Call me a selfish prick, but I do NOT want to lose the Senate Judiciary Committee

[LynneSin]

Perhaps this is why I'm willing to deal with Lieberman. I want the majority in that committee because I know that back in 2002 when we last had the majority, our Senate Judiciary committee prevent around 10 of Bush's worst judicial nominations from ever getting a floor vote.

If you can't get the judicial nomination out of committee there is no need to worry about the filibuster or gang of 14 or any of that other political stuff we had to do because there won't be a floor vote. Hell, if we had a majority when Alito was nominated he might not have made it out of committee since everyone in committee who was a democrat voted against him.

Judicial appointments are LIFETIME positions, which means the judges that Bush picks today could be affecting our children and grandchildren in the future.

We need that Senate Judiciary Committee, it is worth putting up with Joe Lieberman (who isn't on the committee) to keep it!

[cali]

1. Amen.

Specter or Leahy? That's not exactly a difficult choice.

[wicket]

2. Ditto

As much as it kills me.

[LSK]

3. and the Armed Services Committee, Intelligence Committee...

etc etc etc

There are a brazilian reasons to keep the Senate and put up with Joementum. Also keep in mind that Joementum is strong on environmental issues.

[bryant69]

4. I think we need to build a Lieberbot to replace him

But since that's probably impossible, and might also be unethical, I suppose it's better to deal with him.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[philosophie_en_rose]

5. exactly! lieberman or more Harriet Myerses and Antonin Scalias.

:scared:

[Dhalgren]

6. Agreed. Our priorities must be in line with the restoration of

democracy and the reinstitution of our Rights. We have to restore the nation first and worry about the niceties of inner-party politics later. Our future is going to be a slim morsel of Hell regardless of how successful our Democratic Congress can be. We have far too much rebuilding to do in this country to worry about Lieberman, one way or the other - he just isn't that big of an item...

[BlooInBloo]

7. Fucking jackass CT voters.

[LynneSin]

8. Well now, don't curse all of the Connecticut voters....

...First, I don't think I could find one DUer that supported Lieberman after the primaries. And those democratic voters in Connecticut helped to add +2 to the house (was that 2nd race ever called yet, the dem was in the lead).

So perhaps we should just say "Fuck you Connecticut Republicans"

[BlooInBloo]

13. (a) I can find such easily (b) I wasn't - just being economical in speech..

(c) It's patently obvious that CT republicans are NOT enough to win lieberman the election. So even if I WERE interested in a longer-winded version of what I said, it wouldn't be your suggestion.


EDIT: That was probably too elliptical. Jillions of CT Democrats voted for Lieberman - *they* are who assured his victory. But every lieberman voter - i.e. well over half of them - is a fucking jackass.

EDIT EDIT: Still likely to be too elliptical. The reason why there's no great harm in my economy of speech, for intelligent people, is that no one but an idiot would even consider, for any length of time, the notion that Lamont voters were included in my epithet.

[LSK]

11. no, just the Republicans

Joementum got 70% of the GOP vote.

[kaygore]

16. I was called "childish" for my displeasure with CT voters

I hope that both the Senate and the House put ethic rules in place that stop all the pork and lobbyist money and then maybe Joemomentum will finally get bored with the Senate and simply join the mafia.

If he skips out on the Democrats then I promise to move to CT in 2112 to work for his defeat as I worked for Allen's in Virginia this time.

He led people in CT to believe that he would caucus with the Democrats so not doing so might finally get through their thick heads what an opportunist he is.

[BlooInBloo]

20. (shrug) I get called childish all the time - but considering that it's generally...

... idiots saying it, it doesn't matter all that much.

That, and it's largely true - lol!

[kaygore]

32. That's what I replied: "Agree"

[meldroc]

9. I have to agree.

As much of a pain in the ass that Lieberman's going to be, we're going to have to work with him. We can't afford to lose the Supreme Court to the far-right. I do think it will be more to his advantage to stay with the Democrats, since he'll get to keep his seniority and a committee chair, but he'll certainly threaten to jump specifically to get more concessions.

Lieberman must be in ecstasy right now. We are going to have to give him a few big favors, but give him favors in such a way that we can keep him in favor-debt and make him behave himself.

[LynneSin]

10. Well in two years when we pick up a few more seats

THEN we can kick Joe to the curb!

[Lasher]

31. That's the way I'm thinking too.

Let's not cut off our noses to spite our faces. But things are looking very good for us to pick up more Senate seats in 2008, partly because there will be more Republicans running for re-election than Democrats. Build ourselves a little margin and then exile him. And at that point he'll have nothing to negotiate with Republicans, so they won't give him the time of day either. Then when Willie Tanner tries to get re-elected, all he'll have is a record of being an impotent traitor.

[MADem]

12. Lynne, you are wise. We must be pragmatic.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. We're fortunate to have both the House and the Senate. What's interesting is that the mood of the country is shifting, and you can see it, even in the attitudes of the TV talking heads. Some of them are whining as they adjust, but they are all adjusting.

Joementum may be a snake, but he's no fool. He himself "adjusted" as he ran his campaign, and the reason he kept his job is because 1) He promised to caucus with the Democrats, 2) He was "the devil they know" 3) He was reliable on bread-and-butter issues, like the Sub Base in Groton, and 4) His seniority translates to pork for CT.

He may have gone in being the 800 pound gorilla, but in reality, here's the choice that he ACTUALLY has: He can be part of the WINNING team....or, he can be a SPOILER. And if he dared to choose the latter, and jump ship, it wouldn't surprise me if the CT Dems petitioned to recall his ass (I'd bet every Lamont voter would sign that petition in a heartbeat). I mean, if you're gonna have a GOP senator, you may as well have a real one. And the Governor would appoint one, but you wouldn't have to wait six years for an election in that event, because they'd hold a Special Election in 08 to fill out his term (I'd wager Lamont would win that in a walk if he ran again). So, while on the one hand, Joementum may be the "decider," he's really STUCK. He can advance the agenda, or be an obstructionist asshole.

It's imperative that HE play ball, or get bounced like one.

[xultar]

14. AMEN!! AMEN!!! AMEN!!!!

[kaygore]

15. Agreed

[On the Road]

17. Since You're Following the Situation, Lynne,

is the Gang of 14 still intact? Any losses or other developments that might make the no-filibuster agreement moot? It's not an immediate issue, but for the GOP made a horrible threat for the future.

[LynneSin]

21. Not sure about that but I do know none of them are on the Judiciary

Currently the committee is Leahy, Kennedy, Biden, Kohl, Feinstein, Feingold, Schumer and Durbin. And although everyone can probably post misgivings about 80% of this committee (Hell I'm still pissed Feingold voted for Asscrap and Roberts), when it counted they banded together and kept activist judges off the bench.

None of these current members are part of the Gang of 14. Now depending on how many seats we get to add (I'm guess it'll be two), at least one of those seats will go to John Kerry, the guy who gave up his seat when we lost a Judiciary seat back in 2004. So if we get a second seat it'll be interesting to see who the democrats will pick.

Rarely will the committee take someone brand new to the senate AND I've haven't seen anyone adamently anti-choice serve on the committee. Usually an appointment to this committee is high profile, which would make me believe that someone like Barack Obama or one of the Emily's List gals might be that 2nd choice. Getting picked to serve on the Judiciary committee is like getting picked 2nd for gym class kickball (Appropriations would be first pick)

[onenote]

29. 2 repubs from the gang of 14 lost: DeWine and Chafee

DeWine was a judiciary member

[LynneSin]

30. It doesn't matter about the Republican gang members

I just don't want the democratic gang members on it

[jonnyblitz]

18. so you think by complaining on an internet discussion board

we jeopardize his judiciary committee position? LMFAO :rofl: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:

I love ya Lynnsin but I think you assign waaaay to much signifance to mere discussions on the internet.

[LynneSin]

22. I know - but I love this place and get tired of the bitching

and perhaps I'm just dealing with a bit of PMS myself

:loveya:

[in_cog_ni_to]

19. YUP. We MUST kiss Lieberman's ass...it's imperative.

We cannot allow the repuke fundies to seat another Supreme Court Justice.

[LynneSin]

24. Knowing that the terrorism bill will probably go to the courts

We need to keep the courts intake. I can see this going up to the Supreme Court and right now I'm thinking we're three definate supports of the bill (Alito, Scalia and Thomas), four definates against the bill (Stevens, Souter, Ginsberg, Breyers) and the wild cards being definately Kennedy and possibly Roberts.

[Hubert Flottz]

23. I'd never call you a selfish prick, like people call me!

You are a sweetie-pie...Joe LIEberman might have learned a lesson from the voters in his state in the Democratic primary and when he ran for prez. I can only hope!

Is our Joementum learning?

[drm604]

25. I'll have to hold my nose, stifle my gag, and say yes. n/t

[LynneSin]

28. You and me both

Hey, it's not like I'm happy about this, just being a selfish prick!

[GardeningGal]

26. I completely agree.

And in two more years we can take more seats so it won't make any difference what Lieberman decides to do.

[Nikki Stone1]

27. This is absolutely correct. Thank you

:kick:

[Zhade]

33. I don't think you're either.

But I do think you're naive if you think lieberman isn't in a position to fuck us over - he won't even rule out not going to the fascists.

[blondeatlast]

34. SELFISH PRICK! Nanny, nanny, boo-boo, I'm first! You know I agree

even though it pains me.

Let's make coffeee table nice with him and then bully the hell out of him in two years or so.

[Bake]

35. Absolutely 100% Positively Correct! You selfish prick!

:-)

YOu're right on the money, as usual.

Bake