Quote of the day.

"You know, the desire of revenge is great, of course. But the truth is public policy doesn't run on revenge very well. And when you see the trouble this country has gotten into in terms of foreign policy, where Bush basically ran a foreign policy based on petulance because he was mad at, for example, Mexico, for abstaining on the Security Council when the Iraq War came up, if you have to actually run the country, it is best not to do it based on feeling of anger towards your enemies."

---Howard Dean, commenting on the Dem Senate caucus's decision about Lieberman today.

Link: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/18/dean-applauds-move-to-kee_n_144667.html

I want Lieberman out because we can't trust him as far as I can throw him (and I'm not strong). I wanted him out from the moment he lost the Democratic nomination but still ran because that is the price you pay for being an "Independent" - you don't get any party perks. I want him out because he would sell his own mother up the river if he thought it would keep him in power. And I want him out because he pretty much said he'll filibuster with the Pugs. The revenge part is just icing on the cake.

There are plenty of reasons to want Lieberman out -- it isn't just revenge.
I want change. Keeping him in his cushy position is a slap in the face for a lot of reasons (lots of slaps, I guess).

That's how it would be handled in the movies.

that they were going to be better for the country.

If he really believed that, he is republican - and has questionable judgment.

If he is republican why do we want him caucusing with the dems?

The only reason I can possibly fathom, and I think that Dean was saying as much without using the words, is that jOe liarmann is mole. A double agent man. He is a spy supplying the dem leadership with some neocon intelligence. Granted, that is in short supply but he must be doing something of value or according to Deans logic they surely would have canned his ass.

Good for him, but rewarding someone for slander and campaigning with the opposing party's nominee for president doesn't sound like good politics to me. Putting him in his place and taking away responsibility that belongs to someone who is loyal to the candidate isn't "petulant" - it's justice. This is a huge mistake because, from experience, we know that Lieberman will stab Dems in the back again. His vote with them isn't a sure thing - they'll be sorry.

is that Joe and others have a distorted, non-reality-based view on life here in the USA. Revenge isn't my need to shun all Republicans or Loserman (I wonder if his Republican friends still call him that) from having a hand in the new government. It's just that I really don't think that they have my or your best interests in mind while they seek control of policy and procedure. Revenge isn't necessary for me to say that reaching across the aisle is a bad idea. It's the 12 years of Republican dominance in Congress and the last 8 years of a Republican president who was rubber-stamped by fellow Republicans on policies that even the least "wonky" of us could see was not in the best interest of our citizens that make me wary.