‘This is not so much to threaten anybody, but…’

November 9, 2006

I’m not at all happy about it, but I can’t help but notice that Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), in a 51-49 Senate, holds a lot of cards right now. And he knows it.

The morning after a six-month roller coaster of an election season, Senator Joseph I. Lieberman stood victorious, again promising to burnish his independence in the narrowly divided Senate.

Mr. Lieberman said he spoke Wednesday morning to Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the Democratic leader, and that Mr. Reid assured him that he would retain his seniority despite having bolted the party after losing its primary in August to run on his own party line.

That means that if a Democratic victory is confirmed in Virginia, to give the party control of the Senate, Mr. Lieberman will be in line to become chairman of the Homeland Security Committee.

Lieberman shot down speculation about taking a post in the Bush administration — Connecticut Gov. M. Jodi Rell would appoint a Republican in his place — telling reporters yesterday, “I would reject any offer, which has not come, and, I believe, will not come.” He is sticking with his job in the Senate.

Will he, however, stick with his party in the Senate? Asked if there was anything Republicans could do to persuade him to switch to the GOP, Lieberman reportedly smiled before saying, “There’s a little playfulness in me that wants me to make a joke about that, but it’s too serious. The answer is no.” He added:

“This is not so much to threaten anybody, but, look, this is going to be a closely divided Senate however it works out,” he said. “And I’m just going to feel empowered and in some sense directed by the voters of Connecticut, issue by issue.”

Call me overly-sensitive, but when someone says, “This is not so much to threaten anybody, but…” I take it to mean that the person is threatening somebody.

I suspect, however, that it’s a threat that the Dem leadership will have no choice but to take seriously.

I mentioned a week ago that Lieberman had received money and campaign assistance from Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine), the outgoing chair of the Homeland Security committee, suggesting that Lieberman may not be the ideal choice to replace her if Dems took back the Senate. It creates an odd dynamic — the “Democratic” chair of the committee is indebted to the Republican ranking member.

After all, how many prospective Dem committee leaders campaigned alongside their Republican rivals this year? How would Republicans feel if a possible committee chair started campaigned with the ranking Dem on the committee the Republican expected to lead? Indeed, just yesterday, Lieberman said he hadn’t returned Harry Reid’s phone call, but he did return Collins’.

Apparently, it didn’t much matter to the Senate Dem leadership, who essentially ended the debate yesterday by saying Lieberman would chair the committee. Dems know that they could push Lieberman just a little — say, deny him the committee chairmanship he wants — and he could stroll across the aisle, and take our majority with him.

After all, Lieberman said, “This is not so much to threaten anybody, but…”

Not to be an ass, BUT: What are the rules about recalling a senator? If they pulled it off in California…

  • Is there somewhere safe we could put this guy. Homeland Security is definately not it, considering his inclination to laud pork all over Connecticut. Come the next al Qaeda attack and the only North Eastern state to survive would be Connecticut.

    Of course, it would be adrift in the Atlantic and we could tow it over to Europe 😉

    Hmmm!!!

  • I say throw him overboard. Now. No committee chairs, because HE’S NOT A DEMOCRAT.

    Who needs this kind of crap? Having the majority will not mean jack if we are held hostage by a prick like lieberman. I’d rather see a split senate with Dick “subpoena man” Cheney deciding the vote. Then in six years, Lieberman can run as what he is, a moderate Republican.

    I can’t believe our leaders are making this kind of deal just to get power. Didn’t we learn anything from the Republicans?

  • There’s always the hope of a car accident, and given he’s my age, cancer, heart attacks and other things can happen. But not till after 2008 please.

    To paraphrase a former Publick Moron: You fight your political wars with the majority you’ve got.

    And I think “a change is gonna come” over the next two years as the public becomes more aware of just exactly what’s happened in the past six years, as candles are lighted in all the dark corners by the power of subpeonas. And Holy Joe is nothing if not a weathervane. He will blow with the prevailing wind.

  • Does Lieberman really want anything more than to be chairman of the Homeland Security committee? I’m not talking about small things like funding for a water treatment plant—any big initiatives? Big projects? Killing legislation to protect certain industries (insurance companies in CT)?

    Any ideas and thoughts on where to draw the line?

  • I, for one, would rather have a Republican Congress than start the Democratic Senate grovelling for Leiberman’s approval. The reason we kicked him out of the party is that he can do far more damage to us with a D next to his name than an R. That’s still true.

    Leiberman can’t win in CT as a Republican. Let him become one. He lost his own party’s nomination because he is so out of step with his own voters, so this should have been a wake up call, if Leiberman didn’t share Bush’s denial of reality.

  • Come on…the Dems will shoot themselves in the foot if they don’t lead with assured civility and grace. If we can’t figure out how to work with Lieberman, how in the world will we be able to work constructively with Bush or members of the now minority party in either chamber? He is in a powerful position right now…and so are the Dems. Let’s move ahead and make this work.

  • Racerx: we have not won the kind of victory you appear to think we have. What we have done is to stop the fall. That’s important. We have to do things one step at a time, and that’s the step that’s most important. Stop digging the hole deeper.

    We don’t need to shoot ourselves in the foot over self-righteousness. You sound like we did when we were 20-something idiots back in the 60s.

  • What about the other Independent? Is he as wobbly as Lieberman? Maybe he wants to flex his position a little bit.

    The way I see it is that the other senators are more like Lieberman than they are like us in the sense that they don’t feel these same animosities toward him. He is a playing a game they all play. If they have to kiss his ass a little bit well it’s in the nature of senators to kiss ass. It’s not us kissing his ass.

    Plus by WEbb winning VA the most Joe can do is tie the senate if he switches. Bad but not a majority.

    I’d love to have pictures of all those Repub senators moving out of their offices. How does that work exactly? Are any Repubs guaranteed their offices?

  • Racerx, one question. What do we do, then, with the other independent member of the Senate? No committee chairs for him either?

  • The drooling mouthbreathers of Connecticut get to determine the national agenda through this feckless, self-absorbed little man. Excellent. I guess that means we’ll be hearing a lot more about pernicious video games and less about screening cargo entering U.S. ports.

    Things like this make me feel a little better about living in Missouri. At least our senator-elect isn’t going to hold the country hostage.

  • Personally, I don’t care if Lieberman is given what he wants in return for caucusing with the dems. I know everyone wants to hate on Joe and, truth be told, I think he’s kind of a jackass after this election cycle. But having the power to set the agenda should not be undersold for revenge against someone perceived to be a sell-out. It would be the height of self-immolation to allow Mitch McConnell to lead the senate just to stick it to Joe Lieberman…with the added downside that he’d probably get what he wanted from the Republicans anyway.

    Just suck it up and comfort yourself with the fact that as long as Joe caucuses with the dems, we will not get another Justice Alito.

  • Re: #7

    Come on. The American people did not send us to Congress to get along with the Republican Party. The American people sent us there because the Republicans are out of control, and we are the only hope they have to rein them in. They’re wrong, of course. We’re a bunch of marshmallows who will go back to the same reaching-across-the-aisle malarky that has failed for us since 1992.

    This is the opposite of the Clinton years. People aren’t fed up with fruitless investigations. They’re fed up with the lack of them. Leiberman can throw a wrench in the whole process.

  • What about the other Independent? Is he as wobbly as Lieberman? Maybe he wants to flex his position a little bit.

    The other independent, Bernie Sanders, will probably prove to be a more reliable vote for Dems than Joe has been or will be. He is also a Socialist, which means the DLC types are likely to snub him.

  • Memkiller – Are you kidding?!? Exactly where will be as a party in 2/4/6 years if we lead with the same vitriol and partisanship of the most recent Republican leadership? Out on our asses! People got fed up with us in ’94 and it wasn’t pretty. We don’t have to lead from dead center, but the leadership we exhibit does need to be effective and have some reflection of the country as a whole.

  • I agree with Tom. We must keep our cool and go about the next two years systematically. Lieberman’s clout will last at most two years and it may not be as great as he would like everyone to think. On another thread, Fifi has an excellent analysis of Lieberman situation.

    Sure, Lieberman can throw the Senate to the Republicans but in the 2008 election, there will be 21 Republican senators but only 12 Democratic senators up for reelection. Unless the Republicans turn around the situation, the Senate will shift decidedly towards the Democrats in 2 years. So, what would Lieberman get out of it ? 2 years of very limited power and a personal shit-storm of unconceivable scale. A lot of people in CT and DC, otherwise favorable to him or neutral, would turn against him and throw everything they can at him. And after 18 years in Washington DC, I’d be surprised if he doesn’t a few very damaging skeletons in his closet and they would come out very quickly if he switched. His life expectancy as a senator could become very short.

    I think Reid has a much stronger hand in this deal than it seems, not strong enough to completely shove away Lieberman but Holy Joe is not in a position to get everything he wants. Far from that. We’ll see how Reid plays it.

  • There’s really no good choice here, but I think Reid is making the only one he can. What’s worse, putting up with Lieberman’s sanctimonious shenanigans for the next two years, or extremist wingnuts on the bench for the next twenty?

    If the Dems play their cards right, they can pick up seats in the Senate in 2008 and they can throw him overboard then.

  • “And I’m just going to feel empowered and in some sense directed by the voters of Connecticut, issue by issue.” Now that’s my kind of Senator, not beholden to either party’s agendas, especially those fueled by the fringes. Viva the moderates!

    Anybody in the Dem party now wishing they didn’t sack him in the primary?

  • Let the little Joker-faced Napolean have his committee chair. Chairing a Senate committee is not the same as a House Committee (who is the House Homeland Security chair?). If he gets extreme (on what I don’t know) his crap still has to pass the Full Senate and the House.

    Joe Lieberman is all about Joe and sometimes you have to give it to him. Kiss, make-up and give him what he wants. the last thing wee need now is the Democratic leadership bickering with Lieberman every step of the way.

  • Politics is politics. The Democrats need Joe Leiberman to get their agenda (or most of it) through. And Joe Leiberman actually needs the Democrats to get what he wants, in the long term.

    Leiberman wants/needs to be “the guy in the center” — he wants a chairmanship — he wants prominance and importance. He wants to be “the guy who makes deals happen.” If he goes R, he’s no longer “a man of his word” and he’s part of partisan warfare.

    Plus, in two years, the odds are that Democrats will pick up seats (the Senate electoral map favors Dems). He could risk being a turncoat now, only to find himself a) in the minority, and b) hated even more, in just two years.

    Enough of the leadership backed off in the last month in CT for Leiberman to feel comfortable. In a sense, the leadership hedged their bets so that if this moment came, they’d have some bargaining power.

    Also, Bush is clearly lame, lame, lame. Leiberman will begin to move away from him, rather than move towards him.

    A little ass-kissing, a little ego-stroking, a few plum assignments, and Leiberman and the Dems will get along most of the time. There will be bumps along the way, and he’ll make loud independent noises and annoy many of us, but he’ll mostly be on the right side.

    I think the politics line up the right way, and against Leiberman trending R.

  • Brian,
    The country sent a clear and unequivocal message that they are fed up with the corrupt and unaccountable Republican Party, and a rogue President. The only chance they have to put a check back in the system is to put Democrats in, so they did so, despite their continue misgivings that were a bunch of pussies who will get steamrolled. Every exit poll clearly shows that the message they sent is they want balance brought back to Washington.

    Besides, what “blowback” did Gingrich suffer? The Republican control his scandal mongering of a popular President gave him ended Tuesday. The scandal fatigue is what undid Gore. In times of peace and prosperity, with a popular President, and after six years of non-stop fruitless investigations of every non-controversy of the Clinton years, they got all three branches of government, and began a reign of terror that just ended this week. What blowback?

    Now we are suffering from lack-of-oversight fatigue, with an unpopular President in a time of war and malaise, with six years of non-accountability. The public doesn’t see us as on a witch hunt, but neutered and unable to stand up for ourselves. They gave us power anyway because they have no choice. If we don’t put a check in the system, no one will. And if you had your way, that’s what will happen.

    America sent us there for a reason. Let’s do what we were sent there to do.

  • Agreed, brainiac. Bernie’s about as far to the left as we’ve got. No way he’ll side with the Republicans.

  • Hey JRS Jr,

    Without Lieberman in the race, Lamont (the true Democrat) would have won. I guess this makes Holy Joe–if not a DINO–a Democrat-lite.

    PS — Carpetbagger, where’s the preview feature?

  • I agree with most of the sentiment here, Holy Joe is an R in D clothing. I don’t think it matters if hecaucuses with the Dems if he votes with the Rethugs. If Cheney has to come in to break one single tie because Joe voted against the Democrats, then Harry should strip him of his chaimanships that same day and kick him out of the party.

  • Steve M – that’s always a good quote, but isn’t the concern that Lieberman is inside the tent and still pissing in?

    Unfortunately, without a Lieberman-proof majority, I’m with Tom (and Harry Reid) that it’s ultimately a better bargain to try to work with the douchebag. I hope that Harry is making more subtle threats to Joe behind closed doors, and at least refuses to let Joe identify as (D). He’s (I) now, and the unease of his caucus with the real Dems goes both ways. When he’s no longer in a position to make demands, he may be caucusing with the rest of the Connecticut for Lieberman party. For now, he has some use to us (we need to be the clear majority), that party leaders are deciding is worth the risk of the double-cross. We can only hope it doesn’t last long.

  • Lieberman’s an insufferable narcissist who’s made a principle out of having no principles. But–in a reversal of how this usually works–if we just ignore him, he won’t go away (and join the Republicans).

    I advise everyone to grit their teeth, let him have Homeland Security–much better he be there than Government Reform and Oversight, where he could and would protect the scumbags who did so much to return him to office!–and remember that putting up with the weasel is a small price to pay for all the good a Democratic majority can do over the next two years.

    And then, as others have noted, after we pick up Colorado, Minnesota and maybe New Hampshire, we kick him out on his miserable old ass.

  • If all Joe wants is chairmanship of a committee, that isn’t too much to ask; the real oversight work is going to get done in the House anyway and there is nothing Lieberman can do to screw it up. If he demands a say in overall Senate leadership then Reid should toss him out now and get it over with. Joe is going to be a turncoat at some point, probably the most vulnerable time he can find to stick the final knife in. Reid should be working hard to turn one of the moderate Republicans and minimize Joe’s influence before that critical moment comes.

  • Memekiller – You’re way overreaching in your analysis of beliefs, perspectives, etc. Dems need to be assertive and strong in their leadership and project both to the public. They need to offer a strong check to the presidency that has been sorely missing. But, and I say again with emphasis, they need to lead with civility and assured willingness to lead the entire country not just the Dem party.

  • Having the majority will not mean jack if we are held hostage by a prick like lieberman.

    I respectfullyl disagree. If the Dems have the majority, then they control every committee. Judicial, Oversight, Defense, everything. No more wingnuts will make it through the committee for the federal courts. That is tremendously important. Waaay more important than getting fleeting revenge on Lieberman. We need to keep Bush from futher damaging our judicial system with his lifetime appointments of nutcases. In two years when we take a Lieberman proof majority, then Reid can say, “Joe, you just didn’t follow the party line the last two years. As an independent you have no seniority in the Dem caucus”

    Patience people. We’ll get our revenge.

  • “In two years when we take a Lieberman proof majority, then Reid can say, ‘Joe, you just didn’t follow the party line the last two years. As an independent you have no seniority in the Dem caucus'” – Edo

    Edo, you are so clever sometimes 😉

    Oh, if only.

  • Brian @ #33,

    One tense press conference with a rabidly partisan president now forced to play nice does not make a new era of civility and bipartisanship. Nor does it mean the Democrats should let bygones be bygones. I’m not sure what election you were watching, but this wasn’t a referendum on bipartisanship and brotherly love. The message was pretty clear: The country’s tired of Republican incompetence and corruption, and it needs to be cleaned up.

    If Republicans are serious about bipartisanship, they can participate in the investigations and cooperate with subpeonas as Democrats sort out their nasty little messes.

  • Ladies and Gentlemen of the blogosphere, may I introduce to your the current crop of Senatorial target possibilities for 2008:

    Lamar Alexander (TN), Wayne Allard (CO), Saxby Chambliss (GA), Thad Cochran (MS), Norm Coleman (MN), Susan Collins (ME), John Cornyn (TX), Larry Craig (ID), Elizabeth Dole (NC), Pete Domenici (NM), Michael Enzi (WY), Lindsey Graham (SC), Chuck Hagel (NE), James Inhofe (OK), Mitch McConnell (KY), Pat Roberts (KS), Jeff Sessions (AL), Gordon Smith (OR), Ted Stevens (AK), John Sununu (NH), and John Warner (VA).

    Of these 21, I would personally select Inhofe, Roberts, and Stevens as “primary targets.” Take down these three and hold the line—and the United States of America will have a Lieberman-proof Senate. Then let’s see if Joe Lie wants to make his not-so-subtle threats….

  • John Warner is likely not running in 2008 as I understand it. So we should run Mark Warner and he’ll win on name confusion (after what Steele tried to pull in Maryland, that’s okay by me).

    Alexander, run Ford against him.
    Chambliss definately deserves to be thumped.
    I just can’t stand Dole. Send Edwards back to the Senate.
    Pat Roberts just for blowing the investigations on the use of pre-war intelligence (now we’ll see some real investigating happening).
    Sessions should go.
    Ted “Bridge to Nowhere” Stevens needs to be crushed, but he might just give up himself. He is the oldest Republican’t right now as I understand it.

  • Hey Slip, without Lamont in the race, this string would not have existed! JRS Jr

    Hey, JRS Jr is right! Without the voters Lamont wouldn’t have won the primary. Obviously the problem is that we keep letting people vote. Fascists like Lieberman and JRS Jr are totally right, we shouldn’t allow people to vote at all and Lieberman should just be made supreme ruler.

    JRS Jr, you’re not a centrist; Lieberman is not a centrist. The only reason he won is because the Republics wanted to upset Lamont, hence they did not support their own candidate. But you can have him, and the Republics can have him.

    That’s the closest thing to a victory the Republic Party can claim from Tuesday: a sniveling opportunist hell bent on killing brown skinned people no matter the cost of American lives. I hope you and he can live with the guilt because every dead soldier in Iraq is on your hands.

    I will never grovel and ask forgiveness for him. He should be treated as a junior Senator with no seniority and removed from all of his appointments. Any Democrat who kisses his ass will find themselves with a primary challenge, as well.

    Of course you know he won’t stab the Democrats in the back because he knows they are the power now. He’ll do what’s best for his own interests in the long run and right now, because the country has spoken, the Democrats have all the cards.

    It’s time to put an end to your mythical idea of center and open your eyes. If you look to your left, way off in the distance you’ll just faintly be able to make out the center. If you start walking now, you’ll be there in a few years.

  • I’m with Edo and dajafi. Like it or not, Lieberman pulled off a fancy set of political manoeuvres, so he wins perks for successfully gaming the system. Nonetheless, having the majority allows us to set the agenda, deny appointees, police the executive branch, and haul jackasses into investigations and hearings, which is extremely important. Lieberman has got two years of influence, after which, most likely, he’ll no longer be a controlling vote. If he wants to do Homeland Security, why not? He’s interested in it, he’s smart, and he wants government to work (which beats your average Republican right there), and he’d probably be reasonably good at it. So what do we care if Connecticut gets more than its share of pork and Lieberman gets a lot of undeserved ego stroking? The problems with him came about because he’s self-serving and toadies to people more powerful than him, so he acted as an apologist and an enabler for Bush and the Republican agenda, but right now those couldn’t be more dead. After this election, no one is going to be the slightest bit intimidated by the White House, and Bush’s proposals are only going to be listened to if they have genuine merit, so I don’t see that Lieberman can do much of his old damage any more. He can be turfed out later if need be.

  • Lance,

    Oh, if only.

    A boy can dream, can’t he? ;-> After all I dreamed about taking back the House and the Senate all year…and that dream came true!

  • Forget about most of those southern Republican senators, particularly if they are on the young-side of 70 years old. My bullseye on Norm Coleman in Minnesota. Al Franken are you listening?

  • Oh doubtful, every rant like that just shows the extent of the rabies virus flowing through your veins.

  • Harry Reid knows how more about how much he needs to give Joe and be successful than all the anti-Joe folks commenting on this blog. Reid is a better strategist than you and he knows how to keep his folks in line, he has demonstrated this. We have 51-50 advantage. Talk to me about dumping Joe when we get to 52 (I probably won’t listen), talk to me about it when we get to 55, but not before then, okay? Keep your wits.

    Keeping Joe is the difference between majorities in ALL committes and chairmanship of them which gives Democrats the ability to hold hearings, vote things down on party line votes in committee (before they even get to the floor) and generally set the agenda for the Senate.

    Dumping Joe gives us none of those things and doesn’t even make us feel better because we watch the other party get all of those things back –just like it was last week.

    Do you want that more than you don’t want Joe Lieberman? If you say that, you have no judgement or maturity to even have your opinion considered rationale.

  • Oh doubtful, every rant like that just shows the extent of the rabies virus flowing through your veins. JRS Jr

    Unable to write a thoughtful response? I’ll accept that as a concession.

    Run along now; let the adults govern.

  • Take three or four more seats in 2008 and then tell Joe to
    go take a hike. (MN, NH, CO, OK,AK, ME)

    • Comments are closed.