Nice article at HuffPo on what Dems will do with lieberman this week. And the comments to the post have turned back to the primary-season silliness that irks the hell out of me. So many people take a look at 20% of the picture and makes a conclusion that fails to address the whole problem - and the lieberman situation is no different.
This clown's history speaks for itself. He's a shameless, selfish stooge with the moral fiber of a neocon.
I see many at HuffPo waxing philosophic about 'keeping your enemy closer,' but the reality of the situation is this: he's NOT GONNA CHANGE!
When Obama announces plans to start drawing down troops in Iraq, lieberman will be on fux news for weeks, feeding the beast. After the first couple partyline votes in the Senate, lieberman will be on fux news for weeks, denigrating Dems and Obama's ability to bring change while casting no aspersion at all toward his true soul mates across the aisle. There will be other issues, too.
Why? Because he LOVES the ATTENTION.
What will it get him? Probably nothing as the Iraq draw-downs will be almost complete when his reelection bid comes up and he should lose his seat in the Senate (unless CT's still snoozing). His only hope for reelection is to go along with Obama as much as possible. He'll HAVE to do that regardless of whether or not he chairs any committee.
This is an important key to the whole issue. "Palling around with Rs" won't help his reelection bid. He has to get in line with progressive and constructive efforts in the Senate. If he's the guy who votes to keep bills from going to the floor for votes, he is absolutely, positively toast.
In short, lieberman needs the Democratic party more than the Dems need lieberman - period.
If you were running against the man in a few years, wouldn't you trot out snippets of his speech in ads to show the inanity of his "bi-partisanship?" He's not bipartisan.... he's an obnoxious, grand-standing clown that gets off by tail-gunning people on both sides of the aisle. That's not bipartisanship... it's being an insufferable, self-aggrandizing ass. BIG difference.
What will it get the Dems in the Senate? Well, the public might care if Dems toss him out if he did nothing. They could be brought to think of Dems as being spiteful if that were the case. BUT the guy spoke against Obama at the R convention! HELLO!!!!! This is way beyond the point of being 'spiteful' or 'collegial.' It's at a point where you're starting to look stupid if you put any faith in the man to do anything ethically.
Reinstating the man FURTHERS the perception that Dems are spineless.... which is hard to refute in this case. Dems have ALL the leverage here and they cave - typical.
No comments:
Post a Comment