by Damozel | Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), much admired by all of us at Buck Naked Politics for being one of the few Congressional Dems who who is a vertebrate, steps up.
"Every Senator will have to vote the way he or she believes they should," Leahy said, in a reference to the upcoming vote on Lieberman's fate in the Dem caucus next week. "I'm one who does not feel that somebody should be rewarded with a major chairmanship after doing what he did."
"I felt some of the attacks that he was involved in against Senator Obama...went way beyond the pale," Leahy continued. "I thought they were not fair, I thought they were not legitimate, I thought they perpetuated some of these horrible myths that were being run about Senator Obama."
"I would feel that had I done something similar," Leahy concluded, "that I would not be chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee in the next Congress." (TPM; emphasis added)
Via Kos, here's the audio.
Vermont Independent Bernie Sanders, another Senator we much admire, has now joined Leahy in denouncing Lieberman's conduct. Writing to TPM, he said:
"To reward Senator Lieberman with a major committee chairmanship would be a slap in the face of millions of Americans who worked tirelessly for Barack Obama and who want to see real change in our country," Sanders in the statement sent our way by his office.
"Appointing someone to a major post who led the opposition to everything we are fighting for is not 'change we can believe in,'" Sanders continued. "I very much hope that Senator Lieberman stays in the Democratic caucus and is successful in regaining the confidence of those whom he has disappointed. This is not a time, however, in which he should be rewarded with a major committee chairmanship."
At My DD, Josh Orton says:
Leahy nails it: in any normal world, it makes perfect sense for Lieberman to lose his chairmanship of such a powerful committee. But this is Lieberworld, where comity always comes first, and bad faith is ignored willfully...
The Impolitic: Why I Love Vermont.
I've been meaning to mention that I think the back room caucus vote sucks. I'm sick of backroom deals. They should all come forward publicly to declare where they stand. In fact, it should be a job requirement.
DownWithTyranny---OMG, the picture at the top of the page; it burrrrrns---is sick of the Democratic caucus.
The Senate Democratic caucus-- which includes reactionary scumbags like Evan Bayh, Mary Landrieu, Mark Pryor, and Ben Nelson-- is sickening, cowardly and next-to-worthless. Patrick Leahy is the ONLY member of the caucus with the balls to publicly state that the treacherous Joe Lieberman doesn't deserve to be given the chairmanship of the Homeland Security Committee..... At least the vote won't be unanimous.
And DWT says bluntly:
Too bad the voters of Connecticut don't get a say. In a new poll that came out this morning, most Connecticut voters express so much dissatisfaction with Lieberman that it's next to impossible to see him ever winning an election there again. If the voters there could re-do the 2006 election today 59% would vote for Ned Lamont and only 34% would vote for Lieberman. And if loses his chairmanship and then jumps to the GOP only 31% of Connecticut voters say they would favor his re-election.
Via Mudflats, here's Rachel Maddow discussing why keeping Lieberman on the committee is a really bad idea. As Josh Orton comments, she shows why Dems shouldn't trust Lieberman with subpoena power.
Why are some Senate Dems so ready to take Lieberman into a back room and...kiss and make up? Mudflats is on hand to remind us of Lieberman's show of support for Congressional Dems during the summer even as he was undermining the presidential candidate.
Seeing the writing on the wall, Lieberman made a donation this summer- a big FAT donation - to the DSCC to the tune of $100,000. This contribution came on top of last year’s donation of the same amount. Apparently Joe thinks that’s what the going rate is to buy friends. Behold the grown-up political version of “If I give you my lunch, can I sit with you?”
Insiders were saying that he was scrambling to keep his Chairmanship of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, which several Democrats who were actually loyal to their party, were champing at the bit to pull from him after the November election.
On top of this year’s $100,000, his PAC has donated an additional $30,000 since last year. Will this be enough to change the opinion of those who regard Lieberman as the Benedict-Arnold-turncoat-McCain-hugging-Judas-Iscariot-war-monger of the Senate? Is $130,000 the cost of a chairmanship, or will the Democrats ‘pull the Chair out from under him’?
As I've said several times, I'm fine with Lieberman remaining in the caucus, but not at all fine with his remaining Chair of the Homeland Security Committee. It's ridiculous that this is even under discussion and insane that he has the arrogance (some might call it impudence) to demand it.
Independent of the question of his betrayal of his party's candidate, there are substantial reasons for handing of the Chair to someone else, as Maddow says. There's a reason why Ann Coulter---remember when she was relevant?---gave him the thumbs up back in the bad old days of two-ought-ought-six.
Here's what Coulter said about Joe Lieberman today on Your World in a discussion with Neil Cavuto about today's defeat of the two Democratic proposals to set a timetable to withdraw from Iraq....
"I would admire a politician, not as much as basically your run of the mill, garden variety Republican, but as far as Democrats go, like Lieberman, who apparently does want to defend America and fight the war on terrorism. He's the one facing a primary fight."
Cavuto. "You know, there is talk about him maybe bolting to a third party, and that the seeds are there for a third party movement. Do you buy that?"
Coulter: "I think he should just come all the way and become a Republican. He wouldn't be our best Republican but at least he'd fit in with the party that wants to defend the country." (Newhoggers)
As Melanie commented at the time, "If Ann Coulter endorses you, that should be a big, big wake-up call (Joe, the phone's ringing) that you're a goner when it comes to standing up for Democratic values."
More blogger blowback at Memeorandum.
RECENT BUCK NAKED POLITICS POSTINGS
Hillary Met with Obama: Can the Rumors be True?
Is Hillary Under Consideration for Secretary of State?
How You Gonna Keep 'Em in Wasilla Once They've Seen DC?
A Roman Catholic Priest to Obama Supporters: No Eucharist for You!
Waxman Wants Executive Pay Data from Banks Receiving Bailout Funds
Comments