Lieberman is a traitor to the Democrats. Unfortunately for Reid, he still depends on Lieberman's promise to the Connecticut citizens that voted for him to caucus with the Democrats. I certainly agree with Glenn that Reid is not the best Democratic leader that we could have. Let's work on getting Obama elected and another 8 to 10 Senate Democrats elected. Then, Lieberman can become a Republican, and get impeached by the Connecticut citizens that he abandons by changing his party.

Lieberman has defined himself by a single policy issue--the Iraq war. His other votes are all war related and therefore wrong as well.

Whatever good Lieberman stands for on other issues, and he has stood for good (ethics, global warmimg, DC vote) he has obliterated that by his absolutism on the Iraq war and his fear mongering and recklessness on Iran.

Majority Leader Reid, who is mostly right, except for his kowtowing to the pollsters (wrongly I might add) on Alito, is dead wrong on Lieberman. Reid's continued support of Lieberman is his other great failing. With that action he has abandoned his leadership responsibilities to the Democratic caucus..

Right now if Lieberman did what Jeffords did the Republicans would control the Senate. Cheney would break the 50-50 tie. So Lieberman right now is needed. That is Reid's reasonable argument.

If Lieberman did what Jeffords did he would have broken a firm pledge to Connecticut voters that he would caucus with Democrats.Turning the Senate over to Republicans would make Lieberman a 21st century Benedict Arnold.

Next Congress after the 2008 election, if Lieberman continues to support McCain for President,and the Democrats increase their margin by at least two, and Sanders of Vermont caucuses with the Democrats, Lieberman should be stripped of his chairmanship if he continues to support McCain.

The discipline is not for his votes. Lieberman is free to vote on issues as he chooses and seniority would be respected. However, when he supports the Republican candidate for President he loses all caucus privleges. If his support for McCain continues he should be stripped of his chairmanship after the 2008 election if the Democrats control the Senate.

David Cohen

Washington DC

[A boy named Sue]: ... someone has to counter Glenn's tendency to delete that which does not please him.

with

[A boy named Sue]: All it really takes [to get banned/deleted] is continued criticism and mockery of Glenn himself. Like most pathetic whiners, he's pathologically thin-skinned. Being the subject of such treatment reminds him too much of high school.

They call you "Sue" back then too? Or are you still there?

Cheers,

So now the Great Poser determined to steer the gullible left into a frenzy on

Taking down the (viable) Hillary wasn't good enough nor losing Lieberman's seat. Reid is now the target.

You gotta love the Heritage crowd.

"It takes a special kind of person to draw Glenn's ire to the point he deletes their comments."

Not really. All it really takes is continued criticism and mockery of Glenn himself. Like most pathetic whiners, he's pathologically thin-skinned. Being the subject of such treatment reminds him too much of high school.

"Sheer eedjitcy is not enough; that's tolerated and left stand as an object lesson."

Lesson learned Arne: you can stop posting now.

... someone has to counter Glenn's tendency to delete that which does not please him.

Hey, Susan: You misspelled "postings by eedjits with egos far larger than their crania".

It takes a special kind of person to draw Glenn's ire to the point he deletes their comments. Sheer eedjitcy is not enough; that's tolerated and left stand as an object lesson. You have to be an "Adam Nagourney" (using the Mr. "GFY" Cheney lexicon).

Cheers,

Barack Obama backs Lieberman and Dick Durbin backs Obama. WAKE UP PEOPLE BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE. Obama is a member of the boy's club. He likes Lieberman and Lieberman likes McCain. How obvious does it have to be that you're being led down the garden path before you see what's really going on? The cult of personality and media spin have taken over and questions of policy and deals done and allegiances made are not even being considered. Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, is not and never has been a member of the boy's club. For obvious reasons.They don't even like her being in their tree house. In spite of Michael Moore's ravings on the topic, she hasn't been bought off by the health care criminals either. Under her Presidency Bush and Cheney would face a real prospect of hearings into the Iraq war and various other criminal activities followed by prosecutions. It's hard to believe that any ally of Joe Lieberman and Dick Durbin will actually deliver that. Obama's more likely to sing 'Come Together' and say all of that is too 'divisive'. Supporters of Obama claim that too much was made of the 'bitter' comment but not enough was made of it. If he meant that working class Americans were bitter about being shamelessly exploited to make America rich and then being written out of both history and political power what else could any rational person expect them to be? If the American working class had ever been informed of their rights and allowed to exercise their numerical superiority the entire history of America in terms of social justice would have been different. If democracy is the greatest good of the greatest number then America is a failed democracy. Since Bush took office it's become more and more like a medieval kingdom with the king at the top and a rigid hierarchy all the way down to the landless peasants. Tim Russert's claim that 'We now know who the Democratic nominee will be' reminds me of Bush's cousin calling the election for Bush from the desk at Fox in 2000. Russert is a loathsome specimen, an oily, fake-serious lapdog of the right. He and all the others like him are working very hard to make sure the Democrats have a Dukakis moment. This could mean Vice President Lieberman, President McCain, endless war and, most importantly, preservation of the status quo. Not a pretty picture.