This gets more absurd all the time. I gotta write Pryor.

Lieberman can go hang out with his BFF, McCain.

Liebermans judgement has to come into question. His support for Mccain and especially his comments supporting Palin for Vice-president either makes him a fool or he has an agenda that has a more important ultimate purpose than the security of the United States.

Keeping Lieberbush in chairmanship is tantamount to invading Iraq only to have Iran secede to its political governance.....oh, wait..........

It's one of those rare arguments from Lieberman that combines arrogance, incompetence, and demagoguery, all at the same time.

When you put it that way, it really underscores just how well Lieberman fits in with the Republican caucus, doesn't it?

Homeland Security and Governmental Oversight are both crucial national concerns that need more attention, so we need a well-functioning committee. Lieberman has done absolutely nothing useful with his term as chairman, so he should be replaced. That should be the beginning and the end of this issue.

What is becoming increasingly clear is the Obama Administration's use of transformational leadership in its management. So I would use those principles in crafting an opinion about Lieberman so that it gets the appropriate attention and response by a Congress responsive and sensitive to Obama's leadership.

The components of this include arguments based on evidence, logic, reason, human rights and Constitutional congruence.

In this regard, I would appeal to Lieberman's evidential track record of failing to conduct the business of that committee. I would include his failure to conduct oversight, and I would list the specific deficits and failures in all of the business he did conduct.

This becomes a competency over political partisanship issue, and thus, Lieberman's argument can be used against him. (Ha! Sweet satisfaction.) Reid should make the argument that new Committee leadership is necessary to effect the targeted desired outcomes for competent and comprehensive executive oversight and accountability and competent national security (You will never catch me referring to the nation by its odious Bush homeland term)which adhere to the Constitution.

Double epic fail.

have rahm send him a 2-and-a-half foot long dead fish.

I don't which aspect of his committee where Lieberman bothers me more. For Homeland Security, Lieberman's offenses would likely continue to be of the passive variety. On Governmental Affairs, his inner republican is too likely to run wild.

But, why are these 2 distinct oversights cobbled into a single committee? I'm not looking to appease Holy Joe here. But were he stripped of the Governmental Affairs 1/2 of the assignment, I could almost forget he's there.

Framing it as "political retribution" is false and backward looking. Getting rid of him is political prudence and forward looking, for he wants oversight of the executive to carry out a Republican agenda. You may as well have Karl Rove in the job.

"Lieberman's offenses would likely continue to be of the passive variety"

Oh n-o-o-o. He is going to activate to carry out his "inner republican." Our little Joey has an agenda.

We owe Lieberman all the respect and consideration Michael showed Fredo.

Joe Lie took the chairmanship of that Committee and used it specifically as a political tool to protect his BFF George W. Bush. He quashed its ability to function for partisan, political purposes. Now he claims that to remove him from the posting would be "unfair?"

He's already declared that he intends to wield that gavel to bury the Obama administration in oversight, while at the samw time covering up for his new friends on the GOPer side of the aisle. Good gods, people---why not just hand the damned gavel to Tom DeLay and be done with it?

I've said it ad nauseum; I'll say it again---Joe Lie is no longer a Democrat. He is a Party of One. There is no logical reason to deliver unto him any Committee assignments whatsoever. Reid doesn't have to give the man anything at all; he doesn't have to allow Joe Lie to caucus with the Dems, or give him any positions of authority---that's for the Lieberman Party to do....

A solution I was thinking is that Obama should over Lieberman the Cabinet position in Homeland Security, this would go well with his team of rivals theme and a centrist approach in his administration, plus give the Democrats some control over Lieberman and be able to replace his senate seat with a true Democrat. The ball would then be in Lieberman's court to decide to stay in the Senate with GOP minority or join an Obama administration where if his intentions where to "protect America" he would gladly accept the offer.

Eric_d78, your solution to make Leiberman the Secretary of Homeland Security is a joke, right? Two years as Chairman of the Senate committee and he did what? Anything to recommend him now to run the entire department? No, the only solution is to take the chairmanship away from him. Let him caucus with the Republicans, even switch parties if he chooses. At least it would be his obvious choice, not the one he would make as a spy in the Democratic caucus. And despite his protestation that he only wants to remain Chairman of the Homeland Security and Government Oversight committee so he can concentrate on the first part of that title, I call bullshit. I wouldn't trust this guy as dog catcher, let alone a very important post within the Senate.

The first thing Joe the Turncoat did, on receiving the gavel of that committee, was to refuse to do *any* investigation of the Katrina fiasco. Don't know which part of the committee's business this might be, but it was a failure of epic proportions, given that, in '07, it was still a raw and festering wound. So screw him and his personal ambitions.

Agree with "impeachetc", @14:47. Disagree, *strongly*, with Eric_d78 @13:34. The *last* thing Obama now needs is an inimical mole in his cabinet. With Joe the Turncoat there, Obama would need to hire at least two extra bodyguards and 5 checkers of fact. The country is in too precarious a position to take this risk for appearances sake.

I don't know how Lieberman can expect to do an effective job as committee chair with his cranium lodged so far up his rectum.

Some have opined that Obama should have no interest in this situation. This is nuts—any President, Republican or Democrat—needs to have people in place in Congress who will help pass the legislation that he was elected to enact. I would think that one reason Rahm is now COS is specifically to help deal with insufferably pompous assclowns like Lieberman.

Elections have consequences. You backed the wrong side, Joe. TFB

Again, from Josh Marshal at TPM. Let's mention very much what he says has gone little mentioned regarding the part of the committee that has to do with oversight:

Another Reason to Can Joe

As we and many others have chronicled, there's a surfeit of reasons to strip Sen. Lieberman of his committee chairmanship. But one, perhaps the most obvious and substantive, has gone little mentioned. Simply put, he was terrible at it. Lieberman's committee is the senate investigations and oversight committee, the senate's counterpart to Rep. Henry Waxman's committee in the House. And if you remember a lot about Waxman's investigations and hearings and nothing about Lieberman's, that's because Lieberman didn't hold any. Even in the face of endless scandals of the late Bush administration, Lieberman couldn't find anything worth poking into.

--Josh Marshall

And the obvious, willful apathy demonstrated by HoJo in his Committee Chairmanship is being totally glossed over by the Senate Majority Leader who is quite content to have HoJo stay right where he is.

Could HoJo have been doing something productive with his committee and chairmanship instead of traveling the country with his buddy McBush while HoJo tried his damnedest to get his buddy elected president? Maybe. Maybe not... considering it was HoJo. But somebody else as chairman probably could have. Somebody else as chairman probably could have done all kinds of scrutinizing and improving sorts of things instead of running around the country trying to get a Repuke nominated for president. But not HoJo.

And a Senate Majority Leader that actually gave a damn about a supposedly very important committee related to the very important security concerns of the US of A might do something about the very important committee being relentlessly neutralized by a guy coincidentally working to elect a RepubCo president. Then again, he might not. But he'd sure make a push for keeping the joke in place that has been "running", (neutralizing), the committee.

We really can do better than this. It's time to start thinking that way.

instead of running around the country trying to get a Repuke nominated for president.

How about...elected President?

It's one of those rare arguments from Lieberman that combines arrogance, incompetence, and demagoguery, all at the same time

Rare? That's pretty much been the foundation of his entire career!

No mention of Pentagon, Message Force Multipliers, NSA, or National Security Admin.

Isn't it obvious? Lieberman's a mole.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steve-clemons/remove-lieberman-from-all_b_142447.html

Joe Lieberman wants to keep his status and committees and caucus with the Democrats. He has been a fear-monger and someone who has promoted a dangerous, reckless false choice between American relations with Israel and other parts of the Middle East. He is a devout neoconservative who has been a key enabler of many of the most nefarious groups that promoted the Iraq War and who want a series of new wars in the region.

But more than that, he strongly supported someone a heartbeat away from the presidency who knew virtually nothing about America's place in the world, who knew nothing of American history and its leaders and conventions and founders.

Lieberman is dangerous on so many levels -- and he has not apologized for any of his positions or offered any explanation that should make Americans feel comfortable with this Senator in the next four years as Chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security....

It is useful to refresh the memory of what Joe Lieberman said about Sarah Palin, on stage with her, and what he remained on stage listening to as Sarah Palin talked about "Barack Obama's terrorist friends. . ."

This from TNR's Michael Crowley:

It was jarring, however, to hear Lieberman's full-throated endorsement of Sarah Palin, a woman with whom he has no prior relationship, and whose policy credentials you have to think the wonky 20-year Senator would find suspect in any other context.

"She's so strong, she's so capable, she's so competent," Lieberman told the cheering crowd. Emphasizing her "faith," he added that she is someone who "with your help--and God's help--will be the next vice president of the United States." More big cheers.

The religiousity continued when Palin bounded onstage. She commented right away on the number of American flags in the crowd, declaring: "God bless America--you guys get it!" [end quote]

Surely I'm not the only one who sees in these actions Goering's infamous method of engineering public opinion by 1) declaring an existential threat; and 2) denouncing your opponents "for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger? "

What was the whole McCain/Palin campaign? A relentless litany of specious threats to the nation and vile attacks on Obama's patriotism and faith. Liddy Dole's infamous "godless" ad is a perfect case in point.

This was also McCarthy's method: the threat then was a godless communist under every bed. Then Reagan threatened us with the myth of Nicaragua's imminent invasion.

First it was communists, then terrorists, then Islamo-fascists, then socialists or anything at all related to Obama.

Someone has made it policy: to use black psy ops on us. Hmm, maybe having a former CIA director as president was a bad thing. Three words: National Security Administration. What are they up to these days? We have no idea. That's the existential threat to our democratic republic, not Bill Ayers or Obama's charity towards all.

It's called 'myth-jacking,' our new and improved method for jacking whole nations to hell at a time--or just one voting bloc--and then sticking them with the bill. It's been Rove's MO this whole time.

"America is center-right" is the new myth with which the Right is trying to jack us yet again.

I'm just wondering - has there been any word on what the other committee was that Lieberman was going to be made chair of if he willingly gave up Homeland Security?

Looking at the seniority, the most likely one to me looks to be Small Business. Kerry is the current chair, but he's going to move up to Foreign Relations with Biden off to the Old Executive Office Building. The next highest ranking members of Small Business are Carl Levin and Tom Harkin, but they're both chairman of other, more important, committees. Next in line is — you guessed it — Joe Lieberman. I guess the Small Business Committee isn't good enough for Joe.

Lieberman is also highly ranked on Environment and Public Works, but that one has a chairwoman, Barbara Boxer, who isn't going anywhere, so Small Business seems like the more likely offer. At any rate, getting to be chairman of any committee is really too good for Lieberman, and it's pretty absurd that he's being intransigent about this. He was offered a perfectly good, moderately face-saving deal. He refused it. Now he gets nothing. If he wants to go over to the Republicans, they're welcome to have him. What a prima donna.

If Lieberman doesn't recognize that he crossed the pail, became a turncoat, and, if we wants to return to the Democratic fold, he needs to spend some time in purgatory to reestablish his bona fides within the Party, then, quite honestly, f#@* him. He certainly shouldn't retain any chairs or committees.

Whoops! That should be pale. Unless we are talking a bucket of shit.

Toss the traitorous idiot overboard, and get on with serious business!