DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 01:07 PM
Original message |
Poll question: Should Joe Lieberman Be Allowed To Caucus With The Democrats? |
|
The reason Harry Reid is the Democratic Majority leader is because Joe Lieberman chooses to caucus with the Democrats...If Joe Lieberman chose to caucus with the Rethuglicans Trent Lott would be the Majority Leader and the Rethuglicans would be the committee leaders...
That being said I share the late Arthur Schlesinger Jr.'s assessment that Joe Lieberman is a "sanctimonious prick."
Should Joe Lieberman be allowed to caucus with the Democrats?
|
mmonk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 01:08 PM
Response to Original message |
1. I sent contributions to Lamont. |
|
I don't think Lieberman needs to even be in the Senate.
|
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 01:09 PM
Response to Reply #1 |
2. That's A Different Question |
mmonk
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 02:24 PM
Response to Reply #2 |
15. No it doesn't but I don't want him to feel he has some sort |
|
of balance of power. Anyone who backs bush/Cheney I consider a political opponent anyway and don't look for help from him.
|
Warren Stupidity
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 01:10 PM
Response to Original message |
3. Too late for this term. Done deal. |
|
If the senate has 51 Democratic votes in 09 without the sanctimonious prick then they should politely invite him to go sit with his friends.
|
rinsd
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 01:11 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 01:17 PM
Response to Reply #3 |
10. Maybe This Will Give You A Chuckle |
|
Arthur Schlesinger was at an event with Hillary Clinton during "L'affaire Lewinsky" after Lieberman ripped Bill Clinton a new one on the Senate floor for his affair..Joe's name came up and Schlesinger said "he's certainly a sanctimonious prick" and Hillary answered "he's certainly sanctimonious."
|
Warren Stupidity
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 02:18 PM
Response to Reply #10 |
SteppingRazor
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 01:10 PM
Response to Original message |
|
That said, after 2008 -- and the several Senate seats we'll invariably pick up -- he won't be nearly as relevant.
|
hobbit709
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 01:10 PM
Response to Original message |
5. You don't have a HELL NO option |
CTyankee
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Nov-03-07 10:57 AM
Response to Reply #5 |
25. How about VOMIT at the Question option? |
|
I don't know if I'm madder at him or at my fellow CT citizens who voted that bastard back in office.
But don't get me started. I had such high hopes for Ned and I still get his email updates. It makes me happy but also sad to hear from him, becaue we were right and yet got defeated...
|
Richardo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 01:11 PM
Response to Original message |
6. For the reasons you state, I think he should be *encouraged* to caucus with the Dems |
|
Edited on Fri Nov-02-07 01:12 PM by Richardo
What's the point of not letting him? Ideologic purity? Hell, I think Trent Fucking Lott himself should be encouraged to caucus with the Dems. The numbers mean everything.
|
FredScuttle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 01:14 PM
Response to Original message |
|
I remember reading after the 2006 elections that even if Holy Joe abandoned the Dem caucus, the chairs of each of the Senate committees would stay in Democratic hands and Reid would still remain Majority Leader due to Senate rules.
I'll look the reference...but for now, my feeling is you don't let traitors in on your strategy meetings. And Holy Joe, in every action he's exhibited since his 2006 victory, is a traitor.
|
DemocratSinceBirth
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 01:19 PM
Response to Reply #8 |
12. There Are Fifty Rethugs...Forty Nine Dems |
|
Lieberman the Indy and Bernard Sanders the Independent Socialist caucus with the Dems...
Without Joe the split is 50-50 and the VP casts the tie breaking vote which would be used to order the Senate...
|
onehandle
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 01:14 PM
Response to Original message |
9. We must control the Senate. nt |
Stinky The Clown
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 01:18 PM
Response to Original message |
|
..... so yeah ...... until we win control with a greater number of seats ...... then I want his ass keel hauled and then thrown overboard.
|
brazos121200
(626 posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 02:17 PM
Response to Original message |
13. Since Joe Lieberman was Al Gore's running mate |
|
back in 2000 and would now be the legitimate Vice President if the election hadn't been stolen that year by Bush (and if they had been re-elected in '04), I think he should be allowed to caucus with the Democrats. I know he has gone over to the dark side but he had been a loyal Democrat for many years before the iraq war muddled his thinking.
|
IndianaGreen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Nov-03-07 11:02 AM
Response to Reply #13 |
27. Who told Gore to put Lieberman on the ticket? |
|
Edited on Sat Nov-03-07 11:02 AM by IndianaGreen
The only silver lining about SCOTUS appointing Bush is that Holy Joe is not today the Democratic frontrunner. I would never support that warmongering POS.
|
LoZoccolo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 02:28 PM
Response to Original message |
16. Why would we not want him to? |
|
This is another example of DU emotion over logic. Giving up the majority to teach someone a dubious personal lesson? If you think he's such a prick, why would anyone think he'd learn the lesson anyways?
|
hobbit709
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Nov-03-07 07:08 AM
Response to Reply #16 |
18. When someone jacks me around more than once |
|
I won't have anything to do with them after that. I'm not a glutton for punishment. As far as I'm concerned Liarman consistently votes the administration's way, therefore he's not anyone I want to have dealings with.
|
LoZoccolo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Nov-03-07 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #18 |
20. "When someone jacks me around more than once I won't have anything to do with them after that." |
hobbit709
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Nov-03-07 10:44 AM
Response to Reply #20 |
21. Do you really need to ask? |
LoZoccolo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Nov-03-07 11:10 AM
Response to Reply #21 |
28. What does that do for you? n/t |
LoZoccolo
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Fri Nov-02-07 02:30 PM
Response to Original message |
17. I also think it's interesting that the "no's" are in the majority, but... |
|
Edited on Fri Nov-02-07 02:30 PM by LoZoccolo
...none of them have really given us a reason why.
|
The Magistrate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Nov-03-07 10:51 AM
Response to Reply #17 |
23. Sometimes, Sir, Examples Must Be Made |
|
On the condition that we do have a sufficient number of seats for a majority absent the reptile, this would make a good occassion for one. Party discipline needs stiffenning on both wings....
|
cali
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Nov-03-07 08:00 AM
Response to Original message |
19. 70% of the respondents to this poll are willing to hand |
|
the Senate back to repukes. What a crying shame. Yes, the dems have been weak in many ways, but I don't want to see Barbara Boxer handing back the gavel to Inhofe, or Pat Leahy handing his back to Specter.
|
The Magistrate
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Nov-03-07 10:48 AM
Response to Original message |
22. Once We Have Over Fifty Without Him, Sir |
|
He should certainly be barred from the room, and from any committee assignments in the gift of the Party....
|
ginchinchili
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Nov-03-07 10:52 AM
Response to Original message |
24. Unfortunately, yes. That's how our system works. |
|
And as you point out, this time it's to our benefit. But I, too, sent contributions to Lamont in hopes that he'd unseat the sanctimonious prick. Choosing Lieberman as a running mate was Gore's biggest mistake, but he's more than made up for that.
|
IndianaGreen
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Sat Nov-03-07 10:59 AM
Response to Original message |
26. Electing a Democratic Congress has made no difference! |
|
Democrats voted for Kyl-Lieberman (the bomb Iran when you are ready resolution), put impeachment off the table, supported warrantless searches, failed to defund the war, and now we got them embracing torture thanks to those neocon darlings DiFi and Schumer.
What this country needs is an American version of the UK's Liberal-Democrat Party (that's their actual name if some web nanny question my use of "Democrat").
|
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Wed May 01st 2024, 06:04 PM
Response to Original message |