I am sick of watching even people like Bill Maher so uninformed about what the real objection is to Lieberman being stripped of the chairmanship. Let us get one thing clear. Most of us are not asking for him to be booted from the caucus. Our point is this - Strip him of the chairmanship, and if he decides to leave the caucus, let him.
It is important to keep independent voices in your caucus. I have no problem with that. I do have a problem with a chronic bitter malcontent who can't get over any perceived slights in the past. I have a problem with a person who does not respect my point of view on the war in iraq, yet wants me to respect his "independent" opinion on that very same issue.
OK, now if you call a senator's office to put pressure on them, the aides might trot out one of these points. So how do we counter them?
- Do we want to really look petty and punish Lieberman for one transgression?
But is it really just one transgression? This is a guy who badmouthed many Democratic voters for merely exercising their right to vote against him. He has supported more than one Republican senate candidate against a Democratic challenger. While we can forgive him for endorsing McCain, do you really think it is beyond dispute that he went beyond mere support out of friendship when he started badmouthing Obama using Republican talking points regarding his patriotism and national security? Did he have to adopt such a negative tone at the RNC convention or go to such lengths to praise Palin? He has used words against Obama that he hasnt used against Bush or Cheney. Do you seriously want someone who has a higher opinion of Bush and Cheney on Homeland Security to chair that committee? And why would you want to count on him for the possible 60th vote when he has gone on record as saying he fears the Democrats getting the 60th vote for a filibuster proof majority. Should I keep going on or do you want to maintain that he has had just one transgression?
- Lieberman is strong on national security. He is good for Homeland Security.
Let us forget the fact that Lieberman is not even a Democrat. This is a person who refused to investigate the Bush abuses and wants us to move forward. Yet he keeps remembering every slight that happened in his life and keeps badmouthing anti-Iraq war democrats at every opportunity. His middle east agenda is opposite that of Obama's. He is closer to Bush on this policy than Obama. Yet, our senator would even consider that it is OK for him to be chair of Homeland Security? This fact of his unsuitability has NOTHING to do with his non Democratic party membership status. The Iraq war is the biggest foreign policy/war related blunder since Vietnam and Lieberman is more supportive of it than even some Republicans. You still think he is strong on this issue? And if he is, are you implying Obama is not?
- Aren't we a big tent party? Shouldn't we just forgive and forget?
OK, tell me this. Why doesn't Lieberman forgive? Hasn't he and doesn't he continue to bash anyone opposed to his approach on the war on terror? Isn't it hypocritical that he wants us to accept his approach to the middle east as mere difference of opinion when he was unwilling to overlook that difference of opinion in talking about people like Obama and other anti Iraq war liberal Democrats? So ask us to forgive the day after you ask Lieberman to forgive.
- Lieberman is merely an independent thinker. Shouldn't he have that right?
Sure he does. So if he is really an independent thinker who is with us most of the time, shouldn't logic dictate that he bash Republicans more times than he bashes Democrats in recent years? Now take out the campaign run when he had to pander to both parties, can you really say he has bashed Republicans with the same tone as he bashed Democrats? Do you want me to list all the transgressions again? Forget bashing Republicans more times, has he bashed them even once in public with a similar admonishing tone in recent months? .... I am waiting... Take all day...Just name one instance in recent months. So where is this independence? I can think of Republicans who have bashed the Republican party more than so called Mr Independent. And if he is so independent, why does he seem to go mostly on right wing talk radio shows?
- We need him to avoid a filibuster in case we get 57 or 58 seats in the Senate.
This is not the same as needing him as the 51st member to control the senate. You can't avoid a filibuster by virtue of him being in your caucus. He has to actually vote the same way. Do you think there is a chance in hell he will cooperate on issues such as the War on Terror where he is opposed to most Democrats on our approach? Also there is the matter of that Glenn Beck radio interview where he has stated he is opposed to Democrats using a 60 vote majority to deny filibusters. Lieberman himself has said that he feels free now that he is independent. So why even burden him with the chairmanship. SET HIM FREE.
Sir/Madam, we need to appease him. Lieberman could vote the other way on even other issues if he is not in the caucus.
Aaahh. So here's the truth. So you are saying Lieberman has no principles and he is really not Mr Independent and he will vote out of spite and not on principle. Thank you for admitting that.