Letters to the Editor
-
Say It Ain't So, Joe
Maybe Joe hopes to find himself McCain's Vice President, so the chairmanship means very little to him.
-
Enabler
Or he wanted the chair so that he could in fact block any oversight that would question the so questionable policies of his friends. His goal is to be the enabler, not the overseer.
-
Why oversee your friends?
It's pretty obvious by now that Lieberman is more friendly with Republicans than democrats. He wanted the gavel to protect his friends from oversight. Simple. And while Waxman can bang away as much as he wants, without cooperation from his counterpart in the Senate, he has no real pull.
Lieberman didn't want the chairmanship. The Republicans wanted LIeberman to have it. and they probably cut a deal to help him campaign in 2006 in order for him to win and get it.
-
No Oversight is the Point
Well, who is Lieberman aiding by not exercising any oversight over Homeland security? The answer is obvious: President Bush. Lieberman wanted to hold the Chairmanship to do exactly what he is doing--prevent anyone else on the Committee from engaging in active oversight.
-
But Lieberman does wield power...
just by his control over the agenda of that committee. In the hands of another Senator, this committee could become a thorn in the GOP hide.
As it is, not so much. Lieberman indeed influences oversight--by deciding not to conduct it.
-
Lieberman's motivations?
Not doing something can be as important as doing something.
Not reading the Patriot act before voting on it.
Not reading an NIE before authorizing war.
For whatever reason, Lieberman seems to be a rubberstamp on a lot of Bush politices. Being chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and doing nothing is a continuation of that rubberstamp.
Somebody like Waxman might actually take the oversight role seriously and start poking around at what is actually going on. That could screw things up. Remember that Mukasey is busy not doing anything either with respect to Congressional subpoenas.
-
I sure hope so.
They should have kicked him to the curb four years ago.
-
Maybe...
Joe and Al G. could open a law firm together....
-
Maybe...
Joe and Al G. could open a law firm together....
-
not that difficult
Joe wants the committee chair so he can keep any oversight from happening.
-
Lieberman wins if Democrats lose!
If the Dem's lose, they will continue to kiss up to the man. He could then continue his representation of foreign interests in lieu of his Congressional responsibilities.
-
Asked and answered
... why does [Lieberman] want that chairmanship so much in the first place?
... now that he has the authority he sought, he's decided not to conduct any real oversight at all.
Uh... you've answered your own question.
-
Just imagine if Gore had won in 2000
Vice-President Joe Lieberman would now, in all likelihood, be the leading contender for the Democratic nomination just by virtue of being the Veep.
You'd be choosing between Joe and another Republican.
-
Does anyone think Joe counts as a Dem anymore?
The Senate is already 50-50, in reality. Heck, the Dems have more of an ally in Republicans like Olympia Snow than in this war-loving, McCain-boosting turncoat prick who stabs his party in the back at every opportunity.
But that's what the Democratic Party's bigwigs (i.e. Bil and Hil) deserve for helping Joe get re-elected AFTER he betrayed the will of the NJ Democrat rank and file.
So don't reward him for his treachery. I say marginalize him, insult him, spit in his face at every opportunity. Treat him like the traitor he is.
-
Senator Liebermans "stewardship of his Senatoe Committee.
Why is anyone at all surprised that Senator Lieberman wanted the Chairmanship in order to "do nothing"?
For all practical purposes, Joe has become a creature of the Bush White House: Parroting Bush/Cheney/McCain Administration line verbatim.
In that tradition, he is running his Senate Committee in the same manner as his Republican co-conspirators did for four years: Doing nothing and giving the Bush team a free pass on everything.
The fct that his negligence is so apparent in contrast to the work of Rep Waxman means nothing to a man who is apparently so bitter as his failure to be re-nominated that he will stop at nothing to be the Zell Miller of 2008.
My next prediction is that the good Senator will be one of the keynote speakers at the Republican Presidential Convention this summer. Look for the Republicans to give him full, prime-time coverage, and FoxNews will have him on the air on a daily basis, right through November.
After the elections, Joe best hope will be another 50-50 split that he can exploit to a chairmanship. If the Democrats expand their holdings by even one seat, this “Loyal Bushie” can expect to be ignored. If Republicans should take control, Joe will be rewarded for his fealty by being ignored because his usefulness will be over. In any of the last two cases, Joe will fade into deserved irrelevance.
-
If you're hanging on a one vote plurality after all of this
Then you have failed.
-
Lieberman - False Impressions
Chernobyl Kid - If Gore had won, we would not have gone into Iraq and Joe would not have gone down the path he has choosen. He would have been a good little supportive Democratic VP if that was his best avenue to the Presidency. Remember, Lieberman was - and still is - a reliable Democratic vote on most things except the Iraq occupation and homeland security issues, in which he toes the Bush line. That won't have even been a huge problem for him, if he had kept his mouth shut and just quietly cast his votes.
McCain and Lieberman both benefit from the ignorance of voters who make sweeping judgments about who these men are based about the publicity generated by a handful of high-profile votes. Many people incorrectly view McCain as a moderate when his voting record shows him to be in complete agreement with the far right of the Republican Party with the exception of a handful of issues - campaign funding regulation, stem-cell research and immigration issues - where his record differs. People make the mistake of thinking he must be pro-choice - he's not. Similiarly, Lieberman is thought by many to be far to the right of the Democratic Party - a true Bluedog DINO. But he isn't. He is pro-choice, pro-same-sex marriage, pro gay rights, pro-guy controle a few amoung his many liberal positions that put him at odds with Conservatives. He has only found a comfortable haven amoung the Republicans because Iraq and the war on terroism has engulphed our nation dialogue. When the nation turns its attention to Domestic issues, Lieberman will grow uncomfortable with his Conservative friends, which he understands, which is why he has no real attention of quitting the caucaus. The Democrats need to keep everyone they can, even if we don't need him in 2008, who is to say what the 2010 mid-term elections will bring? They certainly need to strip him of the chairmanship, but they don't need to drive him out.