Bill Richardson told CNN McCain's betrayal is "a little bit sad."

Lieberman's betrayal...

[Fixed! I do more than just send trolls back under their bridges! --Mod]

Oh my, but what will Harry Reid do?

Nothing.

Wow....Dunn called Lieberman a moral degenerate? That'll leave a mark.

If Harry Reid had a single, tiny, pitiful little stone, he'd move Droopy Joe's desk into a store-room off the Senate garage, fire his staff and freeze his party financing, and pull his (certainly Dim-party) hard-drive.

I'd also kick him down the stairs...

"Let's dispose of Senator Lieberman first"

Perfect choice of words..

Josh Marshal should get some prize for constructing the Bitch Slap theory to very simply and concisely explain and predict the behavior of Dems and Repubs.

Repubs make all these statements only to show what they can get away with it, i.e., who is the Daddy. Dems get riled up, flail, but ultimately never collect enough gumption to respond in a manner that the Repub thuggery demands.

They should have trundled over him with a bulldozer when they could have shoed Ned Lamont in to take his place. But they were too gutless to go for it.

Lieberman is a horrible, horrible man. A terrible person. A disgusting, prevaricating, lying beast of a man. I would probably have sat down for dinner with McCarthy, just to find out what made his mind tick - Lieberman? Fuck him.

One of the MSNBC hacks just asked a Republiscum governor if Palin was really more qualified than Joe Lieberman to be VP - the governor replied that Joe was "going to be a great member of McCain's cabinet" (not could be or would be, but was going to be). My guess would be he has been promised either State or (more likely) Defense.

(Assuming Obama wins), even in the unlikely event that Lieberman caucusing with the Dems would theoretically give them a filibuster proof 60 votes, I hope Harry Reid grows enough of a pair to tell him to go to h--l when the new congress convenes. Lieberman would never keep his word and support breaking Republithug filibusters.

Lieberman would've been a kapo at Auschwitz -- he's proven himself to be a despicable political whore. Reid better get a pair and dump him.

That's what Obama and those other centrist Dems get for supporting Lieberman instead of Lamont. They should have known better - it's not that there haven't been warning voices. But they didn't want to hear them. Their complaining now is a bit ridiculous.

Lieberman also lied when he called himself a Democrat.

Ask Richard Lugar.

No, really. He knows about Obama reaching across party lines.
.

Not only is the "end of Lieberman as a Dem," it is also getting close to the end of the Republican Party as a national and 'conservative' party. This convention and election should relegate that party to nothing more than a regional (South and Alaska) party, the party of christian religion. "True" conservatives with libertarian leaning views may do best by forming a new party. This old one is being tossed under the bus by the crazy right christians.

Liebermann has shown himself to be a weasel since he passed on a roll call vote for the first Gulf War to wait to see how the vote would turn out. As Casey Stengel said, "You can look it up."

This convention and election should relegate that party to nothing more than a regional (South and Alaska) party, the party of christian religion.

Pretty sure Utah, Kansas, and Idaho are gonna feel left out. And Texans love to pretend they're not Southerners.

But yeah... that's pretty much where things are headed.

In my fondest dreams, I'd like to see some libertarian option sprout up to take their place. Maybe if we get the Democrats winning enough 65-20-15 elections, everyone else will start to take multi-party electoral reform seriously.

Naah... they'd rather run off the cliff in the status quo.

In the Senate, [Obama] has not reached across party lines to get anything significant done

Unlike Lieberman, who reached accross the aisle and agreed to two more years of no government oversight.

If you work for McCain, you will become a liar.

There is no way to avoid it.

Their entire campaign is supported on false promises, flip flops, and blatant lies.

When questioned, they simply call the questioner biased, unfair, sexist, or angry.

I must say I continue to be astonished how effective this strategy is. Some very intelligent people I respect are leaning McCain. They are good people who only listen to MSM and don't get it.

Animal Farm. It's all Animal Farm politics.

What Lieberman meant was that Obama doesn't perform "reach-arounds" to the opposing party. You know, the way Joe does.

My, my. Y'all sure got your panties in a twist these days. "Palpable disdain"--that's item one in the "Progressive" lifestyle playbook, right before "Angst-ridden hysteria." The party that you seem to be assigning to the ash heap of history is going to give your annointed one a run for his money come November, and I suspect the saner ones here know it.

JOEMENTUM, BABY!

This convention and election should relegate that party to nothing more than a regional (South and Alaska) party, the party of christian religion.

As a Christian, I am offended by the suggestion the Republican Party is "the party of christian religion".

Now, if you said "the party of Christian fundamentalist theocracy"...

cm, I did end with "crazy right christians"...

EOC, I still have hope for Kansas. Texas, though, is sui generis.

Yep, I posted the Larry King interview with the Gibbs quotes earlier today, but I'm glad that others are pushing back on LIEberman as well.

"dispose of Senator Lieberman" BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

"Lie" is an ugly word. What Lieberman said was that "In the Senate, [Obama] has not reached across party lines to get anything significant done".

Maybe it's just that Lieberman doesn't consider keeping nuclear weapons out of the hands of terrorists "significant". Let's consider all possibilities before calling the poor guy a liar.

Let's take a moment to thank the good people of Connecticut again for giving us this great statesman.

The Independence Test
1. Joe supports John.
2. Joe thinks John is right on Iraq, the Middle East and national security.
3. Joe calls for bipartisanship and independence from party.
4. John contradicts his emphasis on country first and national security by choosing Palin.
5. Joe does not question this decision.
6. Something does not add up here for Joe, the "independent".
7. Joe is a two faced SOB.

If Joe Lieberman gives that stupid speech of his one more time -- the one where he starts by calling for greater bi-partisanship and collegiality and ends up smearing anyone who disagrees with him (or with Bush) -- I think I will throw up.

And can we just say out loud what everyone is thinking: Joe Lieberman supports McCain and the Republicans because he puts country before party. But in Lieberman's case the country is Israel. That's why he split with the Democrats. He wants US forces in the middle east because of Israel and he doesn't care how he gets it or what it costs. And he is not to fastidious about whether our presence does, or does not, advance US interests -- since his all-purpose rationale is that US and Israeli interests are one and the same. Everything else is smokescreen.

Israel is a good friend and our closest ally in the Middle East. But we don't do anyone any good -- not us, not Israel -- if we relinguish our position as mediator and honest broker in the region. Giving Israel a blank check with a no-questions-asked assurance to support them whatever they do is reckless insanity. And I am afraid that is where Lieberman wants to take us.

I have much more respect for Paulie Walnuts and Tony Soprano than I do for Joe Lieberman.

Doubtful and Woody:

If Harry Reid did the things you suggest, you would be handing the Senate to the Republicans. The Democrats have a one-vote margin with Lieberman (51-49). If Lieberman caucused with the Republicans, Cheney would be able to give the Republicans a 51-50 margin with his tie-breaker.

Reid has had to bied his time until November. If, as polls suggest, the Democrats pick up 5-6 seats, then Lieberman can be sent into exile. So hold your horses, that day is coming.

If Harry would just throw Benedict Joe out the window, I'd personally repair the window. Hell, I'll rebuild the window from scratch. I'll replace the cracked concrete where Joe lands. I'll pick up the broken pieces of glass, and scrub the blood-stains away.

I never thought ol' Joe would come out of the closet and openly admit to his secret jack-boot fetish....

billybob.. said: The party that you seem to be assigning to the ash heap of history is going to give your annointed one a run for his money come November, and I suspect the saner ones here know it.

You are absolutely right: the Republican Party will give Obama (and the Democrats) a run for their money ($300 million +) The result will still be the same: Obama is the new President of the United States.

The only reason there is a "run for the money" as you portray it... There are a LOT of low information voters, and ignorant people out there who are unwilling to look at the truth and the facts. You obviously fit in that category, hence the need of sensible people (progressives) to do participate in the 'run for the money'.

As you mentioned the "saner" ones know it; your just not one of them.

This really is the end of Joe. You don't make a speech at the RNC, and then expect to hold committee chairs with a Democratically controlled Congress. Too many rank and file dems will be saying, "He's shown he has no loyalty to us, it's time we show no loyalty to him."

Maybe, had the most dismal politician simply said, "I think John McCain would be a better president because," and then listed fact-based, honest reasons (of which I can think of none), maybe Joe would have had a chance, but to go and smear the Democratic presidential candidate is essentially admitting that he knows that his time is up.