Why is Lieberman part of the Democratic Caucus? Why is he allowed to chair any committees?

Of course the equation should change, if only to punish Lieberman. He's torpedoing everything anyway, and he campaigned for McCain. What's left that's Dem about him?

If he wants scorched earth, I say make him suffer the remaining years he's in Congress by taking away his toys. Let him join formally with the Republicans, and exercise his zero seniority.

In following the logical direction of Joe LIEberman's problem with public-private competition, it becomes obvious that he is correct and we should:

- return to privatized fire departments
- shut down the VA system
- eliminate medicare/medicaid
- shut down the TVA
- shut down the FAA
- get the government out of public air traffic control
- add your own selection to the above

Is Joe inane or insane or just plain in the pocket of corporate amerika?

"he switched, the Democratic caucus would go from 60 to 59 seats..."

WHO CARES?!?!? Lieberman is effectively a Republican these days anyway, so who cares if the nominal size of the Democratic caucus is 59 or 60? He's going to keep obstructing things anyway, and with him in the Democratic caucus, it just makes it look more like the Dems can't get it together.

What benefit does having Lieberman in the Dem caucus do if he doesn't vote to move the Dems' top priority forward.

Let him go...

You're damn right it should. they should have bounced his ass the moment he showed up at the Republican convention.

I'd prefer that Reid go to reconciliation and pass it that way if possible. Knock Liebermann, Snowe, the turn-coat Democrats right off the stage. Pass a better bill without them. When it's done, drop the axe on Lieberman.

Democrats in the Senate spend so much time triangulating that they completely fail to accomplish anything. They were useless in the last Congress and they are useless today. There is no reason for them to let Lieberman remain in the caucus if he isn't going to do anything to support what Democrats want.

They should have kicked him out of the caucus in 2006 on the day he declared his Lieberman for Lieberman candidacy. He made it clear then that he was not a Democrat and nothing he has done since then should have changed anyone's mind.

Harry Reid seems to think that compromising until nothing is accomplished other than an empty 'win' is somehow useful. Lots of voters think that Democrats who compromise everything away are indistinguishable from Republicans.

If he switched, the Democratic caucus would go from 60 to 59 seats, and the Senate that already seems paralyzed would be even more dysfunctional.

I disagree.

This isn't like keeping someone in your camp to have the bodies for a bare-boned majority that'll give one party an edge on committee membership, etc.

The only real value of keeping Lieberman in the caucus is if he delivers on issues like this. If he can't be counted on now, there is absolutely no reason to give him anything.

In fact, I'd say the Democrats would gain a lot by losing him. They'd no longer have the unobtainable goal of filibuster-proof 60 votes and would focus instead on reconciliation and other measures that worked in this country for 250-odd years. And we'd be spared everyone having to feed Holy Joe's ego.

It's simple -- if Lieberman wants to act like an obstructionist Republican, then let him be treated like one. Period.

joey lieberman doesnt add up to a jack palance stool. trouble is, neither does harry reid.

If he were the one to block the health bill, I wonder if he would still be so esteemed by his Democratic colleagues.

If he switched, the Democratic caucus would go from 60 to 59 seats, and the Senate that already seems paralyzed would be even more dysfunctional.

How? What has 60 meant? Not a damn thing. While, it has some procedural importance, Reid has blown every little bit of it's actual meaning. Plus, when the chips are down the Dems can't get 60 anyway.

There are really 3 parties in the Senate anyway. The Democrats who run from mildly conservative to pretty liberal. There are about 50 or so of those (including Bernie Sanders). 10 or so completely useless assholes who call themselves Democrats or "Joe Lieberman" who exist solely to torpedo the caucus from within. And the Republicans who are worthless fuckers too.

That Reid can't control the ultra-conservative part of his caucus, can't facilitate a simple majority vote on anything and can't deliver on anything puts him squarely in the 10 fuckers who wreck the Democratic agenda on purpose from within.

After 2010, the D's should have about 55 to 57 members and Reid won't be one of them anyway. He's going out showing his true colors on health care. Anti-reform.

But, Bob M, Joe Lieberman is not a Democrat. He quit being a Democrat the day he lost the primary in 2006. He has Senate colleagues. Some may have egos as big as his and wish their states would allow them to ignore primary outcomes.

I think we're operating on the basis of the myth that there are 60 democrats. I believe the real real number is closer to 55.

It's almost as if Joe Lieberman is sleeping with a health insurance lobbyist.

Joe needs to go. 60 votes means nothing. Lieberman is a pawn that needs to be sacrificed in order to enforce order on the rest of the caucus. And we can flip Snowe.

Daily Beast has a good piece on why Lieberman's a small, bitter man.

Strip him of everything. Give him to the Repukes.

Does anyone really think Lieberman is going to be the deciding vote to enact his persecutors top priority? That's what this is about. It's not policy, it's personal.

So pull it out, but Snowe's trigger in. Pass it, replace it in conference then ram the new bill through on reconciliation.

With that in mind, should the "trigger" compromise become the focus of negotiations with the center-right, it suggests the road to 60 votes will go through Sen. Olympia Snowe's (R-Maine) office, not Joe Lieberman's.

I have asked this question a number of times over the past few days but I still don't see the value of a compromise to the "trigger." No one, anywhere thinks a trigger is anything other than bullshit. A trigger won't appease anyone on the left and the people pushing a trigger will be just as happy to have no trigger. Its just them throwing an imaginary bone to the proponents of the public option who are not stupid enough to be fooled by it. So whose vote does a trigger actually buy? Again, as far as I can tell, its a compromise that gives no one anything they actually want. So why bother? Why not bargain over something more substantive like better subsidies or fee structuring? Something that progressives can actually take back to their States as a helpful concession.

Reconciliation. Screw Lieberman, Landrieu, Nelson, Lincoln and all the other wanna be Republicans.

I say strip him of all privileges and let him caucus with the republicans if he so wishes.

Frankly, it's better to have him outside the tent pissing in, than inside pissing in.

remember, there on limits on what can be passed on budget reconciliation - a lot of key terms of the HCR cannot.

Lieberman has already annoucned he plans to campaign for some Rs in 2010. We look absolutely weak if we allow that while he sits in our caucus. Propos to Leahy - and also to Harkin who has similarly threatened action against Lieberman if he filibusters HCR.

Thought exercise: yes, we will have fewer seats after the 2010s, but I assume we still have the majority. Would we get a better HCR bill if we waited, let Reid lose, and have Durbin or Schumer as likely Majority Leader, both of whom are much tougher than Reid?

Nice one, CarloP!

I doubt the Republicans are willing to bid for him. Who's going to give up their GOP committee set to make Joe feel better? They have nothing to offer. Let the Democrats take away most of his chairmanships but not all. Then let him know the last ones can be gone too if he doesn't behave.

He's proven again and again he's a scared bully who attacks those who don't fight back. Fight back and he'll treat you like a Republican: slavishly.

It wouldn't matter one bit if Lieberman left the caucus and joined the Republicans or formed a caucus of one

Don't let the door hit your but on the way out Mentum

Regardless of what you thought of Cindy Sheehan and her actions, she changed the conversation on the Iraq war. Maybe some new Cindy's can camp out in Connecticut, Arkansas, Nebraska, wherever and drive home the point that real people are effected by this bill.

Frankly, it's better to have him outside the tent pissing in, than inside pissing in.

Yup. Turn Senator Quisling loose and go with reconciliation.

""If he switched, the Democratic caucus would go from 60 to 59 seats, and the Senate that already seems paralyzed would be even more dysfunctional""

Why so? The size of the caucaus means little if it is not the same as the votes. There is a de-facto 59 member Democratic caucus. Can the asshole.

If he switched, the Democratic caucus would go from 60 to 59 seats, and the Senate that already seems paralyzed would be even more dysfunctional.

Uh, how so? There is no reason to keep him in the caucus anymore except that Obama and Reid get some sick pleasure by being undermined on a regular basis by a sleazy little backstabber who doesn't give a damn about anyone but himself.

If you need to turn to a Republican in order to break a filibuster on your most important piece of legislation, then there is no reason for him to stay in the caucus. But of course Obama and Reid just continue to say "thank you sir may I have another!"

Reconciliation. Heck, it worked for Republicans when they broke the budget four times - for two tax cuts, and the Medicare bill.

We might as well use it for something GOOD.

It's past time to say to Lieberman and the rest of the conservative dems - "screw you, we're using the nuclear option and destroying the filibuster."

If they won't let the Democrats have an up or down vote on the #1 domestic policy issue for the past 100 years then take away all their power to hold up legislation.

Believe me the country will be better for it.

Remember the threat of the "Nuclear Option." Change the rules to eliminate the fillibuster. No one has been talking about that. If there was ever a time when it would come in handy, it is now!

I'm with the who cares if Lieberman leaves camp. Sixty votes means nothing now with Lieberman in the caucus. I think Democrats should have a rule that if you caucus with Democrats you don't filibuster Democratic legislation. That should at least be a minimum. I don't think Lieberman actually wants to leave the Democratic caucus - he would have absolutely no power as a member of the Republican caucus.

Pie. Lieberman. Face.

Everyone of us...
On every progressive blog...
Should let all concerned know
(Reid, DNC, Obama, et al.)
That we will not suffer Joe one more day.

He isn't a Democrat.
And he is taking up a key chair that should be in the hands of a Democrat.

Until he is gone: NO MORE DONATIONS!

Where do the majority of Liebermans constituents stand on health care reform? Are the majority of them in the pockets of the Health industry like Lieberman? Are they letting him know what they want? Or are they sitting back passively allowing holy joe to screw them. What percentage of his people in Conn. are uninsured? How many are on "Goverment run" (oh the horrors) programs like Medicare, Medicaid, SCHIP, VA.? I know he doesn't give a rats ass about the country as a whole, but what of those he is suppose to represent. Or is just the insurance industry and Israel that gets his attention? What a class A jerk.

Let's see. Joe gets to chair a committee and present himself as a sort of Democrat when he feels like it. And what to we get? Nothing!

God, how I hate Joe Lieberman. I started a Facebook group for all of those who loathe him as much as I do. While we may not be able to kick him out of the caucus ourselves... we can do everything possible to make sure he doesn't retain a Senate seat come 2012.

http://LoathingLieberman.com

Damn it Steve Benen...I keep posting this scenario but it seems I can't get you to read it.

Rahm Emanuel with Obama has bargained away the PO to ensure campaign donations going to the dem party rather than republican party...

That's why Rahm Obama was pushing the "trigger" option (which is no PO at all) but Reid would not go for it and went for the opt out option which angered the WH but he managed to get the support to pass the Bill with an opt out ...Enter Joe Lieberman...to kill the PO one way or another...so now President Rahm Obama can go back to the "Trigger" option (which is no PO at all) and get Snowe to support it so the bill will still pass but without a PO.

Joe Lieberman was responsible for making sure the torture photos could never be shown via the FOIA...something Obama was trying to do but couldn't get it done...so enter Joe Lieberman.

Lieberman was Obama's mentor when he was a Jr. Seantor.

Without a PO the bill is merely a profitable exchange for private ins which will get millions of new customers in exchange for accepting (but with a higher cost) pre-existing conditions. That's the main point. A PO would open the door to gov. involvement in HC ins. which could always be expanded later. So to sum up:

1) Rahm bargains away the PO to keep ins. money going to dems

2)The WH knows the "Trigger" option is no PO at all so they demand Reid go that direction. They have one republican to support and demand the trigger.

3)Reid refuses and gets support for the opt out solution which would make the gov. a player in the ins industry and keep costs down and could also be expanded in the future.

4)Enter Joe Lieberman (independent) to kill the PO

5)Now the bill will not pass unless the senate goes for the trigger option (which is no PO at all) so Snowe replaces Lieberman as the 60th vote to allow the bill to come to a vote which she can then vote against and Lieberman can vote for to save face.

6)The HC reform bill now becomes the HC exchange bill...who will say no way Jose and find another way to get real reform? Just saying...

Do they have recall in Connecticut? And if they do, can they use it now?

Lieberman claims the public option will have higher costs than the private plans. If so, why fear it? It will not be able to compete, and will go out of business.

“Remember the threat of the "Nuclear Option." Change the rules to eliminate the fillibuster”

According to Sean Hannity it’s called the “Constitutional Option”

If Joey L. takes down Healthcare Reform, he should be stripped of everything the next day. The Democrats should then grow a pair and campaign on a theme of destroy all Republicans. There isn't an honest one in the bunch and they will only work to enrich the top one percent and destroy the rest of us. With friends like these, why are we afraid of Islamo-fascists?

Expel Lieberman. Make him go over to the GOP. Make him adopt the RNC's 10 question purity test. Watch him face a primary challenge for the "Connecticut for Lieberman" nomination from someone arguing that Lieberman has betrayed what the party stands for. Watch him lose.

Then laugh.

That was the plan all along....Lieberman would vote against the public option too make Snowe relevant again....the bill will pass with a trigger, this is what Obama said was ok with him...this will get the republican vote he wanted, they just had to go through Lieberman to get it......

Dear Senator Lieberman,

This letter is to acknowledge the great service that you have rendered this country. Your career, your very existence, is a monument to all of the ills that afflict us. No one could have been able to adequately described the disease that has all but devoured the heart and soul of this country, leaving a carcass to be picked over by corporations. But you, through your your never ending efforts to gratify and glorify yourself since running for office, have accomplished this. You have show that you cannot build a nation on a foundation of greed and hypocricy, but you can destroy one when you let these ills flourish. To reward you for your tireless efforts, the name "Lieberman" will become immortal. Whenever corruption is encountered, they will say "Lieberman." Whenever someone struggles for a word for vile or craven, the name "Lieberman" will come to mind. You will join the ranks of Quisling and Arnold; your name will be used to describe the most despicable acts of treason. Your likeness will symbolize the sickness that all but destroyed this country.

Thank you, Joe Liebermen, for showing us the depths to which we as a nation and a people have sunk. I hope it is not too late.

In my opinion, Joe Lieberman would make fine pig food. He's low-fat for a guy his age, his leathery skin would provide excellent chewing exercise, and he's protein all the way to the bone. He wouldn't even need to be cut up - just push him over the rail, and yell "Sooooo - EEEEE!!"

Perhaps afterward a new line of gourmet bacon could be named after him, as a sort of tribute.

If that option doesn't result in consensus, I bow to Koryel's plan. Let the leadership know that Democratic supporters have had enough. Joe has spent the last few years basking in being talked about, and so far there's been no payment exacted for his pursuit of attention even when it led into notoriety.

I can think of a dandy spot for that gavel; one where it was never designed to go.