Lieberman's Costly Support for McCain

[babylonsister]

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1817122,00.html

Lieberman's Costly Support for McCain
Sunday, Jun. 22, 2008
By JAY NEWTON-SMALL/WASHINGTON


Joe Lieberman is having a not-so-secret affair on his political spouse of the past four decades. The Connecticut Senator — now an independent, but until 2006 a staunch Democrat, married to the party — is not just campaigning for presumptive Republican nominee John McCain; he is, to even the most objective eye, in a deep state of rapture.

snip//

If that belief remained tacit, Democrats wouldn't quite be so peeved. But in March, Lieberman told ABC's "This Week" that the Democratic Party has "been effectively taken over by a small group on the left of the party that is protectionist, isolationist and. hyper-partisan." And earlier this month Lieberman participated in a GOP-sponsored conference call criticizing Obama's speech before the American Israel Political Affairs Committee, a leading Jewish Organization.

Lieberman insists he's simply highlighting differences between the two candidates' records, and he would never make personal attacks. Still, he didn't exactly demur when asked to compare McCain and Obama's records in reaching across the aisle. "If you compare record to Senator Obama's, it's not just that Senator Obama has only been in the Senate for only three and a half years and McCain's been here 21 years," Lieberman huffed. "Senator Obama has done very little of that in his time here, very little bipartisan work."

What Lieberman considers drawing distinctions, his peers consider unseemly. "I think people see a difference between supporting someone who's your colleague and friend and attacking the nominee of the other party," says Senator Bob Casey, a Pennsylvania Democrat. "I hope Senator Lieberman will focus on the former and say what he wants to about Senator McCain and why he's for him as opposed to attacking our nominee." Casey was one of a few Democratic senators even willing to discuss Lieberman. Of the dozen polled one afternoon last week after the caucus met with top Obama strategist David Axelrod — a meeting Lieberman discreetly skipped — many simply declined comment. California's Diane Feinstein bit out, "It obviously hurts, there's no question about that and that's all I have to say."

It's a fine line Lieberman's walking and one that could have serious consequences. The Democrats are well-positioned to pick up several Senate seats in November and if he's no longer the 51st vote, Lieberman may find himself facing open calls to throw him out of the caucus. No one likes to play the cuckold for long, sooner or later they ask for a divorce.

[vi5]

1. That's the problem. It's NOT costly...

It hasn't cost him a goddamned thing. And that's why he continues to get away with it.

[no_hypocrisy]

2. Who or what demographic do you believe Lieberman is influencing?

What can he offer McCain besides the ass-kissing of a lifetime?

He snookered Connecticutt two years ago, but that was one state and the republicans put him back in the Senate. He brings as little influence to McCain if not less than he did to Gore.

Joe has no future except for the vain hope of McCain getting in.

[NewJeffCT]

7. It makes McCain appear moderate/bipartisan

even though he's been busy embracing the radical right these last five years.

[no_hypocrisy]

9. It makes Joe look wishy-washy and someone who goes to the highest bidder

by contrast.

[TheCowsCameHome]

3. It'll be "Joe Who?" after the election in November.

Enjoy your rapture, Joe. (While it lasts.)

[KharmaTrain]

4. An 8th Day Wonder On The 9th Day

Joe's bettin' the bank on Gramps somehow resurecting his career. He's a man without a party...as he's all but become personna non-grata in the Democratic caucus and he can't jump to the other side or he'll lose whatever senority or clout he has. His hopes are Gramps names him for VP or some big ticket gig cause he knows his Senate days are numbered. Even if he stays, if the Democrats win, he'll be backbenched...with zero senority or committee chairmanships...and that's not a bad thing. His work on "Homeland Security" has been a total joke.

Joe reminds me of the kid who always got picked on...then somehow got to be buddies with the bullies and started to join them...thinking he was one of them, but he never was.

[qazplm]

5. Joe's done in January

Reid wont be able to hold back the group once we get 52 or more senators.

The only shot Joe has is if he becomes the 60th guy.

[jimshoes]

6. Well, one party has been taken over by

a small group of hyper partisans. Here is where joe gets his left and right mixed up.

[RB TexLa]

8. As a person Joe is addressing with those remarks, I call bullshit

This is an attempt to split our party during the election. Yes there are people more protectionist and isolationist than I and other moderate Democrats. There are issues that fall under those things that are hotly debated here at DU and within the Democratic party, just title a thread "NAFTA sucks," or "NAFTA is great," and watch 100 plus posts pop up.

Neither Democratic presidential candidate left standing in May pushed an isolationist agenda. Ending an occupation and bring troops home is not isolationist. Senator Obama has given no indication of abandoning Iraq. He has given no indication he is going to ignore Iran and their nuclear program. Working to avoid conflict and war through all means possible while holding a military possibility in your back pocket is not isolationism, and it is not weak.

Joe, as a moderate Democrat, something you once were, sorry. It's not going to work. And in the end it's not going to work with millions of moderate to conservative Democrats, sure there are some that will vote the other way in November, there will be Republicans that vote for Obama as well. But your trying to push buttons within the Democratic party is not going to do it. In fact it will only serve to strengthen the bonds I have with my more liberal brothers and sisters in the Democratic party. Even here at DU which (IMHO) overall is more liberal than the party and participation subject to the rules set forth by the administrators I have advocated expansion of free trade and fought against returns to isolationism. Yes, I get flames for it, and called names, but that is what goes on in political debate.

The Democratic party is a pretty big tent. The lines lead further away from the center pole than in the republican tent. But we are tied far too tight this year for shit like yours to work. People like you and Bush have helped in creating unity that will ward off your not so veiled appeals to my wing of the Democratic party.