Plenty of other things are relevant. This really isn't.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w4rma Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 01:10 PM
Response to Reply #41
43. I think it's all relevent to his committee assignment, but nonetheless he sat on his hands as chair
of the committee he is trying so desperately to hold onto. There should be *no* Democratic seats used on his traitor while there are more qualified, more loyal, and more hardworking Democratic Senators who want these seats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
moodforaday Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 03:53 PM
Response to Original message
22. Are you effin kidding me?
Edited on Mon Nov-10-08 03:54 PM by marekjed
DU needs a whole section for exploding heads. It would be for posts like the OP, and like these:

Obama advisers signal Republican roles in administration - The Boston Globe

WASHINGTON - Top advisers to Barack Obama sent a strong message yesterday that Republicans will play a vital role in his administration (...)

Valerie Jarrett, a longtime friend to Obama who is cochairwoman of his transition team, suggested that Obama intends to appoint Republicans to his cabinet or other important posts and does not rule out keeping on Defense Secretary Robert Gates when he takes power in January.

"He thinks he'll make better decisions if he's pushed hard by people with perspectives that are wide and broad," Jarrett said on CBS's "Face the Nation" yesterday, in a response to a question about speculation that Obama will appoint Republicans to cabinet-level positions. "It is important to him to have that kind of breadth at the table." (...)

Meanwhile, Rahm Emanuel, a representative from Illinois who will serve as Obama's White House chief of staff, told ABC's "This Week" that John McCain, Obama's Republican rival, "will be a partner" in the next administration.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/11/10/obama_advisers_signal_republican_roles_in_administration/



Fed Defies Transparency Aim in Refusal to Disclose (Update2)

The Federal Reserve is refusing to identify the recipients of almost $2 trillion of emergency loans from American taxpayers or the troubled assets the central bank is accepting as collateral.

Fed Chairman Ben S. Bernanke and Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson said in September they would comply with congressional demands for transparency in a $700 billion bailout of the banking system. Two months later, as the Fed lends far more than that in separate rescue programs that didn't require approval by Congress, Americans have no idea where their money is going or what securities the banks are pledging in return.

``The collateral is not being adequately disclosed, and that's a big problem,'' said Dan Fuss, vice chairman of Boston- based Loomis Sayles & Co., where he co-manages $17 billion in bonds. ``In a liquid market, this wouldn't matter, but we're not. The market is very nervous and very thin.''

Bloomberg News has requested details of the Fed lending under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act and filed a federal lawsuit Nov. 7 seeking to force disclosure.

The Fed made the loans under terms of 11 programs, eight of them created in the past 15 months, in the midst of the biggest financial crisis since the Great Depression. (...)
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aatlky_cH.tY&refer=worldwide



New envoy urges US to bail out Pakistan

WASHINGTON - With Pakistan teetering on the brink of bankruptcy, Husain Haqqani put on a powder blue tie and made his pitch. A quick infusion of US cash, he said, would ensure that Pakistan will be able to afford to keep up its expensive military operations near the Afghan border.

"All Pakistan is asking for is a bailout of $10 billion to fight terrorism" and get back on its feet, he told a packed audience recently at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a Washington-based think tank.

Fleeing investors and mounting debts have become serious threats for Pakistan, along with a smoldering insurgency and a history of corruption. Now Haqqani - a former Boston University professor of international relations who became Pakistan's ambassador to the United States in May - is charged with an almost impossible task: trying to secure more funding from the already depleted coffers of the US government. (...)
http://www.boston.com/news/world/asia/articles/2008/11/10/new_envoy_urges_us_to_bail_out_pakistan/


...and on and on...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democrattotheend Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #22
30. Obama pledged to appoint Republicans to his cabinet during the campaign
So I don't see why anyone should get upset about this now. It's very much in line with his governing philosophy...one of his favorite books is about Lincoln's cabinet of rivals.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Strelnikov_ Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 04:17 PM
Response to Original message
26. Not mine. O is a pragmatist. Keep Lieberman, they are one seat closer to 60
If Lieberman starts to be a problem in his votes, then he can be dumped.

Politics is the art of the possible.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Egnever Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 04:40 PM
Response to Original message
29. not a bit I want him to continue to caucuss with dems as well
What i dont want is him chairing any commitees.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kath Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-10-08 05:17 PM
Response to Original message
31. Watch this video:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Window Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 06:18 AM
Response to Original message
33. As I mentioned in another post on this subject,
I think I see what Obama is doing, and I think it's a smart move.

In his effort to appear bipartisan, President-Elect Obama has probably already discussed this with Reid and told him to strip Joe of his committees, but let him caucus with Democrats. If this is unacceptable to Lieberman, then so be it. Bye bye.

We all get what we want except Lieberman, and Obama's hands are clean.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harun Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 07:12 AM
Response to Original message
34. I am not upset over this. Lieberman can't pull any of his pro-war neo-con
bullsh*t with the reality in Congress and the WH now. Don't get me wrong I would love to see him impeached completely out of the Senate. But Obama saying that is not a big deal to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
D23MIURG23 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 08:05 AM
Response to Original message
35. If Lieberman keeps his committee Obama will regret it.
Lieberman should be nowhere near any oversight committee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OneBlueSky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 08:14 AM
Response to Original message
36. keep your enemies close . . . but don't give them postions of power . . .
Lieberman has more than earned being booted from his chairmanship . . . and Obama is going to have enough problems without having to deal with a maverick committee chair in the Senate . . .

maybe Joe can be the official greeter in the Senate . . . you know, like those seniors who hand you a sale flyer when you enter Home Depot . . . yeah, that's the ticket . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnnyCougar Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 08:39 AM
Response to Original message
37. Can't they compromise?
Isn't he chair of two committees? Can't they take one of them away from Lieberman, with the threat of taking the other one away if he doesn't shape up? Leaving him with one committee chairmanship gives the Dems further leverage, and it gives Lieberman a reason to work to keep it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 09:00 AM
Response to Original message
39. Stupid move. He will live to regret it.
Bill Clinton did the same thing, thinking he was handing over an olive branch. The sentiment was not returned.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wyldwolf Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Nov-11-08 11:36 AM
Response to Original message
42. Embracing Lieberman AND Emanuel... lol... well, I'm fine with Rahm..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 11:04 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC