I seem to recall folk used to get pretty upset about "indulgences" being bought and sold...

Please don't photoshop this metaphor

Jane and Rachel do Joe...

Has a Lieberman endorsement ever helped a Republican get elected to anything?

Nice chairmanship you've got there, Mr. Lieberman. It would be a shame if something... happened to it.

Who was it who said "Politics ain't beanbag"?

Joe Lieberman is becoming the embodiment of every insidious factor and characteristic of the deterioration of democracy in this country.

Whether it is the late stage cannibal capitalism, the vile narcissism, the corrupt corporate cronyism, the dishonest betrayal of the public trust and service to the American people, and dereliction of devotion to the common good -- it's all in Joe Lieberman...

He is the despicable poster child of the clown car senate and the degradation of this country.

At this point, every Dem knows what a scumbag Lieberman is. These sorts of threats ought to be uttered in private, BEFORE he gets it in his head to betray his party and the majority of voters in his state, not to mention the country.

Besides AIPAC, who likes this guy? Really, he dragged Gore down in 2000 and drags Democrats down today. The upside, some promise of being there in the clutch, has yet to materialize. Give him a couple of million bucks and send him on his way.

(Sen. Tom) Harkin said. "He wants to caucus with us and, of course, he enjoys his chairmanship of the [Homeland Security] committee because of the indulgence of the Democratic Caucus. So, I'm sure all of those things will cross his mind before the final vote."

Yeah, I'm sure Joe will be hurt pretty badly when he receives a sharply worded letter from Spineless Harry saying how 'counterproductive' Lieberman's votes against cloture were.

He campaigned with the GOP last year. He is announcing his plans to campaign with them next year?

Why do the Democrats allow him in the caucus? For 60 votes? When have they ever needed his vote? When was Joe ever the 60th vote on a contentious cloture?

The only thing his presence in the caucus allows is a headline stating that the Democrats can't get anything done despite having 60 votes.

Honestly, I don't see a whole hell of a lot of difference between 59 and 60 at this point.

Drop him.

Wasn't the whole rationale for giving Lieberman a committee chairmanship the idea that it would keep him in the fold on filibusters?

If so, he should definitely be stripped of that post and anything else the Dems have given him.

Harry, just show him the door and tell him not to let it hit his sanctimonious @ss on the way out. So what if he re-registers as a Republican? He effectively is one now, in terms of voting, and he's near retirement age anyway; he won't be a thorn in your side much longer. Get the satisfaction of administering righteous justice to the SOB.

Please, a lot of threats were made last year too. In the end, Lieberman gives them too much cover to kill things liberals want and Democrats have to pretend to try and get. So they'll keep him, just like Obama, begged to have him kept in February, so they can keep drawing the wool over our eyes.

I'm tired of how worthless this party is. I'm really tired of the rest of you falling for this bullshit cycle after cycle.

Quite frankly, it is time for Lieberman to go.

Does Lieberman have any seniority? Can we pull that away from him too?

Why does Harkin think Lieberman still wants to caucus with us? Does he seem like he wants to caucus with us? Wouldn't he really rather caucus with the GOP?

I'm tired of how worthless this party is. I'm really tired of the rest of you falling for this bullshit cycle after cycle.

You do sound tired. You should go somewhere and have a good long rest.

soulite, the democratic party is the worst one out there except for the alternative. How much damage are we willing to inflict on the country to build a truly progressive party? I don't know the answer.

Pushing the Dems to be the party that its platform says it is, is like tying jello with dental floss, but again our stunted, entrenched, political system makes it very expensive in terms of what the repiglicans could do to the country with out the spineless worms that are our Democratic leadership at least being a puddle of ooze that the repiglicans would have to wade through to starve the government, provide tax cuts to the wealthy and corporations, and pile up debt for someone else to clean up. Look at what just 8 years of bushies have done to our economy. Could we afford 20 years of this kind of oligarchy for a new generation of progressive legislators to come to power? Again I don't know the answer, but it is a legitimate question whenever we address the problem of the spineless worms of the democratic leadership.

How much damage are we willing to inflict on the country to build a truly progressive party? I don't know the answer.

Well, that was the question in 2000, too, and the answer ended up being "quite a bit" over the next eight years.

I totally understand what Soullite means about being tired. The D's have no party discipline, which wouldn't be a bad thing except that the Repugs are extremely organized. Demo leadership is spineless and way too willing to cave in the face of criticism.

The Republican party fights dirty and they fight to win. The Democrats don't fight at all. D's seem to enjoy being walked over and Lieberman is the poster child for that fact.

Sometimes I am seriously tempted to just stop paying attention to politics all together, stop voting, stop writing my representative, and stop dreaming that the Demos are actually going to do anything to make this country better.

Oh, we've taken some baby steps, and I honestly believe that Obama is trying, and some of congress is trying; but too many bad apples have spoiled this bunch.

I generally find the Republican's demand for ideological purity absurd and one of the reasons why they are on the decline. However, the ongoing support for Joe is like calling the babysitter who poisoned your child over for a second chance because, other than the poisoning, the evening went rather well.

I second frank romanovsky's response to soullite.

Joe Lieberman is the embodiment of the term "putz" (Yiddish for "a penis that thinks it's a person") and the poster boy for the old Texanism, "He needed killin'!"

He should be stripped of his seniority and assignments and expelled from the caucus. Then he'd find the Republicans no longer cared about him, since he'd have nothing to bring to the table in terms of reputation that would help them pull the wool over the eyes of "independent voters," which is what they see him for now. Then Holy Joe could just sit there till 2012, all by his lonesome, completely ignored.

Of course, Obama, Schumer, Durbin, Reid, Dodd, et al should be really really happy with the results of their display of "party loyalty" in 2006, when Holy Joe received their public support against the DEMOCRAT who defeated him in the primary, Ned Lamont, a man who they wouldn't have to be sweating over his loyalty now. Every one of these spineless scumballs made the decision that of course Joe would win (even with the polls against him at the outset of his independent campaign), and they didn't want to be on his "bad side," especially after he promised them he'd be a loyal party voter in the caucus. And then efter he fucked them during the 110th Congress and campaigned for McCain (appeared at the Republican convention!), he told them "oh please, forgive me and I'll vote loyally now." So their "practical politics" is now biting their ass.

Anyone who would believe this slimy little putz if he told you it's Friday probably still believes in the tooth fairy. Holy Joe is a lying sack of shit whose entire loyalty is to his oversize ego (to make up for his undersize pee-pee).

@TCinLA:

It's always about sex for you Hollywood liberals, right Al?

Joe Lieberman is... the poster boy for the old Texanism, "He needed killin'!"

TCinLA, winger nutpickers' wet dream.

"Lieberman is threatening to help Republican block a vote on health care reform, prepared to help Republican candidates in the midterms, and using his committee gavel to lend credence to Republican attacks against the White House, all after promoting the Republican presidential candidate last year."

Yep - and knows that all will be forgiven for one tiny little vote. He's right and he's playing it for all it's worth.

Is there any way Connecticut people to bring a class action suit to force Lieberman to do his duty and represent the needs of the citizens rather than the needs of insurance companies and his ego?

This cloture vote is the reason the Dems have seen fit to keep the biggest narcissist in the Senate (and that's saying something!) in their caucus. If "Traitor Joe" (h/t Paul Begala) lives up to his nickname on this one, there is no reason left not to kick him to the curb.

The only service Joe Lieberman has rendered is to become the embodiment of corruption. We don't have to imagine what corruption is like, we simply have to look at Joe and all of us, even the most naive, can see. As a therapist, I wonder if someone like Joe Lieberman was always this way, but very adept at hiding his true self, or did he become this way a little at a time? Watching him is like watching Gollum in "The Lord of the Rings." In both cases, you look in vain for traces of humanity.

Lieberman's ass needs to be kicked to the curb! -Kevo

This reminds me, I know it's ungodly early to be thinking about but but how is 2010 shaping up for Senate Dems anyway? Surely we will be gaining even more seats and this will make Lieberman irrelevant, right?

Joe Lieberman caucusing with Democrats is the same as a 59/41 split for all the good it's doing Harry Reid. Might as well strip him of his Chairmanship. At least Obama would have a more reliable, less dishonorable partner at Homeland Security - maybe someone inclined to work on the substantive issues of the day and not waste time with the BS.

Joe Lieberman caucusing with Democrats is the same as a 59/41 split...

I disagree, BC. The other 40* GOP senators are shoulder-to-shoulder in obstructing any healthcare reform. If he had been "kicked to the curb", as so many have suggested in this forum, there would be 41 in the GOP caucus. At least with Lieberman, we have a chance. I say: Give him whatever the hell he wants. In 5 years it won't matter. But we'll have a public option.

* The exception is Cynthia Snowe, who was willing to go along, but not as far as a public option.

Can I join the crowd wishing Joe Lieberman's early demise? We're watching a bandwagon form from ether and start rolling down the information super highway. What a sight to behold! Soon the roar will be deafening! It's flying a banner: No More Joe!

Wouldn't it be nice to see the Democrats boot Lieberman, Lincoln, Ben Nelson and maybe Landrieu out of the caucus if they support a Republican filibuster on ANYTHING? I'd rather see a strong 56-member caucus than the 60 we have right now. And maybe the threat of being expelled might change some behavior. . . .

I agree with Coop. What are these people doing for the democrats ? The definition of a caucus member is to support the caucus. We have been around this thing so many times since it started it's nauseating. Look, the folks who decide to vote against cloture on a landmark bill like this, a bill which has the support of the majority of the people, do not support the democratic caucus, period. In fact they are hostile to the caucus. If we kick them out and they continue to deny cloture, what has changed ?

You all know that the right wingers consider the progressives to be a bunch of pussies who won't fight, and you know what ? They're right. We stand around and wring our hands and play Hamlet, never willing to take a chance and cut anyone out of our flock who is hurting us. We accuse republicans of using the means to justify the ends, but kissing the blue dogs' asses to get their votes is precisely that, cynicism, the same god-damned thing. I don't give a shit about that lying sack of shit Lieberman, but I have to wonder what lincoln, Nelson, and company are doing to earn our trust ?

Maybe, if Lieberman is made an example, Lincoln, Ben Nelson and Landrieu might fall into line knowing that if Lieberman is booted than they could be also.

You know, put the fear of The Flying Spaghetti Monster in them.

I really wonder if Lieberman is doing exactly what Obama wanted him to do...kill the public option.
Remember, Obama wanted the "trigger" version which we all know is no Public Option at all and was quite upset with Reid for pushing for the opt out version which Reid thought he had the votes for and just when he was about to bring that version to the floor...suddenly Lieberman appears to threaten a filibuster unless the PO is dumped. Would Joe have done this if Reid had gone with the "trigger" version (which is no PO either)??

Joe certainly did what Obama could not get done through the courts...bury the torture photos (some victims were boiled alive) after 2 courts ordered the photos release, but Joe put an amendment into an appropriations bill preventing the release of the photos from FOIA.

Wasn't Joe Obama's mentor when he entered the senate? I expect Joe's efforts will kill the public option or make it meaningless and Rahm Obama will make sure there are no repercussions because just like the secret mtg with big Pharma to ensure their huge profits...now private ins gets a huge gift with millions of new customers and government subsidies and all they had to give up was this pre-existing conditions crap.

The winners are big Pharma. private ins industry and dem campaign donations. Excuse me while I pray I'm wrong.

Jerusalem Joe has got to go.

Joe ended 2 dem filibusters by siding with repubs.

The only way to get the senate back to doing what it was created to do is to change the senate rules and end the filibuster. That way the body cannot be blackmailed by this obstructionist group which has abused the filibuster to historic proportions.

It only works for repubs because corporate dems always end democratic filibusters.

Nothing is getting done because of this abused rule...41 senators are holding the majority and country hostage and wasting tax dollars for their nonsense.

Dems should also change the "hold" rule.

The country has made it clear we are sick of this crap...and it's always the senate shutting down our democracy.

No hold or filibuster should last more than 2wks...and then it must be resolved so progress can continue.