Daily Kos

We Can't Afford Senator Lieberman Anymore

by Armando

Wed May 25, 2005 at 09:44:22 AM PDT

This diary will not be a diatribe against Joe Lieberman. He has a right to hold the views he does and strike the tone and deals he does. It's not about the nuclear deal. It is simply this:

From a state like Connecticut, we simply can not afford a Joe Lieberman. I'm sure he believes he is acting in an honorable fashion and with principle. But, even if he stopped shooting at Dems, and embracing Republicans like Santorum, which is what causes my blood to boil, he simply is the wrong man for this time and that state.

So, as a test of ideas within our Party at a primary,  one of my central ideas of reform, I propose that ctkeith and his crew consider focusing not on Lieberman's voting report card - note he voted against Owen today, even though he struck a deal to insure her confirmation (same thing he did with the bankruptcy bill) - but rather on whether someone of Lieberman's compromising makeup is the type of Democratic Senator we need right now from Connecticut. My argument is no, we do not want that nor can we afford it.  

Tags: (all tags) :: Previous Tag Versions

Permalink | 66 comments

  •  swami (4.00 / 4)

    You around?

    What's going on in Conn.? Who's the candidate?

    Everybody dies alone.

    by Armando on Wed May 25, 2005 at 09:43:06 AM PDT

  •  a "processist" (none / 1)

    Describing Lieberman in terms of legal scholarship, I would argue that he falls in the "process" school.  That is, legal results are validated (or not), depending on whether the process complied with the rules agreed to by the parties in advance.  The problem is that this GOP plays Calvinball; the rules are precisely what they say they are, depending on the day, the topic, and Frist's mood.  Lieberman's efforts to lay down beforehand the rules of the game are irrelevant.  Hiss failure to recognize and acknowledge this is a far larger shortcoming than his voting record.

    Are you a Republican? A conservative? A dumbass? -- The Majority Report

    by Passing Shot on Wed May 25, 2005 at 09:45:36 AM PDT

    •  hmmmm (4.00 / 6)

      No one has a better view of how the GOP plays than Lieberman or any other Democratic senator --- your post seems to imply that somehow Lieberman is an innocent victim, when he'd have to be a moron to not figure out what is going on. I give him more credit than that.

      A far simpler explanation is that he enjoyed the attention he got as a national candidate, and that this m.o. is the only way he is going to continue receiving it. Far be it for him to simply recede back into the ranks of good Democratic foot soldier (which is precisely what we desperately need him to be right now).

      Every good Christian should line up and kick Jerry Falwell's ass. - Barry Goldwater, 1981

      by Doug in SF on Wed May 25, 2005 at 09:59:18 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I agree with this (none / 0)

        Everybody dies alone.

        by Armando on Wed May 25, 2005 at 10:01:51 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Great Point (4.00 / 3)

        I've always thought Holy Joe found the attention he received in 2000 to be addictive.  He's also one of those "I'd Rather Be Right Than President And/Or Popular" types who delights in acting as if he's standing up for principle.  Such people get so in the habit of doing that, they end up seeing principles to stand up for where there are none.

        "L'enfer, c'est les autres." - Jean Paul Sartre, Huis Clos

        "L'enfer, c'est le GOP!" - JJB, from an idea by oratorio

        by JJB on Wed May 25, 2005 at 10:12:38 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  One thing for sure, (none / 1)

        He sure does seem to like the press he gets as the de facto "voice of reason" on the news programs.  I don't want to say that he hasn't got other considerations going on; in particular, it seems clear that that DLC-ish corner of the Democratic party is held in thrall to corporate donations, even if those corporate donors would much rather back the Republican party.  

        But probably a big part of the thrill of being Joementum is that the corporate media love to hear from Democrats with funky, outside-the-box, alternative viewpoints -- that is, such ruggedly individualistic stances as utter inside-the-box fealty to Republicans.  Why such rugged iconoclasm is not demanded of Republican voices on the networks and cable news remains unclear.

        Nothing requires a greater effort of thought than arguments to justify the rule of nonthought. -- Milan Kundera

        by Dale on Wed May 25, 2005 at 10:24:42 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  We have Joe (none / 0)

          the Republicans have McCain. Same concept, both are called upon by the media to show an alternative within their respective parties to the party line.

          I would argue that both are needed. Moderates make the best policy.

          by daisycolorado on Wed May 25, 2005 at 10:33:31 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  McCain is from Arizona (none / 0)

            Lieberman is from Connecticut.

            Let Ben Nelson be our McCain.

            Everybody dies alone.

            by Armando on Wed May 25, 2005 at 10:38:53 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  Depends upon what you mean (4.00 / 3)

            by "moderate."

            If you mean a Dem with both a spine and centrist policies, look at someone like Dean or Reid.  (A cursory glance at Dean's policies as Vermont governor doesn't support his media portrayal as a "wild-eyed radical.")

            If, on the other hand, you mean someone who can't make up his mind whether to spend more of his time being craven to the far right or contemptuous towards his own party's base, then yeah, Lieberman's your man.

            Nothing requires a greater effort of thought than arguments to justify the rule of nonthought. -- Milan Kundera

            by Dale on Wed May 25, 2005 at 10:55:11 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  The Voice of Reason ... (none / 0)

          tells us to just lay back and enjoy it, 'cause it is going to happen anyway.

          Get a new Voice of Reason.

          'Kumbaya' is not a plan.

          by linnen on Thu May 26, 2005 at 08:40:21 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  nail on the head (4.00 / 2)

        A far simpler explanation is that he enjoyed the attention he got as a national candidate, and that this m.o. is the only way he is going to continue receiving it.

        Yup.  Joe is an attention whore.  And he loves going on Meet the Press, et al., and being stroked and petted by rightwingers for being the "reasonable" Democrat.  It's his BRAND.

        And I'm afraid that he's going to try to strengthen his dubious brand by helping to find a "bipartisan solution" to the Social Security "crisis," snatching a defeat out of the jaws of a potentially great Dem victory.  

        Maybe he just wants the President to kiss him again.  

        JOHN McCAIN = George W. Bush's 3rd term.

        by chumley on Wed May 25, 2005 at 10:50:29 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Could be, (none / 0)

        but do you really think he's that calculating?

        Are you a Republican? A conservative? A dumbass? -- The Majority Report

        by Passing Shot on Wed May 25, 2005 at 10:58:11 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  It's not calculating at all.. (4.00 / 2)

          ... it's purely emotional.  It is no different than a child who has discovered that throwing a tantrum gets lots of attention.  They do it because they like the strokes they get, but they don't necessarily sit down and say thoughtfully "hmmmm.... I feel underappreciated so I think I'll start screaming now."  They just start screaming.

          Joe's scream for attention just happens on a conversational level.

          The chips are down. Find your outrage.

          by sj on Wed May 25, 2005 at 11:27:17 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  voting and talking (4.00 / 4)

    I think most of us agree that on voting alone, Leiberman is weak, but not subversive. As long as they don't dominate the party and set it's agenda, people who vote like Lieberman are okay. It takes all kinds.

    Lieberman is almost alone in his tendency to harm progressive efforts by the rhetorical aid and comfort he gives to the far right, over and over and over again. If he were in a deep red state, I could probably even look the other way for the vote for Reid for leader. But gosh golly gee, the guy is in Connecticut. Democrats in New England really oughtto be in the liberal vanguard and the GOP in that area is more like Lieberman. Were it not for the efforts of the whips, I think Snowe and Chafee would be superior to Lieberman.

    -8.00,-3.69

    by pHunbalanced on Wed May 25, 2005 at 09:45:55 AM PDT

  •  sorry Armando (none / 1)

    While the wonky types who frequent this site may be more concened with the process issues of Leiberman's covering for Republicans, the votes to actually defeat him in a Primary will only come from folks pissed at him over issues,  like Censorship, the Wars, PATRIOT ACT, and the Drugwar.

    This is a test of the Emergency Free Speech System.
    This is only a test.
    If this had been an actual emergency, I'd already be locked up.

    by ben masel on Wed May 25, 2005 at 09:49:48 AM PDT

  •  Agree!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (none / 0)

    Republicans : Socialism for the rich, capitalism for the poor

    by ctsteve on Wed May 25, 2005 at 09:51:30 AM PDT

  •  I have $100.00 (4.00 / 3)

    for a good candidate to make him Joe-away.

    Anyone know where I can send it?

    by sandblaster on Wed May 25, 2005 at 09:53:44 AM PDT

  •  Any recent approval ratings (none / 1)

    or polls measuring the Joementum among his constituents?

    I'm originally from CT, and moms is still there, and trying to convince them that Joe is a mess is pretty difficult...  I'd be curious to see what kind of perception the non-Kosers/average CT'ers have of him at this point.

    by Abbott on Wed May 25, 2005 at 09:57:03 AM PDT

    •  asdf... (4.00 / 4)

      April 6 is the most recent poll I know of.  Data here.  

      67-22 approve/disapprove (FWIW, Dodd had 65-20 approve/disapprove in the same poll.)

      Breakdown of approve numbers:
      72-18 among Republicans  (Dodd 51-34)
      66-23 among Democrats  (Dodd 77-12)
      66-22 among Independents  (Dodd 67-19)
      68-24 among men  (Dodd 64-25)
      66-20 among women  (Dodd 66-16)

      Other numbers of interest--70% "strong leader," 78% "honest and trustworthy," 69% "cares about the needs and problems of people like you," 57% "shares your views on issues you care about," 70% "pays attention to the needs of CT."

      I see two numbers in the poll that give anti-Lieberman people any help--one is the Dodd Lieberman approval differential, and the other is the 57% "shares your views" number.  Even so, given the other numbers, I don't think it's worth it.

      by profmatt on Wed May 25, 2005 at 10:22:21 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  yikes (none / 1)

        thanks for that.  Talking to the folks from home, that is definitely the impression I get.  For all his faults, Joe (or at least his office) is exceptionally good at responding to individual issues - in fact, he helped my fam get vet benefits years ago...  things like that go a long way with people.

        I don't like Joe on a national level at all, but he seems to do a pretty amazing job of keeping his base solid.  And in the end, that's pretty much what matters for his re-election purposes.  And if he helps keeps the Groton sub-base open, well, that won't help his potential opponents any...

        by Abbott on Wed May 25, 2005 at 10:29:00 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Those are, obviously!, Across-the- (none / 1)

        Board Approval Nos. TO DIE FOR....

        To look at those Nos. and deduce, 'Yeah, Joe's vulnerable', is a disconnect from reality! lol

        [I watch this from the sidelines w/some amusement-being in PA, we have bigger fish to fry a/k/a Santorum ;)]

        Cats, err, Pooties! for Obama

        by PhillyGal on Wed May 25, 2005 at 10:32:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Let me... (none / 1)

          preemptively state the case that will be made "against" these numbers--that they fail to capture an anger among a certain segment of voters who are exceedingly likely to vote in the Dem primary.  I think that's true, to an extent, but not nearly to the extent necessary to undermine the approval numbers.

          by profmatt on Wed May 25, 2005 at 10:34:46 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Plain silly (none / 0)

          If the Dems don't like him, he loses in a primary.

          so save your lols. You're are being silly.

          Everybody dies alone.

          by Armando on Wed May 25, 2005 at 10:36:21 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  Excuse me (none / 1)

        Is this a typo?

        "In a possible Democratic primary, Dodd gets 35 percent, to 33 percent for Blumenthal, with no other candidate above 7 percent."

        Dodd is not up till 2008.

        Do they mean Lieberman? Blumenthal plans to run against dodd? Is he nuts?

        Everybody dies alone.

        by Armando on Wed May 25, 2005 at 10:35:22 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

  •  We Never Could [n/t] (none / 0)

    "L'enfer, c'est les autres." - Jean Paul Sartre, Huis Clos

    "L'enfer, c'est le GOP!" - JJB, from an idea by oratorio

    by JJB on Wed May 25, 2005 at 10:01:26 AM PDT

  •  Lieberman..... (4.00 / 5)

    Provides the Democratic Party all the joementum of a maxxed-out 30% interest rate credit card.

    He's like having an ARM loan on a pasteboard McMansion in a high rent district when the Chinese banks finally call in their notes and end the party.


    Joe Lieberman is a wet and overly friendly stray full size poodle, on a rainy day, which bounds up  to desposit oily, smelly hairs all over your best job interview pants by attempting to hump your leg, then pisses on your foot and bites you.

    Talk to Action

    by Troutfishing on Wed May 25, 2005 at 10:02:39 AM PDT

  •  Compromise is not Lieberman's problem (none / 0)

    Routinely making deals with the Devil when it is unthinkable and unnecessary is.

    The real problem I have with Geritol Joe is that his positions are at odds with his constituents and his party. And a considerable number of his Jewish brethren, as well. So who, exactly does he represent?

    My own feeling is that he is either beholden to, or an active member of a corporate/hyper-Zionist cabal. And one mustn't forget that there is a connection between the neo-cons and the aggressively pro-Israel lobby. Is Joe a neo-con in worm's clothing?

    NOTE: This is neither anti-Israel, nor anti-semite. And I am not saying there's anything wrong with being pro-Israel, either. But there is something clearly wrong and deceitful about believing that US policy should be created and manipulated in order to promote narrow Israeli goals.

    -8.38, -4.97 "...there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." Hamlet, Act II, Scene ii.

    by thingamabob on Wed May 25, 2005 at 10:07:01 AM PDT

  •  What principal? (none / 0)


     1,650 of our own children used as cannon fodder for a pack of lies?

     Endorsing the murder of some 100,000 Iraqi children, woman, and men (who had nothing to do with Sept. 11)?

     Looking the other way while torture and detention camps are carried out in our name?

     Endorsing the unlawful Bush-Cheney concept of pre-emptive invasion and terror on independent sovereign countries?

      There is a difference between him and all the other weak kneed Democrats who were duped into supporting the "authorization" resolution.  Many of them believed the lies or were just too naive or just had no backbone.

      Leiberman has actually been a promoter and public endorser of the Bush-Cheney madness in every facet of their conduct in foreign policy.

      Leiberman must go!!
      Connecticut can do better than this!!

    by NewAmerica on Wed May 25, 2005 at 11:39:49 AM PDT

  •  Here's the plan: (none / 0)

    Get him!

    If Joe is popular in Connecticutt, its only because he has no competition, no one has opposed him. Let the Dem party ostracize him, and rally around a viable opponent, and Holy Joe is toast.

    It would be easy to do. Just tell the truth about his aisle-crossing shenanigans, and point out how damaging its been.

    Plus, he looks, talks, and acts like he's incompetent and confused. He doesn't inspire trust.

    by ThomasGuy on Wed May 25, 2005 at 12:06:46 PM PDT

Permalink | 66 comments