Joe Lieberman; "Open to Supporting a Republican" for President
| By Eli Corp - Jan 28th, 2007 at 6:38 pm EST |
| Also listed in: Campus Progress Blog |
Comments |
Mail to a Friend
Tags: 2008, FOX News, Hurricane Katrina, Joe Lieberman, President, Republicans
Tags: 2008, FOX News, Hurricane Katrina, Joe Lieberman, President, Republicans
As I predicted earlier this month, Sen. Joe Lieberman has all but abandoned the Democratic Party.
Lieberman was on FOX News Sunday with Chris Wallace on Sunday, and discussed his support for the President's plan to escalate the war in Iraq. When asked if there were any Democrats running in 2008 that Lieberman would support Lieberman made his intentions known.
"Are there any Democrats who don't appear to be running at this point? Look, I've had a very political couple of years in Connecticut, and I'm stepping back for a while to concentrate on being the best senator I can be for my state and my country."
"I'm also an Independent-Democrat now, and I'm going to do what most Independents and a lot of Democrats and Republicans in America do, which is to take a look at all the candidates and then in the end, regardless of party, decide who I think will be best for the future of our country."
"So I'm open to supporting a Democrat, Republican or even an Independent, if there's a strong one. Stay tuned."
Earlier this month, a Lieberman's spokeswoman told reporters that Lieberman will not be probing missing documents from the Bush administration's handling of Hurricane Katrina.
According to Leslie Phillips, Senator Lieberman's chief committee spokeswoman. "The senator now intends to focus his attention on the future security of the American people and other matters and does not expect to revisit the White House's role in Katrina."
It appears certain that Senator Lieberman will support a Republican Candidate for President. All of the major Democratic candidates have announced their intention to redeploy troops, which Lieberman vehemently opposes. If Lieberman does support someone like John McCain, or Mitt Romney, a rift between Lieberman and the Senate majority leadership is inevitable, and will likely result in Lieberman switching parties. With such a narrow majority in the Senate, the Senate Democrats are walking a tight-rope trying to avoid becoming the minority party before they finish their first year in power.
The Senate rules require 60 votes for Cloture, therefore, despite having the chairmanship of all of the committee's the Democrats have no real power in the Senate.
The Democrats gave Lieberman the coveted Chairmanship of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee despite his Independent status. Lieberman has demonstrated no desire to hold the President accountable for his failure in Iraq, his failure in dealing with Katrina, and his failure to use diplomacy in the middle east. He has abandoned progressive policy altogether, pushing for military action in Iran, and supporting those who are in lock step with the President.
Again the question must be asked; Why should the Democrats reward a Senator who has abandoned nearly every progressive policy issue to maintain their narrow meaningless majority?
Lieberman was on FOX News Sunday with Chris Wallace on Sunday, and discussed his support for the President's plan to escalate the war in Iraq. When asked if there were any Democrats running in 2008 that Lieberman would support Lieberman made his intentions known.
"Are there any Democrats who don't appear to be running at this point? Look, I've had a very political couple of years in Connecticut, and I'm stepping back for a while to concentrate on being the best senator I can be for my state and my country."
"I'm also an Independent-Democrat now, and I'm going to do what most Independents and a lot of Democrats and Republicans in America do, which is to take a look at all the candidates and then in the end, regardless of party, decide who I think will be best for the future of our country."
"So I'm open to supporting a Democrat, Republican or even an Independent, if there's a strong one. Stay tuned."
Earlier this month, a Lieberman's spokeswoman told reporters that Lieberman will not be probing missing documents from the Bush administration's handling of Hurricane Katrina.
According to Leslie Phillips, Senator Lieberman's chief committee spokeswoman. "The senator now intends to focus his attention on the future security of the American people and other matters and does not expect to revisit the White House's role in Katrina."
It appears certain that Senator Lieberman will support a Republican Candidate for President. All of the major Democratic candidates have announced their intention to redeploy troops, which Lieberman vehemently opposes. If Lieberman does support someone like John McCain, or Mitt Romney, a rift between Lieberman and the Senate majority leadership is inevitable, and will likely result in Lieberman switching parties. With such a narrow majority in the Senate, the Senate Democrats are walking a tight-rope trying to avoid becoming the minority party before they finish their first year in power.
The Senate rules require 60 votes for Cloture, therefore, despite having the chairmanship of all of the committee's the Democrats have no real power in the Senate.
The Democrats gave Lieberman the coveted Chairmanship of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee despite his Independent status. Lieberman has demonstrated no desire to hold the President accountable for his failure in Iraq, his failure in dealing with Katrina, and his failure to use diplomacy in the middle east. He has abandoned progressive policy altogether, pushing for military action in Iran, and supporting those who are in lock step with the President.
Again the question must be asked; Why should the Democrats reward a Senator who has abandoned nearly every progressive policy issue to maintain their narrow meaningless majority?
!
Comments are closed for this post.
I was beginning to think that Lieberman was in the wrong party to begin and end with.
With the recent "surge" of centrist Democrats-I would have thought Lieberman would have just been quiet long enough to become Vice President--no matter who the nominee was. Seriously. I'm not just making this pronouncement with a natural proclivity towards the Democratic Party.
Due to the extremely polarized state we find ourselves in I envisioned McCain choosing Lieberman as his running mate for the presidency. It'd be the first bi-partisan presidential team since.....well, has this ever occurred??? I don't know.
But because of Gore picking Lieberman and his experience in the campaign postseason--as it were--I really believed he would be very likely to move ahead, not backwards.
Am I disappointed?? Hell, no. In my opinion what has gone down recently no matter how much Lieberman trys to justify his "independant" decision-making is for the best. And I'm glad voters have developed a healthy skepticism of him.
Being on Fox News and talking to Karl Rove and others might have promoted his image in the media but it will have gone a long way in erasing his legitimacy.
As the meeting began, the protests began both outside the hearing, and inside, when a man stood up and protested Sen. Lieberman's decision not to investigate the White House's role in Katrina.. The man yelled, "Stand up for justice! We want somebody to stand up for justice!" before a law enforcement officer led him out of the hearing room at Louisiana's Supreme Court building.
Link
He still caucuses with the Democrats, giving them a majority--allowing them to control Congress and effectively counter-act the Bush spin zone everday, whether on Iraq or on College Debt.
"According to Leslie Phillips, Senator Lieberman's chief committee spokeswoman. 'The senator now intends to focus his attention on the future security of the American people and other matters and does not expect to revisit the White House's role in Katrina.'"
Link
Yes, I think this is a horrible occurence.
But Lieberman will not stop the investigation: only American apathy will.
The investigation is occuring, and Katrina will be an extremely important issue in 2008.
Link
"It appears certain that Senator Lieberman will support a Republican Candidate for President."
No--it appears certain he will support John McCain for President.
Link
Lieberman was basically kissing McCain's forehead at the AEI talk earlier this month where they came out in favor of a surge. Perhaps in his wildest dreams he would run with McCain as a VP, or perhaps be in his cabinet.
Why? 1) Because he wants to move up, 2) He can't really do that in the party, and 3) He agrees with McCain on how to do next in Iraq.
"The Senate rules require 60 votes for Cloture, therefore, despite having the chairmanship of all of the committee's the Democrats have no real power in the Senate."
Okay, okay--let's not fall into lethal hyperbole here. Are you telling me that having Harry Reid and Pelosi teaming up as the leaders of Congress there is no difference?
Are you telling me that Hagel's Iraq resolution had nothing to do with a Democratic majority?
If you really believe this, you are basically saying the Senate affords no power to any party in power less if have 60 votes.
That's a bit silly.
"He has abandoned progressive policy altogether, pushing for military action in Iran, and supporting those who are in lock step with the President."
One could ask, 'Was he given a choice?'
Lieberman was challenged by the far-left/progressive wing of the Democratic Party. These forces did this purposively to punish and purge him.
They lost, i.e. voters in CT re-elected Lieberman--I think progressive would do better to figure out why than to berate him constantly (since that strategy hasn't worked out so well)
How do you expect Lieberman to act, especially since Republican votes were the ones that guarnteed him his seat--and a fair bit of Democratic ones.
You should really be saying here, 'We knew the costs of challenging Lieberman and losing would be great.'
"Again the question must be asked; Why should the Democrats reward a Senator who has abandoned nearly every progressive policy issue to maintain their narrow meaningless majority?"
a) It's not "meaningless" majority. Taking the majority has propelled Senators Tester and Webb into the national scene--showing a new and vibrant Democratic party.
This would prob. have not occured had Democrats failed to take the Senate.
b) "every progressive issue?"
Let's be fair to Joe, here.
From a new release. Link
“I am concerned that men and women detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement are not being afforded established minimum levels of health, safety, and humane treatment,” Lieberman said. “I expect ICE to improve its record in the face of this recent audit and reexamine the effectiveness of its current annual review process. I am particularly concerned by troubling reports of alleged physical, sexual, and verbal abuse by corrections officers at all five detention facilities and excessive levels of disciplinary action such as the rush to lock down detainees. I am also dismayed that grievance standards do not properly explain to detainees how to report abuse or civil rights violations.”
Clearly this guy has not one progressive bone in his body.
Let's get more on the real issues facing us, rather than falling into the easy Lieberman gripes.