Bio
The short version: Jill Miller Zimon writes the topical blog, Writes Like She Talks (www.writeslikeshetalks.com) and often highlights the paucity of...
 
 
 
 

What’s Hot on BlogHer.com

Lapping up or lamenting Joe Lieberman?

  • Share This Post
  • submit
  • 10
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

Looking back, it seems kind of crazy, the pre-occupation with What Will They Do To Joe Lieberman? But the truth is, I still can't decide if it really matters or not.

If you've been in retreat from politics since November 4 and aren't familiar with the details of how the U.S. Senate, primarily Democrats, boiled over with anger toward the U. S. Senator Joe Lieberman (CT-I), basically, he endorsed fellow Senator John McCain for president, he was not nice to Barack Obama during the campaigning and the Senate Dems felt as though they'd had enough of his maverickiness.

This transcript from his interview last night with Katie Couric provides more background, but you can also watch the few minute clip:

Most people I know seem to have much firmer opinions about Lieberman's fate that I do.

Lisa Renee Ward at Liberal Common Sense sensed that whatever decision was made, it would be a bellwether for who is really in charge:

What happens today will demonstrate who is truly in charge of the
Senate when it comes to the Democratic Party. Those more to the left
who have wanted something done about Lieberman since he decided to run as an "Independent" or the Washington insider politics as usual members of the Democratic Party.

...

This one decision by the Senate Democrats will give a very good look into who holds the power and what we can expect.

Myrna the Minx at Reno and its Discontents wrote about her desire to send Joe packing not once:

Senator Joe Lieberman is begging to be kicked out of the Senate’s Democratic caucus. While stumping for John McCain in Florida, Lieberman sat down for an interview with the conservative news outlet, Newsmax
and told them that ” he is so disappointed with the Democratic Party, he will consider whether to bolt the Democratic Senate caucus next session.”

Why wait Senator Reid? Kick Joe Lieberman out now!

but twice:

I think the Senate Democrats should kick Joe Lieberman out of their caucus no matter how many seats they gain this election. Lieberman has already threatened to leave the caucus/party anyway because he’s so “disappointed with the Democratic Party.” Harry Reid, let’s give Lieberman what he really wants–OUT. The Bold Progressives aren’t as mean as me. They want to let Lieberman stay if he ends up being the 60th vote the Democrats need to get Obama’s legislation passed...

The plight and plunder of Lieberman resulted in multiple posts by Suburban Guerilla over the last few days. including this excerpt from one she titled, "Please, Stop Hitting Us. But We'll Still Like You If You Don't!":

It now appears that Joe Lieberman will get a symbolic slap on the wrist tomorrow from the pantywaists known as Democratic senators. They’re going to remove him as chair of a couple of subcommittees he doesn’t [care] about anyway, and leave him in charge of the important Homeland Security committee, where he will continue to obstruct any significant Democratic progress or oversight.

But they’re going to speak to him in very stern tones, so I’m sure he’s going to turn over a new leaf!

Likewise, Echidne of the Snakes is unimpressed by the treatment of Lieberman as all being part of unity:

I myself think that Joe acted like a traitor to his old party, but Harry Reid disagrees:

Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.) said that, "Joe Lieberman is a Democrat. He's part of this caucus."

If the past Republican era was one where the Democrats came to face the Republicans' guns with old and rusty swords, the new Democratic era appears to be one where the main Democratic weapons are Q-tips.

Vivian Paige writes simply and effectively at her blog of the same name, "Politics as usual." Though this Haiku, from Mad Kane's Political Madness, sums up the majority of opinions in an efficient way too:

Democrats hand Joe
A tiny slap on the wrist.
Thumbs down to the Dems.

Of course, there's inevitable wondering, what do Jewish voters think? Especially, maybe, Jewish voters in CT but also nationally, vis a vis Israel.

Well, like pretty much everything that has to do with the Middle East, it's not so simple. For one thing, Lieberman is at heart a Democrat, but the Republican hawks love him

  • 10
  • Sparkle (
    )
     

Comments

Post comment as twitter logo facebook logo
Sort: Newest | Oldest
Jill Miller Zimon 7 pts

Yup - I agree with you too! Re: Joe made the choices, he should have been made to feel the consequences. It's not so hard for any of us to get the political nature of Reid's decision but that really doesn't make it any easier to take.  And again I find myself asking, in any other arrangement - business, personal - would we do this? Why do we make different rules for politics? Is it the power? the control? what?

Jill
Writes Like She Talks ( http://www.writeslikeshetalks.com )

Jill Miller Zimon 7 pts

I definitely see your perspective and could easily be persuaded that that's what needed to happen re: cleaning house.  But I think your second paragraph also includes a lot of the reasons why they did what they did and again, we have to settle for saying, the voters will have the ultimate judgment.  And - like Babz said and I'm suggesting, maybe he will just become impotent?

Jill
Writes Like She Talks ( http://www.writeslikeshetalks.com )

grannysu 5 pts

Granny Sue Stories from the Mountains and Beyond www.grannysu.blogspot.com ( http://www.grannysu.blogspot.com ) susannaholstein@yahoo.com

I think the Democrats' actions all boil down to being practical. The Congress is still fairly evenly split and every vote counts. They need this turncoat, unfortunately, for ihs vote, and I think that was the real bargaining chip he carried into those meetings.

I would like to have seen them show him the door in no uncertain terms. He chose to be an Independent and he chose to campaign for McCain. What is ambiguous about that? What it comes down to is Joe is for Joe and whatever he thinks will butter his bread. I can't even stand the sound of his voice. For me it's not a Democrat/Repulbican thing, it's an honesty thing. The man is sleazy and slippery, doing what is best for his own self-interest. Please, CT, vote him out!

Jill Miller Zimon 7 pts

Hey Oengus - glad to see you joined here.

I think you're right to say that people who work both sides shouldn't be discounted, but I do agree with others that the boundaries of loyalty sure got a workout from Lieberman.  On the other hand, I have been a staunch supporter that no one should be ridiculed or shunned because they have friends who might have wildly different beliefs than we do.  So - I need to stand by that, I suppose, and conclude that it's up to the voters in the end.

Jill
Writes Like She Talks ( http://www.writeslikeshetalks.com )

Hatchet 5 pts

The problem I have with keeping Joe is this: keeping him makes the Dems look weak. If we can't clean up our own house and get turncoats like Joe kicked out, then how are we supposed to do anything truly important like pass legislation?! Also, if Joe is that last vote needed, assuming the Dems all vote in a bloc (which they NEVER do), then perhaps that legislation isn't good enough?

 The Dems need moderate Repubs to work with them in Congress. Both sides actually Need one another. They always have, they always will. It's the reality of politics. Not everyone thinks alike and they shouldn't. The main problem the Dems have is that because we're all individual thinkers, we can't actually vote lock step (Unlike the Repubs). However, keeping Joe for just that one extra vote seems like a waste of our time. Joe has shown his colors repeatedly. Why is Reid willing to keep putting up with him? Kick him to the curb already!

Oengus1963 5 pts

I have to agree and think that his roles and position in his chair are important considerations.

What are root causes of radical fundamentalisms? What legislation comes across the committee? What threats exist as that is what his chair is all about, that and the legislation related to national security.

What committees do and how they operate and who chairs them…

http://lieberman.senate.gov/about/committees.cfm ( http://lieberman.senate.gov/about/committees.cfm )

Lieberman is not that outside of the parties positions, neither is McCain for that matter. For Lieberman to support McCain probably only made sense to the two of them, moderates attempting to stick together?

The campaign is over and the real matters should be dealt with as real matters, not political matters, Lieberman is not going to undermine a process, neither will McCain and if they do then these instances should be looked at with less partisan perceptions. Do not discount those that work both sides of the aisle particularly the ones that have been doing it for decades.

( http://lieberman.senate.gov/about/committees.cfm )

Jill Miller Zimon 7 pts

In some ways, doesn't it almost feel as though he has made himself completely irrelevant, in trying to BE relevant?  As though he's impotent now - maybe we'll have to wait to see how he functions in his chairmanship to really know for sure what impact if any his being the chair will make on anything.  But it just feels like all the air has gone out of this one - we're all fatigued of him I think and it was almost more a test of the leadership than anything else, even though it seems like that shouldn't have been the case.

Jill
Writes Like She Talks ( http://www.writeslikeshetalks.com )

Tacomamama 5 pts

..."keep your friends close and your enemies closer."  I am sick of his antics and would like him to go away, but objectively it's probably a good idea to keep him right where the democratic party can see him. At least as long as he remains in office.

Tacoma Mama ( http://www.tacomamama.com )

( http://kitchentablemama.blogspot.com/ )

Jill Miller Zimon 7 pts

I'm totally on the same page - I think making people face the people they've walked away from or hurt or crossed is far more challenging than banishment, esp. when the voters can have the ultimate say.  I don't see how his staying on actually hurts anyone anymore than he has already hurt anybody, if in fact has has (and given that Obama won, it's hard to see the damage).

On the other hand, it would be naive for me to think that the whole ricochet that he's gone through hasn't impacted us at all - but honestly, I feel like whatever impact it had has been temporary and that he will ultimately be the one to feel the consequences of his choices.  I know as a parent, that's what I'm always trying to teach my kids. Amazing that I'm talking about Lieberman in that way!! Oy.

Thanks for the contribution - and nice new photo of you, yeah??!

Jill
Writes Like She Talks ( http://www.writeslikeshetalks.com )

Lovebabz 6 pts

He has to sit in a Chair that the DEMS so graciously allow him to sit in.  He has to live with that fact everyday.

Come on, He has to sit in the chair that the winning team holds out for him. You know Homeland is going to change in scope and authority and he will have to MAKE those changes.

It will serve the DEMS in the long run, because Lieberman has already shown us who he really is. So now he has new masters to serve. And he will skip, jump and sing to a new tune...and he will.

Eating crow at the table of those you deserted is just desserts indeed.

Be loving & Be in LOVE