Election2008 Home
I disagree with keeping lieberman on, but feel obama knows what he is doing. I am glad that lieberman said he wishes he hadn't said some things but he should aplogize to obama. I used to like lieberman and ealso respect him. I no longer respect him, but would love to know what congress was thinking.
Lieberman Retains Committee Chairmanship - Reaction
|
The Senate Democratic Caucus voted yesterday in favor of allowing Sen. Joe Lieberman to remain chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, 42 to 13. The vote upsets many Democrats who feel Lieberman betrayed the party by vocally supporting Republican Presidential candidate John McCain and attacking Barack Obama.
Sen. Patrick Leahy of Vermont voted against the Lieberman motion. He said to Green Mountain Daily: "For me, the bottom line is that millions of Americans, with unprecedented energy, worked day and night to get Barack Obama elected and to move our country in a very new direction. I think it's a slap in the face to these activists that someone who opposed those efforts in a very prominent way is awarded with a major committee. Having said that, there is an enormous amount of work that is facing the Senate and we all have to move on and work together to address these issues." In his speech, Majority Leader Harry Reid said this is "not a time for retribution. It's a time for moving forward on the problems of this country.... We need to be unified." Watch the video of his speech: From the Washington Post: Some said privately that the risk of driving Lieberman across the aisle to caucus with Republicans was worth the risk because of the Democrats' increased majority in the next Congress. But Obama endorsed reaching a compromise that would keep Lieberman in the caucus. In a more than two-hour meeting inside the Old Senate Chamber of the Capitol, where the Missouri Compromise of 1820 was reached, Lieberman offered apologies for some of his remarks during the campaign. "There are some that I made that I wish I had never made at all," Lieberman said later. Many Senate Democrats said Lieberman crossed a line during his speech at the Republican National Convention in September, when he called Barack Obama, then the Democratic nominee, "an eloquent young man" who was not prepared to be president. Many bloggers are angered by the Democrats' decision. Ben Smith at Politico says: The Connecticut Senator gets a wrist-slap after delivering a very long list of attacks on Obama. This was, in a quiet way, partly Obama's call, and another signal that he may prove a frustrating president for the left. Or, alternately, that he will keep the symbolism centrist and inclusive, which is different from policy. The Daily Kos says: The American people voted for change in 2006, and they voted for change in 2008, and both years, the Senate made sure to slap the American people in the face. So why should this have been any different? There isn't a more tone-deaf group of people anywhere in this country than inside the U.S. Senate. How do you feel about Joe Lieberman getting support from the Democratic candidate that he has been attacking the past year? Was the Democratic vote to keep Lieberman chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee a good political move by the Democratic Party in order to gain more bipartisan support? Or do you feel the Democratic Party is selling out to appeal to conservatives and moderates? Let us know in the comments. Posted by Megan Z. on 11/19/08 |
Wm. A./Janet M. C.
Saturday November 22, 2008, 12:02 AM
Joseph Leiberman has one client, and one client only, in Congress, ISRAEL. He , in his pious, warped mind, felt that the Texas/Wyoming War Criminals were protecting Israel in their insane invasion of Iraq, and posturing at Iran. He is too narrow-minded to accept that no one has championed Israel more than the Democratic party, since Harry Truman announced U. S. support at it's inception. He professes to be religious, then unleashes completely AMORAL behavior in his own house. He is too stupid to recognize being USED by Republicans for the political whore that he is. Connecticut Democrats recognized his deceptions, rejected him, and Republican voters returned him as an "INDEPENDENT". We can recognize that until Al Franken, and Martin, in Georgia, are cofirmed, the party feels they have to trust this irresponsible fool to vote with the caucus. But, it qualifies as a wild gamble on a turncoat. 54,000,000 voters don't trust this bastard, and are vocal about it. 8 years of arrogant destruction of the fabric of the government by incompetent, hateful despots rules out playing games with any of their allies. Leiberman can go to hell with the other scum Jan. 20, 2009. This dog won't hunt.
Peter W.
Friday November 21, 2008, 7:31 PM
Why is everyone saying that Obama wanted Lieberman to keep this post? What Obama said was that he would not get involved in that decision one way or the other.
I took him at his "word" (actually mouthed by others if I remember right) on that point.
That said, I was very disappointed that Lieberman retained this chairmanship in particular. I would rather he lost this one and kept the one that he lost because of this one's connection to the war, the central issue I disagree with Lieberman on.
I took him at his "word" (actually mouthed by others if I remember right) on that point.
That said, I was very disappointed that Lieberman retained this chairmanship in particular. I would rather he lost this one and kept the one that he lost because of this one's connection to the war, the central issue I disagree with Lieberman on.
Emerald Jordan
Friday November 21, 2008, 7:26 PM
upon retrospect, according to Scripture Christ chose twelve apostles and one of them was a betrayer. It was not necessary for anyone to eliminate the betrayer, because the betrayer eliminated by his very own hands...history has been known to repeat itself.
Emerald Jordan
Friday November 21, 2008, 7:10 PM
The act of supporting communicates a message. This man has publicly turned against president elect Obama, and yet, president elect Obama's "colleagues" supports this man. Not good, not good at all. Behavior such as this causes me to question who is really loyal to whom. No doubt, Lieberman did follow his conscious, and the conscious of many others, however this consciousness does not seem to resound with the leadership that was chosen for the white house. A blind person can see that. To each an indivual opinion, granted. However for me, this situation stinks.
Melvin T.
Friday November 21, 2008, 3:39 PM
Lieberman expressed himself by doing what he felt was right but in politics, you have to back track sometimes to stay in power. I would never make a good politician
Judith Hand
Friday November 21, 2008, 3:34 PM
A major disappointment to say the least. I don't trust a man who changes his allegiance and world view so easily. Especially one in the matter of protecting from terrorism and other threats and helping Americans in emergency disastrous situations. I was pro-Lieberman in a past election. I no longer trust the man, sorry to say. And he shouldn't have been retained in this position.
Tierney G.
Friday November 21, 2008, 3:02 PM
Obama has risen above his enemies instead of stooping to their level. That is the way to go!
Tom Johnson
Friday November 21, 2008, 2:38 PM
Lieberman is a scumbag rethugnican ass kissing war monger. He should be taken out and shot.
Even more outrageous than he is the action of the dimocraps to retain him. For me this only proves the Fascist conversion of America will continue unabated. We are lost.
I had some hope but when Obama voted for the unconstitutional FISA bill I knew it was all mostly BS. And he Obama claims to be a constitutional lawyer.
Even more outrageous than he is the action of the dimocraps to retain him. For me this only proves the Fascist conversion of America will continue unabated. We are lost.
I had some hope but when Obama voted for the unconstitutional FISA bill I knew it was all mostly BS. And he Obama claims to be a constitutional lawyer.
Tuesday November 25, 2008, 8:53 AM