Can you please, please, please for the love of all things holy find a way to get rid of this man? Special election? Recall? anything?

One can only hope that in November, we get a large majority in the Senate, and Harry Reid can strip Lieberman of any committee assignments and relegate him to the Benedict Arnold division of the US Senate.

Joe Lieberman takes the cake. You gotta laugh, or you'd just have to ... I don't know, scream, I guess.

All I can say is, Thank you, Connecticut, for making this hilarious dog-and-pony show possible.

Saying Obama supported Lamont implies he supported Lamont in the Democratic primary. Obama did no such thing, he supported Lamont once he was the Democratic nominee, as did most Democrats at the time.

Is Isaac Chotiner (quoted) related to Murray Chotiner, a Nixon hatchet man? Well, if the shoe fits . . . . Actually, JFK inherited the Bay of Pigs plan, which had been set in motion during the Eisenhower Administration and left to cartwheel almost of its own inertia. Sort of like now, with Iran. Kennedy did not "invade" anybody. As for Joe Lieberman, of course the Small Street Urinal would print that letter. They're just to the right of Attila the Hun. But don't place too much weight on Senator Joe's musings. After all, he's been there, done that. And got creamed. And he thinks if he changes flags it will turn out differently this time? Does this guy have oxygen? He represents a state that doesn't even have counties, for crying out loud. How "American" is that?

Lieberman for VP!! This slogan needs to be shouted from the tallest mountains, until McCain/Lieberman -- the Democrat's dream ticket -- is solidified. What more could we ask for? Way too liberal for your average republican, way too divorced from reality for your average democrat, this team's election percentage would be in single digits.

Pleeeease??

".... activists have successfully pulled the Democratic Party further to the left than it has been at any point in the last 20 years."

Lessee, in 1988, we were watching Ronald Reagan ride off into the sunset after a successful 2-term presidency, wherein he co-opted many moderate Democrats. His hand-picked successor, though a "wimp", was about to kick the butt of a certain liberal Democrat east-coast governor. Yes, we had a majority in congress, but it wasn't veto-proof in the Senate (55D-45R). If I remember correctly, major issues at the time were: the beginning of the end of the Cold War, the War on Drugs, Abortion, Welfare Reform, acid rain and rainforest deforstation, nuclear power, nuclear war, and taxes.

We had 4 years of Bush, then a moderate Democrat (as popular as Clinton was, he was no flaming liberal, even though any step left of center was decried as such by the Rabid Right), a Right Wing Revolution in congress in 1994 that only now may be starting to turn, and then there was George II.

That Democrats would be "activist" and "leftist" today, IMHO, can only be for the good. For a while I felt like Jake and Elwood: "We have both kinds of politicians: conservative and right-leaning."

Lieberman writes: "Obama, who, contrary to his rhetorical invocations of bipartisan change, has not been willing to stand up to his party's left wing on a single significant national security or international economic issue in this campaign." If that means--and it does--that Obama rejects unilateral military pre-emption, that he rejects trade agreements written by multi-nationals and their lobbying familiars then, by all means, let's hope to God the man "has not been willing to stand up" to those who reject this twisted status quo. Here's hoping Lieberman becomes the R-VP candidate. I cannot think of a better man to sweep away once and for all this disgrace-of-a-party.

... the "You kids get the hell off of my yard" dream ticket.

One can only hope that in November, we get a large majority in the Senate, and Harry Reid can strip Lieberman of any committee assignments and relegate him to the Benedict Arnold division of the US Senate.

Doesn't seem likely. Reid, the Linc Chaffee of the Democratic Party, would never have gotten close to the majority leadership if the party hadn't had to caucus with Lieberman to get its 51 seats.

If the Democrats pick up a couple more seats this November, they'll have no more reason to leave Reid in charge. Appeasing Lieberman won't be necessary anymore.

Now, if Obama were super clever, he'd offer Schumer a position in his cabinet, leaving Clinton as the senior senator from New York and a candidate for Majority Leader herself. With the state senate in the hands of the New York GOP, though, that couldn't happen yet even if the Democrats in question all agreed. (Or does New York not work that way?)

I think it's worth noting that Lamont supports Obama. In fact, Lamont is Obama's campaign co-chair in Connecticut.

Looks like Waterboard Joe Lieberman really wants to ride shotgun as VP on another losing ticket, this time with McCain. Why should anybody listen to this man, who is deeply in the pockets of the defense contractors, with regard to foreign policy? His diplomatic bellicosity is only surpassed by his militaristic cupidity.

Then the Democratic Party will have enough votes to ditch this turncoat for good.

Further left than it's been any time in the last 20 years? You mean *when they were losing* Joe? The policy of shifting to the center has only allowed the GOP to fall of the right side of the table. We sped past Nixon's campaigning on Universal Health care and right back to Warren G Harding when the public trust and public lands were payolla for the friends of the winning party. That's not progress, and it's not good for America or the world, Joe.

It was that strong, Republican fighting man, Eisenhower, who warned that allowing the military industrial complex to infect the government would be a grave mistake, KBR, Enron, and Blackwater are evidence that he was more right than even he knew.