Reason # 7913 that Joe Lieberman has no moral principles at all, and really is all about Joe Lieberman, period, full stop:
He seems to think that the United States is not safe unless he gets his committee chair back.
From the Hartford Courant:
"Sen. Lieberman prefers to remain in the Democratic caucus," the [Lieberman] aide said. "However, he believes he should remain as chairman of the Homeland Security Committee. ... He thinks that political retribution should not go ahead of homeland security."
In other words, there are NO OTHER PEOPLE out there who can keep us "safe" like Joementum. Booting him off as committee head would mean that the Democratic party is willing to endanger the citizens of the United States for petty reasons, because only Joe Lieberman's awesome powers and mad skills can save them.
(more below....)
This point was first noticed by Greg Sargent at TPM:
Can the Lieberman camp really be arguing that stripping Lieberman of his committee slot is tantamount to putting politics ahead of our safety, because we're so defenseless without him there to protect us?
Never mind that Lieberma's performance as chair of the committee was just awful. Lieberman's camp is now sounding a kind of hollow echo of the same silly scare-mongering tactics that he used against Obama on the GOP's behalf during the campaign, only this time in service of holding onto whatever vestiges of influence he has left. It's a coda to this whole affair that's perfect in its desperation and unintentional self-parody.
Separately, in reference to Dodd's point that President Obama won't want to be distracted from governing by a messy fight over Lieberman's fate, one could argue that this is all the more reason to get this wrapped up now. Senator Reid?
Personally, I doubt that even Lieberman and his people -- deluded as they might be -- truly believe that Joe Lieberman is all that crucial to our nation's security. I might even be more willing to forgive such arrogance if I thought they really were keeping the best interests of the country first and foremost, and thought in their heart of hearts that Lieberman really has, demonstrably, kept the nation safer with his work as head of the commitee.
But I think it's a lot more cynical than that. Downright Cheney-esque, in fact. As Sargent says, Team Lieberman is trying to play the FEAR CARD again, making baseless assertions that are at complete odds with reality and the record... but trying to paint those who oppose his continued political power as traitors to the country.
As both Josh Marshall and Greg Sargent have said, Lieberman has done an absolutely disgraceful job as Homeland Security chair. He could barely find the time to notice the meriad scandals and failures surrounding Hurricane Katrina, and he continued to push for more and more war in the Middle East at the expense of our real security at home. He's done a horrible job, and truly betrayed his country.
For his minions to now suggest that turning down more of Lieberman's abysmal "work" means endangering the country....well, it's shameless in a way that beggars description.
Lieberman continues to be a disgrace, and he needs to be stripped of all power. And Harry Reid, it's up to you and your fellow Senators to do it. However diplomatic Barack Obama has been on this, it's not his job, and shouldn't be his burden.
Do your job, serve your country, and get rid of this quisling Lieberman, whose only real purpose is staying in the spotlight and keeping his power. He's more than earned his exile.
******
UPDATE: As HoundDog correctly points out below, Lieberman, his supporters, and the usual Beltway gasbags will make "keeping Lieberman" a test of Obama's sincerity re bipartisanship and working across the aisle. They're probably already doing so.
That's a trap worth recognizing, and avoiding like the plague. As I said in response...
Obama can and will work across the aisle, but that doesn't mean keeping an ineffectual, self-promoting do-nothing on as chair of a vital committee.
To say the very least -- he and Lieberman have incredibly different philosophies about keeping the nation secure. Lieberman spent the last couple of years telling us that, and made it ultra-clear during the election.
So why would Obama OR Reid hobble this new start, when it's in their power to do so? Of course you have to deal with the Republicans who have been elected, and try to reach out when you can... but you don't have to keep someone in power who's been terrible at his job, and thinks you suck anyway.
Why burden yourself ? There's no great groundswell of popular love or support for Lieberman. It's all Beltway douchebags who even care in the slightest.
Toss him.
There's very little downside to getting rid of Lieberman, in my opinion. Obama WILL show his bipartisanship in plenty of ways, but this would be an unforced error.
Toss him.