INSTEAD OF Sidney Lumet's 1968 BYE BYE BRAVERMAN,

IT'S GOING TO BE "BYE, BYE joe LIE-berman!!!!!"

SUCH A DESPICABLE S-H-I-T-HEEL IS "our joe,"

WHO SHOULD BE STRUCK BY GOD'S LIGHTNING, DON'T YOU KNOW?????

EVEN YHVH*-JEHOVA DESPISES joe THE S.O.B.** RAT-FINK-GONIFF IN THE UNIVERSE'S PLAN!!!!!

*-Y(od) H(e) V(au) H(e)

**-S(on) O(f) B(eelzebub the B-I-T-C-H)

HAH!!!!! (^0^)V

For so many reason Joe must go. The positions and priviledges he has had as a nominal Democrat must be taken from him. The self-respect of the Democratic Party and the respect of others for it require his removal. He can be trusted by no one. The Republicans can have him and deserve him. If they, understandibly do not want him, let him be his own political party.

Lieberman is a worthless piece of """"! Unfortunately I don't believe Reid has the gonades to remove him from his chairmanship even though Lieberman is not trustworthy. Let Lieberman go back to McCain as him if McCain wouldn't mind having him as a chauffer or gardner. That's where Lieberman should be and not in government where he can spew out lies continuously.

When I see Lieberman on TV I automatically swith the channel!

One of the tenets of an Obama administration is unity. He emphasized this in his brilliant victory speech. Joe Lieberman should keep his committee chairmanships. Reid and Pelosi are the obstructionists who want party fighting to continue. Now that they have the upper hand they are taking on the roles of dictators. That is NOT what our incoming president wants nor is it the way to start a new administration. These are parlous times for America - in-fighting in congress is unacceptable.

Senator Fudd, majority leader of the US Senate, reported yesterday that he is "bery, bery angry" with Joe Lierberman.

"That'll show him," Senator Fudd added.

It's one thing, folks, to reach across the aisle to someone who has a political philosophy different than yours and who has made his or her opposition to you clear.

It's another thing entirely to succor traitors in your midst.

If there are no consequences for Joe Lieberman--and all that has to be done here is for him to be removed from his positions of power--power that depends on other Democrats (the ones he opposed, remember?) having won--then the signal will be clear: the "Democratic Party" as such simply doesn't exist.

Personally, of course, I'd like to see him horsewhipped on the Mall, tarred and feathered, and ridden out of town on a rail. But I am well known for my moderate views.

Someone take a rolled up newspaper to Reid, please? What a weak ass gesture. They go into the woodshed and Reidling comes out mumbling "maybe a subcommittee" ?? I mean really??! What is this insane power Lieberman wields over Reid? Someone point out to Harry that he's the god damned senate majority leader of a party who just steamrolled Lieberman's boy (and girl) and grow some god damned huevos! I don't want to hear the Connecticut failure's name ever again.

Reid will roll over. Too little evidence of him being willing to actually throw Joementum under the bus.

You misunderstand (or are choosing to misrepresent) the ire against Lieberman.

Yes, Obama said that he would reach across the aisle and try and include many different minds into his decisionmaking. I support that and hope he does it.

But that shouldn't include those without integrity, those who stand for bullshit and who worked so hard to prevent him from getting in. Those who cling to a narrow agenda and would seek to obstruct anything deviating from that agenda.

Like, you wouldn't want Obama appointing William Ayers to his cabinet, would you? Sure, Ayers would have some different views, and if you really want to be inclusive, well, you better include Ayers or else you're a hypocrite, right? How about William Jefferson? Tom Delay? Ted Stevens??

See, we've got political parties who work together, united by a certain ideology. If you allow anyone to have power in that party, even if their views are 180 degrees opposed to the basic party platform, then what good is the party? What does it actually represent?

A party needs a certain amount of discipline if it's going to be effective at all. Lieberman went against that discipline, and there need to be consequences. If you think this goes against Obama's campaign promises, then clearly you weren't listening. (Paraphrasing:) "If you intend to tear the world down, then we will defeat you."

When you are reaping the benefits of caucusing with the Democrats when they are in power in the Senate, you *don't* get to go on national TV and proclaim that it will be a disaster for the nation if the Democrats gain 60 seats.

I'll add "political naivete" and "hatred of free speech" alongside "obsessed with vengeance" to your list of attributes.

Maybe all three of those could be lumped into "intolerance of alternative ideas" to categorize you (and a bunch of other Obama supporters, it seems).

It's good to know that the ideological commitment of so many Obama supporters is tissue-paper thin. It's good to know you all place party loyalty above the good of the nation as whole. It's good to know Democrats are so committed to vendetta as a political tool. It's good to know you all practice the Christian ideal of forgiveness so well.

Let's hope Obama stands by his promises, claims and other commitments longer than his supporters have.

(By the way: I personally despise Joe Lieberman. But I despise hypocrites and fools even more.)

The day before the election he said he "...feared for the safety of America" if the Democrats won. Stop pretending he's a Democrat and just dump him. He dumped the Dems long ago....

Revolk that Isreali spy's citizenship and send him to live in his real country. He'll never even be an honest Republican. The only political party that asshole is loyal to is the Likud.

Lieberman goes. Reid goes. Pelosi goes. And that is just for starters.

Reid and Pelosi have sat around for 2 years with their thumbs up their asses waiting for Cheney and Bush to say "Jump!" just so they can ask "How high?"

I do not see how Reid or Pelosi will be of any assistance to President Obama. They cannot keep their own people in line and they are too quick to acquiesce to the repubs. They bent over for the repubs even when there wouldn't have been a political price to pay if they hadn't. In my opinion, their behavior suggests that they have been hand-in-glove with the repubs and their crimes all along.

Lieberman - dead. Reid - dead. Pelosi - dead.

(Thanks Bluto!)